What do the grammars say about this?Jonathan Robie wrote: ↑August 10th, 2021, 4:34 pm ...there are verses where present tense εἰμι has perfect force, starting in the past and continuing into the present, e.g.
- John 15:27 καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρτυρεῖτε, ὅτι ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐστε.
- John 14:9 λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμι καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωκάς με, Φίλιππε; ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακεν τὸν πατέρα· πῶς σὺ λέγεις, Δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα;
Present with Perfect Force?
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Present with Perfect Force?
From another thread:
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 315
- Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
Here are a couple to get the ball rolling:
Below is the reference Turner makes in Burton.
D
Below is the reference Turner makes in Burton.
And Wallace17. THE PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN PROGRESS. The Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial expression denoting duration and referring to past time, is sometimes used in Greek, as in German, to describe an action which, beginning in past time, is still in progress at the time of speaking. English idiom requires the use of the Perfect in such cases. HA. 826; G. 1258.
Acts 15:21; Μωυ?σῆς γὰρ ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς κηρύσσοντας αὐτὸν, for Moses from generations of old has had in every city them that preached him. See also Luke 13:7, ἔρχομαι, 15:29, δουλεύω, John 5:6, ἔχει; 2 Tim. 3:15, οἶδας. This Present is almost always incorrectly rendered in R.V.
Ernest De Witt Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek, Accordance electronic ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago press, 1903), paragraph 62.
https://accordance.bible/link/read/Burton_Greek#62
ThxA. Extending-from-Past Present (Present of Past Action Still in Progress)
1. Definition
The present tense may be used to describe an action which, begun in the past, continues in the present. The emphasis is on the present time.
Note that this is different from the perfect tense in that the perfect speaks only about the results existing in the present time. It is different from the progressive present in that it reaches back in time and usually has some sort of temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase, to show this past-referring element.16 Depending on how tightly one defines this category, it is either relatively rare or fairly common.17
2. Key to Identification
The key to this usage is normally to translate the present tense as an English present perfect. Some examples might not fit such a gloss, however.
Chart 50: The Force of the Extending-from-Past Present
3. Illustrations
Luke 15:29 τοσαῦτα ἔτη δουλεύω σοι
I have served you for these many years
2 Pet 3:4 πάντα οὕτως διαμένει ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως
all things thus continue [as they have] from the beginning of creation
1 John 3:8 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὁ διάβολος ἁμαρτάνει
the devil has been sinning from the beginning
Cf. also Luke 13:7; John 5:6;18 Acts 15:21; 27:33;19 1 Cor 15:6 (possible).
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: an Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 519-520.
https://accordance.bible/link/read/Wallace_Greek#8831
D
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
Here's Cambridge Greek:
But here, the next section goes on to define "present for perfect" or "perfective perfect" only for telic verbs:Present Indicative Basic Uses
33.14 The present indicative refers to actions that occur at the moment of speaking. By virtue of its imperfective aspect (incomplete), it is used by default to refer to actions which are ongoing at the moment of speaking:Note 1: The ongoing action referred to by the present indicative may have begun long before the moment of speaking, and an expression of duration is sometimes added:
- (10) τί κάτησθε, ὦ Πέρσαι, ἐνθαῦτα; (Hdt. 3.151.2)
Why are you sitting there, Persians?
(11) παραβοηθεῖθ᾽, ὡς ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρῶν τύπτομαι ξυνωμοτῶν. (Ar. Eq. 257)
Help me: I’m being roughed up by conspirators!Observe that Engl. here prefers a present perfect (‘have been investigating’).
- (12) εἰ διδακτόν ἐστιν ἀρετὴ πάλαι σκοποῦμεν. (Pl. Men. 93b)
We have long been investigating whether virtue is something that can be taught.
van Emde Boas, Evert; Rijksbaron, Albert; Huitink, Luuk; de Bakker, Mathieu. The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek (p. 412). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.33.18 With a number of specific verbs (all telic), the present stem may refer to the ongoing result of an action as well as to the action itself.
Note 1: This use is sometimes called ‘present for perfect’ or ‘perfective present’, as the present stem resembles the perfect stem in this use (this ‘perfective’ label should not be confused with perfective aspect).
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
Smyth:
[*] 1885. Present of Past and Present Combined.—The present, when accompanied by a definite or indefinite expression of past time, is used to express an action begun in the past and continued in the present. The ‘progressive perfect’ is often used in translation. Thus, πάλαι θαυμάζω I have been long (and am still) wondering P. Cr. 43b. Cp. iamdudum loquor. So with πάρος, ποτέ. This use appears also in the other moods.
a. So with verbs of hearing, saying, learning, whose action commenced in the past, but whose effect continues into the present: ἐξ ὧν ἀκούω from what I hear (have heard) X. A. 1.9.28, ““ὅπερ λέγω” as I said” P. A. 21a. So with αἰσθάνομαι, γιγνώσκω, μανθάνω, πυνθάνομαι. ἄρτι just is often found with these verbs.
b. The perfect is used instead of the present when the action is completed in the present.
[*] 1886. Present for Perfect.—ἥκω I am come, I have arrived, οἴχομαι I am gone, have a perfect sense; as also ἔρχομαι, ἀφικνοῦμαι. Thus, ““Θεμιστοκλῆς ἥκω παρὰ σέ” I Themistocles have come to you” T. 1.137, ““οἶδα ὅπῃ οἴχονται” I know where they have gone” X. A. 1.4.8.
a. ἥκω may be used in connection with the gnomic aorist (P. S. 188a).
[*] 1887. The present of certain verbs often expresses an enduring result, and may be translated by the perfect: ἀδικῶ I am guilty (ἄδικός εἰμι), I have done wrong, νι_κῶ, κρατῶ, I am victorious, I have conquered, ἡττῶμαι I am conquered, φεύγω I am the defendant or I am an exile (οἱ φεύγοντες the fugitives and the exiles), προδίδωμι I am a traitor, ἁλίσκομαι I am captured, στέρομαι I am deprived, γίγνομαι I am a descendant.
““ἥκω εἰς τὴν σὴν οἰκία_ν, ἀδικῶ δ᾽ οὐδέν” I am come to thy house, but have done no wrong” L. 12.14, ““ἀπαγγέλλετε Ἀριαίῳ ὅτι ἡμεῖς γε νι_κῶμεν βασιλέα_” report to Ariaeus that we at least have conquered the king” X. A. 2.1.4.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
Funk
782.4 The present tense of a few verbs is perfective in character: the action denoted has been completed as of the present moment. The most common of these verbs is ἥκω, I have come, arrived.
(10) ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἥκει Lk 15:27
Your brother has arrived
Bl-D §322.
782.5 To be distinguished from the perfective present (§782.4), is the present tense referring to an act prolonged or repeated up to and including the present:
(11) ἰδοὺ τρία ἔτη ἀφ' οὗ ἔρχομαι ζητῶν καρπὸν
ἐν τῇ συκῇ καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκω Lk 13:7
Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit
on this fig tree, and I have found none
Although both (10) and (11) are translated by the English present perfect, the present tense in (11) includes a present as well as past acts.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
Gildersleeve:
Gildersleeve, B. L. (1900). Syntax of Classical Greek from Homer to Demosthenes. Medford, MA: American Book Company.
Present for perfect.
The present tense of a number of verbs that involve unity of character or persistence of result, is often translated by the English perfect. “νικῶ”, I am victorious, I have conquered; “ἥκω”, I am here, I have arrived; “οἴχομαι”, I am off, I am gone; “ἀκούω”, I hear or have heard; “πυνθάνομαι”, I learn or have learned. “στέρομαι”, I am deprived, and so all verbs of privation.
“νῦν δʼ ἑτέρου πολέμου καιρὸς ἥκει τις”, DEM.3.6, “νικῶμεν … βασιλέα”, XEN. An. 2.1.4; We are victorious over (have conquered) the king. “ἐκεῖνο ἀκήκοας; … καὶ τοῦτό γʼ, ἔφη, ἀκούω”, Mem. 3.5.26. “στερόμεθα ἐπιστήμης”, PLATO, Theaet. 196E; We are deprived of, have to go without, science.
DEM.3.6 (see above). 4.24: “πρότερόν ποτʼ ἀκούω ξενικὸν τρέφειν ἐν Κορίνθῳ τὴν πόλιν”, but 19.221: “καὶ γὰρ ταῦτʼ ἀκήκοʼ αὐτὸν λέγειν”.
ANTIPHON. Cf. 3 “δ” 9: “ειʼ δὲ αὐθέντης ἐκ τῶν λεγομένων ἐπιδείκνυται, οὐχ ἡμεῖς αὐτῷ οἱ λέγοντες αἴτιοί ἐσμεν, ἀλλʼ ἡ πρᾶξις τῶν ἔργων”.
PLATO, Gorg. 503C: “Θεμιστοκλέα οὐκ ἀκούεις ἄνδρα ἀγαθὸν γεγονότα”; Theaet. 142 B: “χαλεπῶς μὲν γὰρ ἔχει καὶ ὑπὸ τραυμάτων τινῶν, μᾶλλον μὴν αὐτὸν αἱρεῖ τὸ γεγονὸς νόσημα ἐν τω_ͅ στρατεύματι”. Ibid. 196 E (see above).
XEN. An. 2.1.4 (see above). Mem. 3.5.26 (see above).
THUC.1.70.7: “ἃ μὲν ἂν ἐπινοήσαντες μὴ ἐξέλθωσιν, οἰκεῖα στέρεσθαι ἡγοῦνται”, “In failing to attain an object, they consider that they have lost” (are suffering the loss of) “what was really their own.”—Morris.
HDT.7.53: “ὡς γὰρ ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι, ἐπʼ ἄνδρας στρατευόμεθα ἀγαθούς”.
EUR. Hel. 134: “οἴχεται θανοῦσα δή”.
SOPH. El. 1326: “ὦ πλεῖστα μῶροι καὶ φρενῶν τητώμενοι”. Ph. 414: “ἀλλʼ ἦ χοὖτος οἴχεται θανών”;
PIND. P. 6.22–3: “ὀρφανιζομένῳ” | “Πηλεΐδᾳ”.
HOM. Od. 1.298: “ἢ οὐκ ἀίεις, οἷον κλέος ἔλλαβε δῖος Ὀρέστης”; 2.118: “οἷʼ οὔ πώ τινʼ ἀκούομεν”. 3.86–8: “ἄλλους μὲν γὰρ πάντας, ὅσοι Τρωσὶν πολέμιζον”, | “πευθόμεθʼ, ἧχι ἕκαστος ἀπώλετο λυγρῷ ὀλέθρῳ·” | “κείνου δʼ αὖ καὶ ὄλεθρον ἀπευθέα θῆκε Κρονίων”.
Gildersleeve, B. L. (1900). Syntax of Classical Greek from Homer to Demosthenes. Medford, MA: American Book Company.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 614
- Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
- Location: Finland
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
"Perfect force" shouldn't be confused with "Present of Past Action Still in Progress", they are two different things. The topic subject line talks about the former, while most descriptions quoted from grammars are about the latter. The Bible references in the first post are very clearly PPAs (Present of Past Action).
What Wallace says represents the problems in this "category" pretty well:
The basic problem with a simple short definition and even the name Present of Past Action Still in Progress is that almost all events which happen in the present moment continue from the past. It's even logically impossible for a human being to talk about only the present situation because the present is instantaneous and moves forward all the time.
Wallace says "usually has some sort of temporal indicator" (emphasis mine). Where are the examples where there isn't a temporal indicator? I haven't seen any undisputable example. To me it looks like Wallace adds this word only because he's not sure about it. In my opinion it doesn't make sense to talk about this category without an explicit temporal indicator. Otherwise a present is just a normal present of the present moment, a gnomic present or something else even if the event happens to be continuing from the past. Almost everything could be categorized as continuing from the past if there's nothing by which we can recognize that the past is explicitly in view. Also the imperfective aspect tells us that the event may continue from the past even if it's not in view, so any instance of present tense may be continuing from the past.
Nobody has defined what this temporal indicator can be and cannot be, but it doesn't seem to be narrowly limited. What is important is that it must not exclude the present moment from the view (compare the John 8:58 discussion where πριν excludes it).
I have more to say about this. As I told in the John 8:58 discussion, I have written some kind of essay about this but hasn't published it in any way. I'm reluctant to publish it because I'd like it to be much better, it feels embarrassing now. The better reason is that I have examples only from the NT and there are far too few to draw any conclusions except preliminary hypothesis. This said, I have found things which haven't been discussed anywhere. One important finding is that there are two kinds of temporal indicators which may behave differently.
As I said several times in the mentioned thread, I would need examples from Koine but other than Biblical literature, so I would be thankful for any so that I could analyze them.
What Wallace says represents the problems in this "category" pretty well:
So, how this should be defined? What does "relatively rare" and "fairly common" mean?Depending on how tightly one defines this category, it is either relatively rare or fairly common.
The basic problem with a simple short definition and even the name Present of Past Action Still in Progress is that almost all events which happen in the present moment continue from the past. It's even logically impossible for a human being to talk about only the present situation because the present is instantaneous and moves forward all the time.
Wallace says "usually has some sort of temporal indicator" (emphasis mine). Where are the examples where there isn't a temporal indicator? I haven't seen any undisputable example. To me it looks like Wallace adds this word only because he's not sure about it. In my opinion it doesn't make sense to talk about this category without an explicit temporal indicator. Otherwise a present is just a normal present of the present moment, a gnomic present or something else even if the event happens to be continuing from the past. Almost everything could be categorized as continuing from the past if there's nothing by which we can recognize that the past is explicitly in view. Also the imperfective aspect tells us that the event may continue from the past even if it's not in view, so any instance of present tense may be continuing from the past.
Nobody has defined what this temporal indicator can be and cannot be, but it doesn't seem to be narrowly limited. What is important is that it must not exclude the present moment from the view (compare the John 8:58 discussion where πριν excludes it).
I have more to say about this. As I told in the John 8:58 discussion, I have written some kind of essay about this but hasn't published it in any way. I'm reluctant to publish it because I'd like it to be much better, it feels embarrassing now. The better reason is that I have examples only from the NT and there are far too few to draw any conclusions except preliminary hypothesis. This said, I have found things which haven't been discussed anywhere. One important finding is that there are two kinds of temporal indicators which may behave differently.
As I said several times in the mentioned thread, I would need examples from Koine but other than Biblical literature, so I would be thankful for any so that I could analyze them.
-
- Posts: 3353
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
OK, let's look at Turner, citing the RSV as the version scholars then were working with, and a French translation as its tenses tend to agree with more with the Greek than the English:
Luke 13:7 Ἰδοὺ τρία ἔτη ἀφ’ οὗ ἔρχομαι (RSV "Lo, these three years I have come"; cf. NEG "Voilà trois ans que je viens"). The habit of coming still holds at the present with an explicit reference time extending from the past to the present over three years. The French uses the present here just like the Greek; the English perfect is idiomatic.
Luke 15:29 τοσαῦτα ἔτη δουλεύω σοι (RSV "these many years I have served you"; NEG "il y a tant d’années que je te sers"). The activity of serving still holds at the present, with an lengthy reference time that includes the present. Note how the French uses the present.
John 5:6 τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς κατακείμενον, καὶ γνοὺς ὅτι πολὺν ἤδη χρόνον ἔχει, λέγει αὐτῷ· Θέλεις ὑγιὴς γενέσθαι; (RSV not translated; NIV "he had been in this condition for a long time"; NEG "il était malade depuis longtemps"). The disabled man is still disabled at this point, and the extended reference time for a long time until the present. The English pluperfect "had been" is due to an idiomatic "backshift" not applicable to Greek.
John 8:58 πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί (RSV "before Abraham was, I am"; NEG "avant qu’Abraham fût, je suis") is the example we've been discussing. The issue is the reference time set up by πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι as it excludes the present. The French keeps the present, although it does have a perfect tense it could have used ("ai était").
John 14:9 Τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ’ ὑμῶν εἰμι (RSV "Have I been with you so long"; NEG "Il y a si longtemps que je suis avec vous"). Jesus is still with them and the extended reference time is for such a (long) time. The French uses the present.
John 15:27 καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρτυρεῖτε, ὅτι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐστε. (RSV "... you have been with me from the beginning"; NEG "... vous êtes avec moi dès le commencement"). Jesus' disciples are still with him (present), and the extended reference time is from the beginning. The French uses the present.
Acts 15:21 Μωϋσῆς γὰρ ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς κηρύσσοντας αὐτὸν ἔχει ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς κατὰ πᾶν σάββατον ἀναγινωσκόμενος. (RSV "For from early generations Moses has had in every city those who preach him, ..."; NEG "Car, depuis bien des générations, Moïse a dans chaque ville des gens qui le prêchent, ...") The (law of Moses) is still had in the cities, and the extended reference time is from the generations of the ancients.
Acts 26:31 καὶ ἀναχωρήσαντες ἐλάλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους λέγοντες ὅτι Οὐδὲν θανάτου ἢ δεσμῶν ἄξιον τι πράσσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος. (RSV "... This man is doing nothing to deserve death or imprisonment."; NEG "... Cet homme n’a rien fait qui mérite la mort ou la prison.") Jesus is (still) doing nothing to deserve death. Interesting, it is the French that translates with the prefect.
2 Cor 12:19 Πάλαι δοκεῖτε ὅτι ὑμῖν ἀπολογούμεθα; ... (RSV "Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves before you?"; NEG "Vous vous imaginez depuis longtemps que nous nous justifions auprès de vous."). The action is still going on, and the extended reference time is "for a long time." The French uses the present.
2 Tim 3:15 καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ βρέφους ἱερὰ γράμματα οἶδας, τὰ δυνάμενά σε σοφίσαι εἰς σωτηρίαν διὰ πίστεως τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ· (RSV "and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings ..."; NEG "dès ton enfance, tu connais les saintes lettres, ..."). Odd that Turner is citing a perfect as an example of the present being used for the perfect; maybe he thinks that despite its morphology, it's really a present. At any rate, Timothy still knows, and the extended reference time is from his childhood. The French uses the present as expected.
2 Pet 3:4 καὶ λέγοντες· Ποῦ ἐστιν ἡ ἐπαγγελία τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ; ἀφ’ ἧς γὰρ οἱ πατέρες ἐκοιμήθησαν, πάντα οὕτως διαμένει ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως. (RSV "... For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation."; NEG "... Car, depuis que les pères sont morts, tout demeure comme dès le commencement de la création."). The continuing is (still) present and two extended reference times are in view, both reaching the present.
1 John 2:9 ὁ λέγων ἐν τῷ φωτὶ εἶναι καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ μισῶν ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ ἐστὶν ἕως ἄρτι.(RSV "He who says he is in the light and hates his brother is in the darkness still."; NEG "Celui qui prétend être dans la lumière, et qui hait son frère, est encore dans les ténèbres.") Unclear why this is cited. It's a standard present, though we do see an extending from the past "up to now."
1 John 3:8 ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστίν, ὅτι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὁ διάβολος ἁμαρτάνει. ... (RSV "He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning."; NEG "Celui qui pratique le péché est du diable, car le diable pèche dès le commencement.") The devil is still sinning, and the extended reference time is from the beginning. The French, again, uses the present.
My sense of this grammatical category is that it covers cases where English uses the perfect when other languages are content to use the present. This is such a strange category to use in a Greek grammar (though textbooks may want to point it out).
Luke 2:48 (WH) καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτὸν ἐξεπλάγησαν, καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ· Τέκνον, τί ἐποίησας ἡμῖν οὕτως; ἰδοὺ ὁ πατήρ σου καὶ ἐγὼ ὀδυνώμενοι ζητοῦμέν σε. (RSV "... Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously."). Turner is citing the Westcott & Hort text on the authority of 01 and B, but today's editions go with the imperfect ἐζητοῦμεν. The reference time appears to be the present moment, as their seeking Jesus is just coming to an end.Turner 1963:62 wrote:(c) The Present which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as Perfective, the only difference being that the action is conceived as still in progress (Burton § 17). It is
frequent in the NT: Lk 2:48 13:7 (ἰδοὺ τρία ἔτη ἀφ' οὗ ἔρχεται) 15:29 (τοσαῦτα ἔτη δουλεύω σοι, and I still do), Jn 5:6 8:58 (εἰμί) 14:9 (μεθ' ὑμῶν εἴμί) 15:27 (ἐστέ), Ac 15:21 (M. γὰρ ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς κηρούσσοντας αὐτὸν ἔχει, and still has) 26:31 (πράσσει, his manner of life still continues), 2 Co 12:19, 2 Ti 3:15 (οἶδας), 2 Pt 3:4,1 Jn 2:9 3:8.
Luke 13:7 Ἰδοὺ τρία ἔτη ἀφ’ οὗ ἔρχομαι (RSV "Lo, these three years I have come"; cf. NEG "Voilà trois ans que je viens"). The habit of coming still holds at the present with an explicit reference time extending from the past to the present over three years. The French uses the present here just like the Greek; the English perfect is idiomatic.
Luke 15:29 τοσαῦτα ἔτη δουλεύω σοι (RSV "these many years I have served you"; NEG "il y a tant d’années que je te sers"). The activity of serving still holds at the present, with an lengthy reference time that includes the present. Note how the French uses the present.
John 5:6 τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς κατακείμενον, καὶ γνοὺς ὅτι πολὺν ἤδη χρόνον ἔχει, λέγει αὐτῷ· Θέλεις ὑγιὴς γενέσθαι; (RSV not translated; NIV "he had been in this condition for a long time"; NEG "il était malade depuis longtemps"). The disabled man is still disabled at this point, and the extended reference time for a long time until the present. The English pluperfect "had been" is due to an idiomatic "backshift" not applicable to Greek.
John 8:58 πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί (RSV "before Abraham was, I am"; NEG "avant qu’Abraham fût, je suis") is the example we've been discussing. The issue is the reference time set up by πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι as it excludes the present. The French keeps the present, although it does have a perfect tense it could have used ("ai était").
John 14:9 Τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ’ ὑμῶν εἰμι (RSV "Have I been with you so long"; NEG "Il y a si longtemps que je suis avec vous"). Jesus is still with them and the extended reference time is for such a (long) time. The French uses the present.
John 15:27 καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρτυρεῖτε, ὅτι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐστε. (RSV "... you have been with me from the beginning"; NEG "... vous êtes avec moi dès le commencement"). Jesus' disciples are still with him (present), and the extended reference time is from the beginning. The French uses the present.
Acts 15:21 Μωϋσῆς γὰρ ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς κηρύσσοντας αὐτὸν ἔχει ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς κατὰ πᾶν σάββατον ἀναγινωσκόμενος. (RSV "For from early generations Moses has had in every city those who preach him, ..."; NEG "Car, depuis bien des générations, Moïse a dans chaque ville des gens qui le prêchent, ...") The (law of Moses) is still had in the cities, and the extended reference time is from the generations of the ancients.
Acts 26:31 καὶ ἀναχωρήσαντες ἐλάλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους λέγοντες ὅτι Οὐδὲν θανάτου ἢ δεσμῶν ἄξιον τι πράσσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος. (RSV "... This man is doing nothing to deserve death or imprisonment."; NEG "... Cet homme n’a rien fait qui mérite la mort ou la prison.") Jesus is (still) doing nothing to deserve death. Interesting, it is the French that translates with the prefect.
2 Cor 12:19 Πάλαι δοκεῖτε ὅτι ὑμῖν ἀπολογούμεθα; ... (RSV "Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves before you?"; NEG "Vous vous imaginez depuis longtemps que nous nous justifions auprès de vous."). The action is still going on, and the extended reference time is "for a long time." The French uses the present.
2 Tim 3:15 καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ βρέφους ἱερὰ γράμματα οἶδας, τὰ δυνάμενά σε σοφίσαι εἰς σωτηρίαν διὰ πίστεως τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ· (RSV "and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings ..."; NEG "dès ton enfance, tu connais les saintes lettres, ..."). Odd that Turner is citing a perfect as an example of the present being used for the perfect; maybe he thinks that despite its morphology, it's really a present. At any rate, Timothy still knows, and the extended reference time is from his childhood. The French uses the present as expected.
2 Pet 3:4 καὶ λέγοντες· Ποῦ ἐστιν ἡ ἐπαγγελία τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ; ἀφ’ ἧς γὰρ οἱ πατέρες ἐκοιμήθησαν, πάντα οὕτως διαμένει ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως. (RSV "... For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation."; NEG "... Car, depuis que les pères sont morts, tout demeure comme dès le commencement de la création."). The continuing is (still) present and two extended reference times are in view, both reaching the present.
1 John 2:9 ὁ λέγων ἐν τῷ φωτὶ εἶναι καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ μισῶν ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ ἐστὶν ἕως ἄρτι.(RSV "He who says he is in the light and hates his brother is in the darkness still."; NEG "Celui qui prétend être dans la lumière, et qui hait son frère, est encore dans les ténèbres.") Unclear why this is cited. It's a standard present, though we do see an extending from the past "up to now."
1 John 3:8 ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστίν, ὅτι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὁ διάβολος ἁμαρτάνει. ... (RSV "He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning."; NEG "Celui qui pratique le péché est du diable, car le diable pèche dès le commencement.") The devil is still sinning, and the extended reference time is from the beginning. The French, again, uses the present.
My sense of this grammatical category is that it covers cases where English uses the perfect when other languages are content to use the present. This is such a strange category to use in a Greek grammar (though textbooks may want to point it out).
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 315
- Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm
Re: Present with Perfect Force?
This is interesting. I now wonder if such a category would be commented upon, either at all, or in the same way, in a grammar of Ancient Greek written in French for French speakers. Do you know of any such grammar and what it says ? I have no French myself alas.Stephen Carlson wrote: ↑August 12th, 2021, 2:59 am My sense of this grammatical category is that it covers cases where English uses the perfect when other languages are content to use the present. This is such a strange category to use in a Greek grammar (though textbooks may want to point it out).
Thx
D
-
- Posts: 4170
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: Present with Present Force?
As I slowly wrap my brain around this, I agree. I think Cambridge got this right, footnoting it as part of the default use of the present tense:Stephen Carlson wrote: ↑August 12th, 2021, 2:59 am My sense of this grammatical category is that it covers cases where English uses the perfect when other languages are content to use the present. This is such a strange category to use in a Greek grammar (though textbooks may want to point it out).
Present Indicative Basic Uses
33.14 The present indicative refers to actions that occur at the moment of speaking. By virtue of its imperfective aspect (incomplete), it is used by default to refer to actions which are ongoing at the moment of speaking:Note 1: The ongoing action referred to by the present indicative may have begun long before the moment of speaking, and an expression of duration is sometimes added:
- (10) τί κάτησθε, ὦ Πέρσαι, ἐνθαῦτα; (Hdt. 3.151.2)
Why are you sitting there, Persians?
(11) παραβοηθεῖθ᾽, ὡς ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρῶν τύπτομαι ξυνωμοτῶν. (Ar. Eq. 257)
Help me: I’m being roughed up by conspirators!Observe that Engl. here prefers a present perfect (‘have been investigating’).
- (12) εἰ διδακτόν ἐστιν ἀρετὴ πάλαι σκοποῦμεν. (Pl. Men. 93b)
We have long been investigating whether virtue is something that can be taught.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/