[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #140
b-greek-digest Saturday, 9 March 1996 Volume 01 : Number 140
In this issue:
Re: dynamic words
Re: dynamic words
RE: dynamic words
X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 1.4>
Re: dynamic words
Exegete 1 Tim 5:9
Re: dynamic words
Re: Exegete 1 Tim 5:9
Remedial Question
Luke 16:2
Luke 16:2
Re: dynamic words
Re: Luke 16:2
RE: MIAS GUNAIKOS ANDRA
Re: Luke 16:2
NT Greek Tapes
RE: DYNAMIC WORDS
Re: NT Greek Tapes
RE: DYNAMIC WORDS
Re: Remedial Question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Micheal Palmer <bla00161@wvnvm.wvnet.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 00:29:39 -0500
Subject: Re: dynamic words
At 5:54 PM 3/6/96 -0500, Gary S. Shogren wrote:
>context unless there's evidence of a play on words. By the way - Exegetical
>Fallacies is shortly to be re-released in an updated form.
Gary:
Can you say who will be the publisher?
I would also like to know how I can get a copy of Exegetical Fallacies
*now*. Do you know of a source?
Micheal W. Palmer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistant Professor
Greek and New Testament
Bluefield College
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
------------------------------
From: "Dale M. Wheeler" <dalemw@teleport.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 00:03:57 -0800
Subject: Re: dynamic words
Brent Arias wrote:
>I was wondering if I could solicit submittals of everyone's favorite
>Greek words which meet the criteria of having a notoriously context
>sensitive definition.
How about the ever illusive DOXA in Eph 3:13, is it LXX "glory," or
Classical "opinion"??
Here's a fun one that should cause the theological fur to fly: Should
PARAPIPTW in Heb 6:6 be understood through the theological grid of "losing
one's salvation" by falling away or as BAGD puts it "commiting apostasy" or
should it be interpreted in light of the previous uses of PIPTW (3:17;
4:11); by the way it looks like Moses "fell" as well (he died in the
wilderness and didn't enter the rest).
One of the problems of teaching students exegesis is to try to get them to
look at NT words through a Koine/NT grid, rather than their 20th century
theological grid; a classic example is the verb SWZW and the noun SWTHRIA,
which as we all know always means "regeneration (born
again)"/"justification" (sins forgiven and on your way to heaven). Except
for the fact that it frequently means "to be healed" in the gospels (Mark
5:23, 28), and when combined with PSUCHE it means to preserve or rescue
someone from physical death (Mark 3:4; cf., James 1:21; 1Pet 1:9) not "Jesus
saved my soul."
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com
***********************************************************************
------------------------------
From: "A. Brent Hudson" <abhudson@wchat.on.ca>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 00:08:48 -0500
Subject: RE: dynamic words
- ----------
On Thursday March 7, Gary S. Shogren wrote:=20
Good point, although it strikes me that there are all sorts of
complications: whether we are dealing with Aramaic source material, for
example. Also, puns, like other types of jokes, are very hard to verify =
in
a second language. Also, what looks like deliberate ambiguity may =
simply be
because we are reading the NT with BAGD in front of us, and are aware of =
the
translation options at a glance, while a particular author and his =
community
may be used to using a word like ANWQEN in an idiomatic way.
I guess I'm predisposed to thinking that the NT authors were all =
conscious
that their books were being heard by an audience for many of whom Koine =
was
a second language, and that they were inclined toward literal and
straightforward diction. I know when I'm preaching through a =
translator, I
try to keep it simple and literal. Or maybe I'm reading into the first
century what I would do in that situation.
Any thoughts from the group?
First, there are varying levels of competency in a second language. The =
analogy of a translator implies a certain competency level of the =
translator (after all, there are translators who can handle more than =
"simple" English). The author of the Fourth Gospel seems to have a good =
grasp of Koine as a second language (cf. GMark, Apoc.). I think it =
hinders our understanding of the Gospel when we exclude certain literary =
devices based on our views of source criticism. Should we not evaluate =
the Greek of the Fourth Gospel first and foremost and work from these =
conclusions? Even if Aramaic source material was used, the final shape =
of the Gospel is a literary whole.
Second, the use of ANWQEN could very well have been used in an idiomatic =
way; however, when the word is used elsewhere in the Gospel it means =
"from above" (3:31; 19:11, 23). The fact that Nicodemus interprets this =
as "again" is the reason for "deliberate ambiguity" being applied to =
this verse in many commentaries. As far as idea of Aramaic sources, the =
Nicodemus dialogue only makes sense in Greek, since there exists no =
Aramaic equivalent of ANWQEN (Brown asserts this in his commentary =
(1.130,31) but this was argued at length in _NTS_ in the late 50's (I do =
not have access to the article at this time and I forget the =
bibliographical info., does anyone remember it?)). =20
Perhaps we need to be reminded of J. P. Louw's application of lexical =
semantics to Koine Greek (J. P. Louw, _Semantics of New Testament Greek_ =
(Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982). In sum, ALL words receive their =
meaning from context. Moreover, IMO, it is context (not source theory =
or BAGD) that will show passages as using or not using "deliberate =
ambiguity."=20
A. Brent Hudson
________________
Graduate Student
McMaster University
Hamilton, ON, Canada
abhudson@wchat.on.ca OR g9117472.mcmaster.ca
------------------------------
From: Frank Vander Plaetse <vdplaetf@vito.be>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 14:39:09 +0100
Subject: X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 1.4>
Can someone give me the exact bibliographic references of J.C.Wilson
on an early dating of Revelation , mentioned by Greg Doudna in
an e-mail dated Thu,30Mar 1995(!) ?
I was unsuccesful reaching G.D. by electronic way.
Thanks in advance.
Sincerely Yours,
Fr.Vander Plaetse
Elzenstraat 17
3271 Averbode
BELGIUM
TEL: +32 13 77 31 16
E-Mail : vdplaetf@vito.be
Internet : http://www.vito.be/
------------------------------
From: Cal Redmond <calred@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 09:15:00 -0800
Subject: Re: dynamic words
Brent Arias wrote,
>I was wondering if I could solicit submittals of everyone's favorite
>Greek words which meet the criteria of having a notoriously context
>sensitive definition.
One of my favorite "dynamic" words is DOKEW. In Gal. 2:6, we have the
participle phrase APO DE TWN DOKOUNTWN EINAI TI. Does this phrase refer
to those who were highly esteemed (as in most commentators I've read), or
does it mean those who have the reputation but not the substance, as in
Plato's _Apology of Socrates_, in 21B and C (in Loeb's numbering), where
Socrates says HLTHON EPI TINA TWN DOKOUNTWN SOFWN EINAI, and then goes on
to say that the man had the reputation of being wise but was not.
What then does that do for us in Gal. 2? Is Paul here granting honor to
those in Jerusalem, or is he indicating that they have an undeserved
reputation for importance, as I think might be more likely?
Cal Redmond
The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
calred@ix.netcom.com
------------------------------
From: Denny A Diehl <dennydiehl@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 08:29:08 PST
Subject: Exegete 1 Tim 5:9
Denny Diehl here,
with a request for someone to exegete 1 Tim 5:9, with an emphasis
on GEGONUIA, if it applies to just the first part of the verse, or is also
connected with ENOS ANDROS GUNE.
Thank you,
Denny
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:22:00 -0600
Subject: Re: dynamic words
On 3/8/96, Cal Redmond wrote:
> Brent Arias wrote,
>
> >I was wondering if I could solicit submittals of everyone's favorite
> >Greek words which meet the criteria of having a notoriously context
> >sensitive definition.
>
> One of my favorite "dynamic" words is DOKEW. In Gal. 2:6, we have the
> participle phrase APO DE TWN DOKOUNTWN EINAI TI. Does this phrase refer
> to those who were highly esteemed (as in most commentators I've read), or
> does it mean those who have the reputation but not the substance, as in
> Plato's _Apology of Socrates_, in 21B and C (in Loeb's numbering), where
> Socrates says HLTHON EPI TINA TWN DOKOUNTWN SOFWN EINAI, and then goes on
> to say that the man had the reputation of being wise but was not.
>
> What then does that do for us in Gal. 2? Is Paul here granting honor to
> those in Jerusalem, or is he indicating that they have an undeserved
> reputation for importance, as I think might be more likely?
This is a good one, and this root DOK- underlies some of the greatest
ambiguities in the language. The problem is that DOKEW can have both a
subjective sense ("I seem to myself to be ..." = "I think I am ...") and an
objective sense (objective, that is, in terms of whose opinion is involved:
"I seem/appear {to others} to be ..." = "I am reputed to be ..." There is
at least one point where Socrates in the Apology emphasizes that duality by
saying that such-and-such EDOKEI hOUTOS hEAUTWi TE KAI POLLOIS ALLOIS SOFOS
EINAI ... It can also have the sense "seem good" and therefore take on a
technical sense of "be decided by ..." as in the official formula of
Athenian legislation: EDOXE THi TE BOULHi KAI TWi DHMWi TWN AQHNAIWN NAUS
APOSTELLEIN ...
The cognate DOXA and its ambiguities have already been mentioned; it is
subject to the same ambiguity noted above for DOKEW in classical Attic--it
can mean public esteem/estimation = reputation/appearance as well as
personal/private opinion; it can mean "appearance" as opposed to "reality"
(ALHQEIA).
Then there's DOGMA, also from that technical sense of DOKEW: it can mean
"decree" as in the modern derivative usage, or it can mean "opinion" as
held by a thinker (one also sees TA DOKOUNTA in this sense = "what X
thought").
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: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:22:04 -0600
Subject: Re: Exegete 1 Tim 5:9
On 3/8/96, Denny A Diehl wrote:
> Denny Diehl here,
>
> with a request for someone to exegete 1 Tim 5:9, with an emphasis
> on GEGONUIA, if it applies to just the first part of the verse, or is also
> connected with ENOS ANDROS GUNE.
It applies only to the first part of the verse; it's like our " ... old" in
"fifty years old," literally "born no less than sixty years (ago)" = "at
least sixty years old." hENOS ANDROS GUNH goes on to add a second
categorization, after which several others follow.
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: chris@shop.internet.net
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 08:36:49 -0600
Subject: Remedial Question
Hi All,
I have recently joined this mail list and have been lurking and observing
all that comes and goes throught this list and figured I take a shot. I
will be leading a small Bible study of 30-40 college students through
Romans 7:14-25. I wish to to understand the contextual, as well as the
relevant, use of SARKINOS (of root SARKON, I believe. sp?) in verse 14.
Paul seems to compare this with the PNEUMATIKOS of the Law.
Any comments?
Grace To You
~Chris~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Uzzi
chris@internet.net
Internet Shopping Network
3475 Deer Creek Road, Palo Alto, California 94304
(415) 846-7462 -- (415) 842-7415 fax <=> http://www.internet.net
"God is dead" -Nietzsche
"No, I think you'll find it's Nietzsche who's dead" -God
------------------------------
From: "Dale M. Wheeler" <dalemw@teleport.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 10:24:43 -0800
Subject: Luke 16:2
I just ran into another alternative for Luke 16:2: Take TI as adverbial
interrogative (Why?) and then TOUTO become the D.O. of AKOUW. Not in
agreement with BDF (their adverbial uses are #299(4)), but how does that
strike you'all.
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com
***********************************************************************
------------------------------
From: "Dale M. Wheeler" <dalemw@teleport.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 09:38:58 -0800
Subject: Luke 16:2
Greetings parse-ologists. Here's an interesting conflict in the tools ! In
Luke 16:2 the phrase TI TOUTO is parsed by some as accusative (evidently
Direct Object of AKOUW, either together as a compound interrogative or TOUTO
is the D.O. and TI is predicate to TOUTO with the copula elided). Others
parse them as nominative (evidently an equative clause with the copula
elided, and the relative pronoun which refers back to TOUTO and functions as
the D.O. of AKOUW also elided).
For those of you who are into crytology, BDF #299(1) refers to this
construction and says that TI is being used predicatively with TAUTA/TOUTO,
then give examples which could go either way with no real explanation: Acts
14:15 vs Matt 26:62.
Any suggestions ??????
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com
***********************************************************************
------------------------------
From: "Carlton L. Winbery" <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 11:25:18 -0600
Subject: Re: dynamic words
Cal Redmond wrote:
> Does this phrase refer
> to those who were highly esteemed (as in most commentators I've read), or
> does it mean those who have the reputation but not the substance, as in
> Plato's _Apology of Socrates_, in 21B and C (in Loeb's numbering), where
> Socrates says HLTHON EPI TINA TWN DOKOUNTWN SOFWN EINAI, and then goes on
> to say that the man had the reputation of being wise but was not.
> What then does that do for us in Gal. 2? Is Paul here granting honor to
> those in Jerusalem, or is he indicating that they have an undeserved
> reputation for importance, as I think might be more likely?
>
In addition to what Carl wrote from the use of DOKEW in the Greek world,
Paul's harsh letter to the Corinthians may answer Cal's question. II Cor.
11:5; 12:11. He did not consider himself inferior (hUSTERHKENAI 11:5 and
hUSTERHSA 12:11) to those "superlative" apostles (TWN hUPERLIAN APOSTOLWN).
Surely he means that their reputation was somewhat undeserved. TEV "to
those very special so-called 'apostles' of yours!" 11:5; "to those very
special 'apostles' of yours." Many commentators feel that Galatians was
written in the same time period as this letter. If so, it is reasonable
that Paul was using DOKOUNTWN and DOKOUNTES in Gal. 2:6 in a similar way.
This would seem to be supported by the phrase hOPOIOI POTE HSAN OUDEN MOI
DIAFEREI, "whatever they were formerly makes no difference to me." You can
almost hear Paul say that in some way these guys are overrated. But, he
did go on to say, "but they did recognize the legitimacy of our mission
(vss. 9-10).
Carlton Winbery
Chair Religion/Philosophy
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
fax (318) 442-4996 or (318) 487-7425
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 13:20:13 -0600
Subject: Re: Luke 16:2
On 3/8/96, Dale M. Wheeler wrote:
> Greetings parse-ologists. Here's an interesting conflict in the tools ! In
> Luke 16:2 the phrase TI TOUTO is parsed by some as accusative (evidently
> Direct Object of AKOUW, either together as a compound interrogative or TOUTO
> is the D.O. and TI is predicate to TOUTO with the copula elided). Others
> parse them as nominative (evidently an equative clause with the copula
> elided, and the relative pronoun which refers back to TOUTO and functions as
> the D.O. of AKOUW also elided).
>
> For those of you who are into crytology, BDF #299(1) refers to this
> construction and says that TI is being used predicatively with TAUTA/TOUTO,
> then give examples which could go either way with no real explanation: Acts
> 14:15 vs Matt 26:62.
>
> Any suggestions ??????
A stab, probably after too little thought about this little puzzler: I
think I would prefer to understand TI as accusative direct object of AKOUW
and TOUTO as predicative (adverbial) to it. Granted, the best English
equivalent is probably, "What is this I hear about you?"--Still, I think it
is literally, "What do I hear about you here/in_this_instance?" I rather
think that those who "parse them as nominative (evidently an equative
clause with the copula elided ..." are construing the Greek as if it were
an English sentence, i.e., reasoning backwards from how you translate it to
how it construes in Greek. My own reasoning, which could be wrong here, is
that, although hOUTOS may very well function substantivally by itself, when
it appears with another element such as the pronoun TI here, it is a
demonstrative predicative pronoun with intensive deictic force.
> I just ran into another alternative for Luke 16:2: Take TI as adverbial
> interrogative (Why?) and then TOUTO become the D.O. of AKOUW. Not in
> agreement with BDF (their adverbial uses are #299(4)), but how does that
> strike you'all.
I wouldn't say this is impossible, but somehow it seems less likely, more
strained, to me.
I will be interested to hear/read what others have to say on this one.
Ellipsis is common enough in Greek, but it always leaves room for honest
doubt when one tries to supply the expletives.
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: "A. Brent Hudson" <abhudson@wchat.on.ca>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 16:49:22 -0500
Subject: RE: MIAS GUNAIKOS ANDRA
David Moore Wrote:
Thanks for your answer, Brent; but both the Greek and the Hebrew
seem to indicate that GUNH in Prov. 6:26 goes with the second foot of =
the
verse rather than the first, so the example isn't really a similar
construction.=20
I did the search on my old XT laptop (yes that's right, an XT laptop) =
using LBASE and the old CCAT files. Anyhow, the telltale DE marking =
GUNH with the second clause was omitted from my search results, =
something Bible Windows made me painfully aware of when rechecked the =
results (after I made the post). Sorry about that.
Brent
_______________________________________________
Graduate Student
McMaster University
Hamilton, ON, Canada
abhudson@wchat.on.ca OR g9117472@mcmaster.ca
_______________________________________________
------------------------------
From: "Carlton L. Winbery" <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 13:36:10 +0400
Subject: Re: Luke 16:2
Dale Wheeler wrote;
>Greetings parse-ologists. Here's an interesting conflict in the tools ! In
>Luke 16:2 the phrase TI TOUTO is parsed by some as accusative (evidently
>Direct Object of AKOUW, either together as a compound interrogative or TOUTO
>is the D.O. and TI is predicate to TOUTO with the copula elided). Others
>parse them as nominative (evidently an equative clause with the copula
>elided, and the relative pronoun which refers back to TOUTO and functions as
>the D.O. of AKOUW also elided).
>
>For those of you who are into crytology, BDF #299(1) refers to this
>construction and says that TI is being used predicatively with TAUTA/TOUTO,
>then give examples which could go either way with no real explanation: Acts
>14:15 vs Matt 26:62.
There seems to me to be only two possibilities. TI TOUTO is "What is
this?" You would expect it to be followed by hOTI or a relative pronoun.
It would then be ellyptical for "What is this (that) I hear about you." TI
could also be translated "why?" "Why am I hearing this about you?" TOUTO
is then object of the verb and TI is an interrogative particle.
Carlton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
------------------------------
From: Larry Chouinard <fa78935@kcc.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:01:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: NT Greek Tapes
Recently I received from Audio-Forum a list of readings of various
Classical authors. Stephen Daitz offers several tapes done in ancient
Greek. They also list a collection of 12 cassettes of the NT in Greek.
It says it is the 1967 Vellas version. Has anybody used these tapes and
found them useful for students in NT Greek? Are they modern Greek
pronounciation or Erasmian?
Thanks for your help.
Larry Chouinard
Kentucky Christian College
------------------------------
From: perry.stepp@chrysalis.org
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 96 16:31:32 -0600
Subject: RE: DYNAMIC WORDS
Re. words that shift according to context--
Kind of simplistic, but how about KAI and DE ("and, even, indeed, especially,
but, . . ." and "and, but, now, so, . . ." repectively)?
Grace and peace,
Perry L. Stepp, Baylor University
------------------------------
From: Nichael Lynn Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 19:13:00 -0400
Subject: Re: NT Greek Tapes
At 5:01 PM 08/03/96, Larry Chouinard wrote:
>Recently I received from Audio-Forum a list of readings of various
>Classical authors. Stephen Daitz offers several tapes done in ancient
>Greek. They also list a collection of 12 cassettes of the NT in Greek.
>It says it is the 1967 Vellas version. [...]
Yes, it's interesting that while Audio-Forum publishes several tapes of
ancient Greek works (including a complete Iliad and a complete Ody.) and
- --in addition to the Modern Greek version mentioned above-- complete NTs in
a couple of dozen languages (including, for example, Tagalog and Hebrew)
they don't publish a complete Greek NT in the "original".
Nichael | "Just because it didn't happen |
nichael@sover.net | don't mean it ain't true." |
http://www.sover.net/~nichael | -Yogi Berra [paraphrasing Mircea Eliade] |
------------------------------
From: Marty Brownfield <mbrownfield@vtcom3.vantek.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 19:33:31 -0600
Subject: RE: DYNAMIC WORDS
Another word whose meaning depends solely on context: TELEIOS.
In 1 Cor. 13:7, TO TELEION is nuanced to mean "completion" by those who
think it refers to the completed canon; "maturity" by those who think it
refers to the maturing of the church in love; or "the end" by those who
think it refers to the parousia. (I'm sure many more views also exist.)
Also, in Rom. 10:4, is Christ the "end" of the Law (meaning it is no longer
in force), or the "goal" of the Law (meaning the Law points to Christ)?
Marty Brownfield
mbrownfield@vantek.net or mpbrownf@fedex.com
http://www.vantek.net/pages/mbrownfield/index.html
------------------------------
From: "Carlton L. Winbery" <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 21:20:16 +0400
Subject: Re: Remedial Question
Chris Uzzi wrote;
>
>I have recently joined this mail list and have been lurking and observing
>all that comes and goes throught this list and figured I take a shot. I
>will be leading a small Bible study of 30-40 college students through
>Romans 7:14-25. I wish to to understand the contextual, as well as the
>relevant, use of SARKINOS (of root SARKON, I believe. sp?) in verse 14.
>Paul seems to compare this with the PNEUMATIKOS of the Law.
>
>Any comments?
SARKINOS and SARKIKOS are adjectives built on the noun SARX. They indicate
that what they describe is "of the flesh." Paul seems to indicate what
this means by adding PEPRAMENOS hUPO THN hAMARTIAN -- "effected by sin."
Contrast this with the Law as given by God -- of the Spirit - PNEUMATIKOS.
Carlton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #140
*****************************
** 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