Re: Lysias' Λόγος ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀδυνάτου
Posted: June 11th, 2014, 9:09 am
That helps immensely. I forgot the larger context of him having a disability in the first place Context is king, and I dropped the ball.
ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2569
Ok, so we would have "...what sort of evil would such a person think fit to abstain from?" (basically saying "What evil is he not capable of !?")Stephen Hughes wrote:Lysias 24.2 wrote:καίτοι ὅστις τούτοις φθονεῖ οὓς οἱ ἄλλοι ἐλεοῦσι, τίνος ἂν ὑμῖν ὁ τοιοῦτος ¹ἀποσχέσθαι¹ ²δοκεῖ² πονηρίας; εἰ μὲν γὰρ ³ἕνεκα³ ⁴χρημάτων⁴ με συκοφαντεῖ —— : εἰ δ᾽ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ⁵ἑαυτοῦ⁵ με τιμωρεῖται, ψεύδεται: διὰ γὰρ τὴν πονηρίαν αὐτοῦ οὔτε φίλῳ οὔτε ἐχθρῷ πώποτε ⁶ἐχρησάμην⁶ αὐτῷJordan Day wrote:And yet, if someone envies such people on whom others have compassion, what sort of evil would such a person ²seem to you | think fit² to ¹possess | abstain from¹? If indeed it was ³because of³ ⁴material possessions | money⁴, he is blackmailing | trying to blackmail me! But if as an ⁵his⁵ enemy, he is punishing me ⁵for himself⁵! | , he is lying! For on account of his evil, I have never ⁶treated⁶ him as a friend nor as a foe.
²δοκεῖ (seem or think)- δοκεῖ is very common in Matthew in the question Τί ὑμῖν δοκεῖ; (Matthew 18:12 et passim in variations), in which case it is an impersonal, but here it is full verb with a subject like Luke 8:18 .
Yes, from our (English & Koine) point of view, the understanding is impersonal, but the construction is not. Impersonal v. full verb is a difference between Koine and Classical Greek. I'm sorry to have man-handled (mislead) you to this question, but it is the question you need to be asking.From your Koine point-of-view it acts like both a full verb and like an impersonal!. You needed to see that conundrum, and work through it, not gloss over the fact that ὁ τοιοῦτος is nominative.Jordan Day wrote:Ok, so we would have "...what sort of evil would such a person think fit to abstain from?" (basically saying "What evil is he not capable of !?")Stephen Hughes wrote:Lysias 24.2 wrote:τίνος ἂν ὑμῖν ὁ τοιοῦτος ¹ἀποσχέσθαι¹ ²δοκεῖ² πονηρίας;Jordan Day wrote:what sort of evil would such a person ²seem to you | think fit² to ¹possess | abstain from¹?Stephen Hughes wrote:²δοκεῖ (seem or think)- δοκεῖ is very common in Matthew in the question Τί ὑμῖν δοκεῖ; (Matthew 18:12 et passim in variations), in which case it is an impersonal, but here it is full verb with a subject like Luke 8:18 [καὶ ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχειν ἀρθήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ].
But how does the ὑμῖν fit in? When I see δοκεῖ and a dative pronoun, I automatically think "It seems to this/that person/people"
or...Luke 1:3 wrote:ἔδοξεν κἀμοί, παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς, καθεξῆς σοι γράψαι, κράτιστε Θεόφιλε,
Is it ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχεινLuke 8:18 wrote:Βλέπετε οὖν πῶς ἀκούετε· ὃς γὰρ ἐὰν ἔχῃ, δοθήσεται αὐτῷ· καὶ ὃς ἐὰν μὴ ἔχῃ, καὶ ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχειν ἀρθήσεται ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ.
Is it οἱ δοκοῦντες (ἐν ἑαυτοῖς) ἄρχειν (+ gen.) which is like they way an English speaker would imagine a person thinking or οἱ δοκοῦντες (τοῖς ἀνθρώποις) ἄρχειν (+gen.) where others are led to an opinion (by what they see) or οἱ δοκοῦντες (ἑαυτοῖς) ἄρχειν (+ gen.) where the reflexivity of appearance is approximated by the English word "think"? But spelling out the reflexive pronoun would have a different (emphatic) significance as inMk 10:42 wrote:{ Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς προσκαλεσάμενος αὐτοὺς λέγει αὐτοῖς, Οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν τῶν ἐθνῶν κατακυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν· καὶ οἱ μεγάλοι αὐτῶν κατεξουσιάζουσιν αὐτῶν.
"Making an ignorant guess about what would be the best thing to do, I did many things against ..."Acts 26:9 wrote:Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ πρὸς τὸ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου δεῖν πολλὰ ἐναντία πρᾶξαι·
I mean don't just take Τί δοκεῖ ὑμῖν as "What do you think?", it is more of "What seems plausible to you?", "What would you consider most probable?", or something along the lines of "(educated / informed) guess".John 11:56 wrote:Ἐζήτουν οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, καὶ ἔλεγον μετ’ ἀλλήλων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἑστηκότες, Τί δοκεῖ ὑμῖν; Ὅτι οὐ μὴ ἔλθῃ εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν;
"I can't say for certain, but my best guess is that..." would be assuming Koine idiom, while taking it as "It seems to me that ..." would be an understanding based on the supposition that Paul was using a phrase like we see here in Lysias in the classical idiom (and likewise some other places in 1 Corinthians where you could either argue the elaborate usage of the classical idiom, or a moment of quiet self-refection and the feeling of the honesty of writer's soul in un-self-effacing humility). Anyway, we have wandered too far from Lysias, I think...1 Corinthians 4:9 wrote:Δοκῶ γὰρ ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐσχάτους ἀπέδειξεν ὡς ἐπιθανατίους· ὅτι θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ, καὶ ἀγγέλοις, καὶ ἀνθρώποις.
"Instinctively" you take it as accusative, but consider these other verses... [There is of course an understood sense of αὐτοῖς here]Mark 6:49 wrote:Οἱ δέ, ἰδόντες αὐτὸν περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης, ἔδοξαν φάντασμα εἶναι, καὶ ἀνέκραξαν·
in regard to the ἄλογον (πρᾶγμα).Acts 25:27 wrote:Ἄλογον γάρ μοι δοκεῖ, πέμποντα δέσμιον, μὴ καὶ τὰς κατ’ αὐτοῦ αἰτίας σημᾶναι.
But γεγονέναι is sometimes γεγονέναι is nearly equivalent to εἶναι. We know πλησίον is indeclinable, but what case is it here?Luke 10:36 wrote:Τίς οὖν τούτων τῶν τριῶν πλησίον δοκεῖ σοι γεγονέναι τοῦ ἐμπεσόντος εἰς τοὺς λῃστάς;
it would be first impulse to take ὅραμα as an accusative with βλέπειν, but if we substituted ἄγγελος for ὅραμα, would it be ἐδόκει δὲ ἄγγελος βλέπειν or ἐδόκει δὲ ἄγγελον βλέπειν? That's the difference between the classical and New Testament idiom in this regard.Acts 12:9 wrote:Καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ· καὶ οὐκ ᾔδει ὅτι ἀληθές ἐστιν τὸ γινόμενον διὰ τοῦ ἀγγέλου, ἐδόκει δὲ ὅραμα βλέπειν.
Why is ἐκλεξαμένους ἄνδρας accusative, rather than nominative as ὁ τοιοῦτος was in Lysias?Acts 15:22 wrote:Τότε ἔδοξεν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις σὺν ὅλῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἐκλεξαμένους ἄνδρας ἐξ αὐτῶν πέμψαι εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν σὺν Παύλῳ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ, Ἰούδαν τὸν ἐπικαλούμενον Βαρσαββᾶν, καὶ Σίλαν, ἄνδρας ἡγουμένους ἐν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς,
There is a New Testament "remnant" of this more flexible construction with only the verb εἶναι .Acts 15:28 wrote:Ἔδοξεν γὰρ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι, καὶ ἡμῖν, μηδὲν πλέον ἐπιτίθεσθαι ὑμῖν βάρος, πλὴν τῶν ἐπάναγκες τούτων
, but actually this construction with εἶναι is well within Koine usage, as inActs 17:18 wrote:Τινὲς δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἐπικουρείων καὶ τῶν Στοϊκῶν φιλοσόφων συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ. Καί τινες ἔλεγον, Τί ἂν θέλοι ὁ σπερμολόγος οὗτος λέγειν; Οἱ δέ, Ξένων δαιμονίων δοκεῖ καταγγελεὺς εἶναι· ὅτι τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τὴν ἀνάστασιν εὐηγγελίζετο.
1 Corinthians 3:18 wrote:Μηδεὶς ἑαυτὸν ἐξαπατάτω· εἴ τις δοκεῖ σοφὸς εἶναι ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, μωρὸς γενέσθω, ἵνα γένηται σοφός.
If you are dropping the ball, that must be cricket or Rugby (league)?Wes Wood wrote:I forgot the larger context of him having a disability in the first place Context is king, and I dropped the ball.
Considering what day it is today, ἡ ἡμέρα τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς (Isaiah 10:3) will be the night of my visiting your rendering-of-the-sense for section 4.Wes Wood wrote:I await the moment of reckoning.
1 Thessalonians 5:2 (and football) wrote:Αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ ἡμέρα Κυρίου ὡς κλέπτης ἐν νυκτὶ οὕτως ἔρχεται· (I'll get back to this this evening before the opening ceremony) 3 ὅταν γὰρ λέγωσιν, Εἰρήνη καὶ ἀσφάλεια (the goal-keepers try), τότε αἰφνίδιος αὐτοῖς ἐφίσταται ὄλεθρος (the strikers will score goals), ὥσπερ ἡ ὠδὶν τῇ ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσῃ, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἐκφύγωσιν (the emotion on the goal-keeper's face). 4 Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν σκότει (the USA is in the same time-zone as Brasil), ἵνα ἡ ἡμέρα ὑμᾶς ὡς κλέπτης καταλάβῃ· 5 πάντες ὑμεῖς υἱοὶ φωτός ἐστε καὶ υἱοὶ ἡμέρας (such an advantage)· οὐκ ἐσμὲν νυκτὸς οὐδὲ σκότους (it's not normal to stay up all night watching the football)·
Hints for §4: (You could look at these after working through it yourself)Λυσίας, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀδυνάτου 24.5 wrote:καὶ τεκμηρίοις χρῆται τῆς μὲν τοῦ σώματος ῥώμης, ὅτι ἐπὶ τοὺς ἵππους ἀναβαίνω, τῆς δ᾽ ἐν τῇ τέχνῃ εὐπορίας, ὅτι δύναμαι συνεῖναι δυναμένοις ἀνθρώποις ἀναλίσκειν. τὴν μὲν οὖν ἐκ τῆς τέχνης εὐπορίαν καὶ τὸν ἄλλον τὸν ἐμὸν βίον, οἷος τυγχάνει, πάντας ὑμᾶς οἴμαι γιγνώσκειν: ὅμως δὲ κἀγὼ διὰ βραχέων ἐρῶ.
Λυσίας, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀδυνάτου 24.4 wrote:¹περὶ¹ μὲν οὖν τούτων ³τοσαῦτά³ μοι ²εἰρήσθω²: ⁴ ¹ὑπὲρ¹ ὧν δέ μοι προσήκει λέγειν⁴, ³ ¹ὡς¹ ἂν οἷόν τε ⁵διὰ βραχυτάτων⁵ ³ ἐρῶ.
Wes Wood wrote:Then indeed about these things so much to me (²was said²?). ⁴But it belongs to me to speak about these things.⁴ ³Since it is possible, I will say ⁵a few words⁵ ³. For the plaintiff testifies that I am ineligible (I think this captures the sense) to receive silver from the city for I am both able-bodied-and not disabled-and know a trade so that I am able to live without being given this [money].
Wes Wood wrote:I am unsure about the word ειρησθω. I am assuming it is a form of λεγω that I have not seen before. Also, for the word βραχυτατων I took a guess based of the meaning of βραχυς.
Wes Wood wrote:Thank you again for donating your time posting and helping us through these readings. I appreciate it.
We are both benefited by your efforts.Stephen Hughes in the [url=http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2432&p=15364&hilit=flames#p15364]What vocabulary does the NT word-list represent?[/url] thread wrote:I'm too close to the fire to see the flames on the difference between Koine and Attic vocabulary. I need to give that question some analytical and statistical distance.
Wes Wood wrote:It helped me realize that I can't make satisfactory sense of the part of the phrase in bold below.
ὡς ἂν οἷόν τε διὰ βραχυτάτων
Would you please translate this phrase as woodenly as possible for my benefit? Thank you again for donating your time posting and helping us through these readings.