[b-greek] Re: Gnomic Aorist / Heb 7:2a

From: Roe (d.roe@t-online.de)
Date: Sun Dec 10 2000 - 15:12:50 EST




Mark Wilson wrote (in part):

> What determines the gnomic sense is the context (this is larger than just
> the verbal idea). I think Carl's examples of the gnomic were right on; in
> each instance the context suggested the gnomic sense, not the morpheme.
>
> This is a guess on my part, but I would think that the "immortality of past
> objective fact" would be expressed by the Aorist form, but not by itself.


Hi Mark,

Thanks for writing (and for your example of ever-present enthusiasm for
Greek!)

It seems that Carl precludes the gnomic aorist for Whitehead's
"immortality of past objective fact"; so my question doesn't really
involve the gnomic (sorry for giving the post that title).

I am interested in what possibilities a Greek writer has for expressing
the "immortality of past objective fact". I had assumed it would have to
be expressed with imperfect (in the referenced passage: EMERIZEN).

Or is it also possible to express this with the aorist? And if so, is
the writer's choice of aorist a natural one, or a rare anomaly?

Thanks again!

David

D.W. Roe
Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany

---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:44 EDT