The Syntax of the Periphrastic Progressive in the Septuagint and the New Testament

In: Novum Testamentum

Abstract

In this article, I discuss the use of the periphrastic progressive construction of εἰµί with present participle in the Septuagint and the New Testament. I argue that a broad distinction can be made between two main uses, called “durative progressive” and “focalized progressive.” In both cases, a number of syntactic frames can be specified in which the periphrastic construction occurs. I conclude the article by discussing the relationship between the Septuagintal and the New Testamental use of the periphrastic construction, arguing that while there are many similarities, this relationship should not be conceived of in terms of imitation, as some scholars have suggested.

  • 1)

    See e.g. H.S.J. Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909) 195; F.C. Conybeare and S.G. Stock, Grammar of Septuagint Greek (Boston, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995[1905]) 68-69; F. Blass and A. Debrunner, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Bearbeitet van Friedrich Rehkopf (15th ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979) 285-287; J.W. Voelz, “The Language of the New Testament,” ANRW II, 25.2 (1984) 962.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3)

    A. Verboomen, L’imparfait périphrastique dans l’Évangile de Luc et dans la Septante (Louvain/Paris: Peeters, 1992) 24-71; T.V. Evans, Verbal Syntax in the Greek Pentateuch: Natural Greek Usage and Hebrew Interference (Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2001) 220-257; K. Hauspie, “Periphrastic Tense Forms with eimi and gignomai in the Septuagint of Ezekiel,” in Et sapienter et eloquenter: Studies on Rhetorical and Stylistic Features of the Septuagint (ed. E. Bons and T.J. Kraus; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011) 127-152.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4)

    S.E. Porter, Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood (SBG 1; New York: Peter Lang, 1989) 454-455, 480.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9)

    Johnson, Discourse Analysis, 103.

  • 10)

    P.M. Bertinetto, “Vers une typologie du progressif dans les langues d’Europe,” MLing 16 (1995) 37-61; P.M. Bertinetto, “The Progressive in Romance, as Compared with English,” in Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe (ed. Ö. Dahl; Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000) 559-604; P.M. Bertinetto, K.H. Ebert and C. de Groot, “The Progressive in Europe,” Tense and Aspect in the languages of Europe (ed. Ö. Dahl; Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000) 517-558.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13)

    Bertinetto, Ebert and de Groot, “The Progressive,” 565.

  • 14)

    Cf. B.M. Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek (OTM; Oxford: Clarendon, 1990) 206. It should be noted, however, that durative progressives can also denote events occurring in a more narrow time-frame. In the following example (borrowed from Bertinetto, “The Progressive,” 571), the event indicated by the durative progressive occurs between two well-defined points in time: “[Yesterday, during my sleep], Ann was playing for two hours all by herself.”

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15)

    See Fanning, Verbal Aspect, 244-249; P.M. Bertinetto, II dominio tempo-aspettuale: Demarcazioni, intersezioni, contrasti (Torino: Rosenberg and Sellier, 1997) 227 n. 8.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22)

    L. Amenta, Perifrasi aspettuali in greco e in latino: Origini e grammaticalizzazioni (ML 38; Milano: Franco Angeli, 2003) 81.

  • 23)

    Cf. K. Beyer, Semitische Syntax im Neuen Testament (SUNT 1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968) 29: “allgemeine Zeit- bzw. Situationsangabe . . . oder begleitende Nebenumstände.” See also M. Johannessohn, “Das biblische καὶ ἐγένετο und seine Geschichte,” KZ 53 (1925) 161-212; S.H. Levinsohn, Discourse Features of New Testament Greek (2nd ed.; Dallas: SIL, 2000) 177-180.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27)

    Verboomen, L’imparfait périphrastique, 27-48. Cf. also Cohén, La phrase nominale, 323.

  • 28)

    See e.g. Ceglia, “L’evoluzione della costruzione perifrastica,” 30-33, 35-36. Perhaps the use of the periphrastic form in these examples could be compared to what Rijksbaron calls the “immediative imperfect” (A. Rijksbaron, The Syntax and Semantics of the Verb in Classical Greek [3rd ed.; Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press, 2006] 17-18). Cf. also Fanning, Verbal Aspect, 252-253.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37)

    Cf. Beyer, Semitische Syntax, 57.

  • 39)

    Johannessohn, “Das biblische καὶ ἰδού,” 36, 48, 55.

  • 40)

    Johannessohn, “Das biblische καὶ ἰδού,” 54-55.

  • 41)

    Cf. Johannessohn, “Das biblische καὶ ἐγένετο,” 205-206; Beyer, Semitische Syntax, 48-52. Typically, the more general circumstances come first (i.e. ἐν µιᾷ τῶν ἡµερῶν).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43)

    Cf. Johannessohn, “Das biblische καὶ ἰδού,” 52. In other words, (17) should not be understood as “And behold two men were carrying on a sickbed a man who was paralyzed,” but rather “And behold two men, who were carrying on a sickbed a man who was paralyzed.”

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51)

    Aerts, Periphrastica, 55-56. Aerts is almost forced to such a strong claim since he considers the use of the periphrastic progressive in the NT a “Septuagintalism” rather than a natural development (following Tabachovitz, Die Septuaginta und das Neue Testament; cf. also Verboomen, L’imparfait périphrastique). For an entirely different view, see Björck, Die periphrastischen Konstruktionen; W. Dietrich, “Der periphrastische Verbalaspekt im Griechischen und Lateinischen,” Glotta 51 (1973) 188-228.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 45 17 2
Full Text Views 144 2 0
PDF Downloads 7 3 0