| In English, we think of the tense of a verb as
denoting the "time" of the action. In Greek
also time is indicated by tense, but only absolutely so
in the Indicative mood. And time is not the primary
significance of Greek tenses. Fundamentally, Kind
of Action, rather than Time of Action, is
indicated by tense.
For now, we will distinguish between two kinds of action,
linear and
punctiliar. Linear action can also be
called durative, continuous, or progressive.
Punctiliar action is instantaneous. (However, we need to
guard against supposing that those tenses sometimes
described as punctiliar necessarily imply instantaneous
action. We will elaborate on this point when we discuss
the aorist tense.)
The kind of action indicated by the use of the present
tense is durative. There are special uses of the present
tense where the durative idea may not be conspicuous.
Sometimes, someone will learn of these special uses and
mistakenly conclude that the durative idea is not
fundamentally characteristic of the present tense. In the
following paragraphs, we will consider the comments of
several well known authors of Greek grammars in order to
put the different uses of the present tense in
perspective.
Linear Aspect is Characteristic of the
Present Tense
It is incorrect to think of the time element (present
time) as fundamental to a present tense verb and to
therefore conclude that linear action is just a trait
that may or may not accrue to the verb. In fact, it is
the other way around.
First, let's consider some comments from the standard
descriptive grammars:
The original function of
the so-called tense stems of the verb in
Indo-European languages was not that of levels of
time (present, past, future) but that of Aktionsarten
(kinds of action) or aspects (points of views).
(Blass & DeBrunner, A Greek
Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature, p. 166.)
...essentially the tense in Greek expresses the kind
of action, not time, which the speaker has
in view and the state of the subject.... In
short, the tense-stems indicate the point of view
from which the action or state is regarded....the
present expresses linear action. (Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New Testament
Greek, vol. 3: Syntax, p. 59.)
[The Present Indicative]
normally expresses linear action (Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek,
vol. 3: Syntax, p. 60.)
The durative (linear
or progressive) in the present stem: the
action is represented as durative (in progress) and
either as timeless (ἔστιν ὁ
θεός) or as
taking place in present time (including, of course,
duration on one side or the other of the present
moment: γράφω 'I am writing [now]';...The
present stem may also be iterative:
ἔβαλλεν 'threw repeatedly (or each
time)'. (Blass & DeBrunner,
A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other
Early Christian Literature, p. 166.)
These ideas (punctiliar,
durative, perfected state) lie behind the three
tenses (aorist, present, perfect) that run through
all moods. The forms of these tenses are meant to
accentuate these ideas. (A.T.
Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament,
p. 824.)
The grammars quoted above are widely recognized as the
most thorough and authoritative. Other grammars, not as
extensive in scope, also provide valuable insights. One
is by Maximilian Zerwick, who describes three "aspects" with which a
speaker might use a verb:
1) as a simple
realization...without reference to continuation or
repetition...: the "aorist"
2) as a nature or kind
of activity in progress or habitual (repeated) or
simply as this kind of activity or activity tending
to a given end: the "present" or
"imperfect"
3) as a completed act
resulting in a "state of affairs" which is
predicated by the verb as holding for the present
time: the "perfect"
(Maximilian Zerwick, Biblical Greek, p. 77.)
H. E. Dana and Julius Mantey were the authors of a
popular intermediate grammar.
There are therefore,
three fundamental tenses in Greek: the present,
representing continuous action; the perfect,
representing completed action; and the aroist...
representing indefinite action.
(Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek
New Testament, p. 178.)
There are really two
fundamental ways of viewing action. It may be
contemplated in single perspective, as a point, which
we may call punctiliar action (R. 823); or it may be
regarded as in progress, as a line, and this we may
call linear action (M. 109)....The aorist may be
represented by a dot (.), the present by a line
(_________), and the perfect by the combination of
the two (.________). (Dana
& Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New
Testament, p. 179.)
Hence, beginning, instructive grammars,
instruct the student to assume the continuous idea when
translating, and to view as exceptional those occasions
when context and the requirements of English idiom demand
some other rendering.
[The present active
indicative verb] can be either a continuous ('I am
studying') or undefined ('I study') action. We
recommend using a continuous translation by default,
and if it does not fit the context switch to the
undefined. (William D. Mounce, Basics
of Biblical Greek_, p. 125.)
The present tense is
basically linear or durative, ongoing in its kind of
action. The durative notion may be expressed
graphically by an unbroken line (___________), since
the action is simply continuous. This is known as the
progressive present. Refinements of the general rule
will be encountered; however, the fundamental
distinction will not be negated.
(James Allen Hewett, New Testament Greek, A
Beginning and Intermediate Grammar, p. 13.)
The Terms Aktionsart
and Aspekt
From German, we get these two terms which are used to
represent the chief significance of tense in the Greek
language. Aktionsart is "kind of
action." Aspekt is "point of
view" and refers to the kind of action as
perceived by the speaker. During most of the 20th
century, the term Aktionsart has been in the
forefront of discussions about Greek tenses, sometimes
being used as distinct from Aspekt, and
sometimes being used comprehensively so as to include the
idea of Aspekt. An example of Aktionsart being
used to cover both ideas is found Nigel Turner's volume
on Syntax. He summarized the significance of the
tense stems in Greek saying they
indicate the point of
view from which the action or state is regarded. The
word Aktionsart (kind of action) has been taken over
in all countries to express this essential idea.New Testament Greek, vol. 3: Syntax,
A Grammar of p. 59.
Some Uses of the Present Tense Obscure the
Linear Idea
Are there occassions when there is no durative idea even
though the present tense is used? A. T. Robertson wrote,
It is not wise
therefore to define the pres. ind. as denoting
'action in progress' like the imperf. as Burton does,
for he has to take it back on p. 9 in the discussion
of the 'Aoristic Present,' which he calls a 'distinct
departure from the prevailing use of the present
tense to denote action in progress.' In sooth, it is
no 'departure' at all. The idiom is as old as the
tense itself and is due to the failure in the
development of separate tenses for punctiliar and
linear action in the ind. of present time. (p. 864)
In other words, Robertson is saying the kind of action
may be punctiliar even though the present is used.
Fifteen pages later, he alludes to this observation
saying,
It has already been seen
that the durative sense does not monopolize the
'present' tense, though it more frequently denotes
linear action. The verb and the context must decide. (p. 879)
But this does not mean Robertson considered the present
tense to be equally well suited to a linear idea and a
punctiliar idea. Rather, certain verbs in certain
contexts may call for a punctiliar understanding.
Similarly, James Hope Moulton described the present stem
as "normally denoting linear or durative
action," but cautioned, "It must not be
thought, however, that the durative meaning monopolises
the present stem." (A Grammar of New Testament
Greek, vol. 1:Prolegomena, p. 119.)
Still, we should not be too quick to cease looking for a
durative idea in instances where it is not at first
apparent. In the phrase, "Friend, I do thee no
wrong" (Matt 20:13), the durative idea may not be
obvious. The verb translated "do wrong" is the
present active indicative ἀδικῶ.
The perceived wrong, that is, the perceived inequitable
treatment, was a one-time occurrence. Is linear akionsart
present here?
Linear aspect doesn't necessarily mean action perceived
as continuing into perpetuity. It simply represents the
subject as speaking from a perspective in the midst of
the action. "Friend, I do thee no wrong." These
words are spoken as the householder is in the midst of
compensating his workers. The addressee has yet to take
up that which is his. From the speaker's perspective, he
is doing something (and he denies that
what he is doing is wrong.) The linear idea is not
absent.
In Matt 17:15, we read "oftimes he falleth into the
fire." The verb "falleth" is the present
active indicative πίπτει. We
know from the context that it refers to repeated action.
It is not literally continuous action. Each incident of
falling is repeated again and again. Is a durative idea
present?
The durative idea can be iterative or habitual, rather
than constant. Robertson even suggests a different graph
to illustrate an iterative action. Rather than a line (
_________ ), he illustrates with dots: (.....). (p. 880.)
From the viewpoint of the father of the boy, falling into
the fire is something that happens over time inasmuch as
it happens repeatedly. In fact, the father means to
convey the idea that this is not an isolated incident.
This use is called the Iterative Present.
This is not a different tense. It is rather one category
of usage wherein the durative idea has a particular
quality.
According to Moulton, Burton regarded "we
forgive" (ἀφίομεν) in
Luke 11:4 as punctiliar. And at first glance we might
agree, understanding that forgiveness occurs at a point
in time, and is not a process. However, Moulton offers
the alternative view that ἀφίομεν
may be describing habitual action and should here be
considered an Iterative Present. Certainly
that suits the context: "And forgive us our sins;
for we ourselves also forgive every one that is indebted
to us."
Burton, as well as Robertson, identified a
Gnomic Present used in proverbs. Turner,
citing Burton's discussion of the Gnomic Present, offers
Mt. 7:17, Jn. 7:52, 2 Co 9:7, and Jas 1:13-15 as
examples. Consider Mt. 7:17, "Every good tree makes
(ποιεῖ, pres. act. ind.) good fruit, but the corrupt
tree makes evil fruit." One might argue that
producing fruit is not a continuous activity, that there
are seasonal interruptions of the process. But the very
nature of a proverb is to state that which is generally
true. The reference is not to a single, isolated instance
of bearing fruit, but to that which is characteristic
over time. Thus the durative idea is present.
In Mt. 13:44,
ἀγοράζει
("buys") is present active indicative, and yet
is not easily understood to be linear. The man paid the
money, took possession, and the deed was done. What use
of the present justifies its occurrence here if the aspect
is not linear? The Historic Present
(again, not a different verb form, just a different use)
occurs frequently in narrative, especially in the
gospels. Often the verb λέγω
("say") is present in form even though it is
describing past action. In these cases, kind of action is
not necessarily durative. The idiom is much like our
colloquial speech:
So the fat guy says to the skinny
guy, "You're a wimp".
Then the skinny guy gets up and
jumps on the fat guy's head.
The verbs "says,"
"gets," and "jumps" are all present
in form, even though they are describing past action. In
the original NASB, these verbs are often translated as
past tense, and marked with an asterisk to alert the
reader to the present form of the Greek verb.
Now, in Mt. 13:44, where
"goes," "sells," "has," and
"buys" are all pres. act. indicatives, if one
insists on bringing the idea of continuous action over
into English, I suppose one could translate, "and
from joy of it, he is going and selling all things
whatsoever he is having and is buying that field."
This, however, would obviously not convey in English the
idea intended in Greek. I believe what we have here is an
example of Historic Present verbs. This seems to be
confirmed by the parallel between the occurences of
ἀγοράζω in
verse 44 and verse 46. In the former case, it is present,
and in the latter, past; however it serves the same
purpose in both cases.
According to Turner, "the hist. present is an
instance where Aktionsart and tense-forms do
not coincide; this present usually has punctiliar
action" (p. 60). But then he goes on to say that
Mark and John are particularly fond of this use and
"their narrative is made vivid thereby." It
seems to me that in this last observation, we find the
durative idea. This mode of speech, relating a past
incident using present tense verbs, makes the narrative
vivid by transporting the hearer to the time of the
action. Or it could be said the incident being described
is transported to the time of the narration. By this
means, the speaker recreates the incident as if it is
happening at the moment. He puts the scene before himself
and his audience and they imagine the events unfolding
before their eyes. They are imagining themselves as being
in the midst of the time of the action. The action is
viewed as happening and accordingly, I
wonder if it is not best to consider that even though the
action may be instantaneous, from the Aspekt of
the speaker, there is a linear quality to it.
Conclusion
Linear Aktionsart characterizes the Present
tense. If it can be argued that there is such a thing as
a punctiliar use of the present, one should not be too
quick to resort to this explanation when a linear idea is
not immediately apparent. Not only the nature of the
activity, but also the point of view of the speaker or
the intended impression upon the hearer may call for
linear Aktionsart and account for the present
tense.
|