I think this is good advice. Only use the means if you have trouble in them getting to the aim.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Don't study the grammars. Read the Greek, and use the grammars for reference as necessary.
Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
Forum rules
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
-
- Posts: 3323
- Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
How does one know when it's necessary to consult the grammars? I'm thinking of cases where one fails to realize that one has misunderstood the text.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Don't study the grammars. Read the Greek, and use the grammars for reference as necessary.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
Where does one begin? Is reading grammars the path to grammatical acquisition, or is using the language the path to grammatical acquisition?Stephen Carlson wrote:How does one know when it's necessary to consult the grammars? I'm thinking of cases where one fails to realize that one has misunderstood the text.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Don't study the grammars. Read the Greek, and use the grammars for reference as necessary.
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.
-
- Posts: 4158
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
One of the things I really liked about Zerwick and Grosvenor is that you could read it verse by verse, but it referred you to explanations in Zerwick's intermediate grammar. That was really useful. I haven't used it for years, but it was great.
When I read grammars these days, I usually go looking for lots of examples of whatever I'm reading about, in context. I find that a lot easier to digest than abstract explanations.
When I read grammars these days, I usually go looking for lots of examples of whatever I'm reading about, in context. I find that a lot easier to digest than abstract explanations.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
I think that the grammars can (and do) play a role in assisting the ongoing process of understanding how contextual usage functions to assist meaning/understanding. I consult the grammars when I realize that I'm not fully satisfied that I understand an item of contextual usage in a text I'm working with. That may be, and most often is, a matter of discomfort about the validity of my perspective on the meaning. Often it comes when I realize that others have understood the text from a different perspective and I want to see how the alternatives match grammarians' understandings of the contextual usage in question. I don't think we are likely to consult a grammar unless we are cognizant of a real or possible ἀπορία in our grasp of the meaning of the text.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Where does one begin? Is reading grammars the path to grammatical acquisition, or is using the language the path to grammatical acquisition?Stephen Carlson wrote:How does one know when it's necessary to consult the grammars? I'm thinking of cases where one fails to realize that one has misunderstood the text.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Don't study the grammars. Read the Greek, and use the grammars for reference as necessary.
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: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
I'm not on board with the either-or framing of this response. Clearly both are appropriate, and knowing when either is appropriate requires wisdom.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Where does one begin? Is reading grammars the path to grammatical acquisition, or is using the language the path to grammatical acquisition?Stephen Carlson wrote:How does one know when it's necessary to consult the grammars? I'm thinking of cases where one fails to realize that one has misunderstood the text.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Don't study the grammars. Read the Greek, and use the grammars for reference as necessary.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
This matches my feelings as well. I also find it instructive to look things up even when I think I know what means.cwconrad wrote:I think that the grammars can (and do) play a role in assisting the ongoing process of understanding how contextual usage functions to assist meaning/understanding. I consult the grammars when I realize that I'm not fully satisfied that I understand an item of contextual usage in a text I'm working with. That may be, and most often is, a matter of discomfort about the validity of my perspective on the meaning. Often it comes when I realize that others have understood the text from a different perspective and I want to see how the alternatives match grammarians' understandings of the contextual usage in question. I don't think we are likely to consult a grammar unless we are cognizant of a real or possible ἀπορία in our grasp of the meaning of the text.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
Stephen, I intended to suggest no such dichotomy. I will say, however, that the grammars are relatively useless without significant language acquistion. It is through such acquisition that one gains the wisdom properly to use the grammars.
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.
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
I'm still hearing the dichotomy, despite the disclaimer. I find grammars helpful to pointing out neglected possibilities, some of which are difficult to predict for non-native speakers. So it's not clear to me that mere reading without consulting the "useless" grammars can open one's mind up sufficiently what the possible meanings are. This is especially true for rare constructions. On the other hand, evaluating the possibilities wisely requires the judgment than only comes from extensive reading and acquisition.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Stephen, I intended to suggest no such dichotomy. I will say, however, that the grammars are relatively useless without significant language acquistion. It is through such acquisition that one gains the wisdom properly to use the grammars.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm
Re: Time-Related Meanings in Perfect Participles
Then I have not been clear (I sometimes think that English is not really my first language ). What you say above is largely what I meant, but with the emphasis on language acquisition to make the grammars useful. Part of my context is experience with individuals who have read grammars, often to score theological points, but little other experience with the language, and thus get it wrong by misapplying what the grammar is saying.Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm still hearing the dichotomy, despite the disclaimer. I find grammars helpful to pointing out neglected possibilities, some of which are difficult to predict for non-native speakers. So it's not clear to me that mere reading without consulting the "useless" grammars can open one's mind up sufficiently what the possible meanings are. This is especially true for rare constructions. On the other hand, evaluating the possibilities wisely requires the judgment than only comes from extensive reading and acquisition.Barry Hofstetter wrote:Stephen, I intended to suggest no such dichotomy. I will say, however, that the grammars are relatively useless without significant language acquistion. It is through such acquisition that one gains the wisdom properly to use the grammars.
Your comment on access to the more obscure points of grammar to native speakers put me in mind of an anecdote related by Aulus Gellius in the Noctes Atticae (14.5) in which two noted Latin grammarians nearly come to blows discussing which is the proper vocative for "vir egregius," vir egregri" or "vir egregrie..." So that even native speakers are not always sure about every construction.
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.