Re: Looking for some direction
- From: "Neeraj Mathur" <neemathur@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:01:42 -0000
"Joachim Pense" <spam-collector@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dvkh4h$akk$01$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Neeraj Mathur wrote:
An 'aorist' is basically just a past tense;
I trust (by knowledge of many well-informed postings of you) that this is
a
deliberate simplification - you certainly know that Aorist is basically a
perfective aspect and not a past tense. You clarify the situation later in
your discussion, but I just cannot leave this first line stand
uncommented.
The finite forms of the aorist are a past tense with perfective aspect
(while the finite forms of the perfect are a present tense with perfective
aspect). The non-finite forms - infinitive, participles, etc. - contrast
with the present in having perfective aspect, without (necessarily) having
any past significance.
Thus, for an active participle, Greek has a three-way distinction between
present (leipo:n, lu:o:n), aorist (lipo:n, lu:sa:s) and perfect (leloipo:s,
leluko:s). The first two contrast in aspect primarily (sometimes in tense as
well); the third from those other two by tense in that the event occurred
before the refernce point, which is concurrent with the speech-act.
Neeraj Mathur
.
- References:
- Looking for some direction
- From: Holly
- Re: Looking for some direction
- From: Chapstick
- Re: Looking for some direction
- From: Day Brown
- Looking for some direction
- Prev by Date: Re: Genome Study: Africans Have Gene For Salt Retention
- Next by Date: Re: Origin of skiing
- Previous by thread: Re: Looking for some direction
- Next by thread: Paleolithic Religion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
