I am using Danker’s “A Concise Dictionary of the New Testament”,but his use of aorist puzzles me:
Can someone explain (or at least try to) the understanding of his use of aorist? Is he following a kind of standard English/American way of understanding the aorist? In case yes, teach me, please!
Example:
ἔδωκα is called 1 aor.act.ind. of δίδωμι - ( I have otherwise learned that τἰθημι, ἵημι and δίδωμι forms a so-called k-aorist)
ἔγνων is called 2.aor. of γινώσκω - ( I thought γινώσκω was amond a group of words that formed athematic/root aorist/3rd aorist)
Thanks for your follow up - the difference between 1st and 2nd aorist would be easy to figure out for me in a grammar or here on the forum.
I was asking on some of your considerations whether Danker’s rendering of e.g. ἔγνων to be 2nd aor was imprecise. I would say it was 3rd/athematic aorist based on what I have been taught. So I was asking for a dialogue on this
But, now I can see, thanks to Mr. Hofstetter, that this above linked particular grammarsite regards both thematic and athematic aorist to be categorised under 2nd aorist. Is this categorisation common among the English/american grammars, does anyone know that?
As far as I know, but please correct me if this is not the case, then it would not make any difference for translation what we denote the aorist as long as we know that a given word is aorist, regardless of 1st,2nd 3rd or a new imagineable aorist from outer space
