From: Paul S. Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Date: Wed Jan 07 1998 - 12:16:10 EST
Regarding the use of articles on names ATR says:
"Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper
names ... Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite
capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the
name or the fact of the person being well known .... So in the ancient
Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names." (p.
759)
Regarding the use of articles on nouns in the predicate he says:
" ... the article is not essential to speech. It is, however,
"invaluable as a
means of gaining precision, e.g. QEOS HN hO LOGOS. As a rule the
predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk
9:50;
Lu 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom. Gildersleeve
notes
that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is
not
much used except in convertible propositions. Winer, indeed, denies that
the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article.
But
the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate
does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate
indefinite and
undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever
the order
may be. So in Jo. 1:1, QEOS HN hO LOGOS, the subject is perfectly clear.
... It is true also that hO QEOS HN hO LOGOS (convertible terms) would
have been Sabellianism. See also hO QEOS AGAPH ESTIN (i Jn 4:16).
"God" and "love" are not convertibe terms any more than "God" and "Logos"
or "Logos" and "flesh."" (pp767-768)
He further cites Moulton who argues "that when the article is used in the
predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well
known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are
identical....
In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject and predicate, both
are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and
interchangeable."
Hmm, unless the anarthrous predicate nominative is a proper name, is it
possible it can still be definite, that is, that the leading nuance on
the noun
is definiteness? If so, can you give me an example?
Paul Dixon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:47 EDT