Re: What's the aorist tense?
|From:||Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, July 1, 2004, 5:25|
On Wednesday, June 30, 2004, at 09:51 , Philip Newton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 07:46:13 +0100, Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>
>> On Tuesday, June 29, 2004, at 07:45 , Philip Newton wrote:
>>> denw - present indicative
>> Identical with the present subjunctive in pronunciation & in the current
>> spelling (but Katharevousa used different spellings for the two sets of
> Well, for most endings, yes. (1sg. is always -w, though, and I'm not
> sure about the distinction in 2pl and 3pl.)
Yes, you're right. 1sg., 2pl., and 3pl. were spelled the same in
Katharevousa,just as in Demotic.
The 2nd & 3rd singulars, which are now spelled -eis and -ei for both
indicative & 'subjunctive' uses, sre spelled -eis & -ei in Katharevousa if
indicative, but -hs & -h (h = eta) if subjunctive. Indeed in the older
forms of Katharevousa, the old iota subscripts were put beneath the etas.
As for the 1st plural, the current spelling is -oume, but Katharevousa has
-ome(n) for indicative & -wme(n) for subjunctive.
"A mind which thinks at its own expense will always
interfere with language." J.G. Hamann, 1760