From: Dale M. Wheeler (dalemw@teleport.com)
Date: Thu Nov 01 2001 - 14:15:26 EST
<x-flowed>
At 06:40 PM 11/1/2001 +0000, Mark Wilson wrote:
>Dale:
>
>You wrote:
>
>------
>Now why the middle form is being used with passive meaning is a whole
>'nother question entirely...but not a
>totally unexpected occurrence in Greek, I'd say!
>------
>
>Well, if I understand Carl, it is NOT a Middle FORM.
>The FORM is M/P or "subject-focused." Which would mean then that
>it is M/P in FORM, functioning semantically as a P.
>
>
>Again, you wrote:
>
>---------
>I can see now that for some reason I put the tags in backwards, ie., the
>formal tag, namely
>>middle, should have been the first tag and the passive tag, the function
>>tag, should have been second, the way it is in Col 3:12. I'll correct that
>>in the next revision of the GC GNT.
>--------
>
>Wait! Before you change that tag, we may all figure out
>that the formal tag should be M/P, and the function/semantic tag is P.
>
>I am kind of hoping this idea of Carl's catches on; sure would make
>Greek much easier. Imagine what it would be like if we could
>group all tenses together, and put the Voices into two, neat subgroups,
>Default and M/P (or something thereabouts). We could finally get
>rid of deponents and "middle in form but passive in meaning."
>
>:o P
Mark:
One of the problems with being the editor of these Morf texts is that at
times one finds oneself between a rock (the traditional way of
understanding/tagging things) and a hard place (the actual truth of the
matter)...so I find myself in these cases. I'm inclined, until the
entirety of the Greek grammar world changes, to continue to tag forms that
are **formally** middle in the Aor and Fut as middle, and ones that art
*formally* passive in the Aor and Fut as passive...and then let the
interpreters sort it out on their end. This, of course doesn't solve the
problem of the Pres/Impf/Pf ambiguous forms, but as I indicated in one of
my previous posts, the best I can do at this point is again to follow the
standard tools, viz., BAGD/BDAG, for middle "deponent" or passive
"deponent", and try to figure out the non-standard ones on a case by case
basis...and again, let the interpreters figure it out for themselves. I
think GRAMCORD's attempt to be as formal as possible allows the user to
decide in final analysis, plus gives the researcher the data to be able to
see patterns of function and meaning based on similar or dissimilar
forms...sort of like what Carl is currently doing with the "deponents." I
am in the process of applying this same philosophy to the MorphLXX and the
results are quite interesting...
I'm open to suggestions however!!!!
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Ph.D.
Research Prof., Biblical Languages Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan St. Portland, OR 97220
V: 503-2516416 F: 503-251-6478 E: dalemw@teleport.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
</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:10 EDT