From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sat Dec 16 1995 - 08:40:59 EST
At 8:14 AM 12/15/95, Carlton Winbery wrote:
>Carl Conrad said;
>>If the infinitive is referring back to the subject of the main sentence,
>>then its subject will be nominative:
>>
>>Socrates says, somewhere early in the _Apology_ of Plato:
>>
>> DIKAIOS OUN EINAI MOI DOKW, "I think then that I am within my
>>rights ..."
>
>It seems to me (pun) that the "subject" of this infinitive is in the dative
>(reference). Like Paul in Phil.1:21 EMOI GAR TO ZHN XRISTOS . . . "For me
>to live is Christ."
These are two very different constructions. The MOI of my citation was NOT
the subject of EINAI but the complement to DOKW;the construction is
literally, "I seem to myself to be (in-the-) right. DIKAIOS is predicate
nom to the subject of DOKW.
>>And similarly he says EGW DE AUTOS EU OIDA OUDEN EIDWS, "But I know very
>>well that I myself know nothing." Here it is the participle that is in the
>>nominative, but the principle is precisely the same. Whereas LATIN while
>>require a reflexive pronoun in the accusative even when the speaker is
>>talking of himself, Greek will use the nominative in such a situation:
>
>The participle in this one seems to be used to indicate indirect discourse.
>Paul usually uses the accusative with the infinitives like in Phil. 1:13
>hWSTE TOUS DESMOUS MOU FANEROUS EN XRISTWi GENESQAI EN hOLWi PRAITWRIWi . .
>"so that my bonds have become evident (as being) in Christ among the whole
>praetorium". .
The participle IS INDEED used to indicate indirect discourse in my example,
but the principle involved is the same as with infinitives: (a) verbs of
assertion (FASKW and the like) use the infinitive with an accusative if the
subject of the infinitive is other than the subject of the verb of
speaking, but with a nominative if the subject is the same; (b) verbs of
perception (hORAW, AKOUW, GIGNWSKW, OIDA, etc.) use the participle--also
with an accusative if the subject is other than the subject of the verb of
perception, but with an implicit nominative, as in my example above, if the
subject is the same as that of main verb. The example you offer above,
Carlton, from Phil 1:13, is altogether different: it is a result
construction introduced by hWSTE; there is indeed an implicit infinitive
EINAI there; but the result construction is not in indirect discourse with
a verb of assertion. All that I am trying to affirm here is that indirect
discourse constitutes an exception to any supposed rule that the subject of
an infinitive is ALWAYS in the accusative.
At 2:58 AM 12/15/95, Carlton Winbery wrote:
>> It is the accusative. The subject of an infinitival phrase is in
>>the accusative case. always.
>>
>>liz
>
>Amen
I would be less surprised at the vehemence of this apodictic assertion if
it were only being offered as a generalization for Hellenistic Greek or
just for the New Testament, but it appears to be offered without any
qualification whatsoever. I think I could find more examples of the
nominative in the NT,but this one seems to be sufficiently succinct:
Rom 1:22 ... FASKONTES EINAI SOFOI, EMWRANQHSAN ...
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:34 EDT