From: Mark Wilson (emory2oo2@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Jan 09 2001 - 13:45:33 EST
<x-flowed>
The following message was returned to me as
undeliverable. I am resending it.
Phil. 3:12
OUC hOTI HDH ELABON
H HDH TETELEIWMAI
DIWKW DE EI KAI KATALABW
EF hW KAI KATELHMFQHN hUPO CRISTOU
I note that ELABON is a transitive verb, without its object(s) provided.
My question has to do with how one goes about determining (eliminating or
including) grammatical object(s).
In the previous section, I am assuming that one or more
of the following could be supplied as the object(s) of ELABON:
CRISTON KERDHSW
hEUREQW EN AUTWi
TOU GNWNAI AUTON
THN DUNAMIN
KOINWNIAN
THN EXANASTASIN
Is it a general rule of thumb that if you can NOT grammatically
eliminate a possible object, you should assume it would be included in
the object(s) of ELABON? Hence, verse 12 would read:
"Not that I have already attained (all the aforementioned)"
Secondly, I note that the NET Bible takes the subsequent, parallel
phrase (??) as the object of ELABON:
"Not that I have already attained this--that is, I have not already been
perfected"
This seems like an odd use of the particle H to me. Is this kind of
usage attested elsewhere?
Thank you
Mark Wilson
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:46 EDT