Functional differences between participles and infinitives

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
acguitarplayer
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:16 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Functional differences between participles and infinitives

Post by acguitarplayer »

So I'm good on the differences in form between participles and infinitives. All of that makes sense. Functionally, though, there seems to be a great degree of overlap in their functionality. Infinitives are generally described as verbal nouns, and participles as verbal adjectives. Even with this difference though, participles often function as nouns, given their adjectival qualities. Is there anything significant in how I should understand them functionally, specifically in their areas of overlap?

Thanks in advance!

Adam

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by Qimmik »

Can you be a little more specific about how you think participles and infinitives overlap?

User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 969
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Contact:

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by ἑκηβόλος »

acguitarplayer wrote:Is there anything significant in how I should understand them functionally, specifically in their areas of overlap?
In both cases, one of the things involved with the finite verb (one that is number and person specific) can become the subject of the infinite verb (one that is not number and person specific). For the participle, what relationship it has is indicated by the case of the participle. For the infinitive it is either understood logically or the persons involved are supplied in the accusative for the subject and in either one of the three oblique cases for the object - depending on what the particular verb in the infinitive usually takes as the case of its object.

There are many other things we could discuss if you would like to take it further.
τί δὲ ἀγαθὸν τῇ πομφόλυγι συνεστώσῃ ἢ κακὸν διαλυθείσῃ;

User avatar
acguitarplayer
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:16 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by acguitarplayer »

Qimmik wrote:Can you be a little more specific about how you think participles and infinitives overlap?
The overlap I see is in the fulfilling of noun-type functions. Both participles and infinitives are able to fill in as nouns in some cases, and both are generally not able to stand on their own when fulfilling verbal functions, relying on a primary verb.

ἐκηβόλος - That is helpful. Thanks!

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by jeidsath »

One is (like) a substantive, and the other modifies one.

See Smyth 1968 for how the infinitive is like a substantive. According to 1969, the infinitive was once a dative / locative verbal noun.

However, a participle is described as a "verbal adjective." See Smyth 2041-42. So it always has to be modifying something (often the subject of the action).

Smyth gives μανθάνειν ἥκομεν we have come for learning as an example of the infinitive with a remnant of its dative verbal noun-ishness. But he gives διάγουσι μανθάνοντες they spend their time in learning where the participle modifies a substantive (the unspoken "they" in διάγουσι).
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by mwh »

They don’t exactly overlap, but when used with the neuter singular article they can come pretty close, for the article substantivizes them, makes them function as nouns or noun equivalents. The critical difference is that a participle is always quasi-adjectival, while an infinitive never is, i.e. you can “supply” a noun for a participle, never for an infinitive.

Infinitive:
μανθάνειν ἐστὶ χαλεπόν (no article) It’s hard to learn, To learn is hard.
τὸ μανθάνειν ἐστὶ χαλεπόν Learning is hard.
διὰ τοῦ μανθάνειν γινόμεθα σοφοί Through learning we become clever.
διὰ τοῦ ἃ μὴ οἴδαμεν μανθάνειν γινόμεθα σοφοί. Through learning what we don’t know we become clever.
Etc. etc.

The article with the infinitive is always singular and always neuter. It can be in any case (nom. acc. gen. dat.), just as with a noun.
But infinitives (whether or not accompanied by article) retain full verbal function: they can have subjects, objects, all sorts of adverbial phrases, dependent clauses, you name it.

Participle:
ὁ καλὸς ὤν One who is goodlooking …; ὁ νῦν μὲν καλὸς πρότερον δ’ αἰσχρὸς ὤν The one who is goodlooking now but was ugly before …
τὸ καλὸν ὄν δαπανηρόν ἐστιν That which is goodlooking is expensive.
(as distinct from τὸ καλὸν εἶναι ὠφέλιμόν ἐστιν Being goodlooking is useful.)

The article with a participle can be any gender, number or case, in agreement with the participle.
τὰ ὠφέλιμα ὄντα Things that are useful …
τιμῶμεν τοὺς διδάσκοντας Let’s respect those who teach.
etc.etc.

Like infinitives, participles too retain verbal function: ἡ χθὲς ἐν τῷ διδασκαλείῳ τὰ τῆς ζωῆς ἀπόρρητα τοὺς παῖδας τολμηρῶς διδάξασα αὐτίκα ἀπέθανεν The woman who yesterday in school brashly taught the boys the mysteries of life dropped dead on the spot.

I don't know if this helps.

Sinister Petrus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 11:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by Sinister Petrus »

From a syntactician's perspective, I wonder if the difference isn't where the VP's "subject" is generated or how the VP hangs in the styntax tree. What I mean is that the participle is adjunct to the NP and the infinitive is not adjunct to an NP. The standard view is that the NP serving as subject of the infinitive's VP is generated within the VP, which is why infinitives wind up with accusative subjects (at least when the subject of the infinitive and the finite verb are different). For participles, the subject generated in the VP has a landing place in the NP (or DP when there's no noun).

But I've not read any papers on the subject, so take that with a large pinch of salt.

What I struggle with is why one situation takes a participle and another takes an infinitive, but that could just be idiomatic to the language and needs to be learned (more or less) on a case by case basis.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Functional differences between participles and infinitiv

Post by mwh »

Some of my best friends are syntacticians, and I’m happy to leave it to them to pronounce on just where the subject of the infinitive is generated in such sentences as ειπον σε σοφον ειναι or το σε σοφον ειναι αναμφισβητητον εστιν, or even whether the σε is rightly so classified. It is at least clear that σε could not be in any other case than accusative.

My post was trying to address in empirical terms the question of participles “function[ing] as nouns” and the perceived functional “overlap” between pples and infins. “in fulfilling noun-type functions.”
For further clarity I could have added e.g.
το συνβαν (aor.pple) “the (past) event,” “the outcome” (lit. the having happened [thing])
τα γενησομενα (fut.pple.) “the future”
το συμβαινειν ου ταυτο σημαινει τω γιγνεσθαι, “συμβαινειν doesn’t mean the same as γιγνεσθαι.”

“What I struggle with is why one situation takes a participle and another takes an infinitive.”
Perhaps you have in mind constructions such as
εφην σε σοφον ειναι (inf.) vs.
ορω σε σοφον οντα (pple),
both conventionally classified as “indirect statement.” In the latter construction (favored by “verbs of knowing and perceiving”) I suppose the sense is more properly “I see you as clever,” “I see you as being a clever person,” σοφον οντα being predicative in agreement with the DO σε.
A true indirect statement would be ορω οτι (συ) σοφος ει.

Post Reply