Re: "Pregnant" consturction

• To: Dvdmoore@aol.com
• Subject: Re: "Pregnant" consturction
• From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
• Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 14:06:52 -0600 (CST)
• Cc: b-greek@virginia.edu
• In-Reply-To: <941201134810_3091733@aol.com>

On Thu, 1 Dec 1994 Dvdmoore@aol.com wrote:
>      The instances of PROS+accusative= "with" including the implication of
> personal relationship which I cited in an earlier post come from the Moulton
> & Geden concordance.  They qualify the usage of Jn. 1:1 as a "pregnant"
> construction.  All the of the referred examples were also "pregnant" usages.
>  This term has come up here again in Greg's post.  I have been unable to find
> a satisfactory definition of the word - either in dictionaries or grammars -
> .  If anyone could clarify this for me, I would appreciate it.

A "pregnant" construction is one that is "big with child"--but the child 
remains unborn. ;-)  Seriously, I have seen the term used of expressions 
wherein one or more implicit elements are assumed. The problem is, it 
seems to me, of being sure about what really IS implicit.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu  OR cwc@oui.com

• "Pregnant" consturction
• From: Dvdmoore@aol.com

• Prev: Re: rendering greek letters and accents
• Next: Re: John 8:58
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread