Paul wrote:I actually think that the first person dual does crop up once or twice somewhere in Homer. But I will check when I get home.
Paul wrote:I too have written this kind of vocabulary program. I would recommend that you allow for second aorists, second perfects, and second pluperfects.
Emma_85 wrote:I'm afraid there are some verbs that have two forms, like kalew's future is either kalesw or kalw (sorry, just can't be bothered with the greek font right now). Same with exw, it also has two different forms for the future.
Deidw's perfect is either dedoika or dedia and euriskw's perfect can be eurhka or hurhka (not a huge difference, though).
There are other examples...
Lex wrote:Are they interchangable? Or are they used in different ways?
annis wrote:Regarding the 1st.dual verb forms, Monro says there is one possible example in the Iliad (23.485), but it may be grammarians getting imaginative. West rejects it from his recent Iliad edition. I look forward to Paul's report. Monro isn't exactly current scholarship.
annis wrote:Lex wrote:Are they interchangable? Or are they used in different ways?
They are not usually interchangeable.
annis wrote:Do you plan to focus on a particular dialect of Greek? There are some verbs that have three separate aorist forms in Epic.
annis wrote:For example, [face=spionic]kixa/nw[/face] "come upon, arrive at" has one first aorist [face=spionic]e)kixhsa/mhn[/face], one thematic second aorist [face=spionic]e)/kixon[/face], and one athematic (or root) aorist [face=spionic]e)ki/xhn[/face].
annis wrote:Regarding the 1st.dual verb forms, Monro says there is one possible example in the Iliad (23.485), but it may be grammarians getting imaginative. West rejects it from his recent Iliad edition. I look forward to Paul's report. Monro isn't exactly current scholarship.
Paul wrote:William, I am charmed at the prospect of 'my report'. Monro is the very source I was thinking of earlier in the day! The only thing I can add is that Smyth does mention 3 poetic forms of 1st person dual, including the form named by Monro.
For Lex's purpose, I'd say ignore this form.
P.S. - I love Monro. He may not be current, but he often has interesting insights and analyses that I've not seen in other grammars.
Lex wrote:*sigh* This language is immense. I didn't quite know what I was getting myself into.
Hmmm.... OK, in another post, 2nd aorists, perfects and pluperfects were mentioned. Now you mention an athematic (root) aorist. Are there also athematic perfects and pluperfects?
And in what voices and moods do any of these tenses apply? In short, how should I extend that huge list that I posted earlier?
Paul wrote:Hi Lex,
It is immense, but take heart.
Two of the aorists William points out ( [face=SPIonic]e)ki/xhn, e)ki/xon[/face] ) are 2nd aorist indicative active. It might be best for your program to treat one as a variant form of the other.
Lex wrote:So the athematic (root) aorist is a form of 2nd aorist?
annis wrote:And in what voices and moods do any of these tenses apply? In short, how should I extend that huge list that I posted earlier?
I'm not sure a list is the best approach. Though I must admit that my brain starts to itch when I try to think about it usefully.
I don't know how you're programming this and what your data structures are looking like, but I think I'd go for a verb analysis encoding that has slots for all the possible variations, one byte each:
|tense|voice|mood|person|number|...dialect note?|...?
And then file each form under a head-word (like in a dictionary), which would allow you to keep track of the fact that 1) the future of [face=spionic]fe/rw[/face] is [face=spionic]oi)/sw[/face], and 2) that the Attic aorist is [face=spionic]h)/negka[/face] and the Epic one is [face=spionic]h)/neika[/face], as well as 3) allow the possibility of including the periphrastic perfect forms (participle + [face=spionic]ei)mi/[/face]).
Just some thinking from a Unix geek.
JauneFlammee wrote:There is a piece of software out there that fully conjugates classical greek verbs, you may want to look at it for some ideas.
Its called Kalos
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/8851/
Lex wrote:Where a verb has both 1sts and 2nds, they can have different meanings (transitive vs. intransitive), so those I want to handle separately in my program. But the 2nd aorist and the root aorist are used the same, so the root aorist doesn't have to be handled separately.
Does this sounds reasonable, or am I still confused?
annis wrote:It depends on what you want to do with these names.
If they will be used just to help beginners learn how the verb is classified then this is probably fine.
This will not work if you plan to generate conjugations from these names. The root aorists are conjugated differently, which makes me grumpy about them being classified with 2nd aorists generically.
Lex wrote:I could easily enough make the root aorists separate from the 2nd, but I'm not sure to which voices the root aorist can apply, and I don't want to bog down the program with conjugations that can't exist.
annis wrote:The classification only says how conjugation happens (and implies something about the verb stem), so all of these have the usual mood/voice/person/number combinations.
annis wrote:I don't know how you're programming this and what your data structures are looking like, but I think I'd go for a verb analysis encoding that has slots for all the possible variations, one byte each:
|tense|voice|mood|person|number|...dialect note?|...?
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], RandyGibbons and 74 guests