View source for Aorist

{{short description|Verb form that usually expresses perfective aspect and refers to past events}}
{{about|the aorists of various languages|the Greek aorist|Aorist (Ancient Greek)}}
'''Aorist'''{{efn|{{IPAc-en|ˈ|eɪ|ə|r|ᵻ|s|t}} {{respell|AY|ər|ist}}, {{IPAc-en|ˈ|ɛər|-}} {{respell|AIR|-}}<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/aorist |title=AORIST definition and meaning |website=[[Collins Online Dictionary]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230221123908/https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/aorist |archive-date=21 Feb 2023 |url-status=live |access-date=29 July 2025}}</ref>}} ([[list of glossing abbreviations|abbreviated]] '''{{sc|aor}}''') [[verb]] forms usually express [[perfective aspect]] and refer to [[past tense|past events]], similar to a [[preterite]]. [[Ancient Greek]] grammar had the aorist form, and the grammars of other [[Indo-European languages]] and languages influenced by the Indo-European grammatical tradition, such as [[Middle Persian]], [[Sanskrit]], [[Armenian language|Armenian]], the [[South Slavic languages]], [[Georgian language|Georgian]], [[Pontic Greek]], and [[Pashto language|Pashto]], also have forms referred to as aorist.

The word comes from [[Ancient Greek]] {{wikt-lang|grc|ἀόριστος}} ({{Transliteration|grc|aóristos}} {{gloss|indefinite}}),<ref>{{LSJ|a)o/ristos|ἀόριστος|ref}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author1= Liddell, Henry George |author1-link= Henry George Liddell |author2= Scott, Robert |author2-link= Robert Scott (philologist) |title= A Greek - English Lexicon |place= Oxford |publisher= Clarendon Press |year= 1992 |url= https://archive.org/details/greekenglishlexi0000lidd_y0v2/page/n5/mode/2up |page=[https://archive.org/details/greekenglishlexi0000lidd_y0v2/page/n223/mode/2up?view=theater 173] |isbn= 978-0-19-864214-5 |url-access= registration |via= [[Internet Archive]]}}</ref> as the aorist was the [[markedness|unmarked]] (default) form of the verb, and thus did not have the implications of the [[imperfective aspect]], which referred to an ongoing or repeated situation, or the [[perfect (grammar)|perfect]], which referred to a situation with a continuing relevance; instead it described an action "pure and simple".<ref name="Beetham362">{{cite book |first=Frank |last=Beetham |title=Learning Greek with Plato |publisher=Bristol Phoenix Press |year=2007 |page=362 |isbn=978-1-904675-56-3 }} This does not mean, however, that the aorist was aspectually neutral, see {{cite book |first=Maria |last=Napoli |year=2006 |title=Aspect and Actionality in Homeric Greek |location=Milano |publisher=FrancoAngeli |isbn=88-464-7836-3 |page=67 }}</ref>

Because the aorist was the unmarked aspect in Ancient Greek, the term is sometimes applied to unmarked verb forms in other languages, such as the [[habitual aspect]] in [[Turkish language|Turkish]].<ref name="Geoffrey Lewis 2000">{{cite book |first=Geoffrey |last=Lewis |title=Turkish Grammar |edition=2nd |year=2000 |location=Oxford |isbn=0-19-870036-9 }}</ref>

==Indo-European languages==

===Proto-Indo-European===
In [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]], the aorist appears to have originated as a series of verb forms expressing [[lexical aspect|manner of action]].<ref name="MM">
Michael Meier-Brügger, Matthias Fritz, Manfred Mayrhofer, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=49xq3UlKWckC&pg=PA173 Indo-European Linguistics]'', Walter de Gruyter, 2003, {{ISBN|3-11-017433-2}}, pp. 173–176.</ref> Proto-Indo-European had a three-way aspectual opposition, traditionally called "present", "aorist", and "perfect", which are thought to have been, respectively, [[imperfective aspect|imperfective]], [[perfective aspect|perfective]], and [[stative verb|stative]] (resultant state) aspects. By the time of Classical Greek, this system was maintained largely in independent instances of the non-indicative moods and in the nonfinite forms.  But in the indicative, and in dependent clauses with the [[subjunctive]] and [[optative]], the aspects took on temporal significance.  In this manner, the aorist was often used as an unmarked past tense, and the perfect came to develop a [[resultative]] use,<ref>{{cite book |last=Teffeteller |year=2006 |chapter=Ancient Greek |title=Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics |edition=2nd |isbn=0-08-044299-4 }}</ref> which is why the term [[perfect (grammar)|perfect]] is used for this meaning in modern languages.

Other Indo-European languages lost the aorist entirely. In the development of Latin, for example, the aorist merged with the perfect.<ref>{{cite book |first=L. R. |last=Palmer |author-link=Leonard Robert Palmer |title=The Latin Language |publisher=University of Oklahoma Press |url= https://archive.org/details/latinlanguage0000palm_o4d7/page/n3/mode/2up?view=theater |place= Norman and London |year=1988 |page=[https://archive.org/details/latinlanguage0000palm_o4d7/page/8/mode/2up?view=theater 9]|isbn=0-8061-2136-X }}</ref> The [[preterite]]s (past perfectives) of the Romance languages, which are sometimes called "aorist", are an independent development.

===Greek===
{{Main|Aorist (Ancient Greek)}}
In [[Greek language|Ancient Greek]], the  [[indicative mood|indicative]]  aorist is one of the two main forms used in telling a story; it is used for undivided events, such as the individual steps in a continuous process (narrative aorist); it is also used for events that took place before the story itself (past-within-past). The  aorist indicative is also used to express things that happen in general, without asserting a time (the "[[Gnomic aspect|gnomic]] aorist").  It can also be used of present and future<ref>Herbert Weir Smyth, ''Greek Grammar'', sect. 1934, citing Euripides, ''Alcestis'', 386 "I am destroyed (aorist indicative) if you will leave me".</ref> events; the aorist also has several specialized senses meaning present action.

Non-indicative forms of the aorist (subjunctives, optatives, imperatives, infinitives) are usually purely aspectual, with certain exceptions including [[indirect speech]] constructions and the use of optative as part of the [[Sequence of tenses#Greek|sequence of tenses]] in dependent clauses.  There are aorist infinitives and imperatives that do not imply temporality at all.  For example, the [[Lord's Prayer]] in Matthew 6:11 uses the aorist imperative in "'''Give''' ({{lang|grc-x-biblical|δός}} {{Transliteration|grc|dós}}) us ''this day'' our daily bread",<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt%206:11&version=KJV Matthew 6:11, KJV]. In Greek: {{lang|grc-x-biblical|Τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον}}.</ref> in contrast to the analogous passage in Luke 11:3, which uses the [[imperfective]] aspect, implying repetition, with "'''Give''' ({{lang|grc-x-biblical|δίδου}} {{Transliteration|grc|dídou}}, present imperative) us ''day by day'' our daily bread."<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2011:3&version=KJV Luke 11:3, KJV]. In Greek: {{lang|grc-x-biblical|τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ' ἡμέραν}}.</ref>

An example of how the aorist tense contrasts with the imperfect in describing the past occurs in [[Xenophon]]'s ''[[Anabasis (Xenophon)|Anabasis]]'', when the Persian aristocrat Orontas is executed: "and those who '''had been previously in the habit of bowing''' ({{lang|grc|προσεκύνουν}} {{Transliteration|grc|prosekúnoun}}, imperfect) to him, '''bowed''' ({{lang|grc|προσεκύνησαν}} {{Transliteration|grc|prosekúnēsan}}, aorist) to him even then."<ref>F. Kinchin Smith and T.W. Melluish, ''Teach Yourself Greek'', Hodder and Stoughton, 1968, p. 94.</ref>  Here the imperfect refers to a past habitual or repeated act, and the aorist to a single one.

There is disagreement as to which functions of the Greek aorist are inherent within it. Some of the disagreement applies to the history of the development of the various functions and forms. Most grammarians differentiate the aorist indicative from the non-indicative aorists. Many authors hold that the aorist tends to be about the past because it is perfective, and perfectives tend to describe completed actions;<ref>Egbert Bakker, 1997, ''Grammar as Interpretation: Greek literature in its linguistic contexts'', p 21; <br>
Constantine Campbell, 2007, ''Verbal Aspect, the Indicative Mood, and Narrative: Soundings in the Greek of the New Testament'', chapter 4; <br>
Donald Mastronarde, 1993, ''Introduction to Attic Greek''; <br>
[[Buist M. Fanning]], 1990, ''Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek'', p 67; <br>
Heerak Kim, 2008, ''Intricately Connected: Biblical Studies, Intertextuality, and Literary Genre''; <br>
Maria Napoli, 2006, ''Aspect and Actionality in Homeric Greek''; Brook Pearson, 2001, ''Corresponding Sense: Paul, Dialectic, and Gadamer'', p 75; <br>
Stanley Porter, 1992, ''Idioms of the Greek New Testament''; <br>
A.T. Robertson, 1934, ''A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research''; <br>
Max Zerwick, 1963, ''Biblical Greek''.</ref> others that the aorist indicative and to some extent the participle is essentially a mixture of [[Perfective past|past tense and perfective aspect]].<ref>Martin Haspelmath, ed., 2001, ''Typologie des langues et les universaux linguistiques'', 1:779; <br>Roger Woodward, "Attic Greek", in ''The Ancient Languages of Europe'', p 33; <br>see also discussion in Stanley Porter, 1992, ''Idioms of the Greek New Testament'', p 38</ref>

==== Hermeneutic implications ====
Because the aorist was not maintained in either Latin or the Germanic languages, there have long been difficulties in translating the Greek [[New Testament]] into Western languages. The aorist has often been interpreted as making a strong statement about the aspect or even the time of an event, when, in fact, due to its being the [[markedness|unmarked]] (default) form of the Greek verb, such implications are often left to context. Thus, within New Testament [[hermeneutics]], it is considered an [[exegesis|exegetical]] [[fallacy]] to attach undue significance to uses of the aorist.<ref name="ExFal"/> Although one may draw specific implications from an author's use of the imperfective or perfect, no such conclusions can, in general, be drawn from the use of the aorist, which may refer to an action "without specifying whether the action is unique, repeated, ingressive, instantaneous, past, or accomplished."<ref name="ExFal">[[D. A. Carson]], ''Exegetical Fallacies'', Baker Book House, 1984, {{ISBN|0-8010-2499-4}}, p. 70.</ref> In particular, the aorist does not imply a "once-for-all" action, as it has commonly been misinterpreted, although it frequently refers to a simple, non-repeated action.<ref name="GRO">[[Grant R. Osborne]], ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=QkrBPCoqn3wC&pg=PA69 The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation]'', 2nd ed., InterVarsity Press, 2006, {{ISBN|0-8308-2826-5}}, p. 69.</ref>

===Sanskrit===
{{Main|Sanskrit verbs#Aorist system}}
Although quite common in older Sanskrit, the aorist is comparatively infrequent in much of classical Sanskrit, occurring, for example, 66 times in the first book of the [[Ramayana|Rāmāyaṇa]], 8 times in the [[Hitopadesha|Hitopadeśa]], 6 times in the [[Bhagavad Gita|Bhagavad-Gītā]], and 6 times in the story of [[Shakuntala|Śakuntalā]] in the [[Mahabharata|Mahābhārata]].<ref name="Whitney11"/>

In the later language, the aorist indicative had the value of a [[preterite]],{{Clarify|date=September 2010}} while in the older language it was closer in sense to the perfect.<ref name="Whitney11"/> The aorist was also used with the ancient [[injunctive mood]], particularly in prohibitions.<ref>T. Burrow, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=cWDhKTj1SBYC&pg=PA299 The Sanskrit Language]'', Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2001, {{ISBN|81-208-1767-2}}, p. 299.</ref>

===Slavic languages===
{{Further|Bulgarian verbs#Past aorist.(aoristus)|Macedonian grammar#Aorist|l1=Past Aorist (Aoristus) in Bulgarian verbs|l2=Verbs in Macedonian grammar}}
The Indo-European aorist was inherited by the [[Slavic languages]] but has survived intact only in the [[South Slavic languages]]. It retains its function entirely in the [[Eastern South Slavic]] languages, [[Bulgarian language|Bulgarian]] and [[Macedonian language|Macedonian]]. However, in [[Western South Slavic]] languages it has become, along with the [[imperfect]] and [[pluperfect]], largely obsolete in daily parlance and mostly superseded by the [[Perfect (grammar)|perfect]] and [[circumlocution]]. The aorist is part of the [[standard languages|standardized varieties]] of [[Serbo-Croatian]] but is no longer part of standard [[Slovene language|Slovene]]. In both languages, the aorist appears mostly in older literature, scripture, religious services and legislation and so carries an archaic tone. In Serbo-Croatian, aorist finds natural use only in certain locales while it is completely supplanted by the perfect in others. As such, its use in formal settings can be construed as either pretentious and bombastic or conversely as rustic and unsophisticated, depending on locale. Its disuse does not cause ambiguity, as Slavic verbs have distinct [[Grammatical aspect in Slavic languages|grammatical aspects]] to convey related yet distinct meaning.

In modern forms of communication, the aorist has experienced something of a revival among younger speakers in Serbia, as its forms are simpler and shorter to type out than the perfect.<ref>Dr Branko Tošović, ''[http://www.maticasrpska.org.rs/casopisi/slavistiku_71-72.pdf Zbornik Matice srpske za slavistiku, knjiga 71-72, p. 393] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120315164610/http://www.maticasrpska.org.rs/casopisi/slavistiku_71-72.pdf |date=March 15, 2012}}'' (Serbian only)</ref>

In Bulgarian, which has produced a new regular formation, the aorist is used in [[indirect speech|indirect]] and in presumptive quotations.<ref>''The Slavonic languages'' ed. Bernard Comrie, Greville G. Corbett, ''passim'', esp. p.212ff.</ref> Bulgarian has separate inflections for aorist (past imperfective) and general perfective. The aorist may be used with the imperfective to produce a compound [[imperfective aspect#Combination of imperfective and perfective|perfective–imperfective aspect]].<ref name="Comrie12">[[Bernard Comrie]], ''[https://archive.org/details/aspectintroducti0000comr/page/12 Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems]'', Cambridge University Press, 1976, {{ISBN|0-521-29045-7}}, p 12.</ref><ref>Östen Dahl, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=HRvoWjxF9v0C&pg=PA290 Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe]'', Walter de Gruyter, 2000, {{ISBN|3-11-015752-7}}, p. 290.</ref>

The aorist in Macedonian is called the "past definite complete tense" ({{lang|mk|минато определено свршено време}}) and refers to a completed action in the past tense. It most often corresponds to the simple past tense in English: ''I read the book, I wrote the letter, I ate my supper'', etc. In contemporary standard Macedonian, the aorist is formed almost exclusively from perfective verbs. The formation of the aorist for most verbs is not complex, but there are numerous small subcategories that must be learned. All verbs in the aorist (except {{lang|mk|сум}}) take the same endings, but there are complexities in the aorist stem vowel and possible consonant alternations. All verbs (except {{lang|mk|сум}}) take the following endings in the aorist:<ref>[[Christina Kramer|Christina E. Kramer]] (1999), ''Makedonski Jazik'' (The University of Wisconsin Press).</ref>

{| class="wikitable" lang="mk"
| '''јас'''  -в || '''ние'''  -вме
|-
| '''ти'''   -∅ / -ше || '''вие'''  -вте
|-
| '''тој'''  -∅ / -ше|| '''тие'''  -а / -ја
|}

(The sign ∅ indicates a zero ending: nothing is added after the stem vowel.)

===Morphology===
In the [[Indo-European languages]] [[Greek language|Greek]] and [[Sanskrit]], the aorist [[word stem|stem]] is marked by several morphological devices (the aorist indicative also has the past-tense [[Augment (Indo-European)|augment]] {{lang|grc|ἐ-}} ''e-'', which [[crasis|contracts]] with the initial [[vowel]]). Three aorist morphological devices stand out as most common:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Morphology
! Description, examples of aorist tense and aorist imperative
|-
| [[Proto-Indo-European root|suffix]]ing of ''s''<ref>{{Smyth|542: first aorist stem}}</ref>
| The first, weak, ''s''-, or [[sigma]]tic aorist is the most common in Greek.
* {{wikt-lang|grc|ἀκούω}} {{grc-tr|ἀκούω}} "I hear"—{{lang|grc|ἤκου'''σ'''α}} {{grc-tr|ἤκου'''σ'''α}} "I heard"—{{lang|grc|ἄκου'''σ'''ον}} {{grc-tr|ἄκου'''σ'''ον}} "Hear!"
|-
| zero-grade of [[Indo-European ablaut|ablaut]],<br/>lack of suffix / [[nasal infix]]<ref>{{Smyth|546, 547: second aorist stem, o-verbs}}</ref><ref>[[Anna Giacalone Ramat]] and Paolo Ramat (eds.), ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=vwUMNCYbLL0C&pg=PA248 The Indo-European Languages]'', Routledge, 1998, {{ISBN|0-415-06449-X}}, pp. 248–251.</ref>
| The second or strong aorist uses the bare [[Proto-Indo-European root|root]] of the verb without the ''e'' of ablaut or the present-tense suffix or nasal infix.
* {{wikt-lang|grc|λ'''εί'''πω}} {{grc-tr|λ'''εί'''πω}} "I leave"—{{lang|grc|ἔλ'''ι'''πον}} {{grc-tr|ἔλ'''ι'''πον}} "I left"—{{lang|grc|λ'''ί'''πε}} {{grc-tr|λ'''ί'''πε}} "Leave!"
* {{wikt-lang|grc|λα'''μ'''β'''άν'''ω}} {{grc-tr|λα'''μ'''β'''άν'''ω}} "I take"—{{lang|grc|ἔλαβον}} {{grc-tr|ἔλαβον}} "I took"—{{lang|grc|λαβέ}} {{grc-tr|λαβέ}} "[[Molon labe|Take!]]"
|-
| [[reduplication]]<ref>{{Smyth|494: reduplication}}</ref><ref>{{Smyth|549.1: reduplication in 2nd aorist}}</ref>
| [[Reduplication]] is more common in the perfect, but a few Greek verbs use it in the aorist. The reduplicated aorist is more common in [[Sanskrit]], e.g. ''ájījanam'' "I gave birth."<ref name="Whitney11">[[William Dwight Whitney]], ''[[:s:Sanskrit Grammar|Sanskrit Grammar: Including both the Classical Language and the older Dialects, of Veda and Brahmana]]'', Oxford University Press, 1950, [[:s:Sanskrit Grammar/Chapter XI|pp. 297-330]].</ref>
* {{wikt-lang|grc|ἄγω}} {{grc-tr|ἄγω}} "I lead"—{{lang|grc|'''ἤγ'''αγον}} {{grc-tr|'''ἤγ'''αγον}} "I led"—{{lang|grc|'''ἄγ'''αγε}} {{grc-tr|'''ἄγ'''αγε}} "Lead!"
|}

==South Caucasian languages==
In [[Georgian language|Georgian]] and [[Svan language|Svan]], the aorist marks perfective aspect.  In the indicative, it marks completed events. In other moods, it marks events that are yet to be completed.<ref>Heinz Fãhnrich, "Old Georgian", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages'' (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 129-217.<br>Howard I. Aronson, "Modern Georgian", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages'' (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 219-312.<br>Karl Horst Schmidt, "Svan", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages'' (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 473-556.</ref>

In [[Mingrelian language|Mingrelian]] and [[Laz language|Laz]], the aorist is basically a past tense and can be combined with both perfective and imperfective aspects as well as the imperative and the subjunctive moods.<ref>Alice C. Harris, "Mingrelian", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages'' (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 313-394.<br>Dee Ann Holisky, "Laz", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 1, The Kartvelian Languages'' (1991, Caravan Books), pp. 395-472.</ref>

==Northeast Caucasian languages==
In [[Khinalug language|Khinalug]], the aorist is a perfective aspect, and the two terms ("aorist" and "perfective") are often used interchangeably.<ref>A.E. Kibrik, "Khinalug", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 4, North East Caucasian Languages, Part 2'' (1994, Caravan Books), pp. 367-406.</ref>

In [[Udi language|Udi]], the aorist is an imperfective aspect that is usually a past tense but can also replace the present tense.<ref>Wolfgang Schulze-Fürhoff, "Udi", ''The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Volume 4, North East Caucasian Languages, Part 2'' (1994, Caravan Books), pp. 447-514.</ref>

==Turkish==
In [[Turkish language|Turkish]], the aorist ({{langx|tr|geniş zaman}}, literally "broad time") is a [[habitual aspect]]<ref name="Geoffrey Lewis 2000"/> and is similar to the English [[present simple]].<ref name="Yavaş">{{cite journal |title=The Turkish Aorist |last=Yavaş |first=Feryal |publisher=Linguisitcs Graduate Student Association, University of Kansas |type=working paper |series=Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics |volume=4 |year=1979 |pages=41–49 |doi=10.17161/KWPL.1808.656 |hdl=1808/656 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free }}</ref> For example, the statement {{lang|tr|Et yemem}} ("I do not eat meat") informs the listener that the speaker is a vegetarian and not merely that they happen not to be eating meat at that very moment. To convey the latter message, the [[present progressive]] {{lang|tr|Et yemiyorum}} ("I am not eating meat") would be appropriate. The Turkish aorist is commonly used in enquiries about someone's wishes, as in {{lang|tr|Bir şey yemek ister misiniz?}} ("Would you like to eat something?"). That makes a question like {{lang|tr|Domuz eti yer misiniz?}} ambiguous, as the listener may interpret it as an informational question ("Are you someone who eats pork"?) or as an offer ("Would you [like to] eat pork?").<ref name="Yavaş"/>

==Constructed languages==
In [[J. R. R. Tolkien]]'s [[constructed language]] [[Quenya]], the aorist is a [[gnomic aspect|gnomic]] tense or [[simple present (English)|simple present]] that expresses general facts or simple present actions.<ref>[[Helge Fauskanger]]. [http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/ Ardalambion]. Quenya - The Ancient Tongue. [http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/quenya.htm#Heading9 The Verb].</ref>

==See also==
* {{slink|Ancient Greek grammar|Mood of the dependent verb}}
* [[Preterite]]

==Notes==
{{notelist}}

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary}}
* [http://www.bcbsr.com/greek/gtense.html Greek tenses]

{{Grammatical aspects}}

[[Category:Grammatical aspects]]
[[Category:Grammatical tenses]]