THE ‘POLITE’ AORIST: TENSE OR ASPECT?

Abstract This article investigates the semantics and pragmatics of ‘hortative’ aorist (the indicative in questions with τί οὐ ‘why don't …’) ‘tragic’ or ‘performative’ (for example ὤμοσα ‘I swear’). Lloyd argued 1999 that tragic is a more polite alternative for corresponding present ( ὄμνυμι Recently, he has extended this view to hortative aorist, suggesting that, example, οὐκ ἐκαλέσαμεν; καλοῦμεν; argues politeness value derives from its being past tense, comparing so-called ‘attitudinal’ (as I wanted ask you something instead want ). The article, building on work by Colvin, Bary Nijk, semantic purely aspectual these cases: aorists serve construe designated event as bounded, while forms unbounded. An extensive discussion evidence presented, well case study concerning behaviour verb . Moreover, argue proposed account terms aspect can be unified Lloyd's pragmatic politeness: difference tone between derived their respective values, rather than temporal values.