From: Steven Lo Vullo (slovullo@mac.com)
Date: Sat Mar 23 2002 - 21:55:47 EST
on 3/23/02 8:18 PM, Polycarp66@aol.com at Polycarp66@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 3/23/2002 8:42:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> slovullo@mac.com writes:
>
>> First, why is AKOUW not the "expected" verb to complete the purpose clause?
>> How can anyone know what verb to "expect" in a purpose clause? What verb
>> SHOULD we expect? Since AKOUW may be subjunctive, what is there to keep us
>> from construing it with hINA? Construing as I have done makes perfect sense:
>> "Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that
>> ... I may hear about your situation [as those who ARE conducting themselves
>> in such a manner], that you are standing firm in one spirit, etc." His
>> purpose in exhorting them to conduct themselves in a manner worthy of the
>> gospel is that he may hear a good report about those things that accompany
>> or comprise living in such a manner, whether he hears it personally in their
>> presence or from sources in his absence. Rhetorically, this is a challenge
>> from a leader to those whom he leads not to let him down.
>>
>
> OK. You got me there. I should not have said "the expected verb" but rather
> "the expected form." I would have expected another participle. Construing
> it as you do may make perfect sense (I do not deny that), but that doesn't
> mean that is what we have before us. It seems that what we have is a
> contrast between "coming and seeing" and "being absent and I hear." These
> constitute a sort of parenthesis before the result (introduced by hOTI) is
> reached. The whole - both the parenthesis with the EITE . . . EITE clause
> and the result clause introduced by hOTI constitute the purpose which is
> completely achieved in STHKETE, "that you may stand . . ." The point of the
> EITE . . . EITE clause is that it doesn't matter whether it is his personal
> observation or the report that he hears - he wants them to stand. I agree
> that he does not want them to let him down - which desire they will satisfy
> by standing.
MONON AXIWS TOU EUAGGELIOU TOU CRISTOU POLITEUESQE, hINA EITE ELQWN KAI IDWN
hUMAS EITE APWN AKOUW TA PERI hUMWN, hOTI STHKETE EN hENI PNEUMATI, MIAi
YUCHi SUNAQLOUNTES THi PISTEI TOU EUAGGELIOU
While I understood (though disagreed with) Manolis Nikolaou's position, I'm
afraid I still do not understand yours. You seem to be construing the hOTI
clause with POLITEUESQE, as a subordinate result clause. Manolis understood
that in order to construe AKOUW with APWN, there must be an elliptical
subjunctive verb for the hINA clause to function as a purpose clause. He
chose GNW as the elliptical verb, and understood the hOTI clause as the
object of GNW. In this case, the correlative clauses would be subordinate to
the elliptical GNW as well. It seems to me that if we eliminate AKOUW as the
subjunctive verb with hINA in the purpose clause, this is the route we must
follow. The way you seem to have construed the hOTI clause leaves us without
a purpose clause at all, since, in the end, there never is a subjunctive
verb to construe with hINA, explicit or implied. If hINA introduces a
purpose clause, and if the correlative clauses (EITE ... EITE) are
"parenthetical," and if hOTI introduces a result clause, what constitutes
the purpose clause? hINA alone? We certainly couldn't construe the hOTI
clause directly with hINA. Then we would have hINA ... hOTI, an impossible
construction. The correlative clauses are subordinate, and cannot in any
intelligible way form a purpose clause with hINA.
============
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 - 15:37:21 EDT