From: Moon-Ryul Jung (moon@saint.soongsil.ac.kr)
Date: Fri Jan 12 2001 - 23:03:15 EST
Dear friends,
I enjoyed reading this thread.
Let me ask one question and comment on the issue of the thred.
1) Should I consider hWN omitted from the third clause below?
hWN TO TELOS APWLEIA
hWN hO QEOS hH KOILIA
KAI hH DOZA EN THi AISCUNHi AUTWN
Could I think that the author failed to keep track hWN (whose),
and says "their glory" rather than "whose glory".
2) Back to the original issue,
I think that in all three clauses "whose end", "whose God",
and "whose glory" are the subjects. The subject of a sentence
is the entity that the sentence talk about. In discourse
analysis theory, we often talk about the topic/focus of the discourse.
Very often the topic/focus is referred to by the subject of a sentence.
In this case, the author talks about some people, and the focus
is their end, their God, and their glory. The three clauses answers
to the questions "what is their end, their God, and their glory?".
These things are what people are very much conerned about. So it is
natural that they become the focus of the discourse which talks about
some people.
Moon
Moon-Ryul Jung
Associate Professor
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea
---
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:47 EDT