[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Architecture of NT Greek

Hidden in my humorous post was a serious question which no one answered:

I wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's a hot Saturday afternoon, you are walking north on first avenue and 
step into the Belltown Pub to get out of the sun. There are two tables 
and each has one vacant chair.

The table on the right is discussing the semantic significance of iota 
stem third declension nouns. The table of the left is discussing the 
semantic significance of the verbal augment. 

Which chair will you take?  Why?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The QUESTION:

What is the relationship between morphological marking in NT Greek and 
meaning? This is a question about language architecture. Abstract, yes, 
but worth discussing none the less. 

I don't see in any of my 25 Greek grammars a discussion of the semantic 
significance of iota stem third declension nouns? Why not? It is a 
marked form. Do not marked forms have meaning? 

I see in most of these same grammars a discussion of the semantic 
significance of the verbal augment. Does verb augment always have 
meaning? Always the same meaning? 

I think there is probably a clear answer to this question. Could some 
one state it clearly? Could someone demonstrate how the morphological 
architecture of NT Greek relates to the semantic architecture of NT 
Greek.


Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
Follow-Ups: