4 Reasons Why Dr. Darryl Burling is WRONG (Response to his video)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- I this video I response to Dr. Burling's view on how Greek verbs should be learned. I offer an alternative opinion proving that most Greek grammar textbook indeed teach verbs right.
GREEK PARADIGM CHART: greekforall.co...
GREEK POSTER: greekforall.co...
// MY RESOURCES FOR LEARNING BIBLICAL GREEK:
VIDEO COURSE: courses.greekf...
VOCABULARY APP: greekforall.co...
iTunes: itunes.apple.c...
Android: play.google.co...
TEXTBOOK: greekforall.co...
ANSWER KEYS: greekforall.co...
// TECHNOLOGY I USE:
My Drawing Tablet:amzn.to/2yLRBf1
My Microphone amzn.to/2YgUfCH
My Camera amzn.to/3j0JVbH
My Camera microphone amzn.to/3ceLu4f
My GoPro: amzn.to/37c9xvn
My Greek New Testament (UBS 4/5): amzn.to/2SvedY9
NA27/28 Greek New Testament: amzn.to/2SsgB1Z
// MY TRUSTED FRIENDS:
Accordance Bible Software: accordancebibl...
// FOLLOW ME:
Instagram: / greekforall
Facebook: / greekforall
Website: greekforall.com
YOUR OPINION: The Aorist or the Present should be studied first? Why?
Thinking about which verb forms are attested in the literature, I know some present's aren't attested in the literature, but I bet there are aorists also not attested in the literature. I can't help but wonder which form is more common in the overall corpus of koine greek. Using the present tense form does hide the complexity of liquid verbs from students until later on, which is probably a good thing.
Hey Stan, you officially win the award for the first video in response to one of my videos! Thanks for the discussion! A couple of clarifying points.
First I am not advocating for starting with the Aorist form, I think doing so would be too difficult at this point, and I myself start with the present tense. However, my argument is more idealistic: that by starting with the present first we've collectively started with the wrong form (back hundreds of years ago when the modern way of teaching Greek was under construction).
I don't expect dictionaries and lexicons to change, but again, what I'm saying is that the lexicons use the present tense as the lexical form by convention, not because it is right. In theory, the simplest form of the verb should be the lexical form. Similarly, the cornerstone paradigm also starts with the present tense because we teach the present tense first. Shouldn't the paradigm start with the root? From there we can develop the morphology from the root. Starting from the present tense starts with a morphological form, which is inherently more complicated.
Regardless, I appreciate your work and the time you've taken to develop this response - and especially pointing out that Decker starts with the present - that is an oversight on my part!
I don't think we really disagree in practice... I'm just making an idealistic argument, and I'm glad it stirred some to think a little about this subject! 😉
Yes Darryl, it’s all good on my end. Thanks for the award. 😁👍 I totally agree that in practice we are on the same page (you made it clear). I couldn’t imagine myself making a video on this topic but we are RUclipsrs and I totally understand how your video came to life. So I thought it was an opportunity to engage and make things interesting.
I think we could make some videos together at some point.
Thanks for doing what you do. Your ministry is appreciated.
@@GreekForAll It is funny. I asked you, Stan and Darryl to read any chapter of your choice in Greek. It is interesting to me how can a person can have a PhD in Greek and cannot read one chapter. Image, a foreigner having a PhD in English and they cannot read one chapter in English.
It is funny. I asked you, Darryl and now Stan to read any chapter of your choice in Greek. It is interesting to me how can a person can have a PhD in Greek and cannot read one chapter. Image, a foreigner having a PhD in English and they cannot read one chapter in English.
@@ak1986 Aleksey, we are busy people with plans, goals, and deadlines. We cannot physically entertain any(and every) idea which appears on the horizon.
If we chase all the “distractions” around us we will never move forward. When one has a mission, he must move forward. Even Jesus didn’t entertain every request people asked him because He was on the mission.
FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! lol
The best point made, in either video, is your fourth point, that the present-active-indicative can be used as the cornerstone of the paradigms. Unless someone has a better case to make, I have to agree with you.
Thanks for the feedback! I am glad my reasoning makes sense.
Calling it the cornerstone seems to evidence ignorance of Greek morphology
@@lufknuht5960 It's been awhile since I watched this video. If my comment was accurate to the video, then he said it can be used as the cornerstone, and the topic is about what is the best way to teach. I'm not sure whether or not your response is in keeping with the context of his claim. He explained his reasoning while speaking accurately about the morphology, so I don't know where you get the idea that his reasoning indicates ignorance of the morphology.
Maybe I'm missing something, and I just need your reasoning to be explained, or maybe I have pointed out something which you had overlooked.
This is the way a difference of opinion should be discussed online without rancor or character assassination. SUBSCRIBED.
I think Greek Scholards need a Council cause they all teach something different
Thank you Stan. I think a respectful debate is helpful. You have helped me a lot. Daryl also has been a help as well so I thank God for you both.
We all edify each other until we all come to the fullness of Christ.
Here i may sound hypocrite but I support both views equally since I studied sanskrit before ancient greek/Koine Greek.
I have a different opinion
I would teach to be and to have before going to any other verb form where I would teach them both aorist and present form for them.
along with ill rather teach the verb system/logic. for example a lot of exceptions cold be explained using sanskrit logic like how Baínō has a N in the middle since sanskrit grammars talk about a nasal present infix in present tense).
second rather learnt using aspect approach over tense approach cause it made sense to me (one biggest difference between sanskrit and ancient greek in terms of past tense is perfect tense acts as an inferential/renerrative tense(aorist of narration) and pluperfect as an infernetial and renerative (imperfect of narration)
teaching aorist helps in learning many other forms infact since we have classes of aorist
1. sigmatic aorist
2. root aorist
3. reduplicative aorist
4. Strong aorist(which go under guṇatvas) - basically pheugō ---> éphugōn eu --> u as u stated lūō as the stem where its lab it can be explained using gunation which would be helpful(it may sound a lot but its due to sanskrit)
reduplicative aorist helps in teaching perfect form more over the only difference is from sigmatic aorist and perfect is the -s- over a -k-
then it would help in teaching future form where we use the sigmatic future.
then aorist form would help to pave the way for imperfect form since of the é- (á- in sanskrti) prefix.
one change we can do it rather than having present form is using the root form and present form which may be easier
also rather than introducing them together we can break it into sigmatic aorist, root aorist reduplication aorist and string aorist where sigmatic shall be taught before.
how sanskrit it taught
the dictionary form is the gunationed root like the word for to be is bhū/bhuh² which goes under gunation and becomes bhāv(vedic)/bhav(classical) which us like how phu became pheu in present.
then we give other forms comes in.
after exam I can teach the aorist paradime
@@yashagarwal8741 very interesting approach. The more languages we know, the more parallels we can see. This allows us to create new systems based on our experience and expertise. Thanks for sharing.
@@GreekForAll sir I have thought of an approach .
u can teach gunation and for pronounciation u can stick to Lucian pronounciation it would be helpful
teaching aorist may sound hard but we can break it down into 4/5 forms and with each aorist.
since sanskrit is a very archaic indo European language you may check vedic sanskrit grammar it may be helpful in teaching grammar.
like the 5 case apprach
you can give nomative form along with root form how
gune has an -k- added or how
ónoma has an ta added
I wish the Bible would never translated to other languages so everyone would have to learn Greek since our childhood
I don’t see any compelling reason to change way verbs are taught. I ordered your verb chart and received it today. Sadly, the mailman folded it in half to put it in mailbox so now I have a damaged chart. You may want to consider protecting the chart in the mail with a heavier cardboard stock on one or both slides of it so it can’t be folded.
Thanks for letting me know. I haven’t thought about it.
I will say that this is the first time I’ve seen a Biblical Greek verbal instruction method controversy on RUclips. 😂
Haha 🤣 happy to pioneer new movements.
I think that if nothing else it has sparked a discussion in the best way to teach things. Something always worth considering. I find it all too true that teaching the present as the base from which other tense forms are built is problematic when it is the tense form with a stem most unlike the verbal root. It is also true that the present requires the most explanation as to the changes seen when the technical personal endings combine with the connecting vowel. Should we come clean with these problems from the start or deal with them when we come to teaching the other tense forms? Unfortunately the latter can result in the mistaken belief than the aorist stem is altered from the present e.g. βαλλω looses a λ to form the aorist whereas it is the present that gains a doubling of the consonant. Should we take the easier approach of teaching combined endings for the present at the risk of causing confusion later and upset truth of their being only four sets of indicative endings? Perhaps like maths we could teach first that 5-6 you can’t do, then later introduce negative numbers then after teaching that you can’t find the square root of a negative number introduce i and unreal numbers. That is teach progressive levels of truth when the student is ready. Perhaps we should teach the simplest form first but make it clear that this is an oversimplification and that more detail will follow. Regarding lexicons, they used to have Greek verbs listed as infinitives back in the 19th century. I’m not sure when they swapped to present or what the rationale was but a change has been wrought before. What would help is if lexicons included the verbal root. My Danker’s concise does not do this, does BDAG? Mounce is very hot on roots and technically correct endings which I find very helpful. I liked your explanation of the sensible order to teach verbs Stan, adding one element at a time. Present, then add augment for the imperfect, then tense formative for the future then both for the aorist. Of course then endings go back and forth from primary to secondary in this order. Perhaps if we take ourselves out of the constraints of teaching/learning to a fixed time schedule, the whole thing becomes simpler in that we can taylor our teaching to the needs of the students and revisit the present in the light of what we learn about the aorist.
Whoa, Neil, you really expounded on the pedagogical approaches. I even got a few ideas which I didn’t think about. Definitely lots of food for thought. Thanks for being here. Your input is appreciated. We all learn from each other.
@@GreekForAll Cheers Stan.
To me (who knows just enough to be dangerous), learning present tense first makes sense because the room for interpretation is not as great as in the aorist. In English we do not have a clear equivalence to the ways Aorist can be interpreted/understood since it's not simply a "past" tense verb, even though it's usually translated that way in our bibles. Present tense is more direct and easier for someone new to biblical Greek to grasp and build confidence in as they learn.
I'm always looking at the Greek and picking apart the different English translations that may have been rendered in such a way as to promote a theological agenda. I don't want to sound negative or claim to be some Greek expert, far from it, but the days where I accept everything I read regarding translations are long gone. That's why I studied Greek in the first place, to verify/revise/question the English translations.
Keep up the good work, Stan.
Thanks for sharing your story. Much appreciated.
In the appendix to Decker's book he has "Morphology Catalog of Common Koine Verbs". Decker uses the Present tense form to to make the catalog and lists the other tense forms afterwards. Maybe Darryl picked up the wrong book. I watched that video last night and found it interesting but as you said Darryl seemed to backstep a little in the video. I'll have to rewatch his video and see what the other book is and if I missed something. Thanks for the video
Thanks for clarifying on the Decker’s appendix. It would be great if you are able to check the other book (of course if it’s available).
You are right. Killed it!
Glad it was helpful.
Hey, that's the book that I have. Is it going to be a problem?
Also, what does this word mean that you keep using: aorist?
Aorist is equal to simple past ( worked, played, etc). A completed action in the past.
Decker’s book should be fine. I read some chapters, they are good. But I haven’t reviewed the entire book.
I, too, once reacted to one of Darryl Burling’s videos where he said that there’s no such thing as mistranslations. He claimed that all bible translations are good. I pointed out that there are some misleading translations that are based on the translator’s *theological bias,* which are not faithful to the original Greek text. For example, there are inaccurate translations of Acts 1:11, such as the NIV, NLT, BSB, CEV, GNT, ISV, AMP, GW, NET Bible, NHEB, & WEB. All these Bible versions mistranslate the verse as if Jesus “will come back” or “will return.” However, the original Greek uses a word (ἐλεύσεται) that does not imply a “coming back” or a “return.” It simply indicates *one* single coming. Thus, this mistranslation changes the theological implications of the New Testament. The Greek text uses the word ἐλεύσεται, which simply means “will come”! So, finally Darryl agreed with me but said, who cares as long as they come to Christ. I found that to be an inappropriate response, unworthy of a scholar. We obviously should care if people butcher the text!
Every translation is an interpretation and reflects translators understanding and theology to some degree. That’s why we learn original languages to study God’s word directly.
Hey Eli, I hope I didn't leave you with the impression that translation was not important. However, we generally don't depend on a single verse for any significant theological point, and perhaps that was where I was going. Please forgive me if I spoke wrongly.
@@bma Hey Darryl, I have a lot of respect for you, and I think you’re doing a wonderful job educating us about Biblical Greek. I’m sure you were trying to say that different translations have different purposes and intentions in targeting different audiences with different levels of education & understanding, so, in that sense, they should not be criticized harshly. I get it. That’s a valid point. But I was specifically referring to those of us who are fluent in koine and need faithful translations rather than paraphrases or theological interpretations. So it was probably a miscommunication (talking past each). I still think you’re great. Keep up the good work!
--Eli
@@elikittim7971 Thanks Eli. 👍
IMHO: The present tense is not the "cornerstone." And it is not so simple. It is an error to consider it the starting point & other tenses derived from it as variations on present tense. Emphasize morphs (erroneously called "morphemes") more than paradigms. There are 4 indicators of present stem: 1) addition of o/e to the root before the pronominal endings, 2) reduplication with iota, & 3) present tense infixes, 4) absence of augment. They might have spoken of 1st Present & 2nd Present (like 1st Aorist & 2nd Aorist). Luo verbs use o/e suffix for present markers. The 3 major -mi verbs could be called 2nd Present: They do not use o/e suffix, but employ reduplication with iota to indicate present stem. Then there are infixed present tense verbs that use an infix to indicate present tense, including ablaut, -nasal infix, geminated lambda (ll), -an, & (i)sk. Example: lambano: the m & the an are present tense infixes. Take gi(g)nosko: The gi is present tense reduplication with iota, & the sk is an inchoative present infix. To ignore the present tense morphology and pretend that the present tense is the base form cornerstone from which the others are derived, is a blunder. I don't think would hurt anything to start with aorist in learning the language. Maybe one should start with the general morphology of Greek: demonstrate how all the tenses are made without memorizing any paradigms in first lesson. Teach basic morphs (sa Aorist active & middle, theta eta for aorist passive, se/so future active & middle, ka for perfect active, # for perfect passive; augment, reduplication; etc.).
Great post and a wealth of knowledge. I do agree about the morphemes and their importance and this is what I generally teach.
However, as you yourself can see your answer is too technical. It would demoralize the beginning Greek students. What I do is making things simple. I offer shortcuts. Students do not need to know all this in the 2nd lesson. At the end of the day all students want is to be able to recognize the form and translate it properly. And PAI is the simplest form from which it’s easy to move to any other form.
Similarly in semantics, we don’t need to stress etymology but rather the current meaning of the word. It doesn’t matter where it came from or what it meant originally. Same here, one can easily “kill” students with all the morphological formations of the past. What matters is how it looks now, recognizable morphemes, and translation.
Those who are interested can go deeper on their own. PAI is the cornerstone from pedagogical simplicity. Experience.
Question. In John 3:36 is “believing” speaking of a one time faith? Or a ongoing continuous faith?
It literally says “ the one who believes” = “a believer”. So “ the believer has life eternal.” Which means that if someone stopped believing then he is no longer a believer and thus does not have the life anymore.
@@GreekForAll thank you!! My Greek is very sophomoric. Need to study more.
I ran into some free grace proponents, who use verses like this to state as long as you ever believer then it doesn’t matter if you become apostate that you still possess eternal life.
@@Kdubtru I see. I think Paul makes it clear (I think in Hebrews) about those who fall away from faith that there is no more sacrifice for sin for them (that is if they stopped believing, Jesus’s sacrifice can’t do much for them).
Being involved in the spoken, conversational method of teaching Koine Greek (like any language), introducing early the Aorist Imperatives (command forms) introduces the Aorist stem.
This is a great segway to introduce
Aorist infinitive
Aorist indicative past verbs
...but still agree start with Present Tense, Indicative mood, Active voice verbs.
Soon after, add the Present tense infinitive and form lots of sentences.
There's some thoughts.
Appreciate you, my brother from another mother.
Very interesting input. Thanks.
"Greek for all " host.........The Man........The Myth.........The Legend !!!
You made my day!
Fantastic response Stan.
@@nyexpato9563 thanks!
More great content!
Happy to serve. 🙏😉
The other thing to remember is that based on the extensive work that has been done on "Order of acquisition" in most languages learners acquire first the present forms->articles->imperfect->past.
Very interesting. Never compared it before but I think it’s correct.
Thanks for your analysis. It was kind and clear and I think that Dr. Burling would agree with much of what you say. I think that Dr. Burling is making an argument for the "best possible world Greek" and you are recognizing the practical problems in a world that is not the "best possible." In my own practice, I encourage students to compare all verbs to their lexical forms. This simplifies the process and allows students to begin with simple questions like "does the form have an augment." This allows them to begin narrowing down the choices. I compare it to a murder investigation; by looking at the crime scene and narrowing down the suspects. It seems to help my students but your mileage may vary. 😀
I posted a video response to this response for fun 😊
Great overview. It was fun to watch.
I'm glad you responded - I also watch his videos and I like him too, I also questioned his argument and it sounded like it would complicate things. I was really unsettled by it - thanks Stan.
Thank. I am glad to hear that I wasn’t the only one.
Nice, some RUclips controversy to spice things up a bit. 😀 The discussion is valuable though, questioning everything is helpful.
Haha 🤣 Who knew that the primacy of Greek verb tenses can become the most exciting topic of the era! LOL
He did a greate job.
Hi Stan! At what email can I contact you?
I wrote at your previous comment: stan @ Greekforall.com (all together)
Thanks, I really like your videos.
Keep it the way it is. Makes more sense.
Awesome.
I'm still new to Greek but I agree with all the points of argument presented by Stan..always start with the simple forms first..Thank you Stan for being a great Greek Coach..
Happy to be of service. 😁
But it is a fallacy to think that present is "simple form."
You asked. I have taught elemental pre-grammar pre-Seminary Koine Greek (my COVID-version video class is on RUclips) to complete novices. I discovered after teaching it with five test classes over the years that the Present Active Indicative makes learning all the REGULAR verb declensions much easier. My methodology focuses on roots/stems for helping novices at least get the drift of the meaning of words and prepares them to have a fighting chance with Seminary-level Greek. Knowing the root/stem is crucial. Then, adding past-tense prefix and -sa- and -ka- modifiers in a later week turns on the mental light bulb for novices. While it is true the aorist tense has high frequency, it does not enable the novice student to see the stem as easily as Present Active Indicative. Every Greek student will eventually learn the breadth of verbs, but I would err on the breaking out the PIA stems as the first step. Yes, it was how Seminary taught me, but I think it was the correct move for novices.
Thanks for sharing your expertise and experience. I am with you here.
Stan, you are the best. I just started the last (#25) lesson in your Greek for All teaching series. I am reading the Bible in Greek! Thank you! Yes, the Present Active Indicative is the best way to start to learn the verb paradigms. Learn Greek, Love God.
Thank you for the affirmation. I am excited to hear about your successes. Praise God. You did a great job. Well done!
You are correct, Stan. When learning any language, you lay a foundation and add to it, build on it moving to the more difficult parts of it adding to it. Otherwise, you will get lost and probably quit because it will become so confusing.
Thanks 🙏
I an an elderly person, and finding the Greek not that easy to learn. We all know the present and can identify with the present, so for me I support the present tense. Thanks for your commitment Stan
Thank you 🙏
Interesting!
The only reason I’m finding it impossible to learn Greek is because of all the categories with crazy names that require more crazy words to explain them… such as aorist: what the heck is that? You never told us. Present: that means right now. Past: that means what’s already gone. Future, etc. etc. but aorist? No idea.
I have several charts with all the strange categories but I just can’t understand the categories: what does indicative mean? Or why do we have three declensions? What the heck is a participle, or athematic, or indicative…or liquid indicative?
I think I have grammatical dyslexia, because try as I might, these mean nothing to me. Nothing sticks because their definitions are just as muddy as the name of it. Why can we just use understandable words to describe each category? Why is the Subject the Nominative? What the heck is nominative? Why is the Object always in an argument about whose fault it is? Accusative? Really? Are we just trying to make this hard?
Every science has certain terminology including languages. Usually they are well explained in every textbook. It is just part of any learning. To change technical terms is vertically impossible because historically they have been used for centuries. Nevertheless, languages are flexible and often evolving so some terms get simplified over time.
For comparison, in Russian we have 3 grammatical times while in English there are 12. So, I know all about complications.
@@GreekForAll oh I wasn’t suggesting YOU change it for me, I was just asking WHY. Is aorist a simple word like past or present? I don’t think so. I’ve never heard of it. I can’t even come up with any possible root that sounds like anything to help. It’s just an invented word to fill a space it seems like to me. Then when I look them up I have no idea what the explanatory words mean either! Lol. I have honestly come to believe that I must have linguistic dyslexia. I have no idea why I can figure this stuff out. I fail English for the same reason, yet I can write and speak it fluently as my native tongue. I was hoping to learn Greek the same way, but all teachers spend all their time referencing these strange words of category. If you don’t know the category word you can’t learn the language. Sigh. I still like trying though and appreciate your lessons.
@@Dr.Reason all languages somewhat share some terms while others are different. When we learn a new language we learn it in comparison to our mother tongue so students need to know their native tongue grammar.
Aorist is equivalent to simple past in English (the -ed verbs). Ex: worked, ate, studied.
Great work. Agree totally.
Appreciated.
I don't agree with anyone who makes money putting other peopkle down.
Darryl and I discussed this, so he knows that the response video was coming. I don’t think I “put him down” with my words as I tried to choose my words carefully.
As for the video title, it simply mimics his title.
@@GreekForAllIt was a polite and courteous response in the scholarly tradition.