From: c stirling bartholomew (cc.constantine@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Sat Jul 14 2001 - 18:00:19 EDT
on 7/14/01 1:35 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:
>> TINA is certainly the "subject" of PARELQEIN, here: it is the TINA who is
>> considered as performing the action of PARELQEIN. Whether it is the
>> "subject"
>> of ISCUEIN, is a matter of debate. 1) You could take it as such, and then
>> treat PARELQEIN as a complentary infinitive, thus leaving TINA in a
>> once-removed relationship to PARELQEIN. "A person could not pass by that
>> way." I don't think this handles the first infinitive and the negative as
>> well as it could. Alternatively (and I think this is best, myself), you could
>> understand ISCUEIN as an impersonal infinitive, without a stated "subject,"
>> leaving TINA for PARELQEIN alone. "It was not possible for anyone to pass by
>> that way." I think this deals with all the constituents appropriately.
>>
> I would take your option 1) and this seems to be the more common option
> among the "Greeks". Both the numbers in the Friberg tags and the Philip
> Comfort interlinear indicate 1). In the GNT ISCUW is nowhere else found in
> an impersonal construction (Matt 8:28 is the only occurrence of this verb in
> the infinitive). Therefore, it seems better to take TINA as the subject of
> ISCUEIN, meaning that no person had it in his power to pass by that way.
> hWSTE is regularly followed by an infinitive with accusative and if the
> semantic content of the verb is relatively more prominent than the subject,
> then the subject follows the verb.
Iver,
Weighing well under 160 and being from the colonies and even worse from the
west coast ("the end of western civilization") I am the light weight who is
now wondering why a question that I thought was a no brainer is generating
theoretical discussion. This is all very interesting. I was all set to go
with Daniel's solution. I had even made the changes to my document but lo
and behold Iver comes along and we now have a controversy of sorts.
My first stab at this was not a good one. I was thinking of TINA as being
the subject of both infinitives. This breaks one of the ah-h . . . rules,
doesn't it? But you guys know how I am with rules. Seem to forget them most
of the time.
I will keep watching to see how this all turns out.
Thanks to Daniel, Maurice and Iver for helping out.
Clay
--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
---
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 - 15:37:01 EDT