I have a problem here...

Leopold · Post by **Leopold** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:14 pm

Hi,

Does anybody know what does this mean: "There are indeed a few authorities who deny Greek tense any temporal force" or where can I find out?

Thanks a lot

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:27 pm

Hi Leopold,

Since I wrote it

- it means that several authorities on ancient greek think that tense had nothing to do with time.

Most rigid in this posture is probably Stanley Porter, author of "Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood". But there are many other authors who insist that the primary function of the 'tense stems' is to convey aspect and not time.

Cordially,

Paul

P.S. - Welcome to Textkit!

Leopold · Post by **Leopold** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:40 pm

Thanks, Paul., but what I don't understand is not the term "temporal force", but all the idea of tenses having nothing to do with time. Normally, one would think that tenses could have nothing to do with anything but time.
And there is a difference between "tenses having nothing to do with time" and "the primary aspect of tense stems is to convey aspects and not time". Primary is not only.
This is quite intriguing for me, so, as I don't think it possible to get Stanley Porter's book, is it possible to find anything about it in the Net?

Thanks a lot

Bert · Post by **Bert** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:12 pm

Try if the following link is helpful to you.
http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/documents/PorterObj.pdf

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:21 pm

Leopold wrote:Normally, one would think that tenses could have nothing to do with anything but time.
And there is a difference between "tenses having nothing to do with time" and "the primary aspect of tense stems is to convey aspects and not time". Primary is not only.
This is quite intriguing for me, so, as I don't think it possible to get Stanley Porter's book, is it possible to find anything about it in the Net?
Thanks a lot

Hi Leopold,

I mention the other authors in the context of 'primary aspect of tense stems' only to point out that there is a range of thought on this matter. It seems to extend from those who think that tense has nothing to do with time, to those who think it is primarily aspectual, secondarily temporal. I suppose there may still be some who think that tense is primarily temporal, but I am not aware of any.

See reference Bert posted. (Thanks Bert!)

Cordially,

Paul

Titus Marius Crispus · Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:22 am

What exactly are the 'aspects' the tenses convey? My Latin education has taught me that tenses are mainly temporal, with exceptions such as the gnomic perfect and historical present.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:35 am

Hi,

Well, you can alway start here: http://www.textkit.com/tutorials/200407 ... id=5&tid=6

Cordially,

Paul

Leopold · Post by **Leopold** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 8:17 am

Thanks, guys

Leopold