CHAPTER XVIII

TENSE () I. Complexity of the Subject. Probably nothing connected with synta is so i!"er#ectly $nderstood by the a%erage st$dent as tense& This is d$e to %ario$s ca$ses& '& THE (I))IC*+T, -) C-.PARIN/ /REE0 TENSES 1ITH /ER.ANIC TENSES& 2The translators o# o$r English %ersion ha%e #ailed !ore #re3$ently #ro! their "artial 4nowledge o# the #orce o# the tenses than #ro! any other ca$se&5' Ignorance6 one !ay add6 both o# English and /ree4 still stands in the way o# "ro"er rendering o# the /ree4& The English6 li4e the other /er!anic tong$es67 has only two si!"le %erb8#or!s& 1e ha%e a great wealth o# tenses in English by !eans o# a$ iliary %erbs6 b$t they do not corres"ond with any o# the /ree4 tenses&9 It is the co!!onest gra!!atical %ice #or one to !a4e a con:ect$ral translation into English and then to disc$ss the syntactical "ro"riety o# the /ree4 tense on the basis o# this translation&; <$rton= indeed :$sti#ies this !ethod #or the bene#it o# the English st$dent o# /ree4& <$t I s$b!it that the "ractice brings !ore con#$sion than hel"& 2The Aorist #or the English Per#ect6 and the Aorist #or the English Pl$"er#ect5 <$rton $rges as 2a "ertinent ill$stration&5 <$t that !ethod 4ee"s the st$dent at the English stand"oint6 :$st the thing to be a%oided& The /ree4 "oint o# %iew a##ords the only s$re basis o# o"eration& 1iner> la!ents that 2N& T& gra!!arians and e "ositors ha%e been g$ilty o# the greatest !ista4es5 here6 tho$gh it cannot be said that 1iner hi!sel# always li%es $" to his :$st ideal& Translation into English or /er!an is the least "oint to note in :$dging a tense& 7& <A( IN)+*ENCE -) THE +ATIN -N /REE0 /RA..ARIANS& .ost o# the older /ree4 gra!!ars were !ade by !en who 4new +atin better than /ree4& E%en to8day' the st$dy o# the /ree4 tenses is ha!"ered by the stand"oint o# +atin idio!s which de%elo"ed $nder %ery di##erent conditions& This is tr$e o# school gra!!ars7 in "artic$lar6 whereas +atin has had no in#l$ence on the /ree4 tenses the!sel%es by the ti!e o# the & The "er#ect and the aorist blend in +atin6 while that is not tr$e in
1 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 123. 2 K.-G., Bd. I, p. 129. 3 Weymouth, On Renderin into !n . o" the Gk. #ori$t and %er"., 1&9', p. 11. ' (". Broadu$, (omm. on )atthe*, p. +' note. Burton B,R-O., !. /., Synta0 o" the )ood$ and -en$e$ o" the .. -. Gk. 3d ed. 119293. + .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. ' ". Winer WI.!R, G. B., (e %erbor$! c$! "rae"& co!"os& in N& T& *s$ 11&3'41&'33. 555, /ra!!& d& ne$t& S"rachidio!s ('?77)& @& A$#l& %on +Ane!ann 16&783. 7 W.--h., p. 27'. 1 )ut9:auer, (ie /r$ndl& d& griech& Te!"$sl&, 1&93, p. i. 2 K. Roth, (ie erBChlenden Deit#or!en bei (ion& %on Hal&, p. +.

/ree4 till a %ery late date ('EEE A&(&)&9 The se"arate /ree4 de%elo"!ent (c#& the Sans4rit) was d$e to the geni$s and s"irit o# the /ree4 "eo"le and has contin$ed thro$gho$t the history o# the lang$age6; tho$gh in !odern ti!es the /ree4 tenses ha%e s$##ered serio$s !odi#ication& The +atin tenses !$st be le#t to one side& The ti!e ele!ent is !ore "ro!inent in the +atin& 9& A<SENCE -) HE<RE1 IN)+*ENCE& There is no ti!e ele!ent at all in the Hebrew tenses& Hence it is not strange that the +XX translators had !$ch tro$ble in rendering the two Hebrew tenses ("er#ect and i!"er#ect) into the /ree4 with its richness o# tense& A si!ilar di##ic$lty e ists #or the English translators& C$rio$s de%ices ("ossibly sli"s) so!eti!es occ$r6 li4e (< in F$& >G'?)6 (<A in Tob& =G'=)&= <$t s$ch translation /ree4 le#t no lasting i!"ress on the /ree4 o# the N& T& sa%e in (+$& 7EG'7H c#& E & 7=G7')& The "roble!s o# the /ree4 tenses are not to be sol%ed by an a""eal to the Se!itic in#l$ence& ;& /RA(*A+ /R-1TH -) THE /REE0 TENSES& There is no #$t$re o"tati%e in Ho!er and no #$t$re "assi%e& The aorist "assi%e is also rare&> The "ast "er#ect is rare in Ho!er6@ and it does not occ$r with the idea o# relati%e ti!e& 2In the e a!ination o# tense $sages6 we !$st be care#$l to obser%e that tenses6 in the sense in which the word is now $sed6 are o# co!"arati%ely late de%elo"!ent&5? In the beginning the %erb8root was $sed with "ersonal s$##i es& At #irst this was eno$gh& So!e %erbs de%elo"ed so!e tenses6 others other tenses6 so!e #ew all the tenses& =& 2A0TI-NSART5 -) THE VER<8STE.& Aktionsart (24ind o# action5) !$st be clearly $nderstood& The %erb8root "lays a large "art in the history o# the %erb& This essential !eaning o# the word itsel# antedates the tense de%elo"!ent and contin$es a#terwards& There is th$s a do$ble de%elo"!ent to 4ee" in !ind& There were originally two %erb8 ty"es6 the one denoting d$rati%e or linear action6 the other !o!entary or "$nctiliar action&' Hence so!e %erbs ha%e two roots6 one linear (d$rati%e)6 li4e (fero)6 the other "$nctiliar (!o!entary)6 li4e (tuli)& So !"# $% &"# &'& 1ith other %erbs the distinction was not drawn shar"ly6 the root co$ld be $sed either way (c#& '(# ('(% &(# (&(()& All this was be#ore there was any idea o# the later

3 !rnau6t, ($ Par#ait en /rec et en +at&, 1&&7, p. 17'. (". ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''2. ' )ut9:., (ie /r$ndl& d& griech& Te!"$sl&, 1&93, p. =i ". + (". S*ete, Intr. to O. -. in Gk., p. 32&. 7 Sterrett, /ia6. o" <om., .. '2. 8 )onro, <om. Gr., p. ''. & Gi6e$, )an. o" (omp. %hi6o6., p. '&2. 1 Gi6e$, )an., et>., p. '88 ".

tense& So (( is "$nctiliar6 while is linear or d$rati%e& .o$lton7 rightly obser%es that this is the e "lanation o# 2de#ecti%e5 %erbs& .o$lton notes ) as a word that can be $sed either #or d$rati%e6 as in Ro& =G'6 or "$nctiliar6 li4e aorist ) (c#& )* and )* in Fo& ;G'?)& The reg$lar idio! #or a "a"yr$s recei"t is ) + ,& This !atter o# the 4ind o# action in the %erb8root (Aktionsart) a""lies to all %erbs&9 It has long been clear that the 2tense5 has been o%erwor4ed and !ade to !ean !$ch that it did not !ean& The %erb itsel# is the beginning o# all& <$t scholars are not agreed in the ter!inology to be $sed& Instead o# 2"$nctiliar5 (punktuelle Aktion6 <r$g!ann)6 others $se 2"er#ecti%e5 (/iles6 Manual6 "& ;@?)& <$t this brings ine%itable con#$sion with the
)ou6ton )O,?-O., ;. <., # Grammar o" .. -. Greek. @o6. I, %ro6e omena 119273. 3d ed. 1192&3. 555, (hara>teri$ti>$ o" .. -. Greek 1-he !0po$itor, 192'3. 555, Einleit$ng in die S"rache des N& T& 119113. 555, Grammati>a6 .ote$ "rom the %apyri 1-he !0po$itor, 1921, pp. 28142&2A 1923, pp. 12'4121, '234'39. -he (6a$$i>a6 Re=ie*, 1921, pp. 31438, '3'4''1A 192', pp. 1274 112, 1+141++3. 555, Introdu>tion to .. -. Greek 11&9+3. 2d ed. 1192'3. 555, ?an ua e o" (hri$t 1<a$tin $B One-=o6. /. B., 19293. 555, .. -. Greek in the ?i ht o" )odern /i$>o=ery 1(am:r. Bi:6. !$$ay$, 1929, pp. '714 +2+3. 555, -he S>ien>e o" ?an ua e 119233. )O,?-O., W. F., and G!/!., #. S., # (on>ordan>e to the Greek -e$tament 11&983. )O,?-O. and )I??IG#., ?e0i>a6 .ote$ "rom the %apyri 1-he !0po$., 192&53. 555, -he @o>a:u6ary o" the .. -. I66u$trated "rom the %apyri and other .on-?iterary Sour>e$. %art I 1191'3, II, III. 2 %ro6., p. 112 ". 3 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '79. Bru mann BR,G)#.., K., !6ement$ o" (omparati=e Grammar o" the Indo-Germani> ?an ua e$ 1tran$6ation :y Wri ht, 1&9+3. 555, /riechische /ra!!ati4& 9& A$#l& 119223, the ed. Cuoted. Vierte %er!ehrte A$#l& o" #. -hum: 119133. 555, /r$ndriI der %ergl& /r& d& indog& S"rachen& 7& A$#l&6 <de& I, II 11&98419133. 555, 0$rBe %ergleichende /ra!!ati4 der indoger!anischen S"rachen 1192'3.

"er#ect tense& All %erbs !ay be described as 2"$nctiliar5 (punktuell) and 2non8 "$nctiliar5 (nicht-punktuell)& <$t the 2non8"$nctiliar5 di%ides into the inde#inite linear (d$rati%e) and the de#inite linear (co!"leted or "er#ect)& The notion o# "er#ect action as distinct #ro! "oint action ca!e later& The three essential; 4inds o# action are th$s !o!entary or "$nctiliar when the action is regarded as a whole and !ay be re"resented by a dot (&)6 linear or d$rati%e action which !ay be re"resented by a contin$o$s line 888886 the contin$ance o# "er#ected or co!"leted action which !ay be re"resented by this gra"h & The distinction between "$nctiliar and "er#ected action is not clearly drawn in the %erb8root itsel#& That is a later re#ine!ent o# tense& <r$g!ann= credits this 2"er#ected5 idea to the "er#ect ste!& 2Iterati%e5 action belongs to certain ste!s (red$"licated6 li4e )6 b$t it is not a #$nda!ental 4ind o# action& >& THE THREE 0IN(S -) ACTI-N EXPRESSE( IN TER.S -) TENSE& These ideas ("$nctiliar6 d$rati%e6 "er#ected state) lie behind the three tenses (aorist6 "resent6 "er#ect) that r$n thro$gh all the !oods& The #or!s o# these tenses are !eant to accent$ate these ideas&' The aorist ste! "resents action in its si!"lest #or! (-(*6 J$nde#inedK)& This action is si!"ly "resented as a "oint by this tense& This action is ti!eless& The "resent is also ti!eless in itsel# as is the "er#ect&7 It is con#$sing to a""ly the e "ression 2relations o# ti!e5 to this #$nda!ental as"ect o# tense6 as is done by so!e gra!!ars&9 R ader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '7') $ses Zeitart and Zeitstufe6 b$t why Zeitart instead o# Aktionsart? It is better to 4ee" 2ti!e5 #or its nat$ral $se o# "ast6 "resent and #$t$re6 and to s"ea4 o# 24ind o# action5 rather than 24ind o# ti!e&5; These three tenses (aorist6 "resent6 "er#ect) were #irst de%elo"ed irres"ecti%e o# ti!e& (ionysi$s Thra erred in e "laining the /ree4 tenses #ro! the notion o# ti!e6 and he has been #ollowed by a host o# i!itators& The st$dy o# Ho!er o$ght to ha%e "re%ented this error& The "oets generally do not bring the ti!e relations to the #ore&= E%en Pa$l (Principles of the History of

Gi6e$ GI?!S, %., # Short )anua6 o" (omparati=e %hi6o6o y. 2d ed. 119213. 555, -he Greek ?an ua e 1!n>y>. Britanni>a, 19123. ' (". K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131A Stah6, 0rit&8hist& Synt& d& griech& Verb$!s, p. &7 ". + Grie>h. Gr., p. '82. 1 K.-G., Bd. I, p. 132. 2 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '79. 3 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '33A Gi6der$6ee=e, Synt. o" (6a$$. Gk., p. 89. Raderma>her R#/!R)#(<!R, ?., Ne$t& /ra!!ati4& (as /riechisch des N& T& i! D$sa!!enhang !it der Vol4ss"rache 119113. ' (". Benard, )or!es Verb& en /rec, 1&92, p. 289. + )ut9:., (ie /r$ndl& d& griech& Te!"$sl&, 1&92. %au6 %#,?, <., %rin>ip6e$ o" the <i$tory o" ?an ua e 11&&&3. -r.

Language6 "& 9EE) #alls into this error& It is do$btless easier> to trace the history o# the %erb than o# the no$n6 b$t as !any !ista4es lie along the way& @& TI.E E+E.ENT IN TENSE& <$t #or the indicati%e the /ree4 tenses wo$ld ha%e had a si!"le history& There are no "ast tenses in the s$b:$ncti%e& The #$t$re s$b:$ncti%e is an ano!aly o# %ery late /ree4& The #$t$re o"tati%e occ$rs only in indirect disco$rse and is not #o$nd in the N& T& The ti!e ele!ent in the in#initi%e is con#ined to indirect disco$rse and &&& Ti!e in the "artici"le is only relati%e to the "rinci"al %erb& It is th$s 4ind o# action6 not the ti!e o# the action6 that is e "ressed in these #or!s&@ <$t in the indicati%e the three grades o# ti!e had tenses o# their own& The /ree4s e%idently #elt that there was no need #or ti!e in the other !odes e ce"t in a relati%e sense& As a !atter o# #act6 the real ti!e o# s$b:$ncti%e6 o"tati%e6 and i!"erati%e is #$t$re in relation to s"ea4er or writer&' It was e%idently with di##ic$lty (c#& absence o# ti!e in Hebrew) that ti!e was e "ressed in a "ositi%e (non8relati%e) sense e%en in the indicati%e& It is only by the a$g!ent ("robably an ad%erb) that "ast ti!e is clearly e "ressed&7 2Ho!er and later /ree4 writers o#ten $se the "resent with an ad%erb o# ti!e instead o# a "ast tense6 a constr$ction which has an e act "arallel in Sans4rit and which is there#ore s$""osed to be Indo8/er!anic&59 There is no really distincti%e #or! #or the "resent indicati%e& The #$t$re was a later de%elo"!ent o$t o# both the "resent and aorist& See cha"ter VIII6 Con:$gation o# Verb& The a$g!ent was not always $sed& Ho!er $sed it only when it s$ited hi!& <$t "ast ti!e was ob:ecti%e and the three 4inds o# action ("$nctiliar6 d$rati%e6 "er#ected) were reg$larly e "ressed with the tenses (aorist6 i!"er#ect6 "ast "er#ect)& There is Aktionsart also in the "resent and #$t$re ti!e6 b$t the tense de%elo"!ent did not go on to the #$ll e tent here& There are only two tense8#or!s in the "resent and "ractically only one in the #$t$re& <$t both "$nctiliar and linear action are e "ressed6 b$t not di##erentiated6 in the "resent ti!e by the sa!e tense6 as is tr$e also o# the #$t$re& The 4inds o# action e ist6 b$t se"arate tense8#or!s $n#ort$nately do not occ$r&; There !ight th$s ha%e been nine tenses in the indicati%eG three "$nctiliar ("ast6 "resent6 #$t$re)6 three linear ("ast6 "resent6 #$t$re)6 three "er#ect ("ast6 "resent6 #$t$re)&= <eca$se o# this di##erence between the indicati%e and the other !oods in the !atter o# ti!e so!e gra!!ars> gi%e a se"arate treat!ent to the indicati%e tenses& It is not an easy !atter to handle6 b$t to se"arate the indicati%e "erha"s accents the ele!ent o# ti!e $nd$ly& E%en in the indicati%e the ti!e ele!ent is s$bordinate to the 4ind o# action e "ressed& A do$ble idea th$s r$ns thro$gh tense in the indicati%e (4ind o# action6 ti!e o# the action)& ?& )A*+T, N-.ENC+AT*RE -) THE TENSES& There is no consistency in the na!es gi%en the tenses6 as has already been e "lained& C#& cha"ter VIII6 VII6 (b)& The ter!s
7 Say>e, Intr. to the S>i. o" ?an ., =o6. II, 1&&2, p. 1'9. 8 (". Spyridi$, ?an . grec& act$elle o$ !od&, 1&9', p. 2&8. 1 Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, 1&92, pp. 23, 28. 2 (". Seymour, -ran$. o" the #m. %hi6o6. #$$o., 1&&1, p. &9. 3 Gi6e$, )an., et>., p. '&8. ' (". K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131. + (". Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 122 ". 7 (". Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, pp. &, 22.

aorist6 i!"er#ect and "er#ect ("ast6 "resent6 #$t$re) are "ro"erly na!ed #ro! the "oint o# %iew o# the state o# the action6 b$t "resent and #$t$re are na!ed #ro! the stand"oint o# the ti!e ele!ent& There is no ti!e ele!ent in the "resent s$b:$ncti%e6 #or instance& <$t the na!es cannot now be changed6 tho$gh %ery $nsatis#actory& L& THE ANA+,TIC TEN(ENC, (Periphrasis)& This is the co!!on way o# e "ressing tense in the /er!anic tong$es& It was not $n4nown to the older /ree4 and was %ery #re3$ent in the +XX $nder the Hebrew in#l$ence& See an e tended list in Conybeare and Stoc46 Selections from the LXX6 ""& >?M@'& The tendency is strong in the N& T& See the s$!!ary already gi%en (""& 9@;M9@>)& In the !odern /ree4 the "eri"hrastic #or! has dis"laced the $s$al in#lected #or!s in all the tenses b$t the "resent6 i!"er#ect and aorist& These are 2si!"le&5 The rest are 2co!"o$nd5 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& ''=)&' This analytic tendency a##ected the d$rati%e and "er#ect 4inds o# action& It did not s$it the "$rely "$nctiliar idea& 'E& THE E))ECT -) PREP-SITI-NS -N THE VER<& This is another as"ect o# Aktionsart& This s$b:ect has already been brie#ly disc$ssed #ro! the stand"oint o# the "re"ositions&7 (elbrAc49 has wor4ed the !atter o$t with thoro$ghness and he is #ollowed
(ony:eare and Sto>k (O.DB!#R! and S-O(K, Se6e>tion$ "rom the ?EE. # Grammati>a6 Introdu>tion 1192+3. -hum: -<,)B, #., (ie )orsch& Aber die hellen& S"r& in den Fahren 19224192' 1#r>h. ". %ap. 3, pp. ''34 '833. 555, (ie griech& S"rache i! Deitalter des Hellenis!$s 119213. 555, (ie s"rachgesch& Stell& des bibl& /riech& 1-heo6. Rund., 19223. 555, Handb$ch der griech& /ia6. 119293. 555, Handb$ch d& ne$griech& Vol4ss"rache& 7& A$#l& 119123. 555, Handb$ch des Sans4rits. I, Grammatik 1192+3. 555, *nters& Aber d& S"& As"er i! /riech& 11&&93. 1 ;e:: in @. and /.B$ <and:., pp. 323, 327. 2 (". >h. EIII, I@, 1i3. /e6:rF>k /!?BRG(K, B., Ablati% +ocalis Instr$!entalis 11&783. 555, /r$ndriI der %ergl& /ra!!& d& indog& S"rachen& Synta & <de& III4@ 11&93, 1&98, 19223. 555, Introdu>tion to the Study o" ?an ua e 11&&23. Einleit$ng in das S"rachst$di$!& ;& A$#l& ('LE;)& =& A$#l& 119133. 555, Synta4tische )orsch$ngen& = <de& 11&8141&&&3. 3 @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 1'74182.

by <r$g!ann&; .o$lton= has a""lied the "rinci"le to N& T& %erbs& The "oint is that o#ten where the si!"le %erb is d$rati%e it is rendered 2"er#ecti%e5 by the "re"osition in co!"osition& This "ec$liarity is co!!on to all the Indo8/er!anic tong$es and reaches its highest de%elo"!ent in the /er!anic (c#& English and /er!an) and the <alto8Sla%ic lang$ages&> Th$s we in English say bring and bring up, burn and burn up, carry and carry off, come and come on, dri e and dri e a!ay "home, in, off, out#, drin$ and drin$ up, eat and eat up, follo! and follo! up, go and go a!ay, gro! and gro! up, $noc$ and $noc$ do!n, ma$e and ma$e o er, pluc$ and pluc$ out, run and run a!ay, spea$ and spea$ out, stand and stand up, ta$e and ta$e up, !a$e and !a$e up, !or$ and !or$ out&@ The 2i!"er#ecti%e5 si!"le beco!es 2"er#ecti%e5 in the co!"o$nd& Pro#& A& Th$!b? has a "a"er 2D$r A4tionsart der !it PrC"ositionen B$sa!!engesetBten Verba i! /riechischen65 in which he co!"ares so!e tables o# Schlachter #or Th$cydides with so!e by Pro#& S& (ic4ey #or the N& T& Th$cydides shows #or the "resent tense 7>E simplicia %erbs to ?9 co!"o$nd6 #or the aorist '=? to 'LL& (ic4ey has in%estigated abo$t thirty N& T& %erbs li4e .)6 etc& He re"orts #or the "resent tense a "ro"ortion o# ''>E simplicia to ?9 co!"o$nd6 #or the aorist ??= to 77>& It is $n#ort$nate that the ter! 2"er#ecti%e5 is $sed #or this idea6 since it ine%itably s$ggests the "er#ect tense& So!e writers' $se 2"er#ecti%e5 also #or the aorist or "$nctiliar action6 a !eans o# still #$rther con#$sion& <r$g!ann7 $ses 2Per#e4ti%e A4tion5 #or the e##ect o# the "re"osition in co!"osition and 2Per#e4tische A4tion5 #or the "er#ect tense6 a distinction hard to draw in English& +atin and /ree4 both show ab$ndant ill$strations o# this $se o# "re"ositions& C#& se%uor and conse%uor, facio and efficio, teneo and sustineo& .o$lton9 thin4s that the #reedo! in the "osition o# the "re"osition in Ho!er hel"ed the ad%erb to retain its #orce longer than in later /ree4 and +atin& The "oint o# the "re"osition here is best seen in the "re"ositions ./# /# /# 0/&; <$t e%en in these the act$al !a:ority o# e a!"les "reser%e the original local !eaning and so are not "er#ecti%e& <$t in +$& ?G7L6 &&1* )* 0'" 26 the "er#ecti%e sense o# 3 co!bines with the "ast "er#ect tense and the locati%e (or instr$!ental) &&1* )* to denote 2not the te!"orary "aro ys!6 b$t the establish!ent o# a "er!anent hold5 (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& ''9)& So
' Grie>h. Gr., pp. '&2 "". + %ro6., pp. 111411+. 7 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '&2. 8 (". )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 112. & Indo er. For$>h., EE@II. S>h6a>hter S(<?#(<-!R, Statist& *nters& Aber den /ebr& der Te!"& $nd .odi bei einBelnen griech& Schri#tst& 1192&3. /i>key /I(K!D, S., .e* %oint$ o" @ie* "or the Study o" the Greek o" the .. -. 1%rin>eton -heo6. Re=., O>t., 19233. 1 So Gi6e$, )an., p. '8&A B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&8. 2 Grie>h. Gr., p. '82. 3 %ro6., p. 112. ' Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '&2.

 is d$rati%e (Jgaining 4nowledge6K as in .4& '9G7?)6 is e##ecti%e (Jgras"ing the "oint6K as in +$& '>G;6 )6 is "er#ecti%e (J4nowing !y lesson6K as in ' Cor& '9G'7)6 and 4 also (Jrecognising6K as in .t& ';G9=)& .o$lton (ib.6 "& '';) calls "artic$lar attention to 5 .&&3 (' Cor& 'G'?)6 Jthe "erishing6K where the destiny is accented by .6 and the "rocess is de"icted by the tense& In Heb& >G'?6 5 0*6 the "er#ecti%e sense o# " coincides with the e##ecti%e aorist& So e%en when the tense is d$rati%e6 the notion o# co!"letion is e "ressed in the "re"osition as conte!"lated or certain& In ' (+$& ?G;L) the "er#ect tense o# the si!"le is s$##icient6 b$t not so in . (+$& ?G=9)& 6 as si!"le beca!e obsolete o$tside o# the "er#ect6 so that .' (+$& ?G;7H c#& 7 Cor& >GLH Heb& ''G7') occ$rs #or the notion o# Jdying&K 2The linear "er#ecti%e e "ressed its !eaning s$##iciently6 denoting as it does the whole "rocess leading $" to an attained goal&5= .o$lton notes also the iterati%e $se o# . in ' Cor& '=G9'6 and the #re3$entati%e in ' Cor& '=G77& See also the 2"er#ecti%e5 $se o# .6 the acti%e o# .& In .&&0 and .&&0 7.&&8 the si!"le is obsolete& E%en in the "resent tense the #orce o# ./ is ob%io$s& C#& 1* .&&0* (' Cor& 'G'?)6 .&&0 (+$& '=G'@)6 .&&3 (.t& ?G7=)6 where .o$lton' e "lains ./ as s$ggesting 2the sense o# an ine%itable doo!&5 C#& also 3 (.t& 7G'9)6 Jto #lee6K with 3 (Ac& 7@G;7)6 and 3 (Heb& 7G9)6 Jto esca"e6K 3 (Heb& >G'?)6 Jto #ind re#$geKH ' (Ac& 7;G79)6 Jto watch6K with '6 Jto 4ee" contin$allyK (+$& 7G=')6 and 0' (+$& 7G'L)6 Jto 4ee" together (sa#ely)KH " (.4& ';G;@)6 Jto draw6K with " (.4& =G;)6 Jto draw in twoKH (Fo& '=G>)6 Jto b$rn6K with (Ac& 'LG'L)6 Jto b$rn $"KH (Fo& =G9E)6 Jto :$dge6K with (.t& '7G;')6 Jto conde!nKH &3 (+$& 9G'>)6 Jto loosen6K with &3 (.t& 7;G7)6 Jto destroyKH ) (Ac& '9G=H Re%& 'EG7)6 Jto ha%eK or Jhold6K with ) (Ac& 9G=)6 Jto hold on to6K and 0) (+$& ?G;=)6 Jto hold togetherK or J"ress6K and .) (.t& >G=)6 Jto ha%e in #$ll6K etc& As to .) #or Jrecei"t in #$ll6K see (eiss!ann6 Light6 "& ''E #& The "a"yri and ostraca gi%e n$!ero$s ill$strations& It is not necessary to !a4e an e ha$sti%e
+ )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 11'. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 11'. /ei$$mann /!ISS)#.., #., Bi:6e Studie$ 119213. -r. :y #. Grie=eA >". <ibelst$dien 11&9+3 and Ne$e <ibelst$dien 11&983. 555, <iblische /rCcitCt etc& 1-heo6. Rund$>hau, Okt. 19123. 555, (ie Hellenisier$ng des se!itischen .onotheis!$s 1.. ;ahr:. ". d. k6. #6t., 19233. 555, (ie ne$t& )or!el Hin (hri$toI 11&923. 555, (ie S"rache d& griech& <ibel 1-heo6. Rund$>hau, 1927, .o. 1173. 555, (ie *rgeschichte des Christent$!s i! +ichte der S"rach#orsch$ng 1Intern. Wo>h., 32. Okt. 19293. 555, Hellenistisches /riechisch 1<er9o -<au>kB$ Rea6en>y>., @II, 1&993. 555, +icht %o! -sten 1192&3.

list to "ro%e the "oint& C#& 4 9 4 (Ph& 'G7=)6 ) 9 0) (7G'@)6 where the "oint lies in the "re"osition6 tho$gh not 2"er#ecti%e5 here& So ' 9 .' (7 Cor& 9G7)6 . : 9 ('G'9)6 1 .' (+$& >G9?)6 )*;)* (7 Cor& >G'E)& C#& <& (.t& 77G'9)& In so!e %erbs7 the "re"osition has so #ar lost its original #orce that the 2"er#ecti%e5 idea is the only one that s$r%i%es& (r& Eleanor P$rdie (&ndog. 'orsch.6 IX6 ""& >9M'=96 '?L?) arg$es that the $sage o# Polybi$s as co!"ared with Ho!er shows that the aorist si!"le was increasingly con#ined to the constati%e sense6 while the ingressi%e and e##ecti%e si!"le ga%e way to the 2"er#ecti%e5 co!"o$nds& .o$lton9 is inclined to agree in the !ain with her contention as s$""orted by the "a"yri (and Th$!b thin4s that !odern /ree4 s$""orts the sa!e %iew)& At any rate there is a decided increase in the n$!ber o# co!"o$nd %erbs& The ingressi%e and e##ecti%e $ses o# the aorist wo$ld nat$rally blend with the 2"er#ecti%e5 co!"o$nds& <$t it re!ains tr$e that the Aktionsart o# the %erb8root is o#ten !odi#ied by the "re"osition in co!"osition& ''& 2A0TI-NSART5 1ITH EACH TENSE& It is not !erely tr$e that three se"arate 4inds o# action are de%elo"ed ("$nctiliar6 d$rati%e6 "er#ected)6 that are re"resented broadly by three tenses in all the !odes6 tho$gh i!"er#ectly in the "resent and #$t$re tenses o# the indicati%e& The indi%id$al %erb8root !odi#ies greatly the res$ltant idea in each tense& This !atter can only be hinted at here6 b$t !$st be wor4ed o$t !ore care#$lly in the disc$ssion o# each tense& The aorist6 #or instance6 tho$gh always in itsel# !erely "oint8 action6 2"$nctiliar65 yet !ay be $sed with %erbs that accent the beginning o# the action or the end o# the action& Th$s three distinctions ariseG the $n!odi#ied "oint8action called 2constati%e65 the "oint8action with the accent on the beginning (ince"ti%e) called 2ingressi%e65 the "oint8action with the accent on the concl$sion called 2e##ecti%e&5 The na!es are not "artic$larly ha""y6 b$t they will answer& 2Constati%e5 is es"ecially aw4ward&' In reality it is :$st the nor!al aorist witho$t any s"eci#ic !odi#ication by the %erb8!eaning& Hirt7 does not $se the ter!6 b$t di%ides the aorist into 2ingressi%e5 and 2e##ecti%e5 when there is this s"ecial Aktionsart& <$t the $se o# these de!ands another ter! #or the nor!al aorist&9 As an e a!"le o# the 2constati%e5 aorist #or the whole action ta4e (Fo& 'G';)6 #or the earthly li#e o# Fes$s& So also =' ('G'?)6
555, ?i ht "rom the #n>ient !a$t 119123. -r. :y Stra>han. 555, .e* ?i ht on the .. -. 119283. -r. :y Stra>han. 555, %apyri 1!n>y>. Bi:6., III, 19223. 555, St. %au6 in the ?i ht o" So>ia6 and Re6i iou$ <i$tory 119123. 2 I:., p. 112. Indog. Indog. Forsch., Indoger!anische )orsch$ngen (StraIb$rg). 3 I:., pp. 11+411&. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 129. <irt <IR-, <., Handb$ch der griech& +a$t8 $nd )or!enlehre ('LE7)& 7& A$#l& 119123. 2 <and:. d. Grie>h et>., p. 392. 3 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '8+.

while ('G';) is 2ingressi%e65 and accents the entrance o# the +ogos $"on his li#e on earth (Incarnation)& >" ('G';) is "robably 2e##ecti%e5 as is &"< ('G'>)6 accenting the res$lt (2res$ltati%e65 <r$g!ann6 Griech. Gr.6 "& ;@=)& So li4ewise in the so8called 2"resent5 tense %ario$s ideas e ist as set #orth by the %ario$s 2classes5 o# %erbs or 2con:$gations&5 The "er#ect and the #$t$re li4ewise ha%e !any %ariations in res$ltant idea6 growing o$t o# the %arying %erb8idea in connection with the tense8idea& These !$st be borne in !ind and will be indicated in the "ro"er "lace in disc$ssing each tense& '7& INTERCHAN/E -) TENSES& The "oint here is not whether the /ree4s $sed an aorist where we in English wo$ld $se a "er#ect6 b$t whether the /ree4s the!sel%es drew no distinction between an aorist and a "er#ect6 a "resent and a #$t$re& It is not "ossible to gi%e a categorical answer to this 3$estion when one recalls the slow de%elo"!ent o# the /ree4 tenses and the long history o# the lang$age& There was a ti!e long a#ter the N& T& "eriod; when the line between the aorist and the "er#ect beca!e %ery indistinct6 as it had been largely obliterated in +atin& It is a 3$estion #or disc$ssion whether that was tr$e in the N& T& or not& The s$b:ect will recei%e disc$ssion $nder those tenses& The #$t$re grew o$t o# the "resent and the aorist& The "resent contin$ed to be $sed so!eti!es as %i%id #$t$re6 as is tr$e o# all lang$ages& <$t it is a %ery cr$de way o# s"ea4ing to say that one tense is $sed 2#or5 another in /ree4& That wo$ld only be tr$e o# ignorant !en& In general one !ay say that in nor!al /ree4 when a certain tense occ$rs6 that tense was $sed rather than so!e other beca$se it best e "ressed the idea o# the s"ea4er or writer& Each tense6 there#ore6 has its s"eci#ic idea& That idea is nor!al and can be readily $nderstood& Vario$s !odi#ications arise6 d$e to the %erb itsel#6 the conte t6 the i!agination o# the $ser o# the tense& The res$lt is a co!"le one6 #or which the tense is not wholly res"onsible& The tenses6 there#ore6 are not loosely interchangeable& Each tense has a se"arate history and "resents a distinct idea& That is the starting8"oint& 1iner (1iner8Thayer6 "& 7>;) is entirely correct in sayingG 2No one o# these tenses strictly and "ro"erly ta4en can stand #or another&5 1riters %ary greatly in the way that the tenses are $sed& A %i%id writer li4e .ar46 #or instance6 shows his li%ely i!agination by swi#t changes in the tenses& The reader !$st change with hi!& It is !ere co!!on8"lace to s!ooth the tenses into a dead le%el in translation and !iss the writerKs "oint o# %iew& Rader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '7;) is do$bt#$l whether in the N& T& we are :$sti#ied in !a4ing 2shar" distinctions between the i!"er#ect6 aorist or "er#ectH a s$b:$ncti%e6 i!"erati%e6 or in#initi%e o# the aorist or "resent&5 <$t #or !y "art I see no !ore real gro$nd in the "a"yri and inscri"tions #or s$ch hesitation than we #ind in the ancient Attic /ree4& Th$!b (Handb.6 "& ''>) notes that !odern /ree46 in s"ite o# hea%y losses6 has "reser%ed the distinction between linear and "$nctiliar action e%en in the i!"erati%e and s$b:$ncti%e& I shall disc$ss the tenses according to the three ideas designed by the! rather than by the na!es accidentally gi%en& II. Punctiliar Action. This is the 4ind o# action to begin with& It is "robably not "ossible always to tell which is the older ste!6 the "$nctiliar or the linear& They co!e into %iew side by side6 tho$gh the "$nctiliar action is logically #irst& The aorist tense6 tho$gh at #irst con#ined to %erbs o# "$nctiliar sense6 was grad$ally !ade on %erbs o# d$rati%e sense& So also %erbs o# d$rati%e action ca!e to ha%e the tenses o# "$nctiliar action&' Th$s the tenses ca!e to
' ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''2. Winer--hayer WI.!R--<#D!R, # Grammar o" the Idiom o" the .. -. 11&793. @ariou$ ed$. 1 /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 2'1, 317.

be $sed #or the e "ression o# the ideas that once belonged only to the root& The Stoic gra!!arians6 who ga%e $s !$ch o# o$r ter!inology6 did not #$lly a""reciate the aorist tense& They gro$"ed the tenses aro$nd the "resent ste!6 while as a !atter o# #act in !any %erbs that is i!"ossible6 the root a""earing in the aorist6 not in the "resent& C#& ( '( 7?('(8# (&<(( 7&<"(86 etc& This error %itiated the entire theory o# the Stoic gra!!arians&' /ra!!atical #or!s cannot e "ress the e act concord between the logical and the gra!!atical categories67 b$t the aorist tense ca!e %ery near doing it& <y Ho!erKs ti!e (and PindarKs) the distinction between the aorist and i!"er#ect tenses is #airly well drawn6 tho$gh so!e %erbs li4e ('( re!ain in do$bt&9 So we start with the aorist tense& In !odern /ree4 the ancient aorist is the base8#or! on which a n$!ber o# new "resents are #or!ed (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& ';9)& F& C& +awson ((ourn. of Th. St.6 -ct&6 'L'76 "& ';7) says that Th$!b wo$ld ha%e s!oothed the "ath o# the st$dent i# he had 2dealt with the aorist be#ore "roceeding to the "resent&5 '& THE A-RIST (.*)& The aorist6 as will be shown6 is not the only way o# e "ressing inde#inite ($nde#ined) action6 b$t it is the nor!al !ethod o# doing so& The /ree4 in tr$th is 2an aorist8lo%ing lang$age5 (<road$s)&; In the the aorist is e%en !ore #re3$ent than in the classic /ree4 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7E)6 es"ecially is this tr$e o# the N& T& / ilderslee%e= does not li4e the na!e and "re#ers 2a"obatic65 b$t that ter! s$its only the 2e##ecti%e5 aorist& The sa!e thing is tr$e o# 2c$l!inati%e&5 The na!e aorist does %ery well on the whole& I do$bt i# the aorist is a sort o# 2resid$ary legatee65 ta4ing what is le#t o# the other tenses& The rather6 as I see it6 the aorist "reser%ed the si!"le action and the other tenses grew $" aro$nd it& It is tr$e that in the e "ression o# "ast ti!e in the indicati%e and with all the other !oods6 the aorist is the tense $sed as a !atter o# co$rse6 $nless there was s"ecial reason #or $sing so!e other tense& It gi%es the action 2an $nd #Ar sich&5 The co!!on $se o# the 2i!"er#ect5 with %erbs o# s"ea4ing ('# &) !ay be aorist in #act& "a# Aktionsart in the Aorist& "# )onstati e *orist& There is still a good deal o# con#$sion in the $se o# ter!s& /ilderslee%e (Synta+ of *ttic Gr.6 "& 'E=) "re#ers 2co!"le i%e5 to 2constati%e&5
1 Steintha6, Ge$>h. d. Spra>h., p. 327 ". 2 %au6, %rin. o" the <i$t. o" ?an ., p. 322. 3 (". Gi6der$6ee=e, #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 1&&3, p. 171A )onro, <om. Gr., pp. 32, '+. Broadu$ BRO#/,S, ;O<. #., (omm. on )att. 11&&73. ' Ro:ert$on, Short Gr. o" the Gk. .. -., p. 138. Gi6der$6ee=e GI?/!RS?!!@!, B. ?., !dition$ o" %indar and ;u$tin )artyr. 555, ?atin Grammar. )any edition$ $in>e 1&78. 555, .ote$ on Stah6B$ Synta0 o" the Greek @er: 119123. 555, .umerou$ arti>6e$ in the #meri>an ;ourna6 o" %hi6o6o y. + #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 398 ".

.o$lton> co!!ents on .iss P$rdieKs $se o# 2"er#ecti%e5 in the sense o# 2"$nctiliar&5 So /iles' $ses 2"er#ecti%e or !o!entary5 #or the aoristic action6 b$t he also ("& ;@? note) $ses constati%e& <$t .o$lton7 also !a4es a distinction between 2constati%e5 and 2"$nctiliar65 $sing 2"$nctiliar5 #or real "oint8action and 2constati%e5 #or what is !erely treated as "oint8action& That is a tr$e distinction #or the %erb8root6 b$t the growing n$!ber o# constati%e aorists was in har!ony with the si!"le idea o# the tense& <r$g!ann9 rests constati%e6 ingressi%e and e##ecti%e aorists6 all three on the punktuell idea and draws no shar" distinction between 2"$nctiliar5 and 2constati%e&5 (elbrAc4; di%ides the punktuell or aorist into *nfangspun$t or Ingressi%e6 Mittelpun$t or Constati%e and Schlu,pun$t or E##ecti%e& The constati%e accents the 2!iddle "oint&5 The idea o# (elbrAc4 and <r$g!ann is that punktuell action is 2action #oc$sed in a "oint&5= 2The aorist describes an e%ent as a single whole6 witho$t the ti!e ta4en in its acco!"lish!ent&5> It see!s best6 there#ore6 to regard 2constati%e5 as !erely the nor!al aorist which is not 2ingressi%e5 nor 2e##ecti%e&5 The root8di##erence between the aorist and the i!"er#ect is :$st this6 that the aorist is 2constati%e5 while the i!"er#ect 2describes&5@ The 2constati%e5 aorist :$st treats the act as a single whole entirely irres"ecti%e o# the "arts or ti!e in%ol%ed&? I# the act is a "oint in itsel#6 well and good& <$t the aorist can be $sed also o# an act which is not a "oint& This is the ad%ance that the tense !a4es on the %erb8root& All aorists are "$nctiliar in state!ent (c#& .o$lton6 Prol.6 "& 'EL)& The 2constati%e5 aorist treats an act as "$nctiliar which is not in itsel# "oint8 action& That is the only di##erence& The distinction is not eno$gh to !a4e a se"arate class li4e ingressi%e and e##ecti%e o%er against the "$rely "$nctiliar action& Th$!b (Handb.6 "& '77) "asses by 2constati%e5 as !erely the reg$lar aorist 2to "ortray si!"ly an action or occ$rrence o# the "ast65 whether in reality "$nctiliar or not& He #inds both ingressi%e and e##ecti%e aorists in !odern /ree4& <$t Th$!b $ses 2ter!inati%e5 #or both 2ends5 (initial and #inal)6 a so!ewhat con#$sing word in this connection& The "a"yri show the sa!e Aktionsart o# the aorist& So note constati%e @ 0* &4*6 <&/&*& ;79 (iiNA&(&)& Th$s in Fo& 7G7E6 A" 9 B= ' ! C* D*6 we ha%e a good e a!"le o# the constati%e aorist& The whole "eriod o# #orty8si years is treated as a "oint& In .t& =G'@6 E&6 we ha%e a %ery si!"le constati%e aorist6 :$st "$nctiliar and nothing !ore6 describing the "$r"ose o# ChristKs !ission& It is tr$e that the constati%e aorist in this sense is #ar !ore #re3$ent than the
7 %ro6., p. 117. 1 )an., p. '&1 ". 2 %ro6., p. 117, :ut not on p. 129. 3 Grie>h. Gr., pp. '8+4'88. ' @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 232. + -homp$on, Synt. o" #tt. Gk., p. 1&'. But (". K.-G., Bd. I, p. 1+8, Hmomentan, e""ekti=, in re$$i=.I 7 )ou6ton, Intr. to the Stu. o" .. -. Gk., 1&9+, p. 192. 8 /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 322. & )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 129, pre"er$ H$ummaryI to H>on$tati=e.I

ingressi%e and the e##ecti%e $ses o# the tense& This has always been so #ro! the nat$re o# the case& The increasing n$!ber o# 2"er#ecti%e5 co!"o$nds6 as already shown6 increased the "ro"ortion o# constati%e aorists&' 1hen the action is in itsel# !o!entary or instantaneo$s no di##ic$lty is in%ol%ed& These e a!"les are %ery n$!ero$s on al!ost any "age o# the N& T& C#& in Ac& 'EG77 #&6 )''# # .,# =# 0F&& See the aorists in Ac& 'EG;' #& C#& .t& ?G9H Ac& =G=& This is the nor!al aorist in all the !oods& <$t %erbs that are nat$rally d$rati%e !ay ha%e the aorist& In ' (Heb& ''G7@) we ha%e a %erb nat$rally 2d$rati%e5 in idea6 b$t with the 2constati%e5 aorist& C#& also 3<' ' (Heb& ''G79)6 where a "eriod o# ti!e is s$!!ed $" by the constati%e aorist& C#& <&0 ! "* .C G+ ) .& (Ro& =G';)& A good e a!"le is H' 9 <&0 + , , )& ' (Re%& 7EG;)& Here H' is "robably ingressi%e6 tho$gh H is constati%e in ' Th& =G'E6 b$t <&0 is clearly constati%e& The "eriod o# a tho$sand years is !erely regarded as a "oint& C#& also Fo& @GL I J&&K6 'EG;E 1& See also Ac& ''G7> 21* 0C @& 0)F I &'K6 ';G9 5C ) 6 '?G'' " 0C 9 F* L=6 7?G9E @&'& C#& E"h& 7G;& See .9;& in <&/&*& 7?@ (A&(& 7=E)& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& 'E=) calls this 2aorist o# long d$ration5 (constati%e)& )or a stri4ing e a!"le o# the constati%e (s$!!ary) $se o# the aorist6 note M N "* O (Ro!& =G'7)& Note in "artic$lar the s$!!ary state!ents in Heb& ''6 as . D "* ('9)6 D "*;2 (9L)& /ilderslee%eKs 2aorist o# total negation5 (Synta+6 "& 'E>) is nothing !ore than this& Re"eated or se"arate7 actions are th$s gro$"ed together6 as in .t& 77G7?6 "* ) 2& So 9* <'# 9* 0"' (7 Cor& ''G7=)& In .4& '7G;;6 "*;<&# P' Q;<&6 the two actions are contrasted shar"ly by the aorist& There is no di##ic$lty in R* SQ " .T - 5 "* . (7 Cor& =G';)& The sa!e %erb !ay so!eti!es be $sed either as constati%e (li4e <&06 Jreigned6K Re%& 7EG; abo%e) or ingressi%e (9 <&0*6 Jass$!ed r$le6K Re%& ''G'@6 tho$gh tr$e here o# /od only in a dra!atic sense)& Th$s ' (Ac& '=G'7) is J4e"t silenceK (constati%e)6 b$t F (%erse '9) is ingressi%e as is ' (+$& LG9>)& C#& <$rton6 N. T. Moods and Tenses6 "& 7'& In /al& =G'>6 2 U &'6 we ha%e the constati%e aorist6 while &'4 is e##ecti%e in .t& =G'@& In line with what has already been said6 <&1 !ay !ean JthrowK (constati%e)6 Jlet #lyK (ingressi%e) or JhitK (e##ecti%e)& C#& .o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '9E& Ill$strations occ$r in the N& T& in <& 2C * 0& (.t& '?G9E6 constati%e6 JcastK or JthrewK)6 <"& 0C , " (+$& ;GL6 ingressi%e6 Jh$rl&K Note ,6 as well as 2"er#ecti%e5 #orce o# "& C#& .t& =G7L)6 <& M 2F* (e##ecti%e6 Jbeat6K Ac& 7@G';)& "# &ngressi e *orist& This is the ince"ti%e or inchoati%e aorist& It is not6 howe%er6 li4e the 2constati%e5 idea6 a tensenotion at all& It is "$rely a !atter with the indi%id$al %erb&' Th$s )06 7 Cor& ?GL6 is Jbeca!e "oorKH H'6 Ro& ';GL6 is Jbeca!e ali%eK (c#& . :$st be#ore)&7 Perha"s in Fo& '>G96 2 6 the !eaning is Jdid
1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 11+. 2 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 193. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 193. See Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 12+. 2 I:.

not recognise&K9 <$t this co$ld be constati%e& <$t it is clear in Fo& 'G'E& So in L &< 2 (Fo& 'G'7) the ingressi%e idea occ$rs6 as in 2 &< in %erse ''& C#& &0 (+$& 'LG;')OJb$rst into tearsK and * (%s& ;7)OJca!est to 4now&K So "0 (Fo& ''G9=)& In .t& 77G@ V'OJbeca!e angry&K C#& also U =' (.t& 9GL)6 .3 (+$& ?G79)6 0' (.t& 7G'>)& In +$& '=G97 H' is ingressi%e6 as is ' (Ac& @G>E)6 )3 &* (Ac& 7@G'>)6 (+$& >G77)6 W"' (.4& 'EG7')6 &0' (7 Cor& @GL)6 &0' (7 Cor& ?GL)& The notion is co!!on with %erbs e "ressing state or condition (/oodwin6 Moods and Tenses6 "& '>)& .o$lton 3$otes <&3* .6 Jha%ing co!e to his throne he shall rest6K Agra"hon6 -&P& >=;& See also &< <" + X*6 <&/&*& ;79 (iiNA&(&)& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;?) cites Fo& ;G=76 )6 Jgot better6K and co!"ares it with + 4* )46 Tb&P& ;'; (iiNA&(&)& Another instance is .t& 7'G'&; C#& (Ac& 'G'?)& "# -ffecti e *orist& The na!e is not "artic$larly good and 2res$ltant aorist5 is s$ggested by so!e scholars& /ilderslee%e= s$ggests 2$"shot aorist&5 /iles' calls it aorist o# the 2c$l!inating "oint65 #ollowing .onro&7 <$t the idea is that e!"hasis is laid on the end o# the action as o""osed to the beginning (ingressi%e)& This is done (i# done) by the %erb itsel# (Aktionsart)& The #ollowing e a!"les will !a4e the !atter clearG (.t& 9G?)6 &* (>G>)6 & (@G7?)6 Y' ('9G7;)6 ' (77G@)6 ' (7=G7E)6 (7@G7E)6 &3' (.4& @G9=)6 "' (+$& 7;G'@)6 3<' ('LG;7)6 (Fo& 'G;7)6 .' (Ac& =G9@)6 &'* ('7G7=)6 (7EGL)6 3 (7'G97)6 &0 (7@G;9)6 (Ph& ;G'')6 ' (Re%& =G=)& A good e a!"le o# the e##ecti%e aorist in the "a"yri is 6 <&/&*& ;79 (iiNA&(&)& So then in the case o# each aorist the "oint to note is whether it is !erely "$nctiliar (constati%e) or whether the %erb8idea has de#lected it to the one side or the other (ingressi%e or e##ecti%e)& It needs to be re"eated that there is at botto! only one 4ind o# aorist ("$nctiliar in #act or state!ent)& The tense o# itsel# always !eans "oint8action& The tense6 li4e the !ode6 has nothing to do with the fact o# the action6 b$t only with the way it is stated& So!eti!es it will not be clear #ro! the conte t what the Aktionsart is& The 2"er#ecti%e5 #orce o# "re"ositions a""lies to all the tenses& It !$st be said also that the Aktionsart in the aorist (ingressi%e6 e##ecti%e) a""lies to all the !odes& Indeed6 beca$se
3 (". #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 32&. Good*in GOO/WI., W. W., Greek Grammar. @ariou$ edition$. 555, Synta0 o" the )ood$ and -en$e$ o" the Greek @er:. Re=. !d. 11&923. ' -he$e in re$$i=e aori$t$ are o"ten denominati=e =er:$. (". Gi6der$6., Synt. o" #tt. Gk., p. 12'. + Synt. o" #tt. Gk., p. 12'. 1 )an., p. '9&. )onro )O.RO, /. B., <omeri> Grammar 11&&23. 2d ed. 11&913. Fir$t ed. u$ed. 2 <om. Gr., p. '&.

o# the ti!e8ele!ent in the indicati%e (e "ressed by the a$g!ent and secondary endings) the real character o# the aorist tense is best seen in the other !odes where we do not ha%e notes o# ti!e&9 It is !erely a !atter o# con%enience6 there#ore6 to note the aorist in the di##erent !odes6 not beca$se o# any essential di##erence (o$tside o# the indicati%e)& -ne is in constant danger o# o%erre#ine!ent here& /ilderslee%e; criticises Stahl= #or 2characteristic "roli ity5 in his treat!ent o# the tenses& A #ew stri4ing e a!"les are s$##icient here& "b# Aorist Indicative& The ca$tion !$st be once !ore re"eated that in these s$bdi%isions o# the aorist indicati%e we ha%e only one tense and one root8idea ("$nctiliar action)& The %ariations noted are incidental and do not change at all this #$nda!ental idea& "# The Narrati e or Historical Tense&> It is the tense in which a %erb in ordinary narrati%e is "$t $nless there is reason #or $sing so!e other tense& Hence it is enor!o$sly #re3$ent in the /ree4 historians& 1riters %ary greatly6 o# co$rse6 in the $se o# the tenses as o# words6 b$t in the large %iew the "oint holds& The aorist holds its "lace in the "a"yri and in the !odern /ree4 as the $s$al tense in narrati%e (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '77)& Al!ost any "age in the /os"els and Acts will show an ab$ndance o# aorist indicati%es that ill$strate this "oint& C#&6 #or instance6 the eight aorists in Ac& '9G'9 #& (no other tense)6 the eight aorists in 7'G' #& (no other tense)6 the three aorists in 7=G' #& (no other tense)& In these instances the tenses are not all in indicati%e !ood6 tho$gh "redo!inantly so& See again the #i#teen aorists in Ac& 7?G''M'= (one "er#ect)& The aorist was $sed in narrati%e as a !atter o# co$rse& Note the !any aorists in Heb& ''& The red$ndant $se o# the %erb as in &<Z (.t& '9G9')OJtoo4 and sowedK is not a "ec$liarity o# the aorist tense& C#& .F& 9 $ (Fo& =G'=)OJwent and told&K Nor is it a "ec$liarity o# /ree4& It belongs to the %ernac$lar o# !ost lang$ages& <$t we no longer #ind the iterati%e $se o# - with the aorist according to the classic idio! (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '>@)& "# The Gnomic *orist& Fannaris' calls this also 2e!"iric aorist65 while /ilderslee%e7 $ses 2e!"irical5 #or the aorist with a negati%e or te!"oral ad%erb6 a rather needless distinction& The real 2gno!ic5 aorist is a $ni%ersal or ti!eless aorist and "robably re"resents the original ti!elessness o# the aorist indicati%e&9 This aorist is co!!on in
3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 129. ' #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '22. Stah6 S-#<?, ;. )., 0ritisch8historische Synta des griech& Verb$!s der 4lass& Jeit. 119283. + Krit.-hi$t. Synt., pp. 1'&4222. 7 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 19. It i$ the >hara>teri$ti> idiom in the indi>ati=e. (". Bernhardy, Wi$$. Synt., 1&29, p. 3&2. ;annari$ ;#..#RIS, #. .., # <i$tori>a6 Greek Grammar 11&983. 555, On the -rue )eanin o" the X 1(6a$$. Re=., 1923, pp. 93 "".3. 1 <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '37. 2 Synt., p. 112.

Ho!er; in co!"arisons and general sayings& The di##erence between the gno!ic aorist and the "resent is that the "resent !ay be d$rati%e&= <$t general tr$ths !ay be e "ressed by the aoristic "resent& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& 'EL) co!"ares this $se o# the aorist to the generic article& 1iner> denies that this idio! occ$rs in the N& T&6 b$t on ins$##icient gro$nds& Abbott@ rather needlessly a""eals to the 2Hebrew in#l$ence on Fohannine tense8 constr$ction5 to e "lain <&' 9 ='"'& (Fo& '=G>) a#ter + * [ & It is a general constr$ction here and is #ollowed by three "resents (aoristic)& This is a !i ed condition certainly6 the "rotasis being #$t$re (third class6 $ndeter!ined with so!e li4elihood o# deter!ination)& <$t ="' (Fo& '=G?) is "ossibly also gno!ic& C#& "* O 9 S, (Ro& 9G79)& <$t in Fo& '=G>6 ?6 we !ay ha%e !erely the 2ti!eless5 aorist6 li4e @ &[*# =F&*6 in E"ictet$s6 IV6 'E6 7@& Rader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '7;) so thin4s and adds6 what I do not ad!itG 2The gen$ine gno!ic aorist a""ears to be #oreign to the Hellenistic %ernac$lar&5 It s$r%i%es in !odern /ree46 according to Fannaris6 Hist. G$. Gr.6 "& ;9>& .o$lton (Prol.6 ""& '9=6 '9L) ad!its it in N& T&6 b$t ("& '9;) considers Fo& '=G> the 2ti!eless5 aorist6 li4e .&' \ &* in E$r&6 *lc.6 9?>& There are other e a!"les6 li4e 0 (.t& '9G;;) which is #ollowed by "resents S"# &1# W ('9G;>)6 0&=;<& ('9G;?)6 Y' ('?G79)6 " (79G7)6 2' (+$& 9G77)6 ' (@G9=)6 = (Fo& ?G7?)6 .& and the other aorists in Fas& 'G''6 "&;= (Ro& ?G9E)6 ='"';= (' Pet& 'G7;H +XX6 Is& ;EG@)& It is tr$e that the ti!eless Hebrew "er#ect is !$ch li4e this gno!ic aorist6 b$t it is a co!!on eno$gh /ree4 idio! also& C#& #$rther +$& 'G='M=9& It is not certain that 2' (.t& 9G'@H '@G=H .4& 'G''H +$& 9G77) belongs here& It !ay be !erely an e a!"le o# the ti!eless aorist $sed in the "resent6 b$t not gno!ic& See $nder ()& <$rton (N. T. Moods and Tenses6 "& 7L) #inds it di##ic$lt and thin4s it originally 2ince"ti%e5 (ingressi%e)& "# .elation to the &mperfect& The aorist is not $sed 2instead o#5 the i!"er#ect&' <$t the aorist is o#ten $sed in the !idst o# i!"er#ects& The -ld <$lgarian does not disting$ish between the aorist and the i!"er#ect& In !odern /ree46 aorists and i!"er#ects ha%e the sa!e endings (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& ''L)6 b$t the two tenses are distinct in !eaning& Rader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '77) thin4s that in the he #inds
3 ;. S>hmid, Pber den gno!ischen Aorist der /riech&, 1&9', p. 1+. (". /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 28&. ' )onro, <om. Gr., p. '& ". + Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. +'. 7 W.--h., p. 288. #::ott #BBO--, !. #., (6ue. # Guide throu h Greek to <e:re* 1192'3. 555, ;ohannine Grammar 119273. 555, ;ohannine @o>a:u6ary 1192+3. 8 ;oh. Gr., p. 328. 1 )onro, <om. Gr., p. '7A ?eo )eyer, Grie>h. #ori$te, p. 98A Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2'3A )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12&. ] may :e either aori$t or imper"e>t.

the i!"er#ect $sed as aorist6 as in 4 3 78 C < (Inscr& de la Syrie 7;'9a)6 and "* #or "'* (P& +ond&6 X+II6 0enyon 9E)& <$t I %ent$re to be sce"tical& In both "assages the i!"er#ects !a4e "er#ectly good sense& Rader!acher $rges the co!!on $se o# &36 b$t that !ay be !erely descri"ti%e i!"er#ect& I grant that it is 2will4Arlich5 in Herodot$s (in '7';) to say "' 9 &0^6 as in Strabo (C ?7?) to ha%e &3;& It is 2rein stilistisch65 b$t each writer e ercises his own whi!& 1iner7 "ro"erly re!ar4s that it 2o#ten de"ends on the writer5 which tense he will $se& 1hy 2o#ten5Q 1hy not 2always5Q The "resence o# aorist6 i!"er#ect and "ast "er#ect side by side show how 4een the distinction was #elt to be&' <lass7 see4s to disting$ish shar"ly between & and $6 b$t with little s$ccess& The tro$ble6 as already stated6 is "robably that L& !ay be either aorist (li4e &) or i!"er#ect& He ad!its that Th$cydides introd$ces his s"eeches either with & or &=& /ilderslee%e69 li4e Stahl6 denies 2an act$al interchange o# tenses&5 In any gi%en incident the s"ea4er or writer !ay ha%e the choice o# re"resenting it in narrati%e by the aorist ("$nctiliar) or the i!"er#ect (d$rati%e)& An interesting e a!"le is #o$nd in .4& '7G;'M;;&; The general scene is "resented by the descri"ti%e d$rati%e i!"er#ect and the d$rati%e "resent <"&&& It is %is$aliBed by &&;<&&& <$t the #ig$re o# the widow wo!an is singled o$t by the aorist <&& The closing re#erence by Fes$s to the rest is by the constati%e aorist "* <&& Note also the "recise distinction between $) and <& at the end& 1here the aorist and the i!"er#ect occ$r side by side6 it is to be ass$!ed that the change is !ade on "$r"ose and the di##erence in idea to be so$ght& In :$ ta"osition the aorist li#ts the c$rtain and the i!"er#ect contin$es the "lay& C#& 3= (ingressi%e6 J#ell to noddingK) and "0 (Jwent on slee"ingK) in .t& 7=G=& So A* 0 O% 9 <& (.4& =G97)6 JHe began to loo4 aro$nd beca$se o# the to$ch&K See also &3' ! C* F* &'* 2,# 9 &"& _4* (@G9=)& A si!ilar distinction a""ears in -& F& 9 '0 2` (.t& ;G'')H 9 0 ('9G?)H <' &1&; 9 0&', (+$& ?G79)H E C "< 2, 9 " (Fo& =GL)H .<';9 (@G';)H =F& 9 3H ('7G'9)& In +$& ?G=9 note & and .& -nce again note \;9 &3 in LG;L and 0 9 $ (Ac& ''G>)& C#& #$rther Ac& ';G'EH ' Cor& 9G>H .t& 7'G?H .4& ''G'?H Fo& 7EG9 #& In ' Cor& 'EG; note ;H in ''G796 # & The
Kenyon K!.DO., F. G., !=iden>e o" the %apyri "or -e0tua6 (riti>i$m o" the .. -. 1192+3. 555, <and:ook to the -e0tua6 (rit. o" the .. -. 2d ed. 119123. 555, %a6Ko raphy o" the Greek %apyri 11&993. 555, %apyri 1<a$tin $B /. B., e0tra =o6., 192'3. 2 W.--h., p. 287. 1 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 11'. 2 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 192. 3 #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 39&. ' Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 32.

sa!e sort o# e%ent will be recorded now with the aorist6 as &a &F* W&3' (.4& 9G@)6 now with the i!"er#ect6 as W&3 b)&* &3* (=G7;)& C#& +$& 7G'? and ;G77&= <$t the changing !ood o# the writer does not !ean that the tenses are e3$i%alent to each other& A word #$rther is necessary concerning the relati%e #re3$ency o# aorists and i!"er#ects& Statistical synta is interesting6 laborio$s and not always concl$si%e& Schlachter' has a""lied statistics to Ho!er& In both Iliad and -dyssey the aorists in the indicati%e are !ore n$!ero$s than the i!"er#ects& /ilderslee%e7 #o$nd a si!ilar res$lt in Pindar& Facobsthal (/er Gebrauch der Tempora und Modi in den $retischen /iale$tinschriften) #inds the aorist s$r"assing the i!"er#ect& <$t H$ltsch9 #o$nd the i!"er#ect %ery ab$ndant in Polybi$s6 and Pro#& .iller; has added statistics #or other writers& 2The i!"er#ect di%ides the crown with the aorist in di##erent "ro"ortions at di##erent ti!es and in di##erent s"heres&5= A #$rther e tended 3$otation #ro! /ilderslee%e> is "ertinentG 2Not the least interesting is the table in which Schlachter has co!bined his res$lts with Pro#essor .illerKs and #ro! which it a""ears that the $se o# the aorist indicati%e grad$ally di!inishes $ntil it #inds its low8water8!ar4 in Xeno"hon& Then the aorist thr$sts itsel# !ore and !ore to the #ront $ntil it c$l!inates in the N& T& The "se$do8naR%etS o# Xeno"hon s$ggests an answer to one "roble!& The Hellenica has the lowest "ercentage o# i!"er#ects6 b$t it !o$nts $" in the no%elistic 0yropaideia& The other "roble!6 the %ery low "ercentage o# the i!"er#ect in the N& T&Te&g& .atthew '9 "er cent&6 A"ocaly"se @TSchlachter a""roaches gingerly6 and well he !ay& It stands in !ar4ed contrast to Fose"h$s whose ;> "er cent& o# i!"er#ects shows the arti#iciality o# his style6 so!ewhat as does his $se o# the "artici"les (*. (. P.6 IX '=;)6 which6 according to Schlachter6 he $ses !ore than thrice as o#ten as St& FohnKs /os"el (;'G'7)& This "redo!inance o# the aorist indicati%e can hardly be dissociated #ro! the "redo!inance o# the aorist i!"erati%e in the N& T& (F$stin .artyr6 *pol. I6 '>& >)6 altho$gh the "redo!inance o# the aorist i!"erati%e has a "sychological basis which cannot be !ade o$t so readily #or the aorist indicati%e& <esides6 we ha%e to ta4e into consideration the growth o# the "er#ect and the #a!iliar $se o# the historical "resent6 which is 4e"t down in St& +$4e alone (*. (. P.6 XX 'EL6 XXVII 97?)&5 The "ersonal e3$ation6 style6 character o# the boo46 %ernac$lar or literary #or!6 all co!e into "lay& It largely de"ends on what the writer is a#ter& I# he is ai!ing to describe a scene with
+ I:. 1 Stat. *nters& Aber den /ebr& der Te!"& $nd .odi bei einBelnen griech& Schri#tst ., 192&. 2 #m. ;our. o". %hi6o6., 1&87, pp. 1+&417+. ;a>o:$tha6 ;#(OBS-<#?, <. K., (er /ebra$ch der Te!"ora $nd .odi in den 4retischen (iale4tinschri#ten 119273. 3 (er /ebr& der erBChlenden Deit#& bei Polyb . 11&9&3. )i66er )I??!R, (. W. !., -he ?imitation o" the Imperati=e in the #tti> Orator$ 1#m. ;. %h., 1&92, pp. 3994'373. ' #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., E@I, pp. 139 "". (". a6$o ?. ?an e, #ndeut. Aber Diel $nd .eth& der synt& )orsch., 1&+3. + Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2'2. 7 I:., p. 2''.

%i%idness6 the i!"er#ect "redo!inates& -therwise he $ses the aorist6 on the whole the narrati%e tense par e+cellence&' 2Hence the aorist is the tr$ly narrati e tense6 the i!"er#ect the tr$ly descri"ti%e oneH and both !ay be $sed o# the sa!e transaction&57 "# .elation to the Past Perfect& It is rather shoc4ing6 a#ter 1inerKs "rotest that the tenses are not interchanged6 to #ind hi! saying bl$ntlyG 2In narration the aorist is $sed #or the "l$"er#ect&59 <$rton; hel"s the !atter by inserting the word 2English5 be#ore 2"l$"er#ect&5 1iner !eant 2/er!an "l$"er#ect&5 /ilderslee%e= does !$ch better by $sing 2translated&5 21e o#ten translate the aorist by a "l$"er#ect #or the sa4e o# clearness&5 /oodwin> adds !ore e actly that the aorist indicati%e !erely re#ers the action to the "ast 2witho$t the !ore e act s"eci#ication5 which the "ast "er#ect wo$ld gi%e& That is the case& The s"ea4er or writer did not always care to !a4e this !ore "recise s"eci#ication& He was content with the !ere narrati%e o# the e%ents witho$t the "recision that we !oderns li4e& 1e are there#ore in constant "eril o# reading bac4 into the /ree4 aorist o$r English or /er!an translation& All that one is entitled to say is that the aorist so!eti!es occ$rs where the conte t 2i!"lies co!"letion be#ore the !ain action65@ where in English we "re#er the "ast "er#ect& This $se o# the aorist is "artic$larly co!!on in s$bordinate cla$ses (relati%e and te!"oral and indirect disco$rse)&? It !$st be e!"hasiBed that in this constr$ction the antecedence o# the action is not stressed in the /ree4& 2The /ree4s neglected to !ar4 the "riority o# one e%ent to another6 lea%ing that to be gathered #ro! the conte t&5L Strictly there#ore the aorist is not $sed #or the "ast "er#ect& The /ree4s cared not #or relati%e ti!e& In .t& ';G9 it is "lain that ' and . are antecedent in ti!e to 06 %erse '6 and $ in %erse 76 b$t the story o# the "re%io$s i!"rison!ent and death o# Fohn is introd$ced by " in a re!iniscential !anner& In .t& 7GL c $ "oints bac4 to %erse 7& C#& also @ (.t& 77G9;)H @ = 2`# =0 2 (7@G9')& So in 7?G7 is antecedent to E& in %erse '& In 7@G'? note in "artic$lar d @ and co!"are with @ in .4& '=G'E (c#& ?* in %erse @)& Here .ar4 did draw the distinction which .atthew did not care to !a4e& In +$& 'LG'= we ha%e $* 6 b$t 3& -ther e a!"les where the antecedence is not e "ressed6 tho$gh tr$e6 and the aorist is $sed6 are &" (.4& ?G';)6 )' (+$& 'G')6 Y* & (7G9L)6 U & (@G')6 3 (?G7@)6 e f (+$& 7;G')6 Y* 3 (Fo& 7GL)6 @ 0 (;G')6 c $ (;G=E)6 =0 (=G'9)6 Y* (>G'>)6 @ .<& (LG'?)6 @ =<& (LG9=)6 @0 S' (''G9E and note &'&3)6 @
1 Stah6, Krit.-hi$t. Synt., p. 1+&. 2 (6yde, Gk. Synt., p. 88. 3 W.-)., p. 3'3. ' .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 22. + Synt. o" #tt. Gk., p. 129. 7 Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 1&. (". Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 129. 8 )onro, <om. Gr., p. '8. & ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '38. 9 (6yde, Gk. Synt., p. 87. (". K.-G., Bd. I, p. 179.

('9G'7)6 Y* .<' (7'GL)6 g* =&= (Ac& 'G7)6 g* Q (Ro& ?G7L& C#& 9E also)& In Fo& '?G7;6 .& h6 the "resence o# h !a4es the !atter less certain& I# h is transitional6 there wo$ld be no antecedence& <$t i# h is in#erential6 that !ay be tr$e6 tho$gh Abbott considers it 2i!"ossible&5' Clyde7 calls the aorist 2an aggressi%e tense6 "artic$larly in the acti%e %oice6 where it encroached on the do!ain o# the "er#ect6 and all b$t s$""lanted the "l$"er#ect&5 That is tr$e6 and yet it !$st not be #orgotten that the aorist was one o# the original tenses6 !$ch older than the "er#ects or the #$t$re& In wishes abo$t the "ast ($nattainable wishes) the N& T& $ses b& (shortened #or! o# i&) with the aorist indicati%e (' Cor& ;G?) b& <&3& A si!ilar re!ar4 a""lies to $se o# the aorist indicati%e in conditions o# the second class ("ast ti!e)6 witho$t - in a"odosis (/al& ;G'=) or with - (Fo& ''G7')& In both cases in English we translate this aorist by a "ast "er#ect& "# .elation to the Present& The so8called (ra!atic Aorist is "ossibly the oldest $se o# the tense& In Sans4rit this is the co!!on $se o# the tense to e "ress what has :$st ta4en "lace&9 -ne wonders i# the gno!ic or ti!eless aorist indicati%e is not still older& The absence o# a s"eci#ic tense #or "$nctiliar action in the "resent !ade this idio! !ore nat$ral&; This "ri!iti%e $se o# the aorist s$r%i%es also in the Sla%onic&= /iles s$ggests that 2the +atin "er#ect !eaning6 li4e the Sans4rit6 !ay ha%e de%elo"ed directly #ro! this $sage&5 The idio! a""ears in Ho!er> and is #o$nd chie#ly in the dra!atic "oets where a s$dden change co!es6' or in collo3$ial s"eech or "assionate 3$estions&7 It is a reg$lar idio! in !odern /ree4 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '79) as 6 JI grew h$ngry6K Ja! h$ngry still&K This aorist is $sed o# actions which ha%e :$st ha""ened& The e##ect reaches into the "resent& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;@) 3$otes a tra%eller in Cos who 2had a "leasant shoc46 on calling #or a c$" o# co##ee6 to ha%e the waiter cry j&5 The /ree4 can still $se a "ast tense in "assionate 3$estions a##ecting the "resent&9 .o$lton; s"ea4s o# 2cases where an aorist indicati%e denotes "resent ti!e65 tho$gh he addsG 2None o# these e a!"les are really in "resent ti!e6 #or they only see! to be so thro$gh a di##erence in idio! between /ree4 and English&5 This latter state!ent is the tr$th& The aorist in /ree46 "artic$larly in dialog$e6 !ay be $sed #or what has :$st ha""ened& It see!s aw4ward in English to re#er this to "ast ti!e6 b$t it is "er#ectly nat$ral in /ree4& So we
1 ;oh. Gr., p. 337. (". Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 23. (6yde (?D/!, ;., Greek Synta0 11&873. 2 Gk. Synt., p. 87. 3 Whitney, San$. Gr., p. 329. ' Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 129. + Gi6e$, )an., et>., p. '9&. H-he aori$t i$ u$ed not un>ommon6y o" pre$ent time.I I:., p. '98. 7 )onro, <om. Gr., p. '&. 1 Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 1&. 2 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '38. 3 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 113. ' %ro6., p. 13'.

translate it by the "resent indicati%e& )ro! the /ree4 "oint o# %iew the "ec$liarity lies in the English6 not in the /ree4& The e a!"les in the N& T& are n$!ero$s eno$gh in s"ite o# 1iner= to be worth noting& .o$lton> has !ade a s"ecial st$dy o# .atthew concerning the translation o# the aorist& 2*nder the head o# Jthings :$st ha""enedK co!e LG'? &3' (with -)6 =G7? )06 and ';G'= F& and '@G'7 E& (with ')H >G'7 .6 '7G7? 6 ';G76 etc&6 W'6 '>G'@ ."&06 '?G'= '*6 7EG'7 ' /*6 7>G'E W"6 7>G'9 '6 7>G>= <&'# W36 7>G7=6 >; $*6 7@G'L 6 7@G;> &*6 7?G@ $6 7?G'? ' ($nless ''G7@ #orbids) and "erha"s '&5 Certainly this is a res"ectable list #or .atthew& Add ' (.t& '7G7>)& These all can be translated by the English Jha%e&K k2' (.t& 9G'@ and "arallels) is a "ossible e a!"le also& C#& c 2' f 0) 0 ('7G'?6 +XX)& It is a 2ti!eless5 aorist@ and !ay be gno!ic6 as already "ointed o$t& C#& 7 Pet& 'G'@H .4& 'EG7E6 0&="' F* '*% =' in .4& 9G7'H .)# E&; (';G;')& -ther e a!"les o# the aorist #or what has :$st ha""ened are W'# 2 l (.4& '>G>)H W'; (+$& @G'>)H W# ' (';G'?M7E)H H'# S' ('=G97)H ('>G;)H 3<' ('LG;7)H b* W' (7;G9;)H 3' (Fo ;G7E)H 0* (''G;')H .F& ('7G'L)H E& * U m 3' ('7G7@)H E& ('9G')H , ="' ('9G9')6 b$t = ('@G;) "oints bac4ward6 JI did glori#y thee6K while ="' in '=G? is "ossibly gno!icH " , (7'G'E)H 3&# ' (' Cor& LG'L6 7E6 77& C#& 4 in %erse 79)H # (Re%& ';G?H '?G7)&' 1ith this $se o# the aorist ad%erbs o# ti!e are co!!on to !a4e clear the "resent relation o# ti!e& C#& , ' ' (Fo& 7'G';) where , has the e##ect o# bringing the action #orward& )or a shar" contrast between the aorist and "resent see )*# 9 , c )* (Fo& ;G'?)& So 0 9 .=n4o6 <&/&*& 7?@ (A&(& 7=E)& C#& also +$& 'EG7;& See in "artic$lar # and in Fo& '@G7=& The ti!eless aorist is well ill$strated in the "artici"le in +$& 'EG'?6 0 C p & "# .elation to Present Perfect& The "roble! :$st here is not whether the "resent "er#ect is e%er $sed as an aorist& That will be disc$ssed $nder the "resent "er#ect& I# the distinction between the two tenses was #inally7 obliterated6 as early ha""ened in +atin69 there wo$ld be so!e necessary con#$sion& <$t that has not ha""ened in the N& T& "eriod& Fannaris; notes it reg$larly abo$t 'EEE A&(& It is $ndeniable that the early Sans4rit $sed the aorist chie#ly #or 2so!ething "ast which is %iewed with re#erence to the "resent5 and it disa""eared be#ore the growth o# the other !ore e act tenses&= The "er#ect !ay be
+ W.--h., p. 28&. 7 %ro6., p. 1'2. 8 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 13' ". 1 (". )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 13+. 2 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''2. 3 (6yde, Gk. Synt., p. 8&. Sti66, in ?at. the aori$t mu$t :e noted "or $eCuen>e o" ten$e$. (". )ei66et, +KAoriste en +at&6 Re%$e de Phil&, 1&98, p. &1 ". ' <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '38. (". <at9., !in6., p. 22' ". + Whitney, San$. Gr., pp. 29&, 329.

said to be a de%elo"!ent #ro! the aorist6 a !ore e act e "ression o# co!"leted action than !ere 2"$nctiliar5 (aorist)6 %iB& state o# co!"letion& <$t in the /ree4 the aorist not only held its own with the other tenses6 b$t 2has e tended its "ro%ince at the e "ense o# the "er#ect65 "artic$larly in the N& T& "eriod6 tho$gh di##erent writers %ary greatly here&> <$t was the aorist $sed 2#or5 the "er#ectQ Clyde@ saysG 2The aorist was largely $sed #or the "er#ect&5 1iner? re"liesG 2There is no "assage in which it can be certainly "ro%ed that the aorist stands #or the "er#ect&5 /ilderslee%eL !ore correctly saysG 2The aorist is %ery o#ten $sed where we sho$ld e "ect the "er#ect65 i&e& in English& <$t the translation o# the aorist into English will call #or s"ecial disc$ssion a little later& 1hat is tr$e is that the action in s$ch cases 2is regarded as s$bordinate to "resent ti!e65' in other words6 the "recise s"eci#ication o# relati%e ti!e which we draw in o$r English "er#ect is not drawn in the /ree4& The /ree4 states the si!"le $nde#ined "$nctiliar action in a connection that s$ggests "resent ti!e and so we render it in English by o$r 2ha%e&57 <$t )arrar9 is right in insisting that we do not e "lain the /ree4 tense by the English rendering& In tr$th6 the e a!"les gi%en $nder the head o# 2Relation to the Present5 () !ay o#ten be rendered by the English 2ha%e5 with tolerable acc$racy& ; So!eti!es the $se o# an ad%erb or "article hel"s the English& The e a!"les are rather n$!ero$s in the N& T&6 as in the "a"yri6= where the aorist and the "resent "er#ect occ$r side by side& Th$s )9* l ."' 9 6 -&P& ;?7 (iiNA&(&)H F* '* 9 .'* 0*6 N&P& 'L (iiNA&(&)& .o$lton addsG 2The distinction is %ery clearly seen in "a"yri #or so!e cent$ries&5 In !ost instances in the N& T& the distinction is %ery shar"ly drawn in the conte t6 as in @ "'# 9 @ (' Cor& '=G;)& So '# (Col& 'G'>)& C#& Ac& 7'G7?& In !ost instances where we ha%e tro$ble #ro! the English stand"oint it is the "er#ect6 not the aorist that occasions it6 as in 9 W (.t& '9G;>)& 1e shall co!e bac4 to this "oint $nder the "resent "er#ect& As a r$le all that is needed is a little i!agination on the "art o# the English reader to sy!"athiBe with the !ental alertness e "ressed in the changing tenses6 a sort o# 2!o%ing "ict$re5 arrange!ent& C#& ' + q0C 9 .&&0 9 2* &" !1* E (Fas& 'G7;)& The single "oint to note concerning the aorist in those e a!"les where we $se 2ha%e5 is that the /ree4s did not care to $se the "er#ect& C#& 2 &&0 & 0* (+$& =G97) with 2 + E& & 0* (.t& LG'9)6
7 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 199. 8 Gk. Synt., p. 8&. & W.-)., p. 3''. 9 Synt., p. 128. 1 )onro, <om. Gr., p. '&. 2 Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 1&A %. -hom$on, -he Gk. -en$e$ in the .. -., p. 2'. Farrar F#RR#R, F. W., Greek Synta0 11&873. 3 Gk. Synt., p. 12+. ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'2. + I:., p. 1'2 ".

:$st two ways o# regarding the sa!e act& That is the whole story and it is a di##erent thing #ro! saying that the aorist is $sed 2#or5 the "resent "er#ect& Here are so!e o# the !ost interesting e a!"les in the N& T& where 2we5 in English "re#er 2ha%e5G W3 (.t& =G7')H D (?G'E)H . ('7G9)H )3' 9 0 9 "0 ('9G'=6 +XX6 Is& >G'E& +i4ely eno$gh the ti!elessness o# the Hebrew "er#ect !ay ha%e ca$sed this translation into the aorist so co!!on in the +XX)6 W0 (.t& '=G>)H 0H0= ('LG>)H . @ ' (7'G'>)H . (79G79)H ' (7;G;=)H ' (7@G79)'H W' (7?G>)H =' (.4& 9G7')H . (=G9=H c#& 3&&*H =G9=& C#& .&&+ 3)H \ (+$& =G7>)H ' ('EG77)H O ('=G7')H (Fo& @G7>)H .F (?G7L)H &< ('EG'?)H = ('EG97)H = ('7G7?& C#& =")H ('9G';)H =&="' ('9G'?)H W"' ('9G9;)H ('=G'=)H 2 ('>G9)H E;' (7EG7)H " (7'G'E)&7 C#& .4& ';G?& Abbott re!ar4s6 that the /ree4 "er#ect does not lay the sa!e stress on what is recently co!"leted as does the English 2ha%e&5 C#& also 2 (' Fo& ;G?& C#& ' Cor& ?G9)H ' (' Fo& ;GL& Contrast .& in %erse L and W# W in !argin6 in %erse 'E with W"' and .& in %erse 'E)H &< (Ph& 9G'7)H (;G'')H " (Heb& 'G9)H =' (7 Cor& =G'9)& The sa!e e%ent in .4& '=G;; is #irst !entioned by ' ' and is then re#erred to by ' (or "&) .& The distinction is not here %ery great6 b$t each tense is "ertinent& Howe%er6 ' !eans "ractically Jto be dead6K while .OJdied6K Jhas died&K C#& /ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& 'E?& "# -pistolary *orist& This idio! is !erely a !atter o# stand"oint& The writer loo4s at his letter as the reci"ient will& It is "robably d$e to delicate co$rtesy and is co!!on in +atin as well as in the older /ree46 tho$gh less so in the later /ree4&9 The !ost #re3$ent word so $sed was 6 tho$gh was also co!!on& The aorist has its nor!al !eaning& -ne has !erely to change his "oint o# %iew and loo4 bac4 at the writer& In ' Fo& 7G'7M'; we ha%e the rhetorical re"etition o# "# (note the "er#ects a#ter @)& <$t in ' Fo& 7G7' !ay be the e"istolary $se6 tho$gh 1iner; "rotests against it& Here as in 7G7>6 , 6 the re#erence !ay be not to the whole e"istle6 b$t to the "ortion in hand6 tho$gh e%en so the stand"oint is that o# the reader& C#& also =G'9& In ' Cor& LG'= also the re#erence is to the %erses in hand& In E"h& 9G96 Z* _&r6 the all$sion !ay be to what Pa$l has :$st written or to the whole e"istle6 as is tr$e o# & (Heb& '9G77)& Certainly " is the $s$al constr$ction in the N& T& (' Cor& ;G';H ';G9@H 7 Cor& '9G'E6 etc&)& j $s$ally re#ers to an e"istle :$st #inished (Phil& 'LH ' Pet& =G'7H ' Fo& =G'9)6 b$t e%en so the stand"oint %eers nat$rally to that o# the reader& This is "artic$larly so in /al& >G'' which "robably re#ers to the concl$ding %erses ''M'? and6 i# so6 a tr$e e"istolary aorist& In Ro& '=G'= the re#erence !ay be' to another "ortion o# the sa!e e"istle or to the e"istle as a whole& In ' Cor& =GL6 ''6 re#ers to a "re%io$s letter6 as see!s to be tr$e also in 7 Cor& 7G96 ;6 LH @G'7H 9 Fo& L& <$t is #o$nd in $ndo$bted instances as in Ac& 79G9EH E"h& >G77H Ph& 7G7?H
1 )o$t o" the$e e00. "rom )t. >ome "rom )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'2. 2 (". #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 32'. 3 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '38. ' W.--h., p. 28&. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 19'.

Col& ;G?& So . in Phil& '7 and W<0&' in Te t& Rec& 7 Fo& '7& C$rio$sly eno$gh /ilderslee%e7 saysG 2The aorist in the N& T& UE"& aor&V is clearly d$e to Ro!an in#l$ence6 and is not to be cited&5 The e"istolary aorist is !ore co!!on in +atin (c#& CiceroKs Letters)6 "robably beca$se o# o$r ha%ing !ore e"istolary !aterial& The idio! occ$rs o#ten eno$gh in the "a"yri& C#& L6 <&/&*& ;79 (iiNA&(&)6 L SQ 2, U * "6 P&- y& 7@= (A&(& >>)& There is there#ore no ade3$ate reason #or denying its "resence in the N& T& e a!"les abo%e& "# .elation to the 'uture& The #$t$re was "robably (c#& <r$g!ann6 Griech. Gr.6 "& ;?E) a late de%elo"!ent in the lang$age6 and other de%ices were at #irst $sed6 li4e the "resent indicati%e6 the "er#ect indicati%e6 the aorist s$b:$ncti%e& The aorist indicati%e was also one o# the e "edients that ne%er 3$ite disa""eared& It is not e actly6 li4e the e"istolary aorist6 a change o# stand"oint& It is a %i%id trans#erence o# the action to the #$t$re (li4e the "resent L)6 Fo& ';G9) by the ti!eless aorist& The a$g!ented #or! is still $sed6 b$t the ti!e is hardly #elt to be "ast& This idio! s$r%i%es in the Sla%onic also&9 It is a %i%id idio! and is still #o$nd in !odern /ree4&; Th$!b (Handb.6 "& '79) cites 1 s Q 0<&# L* JC* )"'6 Je%en i# yo$ i!"ale !e only one /ree4 "erishes&K Rader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '7;) cites #ro! E"ictet$s6 @ &[*# =F&*& /ilderslee%e= calls it 2a %ision o# the #$t$re&5 <$rton> considers it 2rather a rhetorical #ig$re than a gra!!atical idio!65 b$t the idio! is not so strange a#ter all& C#& E$r&6 *lc.6 9?>6 .&' \ &*OJI "erish i# yo$ lea%e !e&K The e a!"les are not n$!ero$s in the N& T& and so!e o# the! !ay be gno!ic& C#& " 0 .3[# '* C .& 0 (.t& '?G'=& C#& "&< as the ne t a"odosis in %erse '> and L in %erse '@)H + 9 [*# 2) O* (' Cor& @G7?)H @ &&[ &H# 9 &' (Re%& 'EG@)6 "robably also + * [ # <&'; 9 ='"' (Fo& '=G>)6 tho$gh this !ay be !erely gno!ic6 as already stated& C#& the $se o# ' and in .t& '7G7>6 7? in a condition o# the "resent ti!e& In Fo& '9G9' ="' (twice) is e "lained (%erse 97) by =" 9 2a* ="& C#& "& 'E7E (stand"oint)& "# *orist in 1ishes& The s"ecial $se o# the aorist indicati%e in wishes abo$t the "ast and conditions deter!ined as $n#$l#illed will be disc$ssed in cha"ter XIX6 .odes& "# 2ariations in the 3se of Tenses& 1here so !$ch %ariety is "ossible6 great #reedo! is to be e "ected& In !odern English we !a4e a "oint o# $ni#or!ity o# tense in narrati%e& The /ree4s al!ost !ade a "oint o# the o""osite& It is :e:$ne6 to say no !ore6 to "lane down into a dead le%el the /ree4 s"ontaneo$s %ariety& C#& O 9 S, (Ro& 9G79)& In .att& ;G''6 #or instance6 we ha%e .' (historical "res&)6 F& (aor&)6 '0 (i!"er#ect)& In .t& '9G;= #& note # H',# S# .&# # $)# W& 21hen they wished to narrate a #act6 or to con%ey a !eaning6 there is good gro$nd #or holding that they e!"loyed the tense a""ro"riate #or the "$r"ose6 and that they e!"loyed it :$st beca$se o# s$ch a""ro"riateness&5' That
2 Synt., p. 12&. 3 Gi6e$, )anua6, p. '99. ' ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '38. + Synt. o" #tti> Gk., p. 11'. 7 .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 23. 1 %. -hom$on, -he Gk. -en$e$ in the .. -., p. 18.

is well said& The e "lanation is chie#ly "sychological6 not !ere analogy6 which is tr$e o# only a #ew tenses6 es"ecially in late /ree4 (.iddleton6 *nalogy in Synta+6 '?L76 "& >)& Fannaris6 Hist. G$. Gr.6 "& ;9@6 lays "robably too !$ch stress on 2the ter!inal ho!o"hony o# the two tenses5 (aor& and "er#&)& "# Translation of the *orist into -nglish& The /ree4 aorist ind&6 as can be readily seen6 is not the e act e3$i%alent o# any tense in any other lang$age& It has nuances all its own6 !any o# the! di##ic$lt or well8nigh i!"ossible to re"rod$ce in English& Here6 as e%erywhere6 one needs to 4ee" a shar" line between the /ree4 idio! and its translation into English& 1e !erely do the best that we can in English to translate in one way or another the total res$lt o# word (Aktionsart)6 conte t and tense&7 Certainly one cannot say that the English translations ha%e been s$ccess#$l with the /ree4 aorist&9 1ey!o$th in his Ne! Testament in Modern Speech has atte!"ted to carry o$t a consistent "rinci"le with so!e s$ccess& .o$lton; has tho$ght the !atter i!"ortant eno$gh #or an e tended disc$ssion& He !a4es clear that the /ree4 aorist is tr$e to itsel#6 howe%er it is rendered into English& Ta4e Q* ' (' Cor& '=G>)6 #or instance6 J#ell aslee" (at %ario$s ti!es)6K .o$lton e "lains6 2and so ha%e #allen aslee"&5 In .t& 9G@ S= !ay be translated by Jhas warned6K b$t JwarnedK will answer& The English "ast will translate the /ree4 aorist in !any cases where we "re#er 2ha%e&5 <$rton' "$ts it clearly th$sG 2The /ree4 e!"loys the aorist6 lea%ing the conte t to s$ggest the orderH the English $s$ally s$ggests the order by the $se o# the "l$"er#ect&5 The /ree4 aorist ta4es no note o# any inter%al between itsel# and the !o!ent o# s"ea4ing6 while the English "ast ta4es note o# the inter%al& The /ree4 aorist and the English "ast do not e actly corres"ond6 nor do the /ree4 "er#ect and the English "er#ect&7 The /ree4 aorist co%ers !$ch !ore gro$nd than the English "ast& C#& C &' ! .C* 1* GC* t?* L* F* (.t& 7@G?)6 where the /ree4 aorist is connected with the "resent in a way that only the English "er#ect can render& See also L* - 2 u (Fo& '>G7;)& )ro! the /ree4 "oint o# %iew the aorist is tr$e to its own geni$s& The aorist in /ree4 is so rich in !eaning that the English labo$rs and groans to e "ress it& As a !atter o# #act the /ree4 aorist is translatable into al!ost e%ery English tense e ce"t the i!"er#ect6 b$t that #act indicates no con#$sion in the /ree4&9
)idd6eton )I//?!-O., #na6o y in Synta0 11&923. 555, -he /o>trine o" the Greek #rti>6e 11&++3. 2 Weymouth, On the Renderin into !n . o" the Gk. #ori$t and %er"e>t, 1&9', p. 1+. 3 -hom$on, -he Gk. -en$e$ in the .. -., p. 23. Weymouth W!D)O,-<, On the Renderin into !n 6i$h o" the Greek #ori$t and %er"e>t 11&9'3. ' %ro6., pp. 13+41'2. 1 .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 28. 2 I:., p. 2' ". 3 -homp$on, Gk. Synt., 1&&3, p. 0i0.

"c# The Aorist Subjunctive and Optative. The aorist o# these two 2side8!oods5; !ay %ery well be disc$ssed together& The two !oods are not radically di##erent as we shall see& "# No Time -lement in the Sub4uncti e and 5ptati e&= There is only relati%e ti!e (#$t$re)6 and that is not d$e to the tense at all&> The s$b:$ncti%e is #$t$re in relation to the s"ea4er6 as is o#ten tr$e o# the o"tati%e6 tho$gh the o"tati%e stand"oint is then !ore re!ote6 a sort o# #$t$re #ro! the stand"oint o# the "ast& "# 're%uency of *orist Sub4uncti e& As between the aorist and "resent in s$b:$ncti%e and o"tati%e6 the aorist is #ar !ore co!!on& )or "ractical "$r"oses the "er#ect !ay be al!ost le#t o$t o# %iewH it is so rare& As a r$le in these !oods the action is either "$nctiliar (aorist) or d$rati%e ("resent)& The contrast between "oint and linear action co!es o$t si!"ly and clearly here& It is :$st that seen between the aorist and the i!"er#ect indicati%e&' In the classical Sans4rit the s$b:$ncti%e e ists only in a re!nant o# the #irst "erson6 which is treated as an i!"erati%e6 b$t it is co!!on eno$gh in the early lang$age&7 In Ho!er (both &liad and 5dyssey) the aorist is in great "re"onderance o%er the "resent (>= to 9= #or the a%erage between s$b:$ncti%e and o"tati%e6 abo$t the sa!e #or each)&9 /ilderslee%e; considers the di##erence d$e to the nat$re o# the constr$ctions6 not to !ere lac4 o# di##erentiation in the early stage o# the lang$age& The s$b:& is !ore co!!on in Ho!er than in the later /ree4 and the aorist s$b:& is corres"ondingly ab$ndant& There is no do$bt that the aorist is gaining in the o%er the "resent in the s$b:&6 o"t&6 i!"er& (Rader!acher6 N. T. Gr.6 "& '79)& The distinction is $nderstood& C#& )* s O&* 3[ (ai!) and -)* s I (d$ration)6 I& /&6 XII6 =6 >;@& Rader!acher cites also @* &<" and @* &"<# @* S")[ and ? I #ro! a Perga!$! inscr&6 N& '9 (<&C& 9EE)& He #ears that this "ro%es con#$sion between the tenses6 and a""eals also to the "a"yr$s e a!"le ? " 9 &0 ((eiss!ann6 Light6 "& 7E;)& <$t there is no necessary con#$sion here& The !odern /ree4 "reser%es clearly the distinction between "$nctiliar and linear action in the s$b:& and $ses the aorist and "resent side by side to show it (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7;)& The sit$ation in the N& T& is e%en !ore stri4ing& .r& H& Scott6 <ir4enhead6 England6 writes !e that he #inds only #i%e "resent s$b:s& in Acts and one ('9G;') is a 3$otation& In the Pa$line E"istles ('9) he notes 7=? de"endent aorist s$b:s& and '>' de"endent "res& s$b:s& /ilderslee%e= co!"lains o# StahlKs weariso!eness in "ro%ing what 2no one will dis"$te&5 The "oint is that the aorist s$b:& or o"t& is $sed as a !atter o# co$rse $nless d$rati%e (linear) action is to be e!"hasiBed or (as rarely) the co!"leted state is to be stressed ("er#ect)& <$t %ariations occ$r e%en here& Th$s Abbott> notes only two instances o# the "res& s$b:& with " in .4& (LG;=H ';G9') and two in +$&
' Gi6der$6ee=e, #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '21. + K.-G., Bd. I, p. 1&2. 7 Stah6, <i$t.-krit. Synt., p. 181. 1 (6yde, Gk. Synt., p. &2A B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 19'. 2 Whitney, San$. Gr., p. 29&. 3 S>h6a>hter, Stati$t. ,nter$., pp. 237423&. ' #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2'+. + I:., p. '22.

(>G99H 'LG9')6 a"art #ro! and e ce"t cla$ses with ) and && The aorist s$b:$ncti%e with " occ$rs in Syno"tics 7; ti!es6 "resent @L& <$t in Fohn there is !ore di%ersity between the two tenses& 2.ost /ree4 writers obser%e the distinction between the aorist and "resent s$b:$ncti%e6 as English!en obser%e that between JshallK and Jwill6K $nconscio$sly and witho$t any a""earance o# deliberately e!"hasiBing the di##erence& <$t we ha%e seen abo%e (7='') that Fohn e!"loys the two #or!s with great deliberateness6 e%en in the sa!e sentence6 to disting$ish between the beginning o# J4nowingK and the de%elo"!ent o# it&5' C#& ? 4 9 ' ('EG9?) and , \# " + F 2" ('9G'@)6 where the "res& is again $sed "$r"osely& Note also FohnKs 4 (>G7?) and +$4eKs (9G'E)& 1e need not #ollow all the details o# Abbott67 b$t he has !ade it "er#ectly clear that Fohn !a4es the shar" distinction between the aor& and "res& s$b:& that is co!!on between the aor& and i!"er#& ind& C#& " * '[ (Fo& ?G=') and + '4 (' Fo& 7G9)H @ s ' (Fo& ';G'9) and v s 4 (' Fo& 9G77)& <$t Pa$l also 4nows the "$nctiliar #orce o# the aor& s$b:& C#& w (Ro& >G'=) with (>G')6 where the "oint lies chie#ly in the di##erence o# tense& See also 7 Ti!& 7G=6 + Q 9 .&I *# 2 , + U * .&[& C#& F in /al& =G'@& In deliberati%e 3$estions the aorist s$b:& is "artic$larly co!!on6 as in 4 x U 4 (.4& '7G';)& In ' ) (Ro& =G') the d$rati%e "resent occ$rs designedlyOJ4ee" on en:oying "eace with /od6K the "eace already !ade (*)& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '?>) thin4s that the aorist s$b:& in relati%e cla$ses li4e c* s 3[ (.t& =G7')6 or @0 + &"<[ (.4& LG'?)6 or conditional sentences li4e + ."' (.t& =G;@) 2gets a #$t$re8"er#ect sense&5 <$t one do$bts i# a#ter all this is not reading English or +atin into the /ree4& C#& .t& =G9'& The s"ecial constr$ction o# the aorist s$b:& with 2 (Fo& >G9=H '?G'') co!es $" #or disc$ssion elsewhere (""& L7L #&6 ''@; #&)& "# *$tionsart& The three 4inds o# "oint8action occ$r6 o# co$rse6 in the aorist s$b:& Th$s in ? 0[ (Fo& 'G@) the aorist is !erely constati%e6 as is + ' (Fo& '=G@)& C#& + * [ ('=G>)& In Fo& >G9E6 L \ 9 3 6 the ingressi%e $se is e%ident in 3OJco!e to belie%eK (c#& ? 3' in %erse 7L)& C#& also ? 3 9 .4 (' Fo& 9G79)H (Ro& >G;H '9G'9)& The e##ecti%e aorist is seen in 4* &'4 (.t& 7>G=;)& C#& @ [ (' Cor& '=G7;) #or the 2"er#ecti%e5 $se o# the "re"osition also& In the !odern /ree4 the aorist s$b:& "reser%es Aktionsart (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7;)& "# *orist Sub4uncti e in Prohibitions& It see!s clear' that originally both in Sans4rit and /ree4 "rohibition was e "ressed only by the s$b:& Hence the growth o# the
7 ;oh. Gr., p. 382 ". But there i$ 6itt6e point in the$e e0>eption$. #::ott ri ht6y note$ the =ariation$ in the maLor un>ia6$ :et*een ([ and (H[ in )k. 9M'34'8. )r. <. S>ott "ind$ " *ith pre$. $u:L. a6$o 1W. <.3 in )k. 1M'2A 9M'8 1' in a663. In ?u. he add$ +M12 1N)k. 1M'23A 12M7, &, 12 1" to :e $upp6ied3A 13M3A 22M2& 1& in a663. In )t. he note$ +M23A 7M22, 23A &M2 1N)k. 1M'23A 12M13 bisA 1+M1'A 18M22A 21M21A 2'M'9 bisA 27M3+ 112 in a663. But he make$ 8& aor. $u:L$. *ith " in the Synopti>$. 1 #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 3&1. 2 I:., pp. 37943&&. 1 )onro, <om. Gr., p. 2'2.

i!"erati%e ne%er #inally dis"laced it& In "artic$lar the aorist s$b:& held its "lace in "rohibitions as against the aorist i!"er& (a late #or! anyhow)& This distinction has held in the !ain right on thro$gh& In the N& T& e a!"les o# the aor& i!"er& in "rohibitions do occ$r in the third "erson6 b$t the aor& s$b:& s$r%i%es& In the second "erson the r$le is still absol$te& .o$lton7 has gi%en a %ery interesting disc$ssion o# the de%elo"!ent o# the disco%ery o# the distinction between the two constr$ctions& The aorist s$b:& is o# co$rse "$nctiliar6 and the "resent i!"er& linear& Inas!$ch as the "rohibition is #$t$re6 the aorist s$b:& wo$ld nat$rally be ingressi%e& /ott#ried Her!ann long ago !ade the distinction6 b$t a #ew years ago (r& Henry Fac4son tells how one day he got the idea #ro! a #riend (3$oted by .o$lton7)G 2(a%idson told !e that6 when he was learning !odern /ree46 he had been "$BBled abo$t the distinction6 $ntil he heard a /ree4 #riend $se the "resent i!"erati%e to a dog which was bar4ing& This ga%e hi! the cl$e& He t$rned to PlatoKs *pology6 and i!!ediately st$!bled $"on the e cellent instance6 7E E6 U 0<'6 Jbe#ore cla!o$r begins6K and 7' A6 U 0<16 Jwhen it has beg$n&K5 This distinction is clearly in har!ony with the "$nctiliar aorist s$b:& and the d$rati%e "resent i!"er& It is !aintained in ancient /ree4 and in !odern /ree46 and .o$lton9 shows how the "a"yri ab$ndantly ill$strate it& *n#ort$nately the "resent i!"erati%e is rare in the "a"yri #ro! the nat$re o# the s$b:ect8!atter6 b$t the #ew e a!"les agree to the distinction drawn& The aorist s$b:$ncti%e is ab$ndant eno$gh& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '79) #inds in -&P& (all iiNA&(&) si aorist s$b:s& with & Th$s U .&[* re#ers to a re3$est in a letter& C#& also U -&&* [*# @ '9;3[*& <$t , U &6 Jsto" saying this6K is in a letter in re#erence to what had already been said& So U .6 JdonKt go on worrying&K Another good e a!"le is in Hb&P& => (iiiN<&C&)6 a h U )& 2& .o$lton clinches it by the !odern /ree4 U "[* (to one already writing) and U "[* (to one who has not beg$n)& The distinction is not ad!itted by all !odern scholars&' <$t the di##ic$lty lies !ainly in the $se o# the "resent i!"erati%e6 not in the aorist s$b:& E a!"les li4e U 0"[* (Fo& 9G@) do occ$r6 where the thing "rohibited has beg$n& Here it is the constati%e aorist rather than the ingressi%e which is !ore $s$al in this constr$ction& .o$lton7 3$otes (r& Henry Fac4son againG 2yU "[* always6 I belie%e6 !eans6 JI warn yo$ against doing this6K JI beseech yo$ will notKH tho$gh this is so!eti!es $sed when the thing is being doneH notably in certain cases which !ay be called collo3$ial or idio!atic6 with an e##ect o# i!"atience6 U [*6 J-h6 ne%er !indWK U [*6 JNe%er #earWK U 0"[*6 J,o$ !$stnKt be s$r"risedWK5 Add also U <'I* (.t& 'G7E)& <$t6 as a r$le6 it is the ingressi%e aorist s$b:& $sed in "rohibitions to #orbid a thing not yet done or the d$rati%e "resent i!"er& to #orbid the contin$ance o# an act& The N& T& is %ery rich in e a!"les o# both o# these idio!s beca$se o# the hortatory nat$re o# the boo4s&9 .o$lton; #inds '9; e a!"les o# with the "res& i!"er& and ?; o# with the aorist s$b:& In .atthew there are '7 e a!"les o# with the "res& i!"er&
2 %ro6., p. 122. <enry <!.RD, PrScis de gra!!aire d$ grec et d$ latin. +th ed. 11&9'3. !66iottB$ tr. o" 1$t ed. 11&923. 2 %ro6., p. 122. 3 I:., p. 122 ". 1 (". R. (. Seaton, (6. Re=., /e>., 1927, p. '3&. 2 %ro6., p. 127.

and 7L o# with the aorist s$b:& <$t these #ig$res are co!"letely re%ersed in the /os"el o# +$4e (7@ to 'L)6 in Fa!es (@ to 7)6 in Pa$lKs E"istles (;@ to ?) and FohnKs writings ('L to ')& The case in Fo& 9G@ has already been noticed& It !ay be said at once that the e cess o# e a!"les o# "res& i!"er& o%er aorist i!"er& is the old sit$ation in Ho!er&= In the Attic orators6 .iller (*. (. P.6 iii6 ;79) #inds the "ro"ortion o# U ty"e to U [* ty"e => to ;;6 abo$t the sa!e as that in the N& T&6 '9; to ?;& In the N& T& this "redo!inance holds e ce"t in .atthew6 ' Peter and Re%& (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '7;)& The aorist i!"er& was an a#ter8growth6 and yet is %ery co!!on in the N& T& (and +XX) as co!"ared with the older /ree4&> In the +ordKs Prayer6 #or instance6 e%ery tense is aorist (.t& >GLM'9)& /ilderslee%e re!ar4s that the aorist s$its 2instant "rayer&5 <$t c#& +$& ''G7M;& Howe%er6 the "oint is here that in the N& T&6 as a r$le6 the idio! gi%es little di##ic$lty& C#& U ' (.t& =G'@)H U [* fp* (.t& >G'9H +$& ''G;)H U [* 21* 3' (Ac& @G>E)& C#& U &[* (.t& >G7)6 JdonKt begin to so$nd6K and U '0H (>G'L)6 Jthey were already doing it&K Note again U 4 'Q <"&' (.t& @G>) and U (@G')& 1ith .t& 9GL U =' & co!"are +$& 9G? U -=' && <$t in +$& 9G';6 ' ' 'Q 0'6 we ha%e the constati%e aorist rather than the "res& i!"er& (the soldiers were "resent6 i# Fohn s"o4e in /ree4 to the!6 !ore restrained at any rate)& In +$& ''G@6 0* ")OJ3$it tro$bling !e6K while in Re%& 'EG;6 U 2+ "[*OJdo not begin to write&K (C#& && " in sa!e %erse&) It is not necessary to labo$r the "oint& <$t in .t& >G7= we ha%e U p6 i!"lying that they were an io$sH in >G9;6 U h '6 a general warning in concl$sion& -nce !ore6 in .t& 'EG7>6 note U h <'F 23*6 the warning against #earing e%il !enH in 'EG9'6 U h <1OJ3$it being a#raid&K In Fo& =G;=6 U 16 it is i!"lied that Jthey had been thin4ing thatKH in 7 Cor& ''G'>6 * =[6 Jno one did6 o# co$rse&K' In Fo& >G;9 U 3H is inter"reted by 0H in %erse ;'& C#& U & (+$& ?G=7)6 Jthey were wee"ing&K In U =[ (7 Cor& ''G'>) and U =0[ (' Cor& '>G'') the nor!al $se o# with the aorist s$b:& occ$rs with the third "erson& A good do$ble e a!"le occ$rs in +$& 'EG;6 U <"H <&&" (JdonKt 4ee" carryingK)6 and in ' ."' (JdonKt sto" to sal$teK)& In Col& 7G7' U z[ is a warning to the Colossian Christians not to be led astray by the gnostic asceticis!& In 7 Cor& >G'@6 ."0 U z6 the "ro"het (Is& =7G'') ass$!es that the "eo"le were g$ilty6 i# AX be #ollowed as by Pa$l6 b$t < has z'& In Fo& 7EG'@6 0 -06 Fes$s indicates that .ary !$st cease clinging to hi!& C#& _[* (.t& =G9>) and U _3 (Fas& =G'7)& As to the "resent i!"erati%e #$rther
3 I:., p. 123. )r. <. S>ott proper6y o:$er=e$ that Hthe >orre>tne$$ o" the$e "i ure$ *i66 depend upon ho* a repeated or ' *ithout a verb i$ to :e >ounted. !. . i$ )t. 12M9 ". to :e >ounted a$ one or a$ $e=enO -he $ame Cue$tion ari$e$ *ith a =er: *ithout a repeated " or ?, et>. It $eem$ to me that the$e are mere6y a::re=iated or >onden$ed $enten>e$ and $hou6d :e >ounted a$ i" printed in extenso5a$ $eparate $enten>e$. In that >a$e )t. 12M9 ". *ou6d >ount $e=en in$tan>e$ o" *ith $u:L. aor.I ' I:. + Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2''. 7 Gi6der$6., ;u$tin )artyr, p. 138. 1 (". B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 197.

disc$ssion belongs elsewhere6 b$t a word is necessary here& .o$lton7 thin4s that 2rather strong e ternal "ress$re is needed to #orce the r$le $"on Pa$l&5 Fohn has only one case o# with the aorist s$b:&6 and yet .o$lton holds that all his $ses o# the "resent i!"er& #it the canon co!"letely& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& '>;) saysG 2 with the "resent i!"erati%e has to do with a co$rse o# action and !eans so!eti!es J4ee" #ro!K (resist)6 so!eti!es Jcease toK (desist)&5 So Jcontin$e not doing6K or Jdo not contin$e doing&K -ne o# the i!"er& "resents is !erely e cla!atory (c#& z6 Fas& =G')& Another6 li4e @ with '9 \[* (.t& ?G;)6 is al!ost li4e a 2sort o# "article adding e!"hasis&5' I# 2a negati%e co$rse o# action5 (/ilderslee%e) is en:oined6 it is not necessarily i!"lied that one is doing the thing& .o$ltonKs di##ic$lty abo$t Pa$l is th$s ob%iated& Hence the answer7 to U 6 which $s$allyOJSto" doing6K !ay be in a gi%en caseOJ(o not #ro! ti!e to ti!e6K J(o not as yo$ are in danger o# doing6K J(o not atte!"t to doK or si!"ly JContin$e not doing&K In E"h& =G'? U 3 !ay !ean that so!e o# the! were getting dr$n4 (c#& e%en at the +ordKs Table6 ' Cor& ''G7')6 or a co$rse o# action (the habit) !ay be "rohibited& In U w" (E"h& ;G7>) the i!!inent "eril o# sin !ay be i!"lied (c#& _H)& So in U 3 (Col& 9GL) we !ay ha%e the co$rse o# action6 tho$gh the $s$al linear notion is "ertinent& <$t c#& U .& (' Ti!& ;G';)6 '9 and 'Q (=G77)69 and U Y* 5 S (.t& >G'>)6 as ill$strations o# the "oint in dis"$te& In the !odern /ree4 2as a "rohibiti%e the aorist s$b:& is on the whole less co!!only $sed than the "res& s$b:&5 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7@)& y with the "resent i!"er& s$r%i%es in a #ew instances6 b$t the s$b:& in !odern /ree4 does "ractically all the wor4 o# "rohibiting& "# *orist Sub4uncti e !ith 2 & It is !erely the tense that calls #or co!!ent here6 not the !ode nor the negati%e& The "resent s$b:& was so!eti!es $sed with 2 in the ancient /ree46 b$t no e a!"les occ$r in the N& T& The aorist is %ery nat$ral as the action is distinctly "$nctiliar& -# the 'EE e a!"les o# 2 in the 1& H& te t6 ?> are with the aorist s$b:&6 '; are #$t$re inds&; C#& 2 U &' (.t& =G7E)H 2 2 U (.4& ';G7=)& The other as"ects o# the s$b:ect will be disc$ssed elsewhere (cha"ters on .odes and Particles)& "# *orist 5ptati e& It is !ore #re3$ent than the "resent in the N& T& This is "artly d$e to the relati%e #re3$ency o# U (c#& /al& >G';) and the rarity o# the o"tati%e itsel#& The distinction o# tense is "reser%ed& C#& '9* " (ingressi%e6 .4& ''G';)H &'0' (e##ecti%e6 ' Pet& 'G7)H 03;&" 9 3 (constati%e6 ' Th& 9G'' #&)& C#& {' (7 Ti!& 'G'>6 '?)& C#& 7 Ti!& ;G'>& These are wishes& The aorist occ$rs also with the "otential o"t& as in s (+$& >G'')& C#& Ac& 7>G7L& In the N& T& certainly the o"tati%e $s$ally re#ers to the #$t$re (relati%ely)6 tho$gh /ilderslee%e= is willing to ad!it that Ho!er $ses the "otential o"t& with - a #ew ti!es o# the "ast& The o"t& in indirect 3$estions has to be noted&
2 %ro6., p. 12+. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12'. 2 I:., p. 12+ ". 3 I:. ' I:., p. 192. + #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '23.

"d# The Aorist Imperative. In Ho!er the aorist i!"erati%e6 as already stated6 is not so co!!on as the "resent6 while in the N& T& it is re!ar4ably #re3$ent&' This #re3$ency o# the i!"er& is characteristic o# the generally67 tho$gh in the end the s$b:& ca!e to be $sed in "ositi%e co!!ands li4e the +atin&9 There is no co!"lication in the "ositi%e co!!and6 li4e the ban "$t $"on U ' #ro! the beginning o# o$r 4nowledge o# the /ree4 lang$age&; Hence in the "ositi%e i!"erati%e we are #ree to consider the signi#icance o# the aorist (and "resent) tense in the essential !eaning& Here the distinction between the "$nctiliar (aorist) and the d$rati%e ("resent) is 3$ite !ar4ed&= Indeed .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '7L) holds that to get at 2the essential character o# aorist action6 there#ore6 we !$st start with the other !oods5 than ind& It is easier6 #or the ti!e ele!ent is absent& C#& <&, C 5" 0 9 .&3 (Ac& '7G?)& It is e actly the distinction between the aorist and i!"er#& ind& (c#& =&Z W&3 in %erse L)& The constati%e aorist6 <&,6 is li4e the "receding6 H4 9 S' + "&" 0& In Fo& =G? note | C "< 0 9 " (the ingressi%e aorist and the d$rati%e6 Jwal4ing6K Jwent on wal4ingK)6 and the sa!e tense8distinction is "reser%ed in %erse L6 E;9 " (c#& #$rther =G'')& In P (Fo& LG@) the "resent P is e cla!atory (c#& | in =G?)& C#& .4& 7GL6 ''& In the !idst o# the aorists in Fo& 7G=M? (the e##ecti%e # # .& ,) the "resent stands o$t& It is "robably a "olite conati%e o##er to the !aster o# the #east& In the +ordKs Prayer in .t& (>GLM'') note w# '# *# z* and \&; 0= in >G>& In o""osition to C* in .atthew we ha%e 0 C M f in +$& ''G96 a #ine contrast between the "$nctiliar and the linear action&> So ` , * (.t& =G;7) and 9 , 0 (+$& >G9E)H )"' [ I fK (+$& >G79) and ) (.t& =G'7)H - , ,# U 1 (Fo& 7G'>6 a %ery #ine ill$stration)& In Ro& >G'9 a "ointed distinction in the tenses is drawn6 'Q " + &' S4 @& .* I wK# .&&+ q03* (one the habit o# sin #orbidden6 the other the instant s$rrender to /od en:oined)& C#& also , in %erse 'L& In +$& @G?6 3';3# ';16 the "resents are also aoristic& As with the ind& the aorist (constati%e) !ay be $sed with a d$rati%e word& So I ."[ I I (Fo& '=GL)& The action6 d$rati%e in itsel#6 is treated as "$nctiliar& C#& .t& 7>G9?6 l 9 '1 M , (.4& ';G9;)& So with 0 L* F* 0* , 00 (Fas& =G@)H U ' 3&= (' Ti!& >G7E& C#& 7 Ti!& 'G';H ' Fo& =G7')H , "0 (7 Ti!& 7G7)H 0"' (7G9)H 3 (7G'=)& C#& the aorists in Fas& ;GL& .ost o# the! call #or little co!!ent& C#& Fo& ;G'>6 9=& Abbott' notes the a%oidance o# the aorist i!"er& o# 36 "ossibly beca$se !ere belie# (aorist) had co!e to be !is$nderstood& The "res& i!"er& "resses the contin$ance o# #aith (c#& Fo& ';G'')& The real #orce o# the
1 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2'' ".A #pr., 1929, p. 23+. 2 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '+1. 3 I:., p. ''9. ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 183. + -hom$on, -he Gk. -en$e$ in the .. -., p. 29. 7 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 129. 1 ;oh. Gr., p. 319 ".

e##ecti%e aorist is seen in &3 C C , (Fo& 7G'L)& In .4& '=G976 <" ,6 the 2"er#ecti%e5 #orce o# the "re"osition is added& .o$lton7 notes that ' Peter shows a !ar4ed li4ing #or the aorist (7E aorists to = "resents in co!!ands6 H& Scott)6 while Pa$lKs habit6 as already noted6 is :$st the o""osite& .o$lton9 has an interesting co!!ent on the #act that 2in se%en instances only do the two e%angelists U.t& =M@ and +$4eKs corres"onding "assageV $se di##erent tenses6 and in all o# the! the acco!"anying %ariation o# "hraseology acco$nts #or the di##erences in a way which shows how delicately the distinction o# tenses was obser%ed&5 There !ay be %ariations in the translation o# the Ara!aic original (i# the Ser!on on the .o$nt was s"o4en in Ara!aicQ)6 2b$t we see no trace o# indi##erence to the #orce o# the tenses&5 In the i!"erati%e also di##erent writers will "re#er a di##erent tense& -ne writer is !ore #ond o# the aorist6 another o# the "resent& Note the i!"ressi%e aorists6 - C &# &3 2C 9 - 2C S" (Fo& ''G9L6 ;;)& Abbott; rightly calls the aorist here !ore a$thoritati%e and sole!n than the "resent wo$ld ha%e been& The aorist here accords with the conscio$sness o# Fes$s (''G;'6 0*)& The aorist i!"er& occ$rs in "rohibitions o# the third "erson6 li4e U (.t& >G9)H U <" (7;G'@)H U " (7;G'?)& This constr$ction occ$rs in ancient /ree46 as ' '" *6 So"h& Ai& ''?E& <$t and the aorist s$b:& was "re#erred& In the N& T& this is rarely #o$nd (' Cor& '>G''H 7 Th& 7G9H 7 Cor& ''G'>)& "e# The Aorist Infinitive. In Ho!er the d$rati%e ("resent) idea is !ore co!!on than the "$nctiliar (aorist) with the in#initi%e6 as with the i!"erati%e&' There is6 o# co$rse6 no ti!e in the in#& e ce"t relati%e ti!e in indirect disco$rse& The history o# the in#& belongs elsewhere6 b$t here we ha%e only to do with the e cellent ill$stration o# "$nctiliar action a##orded by the aorist in#& Rader!acher6 "& '796 #inds the aorist and the "res& in#& together in the Carthaginian inscr& (A$dollent6 79?6 7L6 iiiNA&(&)6 'Q ) 'Q 1 'Q F 'Q =&1& So in the "a"yri <&/&*&6 I6 '?96 7=& The #eat$res o# the tenses in the in#&6 once they are #$lly established6 corres"ond closely to the $se in the !oods&7 As a !atter o# #act originally the in#&6 beca$se o# its s$bstanti%al origin6 was de%oid o# real tense8idea (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& 7E;)6 and it was only by analogy that tense8ideas were associated with the in#& <$t still the aorist in#& deser%es a "assing word& Ta4e Ac& '=G9@ #&6 #or instance69 }"<* Q <3& 0&<1 9 C ~ C & y"& Here the constati%e aorist is "er#ectly nat$ral #or the "ro"osed :o$rney& <$t see the o$tco!e6 ,&* Q W=0;U 0&<" ,& Pa$l was 4eenly conscio$s o# the disco!#ort o# .ar4Ks "re%io$s desertion& He was not going to s$b:ect hi!sel# again to that contin$al "eril (d$rati%e)& C#& also .t& ';G776 W" a* '+* <F (constati%e aorist)6 9 " 2 (d$rati%e6 Jgo on ahead o# hi!K)& An interesting e a!"le occ$rs in Fo& '9G9> #&6 2 3 , .&0F (constati%e aorist !ost li4ely)H + 2 3
2 %ro6., p. 18'. 3 I:. ' ;oh. Gr., p. 31& ". 1 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., p. 2''. In San$. the in". ha$ no ten$e$ at a66. 2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 22'. (". Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 133 ".A Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 32. %6ato, -heat., 1++ (, -0 , .3. 3 )ou6ton, i:., p. 132.

.&01 - (d$rati%e6 J4ee" on #ollowing6K is PeterKs idea)&; The aorist in#& is the "redo!inant constr$ction with 3# 0*# &# &36 etc&= The distinction in tenses is well obser%ed& )or 3 see #$rther &<" (Fo& 9G7@) and &<1 (';G'@)H <"H ('>G'7) and <" (Re%& 7G7)H , (Fo& =G;;) and 3 ('7G9L)&> Abbott notes also that F occ$rs in Fohn with 3 only in Fo& ''G9@6 whereas 1# &1# 'F are nat$ral (9G9 ##&)& So with & note &<1 (Fo& >G7')H " (@G;;)6 b$t p ('>G'L)& In .t& =G'@ #& &, and &'4 are e##ecti%e6 b$t F (Ac& '=G'9) is ingressi%e6 while F (.t& >G?) is constati%e& C#& +$& @G7; #& The aorist in#& is rare with && (.&0F6 Ro& ?G'?H /al& 9G796 tho$gh .&3 in ' Pet& =G')& So && .1 (Re%& 9G7)& C#& Re%& 9G'>H '7G;& A good e a!"le o# the constati%e aorist in#& occ$rs in Ro& ';G7'&' The aorist in#& is $sed with an aorist as the ind&6 2 E& &, (.t& =G'@)6 the s$b:&6 \ , <F (+$& LG=;)6 the i!"er&6 -* " (.t& ?G77)& <$t the aorist in#& is co!!on also with d$rati%e tenses li4e H0 F(.4& '7G'7)H 2 &;p (+$& '?G'9)& There is a""arently no instance in the N& T& o# an aorist in#& $sed to re"resent an aorist ind& in indirect disco$rse&7 In +$& 7;G;>6 @ P* 1 9 .F 46 we ha%e the $s$al ti!eless aorist6 the s$b:ect o# & So U 1 (7G7>)& In Ac& 9G'? 1 is the ob:ect o# && The aorist and "res& in#& with "re"ositions %ary a good deal& The aorist occ$rs with " (.t& 7>G97H +$& '7G=6 etc&)6 with (+$& 7G7'H Fo& 'G;?)H * (.t& >G')H * (Ph& 'G79)H and e%en with so!eti!es (+$& 7G7@)6 b$t only once with " (.t& 7;G'7)& C#& <$rton6 N. T. Moods and Tenses6 "& ;L #& The #ollowing are .r& H& ScottKs #ig$res #or the Syno"ticsG
, + P '7 * ARTIC*+AR IN)INITIVE ` + C , P 9' A ? 9L P T A > P T A 9 C* P 7 A = @ Total P A Per#& =@ == ; ''>

P A P A 7 ; L 77 > 9'

A P A ' ' > '9 @ Per#& ; '@

There are !ore artic$lar "resents than aorists in N& T& "f# The Aorist Participle. The tenses got started with the "artici"le sooner than with the in#& (c#& Sans4rit)6 b$t in neither is there ti!e e ce"t indirectly& The Sans4rit had tenses in the "artici"les& The aorist "art& is not so #re3$ent in Ho!er as is the "resent&9 <$t 2the #ondness o# the /ree4s #or aorist "artici"les in narrati%e is %ery re!ar4able&5;
' #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 371. + B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 197 ". 7 #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 372 ". 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 198. 2 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. +3. 3 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2''. ' -homp$on, Synt. o" #tt. Gr., p. 213.

"# *$tionsart& That is "resent here also& Th$s we #ind the ingressi%e aorist6 &'* (.t& 7@G9)H <'1 (.4& =G99)H .* (Ac& '9G7@)H .* (7 Ti!& ;G'E)& The e##ecti%e aorist a""ears in &'* (Ac& '7G7=)6 the constati%e in 0&<* (ib.)& )$rther e a!"les o# the e##ecti%e aorist are * a* b)&0* 9 &"* C ,& (Ac& ';G'L)H * (Ro& =G')& The constati%e is seen again in 3* (.t& 7@G;)H 3* (Fo& @G9L)& The aorist "artici"le in itsel# is6 o# co$rse6 !erely "$nctiliar action& "# and the *orist Participle& The "$nctiliar #orce o# the aorist "art& is well ill$strated in this idio!& It di##ers #ro! the relati%e (@* Y %erb) in being a !ore general e "ression& In .t& 79G7E #&6 ! _* _36 we ha%e identical action6 not antecedent& The aorist is6 strictly s"ea4ing6 ti!eless (<$rton6 Moods and Tenses6 "& >L)& _*OJthe swearer6K ! &<OJthe recei%er6K etc& C#& Sey!o$r6 2-n the *se o# the Aorist Part& in /ree465 Transactions of the *m. Philol. *ss.6 '??'6 "& ?L& In Fohn the e a!"les6 howe%er6 are $s$ally de#inite&' Contrast ! &< (Fo& 9G99) "robablyOJthe <a"tistK with p* ! .3*; (>G;=) and 5 .3*# 5 * (=G7=6 7L)& Yaorist "art& !ay be $sed with any tense o# the ind& Th$s ! &< in Fo& 9G99 occ$rs with "# p* ! .3* (>G;=) with )# 5 * (=G7L) with 3& C#& .t& 7>G=76 "* 5 &<* ") )[ .&,& In si!"le tr$th the aorist in each instance is ti!eless& It is not necessary to ta4e it asO#$t$re "er#&7 in an e a!"le li4e ! S* * &* D* (.4& '9G'9)& So .t& 'EG9L& Note the res$!"ti%e D*& C#& ! 3*;9 U q"* : * (+$& '7G;@)& C#& Fo& @G9LH '>G7H 7EG7L6 in all o# which e a!"les the si!"le "$nctiliar action is alone "resented in a ti!eless !anner& <$t in Fo& 9G'96 29* .<<' * C 2C U ! , 2, <"*6 the content s$ggests antecedent action& C#& also >G;'6 ! -* ! <"*9 C .& in .t& 'EG;EH Fo& =G'=6 ! *H Heb& 'EG7L& and the aorist "art& is so!eti!es $sed o# an act "ast with re#erence to the ti!e o# writing6 tho$gh #$t$re with re#erence to the action o# the "rinci"al %erb&; This classic idio! occ$rs in the N& T& also& C#& ~3* ! ~'* ! 9 a* 2 (.t& 'EG;H c#& also 7@G9)H $s$ally the "hrase is ! 3* (7>G7=H Fo& '?G76 =)& So in Ac& 'G'> both 0 and 0&&<, are #$t$re to 1& In Col& 'G? ! 9 '&* is #$t$re to "& So Fo& ''G7 (c#& '7G9) E Q y+ f .& C 3 3r 9 "= a* * 2,& C#& Ac& @G9= , _*6 LG7' ! *& This de%elo"!ent6 tho$gh a""arently co!"le 6 is d$e to the %ery inde#initeness (and ti!elessness) o# the aorist "artici"le and the ad:ecti%al #orce o# the attrib$ti%e "artici"le&
Seymour S!D)O,R, -. /., <omeri> ?an ua e and @er$e 119223. 555, ?i"e in the <omeri> # e 119283. 555, -he ,$e o" the Gk. #or. %art. 1-ran$. #m. %hi6. #$$o>., EII, 1&&1, pp. && "".3. 1 #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 373. 2 #$ #::ott doe$, ;oh. Gr., p. 372. 3 I:., p. 37' ". ' Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. +2 ".A <umphrey$, (6. Re=., Fe:., B91.

"# *ntecedent *ction& This is the $s$al idio! with the circ$!stantial "artici"le& This is indeed the !ost co!!on $se o# the aorist "artici"le& <$t it !$st not be #orgotten that the aorist "art& does not in itsel# !ean antecedent action6 either relati%e or absol$te&' That is s$ggested by the conte t6 the nat$ral se3$ence o# e%ents& As e a!"les o# the antecedent aorist "art& (antecedent #ro! conte t6 not per se) ta4e '3*; (.t& ;G7)H Z;&'9* (7@G9)H *;.)'# .&Z .= (7@G=)& These so8called antecedent aorists do not ha%e to "recede the "rinci"al %erb in "osition in the sentence& Th$s 2U * F* )* (.4& 'G9')6 2),;.3* (Col& 'G96 ;)6 && ;) (Ac& '@G9')6 ";* (Heb& 'G9)& This idio! is %ery co!!on in the N& T& as in the older /ree4&7 Indeed6 one "artici"le !ay "recede and one !ay #ollow the %erb as in +$& ;G9=6 ;=F&;<&"& In Heb& >G'E the aorist is disting$ished #ro! the "resent6 =;* 1* w* 9 ,*& In Ro& =G'>6 M q* w*6 there is a re#erence to Ada! (%erse ';)& The "rinci"al %erb !ay itsel# be #$t$re as in -*; (' Cor& >G'=)& In +$& 79G'L E <&'* is "$nctiliar "eri"hrastic (aorist "assi%e)6 E being aoristic also& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;L) cites E .3 #ro! Pelagia (inscr& '?)& C#& E in Th$c& ;6 =;6 96 and \' * in Herod& 9G7@& See /ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& '7=& "# 6ut Simultaneous *ction is )ommon also& It is so with the circ$!stantial "artici"le as with the s$""le!entary& Here again it is a !atter o# s$ggestion& It is si!"le eno$gh with the s$""le!entary "artici"le as in & =* (Heb& '9G7)6 tho$gh rare6 the "resent s$iting better (c#& .t& '@G7=)& The $s$al idio! is seen in 3 &&4 (+$& =G;)& Indeed this si!$ltaneo$s action is in e act har!ony with the "$nctiliar !eaning o# the aorist tense& It is a %ery co!!on idio! (chie#ly circ$!stantial) in the N& T&9 as in the older /ree4&; So *;$ (.t& 7G?)H .9* $ (77G')H O a* R (7@G;)H 3 &4* '* * (Ac& 'EG99)H )'"* (7@G9)& C#& Ac& 'G7;H Ro& ;G7EH Heb& 7G'E& It is needless to "ress the "oint e ce"t to obser%e that the order o# the "art& is i!!aterial& Note Ac& 'EG99 abo%e& So in 4 <"* (.4& '=G9E)H E& 3* (+$& 7G'>& C#& 3* "<'6 +$& 'LG=)H 3' a* C , (Ac& '=G?)H * ('=GL)H ' .&* (''G9E)H & .* (7 Ti!& ;G'E)H &"< 3* (Ac& 'LG7)& This constr$ction o# the "art& a#ter the %erb is %ery co!!on in the N& T& The coincident $se o# the aorist tense occ$rs also with the i!"er#ect6 as 0&&; (Ac& @G7>)6 <&Z & (.4& ';G@7)H the "resent6 as .9* & (.4& ?G7L)H the "er#ect6 as &;.* (Ac& '9G99)H and the #$t$re6 as &4* * * (9 Fo& >)&' In !any e a!"les only e egesis can deter!ine whether antecedent or coincident action is intended6 as in Heb& LG'76 F&;S"* (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '97)& So .o$lton (ib.6 "& '9') notes , #or antecedent and \ (<CZ) #or coincident action in Fo& ''G7?& The
1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 198A Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 82A )onro, <om. Gr., p. 177. 2 W.-)., p. '33. 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 131. ' Good*in, Gk. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. '9 ". 1 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 7+. (". Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. +2.

coincident aorist "art& is co!!on eno$gh in the ancient /ree4 (/ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& ';')& The "a"yri show it also& C#& 2 * 3*6 )&P& '7' (iNii A&(&)6 a constant #or!$la in the "a"yri (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '9')& .o$lton (ib.) ill$strates the obsc$re <& in .4& ';G@7 by <&Z 0) Tb&P& =E (<&C&)6 Jhe set to and da!!ed $"&K I# it is coincident in .ar46 it is so 2with the #irst "oint o# the linear &&5 "# Subse%uent *ction not -+pressed by the *orist Participle& So!e writers ha%e held this as "ossible6 tho$gh no satis#actory e a!"les ha%e been add$ced& /ilderslee%e7 denies that Stahl s$cceeds in his i!"lication& 2Coincidence or ad%erbiality will e "lain the tense&5 <$rton9 li4ewise ad!its that no certain instance o# an aorist "art& $sed to e "ress s$bse3$ent action has been #o$nd& He clai!s the idio! in the N& T& to be d$e to 2Ara!aic in#l$ence&5 <$t we can no longer call in the Ara!aic or Hebrew6 alas6 $nless the /ree4 itsel# will not s3$are with itsel#& The instances cited by <$rton are all in Acts ('>G79H 77G7;H 79G9=H 7;G79H 7=G'9)& 2In all these cases it is scarcely "ossible to do$bt that the "artici"le (which is witho$t the article and #ollows the %erb) is e3$i%alent to with a co8ordinate %erb and re#ers to an action s$bse3$ent in #act and in tho$ght to that o# the %erb which it #ollows&5' This %iew is held by Pro#& Sir 1& .& Ra!say7 to a""ly to Ac& '>G>6 and is in #act essential to his inter"retation o# that "assage& Rac4ha!9 adds Ac& '7G7= and regards these e a!"les as 2decisi%e&5 Another instance $rged is Ac& 7'G';& <$t are they 2decisi%e5 a#ter allQ /ilderslee%e; is still $ncon%inced& <lass= bl$ntly says that s$ch a notion 2is not /ree45 and e%en re#$ses to #ollow the $ncials in Ac& 7=G'9 in reading ." rather than .& .o$lton> re#$ses to #ollow Rac4ha! in his inter"retation o# Ac& '7G7=G 2<$t to ta4e 0&<* in this way in%ol%es an $nbl$shing aorist o# subse%uent action6 and this I !$st !aintain has not yet been "aralleled in the N& T& or o$tside&5 And6 once !ore6 Sch!iedel@ co!!ents on Ac& '>G>G 2It has to be !aintained that the "artici"le !$st contain6 i# not so!ething antecedent to Jthey wentK (F&)6 at least so!ething synchrono$s with it6 in no case a thing s$bse3$ent to it6 i# all the r$les o# gra!!ar and all s$re $nderstanding o# lang$age are
2 #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '2&. 3 .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 77. 1 .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 77. Ram$ay R#)S#D, W. )., (itie$ and Bi$hopri>$ o" %hry ia. 2 =o6$. 11&9+, 1&983. 555, St. %au6 the -ra=e66er 11&973. 2 St. %au6 the -ra=e66er, p. 212. (". di$>u$$ion in -he !0po$itor in 1&9' and -he !0p. -ime$, #u ., 1&9'. In -he !0p. -ime$ 119133 Ram$ay ha$ $ou ht another interpretation o" the pa$$a e *ithout the notion o" H$u:$eCuentI a>tion. 3 (omm. on #>t$, p. 1&3 ". ' #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '2&. (". a6$o hi$ %indar %yth., I@, 1&9. + Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 198 ". 7 %ro6., p. 133. 8 !n>y>. Bi:6., II, p. 1+99.

not to be gi%en $"&5 The !atter !ight sa#ely be le#t in the hands o# these three great gra!!arians& <$t an a""eal to the e a!"les will be interesting& As to Ac& '7G7=6 S;&'* U # 0&<* ~"'6 there is no

"roble! at all $nless * be read rather than = or .& It is tr$e that <+ read *6 b$t that reading is contradicted by the conte t& In ''G9E it is "lain that <arnabas and Sa$l were sent #ro! Antioch to Fer$sale!6 and in '9G96 =6 they are in Antioch with Fohn .ar4& The great $ncials are not always correct6 b$t i# they are right in reading *6 the te t has been otherwise ta!"ered with& E%en granting the gen$ineness o# * and the 2s$bse3$ent5 aorist6 we are absol$tely in the dar4 as to the sense o# the "assage& 1ith * the coincident aorist is good /ree46 b$t still lea%es $s in the dar4& 1ith = or . there is no "roble! at all6 &'* being antecedent6 and 0&<* coincident& In '>G>6 F& Q U 0 9 J&U )# &0* SC , w0 3* &&F C & I GK6 the "artici"le is nat$rally antecedent (or coincident)& Pa$l was headed west #or Asia6 b$t6 being #orestalled by the S"irit6 he t$rned #arther north thro$gh 2the Phrygian and /alatic region&5 +ater he tried to "$sh on into <ithynia6 b$t the S"irit again inter"osed and he de#lected northwest to Troas ('>G@ #&)& -ne is not entitled to !a4e &0*9 &3' beca$se o# the e igencies o# a theory that de!ands that 2the Phrygian and /alatic region5 be +ycaonia (so$thern "art o# the Ro!an "ro%ince o# /alatia)6 which had already been tra%ersed ('>G' #&)& <esides6 the narrati%e in '>G> see!s to be not res$!"ti%e6 b$t a new state!ent o# "rogress& 1hate%er the #ate o# the !$ch disc$ssed 2So$th /alatian5 theory6 the "oint o# gra!!ar here is %ery clear& Another so8called instance is in '>G796 <& * 0&# &* ` 3&& This is so ob%io$sly a case o# coincident action that it wo$ld ne%er ha%e been add$ced b$t #or need o# e a!"les to s$""ort a theory elsewhere& Certainly 2in '@G7> !* is not JlaterK than the ' in ti!e5 (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '99)& Still worse is the instance in 7'G';6 U 0 Q 2, f0)" *T A, 00 C &' & The "artici"le is here necessarily antecedent or coincident (this last re!ar4 o# ac3$iescence)& So in 77G7;6 &0;\*6 the "artici"le is coincident li4e the co!!on .9* $& C#& & in Heb& 7G'' #&H Ac& @G9=& Precisely the sa!e thing is tr$e o# ';&3* in 79G9=& In 7;G796 .<"& is e "anded by three coincident aorist "artici"les6 *; \*;="*& There re!ains 7=G'96 ' * X ." C F& Here <lass6 as already noted6 acce"ts the #$t$re .6 b$t the aorist is "robably correct& <$t e%en so6 i# one si!"ly notes the 2"er#ecti%e5 #orce o# the "re"osition in '6 Jwent down6K he will ha%e no di##ic$lty at all with the coincident action o# the aorist "art& X' is the e##ecti%e aorist and accents the end (rein#orced by /)& JThey ca!e down sal$tingK (Jby way o# sal$tationK)& The sal$tation too4 "lace6 o# co$rse6 when they were 2down5 (/)& )indlay (in loco) connects . with the initial act o# '& Th$s %anish into air the e a!"les o# 2s$bse3$ent5 action with the aorist "art& in the N& T&6 and the constr$ction is not #o$nd elsewhere& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '97) cites #ro! the "a"yri6 = l * ;&0" 0 + 5" q -&P& =9E (iiNA&(&)6 a clear case o# coincident action& The rede!"tion o# the clothes is obtained by "aying the h$ndred drach![& "# *orist Participle in &ndirect /iscourse ")omplementary Participle#& It is a rare constr$ction on the whole6' tho$gh !ore #re3$ent with !" than with .3&7 This
1 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '2&. 2 Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. +1.

aorist "art& is absol$tely ti!eless6 not e%en relati%ely "ast& It is another instance o# the coincident aorist "art& So @ W3 (+$& ;G79)6 0 C p Y* .U , 0, ('EG'?)& In we ha%e the constati%e aorist&9 Contrast the "er#ect in Re%& LG'6 $ . , 2, * U F6 and the "resent in Re%& @G76 $ -&& .< (linear)6 and \ ` _ 0 <"&& (+$& LG;L)& C#& $ -;& 9 (Ac& LG'7& So in 'EG9H 7>G'9)H W3;)1 (7 Pet& 'G'?)& 7& P*NCTI+IAR (A-RISTIC) PRESENT (! Z* )*)& The "resent tense is na!ed entirely #ro! "oint o# ti!e which only a""lies to the indicati%e& <$t a greater di##ic$lty is d$e to the absence o# distinction in the tense between "$nctiliar and linear action& This de#ect is chie#ly #o$nd in the indicati%e6 since in the s$b:&6 o"t&6 i!"er&6 in#& and "art&6 as already shown6 the aorist is always "$nctiliar and the so8called "resent "ractically always linear6 $nless the Aktionsart o# the %erb itsel# is strongly "$nctiliar& C#& disc$ssion o# the i!"er& <$t in the ind& "resent the shar" line drawn between the i!"er#& and aorist ind& ("ast ti!e) does not e ist& There is nothing le#t to do b$t to di%ide the so8called Pres& Ind& into Aoristic Present and ($rati%e Present (or P$nctiliar Present and +inear Present)& The one /ree4 #or! co%ers both ideas in the ind&; The "resent was only grad$ally de%elo"ed as a distinct tense (c#& the con#$sion abo$t ('(6 whether aorist or i!"er#&)& The "resent is #or!ed on "$nctiliar as well as linear roots& It is not wise there#ore to de#ine the "res& ind& as denoting 2action in "rogress5 li4e the i!"er#& as <$rton= does6 #or he has to ta4e it bac4 on "& L in the disc$ssion o# the 2Aoristic Present65 which he calls a 2distinct de"art$re #ro! the "re%ailing $se o# the "resent tense to denote action in "rogress&5 In sooth6 it is no 2de"art$re5 at all& The idio! is as old as the tense itsel# and is d$e to the #ail$re in the de%elo"!ent o# se"arate tenses #or "$nctiliar and linear action in the ind& o# "resent ti!e& 2The #or!s # $# '# -# "6 etc&6 in which the ste! has the #or! generally #o$nd only in aorists (\ ''6 \ 9') !ay be regarded as s$r%i%ing instances o# the JPresent Aorist6K i&e& o# a "resent not con%eying the notion o# "rogress& 1e !ay co!"are the English $se o# & am, & go (now archaic in the sense o# & am going)6 & say6 (says she)6 etc&5' Hear .onro againG 2The "resent is not a s"ace o# ti!e6 b$t a "oint65 and6 I !ay add6 yields itsel# nat$rally to aoristic ("$nctiliar) action& So!e "resents are also 2"er#ecti%e5 in sense li4e O& The so8called 2"resent5 tense !ay be $sed6 there#ore6 to e "ress an action si!"ly ("$nctiliar)6 a "rocess (d$rati%e or linear)6 a state ("er#ecti%e or "er#ect)&7 So!e o# the root8"resents (li4e '() are aoristic& The "er#ect ca!e originally o$t o# the root8 !eaning also (c#& O# $) and grew o$t o# the "resent as a sort o# intensi%e "resent&9 The notion o# state in 4# 4# f4 is really that o# the "er#ect& So the !o!entary action in <' 7(<'(8 beco!es linear in the iterati%e <(<"(6 J"atter6 "atter&K .o$lton; clearly recognises that 2the "$nctiliar #orce is ob%io$s in certain "resents&5 The original "resent was "robably there#ore aoristic6 or at least so!e roots were $sed
3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 13'. ' (". Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 122 ".A Say>e, Intr. to the S>ien>e o" ?., =o6. II, p. 1+2 ". + .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 7. 1 )onro, <om. Gr., p. '+. 2 Gi6e$, )an., p. '&'. 3 I:., p. '91 ".

either as "$nctiliar or linear6 and the distincti%ely d$rati%e notions grew $" aro$nd s"ecially #or!ed ste!s and so were a""lied to the #or! with !ost %erbs6 tho$gh ne%er with all& In the !odern /ree4 we #ind 2the creation o# a se"arate aorist present (")65 while is linear& So is JI 4ee" going6K while " is JI goK (single act)& C#& Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& ''L& 2As a r$le the "resent co!bines cursi e (d$rati%e6 contin$o$s6 etc&) and aorist action5 (ib.6 "& '7E)& The aoristic "resentO$nde#ined action in the "resent6 as aoristic "ast (ind&)O$nde#ined action in the "ast& In the case o# - we see a root $sed occasionally #or "$nctiliar6 linear and e%en "er#ected action& There are6 besides the nat$rally aoristic roots6 three s"ecial $ses o# the aoristic "resent (the $ni%ersal "resent6 the historical "resent6 the #$t$ristic "resent)&= "a# The Specific Present. /ilderslee%e> th$s describes this si!"lest #or! o# the aoristic "resent in contrast with the $ni%ersal "resent& It is not an entirely ha""y descri"tion6 nor is 2e##ecti%e "resent65 s$ggested by Fannaris6@ since there !ay be ingressi%e and constati%e $ses also& The co!!on (Fo& 'EG'') is o#ten aoristic& A #ine e a!"le o# the constati%e aorist "resent occ$rs in +$& @G?6 3'# 9 3;)0# 9 );'# 9 1& C#& =H (.t& 7>G>9)H !4 (Ac& ?G79)H - <& (Fo& LG7=)& The #re3$ent Z Q & (.t& =G776 7?6 etc&) is e a!"le o# the s"eci#ic aoristic "resent (constati%e)& So .&'4* & (+$& '7G;;)& C#& 9 & (.4& =G;')H ' (.t& ';G?)H 2 &<";.&&+ & (Fo& =G9;)6 etc& In .4& 7G= . is e##ecti%e aorist "resent as in p (Ac& LG9;)& C#& @ 2 )0# ?* 2 (Re%& 7G7;)H & and ) (Fo& ?G';)H ); E& (Fo& '>G7')& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;@) notes how in .t& >G76 =6 '>6 .)06 the co!bination o# the aoristic "res& and the "er#ecti%e $se o# . !a4es it %ery %i%id& 2The hy"ocrites ha%e as it were their !oney down6 as soon as their tr$!"et has so$nded&5 The 2"er#ecti%e5 .) (.4& ';G;') is co"io$sly ill$strated in the "a"yri and ostraca ((eiss!ann6 Light6 etc&6 "& ''')& "b# The Gnomic Present& This is the aorist "resent that is ti!eless in reality6 tr$e o# all ti!e& It is really a gno!ic "resent (c#& the /no!ic Aorist) and di##ers %ery little #ro! the 2S"eci#ic Present&5 In .t& 79G7 " is gno!ic6 and in %erse 9 we ha%e the aoristic "resents (gno!ic also)6 &0 + 9 2 ,& Note Fo& LG?& C#& also Y* &0 (Re%& 7G7;)& /ood instances are #o$nd in ' Cor& '=G;7 ##&6 & So m 5 S9 , (.t& >G7)& Abbott' has great di##ic$lty with F* J&&* '* 2 (Fo& @G=7)& It is this gno!ic "resent& It is not tr$e6 to be s$re6 b$t this was not the only error o# the Sanhedrin& C#& .t& @G?&
' %ro6., p. 119 ". + Gi6e$, )an., p. '&+. (". )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 122. 7 Synt. o" (6. Gk., p. &1. 8 <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '33. #::ott #BBO--, !. #., (6ue. # Guide throu h Greek to <e:re* 1192'3. 555, ;ohannine Grammar 119273. 555, ;ohannine @o>a:u6ary 1192+3. 1 ;oh. Gr., p. 3+&.

"c# The Historical Present& This %i%id idio! is "o"$lar in all lang$ages67 "artic$larly in the %ernac$lar& 21e ha%e only to o%erhear a ser%ant girlKs Jso she says to !eK i# we desiderate "roo# that the $sage is at ho!e a!ong $s&59 C#& *ncle Re!$s& C$rio$sly the historic "resent is absent in Ho!er&; <$t /ilderslee%e= a""la$ds Stahl #or agreeing with his "osition 2that it was tabooed as %$lgar by the e"os and the higher lyric5 (*.(.P.6 iii6 7;=)& It is absent #ro! Pindar and the Nibelungenlied& /ilderslee%e> also obser%es that it is !$ch !ore #re3$ent in /ree4 than in English and is a s$r%i%al o# 2the original stoc4 o# o$r lang$ages&5 2It antedates the di##erentiation into i!"er#ect and aorist&5 The 2Annalistic or Note8<oo4 Present5 (li4e 1* 3) is "ractically the sa!e

2 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '3'. 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 122 ". ' )onro, <om. Gr., p. '8. Gi6der$6ee=e GI?/!RS?!!@!, B. ?., !dition$ o" %indar and ;u$tin )artyr. 555, ?atin Grammar. )any edition$ $in>e 1&78. 555, .ote$ on Stah6B$ Synta0 o" the Greek @er: 119123. 555, .umerou$ arti>6e$ in the #meri>an ;ourna6 o" %hi6o6o y. + #m. ;our, o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 393. Stah6 S-#<?, ;. )., 0ritisch8historische Synta des griech& Verb$!s der 4lass& Jeit. 119283. 7 Synta0 o" (6. Gk., p. &7.

$se o# the aorist "resent& .o$lton@ e cl$des p in .t& 7G;6 #or that is !ore li4e the #$t$ristic ("ro"hetic) $se o# the "resent& <r$g!ann' di%ides the hist& "res& into 2dra!atic5 and 2registering5 or annalistic "resents (c#& /ilderslee%e)& This %i%id idio! is "reser%ed in the !odern /ree4 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7E)& It is co!!on eno$gh in the +XX6 since Thac4eray (Gr.6 "& ) notes '=' e a!"les in ' Sa!$el6 tho$gh it is rare in 7 Sa!$el and 7 0ings (2absent65 Thac4eray6 Gr.6 "& 7;)& <$t Haw4ins (Horae Synopticae6 "& 7'9) #inds it 97 ti!es in 7 Sa!$el and twice in 7 0ings& Haw4ins (ib.) #inds the hist& "res& in the +XX 99@ ti!es& Fose"h$s $ses it also& The N& T& e a!"les are th$s 2dra!atic&5 The hist& "res& is not always aoristic& It !ay be d$rati%e li4e the i!"er#ect&7 This "oint has to be watched& <lass9 considers that the historical "resent 2habit$ally ta4es an aoristic !eaning65 b$t roo! has to be le#t #or the d$rati%e !eaning also& It is

)ou6ton )O,?-O., ;. <., # Grammar o" .. -. Greek. @o6. I, %ro6e omena 119273. 3d ed. 1192&3. 555, (hara>teri$ti>$ o" .. -. Greek 1-he !0po$itor, 192'3. 555, Einleit$ng in die S"rache des N& T& 119113. 555, Grammati>a6 .ote$ "rom the %apyri 1-he !0po$itor, 1921, pp. 28142&2A 1923, pp. 12'4121, '234'39. -he (6a$$i>a6 Re=ie*, 1921, pp. 31438, '3'4''1A 192', pp. 1274 112, 1+141++3. 555, Introdu>tion to .. -. Greek 11&9+3. 2d ed. 1192'3. 555, ?an ua e o" (hri$t 1<a$tin $B One-=o6. /. B., 19293. 555, .. -. Greek in the ?i ht o" )odern /i$>o=ery 1(am:r. Bi:6. !$$ay$, 1929, pp. '714 +2+3. 555, -he S>ien>e o" ?an ua e 119233. )O,?-O., W. F., and G!/!., #. S., # (on>ordan>e to the Greek -e$tament 11&983. )O,?-O. and )I??IG#., ?e0i>a6 .ote$ "rom the %apyri 1-he !0po$., 192&53. 555, -he @o>a:u6ary o" the .. -. I66u$trated "rom the %apyri and other .on-?iterary Sour>e$. %art I 1191'3, II, III. 8 %ro6., p. 122. Bru mann BR,G)#.., K., !6ement$ o" (omparati=e Grammar o" the Indo-Germani> ?an ua e$ 1tran$6ation :y Wri ht, 1&9+3. 555, /riechische /ra!!ati4& 9& A$#l& 119223, the ed. Cuoted. Vierte %er!ehrte A$#l& o" #. -hum: 119133. 555, /r$ndriI der %ergl& /r& d& indog& S"rachen& 7& A$#l&6 <de& I, II 11&98419133. 555, 0$rBe %ergleichende /ra!!ati4 der indoger!anischen S"rachen 1192'3.

co!!on in the Attic orators and in the N& T&6 e ce"t in +$4e where it is rare&; +$4eKs /os"el has it only L ti!es ("ossibly '') and the Acts '9 ti!es& Haw4ins6 #ro! whose Horae Synopticae (7d ed&6 ""& ';9 ##&) these #ig$res are ta4en6 #inds L9 historic "resents in .atthew ('= o# the! in Parables)6 b$t '>7 in Fohn and '=' in .ar4& It is rare in the rest o# the N& T& It is !ost #re3$ent in .ar46 Fohn6 .atthew and in this order& .ar4 indeed $ses it as o#ten as ' Sa!$el6 tho$gh a !$ch shorter boo4& FohnKs /os"el is !$ch longer than .ar4Ks6 b$t when the disco$rses and dialog$es are eli!inated6 the di##erence between Fohn and .ar4 is not great&= .o$lton> adds that the idio! is co!!on in the "a"yri& C#& Par& P& =' (iiN<&C&) .3;!4;&";';9 );&6 etc& .o$lton ill$strates & ~',* in the - yrhynch$s +ogia by X1 &6 Syll& 9@>& See also . 9 <3&6 P& - y& 9@ (A&(& ;L)& +$4eKs !ani#est rel$ctance to $se it (changing .ar4Ks historical "resents e ce"t in ?G;L) is d$e to the #act that in +$4eKs ti!e the constr$ction was regarded as 2too #a!iliar #or his li4ing&5 He is the scienti#ic historian6 while .ar4 and Fohn are the dra!atists& (i##erent
1 Gk. Gr., p. '&' ". -he hi$t. pre$ent demand$ mere6y that the reader take hi$ $tand *ith the *riter in the mid$t o" the mo=in panorama. /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 271. -hum: -<,)B, #., (ie )orsch& Aber die hellen& S"r& in den Fahren 19224192' 1#r>h. ". %ap. 3, pp. ''34 '833. 555, (ie griech& S"rache i! Deitalter des Hellenis!$s 119213. 555, (ie s"rachgesch& Stell& des bibl& /riech& 1-heo6. Rund., 19223. 555, Handb$ch der griech& /ia6. 119293. 555, Handb$ch d& ne$griech& Vol4ss"rache& 7& A$#l& 119123. 555, Handb$ch des Sans4rits. I, Grammatik 1192+3. 555, *nters& Aber d& S"& As"er i! /riech& 11&&93. -ha>keray -<#(K!R#D, <. S-., # Grammar o" the O. -. in Greek. @o6. I, Introdu>tion, Ortho raphy and #>>iden>e 119293. 555, Re6ation o" St. %au6 to (ontemporary -hou ht 119223. <a*kin$ <#WKI.S, ;. (., Horae Syno"ticae& 2d ed. 119293. 2 Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 11. 3 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&&. ' I:. + <a*kin$, Horae Syno"ticae, p. 1'3 ". 7 %ro6., p. 121.

writers wo$ld #eel di##erently abo$t it& 2Fose"h$s wo$ld $se the tense as an i!itator o# the classics6 .ar4 as a !an o# the "eo"le who heard it in daily $se aro$nd hi!H while +$4e wo$ld ha%e /ree4 ed$cation eno$gh to 4now that it was not co!!on in the c$lt$red s"eech o# his ti!e6 b$t not eno$gh to recall the enco$rage!ent o# classical writers who! he "robably ne%er read and wo$ld not ha%e i!itated i# he had read the!&5' <$t what abo$t FohnQ Fannaris7 re!ar4s that the idio! was co!!on in the late /ree4 as in the early& The "ersonal e3$ation !ay ha%e to e "lain the %ariations in the /os"els& <lass9 $nderta4es to gi%e a "hiloso"hy o# the !atter on the theory that the 2circ$!stances65 2incidentals5 and 2#inal res$lts5 are e "ressed in the "ast tenses o# the ind&6 while the 2"rinci"al actions5 are #o$nd in the historical "resent& He cites Fo& 'G7LM ;7 in ill$stration (<&;&;3';5;&; 0;&; $;&;& 9 $;E;E;S;&; ;$)& -ne do$bts i# the "heno!ena can be bro$ght $nder any r$le& .atthew and +$4e $se 3 to enli%en the narrati%e6 while .ar4 and Fohn a%oid it&; .ar4 has a habit o# $sing be#ore the historical "resent6 while Fohn o#ten e!"loys asyndeton&= <$t there is no do$bt o# the %i%idness o# the narrati%e in .ar4 and Fohn which is largely d$e to the historical "resents& .odern literary English abhors this idio!6 b$t it o$ght to be "reser%ed in translating the /os"els in order to gi%e the sa!e ele!ent o# %i%idness to the narrati%e& The historical "resent !ay begin> a "aragra"h (o#ten so)6 occ$r in the !idst o# aorists and i!"er#ects6 or alternate with aorists& In .t& 9G' ~"'* is "receded by a note o# "ast ti!e& In .4& =G'= ) 9 , occ$r between aorists& In .4& ;G9@ the realistic &1& is #ollowed by the i!"er#ect& As s"eci!ens o# this "resent in "arables see .t& '9G;;& So!eti!es the .SS& %ary as between and "' (.t& 7G'9)& The %ariation in "arables !ay be "artly d$e to obsc$ration o# the gno!ic nat$re o# the narrati%e& In s$ch a wealth o# !aterial #or ill$stration it is hard to select6 b$t note Fohn 7E& In %erse ' #& note );<&;);)6 all indicating the e cite!ent o# .ary& Then the narrati%e goes on with aorists and i!"er#ects till Peter and Fohn draw near the to!b6 when we ha%e <&;); 1 (=M@) with two "arenthetic aorists inter:ected (2 F&# F&)& In %erse ? the narrati%e is res$!ed by aorists& In %erse '7 again 1 shows the s$r"rise o# .ary at seeing the angels (&0;&6 %erse '9)6 as in %erse '; the "resent is $sed when she sees Fes$s& Historical "resents r$n thro$gh the dialog$e with Fes$s ('=M'?)& Then the res$!"ti%e , $& That is eno$gh to say on the s$b:ect&
1 %ro6., p. 121. ;annari$ ;#..#RIS, #. .., # <i$tori>a6 Greek Grammar 11&983. 555, On the -rue )eanin o" the X 1(6a$$. Re=., 1923, pp. 93 "".3. 2 <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '3'. 3 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&&. ' <a*kin$, <or. Synop., p. 1''. + #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 3+2. 7 W.--h., p. 278.

"d# The 'uturistic Present& This #$t$ristic "resent is generally "$nctiliar or aoristic&' The constr$ction certainly had its origin in the "$nctiliar roots67 b$t so!e o# the N& T& e a!"les (c#& English 2I a! going65 as well as 2I go5) are d$rati%e6 as .o$lton9 shows& Th$s in ' Cor& '>G= ) (in contrast with &) !eans JI a! going thro$ghK (.acedonia)& J leans to the aoristic; and so (.t& 7>G7) !ay be "$nctiliar& 2In . (' Cor& '=G97) we ha%e a %erb in which the "er#ecti%e "re#i has ne$traliBed the ince"ti%e #orce o# the s$##i /G it is only the obsoleteness o# the si!"le which allows it e%er to borrow a d$rati%e action&5= The aoristic origin o# !any "resent8ste!s has already been shown (and so!e "er#ecti%es li4e O)& Th$s all three 4inds o# action are #o$nd in the "resent ("$nctiliar6 d$rati%e6 "er#ect)& All three 4inds o# ti!e are also #o$nd in the "resent ind& (historical "resentO"ast6 #$t$ristic "resentO#$t$re6 the co!!on $se #or "resent ti!e)& So!e o# these 2!o!entary "resents5 are always #$t$re& So $ in old /ree4 "rose6> b$t Ho!er $ses $ also as a "resent&@ The N& T& $ses ) and 3 in this #$t$ristic sense (Fo& ';G7 #&)6 not $& Indeed 2the #$t$re o# /ree4 was originally a "resent5 (Febb in Vincent and (ic4sonKs Handboo$6 "& 979)& That is too strong6 #or the #$t$re ind& o#ten co!es #ro! the aorist s$b:& In the N& T& s$ch so8called #$t$res as and " (+$& '@G?) are really old aorist s$b:s& C#& .t& 7;G;E #& The #$t$ristic "res& occ$rs in the inscri"tions and "a"yri6 as in Petersen8 +$schan6 "& '>E6 N& 'LE6 s * .[# S& See e U 3# )6 <& .& II6 ;'@ (i%NA&(&)6 . .Z .<6 -& P& ''=@6 7= #& (A&(&Niii)6 " 9 2` '6 -& P& ''=?6 79 #& (A&(&Niii)& C#& Rader!acher6 N. T. Gr.6 "& '7;& In So$th Italian /ree4 the #$t$ristic "resent is the only !eans o# e "ressing the

1 /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 329A Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '&'. 2 Gi6e$, )an., p. '&+. 3 %ro6., p. 122. (". B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&9. ' Gi6der$6ee=e, #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 393. + )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 122. 7 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. &'. 8 Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 12. ;e:: ;!BB, R. (., #tti> Orator$. 2d ed. 11&933. 555, Introdu>tion to the I6iad and the Ody$$ey. 11&923. 555, On the Re6ation o" (6a$$i>a6 to )odern Greek 1#ppendi0 to @in>ent and /i>k$onB$ <and:ook to )od. Gk., 1&&83. @in>ent and /i>k$on @I.(!.- and /I(KSO., # <and:ook to )odern Greek 11&&83. Raderma>her R#/!R)#(<!R, ?., Ne$t& /ra!!ati4& (as /riechisch des N& T& i! D$sa!!enhang !it der Vol4ss"rache 119113.

#$t$re ind&? The other $se o# the #$t$ristic "resent is the dra!atic or "ro"hetic&L 2This "resentTa sort o# co$nter"art to the historic "resentTis %ery #re3$ent in the "redictions o# the N& T&5' It is not !erely "ro"hecy6 b$t certainty o# e "ectation that is in%ol%ed& As e a!"les note .t& '@G'' &* ) 9 . "6 7;G;9 K 0&I ! &'* )6 7>G7 9;6 7>G'? 4 C ")6 7@G>9 6 +$& 9GL 9 <"&&6 'LG? 9 .6 Fo& ;G9= ! C* )6 ?G'; , S"6 ?G7' S" 9 H'6 'EG'= U ) 0 '6 '7G7> @0 9 6 7EG'@ .<6 7'G79 2 .6 ' Cor& '=G7> 1& In Fo& 'EG'= ##& ' really co%ers the whole o# ChristKs li#e %iewed as a $nit (constati%e aorist)&7 In .4& LG9' we ha%e 6 in .t& '@G77 && & This $se o# && and in#& is a sort o# hal#8way station between the #$t$ristic "resent and the "$nctiliar #$t$re& C#& Fannaris6 Hist. G$. Gr.6 "& ;;9& The #$t$ristic "res& startles and arrests attention& It a##ir!s and not !erely "redicts& It gi%es a sense o# certainty& C#& in .t& '?G'76 . 9 09* H'1 together6 and 3 (Re%& LG>)& 9& THE P*NCTI+IAR (A-RISTIC) )*T*RE (! && )*)& "a# Punctiliar or urative. The #$t$re is a 2!i ed tense5 both in origin and !eaning&9 The !i ed origin was disc$ssed in ch& VIII6 VII6 (g)& It was a late tense6 little $sed in the early Vedic Sans4rit6 and as a distinct #or! grad$ally disa""eared #ro! the !odern /ree46 where the "eri"hrastic #or!s li4e + &3 7&38 alone occ$r& <$t the !odern /ree4 has de%elo"ed th$s two #$t$res6 + &3 "$nctiliar6 + &3 d$rati%e (Th$!b6 Handb.6 ""& ''>6 '7=)& The /er!anic lang$ages (c#& English shall and !ill) ha%e only the "eri"hrastic #$t$re& )or the history o# the #$t$re ind& see Fannaris6 Hist. G$. Gr.6 ""& ==7 ##& In Sans4rit the #$t& had no !odes6 i&e& it was con#ined "ractically to the ind& (1hitney6 Sans. Gr.6 "& 7E')& The oldest roots are deri%ed either #ro! "$nctiliar "resents (ind&) or aorist ("$nctiliar) s$b:$ncti%es&; C#& # <& /rad$ally the #$t$re was #or!ed on d$rati%e roots also& Th$s 46 JI shall re!ain&K So!e %erbs #or!ed two #$t$res6= one "$nctiliar6 li4e ) #ro! )OJI shall obtain6K the other d$rati%e6 li4e L=6 JI shall ha%e&K The has dro""ed )6 as it has 2generally got

& ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '3'. 9 Gi6e$, )an., p. '&+. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&9. 2 #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 3+2. 3 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '89. Whitney W<I-.!D, W. /., # San$krit Grammar 11&913. 'th ed. 119133. 555, ?an ua e and the Study o" ?an ua e 11&783. 555, ?i"e and Gro*th o" ?an ua e 11&8+3. ' Gi6e$, )an., p. ''8. + Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '&2.

rid o# alternati%e #or!s&5> So also = 7)8 was d$rati%e and , 78 "$nctiliar6@ tho$gh both are absent in the N& T& It is "robable that in the #$t$re "assi%e we ha%e with !ost %erbs a "$rely "$nctiliar #$t$re #or!ed on the aorist ste!& The !iddle #$t$re was $s$ally d$rati%e6 the #$t$re "assi%e "$nctiliar&' Very #ew o# the list o# e a!"les gi%en by Fannaris can be ill$strated in the N& T& owing to the disa""earance o# the #$t$re !iddle be#ore the #$t$re "assi%e& In ' Pet& ;G'? 1 (+XX6 Pro%& ''G9') is d$rati%e and certainly (.t& 7;G9E) is "$nctiliar& So in +$& '>G9' is "$nctiliar (e##ecti%e)6 b$t does not occ$r in the N& T& So +* 0)"* S4 (+$& 7'G'L) see!s to be d$rati%e6 tho$gh no #$t& "assi%e o# this %erb a""ears in the N& T& So also 0) (.t& 7;G7?) is "$nctiliar (e##ecti%e)& <$t the %ery disa""earance o# the #$t$re !iddle (as with the Attic <) threw the b$rden o# the d$rati%e #$t$re7 on the #$t$re "assi%e& So <' in Heb& '9G> is d$rati%e& C#& the d$rati%e .' (' Ti!& >G?)& So also .&&+ 9 ) (Ph& 'G'?) is d$rati%e& C#& also Fo& '>G7E6 776 tho$gh ) in +$& 'G'; is ingressi%e "$nctiliar6 as &' ('G'=) is e##ecti%e "$nctiliar& <$t in Fo& '>G7E both &0' and see! ingressi%e& In Heb& LG7? _ (c#& Ac& 7>G'>) is ingressi%e6 b$t @ !ay be either d$rati%e (.t& =G?H Fo& 'G=EH 'LG9@H Re%& 77G;) or "$nctiliar (Fo& 'G9LH Heb& '7G';6 etc&)& An e cellent e a!"le o# the e##ecti%e #$t$re is #o$nd in ! S* * &* (.t& 'EG77)& So the sa!e #or! in the #$t$re !ay be either "$nctiliar or d$rati%e6 as "= Sp* (.4& ';G7?) is d$rati%e6 while -= is "$nctiliar (e##ecti%eOJbringK)&9 is "$nctiliar (e##ecti%e) in .t& 7?G'; and d$rati%e in ' Fo& 9G'L& So is "$nctiliar or d$rati%e (Re%& 7G79)& As "$nctiliar this %erb !ay be either ingressi%e (' Cor& ';G@6 L)6 e##ecti%e (' Cor& ;G'L) or !erely constati%e (Fo& ?G7?6 97)& )ro! the nat$re o# the action as #$t$re this *$tionsart o# the %erb will not be as "ro!inent; in the #$t$re aorist as in the other "$nctiliar constr$ctions& <lass= e%en goes so #ar as to say that the #$t$re 2is the one tense which does not e "ress action U4ind o# action6 he !eansV6 b$t si!"ly a ti!e relation6 so that co!"leted and contin$o$s action are not di##erentiated&5 <$t it !$st be borne in !ind that the #$t$re tense in itsel# !a4es as !$ch distinction between "$nctiliar and d$rati%e action as the "resent tense does& The di##erence is that the #$t$re is $s$ally "$nctiliar6 while the "resent is !ore o#ten d$rati%e& The "oint need not be "ressed& -ther e a!"les o# the "$nctiliar aorist are &* (.t& 'G7') ingressi%eH &' (.t& =G;) e##ecti%e6 and so )6 b$t &' is ingressi%e while &' is e##ecti%e& In ' Cor& '=G776 7? note H' and S (e##ecti%e)& In Fo& ?G97 note &0 e##ecti%eOJset #reeK (c#& &3 6 %erse 99)&' So then both in origin and $se the #$t$re is chie#ly "$nctiliar&
7 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+2. 8 -homp$on, Synt., p. 219. 1 (". K.-G., Bd. I, pp. 11' ""., 182 "".A Gi6e$, )an., p. '&3A ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''1. 2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+2. 3 I:., p. 1'9. ' Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 33. + Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 221.

(b) The !odal Aspect of the "uture. The #$t$re indicati%e is not !erely a tense in the tr$e sense o# that ter!6 e "ressing the state o# the action& It is al!ost a !ode on a "ar with the s$b:$ncti%e and i!"erati%e& /ilderslee%e7 "$ts the !atter "lainly when he saysG 2The #$t$re was originally a !ood&5 In both /ree4 and +atin the #or!s o# the #$t$re co!e #or the !ost "art #ro! the s$b:& and it !$st be treated as a !ode as well as a tense& Indeed (elbrAc49 and /iles; "$t it wholly $nder !oods& It "arta4es6 as a !atter o# #act6 o# the 3$alities o# both !ood and tense6 and both need to be considered& The !odal as"ect o# the #$t& ind& is seen in its e "ression o# !ill and feeling +i4e the s$b:& the #$t& ind& !ay be !erely futuristic, olitional or deliberati e& 1e ha%e a re#lection o# the sa!e thing in o$r shall and !ill& The #$t& ind& has had a "recario$s history in /ree4& Its "lace was always challenged by the "resent and e%en by the aorist ind&6 by the s$b:& and i!"er& !odes6 by "eri"hrastic #or!s& It #inally ga%e $" the #ight as a distinct #or! in /ree4&= See $nder 96 (a)& In the !odern /ree4 the distinction between the "eri"hrastic #$t& and the s$b:& is "ractically lost&> The !odal as"ects o# the #$t& ind& a""ear clearly in s$bordinate cla$ses where the tense is co!!on& In indirect disco$rse the #$t$re ind& !erely re"resents the direct disco$rse (c#& Ro& >G?)& The #$t$re with the descri"ti%e or identi#ying relati%e@ (Fo& >G=') shows no !odal #eat$res& <$t it is #o$nd in other relati%e cla$ses where "$r"ose (+$& @G7@) or res$lt (+$& @G;) is e "ressed& The #$t$re has also a !odal %al$e in te!"oral cla$ses (Re%& ;GLH '@G'@)6 in #inal cla$ses (+$& 7EG'EH Heb& 9G'7)6 in conditional sentences (+$& 'LG;E)6 in wish (/al& =G'7)& In Re%& 9GL the #$t& ind& and the aorist s$b:& occ$r side by side with ?& <$t in inde"endent sentences also the !odal as"ects o# the #$t$re a""ear&
1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'9. 2 Synt., p. 11+. /e6:rF>k /!?BRG(K, B., Ablati% +ocalis Instr$!entalis 11&783. 555, /r$ndriI der %ergl& /ra!!& d& indog& S"rachen& Synta & <de& III4@ 11&93, 1&98, 19223. 555, Introdu>tion to the Study o" ?an ua e 11&&23. Einleit$ng in das S"rachst$di$!& ;& A$#l& ('LE;)& =& A$#l& 119133. 555, Synta4tische )orsch$ngen& = <de& 11&8141&&&3. 3 @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 322 ". Gi6e$ GI?!S, %., # Short )anua6 o" (omparati=e %hi6o6o y. 2d ed. 119213. 555, -he Greek ?an ua e 1!n>y>. Britanni>a, 19123. ' )an., pp. +22, +2+A -homp$on, Synt., p. 21&. + ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ++2. 7 B6a$$, Her!ene$ti4 $nd 0rit&, 1&92, p. 199. 8 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 11+.

"# Merely 'uturistic& This is the !ost co!!on $se o# the #$t$re and in itsel# wo$ld not be !odal& It is the "ros"ecti%e6 what lies be#ore the s"ea4er&' The predicti e7 (or "ro"hetic) #$t$re has to be classed as aoristic ($s$ally constati%e)6 tho$gh the 3$estion as to whether the action is d$rati%e or "$nctiliar !ay not ha%e crossed the s"ea4erKs !ind& C#& .t& 7'G9@ 6 ;' .&6 ;9 .;6 7;G9' .&16 etc& C#& .4& '9G7;M7@& )$rther good e a!"les o# the "redicti%e #$t$re are in .t& ''G7? #&H '7G9'& *n#ort$nately in English we ha%e no established "rinci"le #or the translation o# the "redicti%e #$t$re& In the #irst "erson it is done by 2shall65 and nat$rally by 2will5 in the second and third "ersons& It is not always easy to disting$ish the !erely #$t$ristic #ro! the %oliti%e #$t$re6 2b$t we ha%e to rec4on with an archaic $se o# the a$ iliaries which is traditional in <ible translations&59 The $se o# 2shall5 in the second and third "ersons is al!ost constant in the R& V& both #or the %oliti%e and the #$t$ristic $ses& I# 2shall5 co$ld be con#ined in these "ersons to the %oliti%e and 2will5 to the #$t$ristic6 e%en 2the sole!nly "redicti%e65; it wo$ld be a gain&= Th$s in .4& ';G'9 . wo$ld be Jwill !eet&K In .t& ''G7? #& .3 wo$ld be Jshall gi%e yo$ restK (R& V& JwillK)6 S Jwill #indK (R& V& JshallK)& <$t .3 here !ay be %oliti%e& I# so6 JwillK is correct& So in .t& '7G9' . wo$ld be Jwill be #orgi%enK (R& V& JshallK)& C#& also .t& 7>G'96 &&'OJwill be "reached&K .o$lton> notes that .[ (.t& 7>G9;H .4& ';G9EH +$& 77G>') is o#ten !is$nderstood beca$se o# the rendering Jshalt deny !e&K 2It co$ld not there#ore be PeterKs #a$lt i# Fes$s co!!anded hi!&5 Here 2will5 is #ree #ro! that "eril& C#& .t& 7=G7L6 97H +$& 'LG;9& 1ith the negati%e the English 2shall5 beco!es %oliti%e when the /ree4 is not& C#& .4& '9G9'6 2 &3 (c#& 2 U &[ in '9G9E)& So!eti!es (%ery rarely) 2 occ$rs with the "redicti%e #$t& (c#& the $s$al aorist s$b:&) as in 2 U &3 (+$& 7'G99)H 2 U S0 (Re%& LG>)H 2 2 U S0 ('?G';H c#& .F&# .&)& The constr$ction o# 2 with the #$t& ind& is 2!orib$nd5 in the N& T&6' only '; and so!e o# these do$bt#$l (.SS& %ary greatly between aorist s$b:& and #$t& ind&)& So!e o# the '; are e a!"les o# the %oliti%e #$t$re& In .t& '=G= 2 U is "robably %oliti%e67 tho$gh so!e hold it "redicti%e& "# The 2oliti e 'uture& The three di%isions (#$t$ristic6 %oliti%e6 deliberati%e) glide into one another both in the s$b:$ncti%e and the #$t$re ind&9 The %oliti%e #$t$re is "ractically an i!"erati%e in sense6 #or the will is e ercised& The #$t$ristic glides i!"erce"tibly into the %oliti%e 2as in the collo3$ial a b[6 Jyo$ will see to that6K .t&
1 /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 329. 2 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 3' ". 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+2. ' Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 3'. + )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+1. 7 I:., p. 1+2. 1 %ro6., p. 192. 2 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 3+. 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1&'.

7@G;&5; C#& S1* b (.t& 7@G7;)6 * (+$& '9GL)& In Heb& ?G= the i!"erati%e and the #$t& ind& occ$r together6 @ *& The i!"atient 2 3[ (Ac& '9G'E) is al!ost i!"erati%al6 certainly %oliti%e& 2The #$t$re ind& is e ceedingly co!!on in this sense (%oliti%e)&5= In legal "rece"ts the #$t& ind& is $nclassical&> <$t the idio! itsel# is classical and 2is not a !ilder or gentler i!"erati%e& A "rediction !ay i!"ly resistless "ower or cold indi##erence6 co!"$lsion or concession&5@ It is e ceedingly #re3$ent in the +XX& It is chie#ly #o$nd in the N& T& in 3$otations #ro! the -& T& C#& &* (.t& 'G7')6 2 (>G=)H 1 (7'G9)O\ (.4& ''G9)& C#& Fas& 7G?H Ro& '9GLH /al& =G';& The %oliti%e #$t$re really incl$des "$r"ose (will) in the #irst "erson6 as well as in the second and (rarely) in the third& Th$s 3=# &4 (' Cor& ';G'=)OJI will "ray6K JI will sing6K not !ere #$t$rity& So in .+* 3 (+$& '=G'?) we see! to #ind Jwill6K not !ere declaration& .ost o# the e a!"les are in the second "erson6 li4e 2 (.t& >G=)6 and are chie#ly negati%e (;G@H Ac& 79G=H Ro& @G@)& <$t so!e e a!"les occ$r in the third "erson alsoH tho$gh <$rton? is sce"tical& C#& in .t& 7EG7> #& (note &[)& So .4& LG9=& In +$& 'EG> we ha%e M 2C f '6 while in .t& 'EG'9 &" f ' S4 M 2&L In the %oliti%e #$t$re JwillK is the English translation #or the #irst "erson6 JshallK #or the second and third& The rare $se o# with the #$t& ind& shows a %oliti%e $se& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& ''@) is sce"tical6 b$t .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '@@) cites #ro! (e!osthenes U <0& and #ro! <& *& 'L@ (iNA&(&) U =6 <& *& ?'; (iiiNA&(&) U .*6 <& .& ;7 U;* (iiN<&C&)& <lass' 3$otes ' #ro! Cle!&6 Hom.6 III6 >L6 and .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;E) adds U '06 ( in .t& >G'L6 and &=* Q '6 E$ri"&6 Med. ?776 and obser%es ("& 7;?) that .S& e%idence sho$ld be watched on the "oint& So!eti!es 2 occ$rs with the %oliti%e #$t$re as in 2 U (.t& '=G=)H 2 U , ('>G77)& In .t& 7>G9= 2 U . is also %oliti%e (c#& .4& ';G9')& The %oliti%e #$t$re see!s to be #o$nd in +$& 'EG'L6 2Q 2 U Sp* . (1& H& te t)6 b$t it is d$rati%e& <$t 2 alone is the $s$al negati%e in the %oliti%e #$t$re6 as in 2) +" * F* )* 0 (Fo& 'EG7?& C#& 2 U .&)& C#& "res& i!"er& and #$t& ind& side by side in Fo& 'G9L (c#& 'G;>)& -n 2 see .odes and Particles& It is "ossible that 2 )30 2F* (.t& '>G'?) is %oliti%e& "# /eliberati e 'uture& <$rton7 has "ointed o$t that 3$estions are o# two 4inds (3$estions o# #act or 3$estions o# do$bt)& X$estions o# #act !a4e an in3$iry #or in#or!ation abo$t the "ast6 "resent or #$t$re& These 3$estions e!"loy the !oods and tenses as other si!"le declarati%e sentences in both direct and indirect disco$rse& <$t
' I:., p. 188. + I:., p. 187. 7 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 229. 8 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 117. Burton B,R-O., !. /., Synta0 o" the )ood$ and -en$e$ o" the .. -. Gk. 3d ed. 119293. & .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 3+. 9 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 229. 1 I:. 2 .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, pp. 37, 87 ".

deliberati%e 3$estions as4 not #or the #acts6 b$t abo$t the 2"ossibility6 desirability or necessity5 o# a "ro"osed co$rse o# action& The s$b:& as the !ood o# do$bt#$l assertion is "er#ectly nat$ral here& The #$t$re is also do$bt#$l #ro! the nat$re o# the case& So deliberati%e 3$estions $se either the s$b:& or the #$t& ind& (eliberati%e 3$estions (li4e 3$estions o# #act) !ay be !erely interrogati%e or they !ay be rhetorical& The deliberati%e 3$estions in the N& T& with the #$t& ind& are all direct 3$estions e ce"t Ph& 'G776 5 2 H6 where the "$nct$ation is do$bt#$l& (1& H& !arg& ha%e 5&)9 In )4 " (Ac& 7=G7>) it is not certain whether " is #$t& ind& or aorist s$b:& In +$& ''G=6 * = S4 L= & 9 3;9 \[ 2`6 the #$t& ind& (rhetorical) and aorist s$b:& occ$r side by side i# we can tr$st the reading& C#& .t& @G>6 with H E"h& >G96 with ? (-& T&)& The e a!"les o# the #$t& ind& in deliberati%e 3$estions are all dis"$ted by so!e .SS& which ha%e the aorist s$b:&6 so that <lass; re!ar4s that 2the N& T& in this case "ractically $ses only the con:$ncti%e5H b$t that is an o%erstate!ent6 since the best .SS& (see 1& H& and Nestle te ts) s$""ort the #$t& ind& in so!e instances& As an e a!"le o# !erely interrogati%e deliberati%e 3$estions with #$t& ind& ta4e "= )[ (+$& 77G;L)& In Fo& '?G9L6 <3& .&36 we !ay ha%e the #$t& ind& or the aorist s$b:&6 b$t note <3&& The N& T& e a!"les are nearly all rhetorical& So .t& '7G7> 4* 6 .4& ;G'9 4*; 6 Fo& >G>? C* .&0& C#& #$rther Ro& 9G=H >G' (the co!!on ,7)H LG';H ' Cor& ';G@6 L6 '>H '=G7L6 ='H ' Ti!& 9G=& C#& +$& 7EG'=& C#& ." 9 (.4& >G9@)& "c# The "uture in the !oods. The #$t$re di##ers #ro! the other tenses in this res"ect6 that in the !oods where it occ$rs it has always the ele!ent o# ti!e& This is not tr$e o# any other /ree4 tense&' "# The &ndicati e& It is #ar !ore co!!on here than in the other !oods& In direct disco$rse the #$t& ind& e "resses absol$te ti!e& C#& b (+$& 7'G7@)& In the gno!ic #$t$re the act is tr$e o# any ti!e (c#& gno!ic aorist and "resent)& So &* SQ 0 * .1 (Ro& =G@)H )' (@G9)6 etc& In indirect disco$rse the ti!e is relati%ely #$t$re to that o# the "rinci"al %erb6 tho$gh it !ay be absol$tely "ast& So with @ & (.t& 7EG'E)H $ ' r "r =" C (Fo& 7'G'L)&7 "# The Sub4uncti e and 5ptati e& There ne%er was a #$t& i!"erati%e& The so8called #$t& s$b:s& in the N& T& ha%e already been disc$ssed& 1& H& ad!it b' to the te t in +$& '9G7?6 b$t clai! it to be a late aorist s$b:&9 The sa!e thing !ay be tr$e o# [6 read by .SS& in Fo& '@G7H Re%& ?G96 b$t not o# 0 in ' Cor& '9G9& This !ay be a lapsus calami; #or 0)& Harnac4 (The -+positor6 .ay6 'L'76 "& ;E') 3$otes
3 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 211. ' I:., p. 212. (". W.--h., p. 289. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 221. 2 I:. 3 #ppendi0, p. 182. ' I:.A )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+1. <arna>k

Von Soden as sayingG 2X0Tnot 0Tis to be recognised as the traditional #or! in #a!ilies o# .SS& which do not gi%e 0)&5 <$t Harnac4 re#$ses to 2saddle5 Pa$l with this <yBantine 2de#or!ity&5 Fannaris= thin4s that these s"oradic e a!"les in late /ree4 are the #$t& ind& 2s"elt with the the!atic %owel (' and ) o# the s$b:$ncti%e&5 -ne nat$rally thin4s o# the +atin s$b:& #$t$re& The #$t& o"t& ne%er had a "lace sa%e in indirect disco$rse6 and that is lost in the N& T& "# The &nfiniti e& The #$t$re in#& was ne%er a co!!on constr$ction and was al!ost con#ined to indirect disco$rse&> The si e a!"les in the N& T& see! to be "$nctiliar sa%e two (Ac& ''G7?H Fo& 7'G7=)& y&& has the #$t& in#& three ti!es6 b$t only in the case o# (Ac& ''G7?H 7;G'=H 7@G'E)& The three other instances o# the #$t& in#& in the N& T& belong to ind& disco$rse& -ne ()) occ$rs with $ (Fo& 7'G7=)6 one () with '36 or !ore e actly a#ter <0& (Ac& 79G9E6 geniti%e absol$te6 '0'* <0&F* )6' one (&3) with _3 (Heb& 9G'?)& So that the #$t& in#& 2was already !orib$nd #or "ractical "$r"oses&57 In the "a"yri .o$lton #o$nd the #$t& in#& o#ten a !ere bl$nder #or an aorist& In Ac& 7>G@6 < has the #$t& in#& a#ter &H& In the #$t& in#& the ti!e relation is only relati%e6 as with all in#initi%es6 not absol$te as in the ind&9 Elsewhere with s$ch %erbs the aorist in#& occ$rs as with &H (' Cor& '>G@)H && (Ro& ?G'?)H _3 (Ac& 7G9E)H !& (.t& ';G@)H " (Ac& 7@G99)H && (Ac& 9G'?)H or the "resent in#& as with && (Ac& 9G9)H or the "er#ect in#& as with &H (7 Cor& =G'')& "# The Participle& The #$t$re "art& was later in its de%elo"!ent; than the other tenses o# this %ery ancient6 e%en "rehistoric6= %erbal ad:ecti%e& The #$t& "art& was ne%er de%elo"ed in the <]otian (ialect&> It is by no !eans dead in the "a"yri& .o$lton@ notes 2the string o# #inal #$t& "artici"les in -& P& @7@ (iiNA&(&)H <& *& L? (iiiNA&(&6 etc&5 See also
<#R.#(K, #., ?uke the %hy$i>ian 119283. 555, -he #>t$ o" the #po$t6e$ 119293. Soden SO/!., <. @O., (ie Schri#ten des N& T& in ihrer Cltesten erreichbaren Te tgestalt . -ei6 I, ,nter$u>h. 11922419123A -ei6 II, Te t $nd A""arat 119133. 555, /riechisches N& T& Te t !it 4$rBe! A""arat 119133. + <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ++7. 7 See the 6i$t in ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '&7. 1 Sim>o0, ?an . o" the .. -., p. 122, $u e$t$ omi$$ion o" &&.

2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+1. (". <at9., !in6., pp. 192 "". 3 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222. ' Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 81. + )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+1. 7 (6a"6in, Synt. o" the B. In$>r., p. 83. 8 %ro6., p. 232.

&' P& /oods"eed ; (iiN<&C&) +;78' P& Tb& 99 (<&C& ''7)6 and the list in -& P& '''?6 'E# (iNA&(&)& It see!s to !e to be !ore co!!on in the "a"yri than in the N& T& Si!co ? s$ggests that its rarity in the N& T& is d$e to the $se o# other "hrases& C#& && in Ac& '?G';H 7EG96 @ and )* in Re%& 'G;6 etc& The ti!e is6 o# co$rse6 only relati%e to that o# the "rinci"al %erb6 as in &'&3 0 (Ac& ?G7@)& The anarthro$s e a!"les are %oliti%eL and are the !ost #re3$ent&'E They are $sed #or "$r"ose or ai!& C#& .t& 7@G;L ) 6 Ac& ?G7@ &'&3 06 77G= 0' =6 7;G'' .<' 06 7;G'@ '6 Heb& '9G'@ .0, Y* .*& C#& also V& l& Y* S in .4& ''G'9& These all see! to be "$nctiliar& So!e .SS& also read . in Ac& 7=G'9& This is s$rely a sli! showing co!"ared with the classic idio!&' So!e .SS& read 3 in 7 Pet& 7G'96 rather than .3& The #$t$re "artici"le with the article is #$t$ristic6 not %oliti%e& So with C (+$& 77G;L)H ! (Fo& >G>;)H + 0 (Ac& 7EG77)H ! (' Pet& 9G'9)H C ' (' Cor& '=G9@)H ! 4 (Ro& ?G9;)H 4 &&'' (Heb& 9G=)& "d# The Periphrastic Substitutes for the "uture& The "eri"hrastic #$t$re is as old as the Sans4rit and has s$r%i%ed the in#lected #or! in /ree4& So!e o# these #or!s are d$rati%e6 "robably !ost o# the!6 b$t a #ew are "$nctiliar& Fannaris notes in So"hocles6 -& C& ?'>6 &0'9* 6 and -& T& '';>6 2 * 6 b$t no e a!"les o# the aorist "artici"le and occ$r in the N& T& They are all "resent "arts& (li4e 36 +$& 7'G'@) and so d$rati%e& In the +XX we act$ally ha%e the in#& with (N$!& 'EG7H 7 Sa!& 'EG''H Tob& =G'=)& The $se o# && with the aorist in#& a""roaches the "$nctiliar #$t$re&7 C#& && 1 (Ac& '7G>)H &&0 .&0F (Ro& ?G'?& C#& /al& 9G79)6 with which co!"are the "res& in#& in ' Pet& =G'& The aorist in#& occ$rs also in Re%& 9G76 '>H '7G;& The %oliti%e #$t$re was so!eti!es e "ressed by & and in the later /ree4 hel"ed dri%e o$t the #$t$re #or!& It is dis"$ted whether in the N& T& & is e%er a !ere #$t$re& <$t in a case li4e &* \ (+$& LG=;) we note the deliberati%e s$b:&9 C#& .t& '9G7?& So <3& .&3 (Fo& '?G9L)&
Sim>o0 SI)(OE, W. <., -he ?an ua e o" the .. -. 11&923. 555, -he Writer$ o" the .. -. & ?an . o" the .. -., p. 127. 9 Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '97. 12 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1+1. -hat i$, in the o6d Gk. Both =o6iti=e and "uturi$ti> are rare in the .. -. 1 (". Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 33+. Sopho>6e$ SO%<O(?!S, !. #., Greek ?e0i>on o" the Roman and By9antine %eriod 11&&&3. 2 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''3. (". /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 2+3. H-he di""eren>e :et*een pre$. and aor. "urni$he$ the e0p6an. o" && *ith aor. ind.I Gi6e$, )an., p. '89. 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1&+.

}3& is less #re3$ent in the N& T& than & and can hardly be resol%ed into a !ere #$t$re& It is "$r"ose& C#& e a!"les with the aorist in#& in .t& ''G7@H Ac& =G7?H '@G7E& 1ith & the aorist in#& is the $s$al constr$ction6 and it is nearly always easy to see the ele!ent o# will as do!inant& In a #ew cases & see!s to shade o## towards the %oliti%e #$t& ind& C#& Fo& =G;E6 2 & &1 * 6 Ac& 7=GL6 &*;F7 Here we ha%e an a""roach to the later $sage6 b$t the a$ iliary has not yet lost its #orce& C#& also Fo& >G>@H LG7@H Fas& 7G7E6 where the #or!$la is "olite& <$t in Fo& @G'@ the R& V& rightly "reser%es 2willeth&5 So in .t& '>G7;& Herodot$s shows a #ondness #or & as a 3$asi8a$ iliary6 and the connection between hi! and the !odern /ree4 $sage is do$btless thro$gh the %ernac$lar& C#& Febb in Vinc& and (ic4son6 "& 97>& E%en 3 !ay contain an 2ince"ti%e #$t$re&5' In +$& 7EG9> the .SS& %ary between 3 and &&0& <$t in the N& T& 3 retains its real #orce e%en in e a!"les li4e .4& 7G'LH 9G7;H 'EG9?H ';G@H Fo& '9G9@H Ac& '@G'L& In Ac& 7=G7> note " 2 ) (c#& )4 ")& III. urative #$inear% Action. The "rinci"les $nderlying the $se o# the tenses ha%e now been set #orth with s$##icient clearness to :$sti#y bre%ity& '& IN(ICATIVE& "a# The Present (! *) for Present Time. It has already been seen that the d$rati%e sense does not !ono"oliBe the 2"resent5 tense6 tho$gh it !ore #re3$ently denotes linear action&7 The %erb and the conte t !$st decide& "# The /escripti e Present& Its gra"h is (88888)& As with the i!"er#ect6 so with the "resent this is the !ost #re3$ent $se& C#& .&&3 (.t& ?G7=& Contrast aorist 4& So .4& ;G9?H +$& ?G7;)H <0 (.t& 7=G?)H N ) (Fo& =G@)H (' Fo& 7G?)H 0)3 (Ac& 7'G9')H &1 (7 Cor& '7GL)H 0"H @ P* )* (/al& 'G>)H (;GL)H )0 (.4& 7G'L)& C#& ' Th& 9G?& In these e a!"les the d$rati%e action is %ery ob%io$s and has to be translated by the "rogressi%e ("eri"hrastic) #or! in English6 J1e are "erishing6K J-$r la!"s are going o$t6K etc& <$t in the case o# 0"H (/al& 'G>) JI wonderK brings o$t the d$rati%e idea6 tho$gh Jye are changingK is necessary #or & C#& ) (Fo& 9G9>) where JhasK is d$rati%e& C#& H', (+$& 7G;?)6 2 & (+$& 'LG';)& "# The Progressi e Present& This is a "oor na!e in lie$ o# a better one #or the "resent o# "ast action still in "rogress& *s$ally an ad%erb o# ti!e (or ad:$nct) acco!"anies the %erb& /ilderslee%e9 calls it 2Present o# *nity o# Ti!e&5 C#& 9 L* - (' Fo& 7GL)& -#ten it has to be translated into English by a sort o# 2"rogressi%e "er#ect5 (Jha%e beenK)6 tho$gh6 o# co$rse6 that is the #a$lt o# the English& 2So in !odern /ree46 q=F F* M .4 (Abbott6 (oh. Gr.6 "& 777)& The d$rati%e "resent in s$ch cases gathers $" "ast and "resent ti!e into one "hrase5 (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& ''L)& C#& ~a ' .M D ) (+$& '9G@)H , ' 0&3 ('=G7L)H &a ' ) ) (Fo& =G>)H , ) M S4 (';GL)H .M .)F* M , ('=G7@)H "& 1 (7 Cor& '7G'L)& C#& .C <0* $* (7 Ti!& 9G'=)& It is a co!!on idio! in the N& T& C#& 7 Pet& 9G;H ' Fo& 9G?& In Fo& ?G=? is really absol$te&
1 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''3. 2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 119. 3 Synt., p. &7. (". B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 1&9A Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 12.

"# The &terati e or )ustomary Present& Its gra"h is (& & & & &)& C#& 3 (' Cor& LG7=)H 03 and S"H 9 0&4 (LG7> #&)& So '3 9* , <<"0# .3 " @ 4 (+$& '?G'7)H 9 . ('LG?6 !ore li4ely it is a new "$r"ose in Dacche$s6 when it wo$ld be aoristic)H c 2&, (' Cor& 'EG'>)H c &4 ('EG'>)H &<" (''G7')H && (''G7>)H 9 (''G7L)H 4 (''G9E)H 2) w" (' Fo& 9G>)H w" (9G?)& C#& .t& LG'@& Probably also . (+$& ''G;)& "# The &nchoati e or )onati e Present& Either an act :$st beginning6 li4e (.4& ''G79)6 2a* &H (;G'@)6 &"H (Fo& 'EG97)6 * ('9G>)6 1* ('9G7@)6 - (Ro& 7G;)6 or an act beg$n b$t interr$"ted li4e * (Ac& 7>G7?H c#& 7 Cor& =G'')6 ."H* (/al& 7G';)6 , (=G;)6 ."H0 (>G'7)& Indeed &"H (Fo& 'EG97) and * ('9G>) !ay be regarded as conati%e also& This idio! is !ore co!!on in the i!"er#ect& C#& /ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& ?7& In English we ha%e to $se 2begin5 or 2try&5 "# The Historical Present& These e a!"les are $s$ally aoristic6 b$t so!eti!es d$rati%e&' In .4& 'G'7 we ha%e <"&& which is d$rati%e& C#& in +$& ;G' (b$t .t& ;G'6 .)')& So in .4& 'G7' 3 is d$rati%e& The sa!e thing see!s to be tr$e o# .&0, in >G'& "# The /eliberati e Present& Rhetorical deliberati%e 3$estions !ay be "$t by the "resent ind&6 b$t it is rather a rhetorical way o# "$tting a negation than a 3$estion o# do$bt& C#& ,7 (Fo& ''G;@)6 J1hat are we doingQK C#& (.t& 7'G;E) with 4 (Fo& >G7?) and (Ac& ;G'>)& The i!"lication o# the 3$estion in Fo& ''G;@ is that nothing was being done& In .t& '7G9;6 4* 3 .+ &&17 a d$rati%e deliberati%e 3$estion is e "ressed by !eans o# 3 and the "res& in#& C#& a si!ilar constr$ction with 1 in Ac& '>G9E&7 C#& the sa!e idio! in an indirect 3$estion (Col& ;G>H 7 Th& 9G@H ' Ti!& 9G'=)& The $se o# the "res& ind& in a deliberati%e 3$estion is a rare idio!& <lass9 #inds "arallels in collo3$ial +atin and an e a!"le in Her!&6 Sim.6 IX6 L6 '& "# The Periphrastic Present& The e a!"les are not n$!ero$s in the +XX&; C#& N$!& ';G?H ' 0i& '?G'76 etc& It is rare in the N& T& .o$lton' warns $s that 2) and (with other i!"ersonal %erbs) are both classical and %ernac$lar&5 In the "resent tense the idio! is on "$rely /ree4 lines6 not Se!itic& )or classical e a!"les see /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& ?')& So the i!"ersonal %erbs (and )) stand to the!sel%es7 in s$""ort #ro! ancient /ree4 and the & C#& ) (Col& 7G79)H (.t& 9G'=)H = (sc. ) in Ac& 7G7L and 7 Cor& '7G;H (Ac& 'LG9>& C#& ' Pet& 'G>)& -ther e a!"les are q* (Ac& 7=G'E)6 )' (Fas& 9G'=)6 9 &',;.&&+ 9 30 (7 Cor& LG'7)6 .&&'3 (/al&

1 Good*in, ). and -., p. 11. 2 (". B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 212. 3 I:. ' (. and S., Se6., p. 7&. 1 %ro6., p. 227. (". a6$o S>hmid, #tti>i$mu$, III, p. 11'A K.-G., Bd. I, pp. 3& "". 2 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 22'.

;G7;) and6 in "artic$lar6 e "lanatory "hrases with @ (.t& 'G79H 7@G99H .4& =G;'H Fo& 'G;')& C#& #$rther Ac& =G7=H Col& 'G>H 9G'H 7 Cor& 7G'@& "# Presents as Perfects& Here the #or! is that o# the "resent6 b$t the root has the sense o# co!"letion& The action is d$rati%e only in the sense o# state6 not o# linear action& This is an old $se o# these roots&9 C#& +$& '=G7@6 ! .&C* O (Jhas co!e6K Jis hereK)& C#& =F& 9 O (Fo& ?G;7)& See ch& VIII& So with 1 (.t& 9G'E)6 Jthe a e lies at the root o# the treesK (has been "laced there)H ! "&* " (Fo& ''G7?)OJthe Teacher is co!e&K So!eti!es " is so $sed (c#& Ro& '7G7'H Re%& '=G7)& So f4 (7 Pet& 7G7E)& C#& .3 in ' Cor& ''G'?& See also .3 (' Cor& =G') which is rather iterati%e& G4 in .t& 7EG'9 is d$rati%e6 b$t a""roaches a "er#ect in Ac& 7=G'' (c#& ))& "# Perfects as Presents& So!e "er#ect #or!s ha%e co!e to be $sed as "ractical d$rati%e "resents6 tho$gh not o# the sa!e word& Th$s $ #ro! $OJI ha%e seen6K JI 4nowK (c#& .t& >G?)& So L' (+$& ?G7E)6 ' (' Cor& ''G7)& As to .&& that occ$rs in the N& T& in the "artici"le (.t& 'EG>) and the sa!e thing is tr$e o# \ (+$& ;G'>)6 which occ$rs in "ast "er#ect& So <<'# # # W# # # &'# '# # 0# '& C#& Fannaris6 Hist. G$. Gr.6 "& ;9?& "# 'uturistic Presents& These are $s$ally "$nctiliar6 b$t so!e are d$rati%e&; /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& ?9) calls this 2Praesens Pro"hetic$!&5 The absence o# $ in the N& T& is noticeable& The "a"yri ill$strate ab$ndantly this #$t$ristic "resent (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '7E)& Since the "res& ind& occ$rs #or "ast6 "resent and #$t$re ti!e it is clear that 2ti!e5 is secondary e%en in the ind& In the other !oods it has6 o# co$rse6 no ti!e at all& As e a!"les o# the d$rati%e "resent in this sense ta4e (.t& 7>G;=)6 .< (.4& 'EG99)6 S" w&3 and ) (Fo& 7'G9)6 ) (' Cor& '>G=)6 ) (7 Cor& =G')& y&& and the "res& in#& is6 o# co$rse6 a "ros"ecti%e "resent& This idio! is %ery co!!on in the N& T&6 ?; e a!"les with the "res& (> aor&6 9 #$t&) in#&6 tho$gh6 o# co$rse6 && is not always in the "res& ind& C#& .t& 7G'9H '>G7@6 etc& "b# The Imperfect for Past Time (! *)& Here we ha%e the ti!e8ele!ent "ro"er6 the a$g!ent "robably being an old ad%erb #or 2then65 and the action being always d$rati%e& 2The a$g!ent throws linear action into the "ast&5' The absence o# a tr$e i!"er#ect in English !a4es it hard to translate this /ree4 tense& "# /oubtful &mperfects& They are so!eti!es called 2aoristic5 i!"er#ects& This ter! is not a ha""y one6 as /ilderslee%e7 shows in his criticis! o# Stahl #or his 2synony!8 !ongering5 and 2!$lti"lication o# categories&5 The only :$sti#ication #or the ter! is that6 as already shown in the disc$ssion o# the aorist6 it is not "ossible always to tell whether so!e #or!s are aorist ind& or i!"er#& ind& The sa!e root was $sed #or both #or!s6 as only one #or! e isted and it is hard to tell which tense the #or! is& A certain a!o$nt o# obsc$rity and so o# o%erla""ing e isted #ro! the beginning&9 1e see this di##ic$lty in E# '# &6 etc&6 "artic$larly in %erbs o# saying6 co!!anding6 etc&; .odern /ree4 concei%es o# SF# F and as aorists (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "&
3 Good*in, ). and -., p. 9A Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. 12A Gi6der$6., Synt., p. &8. ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 122. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12&. 2 #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 39'. 3 Gi6e$, )an., p. '&&A Bru ., Grie>h. Gr., p. '&8A )onro, <om. Gr., p. '7.

';9)& Th$!b (Th. L.89.6 %iii6 ;79) thin4s that in the N& T& had beg$n to be treated as aorist6 b$t .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '7L) de!$rs6 tho$gh he ad!its the "ossibility o# "$nctiliar action in C 4 in .t& =G7; (ib.6 "& 7;@)& See also 9 \# 9 <"& in Fo& 7EG7@& <$t one !$st not thin4 that the /ree4s did not 4now how to disting$ish between the aorist and the i!"er#ect& They 2did not care to $se their #inest tools on e%ery occasion65= b$t the line between aorist and i!"er#& was $s$ally %ery shar"ly drawn&> The distinction is as old as the Sans4rit&@ In !odern /ree4 it still s$r%i%es6 tho$gh the di##erence between & and $ is well8nigh gone6' i# it e%er e isted& The sa!e thing is tr$e o# the $sage o# Achilles Tati$s&7 Hence we need not insist that (Fo& 'G') is strictly d$rati%e always (i!"er#ect)& It !ay be so!eti!es act$ally aorist also& So as to ' (.t& ;G@)H & (.4& ;G7'6 7;6 7>6 9E6 etc&)6 etc& <lass6 Gr. of N. T. G$.6 "& 'L76 #ails to !a4e a clear distinction& Note &0 (Ac& '>G77)& "# The /escripti e Tense in Narrati e& <$t the linear action !ay be insisted on in the tr$e i!"er#ect& It is "ro"erly 2nichtpunktuell&5 Tho$gh less #re3$ent in Ho!er than the aorist it o#ten 2di%ides the crown with the aorist&59 The i!"er#ect is here a sort o# !o%ing "anora!a6 a 2!o%ing8"ict$re show&5 The !odern /ree4 "reser%es this idio! (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7')& In ' Cor& 'EG9 #& and gi%e the s$!!ary (constati%e) record6 while "resents an e "lanatory descri"tion& See #$rther F& 9 '0 (.t& ;G'')H 9 0 ('9G?)H 3= 9 "0 (7=G=)& So!eti!es the change #ro! aorist to i!"er#& or ice ersa in narrati%e !ay be d$e to the desire to a%oid !onotony& In .t& 7>G>E we ha%e 2) D6 in .4& ';G== 2) P& The aorist tells the si!"le story& The i!"er#ect draws the "ict$re& It hel"s yo$ to see the co$rse o# the act& It "asses be#ore the eye the #lowing strea! o# history& It is the tense o# Schilderung&; C#& $) C 0 2, (.t& 9G;)6 =3 (9G=)6 <H (9G>)& The whole %i%id scene at the Fordan is th$s s4etched& Then .atthew re%erts to the aorist (9G@)& C#& ) in Fo& 'LG9& So c* i& 2` (.t& '?G7?) a"tly describes a debtor as 6 Jthe cho4ing in his rage&K See the "ict$re o# Fes$s in (.4& '7G;')& C#& 0 (+$& 'EG'?)6 =& (';G@)6 <& (.4& =G97)6 = (+$& 7G;@H c#& Ac& 7G'7)& C#& +$& LG;9M;=H '>G'LH .t& ?G7;& A good e a!"le is 0& .H (.4& LG7E)& C#& #$rther6 9 '3) (.4& ';G9=)6 the realistic scene in /ethse!ane (PeterKs descri"tion "robably)H 3 9 29* 0 (+$& '=G'>)H Y&0 C* .&&&0*
' Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., EEI@, p. 1&2A EEIE, p. '. -h. Th. L.-Z., Theologische +iterat$rBeit$ng 1?eip9i 3. + Good*in, )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 18. 7 Gi6der$6., Synt., pp. 91, 9'. 8 Whitney, San$. Gr., p. 221 ". 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12&. (". ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '37. 2 Se0auer, (er S"rachgebr& d& r^!& Schri#tst& Achilles Tati$s, 1&99, p. 29. 3 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 2'2. ' <u6t$>h, (er /ebr& d& erBChlenden Deit#& bei Polyb .

(7;G';)H =&0 (.t& @G7?)H (7 Cor& 9G'9)H W&0 9 "' (.t& 7>G=?)& A s"lendid e a!"le o# the descri"ti%e d$rati%e is (.t& 7>G>9)OJ4e"t silent&K So & (Ac& 7'G9)& Note H (Ac& 7'G7L) between "ast "er#ect and aorist& C#& & (Fo& ''G9>)6 (+$& 7G='& C#& 7G'L)& See the "ict$re o# NoahKs ti!e in +$& '@G7@& C#& 3 )* (Ac& =G;')& X$ite stri4ing is W&H in +$& 7;G7'& See #$rther #or the 2i!"er#ect and aorist interwo%en5 in narrati%e /ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& L'& An artist co$ld describe his wor4 by ' or 0& /ilderslee%e notes (ib.6 "& L9) that in the inscri"tions o# the #o$rth cent& <&C& the i!"er#ect is absent& It beco!es co!!on again in the i!"erial ti!e& "# The &terati e ")ustomary# &mperfect& So!eti!es it is di##ic$lt to tell whether an act is !erely descri"ti%e or is a series& C#& &&9 &3 <&& (.4& '7G;')H (=G'9)6 where the se"arate details are well described by the %i%id i!"er#ect& The notion o# re"etition is clearly "resent in W &'3' (Ac& 9G9)H W 2 (.4& @G7>)& C#& Fo& ;G9'& The !odern /ree4 4ee"s this $sage (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '77)& It is not necessary to see any 2aoristic5 notion here&' C#& "&0 0* (+$& @G;6 1& H&)H (Ac& 7@GL)& It is well shown in }"<* <3&# ,&* W=0 ('=G9@ #&)6 the one o""osing the other& In Ac& 7;G7> re"etition is shown in Y& by 0 *& C#& -&& Q -&& 0 (7'G9;)H 0" in %erse 99H M f H' (.t& 7>G==)H 0 (7@G9E)H @0 0 (.4& >G==)H '0 &&" ('=G9)H .&0 c [, ('=G>& C#& .&3 c &6 .t& 7@G'=)H 0 (+$& 'G>7)H <"H (Fo& 9G77)H &0 (=G'?)H ('LG9)H H0* (7'G'?)H 0 (Ac& 9G7)H 9 H (7G;=& C#& ;G9;)& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& '7?) re"resents the iterati%e i!"er#ect by the gra"h (& & & & & &)& C#& Ac& '>G'?H '?G?H .4& 9G''H ;G99 #& A good e a!"le is in +$& 7G;'6 3 M *& "# The Progressi e &mperfect& So!eti!es the i!"er#ect loo4s bac4ward or #orward6 as the case !ay be&7 Th$s A @ H'1 (+$& 7G;L)H x \) .M .)F* (' Fo& 7G@)H ' (Ro& '=G77)H && (Re%& 9G7)& This idea is6 howe%er6 o#ten e "ressed by &&69 b$t witho$t the bac4ward loo4 also& C#& +$& LG9'H 'EG'H Fo& ;G;@H >G@'6 etc& In 30 (+$& ?G79) the %erb itsel# e "resses "eril or danger& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& L@) calls this idio! 2I!"er#ect o# *nity o# Ti!e&5 C#& the 2"rogressi%e5 "resent in (a)6 (<)& The Te t& Rece"t& gi%es a good e a!"le in E "& C &1 r F* &"'* (.4& >G;@)& See also E + = 54 ) & 1 2 (+$& 79G?)& "# The &nchoati e or )onati e &mperfect& Here the accent is on the beginning o# the action either in contrast to "receding aorists (:$st beg$n) or beca$se the action was interr$"ted (beg$n6 b$t not co!"leted)& The two sorts o# inchoati%e action !ay be re"resented by two gra"hs6 th$s ( ) #or the #irst6 ( ) #or the second&' In English we ha%e to say 2began5 #or the one6 2tried5 #or the other& The !odern /ree4 !aintains this idio! (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7')& As e a!"les o# the #irst sort where 2began5 brings o$t the idea6 note (.t& =G7& C#& Fo& @G';)H &"& (.4& @G9=& C#& +$& 'G>;)H L& (';G@7)H (+$& =G>)H &"&0 (>G'')H 0&', (?G79)H H
1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 191. 2 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 13 ". Good*in, ). and -., p. 13. 3 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 9' ". 1 (". )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12&.

(LG9;& Note ingressi%e aorist <')H (79G=;)H (Ac& 9G'E)H 0 (LG7E)H (''G7)H && ('9G=)H 3<0 ('@G=)H =3 ('@G'>)H .&1 (7>G')H , (7@G'?)H &3 (7@G;')& C#& +$& '9G'96 '@& In "&0 (+$& 'G=L) we see both ideas co!bined& The action was beg$n6 b$t was shar"ly interr$"ted by 2)# .&&" #ro! EliBabeth& C#& , H0 (Fo& ''G?)& A good instance o# the interr$"ted i!"er#& is in Heb& ''G'@& E a!"les o# the conati%e i!"er#ect (action beg$n6 b$t interr$"ted) are &0 (.t& 9G';)H 0 (.4& '=G796 in contrast with 2 &<)H &3 (+$& LG;L)H H0 (Fo& 'EG9LH c#& 'LG'')H H (Ac& @G7=& Note 2 0F)H 0&& (@G7>& Note .)H (Ac& '?G;)H W"H (7>G'')H b$t not /al& 'G'9& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;@) cites the conati%e "res& ."H0 (/al& >G'7)& "# The :Negati e; &mperfect& This is not a %ery ha""y "iece o# no!enclat$re6 to $se /ilderslee%eKs re!ar4 abo$t StahlKs o%erre#ine!ent6 and yet it is the best one can do& 2The negati%e i!"er#ect co!!only denotes resistance to "ress$re or disa""oint!ent&57 As e a!"les note ! Q 2 & (#ollowed by <&6 .t& '?G9E) and "receded by "& (iterati%e)6 29* 0 (+$& '=G'>)6 2 & ('=G7?& Note V')6 2 0 (Fo& 7G7;)6 2 + & (Fo& @G')6 29* & (7'G'7)6 2 \ (Ac& 'LG9E)& C#& .t& 77G9& "# The :Potential; &mperfect& This is a "ec$liar $se o# the tense #or "resent ti!e6 where the "resent ind& #ails to !eet the re3$ire!ent o# the sit$ation& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& L@) calls it 2!odal5 $se6 6 etc& The $n#$l#illed d$ty co!es as a s$r"rise& This 2!odal5 #orce o# the i!"er#ect ind& a""ears still in the !odern /ree4 (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '7?)& There are se%eral %arieties o# it& Verbs o# wishing #or! one class o# "assages& In a case li4e <0&' (Ac& 7=G77)6 <3& wo$ld be too bl$nt (c#& ' Ti!& 7G?)& The e act idea is JI was :$st on the "oint o# wishing&K It is #reely rendered JI co$ld wishK or JI sho$ld wish&K In 7 Cor& 'G'= <0&' has its $s$al signi#ication& In Phil& '9 #& <0&' (a "ast "re#erence) is set o%er against 2Q W&' (a "ast decision)&' Another e a!"le is & 1 C* Sp* - (/al& ;G7E)& Note -& )or the #orce o# the "resent see ' Cor& 'EG7EH Col& 7G'H and es"ecially +$& 'LG';6 2 && In Fo& >G7'6 &6 the $s$al notion occ$rs& An e a!"le is #o$nd in Ro& LG96 '2)'6 where Pa$l al!ost e "resses a !oral wrong& He holds hi!sel# bac4 #ro! the abyss by the tense& He does not say ) (c#& 7 Cor& '9G@)6 nor 2=' - (Ac& 7>G7L)& Note 2 3 in Ro& LG'& In Ac& 7@G7L ') has its $s$al #orce& 1ishes abo$t the "resent are nat$rally $nattainable& In the ancient idio! \ or " was $sed with the i!"er#& ind& or i& and the in#& Calli!ach$s6 <&C& 7>E6 $ses i& with the ind& The a$g!entless #or! b& a""ears in Herodot$s (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& 7E')& In the N& T& only b& is $sed with the i!"er#& #or wishes abo$t the "resent& C#& b& .) (7 Cor& ''G')H b& E* (Re%& 9G'=)& Verbs o# "ro"riety6 "ossibility6 obligation or necessity are also $sed in the i!"er#ect when the obligation6 etc&6 is not li%ed $" to6 has not been !et& 1iner7 has stated the !atter well& The /ree4s (and the +atins) start #ro! the "ast and state the real "ossibility
2 Gi6der$6., Synt., p. 9+ (". #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 339. 1 Burton, .. -. )ood$ and -en$e$, p. 1+. Winer WI.!R, G. B., (e %erbor$! c$! "rae"& co!"os& in N& T& *s$ 11&3'41&'33.

or obligation6 and the reader6 by co!"aring that with #acts6 notes that the obligation was not !et& The English and the /er!ans start #ro! the "resent and #ind tro$ble with this "ast state!ent o# a "resent d$ty (an $n#$l#illed d$ty)& A distinction is $s$ally drawn between the "resent and the aorist in#initi%es when they occ$r with these %erbs (3# i&# # &C E# 1 E# .F# F)& The "resent in#& re#ers !ore directly to the "resent6 the aorist to an action in the "ast& This is6 howe%er6 only by s$ggestion& Th$s in .t& '?G996 2 9 Q &F6 note Y* .Z Q W&'& C#& also .t& 79G79 , Q F .1 U .16 (7=G7@) <&16 (7>GL) 3 F 9 F6 (7>G7;) &C E 2` (no in#& here)6 (Ac& 77G77) 2 + F 2C HF6 (7;G'L) g* 9 , 16 (7>G97) .&&3 3 (note "er#& in#&)6 (7@G7') U ." F 6 (7 Pet& 7G7') 1 E 21* U ("er#& in#&)6 (7 Cor& 7G9) .M l L )6 (Col& 9G'?) Y* .F 0r& (C#& E"h& =G;) <$t it !$st not be s$""osed that these i!"er#ects cannot be $sed in the nor!al e "ression o# a "ast obligation or "ossibility that was !et& The conte t !a4es the !atter clear& C#& +$& '9G'>H 77G@H 7;G7>H Fo& ;G;6 etc& In +$& '=G97 a""lies to both the "ast and "resent6 "robably with an i!"lication against the attit$de o# the elder brother& In Heb& 7G'E and 7G'@ i& ha%e their nat$ral "ast !eaning& Another instance where the i!"er#ect re#ers to "resent ti!e is in the second8class conditional sentences (see cha"ter XIX6 .ode)& 1hen a condition is ass$!ed as $nreal and re#ers to "resent ti!e6 the i!"er#ect tense is $sed both in the "rotasis and the a"odosis in nor!al constr$ctions& See a"odosis in .t& 7>G7; and in Ac& 7>G97 (both 3$oted abo%e)& It is only the tense that calls #or disc$ssion here& C#& w 2) \) (Fo& '=G776 7;)6 where , is $sed to e "lain the "oint& So 2 $)* (Fo& 'LG'')& In ' Cor& =G'E6 V& -;=&16 and Heb& LG7>6 9 ;16 we only ha%e the a"odosis& C#& E; - (+$& @G9L) as a ty"e o# the !ore $s$al constr$ction wih -& C#& +$& '@G>& In Heb& ''G'= the i!"er#ects describe "ast ti!e& "# &n &ndirect /iscourse& In general the i!"er#ect in indir& disco$rse re"resents an i!"er#ect o# the direct disco$rse& <$t so!eti!es with %erbs o# "erce"tion it is relati%e ti!e and re#ers to a ti!e "re%io$s to the "erce"tion&' Th$s $) C ~"' @ '* E (.4& ''G97)H $ @ 2 E (Fo& >G77& C#& 2 in %erse 7;)H @ '* E (LG?)H @ E ! * (Ac& 9G'E)6 while in ;G'9 E is rightly antecedent to # @;SF) ('>G9)& In Ac& 9G'E the idio! a""roaches that in Fo& 'G'=6 D* E ! (a "arenthesis)6 where the %erb is thrown bac4 to "ast ti!e& -$r idio! !ore nat$rally calls #or here& /ilderslee%e7 calls this the 2i!"er#ect o# s$dden a""reciation o# real state o# things&5 "# The Periphrastic &mperfect& It is easy to see how in the "resent6 and es"ecially in the #$t$re6 "eri"hrastic #or!s were #elt to be needed to e!"hasiBe d$rati%e action& <$t that was the real #$nction o# the i!"er#ect tense& The de!and #or this stressing o# the d$rati%e idea by E and the "resent "artici"le was certainly not so great& And yet it is :$st in the i!"er#ect in the N& T& that this idio! is !ost #re3$ent& It is not $n4nown in
555, /ra!!& d& ne$t& S"rachidio!s ('?77)& @& A$#l& %on +Ane!ann 16&783. 2 W.--h., p. 2&2. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 192A #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 339. -hi$ imper"e>t i$ parti>u6ar6y >ommon in ;ohn. 2 Synt., p. 97 ".

the ancient /ree4&' Sch!id7 #inds it rare in the 6 es"ecially in the i!"er#ect6 where the N& T& is so rich in the idio!& He s$ggests the Ara!aic in#l$ence6 "artic$larly as that lang$age is #ond o# this "eri"hrasis& Peri"hrasis is thoro$ghly /ree46 and yet in the N& T& we ha%e $n$s$al #re3$ency o# a $sage that the has not greatly de%elo"ed e ce"t 2where Ara!aic so$rces $nderlie the /ree45 (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& 77>)& /ilderslee%e (Synta+6 "& '7;) gi%es classical e a!"les #ro! Pindar6 Th$c&6 Isocrates6 etc& It is tr$e that in the N& T& the "res& "artici"le with occ$rs chie#ly in .ar4 ('L ti!es)6 +$4e (9')6 Acts (7?6 b$t '@ o# the! in cha"ters 'M'7)6 and :$st in those "ortions !ost s$b:ect to Ara!aic in#l$ence ("ossible Ara!aic so$rces)& -nly @ occ$r in Acts '9M7?6 and these !ainly in the s"eech in 77 deli%ered in Ara!aic&9 The +XX; gi%es ab$ndant ill$stration o# this analytic tendency in the i!"er#ect& C#& /en& 9@G7H (e$t& LG7;H F$dg& 'G@& C#& Thac4eray6 Gr.6 "& 7;& )ro! Pelagia ("& '?) .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;L) cites ' .)*& )or a "a"yr$s ill$stration see @ E 6 P& - y& ''= (iiNA&(&)& The idio! itsel# is there#ore /ree46 b$t the #re3$ency o# it in the N& T& is d$e to the Hebrew and Ara!aic& .atthew has it 'E ti!es6 Fohn ''6 Pa$l =&= The Pa$line e a!"les (/al& 'G77 #&H Ph& 7G7>) are !ore li4e the classic inde"endence o# the "artici"le& It is $s$ally the descri"ti%e i!"er#ect that $ses the "eri"hrastic #or!& So E " (.t& @G7L)H E ) (.4& 'EG77)H E .<* ('EG97)H E 0) (+$& 'G'E)H ' E (+$& 7;G97)& <$t so!eti!es it is the iterati%e i!"er#ect as in E 3 (+$& 'G77)H E " C M f ('LG;@)&> In +$& =G'@ the "eri"hrastic i!"er#ect and "ast "er#ect occ$r in the sa!e sentence& In +$& 79G'7 note F) b* (c#& Ac& ?GL)& "# Past Perfects as &mperfects& The "resent "er#ects o# these %erbs are !erely "resents in sense when co!"ared with other %erbs& So the "ast "er#ects ha%e only an i!"er#ect #orce& Th$s d (.t& 7@G'?)H (7@G'=)H 5 (Fo& '?G=)& "c# The "uture for "uture Time. The #$t$re is !ainly aoristic ("$nctiliar)6 as has already been shown6 b$t so!eti!es d$rati%e&@ The broad lines o# the "roble! ha%e already been drawn& As already shown6 the !odern /ree4 has a s"ecial d$rati%e #$t$re by !eans o# + &3 ("res& s$b:&)& See Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '>E& A s$!!ary state!ent o# the d$rati%e #$t$re is gi%en& "# The Three 0inds of *ction in the 'uture "futuristic, oliti e, deliberati e#& These occ$r here also& Th$s !erely #$t$ristic are (.t& 'G7')H < (.t& 9G'')H &, ('7G7')H (+$& 'G'; #&)H and &3 ('G'> #&)H q&3 (Fo& '7G97)H H (Ro& >G7)H 03 (>G';)H <" (/al& >G=)H & (Ph& 'G>)H ) ('G'?)H H'0 (Re%& LG>)& <$rton' calls this 2the "rogressi%e #$t$re&5 C#& Ac& @G>& ($rati%e also is . with 2 (+$& 'EG'L)& So 2 U
1 (". K.-G., Bd. I, p. 3& ". S>hmid S(<)I/, W., (er Atticis!$s in seinen Ha$"t%ertretern& ; <de& 11&&841&983. 2 #tti>i$mu$, III, p. 113 ". 3 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 228. ' (. and S., Se6., p. 79. + )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 228. 7 Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. 17. 8 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'9.

(Fo& ;G';H c#& >G9=)H 2 U .&00 (Fo& 'EG=)& E a!"les o# the %oliti%e d$rati%e #$t$re are the legal "rece"ts (co!!on in the +XX) so o#ten 3$oted in the N& T& C#& 2 3* (.t& =G7')H 2 )3* (=G7@)H 2 *# .* (=G99)H .* (=G;9H c#& .p6 %erse ;;)H (=G;?)6 etc& Perha"s (.t& '>G'?)OJI willK rather than JI shall&K In ' Ti!& >G?6 3* .'6 the resol$tion is %oliti%e& It is "ossible that we ha%e the %oliti%e $se in .t& ;G;6 2 M -r r H ! -*& The deliberati%e #$t$re !ay also be d$rati%e& C#& .t& '?G7'6 "* w7 (!erely interrogati%e) and +$& ';G9;6 .07 (rhetorical)& C#& aor&6 "res& and #$t& ind& in .t& 7?G@& "# The Periphrastic 'uture& The %ery #ail$re o# the #$t$re to e "ress d$rati%e action clearly7 led to the $se o# the "resent "artici"le with & In +ysias (7)6 '96 note !ore li4e a #$t$re "$nctiliar (or "er#ect)& C#& .t& 'EG77 and 7;GL6 3 (.4& '9G'9H +$& 7'G'@)H (.4& '9G7=) *6 (+$& 'G7E) [ 46 (=G'E) [ H46 ('@G9=) .&06 (7'G7;) 0'6 (' Cor& ';GL) &&,*& C#& /en& ;G'76 ';H (e$t& 7?G7LH .al& 9G96 etc& The #re3$ent $se o# && and the "res& in#& (d$rati%e) has already been !entioned& The #$t& o# && itsel# occ$rs (.t& 7;G>) with the "res& in#& 7& S*<F*NCTIVE AN( -PTATIVE& The rarity o# the "res& s$b:& (and o"t&6 o# co$rse) has already been co!!ented $"on& The aorist is $sed as a !atter o# co$rse here $nless d$rati%e action is to be e "ressed& A #ew e a!"les will s$##ice& Th$s 47 (Fo& >G7?)H + )' (.t& '@G7E)H ) (Ro& =G')& The s$b:$ncti%e is %ery co!!on indeed6 b$t not in the "resent tense& There is in the N& T& no instance o# a "eri"hrastic "resent s$b:& or o"tati%e& FohnKs #ree $se o# the "res& s$b:& has already been noted (Abbott6 (oh. Gr.6 ""& 9>L ##&)& C#& + F ('9G'@)H + 04 (=G9')& In Col& 'G'? note ' 3 li4e &< (.4& LG9)& The "resent o"t& s$r%i%es in 0' (Ac& ?G9')H ) (Ac& '@G'')H <3& (Ac& 7=G7E)H & (Ac& '@G'?H +$& 'G>7)H \' (LG;>H '=G7>H '?G9>H 77G79H Ac& 'EG'@)& 9& I.PERATIVE& The contrast between the "resent i!"erati%e and the aorist s$b:& in "rohibitions had to be set #orth in connection with the "$nctiliar8aorist s$b:& The "resent i!"er& was #o$nd to be reg$larly d$rati%e& In Pa$lKs #re3$ent $se o# the "res& i!"er& with U the inchoati%e or conati%e or c$sto!ary ("rohibiting a co$rse o# cond$ct) $se o# the "resent is noticeable6 as in U .& (' Ti!& ;G';)H '9 (=G77)H 'Q (ib.)H U 3 (E"h& =G'?)H U 3 (Col& 9GL)&' C#& U . (+$& >G9E)& In general is $sed with the "resent i!"er& to #orbid what one is already doing& C#& U <1 (Fo& >G7E)H U (.t& @G')H ' w" (Fo& =G';)H U 0"H (=G7?)H U 1 (=G;=)H ' 3&& (+$& ?G;L)& The d$rati%e #orce o# the "res& i!"er& is well seen in 3 9 .3 (.t& 7>G;=)& C#& also " )# w&* 3)# 9 2)1 (' Th& =G'>M77)& A good e a!"le is seen in Ac& '?GL6 yU <,# .&&+ &"& 9 U [*6 JHe had been a#raid6 he was to go on s"ea4ing6 he was not to beco!e silent&K C#& 7 Ti!& 7G'>6 77 #& The contrast between aorist and "res& i!"er& is o#ten drawn in the N& T&6 as in Fo& =G?H .t& '>G7;& 1e note the "eri"hrastic "res& i!"er& in \ 24 (.t& =G7=)H \ ) (+$& 'LG'@)H \ * (E"h& =G=)7H (+$& '7G9=)& C#& F$dg&
1 .. -. ). and -., p. 32. 2 (". ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '''. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 12+ ". (". .ay6or, (6. Re=., 1927, p. 3'&.

''G'EH Pro%& 9G=H 0 '4 (Re%& 9G7)H 7 Cor& >G';& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 7;L) cites #ro! Pelagia ("& 7>) & ;& IN)INITIVE& The "resent in#& can be ass$!ed to be d$rati%e& The !atter has had so!e disc$ssion in connection with the aorist in#& ("$nctiliar)6 b$t a #ew #$rther e a!"les will ill$strate the $sage& C#& + 2+ " S1 (Ph& 9G') and C .p 2 (.4& '7G99) where the linear action is ob%io$s&9 Indeed the #orce o# the "res& in#& is so nor!al as to call #or little co!!ent&; C#& 2 3 1 (Fo& =G9E& C#& .t& >G7;)H C & (Ro& @G'?)H w" (' Fo& 9GL)H 3) (' Cor& ''G'9)H , 1 (+$& 'EG'L)6 etc& )or the distinction between the aorist and "res& in#& see <F ;9 " (.t& ';G77)& C#& 1 in Ac& 9G7& The #re3$ent $se o# && and the "res& in#& has already been twice !entioned& In indirect disco$rse the "res& in#& !erely re"resents the "res& ind& o# the direct disco$rse& C#& $ (.t& 77G79H Ro& 'G77)H <"&& (+$& ''G'?)6 etc& There is one instance in the N& T& o# a "res& in#& in indir& disco$rse re"resenting an i!"er#ect ind&' +$4e has a "eri"hrastic "res& in#&6 ` $ 2C 0)6 which occ$rs twice (LG'?H ''G')& C#& 7 Chron& '=G'>& -nly two #$t& in#s& in the N& T& see! to be d$rati%e (Ac& ''G7?H Fo& 7'G7=)& The "res& in#& is !ost nat$ral with (c#& +$& ?G;E)6 and is co!!on with " (c#& .t& '9G= #&)H * (Ro& '7G7)H b$t not ("res& 96 aor& L) with * (.4& '9G77)& It is $sed only once with (Fo& '@G=) and is not $sed with "& C#& <$rton6 N. T. Moods and Tenses6 "& ;L #& =& PARTICIP+E& The "resent "artici"le6 li4e the "resent in#&6 is ti!eless and d$rati%e& "a# The Time of the Present Participle .elati e& The ti!e co!es #ro! the "rinci"al %erb& Th$s in &,* (Ac& ;G9;& C#& &* in %erse 9@) the ti!e is "astH in 4 3 (.t& >G7@) the ti!e is "resentH in 3 (.t& 'EG77)6 ! <& . (.t& >G'?)6 b C 05C , .0 ) (7;G9E) it is #$t$re& C#& .t& 7;G;>H +$& =G;H '7G;9& )$rther e a!"les o# the "res& "art& o# coincident action are seen in .t& 7@G;'H .4& '>G7EH Fo& >G>H 7'G'LH Ac& LG77H 'EG;;H 'LGL& "b# 'uturistic& F$st as the "res& ind& so!eti!es has a #$t$ristic sense6 so the "res& "art& !ay be $sed o# the #$t$re in the sense o# "$r"ose (by i!"lication only6 howe%er)& C#& 2&, (Ac& 9G7>)H .&&* ('=G7@)H 4 (Ro& '=G7=)& In Ac& '?G796 =F& )* U J&U )6 the "res& "art& is coincident with the %erb& In 7'G7 #& the "res& "arts& 4 and .H are #$t$ristic (c#& 9G7>H '=G7@)& <lass6 "age '?L6 notes ! )* (Fo& ''G7@) and ) ('GL)& This $se o# the "res& "art& is co!!on in Th$c& (/ilderslee%e6 *. (. P.6 'LE?6 "& ;E?)& "c# /escripti e& <$t $s$ally the "res& "art& is !erely descri"ti%e& C#& .4& 'G;H Ac& 7EGLH 7 Cor& 9G'?H ;G'?& There is no notion o# "$r"ose in -* (Ac& 7'G'>)& In a* H0* (Ac& 7G;@) the idea is "robably iterati%e6 b$t the descri"ti%e d$rati%e is certainly all that is tr$e o# a* wH0* in Heb& 'EG'; (c#& 'EG'E)& "d# )onati e& It !ay be conati%e li4e the "res& or i!"er#& ind& as in (Ac& 7?G79) or a* )0* (.t& 79G';)&

2 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 22'. 3 Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. '7. ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 22'. 1 ?u. 22M7, >ontrary to Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. +2.

"e# *ntecedent Time& <y i!"lication also the "res& "art& !ay be $sed to s$ggest antecedent ti!e (a sort o# 2i!"er#ect5 "art&)& So 0&C* - <& (Fo& LG7=)& See #$rther .t& 7G7EH Fo& '7G'@H Ac& ;G9;H 'EG@H /al& 'G79& C#& ! <H (.4& 'G;)& "f# &ndirect /iscourse& C#& "& ?>;& An e a!"le o# the "res& "art& with the ob:ect o# a %erb (a sort o# indir& disc& with %erbs o# sensation) is #o$nd in \ <"&& (+$& LG;L)& The "res& "art& is co!!on a#ter $ in Re%& ('EG'H '9G'6 ''H ';G>H '?G'H 7EG'6 etc&)& C#& Ac& 'LG9=6 U & h& "g# 1ith the *rticle& The "resent "artici"le has o#ten the iterati%e (c#& "res& ind&) sense& So ! & (E"h& ;G7?)OJthe rog$e&K C#& ! &3 (.t& 7@G;E)H 5 H',* (7G7E)& The "art& with the article so!eti!es loses !$ch o# its %erbal #orce (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& '7@H 0Ahner8/erth6 I6 "& 7>>)& He cites #ro! the "a"yri6 1* ,6 C& P& R& 7; (iiNA&(&)& C#& a* H0* (Ac& 7G;@)& So in /al& ;G7@6 f S 0# f 2 V0& "h# Past *ction Still in Progress& This !ay be re"resented by the "res& "art& So .4& =G7=H Fo& =G=H Ac& 7;G'E& C#& <$rton6 N. T. Moods and Tenses6 "& =L& "i# :Subse%uent; *ction& <lass' #inds 2s$bse3$ent5 action in the "res& "arts& in Ac& ';G77 and '?G79& <$t in ';G77 note S * U 3;'H* +* 0)+* 4 '46 the aorist ind& is 2e##ecti%e5 and accents the co!"letion o# the action& The "res& "art& is !erely coincident with the 2e##ecti%e5 stage& It is a "oint6 not a "rocess in the aorist& "4# No /urati e 'uture Participles& The #ew #$t& "arts& in the N& T& see! to be "$nctiliar6 not d$rati%e6 $nless C ' (' Cor& '=G9@) be d$rati%e6 b$t this e a!"le is "retty clearly ingressi%e "$nctiliar& I&. Perfected State of the Action #! &* : 0&* %. '& THE I(EA -) THE PER)ECT& "a# The Present Perfect& The oldest o# the "er#ects& 2The "er#ect is a "resent "er#ect&57 S$ch it was in the beginning $ndo$btedly& The "ast "er#ect and #$t$re "er#ect are both b$ilt $"on the "resent "er#ect ste!& <oth are co!"arati%ely rare6 es"ecially the #$t$re "er#ect& The $se was at #irst also con#ined to the indicati%e& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& ';E) calls it the !ost i!"ortant e egetically o# the /ree4 tenses& "b# The &ntensi e Perfect& This $se (or the iterati%e) was "robably the origin o# the tense& So b&&0OJI "erish6K b&&OJI "erish $tterly&K' C#& also # '% # '& The iterati%e "rocess is seen in .& (7 Cor& '7G'@)6 q (Fo& 'G'?)& The 2e##ecti%e5 aoristic "resent is close 4in to the "er#ect6 as we ha%e already seen6 in O (+$& '=G7@)H .3 (' Cor& ''G'?)H .4 (Ac& 7=G'')& Red$"lication6 tho$gh not always $sed6 was an e##ort to e "ress this intensi%e or iterati%e idea& So li4ewise the aorist o# an action :$st acco!"lished6 li4e L (+$& '>G;)6 is near in idea to the "resent "er#ect6 tho$gh there is a di##erence& .ore abo$t the intensi%e "er#ect a little later&

KFhner-Gerth KG<.!R-G!R-<, A$s#& /ra!!& d& griech& S"r& 9& A$#l& o# 0Ahner& Tl& II6 <de& I, II 11&9&, 192'3. 1 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 19&. (". K.-G., Bd. II, p. 121 ". 2 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., p. 39+. 1 ;e:: in @. and /.B$ <and:., p. 328. (". Gi6e$, )an., pp. ''9, '91 ".

"c# The -+tensi e Perfect& This co!es to be the $s$al #orce o# the tense& /ilderslee%e7 has "$t the thing #inelyG 2The "er#ect loo4s at both ends o# an action&5 It 2$nites in itsel# as it were "resent and aorist6 since it e "resses the contin$ance o# co!"leted action&59 That is to say6 the "er#ect is both "$nctiliar and d$rati%e& The aorist ("$nctiliar) re"resents an action as #inished6 the linear "resent as d$rati%e6 b$t the "er#ect "resents a co!"leted state or condition& 1hen the action was co!"leted the "er#ect tense does not say& It is still co!"lete at the ti!e o# the $se o# the tense by s"ea4er or writer& In Fo& 'G97 in the !o$th o# Fohn the <a"tist re#ers to the ba"tis! o# Fes$s so!e wee4s be#ore6 b$t he still has the %ision& C#& 'G9;6 q 9 3'6 where there is a di##erence o# ti!e between the two words& 1hen Andrew said to Peter S ('G;') his disco%ery is recent and %i%id& No single gra"h #or the "er#ect can there#ore be !ade& In so!e cases the line o# connection #ro! the act ("$nctiliar) to the ti!e o# s"ea4ing wo$ld be %ery short6 in others %ery long& This line o# connection is :$st the contrib$tion o# the "er#ect tense as distinct #ro! aorist and "resent& As a !atter o# #act6 in the co!bination o# "$nctiliar and d$rati%e in the "er#ect it begins with the "$nctiliar and goes on with the d$rati%e th$s 6 b$t the e!"hasis !ay be now on the "$nctiliar6 now on the d$rati%e& In others the two are drawn al!ost to a "oint6 b$t not 3$ite& In still others there is a bro4en contin$ity th$s (A _ _ _ _ ` _ _ _ _ <)&; It is the "er#ect o# re"eated action& C#& Fo& 'G'?H =G9@H 7 Cor& '7G'@& "d# &dea of Time in the Tense& In the ind& it a""ears in three #or!s with the notion o# ti!e ("ast "er#ect6 "resent "er#ect6 #$t$re "er#ect)& In the other !odes only the "resent "er#ect occ$rs6 b$t it has no ti!e in itsel# and in the i!"er& and s$b:& is nat$rally #$t$re& -#ten in the N& T&6 as in the Attic writers6' a shar" distinction is drawn between the "er#ect and the aorist or the "resent& C#& 01 with .& and 3' in Fo& =G9> #&H ;9 (Ac& 7'G7?)H @ "'# 9 @ (' Cor& '=G;)H '; (Col& 'G'>)H E# L*# '* (Fo& '@G>)& The "er#ect acti%e is #re3$ently intransiti%e67 as has been already shown $nder Voice& C#& \'# L'# .&&0# .&&6 etc& 7& THE IN(ICATIVE& "a# The Present Perfect (! Z* 0&C* : *)& It is not clear how the notion o# "resent ti!e is con%eyed by this tense in the ind& since it is absent in the s$b:& and i!"er&6 not to say in#& and "art& /ilderslee%e s$ggests that it 2co!es #ro! the absence o# the a$g!ent and #ro! the #act that a co!"leted "heno!enon cannot co!"lete itsel# in the #$t$re&5 <$t that e "lanation is not %ery satis#actory& The tense does occ$r so!eti!es in the #$t$re6 and the "resent "er#ect is older than the "ast "er#ect which rests on it& Perha"s at #irst it was :$st the "er#ect tense (c#& aoristic "resents and ti!eless aorists) and was ti!eless& <y degrees it ca!e to be $sed only #or "resent ti!e& The rise o# the "ast "er#ect !ade it clear& The "res& "er#& is !$ch !ore co!!on in the than in the earlier /ree4& 2The "er#ect was increasingly $sed6 as the lang$age grew older6 #or what wo$ld #or!erly ha%e been a narrati%e aorist5 (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& ';')& In "artic$lar is this tr$e o# the %ernac$lar as the "a"yri show&
2 Synt., p. 99. (". a6$o #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 39+ ". 3 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 19&. ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1''. 1 Gi6e$, )an., p. '93. 2 )onro, <om. Gr., p. 23.

"# The &ntensi e Present Perfect& .o$lton9 calls these 2Per#ects with Present )orce&5 They are Perfecta Praesentia& In reality they are "er#ects where the "$nctiliar #orce is dro""ed and only the d$rati%e re!ains (c#& "ast "er#ect)& /ilderslee%e; disting$ishes shar"ly between the intensi%e $se o# e!otional %erbs and what he calls the 2Per#ect o# .aintenance o# Res$lt&5 <$t it is 3$estionable i# the di##erence does not lie in the nat$re o# the %erb rather than in a s"ecial !odi#ication o# the tense& A real distinction e ists in ' Fo& ;G'; between " and 0,& <$rton= #ollows /ilderslee%e6 b$t he ad!its the do$bt on the s$b:ect&' In these %erbs when the "er#ect has lost the "$nctiliar notion it is d$e to the change in !eaning o# the %erbs&7 The list is rather large in Ho!er6 "artic$larly where attit$de o# !ind is e "ressed&9 /iles (Man.6 "& ;?') thin4s that originally the "er#& was either intensi%e or iterati%e li4e L'6 and that the notion o# recently co!"leted action (e tensi%e) is a de%elo"!ent& These al!ost "$rely d$rati%e "er#ects in the N& T& !ay be ill$strated by (Fas& 'G>)H .r (7 Cor& >G'')H $ (.t& >G?)H L' (Re%& 9G7E)H ' (7 Th& 7G7)H (Ph& 7G7;)H (Fo& 'G'=) which is an e a!"le o# /ilderslee%eKs e!otional intensi%es and d$e according to <lass; to the 2literary lang$age65 ' (' Cor& ''G7)H ' (+$& ?G;L)& .ost o# these %erbs ha%e an inchoati%e or conati%e or iterati%e sense in the "resent& .o$lton= has shown #ro! the +XX and the "a"yri that is %ernac$lar and not !erely literary& He thin4s that6 while "H in the +XX is d$rati%e6 is !erely "$nctiliar& See () The Aoristic Per#ect& It is "ossible also that 3 9 (Fo& >G>L) belong here& It is less o"en to dis"$te that <<' (Fo& >G9?) is a "resent state& C#& ' (Fo& ''G'')& <$t !ore do$bt#$l are & (Fo& =G;=)H O' (Ac& 7>G7)H (Ro& ?G9?)&> <$t " (Fo& '7G7@) see!s to #all $nder the intensi%e "er#ect& C#& qZ* (Ac& 7=G'E)& "# The -+tensi e Present Perfect<a completed state& This act !ay be d$rati%e8 "$nctiliar li4e (.t& 9G7) with a bac4ward loo4 & C#& th$s W# &# ' (7 Ti!& ;G@)& This cons$!!ati%e e##ect is seen in ' (Fo& '@G>)6 &&0 ('7G79) and &' (Ac& =G7?)& C#& Heb& ?G'9H 'EG';& In Fo& 7EG7L6 @ q"* 0*6 the c$l!ination is :$st reached a #ew !o!ents be#ore& <$t !ore #re3$ently it is the "$nctiliar8d$rati%e "er#ect where the co!"leted act is #ollowed by a state o# greater or less d$ration & In Fo& 'LG776 @ 6 we ha%e an e a!"le o# each& C#& the co!!on (.t& ;G@)& JIt was written ("$nctiliar) and still is on recordK (d$rati%e)& Th$s is to be e "lained instances li4e \' in Heb& 'EGL (c#& $ in 'EG@)& JThe state!ent is on record&K It is only in a""earance that
3 %ro6., p. 1'8. ' Synt., p. 99 ". + .. -. ). and -., p. 38 ". 1 (". /e6:rF>k, @er 6. Synt., Bd. II, p. 279 ". 2 Good*in, ). and -., p. 1+. 3 )onro, <om. Gr., p. 22. ' Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 19&. (". #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 3'8 ". + %ro6., p. 1'8. 7 I:.A B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 199.

) and ' (Heb& ''G'@6 7?) see! di##erent& This co!!on $sage in Hebrews has been co!"ared to that in Th$c& %ol& I6 ""& 76 >6 etc& C#& #$rther Heb& @G>6 L6 ''6 '96 '>6 7E6 796 where the "er!anence o# the Fewish instit$tions is disc$ssed& Fo& >G7= * has "$nctiliar and d$rati%e ideas (Jca!est and art hereK)& C#& Abbott6 (oh. Gr.6 "& 9;@& In Col& 'G'> ' is !erely "$nctiliar6 while in sa!e %erse adds the d$rati%e idea6 whereas in %erse '@ again 0' has lost the "$nctiliar and is only d$rati%e& In ' Cor& '=G; stands between two aorists beca$se Pa$l wishes to e!"hasiBe the idea that Fes$s is still risen& *s$ally W' was s$##icient6 b$t not here& C#& (+$& '>G7>)& C#& . (+$& =G79)H )0 (Ro& =G=)& Fohn is es"ecially #ond o# this $se o# the "resent "er#ect& C#& 'G976 9;6 ;'H =G996 9> ##& In cha"ter '@ the "resent "er#ects call #or s"ecial attention& C#& ' Fo& 'G' #or contrast between the "resent "er#ect and the aorist& "# The Present Perfect of 6ro$en )ontinuity&' As already e "lained6 we here ha%e a series o# lin4s rather than a line6 a bro4en gra"h (_ _ _ _ ` _ _ _ _)& Perha"s )" in Ac& 7=G'' is to be so $nderstood& <$t certainly it is tr$e o# .& (7 Cor& '7G'@) where Pa$l re#ers to %ario$s !issions to the Corinthians& In "artic$lar .o$lton7 notes the e a!"les with 6 as 29* q (Fo& 'G'?)& C#& #$rther 3' (=G9@)H 0&3 (?G99)& "# The /ramatic Historical Present Perfect& Here an action co!"leted in the "ast is concei%ed in ter!s o# the "resent ti!e #or the sa4e o# %i%idness& <$rton9 do$bts i# any gen$ine e a!"les o# the %i%id historical "er#ect occ$r in the N& T& Certainly (Fo& 'G'=) is a %i%id historical tense e%en i# only intensi%e in sense& C#& 01 :$st be#ore& <$t by the ter! 2historical5 it is not !eant that this $se o# the "er#ect is co!!on in all narrati%e& <$t the Vedic Sans4rit has it o#ten in narrati%e& It is a !atter o# "ersonal e3$ation a#ter all& Th$s Xeno"hon6 who 2a##ects naR%etS65 $ses the "resent "er#ect !$ch !ore #re3$ently than Herodot$s and Th$cydides&; It is rather the tense o# the orator or the dra!atist and is o#ten rhetorical&= Hence Isocrates and (e!osthenes s$r"ass Plato in the $se o# the "resent "er#ect& 2The nearness o# any de"art!ent o# literat$re to "ractical li#e !ay readily be !eas$red by the "er#ect&5> .o$lton@ notes how in the "a"yri there is an increasing $se o# the "resent "er#ect :$st beca$se it is so largely the lang$age o# li#e& He notes also how Socrates in PlatoKs )rito $ses this %i%id "resent "er#ectG 2 * 00# c q _& 3'* F* 0*6 where "oint o# ti!e in the "ast wo$ld ha%e $ as ine%itable as the aorist is in English6 had not Socrates !eant to e!"hasiBe the "resent %i%idness o# the %ision&5 This %i%id "er#ect is #o$nd in FohnKs /os"el in "artic$lar& -ne only needs to ha%e so!e i!agination hi!sel#& C#& ('G97)& Fohn still has that %ision& So S ('G;')& The aorist wo$ld ha%e been "rosaic& C#& also ."& (=G99)6 a realistic change& (C#& 'G'L ##&)
1 (". )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1''. 2 I:. 3 .. -. ). and -., p. 3&. ' Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. %hi6o6., EEIE, p. 397. + -homp$on, Synt., p. 217. 7 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. %hi6o6., 192&, p. 397. 8 %ro6., p. 1'1.

So also .& in Ac& @G9=H in 7'G7? and ' in 7 Cor& ''G7=& A stri4ing instance o# it is seen in Re%& =G@6 \&'6 where Fohn sees Fes$s with the boo4 in his hand& It is d$ll to !a4e \&' hereO&<& Another e a!"le o# this %i%id "er#ect is ) (7 Cor& 'GL)6 a dread#$l !e!ory to Pa$l& So with )' in @G=& A "artic$larly good instance is (.t& 7=G>)6 where the "resent "er#ect notes the s$dden cry (c#& aorist and i!"er#& :$st be#ore)& C#& \' in 7 Cor& '7GL& <lass' has obser%ed that it occ$rs so!eti!es in "arables or ill$strations6 and 3$ite nat$rally so6 #or the i!agination is at "lay& Th$s is to be e "lained .&&0 (Fas& 'G7;) between two aorists& Fa!es sees the !an& JHe has gone o##&K C#& .t& '9G;>6 .&Z " b $) 9 W 2& In +$& LG9> q is 2%irt$ally re"orted s"eech&57 C#& .' (Ac& >G''6 b$t W3 in '=G7;)& "# The Gnomic Present Perfect& A #ew e a!"les o# this idio! see! to a""ear in the N& T& The "resent was always the !ore $s$al tense #or c$sto!ary tr$ths69 tho$gh the aorist and the "er#ect both occ$r& C#& & (' Fo& 7G=)H (' Cor& @G9L);H and 0 (Fo& 9G'?)H (Ro& ';G79)H & ('9G?)& C#& Fo& =G7;H Fas& 7G'E& "# The Perfect in &ndirect /iscourse& It is !isleading to say6 as <lass= does6 that 2the "er#ect is $sed relati%ely instead o# the "l$"er#ect5 in s$ch instances& This is e "laining /ree4 #ro! the /er!an& <lass does not call this constr$ction 2indirect disco$rse65 b$t !erely 2a#ter %erbs o# "erce"tion5H b$t see !y disc$ssion o# Indirect (isco$rse in ch& XIX& C#& +$& LG9> 29 .& 2Q l q6 Ac& 'EG;= Q=' @ )0& In .4& =G996 01 c 2I E&6 the "er#ect "reser%es the %i%idness o# the wo!anKs conscio$sness& Here the "ast "er#ect or the aorist co$ld ha%e been $sed (c#& .4& '=G'EH .t& 7@G'?H Ac& 'LG97)6 It is a4in to the re"ortorial %i%idness o# the historical "er#ect& It is not the "er#ects here that call #or e "lanation #ro! the /ree4 "oint o# %iew& It is rather the occasional aorists6 i!"er#ects or "ast "er#ects& C#& .S& di##erences in .4& 9G?& "# 'uturistic Present Perfect& Since the "resent so o#ten occ$rs in a #$t$ristic sense6 it is not strange i# we #ind the "resent "er#ect so $sed alsoO#$t$re "er#ect& This "role"tical $se o# the "er#ect !ay be ill$strated by = (Fo& '@G'E)6 ('@G77)6 & ('LG7?)6 ' and and in Fas& =G7 #& (c#& 9 ")& This $se is so!eti!es called 2"ro"hetico8"er#ect&5 Indeed so!e o# the e a!"les classed as gno!ic are really "role"tical also& C#& Fo& 9G'?H =G7;H Fas& 7G'EH Ro& '9G?H ';G79&' "# The :*oristic; Present Perfect& The Present Per#ect is here concei%ed as a !ere "$nctiliar "reterit li4e the aorist ind& 1e ha%e seen how in so!e %erbs the "$nctiliar idea dro"s o$t and only the d$rati%e re!ains in so!e "resent "er#ect #or!s (li4e $)& It is not per se $nreasonable to s$""ose that with so!e other %erbs the d$rati%e idea sho$ld disa""ear and the #or! be !erely "$nctiliar& 1e see! to ha%e this sit$ation in
1 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222. 2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1''. 3 Good*in, ). and -., p. +3 ". ' Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. 39 + Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222. 1 (". Good*in, ). and -., p. 1+A Gi6der$6ee=e, Synt., p. 121.

 in the +XX (.o$lton6 Prol.6 "& ';@)& The action6 itsel# too4 "lace in the "ast tho$gh the state #ollowing its co!"letion is "resent& <y centering attention on the #or!er6 while #orgetting the latter6 the "er#ect beco!es aoristic& 1e !$st disting$ish between the aoristic ("$nctiliar) and the "reterit notions& 1e ha%e seen that originally the tense was "robably ti!eless& Nothing6 then6 b$t an a""eal to the #acts can decide whether in the N& T& the "resent "er#& ind& e%erOthe aor& ind& (i&e& is preterit punctiliar)& The Sans4rit7 shows a deal o# con#$sion and #reedo! in the $se o# the "res& "er#& ind& The blending o# the "er#ect and aorist #or!s in +atin is also a "oint to note in s"ite o# the inde"endence o# the /ree4 tense de%elo"!ent& E& F& /oods"eed (*m. (. Theol.6 X6 'E7 #&) regards +atin as ha%ing so!e in#l$ence on the $lti!ate con#$sion in the /ree4& There is no do$bt o# the $lti!ate con#$sion in the late /ree49 (#ro! A&(& 9EE on) between the "er#ect and the aorist (see later)& The $se o# /' and /' in the aorist "ass& ind& in !odern /ree4 ill$strates one way con#$sion co$ld arise (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& ';;)& C#& # & In the !odern /ree4 all other re!nants o# the old "er#ect #or! are gone sa%e in the "artici"le6 which has lost its red$"lication6 li4e *& <$t had it beg$n in the older /ree4Q Fannaris' answers ,es and cites Th$c& '6 7'6 Y* '9 S; Y* &" =0& <$t this !ay be the dra!atic historical "er#ect& Febb7 answers ,es and 3$otes (e!osthenes and +$cianH b$t these again !ay be !erely the rhetorical dra!atic "er#ect& The gra!!arians and scholiasts6 $nder the in#l$ence o# the +atin6 did co!e to lose all conscio$sness o# any distinction and e "lained one tense by the other&9 The "resent "er#ect was always !ore co!!on in e%ery8day li#e6 as we ha%e noted& The "a"yri "ro%e this ab$ndantly&; .oreo%er6 the "resent "er#ect grew in "o"$lar $se at the e "ense o# the aorist6 where the aorist !ight ha%e been e!"loyed& There is th$s no strong "res$!"tion against the "ossibility o# s$ch con#$sion in the N& T& <esides6 2the line between aorist and "er#ect is not always easy to draw&5= This is es"ecially tr$e o# an e%ent :$st "ast which !ay be described by either tense& .o$lton> ad!its that 2the +XX and inscri"tions show a #ew e a!"les o# a se!i8 aoristic "er#ect in the "re8Ro!an age6 which6 as Th$!b re!ar4s (Hellenismus6 "& '=9)6 dis"oses o# the idea that +atin in#l$ence was wor4ing5 th$s early& <$t .o$lton rightly re:ects Z ! &C* @ ) yF* (E & 97G') as an instance (!erely oratio obli%ua)& Si!co @ says that 2no one b$t a doctrinaire s"ecial "leader is li4ely to deny
2 Whitney, San$. Gr., p. 297. Good$peed GOO/S%!!/, !. ;., /id #6e0andria In"6uen>e the .auti>a6 ?an ua e o" St. ?ukeO 1-he !0po$itor, @III, 1923, pp. 13241'13. 3 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''2A )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'2. 1 <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '39. 2 @. and /., <and:., p. 32&. 3 I:.A ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. 339 ". ' )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'1. + I:. 7 I:., p. 1'2. 8 ?an . o" the .. -., p. 12'.

that in Re%& =G@H ?G=6 \&'6 and in @G';6 \'6 are !ere "reterits in sense&5 1ell6 I do deny it as to \&' in Re%& =G@ and ?G=6 where we ha%e the %i%id dra!atic collo3$ial historical "er#ect& The sa!e thing is "ossible with \' in @G';6 b$t I wai%e that #or the !o!ent& <$rton? is !ore ca$tio$s& He clai!s that the N& T& writers 2had "er#ect co!!and o# the distinction between the aorist and the "er#ect65 b$t ad!its that 2there is clear e%idence that the "er#ect tense was in the N& T& so!eti!es an aorist in #orce65 tho$gh 2the idio! is con#ined within narrow li!its&5 So!e o# the e a!"les clai!ed by hi! #or this $sage I ha%e e "lained otherwise already& .o$ltonL sees that this con#$sion !ay e ist in one writer6 tho$gh not in another6 b$t he ad!its a 2resid$$! o# gen$inely aoristic "er#ects&5 He ad!its to be 2"er"le ing65 tho$gh in the ;= e a!"les in the ind& in the N& T& 2it has ob%io$sly "resent ti!e5 and 2the aoristic sense is not really pro ed #or any o# the!&5 That is certainly tr$e& There are instances in the N& T&6 as in the later /ree4 generally6' where a""roaches a "resent in sense6 as in ' Cor& '9G''6 b$t its $se as a !ere "reterit is not shown6 not e%en by the e a!"les 3$oted by .o$lton7 #ro! the "a"yri (-& P& ;@? and <& *& '9>)& The #irst has <<'; ;&06 all three a""arently %i%id historical "er#ects& The e a!"le in Fose"h$s (*pion6 ;G7') !ay be the sa!e& 1e ha%e le#t \&'# \'# )'# & The last .o$lton9 re#$ses to ad!it as an aorist in sense6 since 2the distinction is %ery clearly seen in "a"yri #or so!e cent$ries5 between and W& He cites -& P& ;?7 (iiNA&(&)6 )9* l ."' 9 & <esides in .t& '9G;> is in a %i%id "arable (dra!atic historical "er#ect)& .o$lton notes the con#$sion as worse in illiterate "a"yri6 li4e 2 &0"' 2 & 7 &86 -& P& =7? (iiNA&(&)& As to )' the !atter is !ore "la$sible in one e a!"le (7 Cor& 7G'9)& <lass; a##ir!s the tr$e "resent "er#ect sense #or )' elsewhere in the N& T& (.4& =G'=H 7 Cor& 'GLH @G=H Ro& =G7)& .o$lton= re"lies that 2we !$st6 I thin46 treat all the Pa$line "assages ali4e&5 <$t whyQ He does not clai! s$ch $ni#or!ity #or in any N& T& writer&> There is so!e analogy between )' and ' and .F6 and ) !ay be ingressi%e6 not constati%e& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& ';=) !a4es a good deal o$t o# the #act that ) occ$rs only 7E ti!es in the N& T& and that th$s )' !ay ha%e co!e to !ean J"ossessedK (constati%e)6 b$t he ad!its that this does not s$it in Ro& =G7& He cites a "ossible e a!"le #ro! <& *& 7L@ (iiNA&(&) 1* )' 9 -0 C* .<'* I I 0* 7/*8& Rader!acher (N. T. Gr.6 "& '77) thin4s that the "er#ect in the co!es within the s"here o# the aorist at ti!es& Thac4eray (Gr.6 "& 7;) thin4s that \&' in (an& 6 ;G9Eb and )'6 9 .& =G7E6 belong here& <$t i# the whole case has to be !ade o$t #ro! one e a!"le (7 Cor& 7G'9H c#& 7 Cor& @G=)6 it is
& .. -. ). and -., p. ''. 9 %ro6., pp. 1'3 "". 1 (". Bure$>h, J 1Rh. )., 1&91, p. 231 note3. 2 %ro6., p. 1'7. 3 I:., p. 1'2. ' Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222. + %ro6., p. 1'+. 7 I:., p. 1'7.

at least 3$ite "roble!atical& The only s$bstantial "lea #or ta4ing )' as "reterit here is the #act that Pa$l did ha%e -* #or his s"irit a#ter Tit$s ca!e& <$t it was a "artial -* as the E"istle shows& It is there#ore "ossible that in 7 Cor& 7G'9 we do ha%e a "resent "er#ectO"reterit "$nctiliar (c#& =F&)6 "ossible b$t not 3$ite certain& Pa$l !ay ha%e wished to accent the strain o# his an iety $" to the ti!e o# the arri%al o# Tit$s& The aorist wo$ld not ha%e done that& The i!"er#ect wo$ld not ha%e noted the end o# his an iety& It was d$rati%e "l$s "$nctiliar& -nly the "ast "er#ect and the "resent "er#ect co$ld do both& The e "erience !ay ha%e see!ed too %i%id to Pa$l #or the "ast "er#ect& Hence he $ses the (historical dra!atic) "resent "er#ect& That is certainly a "ossible inter"retation o# his idea& .o$lton (Prol.6 "& 79?) in the Additional Notes draws bac4 a bit #ro! the "reterit $se o# )'& He had ad%anced it 2with great hesitation5 and as 2a tentati%e acco$nt&5 2The "$re "er#ect #orce is #o$nd long a#ter Pa$lKs dayG th$s in the #or!$la o# an I-*6 !&4 )' + , + )C* = \0 )F (<& *& 'E'= in the early iiiNA&(&)6 Jto ha%e recei%ed and still "ossess&K5 1e ha%e \&' and \' le#t& Ta4e \&'& In Re%& 9G9 we ha%e '0 D 4* \&'* 9 0* 9 # 9 '& It is "receded by P' in the "ro"er sense& This is an e hortation abo$t the #$t$re& I# 0* had been .* no di##ic$lty wo$ld e ist& The "er#ect wo$ld e!"hasiBe the "er!anence o# the obligation& It is as easy to say that 0*Oa "er#ect as that \&'*Oan aorist& <oth are abstractly "ossible and neither !ay be tr$e& The reception !ay see! !ore a !atter to be e!"hasiBed as d$rati%e than the hearing ("$nctiliar)& It is a #ine "oint6 b$t it is "ossible& C#& ' 9 &' in .4& =G'L& C#& Fo& 9G97& The !ere #act o# the $se o# aorists and "er#ects side by side does not "ro%e con#$sion o# tenses& It rather arg$es the other way& It is "ossible with <lass' to see the #orce o# each tense in q and 0 in Fo& 9G97 (c#& ' Fo& 'G'M9)& Note also 9 (Ac& 7'G7?)& C#& +$& ;G'? where the change is nat$ral& .o$lton7 does #ind s$ch con#$sion in the illiterate doc$!ents a!ong the "a"yri& Si!co (Lang. of the N. T.6 "& 'E=) wishes to 4now what 2distinction o# sense5 e ists between &< and & in Ph& 9G'7& It is %ery si!"le and %ery clear& j&< denies the s$##iciency o# Pa$lKs "ast achie%e!ent6 & denies it as a "resent reality& C#& Ro& '9G'7& I ha%e already e "lained \&' in Re%& =G@ and ?G=& There is s$rely no tro$ble abo$t \&' in 7G7?& In ''G'@ again6 @ \&'* U 3 0 U "&' 9 <&0*6 it is not \&'* ("$nctiliar8d$rati%e6 Jrecei%edst and still hastK) that calls #or e "lanation6 b$t <&0*6 which !ay be $sed to accent the ingressi%e idea or as a "ractical e3$i%alent o# the "er#ect& The $se o# \' (Re%& @G';) and \' ('LG9) see!s !ore li4e a real "reterit than any other e a!"les in the N& T& In @G';6 < reads $& I wo$ld not labo$r the "oint o%er these two e a!"les& I# s$ch a con#$sion o# tenses occ$rred anywhere in the N& T&6 the A"ocaly"se wo$ld be the "lace to e "ect it& And yet e%en the A"ocaly"se is entitled to a word in its de#ence on this "oint in s"ite o# the #act that .o$lton' 2#ran4ly yields5 these instances and <lass7 says that 2the "o"$lar inter!i t$re o# the two tenses a""ears $ndo$btedly in the A"ocaly"se&5 It is to be re!e!bered that the A"ocaly"se is a series o# %isions6 is intensely dra!atic& It is :$st here that the rhetorical dra!atic (historical)
1 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 199. 2 %ro6., p. 1'2 ". 1 %ro6., p. 1'+. 2 Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222.

"er#ect so #reely granted in the orators wo$ld be #o$nd& It is wholly "ossible that in this $se o# \' we ha%e only this idio!& 2In history the "er#ect has no "lace o$tside o# the s"eeches and the re#lecti%e "assages in which the a$thor has his say&59 It is c$rio$s how a"tly /ilderslee%e here describes these %ery instances o# the "resent "er#ect which are called 2aoristic&5 So I concl$de by saying that the N& T& writers !ay be g$ilty o# this idio!6; b$t they ha%e not as yet been "ro%en to be& C#& )"' b P' in 7 Fo& ;& The distinction between the "er#& and "res& is shar"ly drawn in Fas& 9G@6 "H 9 "& "# The Periphrastic Perfect& )or the origin o# this idio! see disc$ssion in connection with the Past Per#ect6 (b)6 (')& The $se o# ) (so co!!on in later /ree4 and #inally tri$!"hant in !odern /ree4) has a #ew "arallels in the N& T&= C#& ) [' (+$& ';G'L) with +atin idio! 2I ha%e hi! beaten&5 C#& ) (+$& '7G'L6 "res& "art& $sed as "er#&)6 ='' ) U )1 (.4& 9G')& C#& .4& ?G'@H Heb& =G';H Fo& '@G'96 );&''& Here the "er#& "art& is6 o# co$rse6 "redicate6 b$t the idio! grew o$t o# s$ch e a!"les& The !odern /ree4 $ses not only ) 6 b$t also 6 b$t6 i# a con:$ncti%e "ron& "recedes6 the "art& agrees in gender and n$!ber (c#& )rench)& So U ) '6 JI ha%e seen herK (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '>7)& Passi%e is $ *& The $se o# is li!ited& C#& ' (Re%& '>G'E)6 a !i t$re o# tenses (c#& .4& LG9)& See E & '@G'7H Ps& @7G';& Pec$liar is )* in Heb& =G'7& It is that is co!!only $sed (abo$t ;E ti!es in the N& T&) with the "er#ect "art& C#& N$!& 77G'7H Is& 'EG7E& <$rton' notes that the intensi%e $se o# the "er#ect tense (c#& "ast "er#ect) is !ore co!!on than the e tensi%e& As e a!"les o# the intensi%e (O"resent) ta4e * (+$& 7EG>)& So Fo& 7G'@H Ac& 7G'96 etc& )or the e tensi%e $se (Oco!"leted act) note 9 (+$& 79G'=)& So Fo& >G9'H Heb& ;G76 etc& In Ac& 7>G7> the !ain accent is on the "$nctiliar as"ect (at the beginning6 as in Fo& >G9')& "# Present as Perfect& These e a!"les6 li4e O# "# f"# 16 ha%e already been disc$ssed $nder '6 (a)6 (')& C#& . (7 Ti!& ;G?)& "b# The Past Perfect (! S0&*)& "# The /ouble &dea& It is the "er#ect o# the "ast and $ses the #or! o# the "resent "er#ect "l$s s"ecial endings and o#ten with a$g!ent& The s"ecial endings7 show 4inshi" with the aorist& As the "resent "er#ect is a blending in idea o# the aoristic ("$nctiliar) and the d$rati%e "resent (a sort o# d$rati%e aoristic "resent co!bined)6 so the "ast "er#ect is a blend o# the aorist and the i!"er#ect in idea&9 It is contin$ance o# the co!"leted state in "ast ti!e $" to a "rescribed li!it in the "ast& As in the "resent "er#ect6 so here the relation between the "$nctiliar and the d$rati%e ideas will %ary in di##erent %erbs& The na!e S0&* (plus8%uam8perfectum)O!ore than "er#ect in
3 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 397. ' !. ;. Good$peed 1#m. ;our. o" -heo6., ;an., 1927, p. 122 ".3 $ho*$ that the o$tra>a >on"irm the pap. in the "ree u$e o" the per"e>t. + (". ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. '3&. 1 .. -. ). and -., p. '2. 2 Gi6e$, )an., p. '+8. 3 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 221.

the sense that it always re#ers to an antecedent date6 2a "ast "rior to another "ast5; is not always tr$e& "# * Lu+ury in Gree$& The /ree4s cared nothing #or relati%e ti!e6 tho$gh that was not the only $se #or the "ast "er#ect6 as :$st stated&= -rdinarily the aorist ind& was s$##icient #or a narrati%e $nless the d$rati%e idea was wanted when the i!"er#ect was ready to hand& Herodot$s shows a #ondness #or the "ast "er#ect&> It disa""eared in /ree4 be#ore the "resent "er#ect6@ tho$gh in the N& T& it still s$r%i%es in c$rrent6 b$t not co!!on6 $sage&? It was ne%er so #re3$ent in /ree4 as the "ast "er#ect was in +atin& The N& T& idio! con#or!s to that o# the older lang$age& "# The &ntensi e Past Perfect& Present "er#ects that had co!e to be !ere "resents thro$gh accent on the d$rati%e idea and loss o# e!"hasis on the aoristic ("$nctiliar) are %irt$al i!"er#ects when t$rned into the "ast& C#& Y* (.4& 'EG')& So d (Fo& 'G9')6 5 (Fo& 'LG7=H c#& Ac& 'G'E #&)6 (+$& ''G77) and e%en (.t& '7G@)6' #or so!eti!es is $sed li4e $ (' Fo& 7G;)& So with E .&&* (+$& '=G7;H c#& S')& Here we ha%e a !ere e isting state in the "ast with the obsc$ration o# the idea o# co!"letion (aoristic8"$nctiliar)& <$t it is to be noted that the d$rati%e sense is $s$ally a changed !eaning #ro! the aoristic sense& C#& $ #ro! $& )or this idio! in classic /ree4 see /ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 "& 'E9& C#& also E& SchwartB6 &nde+ to -us.6 ""& 7'; ##& "# The -+tensi e Past Perfect& The "ast "er#ect $s$ally "resents a co!"leted state or #i ed condition in "ast ti!e& As already said6 it is not necessarily 2a blend o# "ast and "r[ter"ast&57 In +atin the "ast "er#ect shows no trace o# the Aktionsart o# the "er#ectH the "ast "er#ect is :$st ti!e relati%ely "ast& The /ree4 "ast "er#ect e "resses a state #ollowing a co!"leted act in "ast ti!e&9 So!eti!es it is !ade clear by the conte t that a considerable s"ace o# ti!e had inter%ened6 tho$gh this is 3$ite incidental with the /ree4& Ta4e Fo& >G'@6 9 ' 9 &'&3 C* 2a* ! ~',*& The %erb in the sentence be#ore is ) (descri"ti%e) and the %erb #ollowing is (inchoati%e)& The ti!e o# these i!"er#ects is6 o# co$rse6 "ast& <$t the two inter%ening "ast "er#ects indicate stages in the going ( )) be#ore they reached the shore& <oth ' and hel" to accent the inter%al between the #irst dar4ness and the #inal a""earance o# Fes$s which is soon e "ressed by the %i%id historical "resent6 , (>G'L)& Here we ha%e a "ast behind a "ast beyond a do$bt #ro! the stand"oint o# the writer6 and that is the %ery reason why Fohn $sed the "ast "er#ect here& In %erse '>6 Y* Q _ <' 5 '6 he had been content with the aorist in both the "rinci"al and the s$bordinate cla$ses& He had not cared there to
' -homp$on, Synt., p. 218. + )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'&. It i$ a:$ent "rom the BPotian dia6. 1(6a"6in, Synt., et>., p. 823. 7 Stah6, Krit.-hi$t. Synt., p. 122. 8 ;ann., <i$t. Gk. Gr., p. ''1. & B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 221. 1 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'&. 2 Gi6der$6., #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 398. 3 Bru mann, K. @er 6. Gr., pp. +79, +87. (". Stah6, Krit.-hi$t. Synt., pp. 122 "".

e "ress relati%e ti!e6 to stress the inter%al at all& The tenses in Fo& >G'>M7'6 by the way6 #or! a %ery interesting st$dy& Fohn; does6 as a !atter o# #act6 $se the "ast "er#ect !ore #re3$ently than do the Syno"tists& He $ses it to ta4e the reader 2behind the scenes5 and o#ten throws it in by way o# "arenthesis& Th$s in 'G7; the "ast "er#ect .& E "oints bac4 to the aorist .& in 'G'L& In ;G? .&'&3 is a "arenthetical e "lanation o# what the disci"les had done before this incident with the wo!an& So in LG77 0 has ' and notes a "re%io$s agree!ent& In ''G'9 "oints to a ti!e :$st be#ore6 b$t note =& The tenses in ''G''M'9 are all interesting ($# &# $# # '# 3# )& In ''G'L &'&3 denotes antecedent action6 and in ''G9E6 &/6 the inter%al is !ar4ed& C#& also ''G;;6 & In ''G=@ "oints bac4ward as is tr$e o# 2 29* E * ('LG;')& In 9G7; and @G9EH ?G7E6 the stand"oint is later than the e%ent described6 b$t none the less it stretches bac4ward tho$gh #ro! a relati%ely #$t$re ti!e& <$t this distinction is not con#ined to Fohn& C#& .t& @G7=6 &6 which "oints bac4 to %erse 7;& So in .4& ';G;; re#ers to F$dasK "re%io$s arrange!ent& C#& also <<& in .4& '>GL with "'& The tenses in .4& '=G>M'E are interesting& The three "ast "er#ects all re#er to antecedent action& C#& ' with in +$& ;G7L6 and with 3 in %erse 9E& In +$& '>G7E <<&' s$ggests that the "oor !an had been at the door so!e while& In Ac& ;G77 (c#& ` ) does not "recede .&0 (%erse 7') by any great a!o$nt o# ti!e6 yet the inter%al is real (c#& 9G'M'E)&' In Ac& LG7' &'&3 is contrasted with ! *& In ';G79 c#& 3 with & C#& Ac& ;G7@ and 9'& In ';G7> the re#erence is to the beginning o# the to$r #ro! Antioch& In 7EG'>6 6 and 7EG9?6 6 the two ends o# the action nearly co!e together6 b$t in 7'G7L the antecedent action is clear& In Fo& ''G9E6 &'&3;.&&M E ;@0 S'6 the three "ast tenses o# the ind& co!e o$t well& In ''G=> #& 1 S1% @ 2 U &[ * U q% 6 the three 4inds o# ti!e ("resent6 #$t$re6 "ast) are all e!"loyed& <$t in '7G'> the aorist ind& is e!"loyed6 2 C 4; '6 tho$gh antecedent ti!e is indicated by C 4 and & Here the "ast "er#ect wo$ld !ore e actly ha%e !ar4ed o## C 4& I# the "re%io$s ti!e is to be de"icted in its co$rse6 the "ast "er#ect is $sed (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '>9)& "# The Past Perfect of 6ro$en )ontinuity7 (_ _ _ _ ` _ _ _ _)& This is tr$e o# +$& ?G7L6 &&1* )* 0'" 2& It is an iterati%e "ast "er#ect in a series o# lin4s instead o# a line6 li4e the "resent "er#ect o# bro4en contin$ity in Fo& 'G'?& C#& the "er#& in#& in Ac& ?G''& "# Past Perfect in )onditional Sentences& *s$ally the aorist ind& occ$rs in these conditions o# the second class deter!ined as $n#$l#illed in relation to the "ast& <$t so!eti!es the "ast "er#ect a""ears& C#& Fo& 'LG''H Ac& 7>G97H ' Fo& 7G'L& See Conditional Sentences6 ch& XIX& "# The Periphrastic Past Perfect& This constr$ction had already beg$n in ancient /ree4& In the third "erson "l$ral o# li3$id and !$te %erbs it was $ni#or!ly done #or the sa4e o# e$"hony& It was occasionally #o$nd also with other %erbs& In the !odern /ree4'
' #::ott, ;oh. Gr., p. 3'9. 1 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 221. 2 )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'&. 1 -hum:, <and:., pp. 171, 17+.

we #ind $) 6 JI had bo$nd6K 0 * or $) 1 j) was at #irst !ore than a !ere a$ iliary6 tho$gh in Herodot$s it a""ears as a tr$e a$ iliary& The dra!atists also $se it o#ten&7 In the N& T& the e a!"les with $) are not "ertinent& C#& 0F $) * 00' (+$& '9G>)H x $) .' (+$& 'LG7E)6 really "redicati%e acc$sati%e "artici"les with )& <$t the "ast "er#ect with the "er#ect "artic& and E is rather co!!on& C#& Fo& 'LG''& <$rton9 notes that abo$t two8thirds o# the! are intensi%e and only one8third e tensi%e& As e a!"les o# the intensi%e $se see .t& 7>G;96 E <<'H +$& '=G7;6 E .&&*& C#& also +$& 'G@& E a!"les o# the e tensi%e ty"e are E &'&0* (+$& =G'@)H E * (Ac& 7'G7L)& )or e a!"les in the +XX see 7 Chron& '?G9;H F$dg& ?G''H E & 9LG796 etc& See also << SF) (Ac& ?G'>)& "# Special 3se of '& This %erb was $sed as the "assi%e o# '& The "resent wasOa "resent "er#ect& So the i!"er#ect was $sed as a "ast "er#ect6 as in Fo& 7EG'76 @0 C 4OJwhere the body had lainK or Jhad been "laced&K So in Fo& 7G> E is a "eri"hrastic "ast "er#ect in sense& C#& +$& 79G=96 E *& See also 'LG7E& Perha"s a si!ilar notion is seen in !0C F (Ac& '7G7E)& "c# The "uture Perfect (! && 0&*)& There was ne%er !$ch need #or this tense6 "er#ect action in #$t$re ti!e&; It is rare in ancient /ree4 and in the +XX (Thac4eray6 Gr.6 "& 'L;)& The only acti%e #or!s in the N& T& are (Heb& ?G''6 +XX6 "ossibly a !ere #$t$re) and the "eri"hrastic #or! * (Heb& 7G'96 +XX also)& <oth o# these are intensi%e& .ost o# the .SS& read "= in +$& 'LG;E6 b$t <+ ha%e "=0& This is also intensi%e (c#& )6 i# it is acce"ted6 as it is not by 1& H& nor by Nestle& I note [ "&' )" nono7*86 <& /& *& =L> (A&(& ?;)& The !odern /ree4 has a #$t& "er#& in + ) (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '>7)& In O=0 (+$& 'LG;9) we ha%e a "ractical #$t$re "er#ect (intensi%e)& )or the rest the futurum e+actum is e "ressed only by !eans o# the "er#ect "art& and & This idio! is #o$nd in the +XX (the acti%e in /en& ;9G?H ;;G97H Is& =?G';6 etc& The "assi%e in /en& ;'G9>H E & '7G>)& N& T& e a!"les are and &&0 (.t& '>G'L)H &&0 ('?G'?)H (+$& '7G=7)& These all see! to be e tensi%e& )or a s4etch o# the #$t$re "er#ect see T ho!"son6 Synta+ of *ttic Gree$6 "& 77= #& This tense died be#ore the #$t$re did& 9& THE S*<F*NCTIVE AN( -PTATIVE& The "er#ect o"tati%e is not #o$nd in the N& T& It was always rare in the /ree4 o# the early "eriod& See HatBida4is6 -inl.6 "& 7'L& The only in#lected "er#& s$b:& in the N& T& is 46 which occ$rs ten ti!es (.t& LG>H .4& 7G'EH +$& =G7;6 etc&)& <$t in this #or! the "er#ect sense is gone& See ? F6 P& <& .& ''@? (A&(& 'L;)& Indeed6 the "er#& s$b:& was always %ery rare in /ree4& In the Sans4rit the "er#& tense6 o$tside o# the Vedic lang$age6 ne%er de%elo"ed to any e tent e ce"t in the ind& and the "artici"le&' In the classic /ree4 it was in s$b:& and o"t& a !ar4 o# the literary
2 ;e:: in @in>. and /i>k$onB$ <and:., p. 329. 3 .. -. ). and -., p. '+. ' #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. 39+. -homp$on -<O)%SO., F. !., # Synta0 o" #tti> Greek. .e* ed. 119283. <at9idaki$ <#-JI/#KIS, G. .., Einleit$ng in die ne$griechische /ra!!ati4 11&923. 1 Whitney, San$. Gr., p. 292.

style and did not really belong to the li#e o# the "eo"le& The "er#& s$b:& is absent #ro! the %ernac$lar !odern /ree4& A little re#lection will show how $s$ally there was no de!and #or a tr$e "er#ect6 co!bining "$nctiliar and d$rati%e6 in the s$b:& E%en in the literary style o# the older /ree46 when the "er#& s$b:& did occ$r it was o#ten the "eri"hrastic #or! in the acti%e and nearly always so in the "assi%e&7 2The "er#ect o# the side8!oods is tr$e to the 4ind o# ti!e6 co!"letion6 intensity6 o%erwhel!ing #inality&5 9 <y 24ind o# ti!e5 /ilderslee%e !eans 4ind o# action6 not "ast6 "resent or #$t$re& C#& the +XX also6 Is& ?G';H 'EG7EH '@G?& In +$& ';G? there a""ears to be a conscio$s change #ro! &'I* to &'*6 "ossibly s$ggesting a long8standing in%itation by the latter& In Fo& 9G7@6 + U 6 it is "$nctiliar8d$rati%e& In '>G7;6 ? &'' (c#& ' Fo& 'G;)6 the cons$!!ation is e!"hasiBed (d$rati%e8"$nctiliar)6 e tensi%e "er#ect (co!"leted act)& The sa!e thing is tr$e o# '@G'L6 ? f6 and '@G796 ? && In Fas& =G'=6 s '*6 we see! to ha%e the "er#ect o# 2bro4en contin$ity&5 In 7 Cor& 'GL6 ? U * 6 it is !erely intensi%e& ;& THE I.PERATIVE& 1hat has been said o# the rarity o# the "er#& s$b:& can be re"eated concerning the "er#& i!"er& -$t o# 7;;= i!"erati%es in the Attic orators the s"eeches the!sel%es show only eight real "er#ects (/ilderslee%e6 Synta+6 Part I6 "& '=?& C#& also .iller6 2The +i!itation o# the I!"erati%e in the Attic -rators65 *. (. P.6 iii6 '?L76 ""& 9LLM;9>)& In Is& ;G' one !ay note & intensi%e& The "er#ect i!"er& is co!!on in Ho!er&' In the late /ree4 it occ$rred !ost #re3$ently in the "$rely intensi%e "er#ects or in the third "erson sing$lar o# other %erbs&7 <$t it is gone #ro! the !odern /ree4 and is nearly dead in the N& T& In Fas& 'G'L \ !ay be i!"erati%e (intensi%e) or ind& See the #or!$la (Ac& '=G7L) and in Te t& Rec& (79G9E)&9 The only other e a!"le is #o$nd in .4& ;G9L6 # 6 where it is also intensi%e li4e the others& The d$rati%e idea is in both (linear "res&) and 6 J"$t the !$BBle on and 4ee" it on&K The "eri"hrastic "er#& i!"er& occ$rs in +$& '7G9=6 H (intensi%e)& C#& & The ti!e o# the "er#& i!"er& and s$b:& is6 o# co$rse6 really #$t$re& C#& "& ?;? ()& =& THE IN)INITIVE& There were originally no tenses in the in#& (see Sans4rit)6 as has already been stated& <$t the /ree4 de%elo"ed a do$ble $se o# the in#& (the co!!on $se6 and indir& disco$rse)& "a# Indirect iscourse. In indir& disco$rse (c#& ch& XIX) the tenses o# the in#& had the ele!ent o# ti!e6 that o# the direct& <$t in the N& T& there is no instance o# the "er#& in#& re"resenting a "ast "er#& ind&; The tense occ$rs in indir& disco$rse6 b$t the ti!e is not changed& C#& Ac& ';G'L 0 = F* &*# H* ' '6 ('7G';)
2 Good*in, ). and -., p. 31 ". (". Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 1'2. 3 Gi6der$6ee=e, #m. ;our. o" %hi6o6., 192&, p. '21. )i66er )I??!R, (. W. !., -he ?imitation o" the Imperati=e in the #tti> Orator$ 1#m. ;. %h., 1&92, pp. 3994'373. 1 )onro, <om. Gr., p. 22. 2 Good*in, ). and -., p. 23 ". 3 B6a$$, Gr. o" .. -. Gk., p. 222 ". ' Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. +2.

.& q"& So in +$& 77G9;H (Fo& '7G7L)H (7 Ti!& 7G'?)& These e a!"les are also all intensi%e "er#ects& So with Col& 7G'6 & Sp* & In ' Ti!& >G'@6 "&& S'&1 'Q W& (indir& co!!and)6 the intensi%e "er#& again occ$rs& In +$& 'EG9>6 1 6 we ha%e 2the %i%id "resent o# story8telling&5= C#& ) (Ac& 7=G7=)& -n the whole the "er#& in#& is rather co!!on (;@ ti!es6 according to H& Scott) in the N& T&' See #$rther Fo& '7G'?H Ac& '>G7@H 7@G'9H Ro& '=G?H Heb& ''G9& "b# Perfect Infinitive not in Indirect iscourse. "# Sub4ect or 5b4ect &nfiniti e& C#& 7 Pet& 7G7'6 U 6 where the tense accents the cli!acteric as"ect (d$rati%e8"$nctiliar) o# the act and rather s$ggests antecedence (e tensi%e) to E& In Ac& 7>G976 .&&3 36 we ha%e an instance o# the ob:& in#& with i!"lied antecedence (e tensi%e)& Note also C* .'&&") (+$& '7G=?)& In Ac& 'LG9> &0* S") is a "eri"hrastic #or! o# the s$b:ect in#& In 7 Cor& =G'' note 4 with &H& C#& ' Pet& ;G9 (with .*)& Not %ery di##erent is the $se with m (Ro& '=G'L)& "# 1ith Prepositions& At #irst it !ay see! s$r"rising that the "er#ect tense sho$ld occ$r with the artic$lar in#& a#ter "re"ositions& <$t the in#& does not lose its %erbal character in s$ch constr$ctions& It is still a %erbal s$bstanti%e& It is6 o# co$rse6 only by analogy that the tense #$nction is bro$ght into the in#initi%e& )or the "a"yri note 9 ` 6 P& - y& 7L; (A&(& 77)H SQ , .&&3 6 P& <& .& ;7 (<&C& '>?)& C#& + C ' (Heb& 'EG'=)6 the only instance with "& Here the tense has the sa!e #orce as \' in 'EGL& It stands on record as said& 1e #ind it with * (twice)6 as in E"h& 'G'?6 * C (intensi%e) and * C (Heb& ''G9)& It is !ost #re3$ent with " and the acc& (@ ti!es)& So .4& =G;6 9 " 9 0 (e tensi%e)& See F (+$& >G;?)& C#& Ac& '?G7H 7@GL& In ?G'' we ha%e the "er#& in#& o# 2bro4en contin$ity&5 In the N& T& the "er#& in#& with "re"ositions a""ears only with "# * and "& >& THE PARTICIP+E& "a# The Meaning& The "er#& "art& either re"resents a state (intensi%e) or a co!"leted act (e tensi%e)& E a!"les o# the #or!er are * (Fo& ;G>)H q* ('?G'?)H C * (+$& ;G'>)& Instances o# the latter occ$r in ! &'* (.t& 7=G7;)H '* (Fo& '?G'?)& The "er#& "art& is 3$ite co!!on in the N& T& and "reser%es the $s$al idea o# the tense& "b# The Time of the Tense& It is relati%e6 not absol$te& It !ay be coincident with that o# the "rinci"al %erb6 $s$ally so in the intensi%e $se&7 C#& Fo& ;G> Z* H6 ('LG99) $ ' '6 (Ro& '=G';) ;&'& <$t by s$ggestion the act !ay be re"resented as co!"leted be#ore that o# the "rinci"al %erb and so antecedent action& Th$s 5;'* (Fo& '?G'?)H "* &'&0 (Ac& '?G7)H .&&0' (+$& '>G'?)H '* (.t& 7>G@=)& This antecedent action !ay be e "ressed also by the intensi%e "er#ect as in =F& ! '* (Fo& ''G;;)6 b$t * is coincident action& So in .4& =G'= 5 is coincident6 b$t C )' antecedent& C#& Re%& >GL& The !odern /ree4 4ee"s the "er#& "art& (Th$!b6 Handb.6 "& '>@)&
+ )ou6ton, %ro6., p. 1'7. So <e:. 'M1. 1 W.--h., p. 33'. 2 Burton, .. -. ). and -., p. 81.

"c# The Perfect Tense 5ccurs !ith 2arious 3ses of the Participle& The "art& is $sed as attrib$ti%e& C#& 5 .& (Ac& 'EG'@)& So!eti!es a distinction is drawn between the aorist and the "er#& "art& C#& ! &< in .t& 7=G7E with ! &'* (7=G7;)H ! &* in +$& ';GL with ! &'* (';G'E)& C#& 7 Cor& '7G7'H ' Pet& 7G'E& The "redicate "artici"le also $ses it& C#& +$& ?G;>H '>G'?6 7E #&H Fo& 'LG99H Ac& '?G7H Heb& '9G79& 1ith Re%& LG'6 $ 6 co!"are +$& 'EG'?6 0 (the state6 the act)& "d# The Periphrastic Participle& There are two e a!"les o# this $n$s$al idio!& C#& E"h& ;G'? I K b*6 (Col& 'G7') b* .'&&0*& The d$rati%e as"ect o# the "er#ect is th$s accented& C#& Heb& =G'; #or ) $sed "eri"hrastically&