From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Sun Jan 04 1998 - 12:46:26 EST
At 08:27 AM 1/4/98 -0600, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>yet there is a distinct rhetorical
>difference, I think, between these and the ordinary attributive pattern: hO
>AGAQOS ANQRWPOS, hO EN TOIS OURANOIS PATHR hHMWN (nom., not voc.), TAS
>hEPTA ESCATAS PLHGAS.
>
>You really ARE determined, aren't you, Jonathan, to know all there is to
>know about articles before you complete that chapter! But if you wait that
>long, it will NEVER get written!
(grin!)
Actually, I ask questions as I write and encounter examples that unsettle
me. Yesterday, I used hO EN TOIS OURANOIS as an example of the
substantive-making power of the article, and this morning I realized
exactly what you point out: that God is being addressed in this prayer, and
this is vocative. So I'll surreptitiously move the example to a more
appropriate section ;->
I imagine I'll have a chapter to post some time in the next week - I'm
almost finished, but when the work week starts up again I have little time
to work on these things. I'm trying to limit myself to the things that
people really should know if they are going to read NT Greek with a good
basic understanding, but I'm finding that this includes a *lot* about the
article. When I post it, I'll mention it here and see if people agree that
I've found the right things to explain.
Jonathan
jonathan@texcel.no
Texcel Research
http://www.texcel.no
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:45 EDT