EPI PASH TH MNEIA hUMON - Philippians 1:3
Carl Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Aug 11 15:16:55 EDT 1999
On 08/11/99, ""Joseph Brian Tucker" <music at riverviewcog.org>" wrote:
> A dative noun or pronoun can function semantically as the subject of a
> dative participle. The dative nominal will be coreferential with another
> dative construction in the sentence. The participial construction is to be
> translated as an adverbial clause, changing the participle into its
> corresponding verb with the dative nominal as its subject (Matt. 8:23
> EMBANTI AUTWi EIS TO PLOION HKOLOUQHSAN AUTWi). Therefore, there is a
> possibility of considering the subject dative with an infinitive instead of
> a dative participle - or am I way off base?
Technically I think we'd want tos ay that the dative of EMBANTI AUTWi is
governed by HKOLOUQHSAN, since AKOLOUQEW regularly construes with a dative;
then the participle EMBANTI is dative circumstantial participle in
agreement with the AUTWi--and, of course, that would accord with the
pronoun no matter what case the pronoun is in. What is extraordinary in
this clause, however (Mt 8:23), is that the AUTWi is repeated after
HKOLOUQHSAN. A redundancy? Or is there a Semitism involved?
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list