Mark 4:30 EN TINI AUTHN PARABOLHi *QWMEN*
Carl Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun Jul 26 13:25:12 EDT 1998
On 07/26/98, "Jonathan Robie <jonathan at texcel.no>" wrote:
> At 10:37 AM 7/26/98, Carl Conrad wrote:
>
> >This is what's generally called a "deliberative" subjunctive; it may take a
> >first-person singular form, but it quite frequently has a rhetorical force
> >and does go, as in this instance, into the first-plural, assuming a sort of
> >classroom (or courtroom?) setting of a discussion in which the speaker and
> >his audience are participating together. The examples that come most
> >readily to my mind and in Paul's rhetorical argumentation in Romans, e.g.
> >Rom 6:1, TI OUN EROUMEN? EPIMENWMEN THi hAMARTIAi, hINA hH CARIS PLEONASHi?
> >or Rom 6:15, TI OUN? hAMARTHSWMEN, hOTI OUK ESMEN hUPO NOMON ALLA hUPO
> >CARIN?
>
> And the distinction between the aspect of the present tense for EPIMENWMEN
> and the aorist for hAMARTHSWMEN is the same distinction that is drawn for
> present tense and aorist imperatives, then? EPIMENWMEN is present tense
> because it is imperfective aspect (remaining in sin), and hAMARTHSWMEN is
> aorist because it is perfective aspect (sinning as an act)? Shall we
> interpret it thus?
Yes. The normal relationship between the aspects usually does apply in the
subjunctive and imperative.
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list