From: Richard Lindeman (richlind@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Thu Mar 26 1998 - 16:35:04 EST
>Rich writes:
>>
>> OK... thank you for the clarification here. The question then becomes,
to
>> what degree or extent does the selection of grammatical forms actually
>> commit a person? Or, as regards to aspect, how strongly is aspect
>> grammatized in the verbal endings? How strong a current is it in Greek
>> thought at this particular juncture of history? My suggestion was that
it
>> conveyed perhaps a more gentle stream rather than an overpowering one.
Mari writes:
>
>The first question is about the linguistic theory, the second about
>the consciousness in Greek thought. Only the first can be answered
>by linguistics. I think the second is probably irrelevant:
Mari... I am truly thankful for people like you who are every bit as
stubborn as I am... but in a totally different direction. What you
consider to be irrelevant I consider to be crucial. Yes, I suppose that
for writing grammars something so subjective is probably irrelevant. But I
believe that the skill of interpretation is every bit as much art as it is
science. What you call exceptions to the rules I call inroads which are
now beginning to throw the old rules out. The truth is that in NT Greek
there often appear to be more exceptions than we can even begin to make
rules for. Form and function are constantly at odds with each other. And
people are constantly refusing to speak "by the rules." But then again,
what would we do without the linguists who write these rules which we
despise so much but are needed to hold us on course? It's truly a vicious
circle.
Rich Lindeman
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:17 EDT