John 17:23, support Clay
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Aug 19 16:56:25 EDT 2002
At 1:32 PM -0700 8/19/02, c stirling bartholomew wrote:
>on 8/19/02 12:04 AM, Randall Buth wrote:
>
>> (MPOUQ GRAFEI)
>> I was uneasy when I saw the line above about 'present subjunctive
>>indicating a
>> wish ... THEREFORE incomplete"
>>
>> There is a basic principle of language involved. The word in question
>>was WSIN
>> 'they would be'. It is a "be" verb which should raise red flags for most
>> linguists, but more importantly in this case, there is only one subjunctive
>> form available. There is no possibility of an 'aorist'/(a.k.a.
>>'perfective' in
>> general linguistics) subjunctive for this verb EINAI.
>
>>Therefore it would be
>> wrong to make a point of this. A person should not give something a special
>> (a.k.a. 'marked' in general linguistics) classification for which another
>> option does not exist. That doesn't mean that WSIN is not a continuative, by
>> nature it is. But here it is functionally just subjunctive.
>
>Randall has pointed out an aspect of this question that I had not
>considered. A important point however and one which has a lot of general
>usefulness beyond this particular application.
>
>Thanks Randall.
>
>Meanwhile,
>the reason I didn't have a problem with WSIN TETELEIWMENOI has more to do
>with methodology and reading habits. I generally don't bother to do internal
>analysis on a functional unit once the functional unit has been identified
>as such.
>
>Let me illustrate with a different example. A week or so ago a question was
>asked about EIS TI, "What is the function of EIS in EIS TI?" I answered the
>question by explaining the semantic function of EIS and its relationship to
>TI. My answer was misleading in a way because it suggested that there was
>more to learn from EIS TI (a functional unit) by looking into the internal
>architecture of the unit. It just so happens that in the case of EIS TI, the
>internal architecture is somewhat transparently related to the function of
>the larger unit and so it isn't a totally futile exercise. However, once a
>functional unit has been identified it is really kind of pointless to look
>inside. It can lead to dead ends and misunderstandings since not all
>functional units are transparent.
>
>So when I encountered, WSIN TETELEIWMENOI (jn 17:23) I read it as a
>functional unit. Didn't even bother to raise the question that was bothering
>Matthew.
But what Clay did is the right way to proceed normally, I think. And the
only note I would have injected into this discussion I'll add now: another
reason not to think of WSIN TELEIWMENOI as two distinct elements is that
the perfect middle/passive 3d plural (indicative or subjunctive) is, so far
as I know, ALWAYS periphrastic in Hellenistic Greek and almost always in
Classical Attic as well; if ever the form TETELEIWNTAI appeared in ancient
Greek, it was more likely in the Homeric era.
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list