PASAN THN PISTIN
Iver Larsen
alice-iver_larsen at wycliffe.org
Fri Jan 19 03:35:07 EST 2001
Dear Carl and Carlton
>
> Iver wrote;
> >
> >How would you explain Acts 27:37: HMEQA DE hAI PASAI YUCAI EN TWi PLOIWi 276?
> >An ALWAYS rule has no exceptions.
>
> You are certainly correct concerning this construction as an attributive
> use of PAS. I thought I had checked Accordance and it did not reveal this
> exception. I went back and checked and I had used the wrong PAS in
> Accordance. When I checked it properly I found two other exceptions in Acts.
>
> Acts 19:7 OI PANTES ANDRES
> Acts 20:18 TON PANTA CRONON
> Acts 27:37 AI PASAI YUCA
>
> Is it significant that all are in Acts?
>
I have a confession to make. I was so caught up in trying to use a Greek
analytical program called BART (I don't have GRAMCORD) that I failed to look up
what BDAG says about PAS. It says in section f the following:
"PAS and PANTES stand attributively between art. and noun, when the noun is
regarded as a whole, in contrast to its individual parts." They give the
following citations: hO PAS ARIQMOS, TO PAN PLHQOS, EIS TON PANTA BION and even
hOI PANTES ANQRWPOI (X., An. 5,6,7).
And they list the "exceptions" in the NT that you and I found, plus more. My
regard for BDAG has
grown through this little exchange.
Thanks,
Iver Larsen
Kolding, Denmark
alice-iver_larsen at wycliffe.org
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list