From: Eric Weiss (eweiss@acf.dhhs.gov)
Date: Fri Mar 22 1996 - 11:21:56 EST
On Thu, 21 Mar 1996, I (Eric Weiss) wrote (re: 1 Peter 2:5):
> This clause looks like it is at the deep structure level a basic sentence
> pattern of the form:
>
> (implied)
> SUBJECT TRANSITIVE VERB DIRECT OBJECT OBJECT COMPLEMENT
> God is building [up] you a spiritual house
>
> which has undergone a transformation such that at the surface structure
> level the verb is now expressed in the passive voice. In the basic sentence
> pattern the DIRECT OBJECT and the OBJECT COMPLEMENT are both in the same
> case, i.e., accusative. But when the active verb at the deep structure
> level is transformed to a passive verb at the surface structure level, the
> DIRECT OBJECT ("you") becomes the SUBJECT of the clause and hence takes the
> nominative case, and the OBJECT COMPLEMENT ("a spiritual house"), now a
> SUBJECT COMPLEMENT, likewise takes the nominative case to agree with the
> noun its complementing.
MORE CORRECTLY, WHAT I SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN IS:
...................................................... In the basic sentence
pattern the DIRECT OBJECT and the OBJECTIVE COMPLEMENT are both in the same
case, i.e., accusative. But when the active verb at the deep structure level
is transformed to a passive verb at the surface structure level, the DIRECT
OBJECT ("you") becomes the SUBJECT of the clause and hence takes the
nominative case. The OBJECTIVE COMPLEMENT ("a spiritual house") is retained
but is now realized at the surface structure level in the nominative case to
agree with the noun it's complementing.
Note: We've greatly benefitted from our professor's application of
linguistics to the exegesis of the New Testament, and I appreciate hearing
from Carl Conrad that the things we're learning can truly be helpful in
understanding the text.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:39 EDT