[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #97
b-greek-digest Thursday, 1 February 1996 Volume 01 : Number 097
In this issue:
Thank you ALL
fonts
Re: Future subjunctive
Wis of Solomon 7
Upsilon
Subjunctive Mood
Don't Let This Happen to You
Re: Upsilon
Re: Upsilon
Re: Wis of Solomon 7
O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
Greek Vocab
Re: Greek Vocab
Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
Apostolic Fathers Questions
Re: Don't Let This Happen to You
Re: Wis of Solomon 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Welder <fwelder@ccinet.ab.ca>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 22:48:56 -0700
Subject: Thank you ALL
I say thank you ALL, for taking time and reply to my ?
Each and everyone of you give me the same answer.
I am studing from; the Greek of Stephens, 1550,
also Elzevir, 1624; I am using a; Bruder's Greek
Concordance. The problem is it is Greek writing.
So some Greek words are hard to follow.
I have a word in James 5:16 "fault"
Now my Greek use the word "offences"
and I have trouble finding the meaning of that word
in realtion to James 5:16 "fault"
I will try to spell the word into english.
"paraptomata" I would like some help with this.
Be patient with my ignorance of Greek.
Could you privately email me as not to tie up
others computers. I say again thank you ALL.
FRANK
2 Pe 3:18
------------------------------
From: "D. Peterson" <harpbard@ccnet.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 22:08:22 -0800
Subject: fonts
The font copyright issue is identical with the issue of program copyrights.
Essentially all fonts used by desktop computers as well as those used in
imagesetters are "outline" fonts- rather than a graphic representation of
the font, these are actually programs written in a variety of languages,
most commonly truetype or postscript. (Yes these are really computer
languages - you can write all kinds of non-graphical programs in them.)
The result is that such fonts are protected by the same copyright laws as
any other program with all the appropriate penalties.
BTW, I developed a font for biblical Greek during my first year or
seminary: it is in truetype format. It does not map directly to the fonts
used by databases, etc, but rather is designed for relatively logical touch
typing of fully accented text with diacriticals. It's in the public domain
and I am glad to send it to anybody who wants as long as you are also
willing to distribute it to students and collegues free.
_
Douglas C. Peterson, MD
harpbard@ccnet.com
------------------------------
From: Mark O'Brien <Mark_O'Brien@dts.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 96 09:07:14 CST
Subject: Re: Future subjunctive
I forward this very informative message to the B-GREEK list, since
this particular thread seems to have divided itself onto the TC-LIST as well!
Xaris,
Mark O'Brien
Grad. student, DTS
______________________________________________
Original message sent on Wed, Jan 31 3:17 AM by jwevers@epas.utoronto.ca (John
Wevers) :
Re: Future subjunctive
Possibly a Septuagint scholar might join the discussion.
The last thirty years of my scholarly career has been devoted
largely to dealing with mss readings. Copyists simply did not
distinguish between the homonymic -omai and wmai. In other
words aorist subjunctives could be spelled with -o- or with -w-
almost indiscriminately. I would strongly suggest that one
abandon the notion of a future subjunctive. Grammatically
that makes no sense, and the reading that has been
identified as a future subjunctive is nothing of the kind,
but is simply a misspelled indicative. As far as I know future
subjunctives are not attested as anything but the result of
homonymic spelling. JWW
- --
John Wevers
Near Eastern Studies
University of Toronto
INTERNET: jwevers@epas.utoronto.ca
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 10:10:35 +0800
Subject: Wis of Solomon 7
I'd like to ask a question about WisSol 7:14. I found the syntax in this
chapter really hard (even if it is easy Greek to some), and this verse was one
of the worst. After trying to make sense of it I consulted, dare I say it,
an English translation, and I don't know how they got their rendering, os that
was pretty worthless.
ANEKLIPHS GAR QHSAURIOS ESTIN ANQRWPOIS
(ON (OI KTHSAMENOI PROS QEON ESTEILANTO FILIAN
DIA TAS EK PAIDEIAS DWREAS SUSTAQENTES
For unfailing is her treasure to men (no problem here),
which having acquired they tried to avoid friendship with God (problem)
on account of the gifts of instruction presented.
My first difficulty here is the meaning of STELLW. BAGD lists various choices
which all seem similar to the option of "try to avoid". That, however, makes
little sense to me.
My other difficulty is SUSTAQENTES. To what or whom does this refer and
how should this passave participle, which means "present" in the active, be
understood?
I have to mention in passing that I did this chapter because I thought
(Aorist) that it had relevance to the NT. I'm now pretty much convinced that
it's completely irrelevant and this was a useless exercise till Midnight.
I think it's rather fitting that v. 21 mentions the "powers of roots" because
clearly the writer who penned this strange chapter, was under the influence of
some foreign substance.
Ken Litwak
GTU
Bezerkley, CA
------------------------------
From: Eric Vaughan <z_vaughanje@titan.sfasu.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 12:23:56 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Upsilon
Upsilon is transliterated as both "y" and "u". What is the correct (or
accepted) pronunciation of it? I've always (probably incorrectly)
pronounced it with a sound in between the long and short "u". I
appreciate any answers.
Eric
------------------------------
From: KevLAnder@aol.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 13:29:37 -0500
Subject: Subjunctive Mood
All this talk about a "Future Subjunctive" reminded me of the discussion of
the Subjunctive Mood in James Allen Hewett's grammar (pp. 162-63), which I
quote in part:
"Tenses in the subjunctive mood do not indicate time of action in and of
themselves. Like the participle (and the infinitive and imperative mood),
tenses in the subjunctive mood adopt a time of action that must be
ascertained from the context within which they occur. This much may be said
regarding the time of the action of the subjunctive per se: Because it is a
mood of contigency or possibility, it does bear a _futuristic_ orientation.
For example, one utters an exhortation (a function of this mood) only with
respect to the future. To say 'Let us thing yesterday' is nonsense. Even to
say: 'Let us think today' demands a future perspective--from the vantage
point of the one who is speaking. So there is a future time orientation, but
that springs from the mood, not the tense."
Kevin Anderson
Concord, CA
------------------------------
From: Jim Brooks <jbrooks@techline.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 09:49:46 -0800
Subject: Don't Let This Happen to You
Due to a faulty outlet, I had a power surge flow through my sensitive
computer equipment. It blew out my printer, mother board, I/O card,
fax/modem card, scanner card, and hard drive. $732 later, (the printer is
still out--cost unknown) I am back together. If there is a silver lining in
this--I upgraded from a 486SX/25Mhz to a 486DX-4/120Mhz and from a 250MB
hard drive to 1.2GB.
Yes, I had a surge protector on all my systems. But, it was one of those $10
jobs one buys at Fred Meyer, Sears (whereever). I've invested in a $40 surge
protector that has a warranty on it that if it fails, the company will
replace the damaged equipment.
A word to the wise: (1) Have a good (no excellent) surge protector; (2) make
backups of your information on the hard drive.
Learning the hard way,
==================================
Jim Brooks
Pastor, Grace Community Church
PO Box 537
Elma, WA 98541
(360) 482 3528
jbrooks@techline.com
===================================
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 12:54:38 -0600
Subject: Re: Upsilon
On 1/31/96, Eric Vaughan wrote:
> Upsilon is transliterated as both "y" and "u". What is the correct (or
> accepted) pronunciation of it? I've always (probably incorrectly)
> pronounced it with a sound in between the long and short "u". I
> appreciate any answers.
The "Y" was taken into the Roman alphabet to represent upsilon precisely
because it had a sound that was no longer represented by the Latin "U" (as
presumably it would have been if upsilon's sound had not undergone a
change). Probably by the Christian era it was already being pronounced as
it is in modern Greek: like an English long E (exactly as iota, EI, OI were
also pronounced).
The "proper" pronunciation? The Erasmian standard has always been, I
believe, that it should be like a French U or like a German umlauted U.
There may be some alternative answers to this question; don't be surprised
if there are!
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: Stephen C Carlson <scarlso1@osf1.gmu.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:50:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Upsilon
Eric Vaughan wrote:
>Upsilon is transliterated as both "y" and "u". What is the correct (or
>accepted) pronunciation of it? I've always (probably incorrectly)
>pronounced it with a sound in between the long and short "u". I
>appreciate any answers.
During the relevant time period (c. 6th cen. B.C. to 9th cen. A.D.)
upsilon was as a high, front, rounded vowel (as in French tu, German
u-umlaut, u"). You can approximate it by trying to say "oo" and "ee"
at the same time. Before the 6th cen. B.C. it was pronounced as 'u'
(like Greek OU), and after the 9th cen. A.D. it is pronounced as 'i'
(like Greek I). I'll always attempt the French sound, but it often
comes out as a short "oo."
Stephen Carlson
- --
Stephen C. Carlson, George Mason University School of Law, Patent Track, 4LE
scarlso1@osf1.gmu.edu : Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs
http://osf1.gmu.edu/~scarlso1/ : chant the words. -- Shujing 2.35
------------------------------
From: Stephen C Carlson <scarlso1@osf1.gmu.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:33:45 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Wis of Solomon 7
Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> I'd like to ask a question about WisSol 7:14.
>ANEKLIPHS GAR QHSAURIOS ESTIN ANQRWPOIS
>(ON (OI KTHSAMENOI PROS QEON ESTEILANTO FILIAN
>DIA TAS EK PAIDEIAS DWREAS SUSTAQENTES
>For unfailing is her treasure to men (no problem here),
>which having acquired they tried to avoid friendship with God (problem)
>on account of the gifts of instruction presented.
>My first difficulty here is the meaning of STELLW. BAGD lists various choices
>which all seem similar to the option of "try to avoid". That, however, makes
>little sense to me.
STELLW (the root of "apostle" and "epistle") normally means "to send,
set up, or place" and probably is related to hISTHMI, "to stand". In
the context, I'd say the sense is probably "establish" as in establishing
a friendship. STELLW is only found in the middle voice in the GNT (2Co8:20
pres. mid. part, 2Th3:6, pres. mid. inf.), so that may be why BAGD rendered
it as "avoid."
> My other difficulty is SUSTAQENTES. To what or whom does this refer and
>how should this passave participle, which means "present" in the active, be
>understood?
SUSTAQENTES should refer to hOI KTHSAMENOI, since it is in the nominative.
Its meaning, as I found from Perseus' LSJ, in the passive in reference to
friends would be "to form a league" or "to be allied" (in the middle voice
it would mean to "introduce" someone). It is thus a excellent word to
describe the result of becoming close friends.
Stephen Carlson
- --
Stephen C. Carlson, George Mason University School of Law, Patent Track, 4LE
scarlso1@osf1.gmu.edu : Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs
http://osf1.gmu.edu/~scarlso1/ : chant the words. -- Shujing 2.35
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 13:03:37 +0800
Subject: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
According to LSJM at Perseus, o)cu/s means "wood sorrel". That can't possibly
be its meaning in WisSol 7:22. Am I missing something in the LSJM entry or is
LSJM missing the boat here? Thanks.
Ken Litwak
------------------------------
From: Larry Chouinard <fa78935@kcc.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 16:12:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Greek Vocab
I have been using Memcards to produce my Greek Vocabulary tests; but
lately numerous problems with the program have developed. Does anyone
know of an alternative program for vocab tests?
Memcards is nice because it allows one the option of selecting the vocab
that matches the text being used (e.g. Metzger's, Lexical Aids). So when
my students are memorizing words that occur 20x in the GNT I can very
easily print off a test on those terms. Recently however, the program
has started to include vocab that the students have not had. I know
there is a way to add and subtract terms--but that is a major time
consumer.
There must be another program. What programs have others found useful in
putting together Vocab tests?
Thanks for the help,
Larry Chouinard
Kentucky Christian College
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:00:05 +0800
Subject: Re: Greek Vocab
Well, I haven't tried putting together vocab tests, but I have used
Flash Works by Bill Mounce and found it helpful for my purposes, which is just
to learn vocabulary. Best of all, its author subscribes to B-Greek and has been
readily available when I needed tech support on the program and the price
is a "steal" IMO (vocabulary drills for five languages for the price of a
Whopper combo is pretty good if you ask me.)
Ken Litwak
GTU
Bezerkley, CA
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:03:26 +0800
Subject: Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
Dear Carl,
According to the tagged morph. LXX at UPENN, the vocab. form is
O)CU/S. I've entered that twice separately now to be sure I avoided a typo
from the first time. It represents omicron-xi-upsilon-sigma. I got back
from typing o)cu/s wood sorrel. So I don't know what I did wrong. This is
from the TLG beta code, per your advice. Thanks.
Ken
------------------------------
From: "Paul J. Bodin" <pjbodin@sirius.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 14:58:59 -0800
Subject: Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
At 01:03 PM 1/31/96 +0800, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> According to LSJM at Perseus, o)cu/s means "wood sorrel". That can't
possibly
>be its meaning in WisSol 7:22. Am I missing something in the LSJM entry or is
>LSJM missing the boat here? Thanks.
I don't know what you found. Try searching for O)CU/J. This should yield
the correct definition, which is essentially "sharp" (as in "oxytone"). The
final sigma is transliterated as a J in beta encoding.
___________________________________________________________________________
Paul J. Bodin Internet: pjbodin@sirius.com
Seminary Pastor smail: 1333 66th Street
Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary Berkeley, CA 94702-2617
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 16:57:08 -0600
Subject: Re: O)CU?S = wood sorrel????
On 1/30/96, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> According to LSJM at Perseus, o)cu/s means "wood sorrel". That can't
>possibly
> be its meaning in WisSol 7:22. Am I missing something in the LSJM entry or is
> LSJM missing the boat here? Thanks.
I don't know exactly what your transliteratIon scheme is, but if c = xi,
then your word SHOULD be the adjective, OCUS, OCEIA, OCU, meaning "sharp,"
"keen," or "high-pitched." If this is the passage I think it is, it
probably qualifies the word for spirit (sorry, I don't have a LXX with me
at home to check the verse).
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: KevLAnder@aol.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 13:29:40 -0500
Subject: Apostolic Fathers Questions
I have a few minor questions about some reading I have done in the Apostolic
Fathers.
(1) Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 7:1
EUCHARISTIAS KAI PROSEUCHHS APECHONTAI, DIA TO MH hOMOLOGEIN THN
EUCHARISTIAN SARKA EINAI TOU SWTHROS hHMWN IHSOU CHRISTOU THN hPER TWN
hAMARTIWN hHMWN PATHOUSAN, hHN THi CHRHSTOTHTI hO PATHR HGEIREN.
Here both THN . . . PATHOUSAN and hHN . . . hO PATHR ktl. make the best sense
with IHSOU CHRISTOU as their antecedent, but they agree in gender with
EUCHARISTIAN. Is this simply a syntactically creative way for Ignatius to
point out the, as it were, "corporeal" connection between the Eucharist and
Christ's Passion/Resurrection? Contextually, of course, Ignatius is dealing
with a docetic heresy.
(2) Didache 7:3
EAN DE AMPHOTERA MH ECHHiS, EKCHEON EIS THN KEPHALHN TRIS hUDWR EIS ONOMA
PATROS KAI hUIOU KAI hGIOU PNEUMATOS.
Here I have a simple parsing question. My guess is that EKCHEON is a Pres.
Act. Ptc. neut. sg. nom. of EKCHEW. I would also surmise that if my parsing
is correct, the ptc. is being used imperativally. Can anyone confirm or
disconfirm this?
(3) Didache 16:5
TOTE hHXEI hH KTISIS TWN ANTHRWPWN EIS THN PURWSIN THS DOKIMASIAS, AND
SKANDALISTHHSONTAI POLLOI AN APOLOUNTAI, hOI DE hUPOMEINANTES EN THi PISTEI
AUTWN SWTHHSONTAI hUP' AUTOU TOU KATATHEMATOS.
My question concerns the very last phrase, hUP' AUTOU TOU KATATHEMATOS. The
Loeb translation (Kirsopp Lake) has, " . . . but 'they who endure' in their
faith 'shall be saved' BY THE CURSE ITSELF." Lake also provides a note
indicating that the meaning here is obscure. But I was wondering if, by any
stretch of the imagination, one could take TOU KATATHEMATOS as an ablative of
separation, thereby providing a more sensible translation such as, "they . .
. shall be saved by him from the curse." The trouble here, however, may be in
tracking down an antecedent for AUTOU.
Of course, part of the whole problem lay in the precise meaning of KATATHEMA,
which I have not adequately researched.
Kevin Anderson
Concord, CA
------------------------------
From: David Rising <rising@epix.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 22:38:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Don't Let This Happen to You
On Wed, 31 Jan 1996, Jim Brooks wrote:
> Yes, I had a surge protector on all my systems. But, it was one of those $10
> jobs one buys at Fred Meyer, Sears (whereever). I've invested in a $40 surge
> protector that has a warranty on it that if it fails, the company will
> replace the damaged equipment.
>
> A word to the wise: (1) Have a good (no excellent) surge protector; (2) make
> backups of your information on the hard drive.
Another cheap protective measure is to unplug everything from the wall
when done each day. It is a pain, but you can't beat the price.
David
>
> Learning the hard way,
>
>
> ==================================
> Jim Brooks
> Pastor, Grace Community Church
> PO Box 537
> Elma, WA 98541
> (360) 482 3528
> jbrooks@techline.com
> ===================================
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 22:43:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Wis of Solomon 7
Ken, I feel obligated to respond a bit to the paragraph below, since I
[perhaps among others] suggested to you that Wisdom 7 would be a good
chapter to translate. Since you clearly did not think it a good
recommendation, I want to defend this great text to you a bit.
You for a good analysis of the passage that gave you difficulty and of the
term OXUS, one of the 21 adjectives applied to SOFIA, so I will not deal
with that at all.
> I have to mention in passing that I did this chapter because I thought
>(Aorist) that it had relevance to the NT. I'm now pretty much convinced that
>it's completely irrelevant and this was a useless exercise till Midnight.
>I think it's rather fitting that v. 21 mentions the "powers of roots" because
>clearly the writer who penned this strange chapter, was under the influence of
>some foreign substance.
I hope to point you to items that show the Wisdom of Solomon is extremely
relevant to the study of the NT.
(1) The great hymn to wisdom in 7:22-8:1 illuminates Hebrews 1:1-4, which
speaks of the Son in language strongly reminiscent of 7:25. The list of 21
adjectives that begins in 7:22, while difficult to translate, if one has to
look up most of the terms, is a marvelous piece of writing. One really
needs to read it aloud to hear the sound and rhythym of the text.
(2) Wisdom 7:21 speaks of wisdom as the "artisan of all thing," It is not
surprising that many scholars think such wisdom theology lies behind John
1:1-18, Col 1:15-18a, etc., which speak of Jesus as God's creative agent.
Among recent books _Jesus the Sage_ by Ben Witherington III (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1994) might illuminate the value of this great wisdom theology
for understanding the teaching and person of Jesus as presented in the NT.
(3) Did you understand what 7:15-21 was affirming? Wisdom teaches one to
understand the entire makeup of the universe (7:17b), which includes the
power and utility of created beings. The "power of roots" refers, most
likely, to the use of them in medicine and [perhaps ?] magical incantations
or spells.
(4) Was this writer "under the influence of some foreign substance"? You
bet! The substance was the heady stuff of Greek, especially Stoic,
philosophy. In 7:23 and 24, DIA PANTWN XWROUN PNEUMATWN, and DIHKEI DE KAI
XWREI DIA PANTWN DIA THN KAQAROTHTA, he is borrowing the language the Stoa
uses of the LOGOS that moves through everything in the universe. Wisdom
holds that it is not the Stoic LOGOS that is the revealer of God (the
language of 7:25), but the SOFIA TOY QEOU. In Wisdom 8:6-7, SOFIA is the
source of the four classical virtures [DIKAIOSUNH, SWFROSUNH, FRONESIS,
ANDREIA]. In short, the author of this great passage on God's wisdom is
claiming all the knowledge of Greek philosophy for her., the same sort of
thing that Philo and Josephus do some two to three centuries later. The
NTapplies all this to Jesus, stating that in him [Jesus] are hid all the
wisdom and knowledge of God.
I suggested that you read Wisdom 7. If you have the <it>Sitzfleisch(it/>,
translate the entire passage on wisdom, 6:12-10:21. Incidentally, years ago
when George Nicklesburg was in a graduate seminar I taught on the Apocrypha
and Pseudepigrapha, the students were expected to translate all of Wisdom
in two weeks! No wonder George went on to become one of this country's
revered specialists in intertestamental studies.
Years ago in the Dropsie College series of commentaries on apocryphal books
(published by Harper & Row, I rthink) Josef Reider (I am writing this away
from those bookshelves) put out an excellent commentary, including a Greek
text and facing original translation. You might find it useful.
I am responding in this fashion because I really want you to love this
deuterocanonical book. Its first section (1:1-6:11) is one of the great
passages on the suffering righteous one in Israel, the one who looks to God
for vindication. And it has much to teach careful readers of the NT Cf. 1
Cor 8:6 on creation and the references to Sapientia in the margins
alongside Rom 1:18-32.
What a wonderful blessing to have such a book at hand to illuminate Jesus
of Nazareth as God's wisdom for us.
Peace,
Edgar Krentz, New Testament
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
Chicago, IL 60615
Tel.: 312-256-0752; (H) 312-947-8105
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #97
****************************
** 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