From: David L. Moore (dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Thu Jul 16 1998 - 11:36:46 EDT
At 08:17 AM 7/16/98 -0700, dalmatia@eburg.com wrote:
>David L. Moore wrote:
>
>> >>Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>> >
>> >>> As I've said previously, unless EK PISTEWS is specifically attached
to hO
>> >>> DIKAIOS by a repeated article, so that it reads hO DIKAIOS hO EK
PISTEWS,
>> >>> then EK PISTEWS ought to construe ONLY with ZHSETAI.
>
>Then George Blaisdell wrote:
>
>> >>Well, a repeated article such as you suggest would most certainly nail
>> >>it to hO DIKAIOS. And the absence ot that article gives us the
>> >>adverb-adjective controversy. If we understand hO DE DIKAIOS ZESETAI
>> >>as a 'unit of discourse' which EK PISTEWS modifies, then the
>> >>difficulty vanishes.
>
>Then David L. Moore wrote:
>> >
>> > But it appears, in that case, the noun is only affected by the
>> >prepositional phrase through the *verb*, _ergo_ the phrase is functioning
>> >adverbially.
>
>This is an amazing thread. I suspect a storm in a tea cup, with
>theological issues brewing, but really have no way of knowing what
>they might be.
>
>Apparently there is no grammatic term that includes adverb and
>adjective, and we are stuck in the box that says we must term a
>prepositional modifier as either one or the other in a sentence where
>there is only a noun and a verb. Apparently we have no rule of
>grammar that allows such a modifier to modify the whole sentence that
>surrounds it. Ergo... "Ah'm jes' amazed, Scarlett!"
>
>Of course it is functioning adverbially! And of course it is
>functioning adjectivally! There is a noun and a verb in the whole of
>this sentence, and the prepositional phrase in question is smack dab
>in the middle. Why is this so hard?? WHY do WE have to INSIST that
>it be EITHER_OR?? [mutter-mutter mumble-mumble!!]
>
>> >Maybe it is better to approach this from the standpoint of
>> >the original question of this thread. Does the phrase EK PISTEWS function
>> >as an adverb or as an adjective? Of course, how one answers this question
>> >is going to influence how each of the components of this sentence are
>> >understood, and that may be what George is getting at. But also, the
>> >sentence as a whole will be understood quite differently depending on how
>> >one answers it.
>
>And I would add that partitive vs holistic thinking will as well be
>determinative... My prejudice here is that I believe the former to be
>a Latinization of the Greek, and the latter to be Greek.
Can you *show* any unambiguous example of "holistic thinking" in Greek
syntax that might back up this assertion? Also, since coming across the
passage in Moulton's grammar about attributive prepositional phrases, I'm
not so certain either Rom. 1:4 or 1:17 are adverbial; I'm taking a second
look at this matter. But I don't admit the possibility that they are *both*.
Regards,
David Moore
David L. Moore
Miami, Florida, USA
E-mail: dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com
Home Page: http://members.aol.com/dvdmoore
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to unsubscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:54 EDT