Aorist

Aorist (/ˈeɪ.ərɪst/; abbreviated AOR) verb forms usually express perfective aspect and refer to past events, similar to a preterite.
Ancient Greek grammar had the aorist form, and the grammars of other Indo-European languages and languages influenced by the
Indo-European grammatical tradition, such as Middle Persian, Sanskrit, Armenian, the South Slavic languages, and Georgian also
have forms referred to as aorist.

The word comes from Ancient Greek aóristos "indefinite",[1] as the aorist was the unmarked (default) form of the verb, and thus did
not have the implications of theimperfective aspect, which referred to an ongoing or repeated situation, or the perfect, which referred
[2]
to a situation with a continuing relevance; instead it described an action "pure and simple".

Because the aorist was the unmarked aspect in Ancient Greek, the term is sometimes applied to unmarked verb forms in other
languages, such as the habitual aspect inTurkish.[3]

Contents
Indo-European languages
Proto-Indo-European
Greek
Hermeneutic implications
Sanskrit
Slavic languages
Morphology
South Caucasian languages
Northeast Caucasian languages
Turkish
Quenya
See also
References
External links

Indo-European languages

Proto-Indo-European
In Proto-Indo-European, the aorist appears to have originated as a series of verb forms expressing manner of action.[4] Proto-Indo-
European had a three-way aspectual opposition, traditionally called "present", "aorist", and "perfect", which are thought to have been,
respectively, imperfective, perfective, and stative (resultant state) aspects. By the time of Classical Greek, this system was maintained
largely in independent instances of the non-indicative moods and in the nonfinite forms. But in the indicative, and in dependent
clauses with the subjunctive and optative, the aspects took on temporal significance. In this manner, the aorist was often used as an
unmarked past tense, and the perfect came to develop a resultative use,[5] which is why the term perfect is used for this meaning in
modern languages.
Other Indo-European languages lost the aorist entirely. In the development of Latin, for example, the aorist merged with the
perfect.[6] The preterites (past perfectives) of the Romance languages, which are sometimes called 'aorist', are an independent
development.

Greek
In the Ancient Greek, the indicative aorist is one of the two main forms used in telling a story; it is used for undivided events, such as
the individual steps in a continuous process (narrative aorist); it is also used for events that took place before the story itself (past-
within-past). The aorist indicative is also used to express things that happen in general, without asserting a time (the "gnomic aorist").
It can also be used of present and future[7] events; the aorist also has several specialized senses meaning present action.

Non-indicative forms of the aorist (subjunctives, optatives, imperatives, infinitives) are usually purely aspectual, with certain
exceptions including indirect speech constructions and the use of optative as part of the sequence of tenses in dependent clauses.
There are aorist infinitives and imperatives that do not imply temporality at all. For example, the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 uses
the aorist imperative in "Give (δός dós) us this day our daily bread",[8] in contrast to the analogous passage in Luke 11:3, which uses
the imperfective aspect, implying repetition, with "Give (δίδου dídou, present imperative) usday by day our daily bread."[9]

An example of how the aorist tense contrasts with the imperfect in describing the past occurs in Xenophon's Anabasis, when the
Persian aristocrat Orontas is executed: "and those who had been previously in the habit of bowing (προσεκύνουν prosekúnoun,
imperfect) to him, bowed (προσεκύνησαν prosekúnēsan, aorist) to him even then."[10] Here the imperfect refers to a past habitual or
repeated act, and the aorist to a single one.

There is disagreement as to which functions of the Greek aorist are inherent within it. Some of the disagreement applies to the history
of the development of the various functions and forms. Most grammarians differentiate the aorist indicative from the non-indicative
aorists. Many authors hold that the aorist tends to be about the past because it is perfective, and perfectives tend to describe
completed actions;[11] others that the aorist indicative and to some extent the participle is essentially a mixture of past tense and
perfective aspect.[12]

Hermeneutic implications
Because the aorist was not maintained in either Latin or the Germanic languages, there have long been difficulties in translating the
Greek New Testament into Western languages. The aorist has often been interpreted as making a strong statement about the aspect or
even the time of an event, when, in fact, due to its being the unmarked (default) form of the Greek verb, such implications are often
left to context. Thus, within New Testament hermeneutics, it is considered an exegetical fallacy to attach undue significance to uses
of the aorist.[13] Although one may draw specific implications from an author's use of the imperfective or perfect, no such
conclusions can, in general, be drawn from the use of the aorist, which may refer to an action "without specifying whether the action
is unique, repeated, ingressive, instantaneous, past, or accomplished."[13] In particular, the aorist does not imply a "once for all"
[14]
action, as it has commonly been misinterpreted, although it frequently refers to a simple, non-repeated action.

Uses of the aorist verb in the New Testament include ἀγαπάω/ἠγάπησεν (John 3:16)[15] and ἐφείσατο (Romans 11:21).[16]

Sanskrit
Although quite common in older Sanskrit, the aorist is comparatively infrequent in much of classical Sanskrit, occurring, for
example, 66 times in the first book of the Rāmāyaṇa, 8 times in the Hitopadeśa, 6 times in the Bhagavad-Gītā, and 6 times in the
story of Śakuntalā in the Mahābhārata.[17]

In the later language, the aorist indicative had the value of a preterite, while in the older language it was closer in sense to the
perfect.[17] The aorist was also used with the ancientinjunctive mood, particularly in prohibitions.[18]

Slavic languages
The Indo-European aorist was inherited by the Slavic languages and only survived in the South Slavic languages. It retains its
function entirely in Eastern South Slavic languages, Bulgarian and Macedonian. In Western South Slavic languages, however, namely
Serbo-Croatian (still appears in the standardized varieties) and Slovene (no longer part of the Standard Slovene), it has become, along
with imperfect and pluperfect, largely obsolete in daily parlance and mostly superseded by perfect and circumlocution. In both
languages, aorist bears an archaic tone and so appears mostly in older literature, scripture and religious services and legislation; as
such its use can be construed as pretentious and bombastic. This has not caused ambiguity as Slavic verbs have distinct grammatical
aspects which convey related yet distinct meanings.

Aorist has experienced something of a revival among younger speakers of Serbo-Croatian through modern means of communication
[19]
as its pattern is simpler and shorter to type out compared to perfect.

In Bulgarian, which has produced a new regular formation, the aorist is used in indirect and presumptive quotations.[20] Bulgarian
has separate inflections for aorist (past imperfective) and general perfective. The aorist may be used with the imperfective, producing
a compound perfective–imperfective aspect.[21][22]

The aorist in Macedonian is called "past definite complete tense" (минато определено свршено време) and it refers to a completed
action in the past tense. It most often corresponds to the simple past tense in English: I read the book, I wrote the letter, I ate my
supper, etc. In contemporary standard Macedonian, the aorist is formed almost exclusively from perfective verbs. The formation of
the aorist for most verbs is not complex, but there are numerous small subcategories that must be learned. While all verbs in the aorist
(except сум) take the same endings, there are complexities in the aorist stem vowel and possible consonant alternations. All verbs
(except сум) take the following endings in the aorist:[23]

јас -в ние -вме

ти -∅ вие -вте
тој -∅ тие -а / -ја

(The sign ∅ indicates a zero ending, i.e., nothing is added after the stem vowel.)

Morphology
In the Indo-European languagesGreek and Sanskrit, the aorist stem is marked by several morphological devices (the aorist indicative
also has the past-tense augment ἐ- e-, which contracts with the initial vowel). Three aorist morphological devices stand out as most
common:

Morphology Description, examples of aorist tense and aorist imperative

The first, weak, s-, or sigmatic aorist is the most common in Greek.
suffixing of s[24]
ἀκούω akoúō "I hear"—ἤκουσα ḗkousa "I heard"—ἀκουσον akouson "Hear!"

The second or strong aorist uses the bareroot of the verb without thee of ablaut or the present-
zero-grade of
tense suffix or nasal infix.
ablaut,
lack of suffix / λείπω leípō "I leave"—ἔλιπον élipon "I left"—λίπε lípe "Leave!"
nasal infix[25][26] λαμβάνω lambánō "I take"—ἔλαβον élabon "I took"—λαβέ labé "Take!"

Reduplication is more common in the perfect, but a few Greek verbs use it in the aorist. The
reduplicated aorist is more common inSanskrit, e.g. ájījanam "I gave birth."[17]
reduplication[27][28]
ἄγω ágō "I lead"—ἤγαγον ḗgagon "I led"—ἄγαγε ágage "Lead!"

South Caucasian languages

In Georgian and Svan, the aorist marks perfective aspect. In the indicative, it marks completed events; in other moods it marks events
yet to be completed.[29]
In Mingrelian and Laz, the aorist is basically a past tense and can be combined with both perfective and imperfective aspects as well
as imperative and subjunctive moods.[30]

Northeast Caucasian languages

.[31]
In Khinalug, the aorist is a perfective aspect and the two terms ("aorist" and "perfective") are often used interchangeably

[32]
In Udi, the aorist is an imperfective aspect that is usually a past tense, but can also replace the present tense.

Turkish
In Turkish the aorist is a habitual aspect.[3]

Quenya
In J. R. R. Tolkien's constructed language Quenya, the aorist is a gnomic tense or simple present that expresses general facts or
simple present actions.[33]

See also
Ancient Greek grammar: Dependence of moods and tenses
Preterite

References
1. ἀόριστος (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=a)o/ristos)
. Liddell, Henry
George; Scott, Robert; A Greek–English Lexiconat the Perseus Project
2. Beetham, Frank (2007).Learning Greek with Plato. Bristol Phoenix Press. p. 362.ISBN 978-1-904675-56-3. This
does not mean, however, that the aorist was aspectually neutral, seeNapoli, Maria (2006). Aspect and Actionality in
Homeric Greek. Milano: FrancoAngeli. p. 67.ISBN 88-464-7836-3.
3. Lewis, Geoffrey (2000). Turkish Grammar (2nd ed.). Oxford. ISBN 0-19-870036-9.
4. Michael Meier-Brügger, Matthias Fritz, Manfred Mayrhofer, Indo-European Linguistics(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=49xq3UlKWckC&pg=PA173), Walter de Gruyter, 2003, ISBN 3-11-017433-2, pp. 173–176.
5. Teffeteller (2006). "Ancient Greek".Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics(2nd ed.). ISBN 0-08-044299-4.
6. Palmer, L. R. (1988). The Latin Language. University of Oklahoma Press. p. 8.ISBN 0-8061-2136-X.
7. Herbert Weir Smyth, Greek Grammar, sect. 1934, citing Euripides,Alcestis, 386 "I am destroyed (aorist indicative) if
you will leave me".
8. Matthew 6:11, KJV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt%206:11&version=KJV)
. In Greek: Τὸν
ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον.
. In Greek: τὸν ἄρτον
9. Luke 11:3, KJV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2011:3&version=KJV)
ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ' ἡμέραν.
10. F. Kinchin Smith and T.W. Melluish, Teach Yourself Greek, Hodder and Stoughton, 1968, p. 94.
11. Egbert Bakker, 1997, Grammar as Interpretation: Greek literature in its linguistic contexts
, p 21;
Constantine Campbell, 2007,Verbal Aspect, the Indicative Mood, and Narrative: Soundings in the Greek of the New
Testament, chapter 4;
Donald Mastronarde, 1993,Introduction to Attic Greek;
Buist M. Fanning, 1990, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek, p 67;
Heerak Kim, 2008, Intricately Connected: Biblical Studies, Intertextuality
, and Literary Genre;
Maria Napoli, 2006, Aspect and Actionality in Homeric Greek; Brook Pearson, 2001,Corresponding Sense: Paul,
Dialectic, and Gadamer, p 75;
Stanley Porter, 1992, Idioms of the Greek New Testament;
A.T. Robertson, 1934, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research;
Max Zerwick, 1963, Biblical Greek.
12. Martin Haspelmath, ed., 2001,Typologie des langues et les universaux linguistiques, 1:779;
Roger Woodward, "Attic Greek", inThe Ancient Languages of Europe, p 33;
see also discussion in Stanley Porter, 1992, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, p 38
13. D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, Baker Book House, 1984,ISBN 0-8010-2499-4, p. 70.
14. Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation
(https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=QkrBPCoqn3wC&pg=P A69), 2nd ed., InterVarsity Press, 2006, ISBN 0-8308-2826-5, p. 69.
15. Nestle Aland Novum Testamentum Graece with Mounce Parsings. Olive Tree Publishing.
16. "φείδομαι" (https://billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/pheidomai)
. billmounce.com. Retrieved 2 May 2017.
17. William Dwight Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar: Including both the Classical Language and the older Dialects, ofeda
V
and Brahmana, Oxford University Press, 1950,pp. 297-330.
18. T. Burrow, The Sanskrit Language(https://books.google.com/books?id=cWDhKTj1SBYC&pg=P
A299), Motilal
Banarsidass Publ., 2001,ISBN 81-208-1767-2, p. 299.
19. Dr Branko Tošović, Zbornik Matice srpske za slavistiku, knjiga 71-72(http://www.maticasrpska.org.rs/casopisi/slavisti
ku_71-72.pdf) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120315164610/http://www .maticasrpska.org.rs/casopisi/slavi
stiku_71-72.pdf) March 15, 2012, at theWayback Machine. (Serbian only)
20. The Slavonic languagesed. Bernard Comrie, Greville G. Corbett,passim, esp. p.212ff.
21. Bernard Comrie, Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems
(https://books.google.co
m/books?id=Z4FM00GAwlUC&pg=PA12), Cambridge University Press, 1976,ISBN 0-521-29045-7, p 12.
22. Östen Dahl, Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe (https://books.google.com/books?id=HRvoWjxF9v0C&pg
=PA290), Walter de Gruyter, 2000, ISBN 3-11-015752-7, p. 290.
23. Christina E. Kramer (1999), Makedonski Jazik (The University of Wisconsin Press).
24. Smyth. A Greek grammar for colleges. § 542 (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0
007:smythp=542): first aorist stem.
25. Smyth. A Greek grammar for colleges. §§ 546 (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.
0007:smythp=546), 547 (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0007:smythp=547):
second aorist stem, o-verbs.
26. Anna Giacalone Ramat and Paolo Ramat (eds.),The Indo-European Languages(https://books.google.com/books?id
=vwUMNCYbLL0C&pg=PA248), Routledge, 1998, ISBN 0-415-06449-X, pp. 248–251.
27. Smyth. A Greek grammar for colleges. § 494 (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0
007:smythp=494): reduplication.
28. Smyth. A Greek grammar for colleges. §§ 549.1 (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.0
4.0007:smythp=549): reduplication in 2n (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0007:
smythp=2)d aorist.
29. Heinz Fãhnrich, "Old Georgian",The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, V
olume 1, The Kartvelian Languages
(1991, Caravan Books), pp. 129-217.
Howard I. Aronson, "Modern Georgian",The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian
Languages (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 219-312.
Karl Horst Schmidt, "Svan",The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, V
olume 1, The Kartvelian Languages
(1991, Caravan Books), pp. 473-556.
30. Alice C. Harris, "Mingrelian",The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, V
olume 1, The Kartvelian Languages
(1991, Caravan Books), pp. 313-394.
Dee Ann Holisky, "Laz", The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages(1991,
Caravan Books), pp. 395-472.
31. A.E. Kibrik, "Khinalug",The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, V
olume 4, North East Caucasian Languages,
Part 2 (1994, Caravan Books), pp. 367-406.
32. Wolfgang Schulze-Fürhoff, "Udi", The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, V
olume 4, North East Caucasian
Languages, Part 2 (1994, Caravan Books), pp. 447-514.
33. Helge Kåre Fauskanger. Ardalambion (http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/). Quenya - The Ancient Tongue. The Verb (http://folk.
uib.no/hnohf/quenya.htm#Heading9).

External links
Greek tenses

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aorist&oldid=826529564

"

This page was last edited on 19 February 2018, at 17:29.

Text is available under theCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.