Lk 18:13; TWi hAMARTWLWi

Steven Lo Vullo doulos at merr.com
Sat Dec 1 17:51:04 EST 2001



On Saturday, December 1, 2001, at 02:22  PM, Clwinbery at aol.com wrote:

> Harry, Carl's next post makes clear that what has to happen for 
> apposition to
> be present is the two substantives have to be exactly the same, whether 
> it is
> regular apposition or the special category some grammarians have - 
> genitive
> of apposition. Now the question in Luke 18:13 is are MOI and TWi 
> hAMARTWLWi
> identical. Is there more to MOI than just being a sinner. I think so, 
> and
> that is what causes my hesitation to join Carl in jumping ship. The 
> least we
> can say about this article is that it marks the prayer as a member of 
> the
> group. Does it do more? I don't know.

Carlton:

Certainly the two substantives have to refer to the same person, but I 
don't think the appositive ever really expresses the totality of the 
noun to which it is in apposition. It sharpens the identification of the 
person or thing or restates the identification of the person or thing in 
a way that highlights a characteristic or attribute of the person or 
thing that may not be obvious from the noun to which it is in 
apposition. I don't think there is an attempt at an exhaustive 
restatement of the person or thing. Certainly, as you ask above, there 
is more to MOI than just being a sinner, but in his mind "the sinner" is 
an apt appellation for himself. "The sinner" in this case identifies the 
tax collector in a way that emphasizes that attribute or characteristic 
that defines him best under the circumstances, whether he means it par 
excellence or in comparison to the Pharisee.

Let me give an example of what I mean:

In Eph 3.8 we have what amounts to the same construction as that under 
discussion in Luke 18.13, except with a genitival modifier: EMOI TWi 
ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN ("to me, the least of all saints"). I think 
most would take TWi ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN as appositive to EMOI. 
Here EMOI ("me") and TWI ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN ("the least of all 
saints") are no doubt the same person. Paul IS (in his mind) "the least 
of all the saints." No one else, in his mind, qualifies. Now, is there 
more to MOI than TWi ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN? Certainly! Though Paul 
IS TWi ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN, that is not ALL he is. Yet both EMOI 
and TWi ELACISTOTERWi PANTWN hAGIWN are the same person. So in Luke 
18.13 (IMO) MOI and TWi hAMARTWLWi are the same person, yet, of course, 
TWi hAMARTWLWi does not exhaust MOI as a person.
=============

Steven Lo Vullo
Madison, WI




More information about the B-Greek mailing list