From: Steven Lo Vullo (slovullo@mac.com)
Date: Tue Feb 26 2002 - 03:03:05 EST
Greetings everyone:
Rom 7.10: EGW DE APEQANON KAI hEUREQH MOI hH ENTOLH hH EIS ZWHN, hAUTH EIS
QANATON
The punctuation of UBS4 and NA27 indicate that the editors did not consider
hAUTH to be a modifier of ENTOLH. It seems to me that this would entail
considering hAUTH as the subject of hEUREQH, with hH ENTOLH "hanging,"
somewhat like a nominativus pendens. However, as I understand the pendent
nominative, it "hangs" at the beginning of the clause, is the logical
(though not syntactical) subject, and is replaced in the sentence by a
pronoun IN A DIFFERENT CASE. I have two questions: (1) Is there anything to
hinder us from considering hAUTH as a qualifier of hH ENTOLH ("this
commandment which was to result in life")? (2) Is it possible for hH ENTOLH
to be an independent use of the nominative here ("and the commandment which
was to result in life--THIS proved to me to be a commandment resulting in
death")? It would seem that if (2) is correct, hAUTH is emphatic to one
degree or another. Perhaps "this very commandment" would be a good
rendering?
============
Steven Lo Vullo
Madison, WI
slovullo@mac.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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:19 EDT