From: Rodney J. Decker (rdecker@bbc.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 11 2000 - 10:20:57 EST
<x-flowed>Yesterday I ran into something in the grammars that was new to me.
Robertson, 233-34 and Moulton-Howard, 203 discuss the significance of the
enclitic forms of EIMI, proposing, if I understand them correctly, that the
enclitics serve as emphatic forms of EIMI and express existence or
possibility rather than being a simple, nonemphatic linking verb. (There
are exceptions: at the beginning of a sentence or following one of a half
dozen conjunctions.)
That is, the usual form of ESTIN is accented ESTI/N and is not emphatic;
but the enclitic form, which is emphatic, is accented E/STIN.
Robertson's comments are based, I think, on the WH text. I notice that our
current NA and UBS texts do not print an accent on the enclitic form at all
(ESTIN).
In light of the nonexistence of the accents in the original text (so far as
we can tell), are there other factors that are involved in this
explanation? Is it a valid one? Is it a useful/significant one?
Any comments or clarification would be appreciated.
Rod
****************************************************
Rodney J. Decker, Th.D. Baptist Bible Seminary
Assoc. Prof./NT PO Box 800, Clarks Summit, PA 18411
rdecker@bbc.edu http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/
The *Resources for NT Study* site is accessible at:
http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/rd_rsrc.htm
****************************************************
--- 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</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:56 EDT