From: clayton stirling bartholomew (c.s.bartholomew@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue Jul 21 1998 - 14:46:58 EDT
In Acts 13:15 we have EI TIS ESTIV. The editors of the received text (NA27)
have placed the accents
EI/ TI/S ESTIN
But Ropes and Alford have
EI/ TIS E/STIN
Now EI is a proclitic and TIS is enclitic and ESTIN appears to behave like an
enclitic, so the accent on the enclitic TIS falls back on the proclitic EI and
the accent on ESTIN falls back on the the enclitic TIS. The result of all this
is to create a bit of hard reading for those who are accustom to the absolute
assurance that TIS and TI/S can always be distinguished by the accent.
I suspect the difference between Alford/Ropes and NA27 is an editorial
decision regarding readability, is this true or is there something more
significant going on here?
-- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062--- 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 leave-b-greek-329W@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