This article discusses the use of proximal deictic expressions to designate distal entities, focusing on the use of the present tense to designate past events. Cognitive approaches to this issue assume that such usages presuppose a special conceptual construal, in which the spatio-temporal distance between the ground and the designated event space is bridged in some way. In this paper, I argue that there are two distinct ways in which this may be accomplished. One is through mentally displacing the ground (...) to the distal space, so that the designated events become proximal in relation to this alternative ground. The other involves bringing the distal space into the ground in the form of a representation. I describe the distinctive characteristics of the two scenarios, showing both where they converge and at what point the difference becomes relevant for linguistic analysis. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Philologus Jahrgang: 160 Heft: 2 Seiten: 217-250.

This article investigates the semantics and pragmatics of the ‘hortative’ aorist and the ‘tragic’ or ‘performative’ aorist. Lloyd argued in 1999 that the tragic aorist is a more polite alternative for the corresponding present. Recently, he has extended this view to the hortative aorist, suggesting that, for example, τί οὐκ ἐκαλέσαμεν; is a polite alternative for τί οὐ καλοῦμεν; Lloyd argues that the politeness value of the aorist derives from its being a past tense, comparing the so-called ‘attitudinal’ past. The (...) present article, building on work by Colvin, Bary and Nijk, argues instead that the semantic value of the aorist is purely aspectual in these cases: the hortative and tragic aorists serve to construe the designated event as bounded, while the corresponding present forms serve to construe the designated event as unbounded. An extensive discussion of the evidence for the hortative aorist and present is presented, as well as a case study concerning the aspectual behaviour of the verb ὄμνυμι. Moreover, I argue that the proposed semantic account of the hortative and tragic aorists in terms of aspect can be unified with Lloyd's pragmatic account in terms of politeness: the difference in tone between the present and the aorist can be derived from their respective aspectual values, rather than from their temporal values. (shrink)

The aim of this article is both to make a contribution towards a fuller understanding of the use of the perfect in Classical Greek, and to show how this understanding can yield new insights into how a speaker uses language to adapt his presentation of past events to his present rhetorical concerns. First, the semantic value of the perfect and its different basic uses are described. Second, four principles that help accounting for the variation between the perfect and aorist are (...) outlined. Third, a number of typical uses of the perfect in Attic forensic oratory are distinguished. Finally, a textual analysis of De Corona 57-60, 79-121 is given in order to show how Demosthenes uses the perfect to accomplish his rhetorical ends. (shrink)