[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: John 1:1c
Regarding the grammar of predicate nominative nouns as pertaining to John
1:1c, I've dug out my copy of
* Lane C. McGaughy's TOWARD A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF EINAI AS A LINKING
VERB IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK (Missoula, Montana: Society of Biblical
Literature, 1972).
Most of my NT references come from this work. McGaughy also refers
extensively to
* E. C. Colwell, "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek
New Testament," JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE 52 (1933), 12-21,
which I haven't read. I have not pointed out Colwell's specific materials
here.
McGaughy points out the following grammatical rules for asserting that a
given nominative noun is a predicate rather than a subject (excluding
appositional expressions):
1. The nominative noun disagrees with the form of the verb EINAI. This
then comprises noun predicates of 1st and 2nd person verbs and
nominatives that disagree with 3rd person verbs (except for neuter
plurals, of course).
2. Nominative pronouns are subjects, whether relative, personal, or
demonstrative. Nominative noun in such clauses are therefore predicates.
3. Two definite nominative nouns are always in the order
Subject-Predicate. Cf. Matthew 6:22, O LUXNOS TOU SWMATOS ESTIN O
OFQALMOS and John 1:4b H ZWH HN TO FWS TWN ANQRWPWN, with the order S-V-P
(subject, then verb, then predicate noun).
4. If a predicate noun p_r_e_c_e_d_e_s the verb, it loses the article,
even if definite. So it is in John 1:1c, QEOS HN O LOGOS, in Mark 2:28,
KYRIOS ESTIN O UIOS TOU ANQRWPOU KAI TOU SABBATOU, in 1 Cor. 1:18, O
LOGOS GAR O TOU STAUROU...DUNAMIS QEOU ESTIN, in John 1:49c, SU BASILEUS
EI TOU ISRAHL (in contrastive order to 1:49b, SU EI O UIOS TOU QEOU), in
John 19:21e, BASILEUS EIMI TWN IOUDAIWN. I might add that the latter two
predicates are surely definite (unique and known), as the emotional tone
of their contexts demonstrates.
5. Names are anarthrous in the predicate. Names are of course nearly
always grammatically definite. Cf. John 1:6, ONOMA AUTWI IWANNHS.
==========Notes to my Rule 3.===========
- One also sees the S-P-V pattern, as in John 6:51, O ARTOS DE ON EGW
DWSW H SARC MOU ESTIN, or 1 Corinthians 11:25, TOUTO TO POTHRION H KAINH
DIAQHKH ESTIN. McGaughy lists the latter two as exceptions to my Rule 4,
but they clearly fit here in my Rule 3. However, only 15 of 244 NT
predicate nouns with articles appear before the verb, and, while 14 of
these 15 occur with pronoun subjects (my Rule 2) or after a prior
definite subject (my Rule 3), this is clearly an uncommon pattern.
===========Notes to my Rule 4.==========
- See above for McGaughy's 15 exceptions. The 15th exception McGaughy
doesn't comment on, but it is truly extraordinary, and it in fact
simultaneously confirms the rule and offers a seeming violation of it:
PANTOS ANDROS H KEFALH O XRISTOS ESTIN, KEPHALH DE GUNAIKOS O ANHR,
KEFALH DE TOU XRISTOU O QEOS (1 Cor. 11:3).
Paul follows the rule in the 2nd and 3rd anaphoric repetitions, but only
after seemingly violating it in the first instance. However, the strained
word order of the initial anarthrous genitive plus an article-bearing
predicate seems to crimp the clause quite deliberately, as though to
announce, "Reverse word order here!" The subsequent pair of clauses, each
using an anarthrous (though definite) predicate and a subsequent genitive,
specifically contrasts to the the odd phrase, as though to soothe the ear
again.
- McGaughy doesn't note that English normally omits articles before
abstract but definite nouns, such as "life, truth, happiness, freedom",
etc. By contrast French and German usually or always apply the article
in these circumstances. Ancient Greek often seems to omit the article
like English, but my Rule 4 makes me reconsider the understanding of
clauses like 1 John 1:5, O QEOS FWS ESTIN. Perhaps the ante-verbal
positon of FWS has triggered the loss of the article, and it remains
definite, "Dieu est la lumiere/God is Light" (capital L). John 1:8 shows
the post-verbal order, and of course the article, too: OUK HN EKEINOS TO
FWS.
- My own impression, unsubstantiated by statistics, is that negative
sentences with abstract nouns as subjects tend to omit the article from
them, as at the end of John 8:44b, OUK ESTIN ALHQEIA EN AUTWI. But I
cannot say any more about that.
--David N. Wigtil. Technical Assessment. U. S. Department of Energy.
Sophronos d' apistias
ouk estin ouden khresimoteron brotois. (Euripides, "Helen" 1617-1618)
(There's nothing more helpful for mortals than sensible disbelief.)
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
{ Internet: david.wigtil@hq.doe.gov (via cc:Mail) }
{ Personal: 72331.1732@compuserve.com }
{ X.400 : g=david s=wigtil o=hq p=usdoe a=attmail c=us }
{ Bitnet : u8806dw@doevm (via OV/VM) }
{ Voice: 301-903-5730. }
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''