From: Stephen Carlson (scc@reston.icl.com)
Date: Fri Aug 18 1995 - 17:03:06 EDT
Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church wrote:
> Recently there has been considerable discussion regarding
> Colwell's Rule, its meaning and abuse, and whether Colwell himself was
> guilty of abusing his own rule.
> In 1975 my Th.M. thesis, "The Signifance of the Anarthrous
> Predicate Nominative in John," argued that it was an abuse of Colwell's
> rule to argue that anarthrous predicate nouns preceding the copulative
> verb tend to be definite. This is the converse of Colwell's rule which
> asserts that definite predicate nouns preceding the copulative tend to be
> anarthrous.
Is this really Colwell's rule? If so, it is of no relevance to
Jn1:1c. In Jn1:1c, if THEOS is to be a predicate nominative,
instead of the subject, am I right in thinking that KAI hO QEOS
HN hO LOGOS must mean "and God was the Word" -- completely ruling
out the possibility of predicate nominative QEOS being arthrous?
Stephen Carlson
-- Stephen Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, : ICL, Inc. scc@reston.icl.com : and songs chant the words. : 11490 Commerce Park Dr. (703) 648-3330 : Shujing 2:35 : Reston, VA 22091 USA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:25 EDT