τίσ φησεται τουσ βαρβαρουσ αναβασ επι την ακροπολιν

Greek Learning Greek
1

The subject sentence is from M., Unit 28.5
My problem is with αναβασ. I read it as aorist, am I right? if not, what is it? If it is, why?

Thanks to all.

2

For anyone answering this, he means: “φθήσεται”

3

τίς φθήσεται τοὺς βαρβάρους ἀναβὰς ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν;

Why dont you look at the explanation on p 234. And the example on page 235 φθάνουσι τοὺς πολεμίους λαβόντες τὸ ἄκρον.

4

With φήσεται (really φήσει) you would expect the acc. with inf. and be right to look for an infinitive here. But φθήσεται is different, just a verb taking an accusative object, of course.

5

First of all, apologies for my egregious spelling. I meant "τίς φτησεται τους etc.
Thanks to all so far.
Seneca:
I understand that the the Greek version asks a question about a future event (Who will beat) using a future tense and an aorist. The usage of the aorist doesn’t make sense to me.
The answer key provides two version of an English translation, both using a future tense and a present participle. I just can’t connect the aorist participle of the Greek with the present participle of the answer key.
But I sense that you are getting annoyed with me, so I will leave it there. But I will continue to mull your answer and maybe I will eventually “get” it. :slight_smile:
Thanks again.

6

Hi, I understand your query is ‘why aorist’? I suggest you read s144 of Goodwin’s Moods and tenses for the answer.

https://archive.org/details/syntaxofmoodsned00gooduoft/page/49/mode/1up

Goodwin’s Moods and tenses is a go-to for ‘why’ questions like this: I highly recommend it. Nothing has replaced it since (Duhoux’s book on verbs is great but in a different way). I had my copy bound in leather with gilt edges, and have read it through cover to cover several times: another exercise I highly recommend! (Smyth did roll over a lot of Goodwin’s content in summarised form however into his work from memory, and so is not a bad starting point for a short version.)

Cheers, Chad

7

Nothing could be further from the truth! I am never annoyed by people’s questions.

It wasn’t clear to me what exactly you didn’t understand. That was more my fault than yours.

You could look at Goodwin as Chad suggests which is very clear.

You should also look at Aorist-Stem Aspect in Mastronarde p 165 and tenses of the participle p 225-6.

When you look at the beginning of Chapter 28 you see that M. says : “Note that English translations of these constructions must often be other than literal in order to convey the meaning of the Greek:” The example he gives is:

φθάνουσι τοὺς πολεμίους λαβόντες τὸ ἄκρον.
[Lit.: Having captured the summit, they anticipate the enemy.]
They captured the summit ahead of the enemy.

I look forward to seeing many more questions from you which are always helpful to others.

8

Thanks Chad and again Seneca.

That hit the nail on the head!
Problem solved.