[Josiah Helsel]

Hey fellow Greek Freaks,

Here's a curious Q about numerals: Can they ever be put in the attributive position? Machen never says whether they can or cannot, but throughout the exercises they always appear in the predicate position (or it is left ambiguous by the absence of an article). So are they like demonstrative pronouns which always prefer the predicate position, or can they ever be put in the attributive position without violating all that is sacred in Greek grammar?

Tre Cool

[98 Degrees]

Josiah:

I don't really have anything to contribute to your Greek question other than echoing your sentiments. What I would really like to know is what does "Tre Cool" mean? If we start with that question, it may put us on solid ground to answer the Greek question.

98

[Josiah Helsel]

John,

Perhaps the most enjoyable part of this whole forum thingy is that you don't know who most of the people are. The challenge is to figure out who they might be by looking at their posts and how they phrase them. It's like trivial pursuit for Greek freaks. But alas, now that is a joy which, like an aorist participle, is past tense.

As for what or who Tre Cool is or means, I'm afraid that if you didn't get it right away, then you'll have to become more wise in the world of Punk Rock. Your first clue is that you need to go out and buy a Green Day CD.

And besides, if I were to tell you all up front, where would be the fun of coming up with the phrase and name to begin with? It's as if Gollum were to ask Bilbo what the solution to his riddle was. No way man, you gotta earn this.

Tre Cool

[A Vonderluft]

[Josiah Helsel]

My Dear Andreas,

Too much Greek can be a bad thing. It can go to one's head and cause one to start thinking in the same categories that Plato used in his analogy of the cave. This is a sad thing. As Neil Postman has pointed out, the medium is the message. Here the medium happens to be the Greek language and the message is RATIONALISM. Your problem, Andreas, is that you are thinking in logical Greek categories that do not allow for metaphor or simile.

When I said that the joy of anonymity was "like an aorist participle... past tense," I was merely making the point that my joy was _similar_ to an aorist participle, which is almost always in the past tense. To point out that an aorist participle could possibly occur in a tense other than the past is like telling the poet Thomas Campion that his love cannot have lips like cherries because there are such things as yellow cherries. The point is logically correct, but when we think of cherries, the overwhelming association is with _red_ cherries, even though yellow ones exist. Just so, the overwhelming association for aorist is past tense, even though there are counter-examples. Free your mind. Try to look at it like a poetic Hebrew, not a rationalistic Greek.

There is no spoon.

Tre Cool

[98 Degrees]

Josiah:

I think you got nailed. Adreas probably has no problem with metaphors, though perhaps a small one with bad metaphors. So his point was, not that metaphors are bad, but that they should not be bad. Even Hebrews realized there were metaphors that didn't work.

As to your name thing, I was hoping that it would be something that you could justify, and I was giving you an opportunity to do it. A knowledge of your name is not something that I desire to earn, or desire to spend money obtaining. But if you would like to justify your ways, then know that you have that opportunity.

98

[Mr. Schwandt]

TC

98 is right. It is best to take correction for a hasty incorrect phrase than to defend it and in doing so degrade literary thought. Lets keep our arguments and thought more within the discipline of Greek, shall we.

The tense choice for adverbail participles only informs us about aspect and time relative to the main verb as Andreas said (who isn't a member of your class and for whom I have much respect). Aorist adverbial partciples are therefore normally antecedent to their governing verb. I would not call non past aorists a rarity.

This is not necessarily true with attributitive participles where the tense choice may indicate no time, relative or absolute.

[Josiah Helsel]

To all my dear fellow Greekies,

I think this topic needs at least one final clarifying post, so here goes:

(1) To Andreas: When I responded to your post, I assumed that you were a member of our class, and so I adopted a bantering tone in my reply. I hope that you took it in the spirit that it was posted in, and beg your pardon if I offended you in any way.

As for your point, in all seriousness, I completely agree with you that aorist participles can be past tense, and it was a good clarification for all those Greek students who might have taken my simile in a literal sense. I still think that the simile works, since I wasn't claiming that all aorist participles are past tense when I used that particular simile. In this respect, I still hold to my argument in the previous post. But since this is quickly turning into a debate over metaphor and literary thought instead of Greek, I'll leave it at that. If anyone wants to continue the discussion, I would be glad to do so - but on another forum.

(2) To John the Ju-Ju Bean:

I don't have that much to say to John, because he didn't do much in his post except make the broad claim that I was using a 'bad metaphor'. That may be true, but first he is going to have to prove it rather than just say that it is so. To him I quote the proverb, "Let not him who puts his armor on boast like him who takes it off."

As for my name: Naming is important. It says something about the person being named, and shouldn't be taken lightly (as John would like to do).

One final parting shot: I find it odd that though my original post has generated a great deal of debate, none of it has related to my original question about numerals. If one of you has an answer or suggestion, post it by all means and lets get back to Greek.

Tre Cool

[A Vonderluft]