At 10:14 AM -0500 4/13/98, dalmatia@eburg.com wrote: >Ward Powers wrote: >> The major point to be noted though is that these are simply three different >> ways of forming an aorist, and that all three aorist, howsoever formed, are >> identical in meaning. > >Well, this is the whole point, you see... Simply asserting it as truth >is not proof, except by reference to authority, of which yours is >great, and mine is nil, obviously. I ran into the same 'argument' >when I was told, on excellent authority, that the sigma in ____S is >different from the sigma in E____SA, whereas the epsilon in E____ is >the same as the one in E____SA. And I understand that these >assertions are backed up by long and arduous chains of very arcane [to >me] reasonings. The language of these reasonings is arcane to the >uninitiated ~ I am not an initiate. So what I am asking for, in plain >language that my 10 year old can understand the words of, is WHY? I >really do have difficulty abandoning common sense and accepting the >authority of what seems to be emerging here as a kind of linguistic >priesthood, comprised of excellent people who have been initiated into >the language and teachings of the Mysteries of the Greek Verb. Ward, >there has simply GOT to be a normal way for you to show this, where an >ordinary student can understand the reason[s] why. > >> George's distinction between sigmatic and non-sigmatic aorists is totally >> invalid. I seem to find myself cast in the role of a member of a "linguistic priesthood, comprised of excellent people who have been initiated into the language and teachings of the Mysteries of the Greek Verb." A theory that the -SA- aorists are bearers of a sort of "timeless past future" sense has been set forward as a "common sense" view and it has been argued that "it works" better than the understanding of the aorist indicative that has been taught. I would think that the burden of arguing a new theory ought to rest upon the proponent of that theory rather than that it should fall to defenders of the traditional view to demonstrate the traditional view is in fact sensible--that's what I did when I argued for a different way of understanding the morphology of the aorist passive a few months ago myself, but so be it. I don't really think it is difficult to demonstrate that an aorist indicative should be understood as referring to a past event and that it usually in fact does so. And so I'm undertaking here to do so, although I really sort of feel like it is a matter of proving "that Napoleon's white horse is white." Is there evidence to support the assertion that an aorist indicative tense form, whether it is (1) a first aorist with a -SA- marker (or a liquid/nasal first aorist where the -S- has evanesced and only the -A- remains), or (2) a second or "thematic" aorist with only a thematic vowel O/E as a link between stem and personal ending (including the occasional second aorists that are already being conjugated with -A- rather than with thematic vowel, as all modern Greek past tenses are conjugated), or (3) "third" or "athematic" aorists, where the personal endings are added directly to root as stem, or (4) aorist passives in -QH- which are formally akin to the "third" or "athematic" type in that active endings are added to the -QH- stems--that any of these in the indicative refers to the same essential simple past action--not some sort of timeless "past future", but all really referring to events in the past? I've decided to run search all first plural aorist verbs in Acts (using Accordance). I find 56 instances, of which 25 are "first aorists" (18 with -SA-, 7 liquid/nasal stems where the -S- has been lost); 2 are "second aorists" conjugated in -A- rather than thematically; 18 are 'regular' second aorists conjugated thematically; 2 are what I like to call "third" or 'athematic' aorists; there are 2 middle-voice first aorists, one of them with -SA- marker, the other a liquid verb with lost -S-; and finally there are 7 forms which are normally called aorist passive, although some of these are not really passive at all but in fact -QH- aorists of so-called "passive deponent" verbs with active meaning. My reason for choosing first plural for the search was that the -SA- should be clearly evident in first aorist forms, and if the notion that the -S- and -A- elements in these somehow indicate a "timeless past future" sense, it ought to be evident in at least some of these verb forms. In fact, however, every one of these first plural aorist forms in Acts must clearly refer to a past event. I have, of course, not considered aorist participles or infinitives because aspect rather than time is more often than not the key element in those forms when the aorist is chosen in preference to a present, future, or perfect participle or infinitive. Finally, my reason for doing this is twofold: (1) I do realize that regurgitating the morphological rules for formation of the aorist from traditional grammars is itself no convincing evidence for the validity of those morphological rules and the assertion of traditional grammars that aorist indicatives do in fact normally refer to past tenses; but also (2) I would be quite disturbed if beginners in Greek on the list should come to suppose that there is really some substance to this "common sense" view of the aorist and they should abandon what they have been taught or have taught themselves in the traditional grammar texts and reference books in favor of this new view. I don't want to aid and abet that by neglect. So here goes: the aorist indicatives of the book of Acts cataloged as follows,all referring to past events: Active 1 plural aorist First aorist (25 instances, including 7 liquid verbs without sigma) Acts 4:20 hA HKOUSAMEN: "what we heard" Acts 5:28 PARHGGEILAMEN: "we instructed" (loss of sigma in liquid verb) Acts 15:10 ISCUSAMEN: "neither your fathers nor you were strong enough (= able) to carry" Acts 15:24 HKOUSAMEN: "when we heard that ..." Acts 15:36 KATHGGEILAMEN TON LOGON TOU KURIOU: "we proclaimed the word of the Lord ..." Acts 16:10 EZHTHSAMEN EXELQEIN EIS MAKEDONIAN: "we sought to leave for Macedonia ..." Acts 16:11 EUQUDROMHSAMEN EIS SAMOQRAiKHN: "we sailed a straight course to Samothrace ..." Acts 19:2 HKOUSAMEN: "nor did we hear that there is a Holy Spirit." Acts 20:6 EXEPLEUSAMEN META TAS hHMERAS TWN AZUMWN: "we sailed out after the days of unleavened bread." Acts 20:6 DIETRIYAMEN hHMERAS hEPTA: "we whiled away seven days ..." Acts 20:15 THi EPIOUSHi KATHNTHSAMEN ANTIKRUS CIOU: "on the next day we arrived at Chios." Acts 21:4 EPEMEINAMEN AUTOU hHMERAS hEPTA: "we remained there for seven days." Acts 21:7 KATHNTHSAMEN EIS PTOLEMAIDA: "we reached Ptolemais" Acts 21:7 EMEINAMEN hHMERAN MIAN PAR' AUTOIS: "we remained one day with them." Acts 21:8 EMEINAMEN PAR' AUTWi: "we stayed with him." Acts 21:12 hWS DE HKOUSAMEN TAUTA: "when we heard these things ..." Acts 21:14 PEIQOMENOU DE AUTOU hHSUCASAMEN ...: "as he kept urging, we held our peace ..." Acts 21:25 PERI DE TWN PEPISTEUKOTWN EQNWN hHMEIS EPESTEILAMEN: "but concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we gave instructions ..." Acts 23:14 ANAQEMATI ANEQATISAMEN hEAUTOUS MHDENOS GEUESQAI...: "we layed a solemn curse upon ourselves to taste nothing ..." Acts 24:6 hON KAI EKRATHSAMEN: "whom we also seized" Acts 27:4 hUPEPLEUSAMEN THN KUPRON: "we sailed below Cyrpus ..." Acts 27:7 hUPEPLEUSAMEN THN KRHTHN KATA SALMWNHN: "we sailed below Crete to Salmone." Acts 27:16 ISCUSAMEN MOLIS PERIKRATEIS GENESQAI THS SKAFHS: "we were barely able to get control of the raft." Acts 28:12 EPEMEINAMEN hHMERAS TREIS: "we stayed for three days." Acts 28:13 KATHNTHSAMEN EIS hRHGION: "we arrived at Rhegium." Second aorist conjugated with alpha endings (2 instances) Acts 4:20 hA EIDAMEN: "what we saw" Acts 28:14 KAI hOUTWS EIS THN hRWMHN HLQAMEN: "and thus did we come to Rome." Second aorist conjugated with thematic endings (18 instances) Acts 5:23 hEUROMEN: "we found the prison locked É" Acts 5:23 hEUROMEN: "we found nobody inside" Acts 10:41 SUNEFAGOMEN KAI SUNEPIOMEN: "we ate together and we drank together." Acts 11:12 EISHLTOMEN: "we went into the man's house." Acts 16:13 EXHLQOMEN EXW THS PULHS: "we went outside of the gate." Acts 20:6 HLQOMEN PROS AUTOUS EIS THN TRWiADA ACRI hHMERWN PENTE: "we went toward them in the course of five days ..." Acts 20:14 HLQOMEN EIS MITULHNHN: "we came to Mytilene." Acts 20:15 THi DE hETERAi PAREBALOMEN EIS SAMON: "on the second day we landed on Samos." Acts 20:15 THi DE ECOMENWi HLQOMEN EIS MILHTON: "on the following day we came to Miletus." Acts 21:1 HLQOMEN EIS THN KW: "we came to Cos." Acts 21:3 KATHLQOMEN EIS TURON: "we arrived at Tyre." Acts 21:6 APHSPASAMEQA ALLHLOUS: "we said farewell to each other ..." Acts 21:8 HLQOMEN EIS KAISAREIAN: "we came to Caesarea." Acts 27:5 KATHLQOMEN EIS MURA THS LUKIAS: "we arrived at Myra of Lycia." Acts 27:8 HLQOMEN EIS TOPON TINAh: "we came to a place ..." Acts 28:13 HLQOMEN EIS POTIOLOUSl: "we came to Puteoli." Acts 28:16 hOTE EISHLQOMEN EIS hRWMHN: "when we entered into Rome ..." "Third" (athematic) 1 plural aorist (2 instances) Acts 21:6 ANEBHMEN EIS TO PLOION: "we went on board the ship" Acts 28:1 TOTE EPEGNWMEN hOTI MELITH hH NHSOS KALEITAI: "Then we learned that the island is called Malta." Middle 1 plural aorist (2 instances) Acts 15:24 DIESTEILAMEQA: "words which we did not instruct/authorize ..." Acts 28:21 EDEXAMEQA: "neither did we receive letters about you from Judaea nor ..." Passive 1 plural aorist (7 instances) Acts 2:8 EGENNHQHMEN: " ... we each hear in our own language in which we were born ..." Acts 20:13 ANHCQHMEN EPI THN ASSON: "we set sail for Assos ..." Acts 21:2 KAI hEURONTES PLOION DIAPERWN EIS FOINIKHN EPIBANTES ANHCQHEMEN: "and upon finding a ship going over to Phoenicia and boarding it we set sail É" Acts 27:2 ANHCQHMEN: "we set sail as Aristarchos a Macedonian of Thessalonica was with us." Acts 27:3 KATHCQHMEN EIS SIDWNA: "we put to land at Sidon ..." Acts 28:11 ANHCQHMEN EN PLOIWi: "we set sail in a boat ..." Acts 28:14 PAREKLHQHMEN PAR' AUTOIS EPIMEINAI hHMERAS hEPTA: "we were exhorted to stay with them for seven days ..." Carl W. Conrad Department of Classics/Washington University One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018 Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649 cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/