Inherent Aspect

Post Reply
Paul-Nitz
Posts: 497
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 4:19 am
Location: Sussex, Wisconsin

Inherent Aspect

Post by Paul-Nitz »

It's much more common to see the Imperative of μνημονεύσαι / μνημονεύειν in continual aspect (παρατατική) rather than Aorist.

επίστρεψαι / επιστρέφειν seems to have an Aorist sort of meaning. Searching the LXX for Aorist aspect forms in the Infinitive, Imperative, and Subjunctive Moods (where aspect is more purely applied) yields 150 hits. The same search, but for παρατατική aspect ("Present") forms, yields 21 hits.

I imagine this is often the case with certain verbs that have either an inherent continual or inherent aorist meaning.

True?
Paul D. Nitz - Lilongwe Malawi
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by Stephen Hughes »

I can't remember if I have expressed my 4 aspect theory before here. Sorry if I have...

There are 3 aspects differentiated in form in the language 1. Present. 2. aorist, 3 perfect. The fourth one in my opinion is not number "4", but number "0". That would be the one where the authour is not wanting to express aspect distinctly at all.

The question - similar to yours - that I ask when I look at a text is, "Is aspect significant here?" and the question - similar to yours - that I ask when I am learning a verb is, "Which of this verb's aspects is used without significance?" As a rule of thimb; 1st aorist - present, 2nd aorist - aorist.

The hyper-aspectualisation of Greek texual analysis has produced a series of stilted understanding - I thnk that ignoring the prescription that aorist is always significant is a breath of fresh air some times.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by RandallButh »

μέμνησο τοῦτο many cases of suppletive verbs revolve around these issues, too.

Register affects things, too. Where written speech is likely to prefer forms like εἰσιέναι for εἰσέρχεσθαι.
Afterwards, ὑπάγουσιν.
Paul-Nitz
Posts: 497
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 4:19 am
Location: Sussex, Wisconsin

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by Paul-Nitz »

RandallButh wrote:μέμνησο τοῦτο many cases of suppletive verbs revolve around these issues, too.
Explain more!
Paul D. Nitz - Lilongwe Malawi
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by RandallButh »

In a nutshell, the re-grouped verbs of suppletion in Greek (like ἐλθεῖν ἔρχεσθαι) testify to verbs that were widely used in one aspect or another.
In other words, in order for τρέχειν and δραμεῖν to be joined together, it would have helped for each to have been primarily and idiomatically limited to the aspects that were joined into the suppletive verb δραμεῖν//τρέχειν. This is true for any case of suppletion, of which Greek has quite a few.

I used μέμνησο to refer to 'remember' because it, too, is almost in a suppletive relationship with μνημονεύειν.
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Stephen Hughes wrote:I can't remember if I have expressed my 4 aspect theory before here. Sorry if I have...
I don't think you have shared it with us before.
Stephen Hughes wrote:There are 3 aspects differentiated in form in the language 1. Present. 2. aorist, 3 perfect. The fourth one in my opinion is not number "4", but number "0". That would be the one where the authour is not wanting to express aspect distinctly at all.
That's an interesting idea, but it is a little confusing, because the user of Greek is forced to choose of the one of the first three aspectual stems. But I think it is important to think about the aspectual form the Greek speaker will chose when "not wanting to express aspect distinctly at all." I tend to think of it in terms of a default aspect.
Stephen Hughes wrote:The question - similar to yours - that I ask when I look at a text is, "Is aspect significant here?" and the question - similar to yours - that I ask when I am learning a verb is, "Which of this verb's aspects is used without significance?" As a rule of thimb; 1st aorist - present, 2nd aorist - aorist.
As far as rules of thumb go, it's not bad.
Stephen Hughes wrote:The hyper-aspectualisation of Greek texual analysis has produced a series of stilted understanding - I thnk that ignoring the prescription that aorist is always significant is a breath of fresh air some times.
Depends on "significant" but, yeah, sometimes the aspectual stem contributes no more to the sense than to confirm the lexical aspect already inherent the verb and its arguments. It's the cross-grain usages that are interesting to me.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by RandallButh »

While discussing Chariton with a friend this week in Greek we mentioned πείσεται, intending "she will suffer". That sparked a question about how we might say "I will be persuaded."

This of course shows how different verbs come into conflict with one another and produce compartmentalizations in the language. The future active of πείθω "I am persuading" is πείσω. The passive would be πειθήσομαι, though someone might want to say πεπεισμένος ἔσομαι.
And then "I will suffer" squeeks into the middle πείσομαι, singing the old Stealer's Wheel song, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DohRa9lsx0Q) Ναί, πείσεται μεταξὺ τῶν ληροῦντων καὶ ἀφρόνων.

This also raises the change of inherent voice and argument structure, where πείθω is transitive but πεποιθα 'I believe, am convinced' is really an intransitive middle.

I recommend that the above be studied and used separately and not learned together, otherwise the brain does a little meltdown. To what may this be compared? Consider learning English, "Go to the overlook, but don't overlook setting the carbrake, You will be too far from the site to oversee the work, but you will have a nice overview. Oh by an oversight, I forgot to mention that the lookout is slippery." Learn the words separately before using them together. That insulates the brain synapses from meltdown.

OK, let me finish my coffee.
Paul-Nitz
Posts: 497
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 4:19 am
Location: Sussex, Wisconsin

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by Paul-Nitz »

Διδάσκαλε Randall,

Thanks for getting that song permanently into my head! :D
Πεισομαι now every time I come across a verb stuck in the middle.

Actualy, that's just the way I talk about so called "deponents" with my students. This is an εαυ̍τική verb that's just stuck in εαυτική. There is no such thing as ερχειν... only ερχεσθαι. It helps that the local language (Chichewa) has a middle-like verbal suffix and at least one verb cannot be constructed without that suffix.

What you explain about learning the strands of meaning of a root word on their own, is one of many values of your Morphology book. A value which is, by the way, not mentioned in it's description http://www.biblicallanguagecenter.com/greek-morphology/ I suppose it would be difficult to explain on a page like that, but it is certainly one of its values for me. An updated preface to that book should include some of your thoughts written in this thread.

ερρώσο,
Σαῦλος
Paul D. Nitz - Lilongwe Malawi
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Inherent Aspect

Post by Stephen Carlson »

We have a couple of "deponent" verbs in English too.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”