Agent noun form of the verb apokalypto/αποκαλύπτω

[DARKastheRAIN]

How would I turn the verb apokalypto/αποκαλύπτω into an agent noun? You know like English words with the suffix -er (e.g. revealer). Is there a way to do this in Greek? I'm going for "thing that reveals" rather than "person who reveals", if that has any bearing on the translation.

P.S. Give me the romanization as well as the Greek spelling.

[NateD26]

I guess you can use a participle with the article: ho apokalyptōn/ὁ ἀποκαλύπτων for a male, hē apokalyptοusa/ἡ ἀποκαλύπτουσα for a female and to apokalytpon/τὸ ἀποκαλύπτον for a neuter.

the definite participle replaces a relative clause:
the man, who revealed the story last night, was right in doing so = the revealer of the story last night...

[DARKastheRAIN]

There's no suffix equivilant to -er or -ist?

[Scribo]

There's no suffix equivilant to -er or -ist?

There is, sort of. The word for general comes from the verb to lead an army etc, But I honestly think it would be less Greek, Greek loves it's participles.

Apocalyptisths or something? No, not really. Is there a typical reason you don't want a participle?

[Damoetas]

Yeah - there is no such word ἀποκαλύπτης listed in LSJ. And that wouldn't be what you want anyway, because it could only be a person. If you want to say "the thing which reveals," or "the revealer (which is a thing)," you definitely want a participle: τὸ ἀποκαλύπτον. That is the perfect way to express that in Greek.

[DARKastheRAIN]

But I don't want to say it in conversation or a sentence. I want it as a name for something. Would a participle work for that? Also is apokalypton a past participle? I need it to be thing that reveals (aorist), thing that's function is to reveal, not the thing that revealed (past).

[Damoetas]

There is a suffix -τρον which means the object or instrument by which something is done. Examples are found in Smyth 842.1: ἄρο-τρον "plough" from ἀρόω "to plough," λύ-τρον "ransom" from λύω "release," σεῖσ-τρον "a rattle" from σείω "to shake," δίδακ-τρον "teacher's pay," from διδάσκω "to teach," λουτρόν "bath" or "bath water," from λούω "to wash."

You could form a word ἀποκάλυπτρον along these principles. (I'm not positive what the accent would be; probably proparoxytone, as I've written.) But you could still use a participle.... Without knowing more details about the "thing," it's hard to say what is better. If the thing is some abstract element or principle that reveals, then the participle is definitely better. The noun ἀποκάλυπτρον will suggest that it's some kind of tool. (Maybe that is what you want.)

It seems that you're confused about tenses. The form we've been discussing (ἀποκαλύπτον) is a present participle. The aorist is the past tense, which would be ἀποκαλύψαν.

[DARKastheRAIN]

It seems that you're confused about tenses. The form we've been discussing (ἀποκαλύπτον) is a present participle. The aorist is the past tense, which would be ἀποκαλύψαν.

lol. Sorry about that. The first language I came across that had a tense called "aorist", the word referred to a tense that had no time bounds on it. It meant that the action was the natural state of the subject, something that it always did. "Cows eat grass" vs present tense "The cows eat grass" in the sense "are eating grass" at this particular time. But clearly it means something else in Greek.

Would the romanization of ἀποκάλυπτρον be apokalyptron? I was going for a tool.

[Swth\r]

I would say ἀποκαλυπτήριον (= apokalypterion, with a prolonged -e-) is the proper one...
The suffix -τήριον, denotes the instrument on the means of an action. In modern Greek there are so many words in -τήρι showing the thing that helps someone to do something, as the instrument, e.g.: κλαδευ-τήρι (<κλαδεύ-ω<κλαδέω<κλάδος), πο-τήρι (from ancient Greek πο-τήριον<πίνω), κουρδισ-τήρι (from χορδισ-τήριον<χορδίζω<χορδή), πατη-τήρι, or in -τήριο, e.g.: παρατηρη-τήριο, σκοπευ-τήριο, επιμελη-τήριο, οβελισ-τήριο, πρα-τήριο (from ancient πρατήριον) and thousands more... Usually the person doing the action is denoted by the suffix -τής/ -της: κλαδευτής, σκαλιστής, πότης, κουρδιστής, παρατηρητής, σκοπευτής, επιμελητής etc. As in ancient Greek.

My instinct shows me this direction... Nevertheless, this suffix is somehow rare in ancient Greek.

[Damoetas]

Yes, it seems that the -τήριον suffix became very productive in Modern Greek; but it was a lot less common than -τρον in Ancient Greek.... So you could go with either one, but ἀποκάλυπτρον is probably closer to being a natural-sounding ancient word.... And you could romanize it as apokalyptron, apocalyptron, or even apocalyptrum (if you want to get very Latinate). But I would vote for the first one.

Here's a nice little Wikipedia article about the tenses that are called "aorist" in different languages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aorist

[Cuchulainn3]

Oddest thing? I was looking up how to form an agent noun from a verb and ancient greek, and this poster was looking for the exact same word as I was: ἀποκάλυψις. Very strange.