Re: Inceptive aorist: questionable textbook example?
Jonathan Robie (jwrobie@mindspring.com)
Mon, 30 Dec 1996 20:48:36 -0500
At 05:44 PM 12/30/96 -0800, Alan Repurk wrote:
>Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
>> I think you've found a pedological limitation to the use of constructed
>> texts. They are presented in a vacuum, without any context, which is
>> essential. I looked for the aorist forms of DIDASKW in the gospels,
>> and none of them are inceptive. I would guess that the author intended
>> the inceptive aorist from his use of the non-classical TOTE = thereupon,
>> but I can't be sure.
>>
>> Stephen Carlson
>
>
>How about in Mr 1:21 where is was not until the sabbath had started 'EUQUS
TOIS SABBASIN'
>and that he had entered into the synagogue 'EISELQWN EIS THN SUNAGWGHN' that he
>began to teach 'EDIDASKEN' ?
>
>Sincerely,
>-lars
Lars,
Some translations add "began to" to this verse, others simply say that Jesus
taught. But what would justify inserting the phrase "began to" in Mark 1:21?
Why should we treat this as an inceptive aorist?
Jonathan
***************************************************************************
Jonathan Robie
POET Software, 3207 Gibson Road, Durham, N.C., 27703
Ph: 919.598.5728 Fax: 919.598.6728
email: jwrobie@mindspring.com, jonathan@poet.com
http://www.poet.com <--- shockwave enabled!
***************************************************************************