From: Iver Larsen (iver_larsen@sil.org)
Date: Sat Jul 07 2001 - 01:36:01 EDT
>This is the text:
>> Jas 2:1 --
>> ADELFOI MOU, MH EN PROSWPOLHMYIAIS ECETE THN PISTIN TOU KURIOU hMWN
>> IHSOU CRISTOU THS DOXHS.
Alan Hultberg wrote:
> Your understanding of the grammar is certainly acceptable, though
> James could equally be understood to be stating a prohibition (taking
> ECETE as imperative rather than indicative), unless I missed
> something in your opening analysis. A quick Accordance search yields
> hundreds of examples of clause initial MH negating imperatives.
> Glancing quickly at the data, Rom 14:15, 20 seem to me to be exact
> parallels to James 2:1.
>
> I haven't looked, but I'm sure that this is how most translators have
> understood the grammar.
Yes, you are right. It would be quite possible to connect the MH with ECETE
rather than the whole sentence and interpret ECETE as present imperative
rather than present indicative.
I suppose it depends on how one understands ECW. It was difficult for me to
make sense of an imperative of the meaning "have", but I can see that this
word is also used with a different meaning "hold" or "hold on to", like a
runner in a race holding something in his hand. With this meaning, the
imperative may well become the preferred option.
As for the translations, one can see how the NRSV battled with this, if one
compares with the RSV:
The RSV says:
"My brethren, show no partiality as you hold the faith of our Lord Jesus
Christ, the Lord of glory."
The NRSV has:
"Do you with your acts of favoritism really believe...?"
Thanks,
Iver Larsen
---
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 - 15:37:01 EDT