From: Perry L. Stepp (plstepp@flash.net)
Date: Thu Feb 06 1997 - 16:40:21 EST
> >According to the apparatus of my NA27, L 326 1241 al ("alii", which I
take
> >to be more than "a few" (pauci) but less than "a number" (permulti))
have
> >the subscription PROS PHILHMONA KAI APPHIAN DESPOTAS TOU ONHSIMOU KAI
PROS
> >ARCHIPPON TON DIAKON THS EN KOLOSSAIS EKKLAHSIAS.
> --------------------
>
> Thanks, Perry, but no thanks! Look at the Greek again: DESPOTAS is
MASC.
> PLURAL, and thus the subscript can only mean that Philemon AND Apphia
> were owners of Onesimus--precisely the common view, which usually sees
> Apphia as Philemon's wife (which may well be the case). But Apphia
(alone)
> as slave-owner? I'm still waiting and wondering.
The minute I hit the "send" buttton I thought, "Hey, wait, DESPOTHS,
MATHHTHS, I bet that's an accusative plural!" Sure enough. Is DESPOTHS
exclusively masculine, or is there a feminine declension as well?
Anwyway, let this be a warning to all about what happens when one's fingers
get ahead of one's mind. As if there weren't ample warning published
abroad already.
(And I used to just worry about *speaking* without thinking.)
PLStepp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:04 EDT