RandallButh wrote:Basically, that means that the reader needs to consider FOUR stems, or more precisely, four tense-aspect categories.
I started down this path yesterday, and got stuck. I got as far as what you mention above - we need tense-aspect categories that can include more than one stem. The first step is relatively easy:
- the present stem (e.g. πιστεύ-ω)
- the aorist stems (e.g. ἐ-πίστευσ-α) - 1st, 2nd, active, middle
- the perfect stems (e.g. πεπίστευκ-α) - 1st, 2nd perfect, 1st, 2nd pluperfect, future perfect, perfect and pluperfect middle (pass.), future perfect middle
- the future stem (e.g. πιστεύσ-ω)
Note that reduplication is part of the perfect stem for Rijksbaron, I kept that here.
This is reasonably clean at this point, but I haven't managed to keep it clean while adding in these:
VIII. First passive, first aorist and first future passive.
IX. Second passive, second aorist and second future passive.
Any thoughts on how best to fit these two cleanly into the model? Do these principal parts each represent two different stems? Makes it a strange model, but it does account for the facts ...
- the present stem (e.g. πιστεύ-ω) - present, imperfect
- the aorist stems (e.g. ἐ-πίστευσ-α) - 1st & 2nd active, 1st & 2nd middle, 1st & 2nd aorist passive
- the perfect stems (e.g. πεπίστευκ-α) - 1st & 2nd perfect, 1st & 2nd pluperfect, future perfect, perfect and pluperfect middle (pass.), future perfect middle
- the future stems (e.g. πιστεύσ-ω) - future active, 1st & 2nd future passive
RandallButh wrote:The four-fold system will allow the student to follow and integrate what is learned in Rijksbaron with discussions in Fanning, et al.
I agree.