From: Vincent M. Setterholm (Vincents@minn.net)
Date: Fri Jan 18 2002 - 19:43:52 EST
I don't have Young's so I can't see exactly what you are looking at, but I
can give you a partial answer:
AUTOU is the genitive form of AUTOS, that is, they are the same word. AUTOS
is the form the word takes in the lexicon, since this is the nominative form
(the form most commonly used to signal that the noun is the subject),
whereas AUTOU is the genitive form. Prepositions (like EPI) do not
typically (never?) take words in the Nominative as their object.
The AUTOU in Matthew 19:9 is functioning as a possessive pronoun (translated
'his', modifying GUNAIKA, 'woman/wife'); it is not part of the prepositional
phrase.
The object of EPI is the dative PORNEIA. There are several options for EPI
+ Dative, but the most likely one in this context is 'on the basis of'
(Bauer cites this verse under that definition as well).
Cheers,
Vincent Setterholm
-----Original Message-----
From: Suelhmc@aol.com [mailto:Suelhmc@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 5:18 PM
To: Biblical Greek
Subject: [b-greek] AUTOS/AUTOU
Greetings. My name is Susan and as you may have heard before: "It's all
Greek to me!" That means I don't know Greek at all. But I am interested in
only a couple of words that interest me and they are: EPI in conjunction
with
AUTOS and EPI in conjunction with AUTOU.
In Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible under EPI, it states that EPI
used with AUTOS means THEREON.
In Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible under AUTOS, it states that
AUTOS used with prepositions can be frequently rendered as THERE(on) as
well.
My questions are: 1) Are the words AUTOS and AUTOU very similar? Can they be
used interchangeably? and 2) In Matthew 19:9, I see that the word AUTOU is
used one word before the word EPI. Would this then take on the meaning of
THEREON in this verse?
I would also like to know why the words "it be" (except it be) in that same
verse are enclosed with brackets in Young's definition of "except". Does
this mean that the translators introduced those words on their own to
possibly clarify their interpretation and that they do not actually exist?
And one last question: I do not find the definition for "for" in Matthew
5:32 listed in Young's Concordance. Is that an oversight on their part?
They
do list the word "for" in reference with the other pertinent words (saving
and cause), however I cannot find the actual meaning for "for".
Thank you for whatever knowledge you can impart to me. If it wasn't for
your
website, I wouldn't know who to ask.
Sincerely,
Susan [McMullen: New list-members please note that BG protocol
requires a full-name signature to be appended to messages sent
to the list]
suelhmc@aol.com
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [Vincents@minn.net]
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
---
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 - 15:37:16 EDT