From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sat Jan 20 2001 - 08:02:47 EST
At 1:54 AM -0500 1/20/01, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>[Moon]
>At 7:53 PM -0500 1/19/01, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>> >Dear Carl,
>> >
>> >When you say that PANTES in PANTES hOI MAQHTAI and hOI MAQHTAI PANTES
>> >is in a predicate position, do you mean that PANTES is predicate
>> >to hOI MAQHTAI?
>> >
>> >Then, the sense of PANTES hOI MAQATAI would be
>> >"being all, the disciples", and the sense of
>> >"hOI MAQATAI PANTES" would be "the disciples, being all".
>> >If this is right, PANTES here is not a MODIFIER in the sense of
>> >Iver.
>>
>
>[Carl]
>> Actually PAS, hAPAS (seems to me there's another one like this) function as
>> demonstratives: one puts the demonstratives in the predicative position:
>> hOUTOS hO ANHR or hO ANHR hOUTOS but not hO hOUTOS ANHR. And no, it is not
>> a modifier in the same way any normal adjective is.
>>
>
>[Moon]
>This comment reveals a great insight to the problem in question.
>I have two questions.
>1)
>Suppose that PAS is a demonstrative like hOUTOS.
>Then PANTES hOI MAQHTAI (hOI MAQHTAI PANTES) can be rendered
>"all, the disciples" ("the disciples, all"). That is, hOI MAQHTAI is
> an apposition to PANTES in "PANTES hOI MAQHTAI". PANTES is an apposition
>to hOI MAQHTAI in "hOI MAQHTAI PANTES". Wouldn't this explanation
>reasonable?
>
>2) If PANTES is an apposition to hOI MAQHTAI in
> "hOI MAQHTAI PANTES", we can say that PANTES is in a predicate position
>relative to hOI MAQHTAI because PANTES further describes hOI MAQHTAI
>whose referent is already determined.
>But when we say that Y is in a predicate position in
>an expression "X Y", we would assume that "X Y" is a clause.
>But when " X Y " is a nominal phrase referring to an object,
>it seems confusing to call Y to be in a predicate position.
>It seems confusing to say that Y is in a predicate POSITION to X
> when Y is not a predicate to X.
>
>If PANTES acts as an apposition to hOI MAQHTAI in "hOI MAQHTAI PANTES",
>it would be best to call its position "an appositional position".
>Any comments?
My problem with this line of inquiry is twofold:
(a) the only answers I can offer to the question which you raise here,
Moon, are speculative, whereas it seems to me that the more professional
('disciplined'?) linguists may offer us a better explanation of why
demonstratives take the "predicative" position normally in Greek. One
should perhaps note that they are properly speaking pronouns rather than
adjectives (the article, hOUTOS, EKEINOS, hODE, TOIOUTOS, TOSOUTOS, etc.);
I've never heard or read that the quantititative words such as PAS, hAPAS,
hOLOS are pronominal, but they do seem generally to behave in terms of
word-order the way adjectives behave with respect to the article-noun
group, by taking the "predicate" position. I've sometimes wondered (but
this is purely speculative on my part) whether, when we say (e.g.) EKEINOS
hO ANHR HSPASATO ME, are we then offering TWO predications about hO ANHR:
(1) he greeted/welcomed me (HSPASATO ME), and (2) he is somewhat distant
from me. Can the linguists enlighten us? I really have only observed this
this behavior of the demonstratives and the demonstrative pronouns.
(b) I really don't think that it's sufficient to call PANTES in either
configuration (PANTES hOI MAQHTAI or hOI MAQHTAI PANTES) 'appositional." To
me at least it's always seemed rather that the "attributive" configuration
does that: we can say that hO AGAQOS ANHR is 'more or less' identical in
meaning with hO ANHR hO AGAQOS, but that there's a rhetorical difference:
I'd say that in the phrase hO ANHR hO AGAQOS the group hO AGAQOS functions
as a substantive in apposition to the noun hO ANHR, i.e. the phrase would
be equivalent to English "the man, i.e. the good one." Now we might want to
say that hOI MAQHTAI PANTES works the same way and is roughly equivalent to
"the disciples, i.e. ALL of them"--and if so, then yes, we'd have to say
PANTES is 'appositional' to hOI MAQHTAI. BUT, even if that's so, it still
leaves unexplained why a word like PANTES or hOUTOI stands outside of the
article-noun configuration. IF it's enough to say that the quantitative
words function like pronouns, then perhaps it's enough to say that pronouns
cannot be substantives created by use of the article with them. Is that an
adequate explanation?
I confess openly here that I am speculating. I don't know what the proper
answer here is, but I'm dubious whether it's adequate to call the
'predicate' position of PANTES in this phrasing "appositional."
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
---
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 - 15:36:48 EDT