[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #43
b-greek-digest Tuesday, 12 December 1995 Volume 01 : Number 043
In this issue:
Definitions/Tranlations Eph 1:2
Re: John 5:39-40
Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
Re: Definitions/Tranlations Eph 1:2
RE > Definitions/Tranlation
Re: Participles
Evangelism of Christ (fwd)
Re: Translations/difinitions
Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
Re: Participles
Re > Participles
FW: b-greek-digest V1 #36
response to: Cremation ==> Burial in Church
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rrilea <rrilea@cnw.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 23:55:12 -0800
Subject: Definitions/Tranlations Eph 1:2
In my continued translation of Ephesians 1:1-2 I have come across the
following words again which I could not find in either "Mastering Greek
Vocabulary" by Thomas A. Robinson or "Lexical Aids For Students of New
Testament Greek" by Bruce M. Metzger:
UMIN
HMWN
Your help with defining and translating these words is much apreciated.
Thanks to those who helped with the similar problem in verse one.
Rod Rilea
------------------------------
From: Stefan Sondergaard <sks@www.cybercity.dk>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 10:45:39 +-100
Subject: Re: John 5:39-40
Calton L. Winbery asked
>John 5:39 ERAUNATE TAS GRAFAS, hOTI hUMEIS DOKEITE EN
>AUTAIS ZWHN AIWNION EXEIN
>KAI EKEINAI EISIN hAI MARTUROUSAI PERI EMOU 40
>KAI OU QELETE ELQEIN PROS ME hINA ZWHN EXHTE.
> [...] Can the first KAI have the function of a mild adversative like DE?
Grammatically the use of KAI is very varied in Greek and the influence from
Aramaic/Hebrew may as others have mentioned makes this variation even
bigger. So from KAI alone nothing can decided.
I think that the first KAI in not adversative but used in a way that can
be translated as "as well", "in deed", "also". That KAI and EKEINAI are
right next to each other may support that. The first KAI may be used to
express that the audience is on the right way.
The second KAI however is then strongly adversative (="And in spite of
that"): The (right) direction that they have taken (looking for life in the
Scriptures) is broken as they will not accept that Jesus' as the one who
the Father has sent.
The latest Danish authorised translation (1992) says (in my crude and
somewhat exaggerated translation):
"You scrutinise the Scriptures because you believe that you have eternal
life in them,
and these actually _do_ bear witness to me.
But in spite of that you will not come to me to have life"
Stefan K. Soendergaard
Student at the Faculty if Theology, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
sks@vip.cybercity.dk
------------------------------
From: Carl William Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 05:51:05 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
Rich, thanks for the clarification;
while the appended pre-history of (this
part of) the thread may seem verbose, it will perhaps help to clarify it
for any coming in on it late. I really think that we are no longer really
talking about periphrastic constructions so much as Word Order patterns.
At 6:51 PM 12/11/95, Richard Lindeman wrote:
>You wrote:
>>
>>
>>I wish you'd offer us some examples of what you mean. I assume that you are
>>going beyond the conventional distinction of three kinds of participial
>>usage as:
>> (1) adverbial: POREUOMENOI TAUTA DIELOGOUMEQA, "As we traveled, we
>> discussed these things."
>> (2) adjectival: TWi FILWi TWi SUN EMOI POREUOMENWi TAUTA EIPON, "I
>> told these things to my friend who was walking with me."
>> (3) nominal: TWi POREUOMENWi TAUTA DIHGHSAMHN, "I explained these
>> things to the traveler."
>>
>>I'm wondering if you are referring to the usage (which I would not
>>characterize as periphrastic) of a noun/pronoun + participle as normal
>>indirect discourse with a verb of perception:
>>
>> OIDA SE TAUTA PEPOIHKOTA, "I know that you have done these things."
>> HKOUSA SOU SOFOU ONTOS, "I heard that you were clever." (more
>idioma-
>> tically, HKOUSA SOU hWS SOFOS HSQA)
>> KATA PANTA hWS DEISIDAIMONSTEROUS hUMAS [scil. ONTAS] QEWRW (Acts
>> 17:22), "I see that in every way you are especially
>reverent"
>>
>>If it is something DIFFERENT from these usages, give us some examples.
>>
>
>OK... so you want actual examples? Well, if I must! :-)
>
>Perhaps I am off the wall on this, but that certainly
>wouldn't be the first time. What I am suggesting is that
>the participle, when standing adverbially on the right side
>of the verb that it modifies, seems often to be more verbal
>than adverbial... and that the opposite is true when the
>participle stands on the left side of the verb.
>
>When the participle stands on the right - there are times when
>I seem to hear an unspoken "eimi" behind the transitive verb
>that the participle is modifying. I am not suggesting that this
>is an actual case of elipse. Nor am I suggesting that
>this is a true periphrastic at all. But rather that when
>translated this participle has essentially the same force
>as a periphrastic.
>
>Luke 13:22 DIEPOREUETO KATA POLIS KAI KWMAS DIDASKWN KAI POREIAN
>POIOUMENOS EIS IEROUSOLUMA.
>
>Luke 11:25 KAI ELQON EURISKEI SESARWMENON KAI KEKOSMHMENON
>
>Luke 8:1 DIWDEUEN KATA POLIN KAI KWMHN KHRUSSWN KAI EUAGGELIZOMENOS
>THN BASILEIAN TOU QEOU
>
>Luke 18:43 HKOLOUQEI AUTW DOXAZWN TON QEON
>
>Luke 2:12 EURHSETE BREFOS ESPARGANWMENON KAI KEIMENON EN FATNH
These examples help very much to clarify for me what you're talking about,
but I think that these examples do not really follow a consistent pattern
that could be typed in any way other than by your classification of whether
the participial expression comes before or after the main verb. Moreover, I
really don't think it's necessary or appropriate to assume any form of
EINAI with any of the participles that appear on the right-hand side,
although they might conceivably be found in the two instances where the
main verb is hEURISKW, the reason being that these are really instances of
what I previously called Indirect Discourse with a verb of perception.
Although we may translate the participial phrases in those two verses as,
"finds it tidied and put in order" (Lk 11:25) and "you will find the baby
wrapped up and lying in a manger" (Lk 2:12), these are in fact equivalents
of "finds that it has been tidied up and put in order (SESARWTAI KAI
KEKOSMHTAI)" and "you will find that the baby has been wrapped up and
placed in a manger (ESPARGWTAI KAI KEITAI = TEQEITAI)."
As for the others (and actually for these as well) I think what we have
here is a logical pattern of word-order that represents chronological
sequence and that one will find normally observed UNLESS the writer has a
particular emphasis he/she wants to make, in which case rhetorical
positioning of words and phrases in the most emphatic locations occurs: (a)
participles that are generally adverbial and are used to explain the
circumstances constituting the setting of the action described by the main
verb come first; more often than not, these go into English best in an
adverbial clause headed by an adverbial conjunction such as "when,"
"since," "although," "if," or the like; (b) participles that are generally
adverbial and that indicate action or state resultant upon or subsequent to
the action of the main verb will follow the verb. I think this will work
with all of the above instances.
>Luke 13:22 DIEPOREUETO KATA POLIS KAI KWMAS DIDASKWN KAI POREIAN
>POIOUMENOS EIS IEROUSOLUMA.
"He passed through the cities and villages, (all the time) teaching and
continuing his journey into Jerusalem."
>Luke 11:25 KAI ELQON EURISKEI SESARWMENON KAI KEKOSMHMENON
"And when it arrives, it finds it (has been) tidied up and put in order."
>Luke 8:1 DIWDEUEN KATA POLIN KAI KWMHN KHRUSSWN KAI EUAGGELIZOMENOS
>THN BASILEIAN TOU QEOU
"He continued his journey through city and village, (all the time)
preaching and proclaiming the good news of the Kingdom of God."
>Luke 18:43 HKOLOUQEI AUTW DOXAZWN TON QEON
"He kept following him, (all the time) glorifying God.
>Luke 2:12 EURHSETE BREFOS ESPARGANWMENON KAI KEIMENON EN FATNHi
"You will find the baby (has been) wrapped up and placed in a manger."
What would other teachers and students of Greek grammar say on this?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: Richard Lindeman <richlind@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 06:03:36 -0800
Subject: Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
You wrote:
>I think what we have here is a logical pattern of word-order that represents
>chronological sequence and that one will find normally observed UNLESS the
>writer has a
>particular emphasis he/she wants to make, in which case rhetorical
>positioning of words and phrases in the most emphatic locations occurs:
>(a)participles that are generally adverbial and are used to explain the
>circumstances constituting the setting of the action described by the main
>verb come first; more often than not, these go into English best in an
>adverbial clause headed by an adverbial conjunction such as "when,"
>"since," "although," "if," or the like;
>(b) participles that are generally
>adverbial and that indicate action or state resultant upon or subsequent to
>the action of the main verb will follow the verb. I think this will work
>with all of the above instances.
>
Exactly! I find this distinction to be especially helpful for beginning
students who have great difficulty with the adverbial use of the participle.
If they look for this distinction between adverbial participles (those going
before the verb and those following the verb) it essentially cuts their
complexity in half.
Perhaps you are correct in calling it an example of word order more than
having anything. But the effect still is that you often end up translating
the participle verbally just *as if* it were a periphrastic construction.
Rich Lindeman
- --
=======================================================================
International Society of Online Christians
"Meeting the future boldly with Christ!"
RichardLindeman@xc.org 2155 Northdale Blvd NW - Coon Rapids, MN 55433
=======================================================================
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 09:16:48 -0600
Subject: Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
[. . . .}
>>Luke 2:12 EURHSETE BREFOS ESPARGANWMENON KAI KEIMENON EN FATNH
>
>These examples help very much to clarify for me what you're talking about,
>but I think that these examples do not really follow a consistent pattern
>that could be typed in any way other than by your classification of whether
>the participial expression comes before or after the main verb. Moreover, I
>really don't think it's necessary or appropriate to assume any form of
>EINAI with any of the participles that appear on the right-hand side,
>although they might conceivably be found in the two instances where the
>main verb is hEURISKW, the reason being that these are really instances of
>what I previously called Indirect Discourse with a verb of perception.
>Although we may translate the participial phrases in those two verses as,
>"finds it tidied and put in order" (Lk 11:25) and "you will find the baby
>wrapped up and lying in a manger" (Lk 2:12), these are in fact equivalents
>of "finds that it has been tidied up and put in order (SESARWTAI KAI
>KEKOSMHTAI)" and "you will find that the baby has been wrapped up and
>placed in a manger (ESPARGWTAI KAI KEITAI = TEQEITAI)."
>
>As for the others (and actually for these as well) I think what we have
>here is a logical pattern of word-order that represents chronological
>sequence and that one will find normally observed UNLESS the writer has a
>particular emphasis he/she wants to make, in which case rhetorical
>positioning of words and phrases in the most emphatic locations occurs: (a)
>participles that are generally adverbial and are used to explain the
>circumstances constituting the setting of the action described by the main
>verb come first; more often than not, these go into English best in an
>adverbial clause headed by an adverbial conjunction such as "when,"
>"since," "although," "if," or the like; (b) participles that are generally
>adverbial and that indicate action or state resultant upon or subsequent to
>the action of the main verb will follow the verb. I think this will work
>with all of the above instances.
>
>>Luke 13:22 DIEPOREUETO KATA POLIS KAI KWMAS DIDASKWN KAI POREIAN
>>POIOUMENOS EIS IEROUSOLUMA.
>
>"He passed through the cities and villages, (all the time) teaching and
>continuing his journey into Jerusalem."
>
>>Luke 11:25 KAI ELQON EURISKEI SESARWMENON KAI KEKOSMHMENON
>
>"And when it arrives, it finds it (has been) tidied up and put in order."
>
>>Luke 8:1 DIWDEUEN KATA POLIN KAI KWMHN KHRUSSWN KAI EUAGGELIZOMENOS
>>THN BASILEIAN TOU QEOU
>
>"He continued his journey through city and village, (all the time)
>preaching and proclaiming the good news of the Kingdom of God."
>
>>Luke 18:43 HKOLOUQEI AUTW DOXAZWN TON QEON
>
>"He kept following him, (all the time) glorifying God.
>
>>Luke 2:12 EURHSETE BREFOS ESPARGANWMENON KAI KEIMENON EN FATNHi
>
>"You will find the baby (has been) wrapped up and placed in a manger."
>
>What would other teachers and students of Greek grammar say on this?
Carl, I agreek with your comments on these, especially the adverbial use of
the participles above. The last instance I would explain as the participle
(a verbal adjective) as the adjectival use of the participle. The two
participles, ESPARGANWMENON KAI KEIMENON, agree with BREFOS just like an
adjective. The entire structure indicates what is found much like indirect
discourse.
Carlton Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
fax (318) 442-4996
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 09:29:09 -0600
Subject: Re: Definitions/Tranlations Eph 1:2
>In my continued translation of Ephesians 1:1-2 I have come across the
>following words again which I could not find in either "Mastering Greek
>Vocabulary" by Thomas A. Robinson or "Lexical Aids For Students of New
>Testament Greek" by Bruce M. Metzger:
>
>UMIN
>HMWN
>
>Your help with defining and translating these words is much apreciated.
>
>Thanks to those who helped with the similar problem in verse one.
>
>Rod Rilea
UMIN is the dative plural of the second person pronoun SU.
HMWN is the genitive plural of the first person pronoun EGW.
If you want to learn Greek inductively, I would suggest that you get an
analytical lexicon like Mounce, The Analytical Lexicon of the NT and a
morphology like Mounce's or Brooks and Winbery Morphology of NT Greek,
Univ. Press of America. When you have to look up a word like HMWN then
find the declension of it (page 103 in Brooks & Winbery) and learn the full
declension of both EGW and SU. Inductive learning can be fun and
profitable.
Carlton Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
fax (318) 442-4996
------------------------------
From: Karen Pitts <karen_pitts@maca.sarnoff.com>
Date: 12 Dec 1995 10:25:18 U
Subject: RE > Definitions/Tranlation
RE > Definitions/Tranlations Eph 1:2 12/12/95 10:26 AM
Rod:
You need something with paradigms listed and need to commit some of these to
memory (or work through an intro Greek text). UMIN and HMWN are basic
personal pronouns that everyone needs to know. I'll do it here from memory:
1st person pronoun (I, mine, me, we, our, us)
sing. plural
nom. EGW HMEIS
gen. EMOU, MOU HMWN
dat. EMOI, MOI HMIN
acc. EME, ME HMEIS
2nd person pronoun (you, yours)
sing. plural
nom. SU UMEIS
gen. SOU UMWN
dat. SOI UMIN
acc. SE UMEIS
Other things to look for are EIMI in all its forms, since it is also highly
irregular.
BIll Mounce (a member of this list) has an introduction to Biblical Greek,
which has been recommended by several others on this list, although I've not
used it. You can get a workbook to go with it which facilitates personal
study. I've seen it listed in CBD. I have Bill's Morphology of Biblical
Greek, which I've found very useful as well.
Peace.
Karen Pitts
Hopewell Presbyterian Church, Hopewell, NJ, teacher of NT Greek
David Sarnoff Research Center, Princeton, NJ, statistician
kpitts@sarnoff.com
------------------------------
From: Karen Pitts <karen_pitts@maca.sarnoff.com>
Date: 12 Dec 1995 10:40:41 U
Subject: Re: Participles
RE> Participles 12/12/95 10:05 AM
Rich:
Here's my view of participles and how to teach them to beginners. The first
time I had to teach participles, I was thouroughly dissatisfied with the
beginning grammars I had at my disposal. I reviewed Smyth's description of
participles and then taugtht that participles can be either
functioning as a adjective (the one who teaches) or substantive (noun)
supplementary to the main verb, completing the thought, especially following
kinds of verbs (Smyth has an extensive list that I don't want to attempt
from memory)
adverbial clause, either time related or causational
genitive absolute
You may already know what Smyth says about supplementary stuff, but if you
don't, I recommend it. I found it very helpful, and I don't think koine is
different from classical here.
I found that presenting it in these four categories clarified the usage
enough. I haven't made a study based on word order, but knowing that the
participle can be either modifying the noun, supplementing the verb, or
introducing an adverbial clause seemed to clarify things sufficiently to get
them translating.
Peace.
Karen Pitts
Hopewell Presbyterian Church, Hopewell, NJ, teacher of NT Greek
David Sarnoff Research Center, Princeton, NJ, statistician
kpitts@sarnoff.com
------------------------------
From: Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church <pauld@iclnet93.iclnet.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 09:29:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Evangelism of Christ (fwd)
Dr. Paul S. Dixon
Pastor, Ladd Hill Bible Church
Wilsonville, Oregon
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 09:28:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church <pauld@iclnet93.iclnet.org>
To: leadership@iclnet93.iclnet.org
Cc: reformed group <reformed@listserv.syr.edu>
Subject: Evangelism of Christ
My complete doctoral product entitled, "The Evangelism of Christ:
a Model for Evangelism Today," is now available at the following ftp
address: members.aol.com\dixonps.
There are 6 files (one chapter per file) and you can select for
either MSWorks or WordPerfect formatting. Download the appropriate
files, then access through MSWorks or Wordperfect accordingly.
The product is also available on microfiche through TREN
(Theological Research Evangelical Network).
Dr. Paul S. Dixon
Pastor, Ladd Hill Bible Church
Wilsonville, Oregon
------------------------------
From: David Moore <dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 16:55:14 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Translations/difinitions
On Sun, 10 Dec 1995, Carlton Winbery wrote:
> >While studying Ephesians 1:1 I came across three words that I am not
> >familiar with and I could not find them in either "Mastering Greek
> >Vocabulary" by Thomas A Robinson or "Lexical Aids For Students of New
> >Testament Greek" by Bruce M. Metzger. I am hoping that someone will be
> >able to help me translate/define the following words:
> >
> > TOIS
> > hAGIOIS
> > OUSIN
> >
> >Thanks ahead of time for the help.
>
> TOIS is the article in the masculine dative plural found in the lexicon as hO.
>
> hAGIOIS is the adjective in the masculine dative plural. With the article
> refers to "the saints."
>
> OUSIN is the masculine dative participle from EIMI. With the article TOIS
> means "to those who are . . ." If the words in brackets (EN EFESWi) are
> original, then "to those who are in Ephesus." If not then "to those who
> are also faithful."
Another possibility is that the name of the recipients was left
blank in the original of this letter (from which our MS tradition would
descend according to this theory) since it was to be sent to several
cities in the area of Ephesus. In copying the letter, the name of the
recipients in each city to whom it was to be sent would be filled in. It
would have been called the Epistle to the Ephesians because Ephesus was
the principal city to which it was sent. Some have suggested that this
may be the letter to the Laodiceans that the Colossian Christians were to
read. Cf. Col. 4:16. The Colossians supposedly got their own specific
letter since theirs was a somewhat unique situation.
An interesting note is that Origen had MSS that supported the
omission of the recipients' name and suggested that it might be
understood as a letter to *the saints that are*, taking OUSIN in an
absolute sense.
David L. Moore Southeastern Spanish District
Miami, Florida of the Assemblies of God
dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us Department of Education
http://members.aol.com/dvdmoore
------------------------------
From: Lee Attema <attema@richmond.infi.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 13:57:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Word-Order Patterns (was Periphrastic)
As a novice with a real interest in NT Greek could I elicit a list of the
most helpful books that I could include in my library. I find myself looking
at the translations that some have done and saying "Why did this happen". I
then consult my resources but come away with different answers which I
cannot apply weight to because of my lack of expertise. I have several text
which I refer to, would anyone be able to evaluate them on a one to ten
scale in regard to either their accuracy or the amount of authority that
they provide for prefering a particular translation.
Scale
A.T. Robinson A Grammar Of The Greek New Testament ( )
Harold Moulton The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised 1978 (
) Trench Synonyms of the New Testament
( )
Dana and Mantey A Manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament ( )
Blass and DeBrunner A Greek Grammar of the New Testament ( )
Zerwick and Govsvenor A Grammatical Analysis of The Greek NT ( )
Machen NT Greek for Beginners
( )
Are there any texts which would be especially helpful for me to add to the
above?
Lee Attema
attema@richmond.infi.net
3208 Bute Lane
Richmond, VA 23221
(804)353-3093
Christ is risen. He is risen indeed!
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 14:33:40 -0600
Subject: Re: Participles
Karen Pitts wrote;
>Here's my view of participles and how to teach them to beginners. The first
>time I had to teach participles, I was thouroughly dissatisfied with the
>beginning grammars I had at my disposal. I reviewed Smyth's description of
>participles and then taugtht that participles can be either
>
> functioning as a adjective (the one who teaches) or substantive (noun)
> supplementary to the main verb, completing the thought, especially following
> kinds of verbs (Smyth has an extensive list that I don't want to attempt
> from memory)
> adverbial clause, either time related or causational
> genitive absolute
>
>You may already know what Smyth says about supplementary stuff, but if you
>don't, I recommend it. I found it very helpful, and I don't think koine is
>different from classical here.
>
>I found that presenting it in these four categories clarified the usage
>enough. I haven't made a study based on word order, but knowing that the
>participle can be either modifying the noun, supplementing the verb, or
>introducing an adverbial clause seemed to clarify things sufficiently to get
>them translating.
Karen, James Brooks and I dealt with the participle in Syntax of NT Greek,
UPA 1978 by first defining the participle as a verbal adjective and then
organizing the syntax according to the four ways the adjective functions,
attributive, substantival, predicative, and adverbial. Of course the
adverbial participle is far more prevalent than the adjective used as an
adverb. We dealt with the genitive absolute as an adverbial ptc. since it
often must be translated as a temporal clause. Our students have been able
to relate to this structure very well.
Carlton Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
fax (318) 442-4996
------------------------------
From: Karen Pitts <karen_pitts@maca.sarnoff.com>
Date: 12 Dec 1995 15:00:22 U
Subject: Re > Participles
Re > Participles 12/12/95 2:53 PM
On 12/12/95 Carlton Winberry wrote:
>Karen, James Brooks and I dealt with the participle in Syntax of NT Greek,
>UPA 1978 by first defining the participle as a verbal adjective and then
>organizing the syntax according to the four ways the adjective functions,
>attributive, substantival, predicative, and adverbial. Of course the
>adverbial participle is far more prevalent than the adjective used as an
>adverb. We dealt with the genitive absolute as an adverbial ptc. since it
>often must be translated as a temporal clause. Our students have been able
>to relate to this structure very well.
Carlton:
Thanks! I just recently ordered Syntax of NT Greek with some Christmas money,
but it hasn't come yet (as if I had time to read Greek references just before
Christmas). I appreciate your ability to succinctly summarize issues. I take
much longer and am not nearly so clear. I am looking forward to spending time
in your book.
You are correct that the genitive absolute is just a special case of the
adverbial participle. I gave it special emphasis just because people have to
recognize the construction, especially to look for the noun in the genitive
case and realize that it is the subject of the clause.
Thanks again for all your suggestions.
Karen Pitts
Hopewell Presbyterian Church, Hopewell, NJ, teacher of NT Greek
David Sarnoff Research Center, Princeton, NJ, statistician
kpitts@sarnoff.com
------------------------------
From: Karl_Schulte-CKS005@email.mot.com
Date: 12 Dec 95 15:17:00 -0600
Subject: FW: b-greek-digest V1 #36
To: b-greek@virginia.edu
From: Schulte-CKS005 Karl on Tue, Dec 12, 1995 3:08 PM
Subject: FW: b-greek-digest V1 #36
snip
_____________________________________________________________________________
__
To: b-greek-digest@virginia.edu@INTERNET
From: owner-b-greek-digest@virginia.edu@INTERNET on Fri, Dec 8, 1995 12:41
AM
Subject: b-greek-digest V1 #36
Errors-To: owner-b-greek-digest@virginia.edu
Precedence: bulk
b-greek-digest Friday, 8 December 1995 Volume 01 : Number
036
In this issue:
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 1995 19:12:38 CST
Subject: Re: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>I've been thinking some more about the weird construction in Mk 2:20 and
>Mt's parallel 9:15): ELEUSONTAI DE hHMERAI hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
>NUMFIOS, KAI TOTE NHSTEUSOUSIN EN EKEINHi THi hHMERAi. It's pretty clear
>that the way Mark phrases this, the last clause is independent
>grammatically, while ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI and hOTAN APARQHi NUMFIOS are
>intimately linked. Yet it cannot be said that the latter clause is the
>protasis of a condition, nor the former clause an apodosis. We cannot
>really translate hOTAN here as "whenever," despite the fact that it is used
>with an aorist subjunctive.
>
>BAGD say, "... where hHMERAI hOTAN, 'days when,' belong together and TOTE
>is connected with KAI)," admitting that this cannot be construed as an
>instance of the common hOTAN w/ subjunctive constructions (what I have
>called in my earlier post, in accordance with one common terminology,
>"future more vivid" and "present general" conditional constructions.
>
>So what is it? The comment by BAGD is correct, that hHMERAI hOTAN belong
>together here and the hOTAN + subj. clause is not linked in a conditional
>construction with ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI. I'm not a linguist, but as a
>grammarian I'd say that the hOTAN APARQHi clauses can only be understood as
>a relative clause--and an adjectival clause wherein hOTAN really is
>equivalent to EN hAIS. Is there a better way to understand the function of
>this clause?
Carl, I think you are on to something. The word "when" can be used as a
pronoun in English where the antecedent is a time noun. I'm not sure I want
to call it a relative pronoun, since it fills an adverbial slot, not a noun
slot (i.e. subject or object). On reflection, my example was poorly chosen
because the hOTAN clause is modifying hHMERAI in an adjectival relationship,
limiting the meaning of "days." It is not in an adverbial relationship to
the
clause ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI; this is easily seen because it cannot be moved to
precede this clause and still mean the same thing.
The reason why you aren't comfortable translating hOTAN "whenever" here is
bacause in English "when" can be used as a pronoun, but "whenever" is not.
I doubt that this is either a solecism or a Semitism since the same kind of
construction occurs in English. The possibility exists that it may have
been
introduced to English via the translation of the Bible into English, but I
suspect that it is a feature of Indo-European grammars (of course, it would
have rather restricted usage, only occurring when the noun antecedent is a
time word). Can anyone give examples from other languages? Also, does the
same thing happen with hOTE in Greek?
Turkish uses a word for time, when, interchangably as a noun. When is "at
what time" and can be used as in English "When is the is the issue not how
we are to do this." or "The when of it not the how of it is our problem now.
" Isn't English flexible?
Regards,
Karl Schulte
WA2KBZ@aol.com
Thanks for smashing my example, since it was ill-chosen; however, "future
more
vivid" construction or not, I still am not convinced that I Cor. 13:10 says
that the thing in part will be done away with *after* the perfect comes.
*****************************************************************************
***
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
*****************************************************************************
***
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: RWGreaves@aol.com
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 16:18:31 -0500
Subject: response to: Cremation ==> Burial in Church
Bob,
I read your question on the B- Hebrew Mailing list, using 1 corinthians
15:37, 42-49 as a possible objection to burying one in the church and an
objection to cremation. Most of the objections that have been raised by
christians to either issue (burial of church members, and/or cremation) are
largely of an interpretational nature.
Often times interpretive dialogs and debates are very worthwhile and
fruitful. Though not entirely, this is more true of meanings searched out of
the very point of a text or a clear phrase within it. However, many
hobby-horse riders love to pick obtuse meanings out of an unexplained offhand
comment from a text that deals largely with an entirely differnt issue at its
central focus. It seems to me that we are using poor exegetical skill if we
use a tangental meaning from a text to "prove" a point.
The point in 1 Corinthians 15 is to discuss the reality of the coming
ressurerection and to offer some insight into the distinctive differences
between the earthly and heavenly bodies. The issues of "burying/not burying"
or" in the church/not in the church" or of "cremation/vs no cremation" are
strained through a strange seive. This makes 1 cor 15 a poor proof text for
such an issue.
The points question seems contradictory from a practical standpoint because
if one was to interpret these verses as not permitting burial in the church
and also not permitting cremation then I suppose the only option left is to
just let dead bodies lie whereever they fall so that they may await the
resurection there. The old testament's declaring cerimonialy unclean anyone
who touches a dead body and offering a cerimony for making clean again those
who do, seems to prefer that someone somehow disposes of these bodies
somewhere.
The text of first corinthians chapter fifteen uses a farming analogy to
describe the difference between the seed that is planted and what is reaped.
The planting metaphore seems to me to imply disposal by burial. The fact
that the body that is raised is very much unlike the body that is planted
seems to me to place little concern for exactly how the body that is planted
comes to be disposed of. And since it is a metaphore there is no need to
think of planting as restricted only to planting in the ground, but rather
planted somewhere upon the earth so as to be raised a heavenly body. All
cremated remains remain somewhere upon the earth?! Do they not?
In short, my answer is really not a solution to your question, but rather, a
disolution of the question. I see nothing in the text to validate the
question. Even from a standpoint of original language, reading greek, hebrew
or english does not change the nature of the question to the text or the
answer because the objection is raised from a tangental interpretation of
what is discussed in the text regardless of what language you are reading it
in.
You might advise your potential episcopal client to express empathy to his
church member's concerns, but that the member seems to be making a point that
strays widely from the focus of the text itself.
sincerely,
Robert W. Greaves Jr.
Bob Greaves Guitar Repair
88 St. Charles Street
Johnson City, NY 13790
RWGreaves@aol.com
GuitarCare@aol.com
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #43
****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu