From: Daniel L. Christiansen (dlc@multnomah.edu)
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 18:31:49 EST
Glenn Blank wrote [snipped]:
> BTW, Iver, I'm not sure what the difference is between <if not A then not B>
> and <only if A then B>. Logically, they are equivalent. But how are they
> different linguistically?
There actually is a logical difference between the two propositions, as stated.
The first <if not A then not B> will not ever _necessarily_ result in the occurence
of B, since the inverse <if A then B> is not required. That is, under the
strictures of this proposition, even when A is true, B may still be false.
On the other hand, the second proposition <only if A then B> will _necessarily_
produce B, in any situation where A is true. This second proposition <only if A
then B> includes within itself the first <if not A then not B>, but goes one step
beyond in its necessary implications.
I suppose that one could be very picky, and say that the second proposition must
have another "if" included <if and only if A then B> to necessarily require the
production of B in A's fulfillment. But, that is normally the sense of the "only
if" phrasing, as I understand it.
FWIW, Daniel
--
Daniel L. Christiansen
Professor, Bible & Theology, Biblical Languages
Multnomah Bible College and Biblical Seminary
(503) 445-5295
---
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 - 15:37:23 EDT