[B-Greek] Middle sense for separate Passive form

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Mar 21 19:42:19 EST 2007


On Mar 21, 2007, at 7:21 PM, Mitch Larramore wrote:

> Dr. Conrad, are there any separate Passive forms
> (where the Middle and Passive do not share the same
> forms) that can NOT be understood as Middles (assuming
> the Passive indicators, such as hUPO plus Genitive are
> absent) IF THE CONTEXT SEEMS TO ALLOW A MIDDLE SENSE?

One needs to look at examples. It would appear you have an instance  
in mind; if so you should cite it and put the question about it. A  
lot depends upon the Aktionsart of the verb in question: some verbs  
are fundamentally transitive, as APOKTEINW where the passive forms  
are clearly passive in meaning. In Rev 6:12 APOKTENNESQAI quite  
clearly bears a passive sense. But on the other hand, we've discussed  
aorists of GINOMAI in EGENOMHN and EGENHQHN where it's highly  
questionable that there's any difference in meaning between the two.  
One might raise this question regarding middle and passive aorists of  
BAPTIZW -- I think some of those might be arguable. We've argued  
about whether forms of hEURISKW in the aorist passive (hEUREQHN KTL.)  
are invariably passive. I'm not so sure myself. I know that there are  
some middle verbs with passive forms that are really passive in sense.

I don't think we can lay down a hard and fast rule on this matter.  
One really needs to have a sense of the behavior of particular verbs  
and one also needs to have a sense of the fundamental ambivalence of  
middle-passive morphology: that it indicates the subject is coming  
into a state or condition, whether voluntarily or involuntarily or  
voluntarily with assistance, as "have one's beard shaved" or "get  
baptized."


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/




More information about the B-Greek mailing list