Alan Patterson wrote:(what is the difference in translating a Future Passive from a Future Perfect)
But then look at Smyth, §1955, who lists 10 future-perfect monolectic forms, including 3 κεκ- forms: ἀναγεγράψομαι, δεδήσεται, κεκλῄσεται, πεπράξεται, εἰρήσεται, κεκλήσομαι, μεμνήσομαι, κεκτήσομαι, τεθνήξω, and ἑστήξω. He does refer to some of these (κεκλήσομαι, μεμνήσομαι, κεκτήσομαι in particular) as being "used like a simple future," but that is a statement of pragmatic function, not morphological formation.
RDecker wrote: ... As for Smyth, I'm a bit puzzled, so Dr. "Carl-Smyth" may need to take me in hand here. The discussion in 447 pertains to what I've usually called "iotat redup." which is the normal form for the present in the μι verbs, in contrast to "normal"/ε redup. used in the perf. And 448 lists only 2 verbs, ἀγω and φερω, that have a duplicated syllable at the beginning of the stem in 2Aor--but I've never thought of them as "reduplicated" forms that have the same morphology as perfects. Perhaps I've just used "reduplicated" in a narrower sense (maybe narrower than I should?). ...
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest