That's pretty much where I'm landing so far. If I knew a really good way to improve my markup, I would do so, but I haven't heard it yet.Barry Hofstetter wrote:I am not going to redo my parsing sheets. I just explain to students that they aren't really moods, but they've got to go somewhere.
Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
-
- Posts: 4166
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Because the discussion is about morphology.Stephen Hughes wrote:Why do you say "don't have", rather than "aren't marked for".
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 3323
- Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?Stephen Carlson wrote:Because the discussion is about morphology.Stephen Hughes wrote:Why do you say "don't have", rather than "aren't marked for".
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Well, at a morpheme "level." That's sort of what morphology is.Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
I don't understand this question. My comment was made in the context of a reply to Barry; I don't see how general patterns of usage are more appositely pertinent.Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?Stephen Carlson wrote:Because the discussion is about morphology.Stephen Hughes wrote:Why do you say "don't have", rather than "aren't marked for".
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Yes, which is why in fact they are called infinitives -- they are not limited with regard to person and number. So on your handy-dandy parsing sheet, you just mark tense, category and voice, i.e. εὶπεῖν, aorist active infinitive.Stephen Carlson wrote:
Participles and infinitives don't have person either.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Seems like some of our recent threads have been going in circles (maybe it seems so to me only). I did "hint" earlier and reiterate (not yet ad nauseam, I hope), that If the term "infinitive" is thought to mean "unlimited", then the term is not wholly apt for a form that is limited for tense and voice.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Yes, which is why in fact they are called infinitives -- they are not limited with regard to person and number. So on your handy-dandy parsing sheet, you just mark tense, category and voice, i.e. εὶπεῖν, aorist active infinitive.Stephen Carlson wrote:
Participles and infinitives don't have person either.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
-
- Posts: 4166
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
With one caveat: when tagging sentences, if a form can have more than one interpretation, many corpuses do use context to choose among the possible interpretations. That's really helpful for searching.MAubrey wrote:Well, at a morpheme "level." That's sort of what morphology is.Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Good point.Jonathan Robie wrote:With one caveat: when tagging sentences, if a form can have more than one interpretation, many corpuses do use context to choose among the possible interpretations. That's really helpful for searching.MAubrey wrote:Well, at a morpheme "level." That's sort of what morphology is.Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs
Corpora, perhaps? Or If the corpus is relatively small, like the GNT, they can be called "corpuscles."Jonathan Robie wrote:With one caveat: when tagging sentences, if a form can have more than one interpretation, many corpuses do use context to choose among the possible interpretations. That's really helpful for searching.MAubrey wrote:Well, at a morpheme "level." That's sort of what morphology is.Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it customary to discuss morphology at a word-by-word level rather than at a sense-unit-by-sense-unit level or is it just in discussions about Greek?
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)