aorist and present infinitive
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
aorist and present infinitive
Line 20 of the Iliad reads as follows;[size=150]παῖδα δ’ ἐμοὶ λῦσαί τε φίλην, τά τ’ ἄποινα δέχεσθαι.<br />My question is: What is the significance of [size=150]λῦσαι being aorist and [size=150]δέχεσθαι present tense.<br /><br />Thanks
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Re:aorist and present infinitive
In the indicative the present is present tense and the aorist is a point past. (By point past, I mean it indicates a singular event in the past, not an ongoing activity. Note that an event in the past can be described as ongoing, or sometimes you might want to talk about the whole event as a single thing.)<br /><br />In every other mood including imperatives and infinitives, the present means "ongoing" and the aorist means "single event."<br /><br />So, "free my dear daughter" - one single event, one hopes - "and accept these ransoms." I admit it's not entirely clear to me why this acceptance is cast as an ongoing activity, but the freeing is necessarily a single event. Later, when griping about the event to the prophet Calchas, Agamemnon will talk about it in the aorist (line 111-112):<br /><br />[size=150]οὕνεκ’ ἐγὼ κούρης χρυσηίδος ἀγλά’ ἄποινα[u]οὐκ ἔθελον δέξασθαι[/u], <br /><br />I used the Perseus "words in context" tool, and I'm guessing the use of the present in your example is a metrical convenience. Some others with the aorist:<br /><br />Iliad 6.46, 11.131<br />[size=150]ζώγρει )ατρέος υἱέ, σὺ δ’ ἄξια δέξαι ἄποινα<br /><br />Iliad 24.137<br />[size=150]ἀλλ’ ἄγε δὴ λῦσον, νεκροῖο δὲ δέξαι ἄποινα.<br /><br />(I really adore Perseus).<br /><br />So I'm afraid I can't offer an authoritative answer, but I always find examples of usage elsewhere can be helpful. But I bet the present infinitive fit the verse better.<br /><br />
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: Belgium
Re:aorist and present infinitive
What I think (but my English ought to be far better... so, in telegraphic style):<br /><br />- [size=150]λῦσαι : perfective aspect. Action considered as a single point, you speak of it only to put it on a chain of actions, as a single link of the chain. You don't draw attention to the details nor to the development of the action. It can also mean "free (in a particular case)" or "free (straightaway)". All three notions (single point, particular case, straighaway) are connected.<br /><br />- [size=150]δέχεσθαι : imperfective aspect. The author reminds you of the different phases in the development of the action, evolutions, efforts needed... The action is considered as interesting in itself. Present (infinitive) is also used to speak of recurring actions or actions that can begin at an undefinite point in time (now or later... no matter)<br /><br />For example (imperative):<br />[size=150]λέγε (present imperative) : "say", "speak" (when you are ready... you can begin and stop and begin again... we will hear your voice for some time... you will say a lot of things...)<br /><br />as opposed to <br />[size=150]εἰπέ (aorist imperative) "Tell me" (sthraightaway, about this particular thing...)<br /><br />Another example (infinitive):<br />[size=150]χαλεπὸν τὸ ποιεῖν, τὸ δὲ κελεῦσαι ῥᾴδιον "It is difficult to achieve (present) while it is easy to command (aorist)."<br /><br />By means of the present [size=150]ποιειν we are reminded of all things needed by an achievement (reflection, decisions, determination, skills, efforts...), while the aorist <br />[size=150]κελεῦσαι denotes the straightforwardness of such an action ("Study the whole dictionary by heart. On with it !")<br /><br />This is my "personal" view of the opposition between present and aorist. I was not yet able to make it public until now. So thanks to you all.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Re:aorist and present infinitive
Hi All,<br /><br />Perhaps the present infinitive [size=150]δέχεσθαι is used because it fits the meter.<br /><br />The line<br /><br />[size=150]παῖδα δ’ ἐμοὶ λῦσαί τε φίλην, τά τ’ ἄποινα δέχεσθαι<br /><br /> seems to scan thus:<br /><br /> _ u u _ _ _ u u _ u u _ u u _ _<br /><br />The two aorist infinitive choices won't fit. First aorist<br />[size=150]δέξασθαι has a long (by position) first syllable. Second aorist [size=150]δέχθαι is only two syllables long, where three are needed.<br /><br />Cordially,<br /><br />Paul
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
Re:aorist and present infinitive
Thank you for the interesting insights.<br />The difference between the aspect of aorist and present is one possibility. The possibility of it being a metrical convenience makes me wonder if Homeric Greek is going to help or hinder my future plans to learn Attic and Koine.<br />I am tying to imagine what it would sound like to listen to someone who learned English using a book of poetry.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1108
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:59 pm
Re:aorist and present infinitive
[quote author=Bert de Haan link=board=2;threadid=398;start=0#3151 date=1060383719]<br />I am tying to imagine what it would sound like to listen to someone who learned English using a book of poetry.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I would imagine it would sound very pretty, very garbled, and very confusing. <br /><br />Keesa
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 640
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:04 am
- Location: Jakarta
Re:aorist and present infinitive
I don't think the suggestions so far are mutally exclusive. Perhaps the tenses are different as a matter of metrical convenience and to convey the different nuances suggested by Skylax and William. Isn't that what makes a great poet?
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Re:aorist and present infinitive
<br /><br />It'll be fine. Even if Homer does something a bit dodgy to fit the meter, he cannot dodge so much that the sense is deformed, or his audience wouldn't know what he was saying.<br /><br />Bert de Haan wrote:<br />Thank you for the interesting insights.<br />The difference between the aspect of aorist and present is one possibility. The possibility of it being a metrical convenience makes me wonder if Homeric Greek is going to help or hinder my future plans to learn Attic and Koine.<br />
<br /><br />There are some differences in vocabulary and syntax, but this is true between Classical and Koine, and even different sorts of prose. Xenophon writes rather differently than Plato.<br /><br />I am tying to imagine what it would sound like to listen to someone who learned English using a book of poetry.<br />
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1108
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:59 pm
Re:aorist and present infinitive
I think that's true in any kind of writing-English prose included. <br /><br />Keesa
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:15 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re:aorist and present infinitive
I'm inclined to dislike arguments metri causa. Sure, in this verse only the inf.pr. fits; but how do you know there isn't a single possible verse (with as far as possible the same meaning) in which the inf.aor. would fit?<br /><br />[size=150]εὔχομαι σε ἐρρῶσθαι<br /><br />Ptolemaios