On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
Smyrnean
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:16 pm

On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Post by Smyrnean »

7. ἐπειδὴ οἱ πολέμιοι τὴν οὐ φυλαχθεῖσαν γέφῡραν ἔλῡσαν, ἅπαντες οἱ ὁπλῖται τὰ ὅπλα ἔλιπον ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ ὡς νῦν γ’ εἰρήνην ἄξοντες.(from H&Q)

"After the enemy destroyed the bridge that was not guarded, all the hoplites left their weapons in the plain in order to (as they claimed) keep peace now at least."

Why is the aorist form used here? Doesn't it make much more sense to use φυλασσομένην instead(the present participle), since the bridge needs guarding not just for one moment, but in an open and ongoing period of time?

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Post by jeidsath »

At least at the moment when it was destroyed, it was not guarded. A present would mean that it was not being guarded, over some time period, or habitually not guarded. There is a passage in Herodotus that this is very similar too, if I recall correctly. I'll try to look it up.

Notice that this is the transitive usage (necessarily, as it's a passive). I don't think that the intransitive meaning, "being on guard", generally takes the aorist.

EDIT: The Herodotus that I was thinking of: πυνθανόμεθα γὰρ Δαρεῖον ἐντείλασθαι ὑμῖν ἑξήκοντα ἡμέρας μούνας φρουρήσαντας τὴν γέφυραν. Transitive here, with aorist φρουρήσαντας, basically the same meaning. So in my head, closer to commanded you to "make a watch alone on the bridge that was 70 days long" than it would be to "be watching the bridge alone for 70 days". IMO, anyway. A very minor difference in mental conception.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Post by mwh »

The aorist is roughly equivalent to “which had not been guarded,” while the present would mean "which was not being guarded.”

The Herodotus quote is incomplete as it stands, and the aorist participle means “after keeping watch on the bridge for only sixty days” (μουνας with ημερας, not "alone"), while the present participle would mean “while keeping watch …”. It needs an infinitive (either present or aorist) to complete the sense.

Jean Putmans
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 12:23 pm

Re: On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Post by Jean Putmans »

Could one understand this as:

(just at a time) the bridge was not guarded, the enemy (took the chance) to destroy the bridge and then …

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: On the usage of an aorist participle as opposed to present

Post by mwh »

That would require the present participle: the bridge was not being guarded at the time it was destroyed—the enemy destroyed it while it was not being guarded.

Post Reply