Codex Bezae (D05) Reading #9
Richard A. Stauch
rstauch at charter.net
Sat Aug 24 10:43:51 EDT 2002
Dear Carl,
Just to address the first point of surprise: why the perfect passive
EMNHSTEUMENHN (UBS3,4/NA26,27) in Luke 1:27? In my opinion, it is
because the direct object of the clause is the PARQENON ... MARIAM.
Since the act of "wooing" is done by the man in that culture, her
betrothal is a passive event from her perspective. Perhaps that
addresses your second point of surprise, as well?
Just my thought, for what it's worth,
Richard Allan Stauch
Long Beach, CA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu]
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 5:17 AM
> To: Biblical Greek
> Cc: Biblical Greek
> Subject: [b-greek] Re: Codex Bezae (D05) Reading #9
>
> Further reflections: I still think that this reading in D05 is an
error
> for
> EMNHSTEUMENHN, but as I pondered the matter I recollected there's a
> Homeric
> verb MNAOMAI for "court, woo" from which MNHSTHS (e.g. those wretched
> "suitors" upon whom Odysseus so horribly--and justly--takes vengeance)
and
> MNHSTEUOMAI derive. Upon checking BDAG this morning, I find this
entry:
>
> MNAOMAI (from MIMNHSKW in the sense 'woo' [so DELG and Frisk s.v. the
> latter, and LfgrE s.v. MNAOMAI] via special development of the primary
> sense of MNAOMAI 'be mindful of', which does not appear in our lit.;
for
> other derivations s. lit. cited in Frisk II 240f and LfgrE III 232;
cp.
> Hom. MNHSTHR 'suitor'; since Hom., also Philo) woo, court for one's
bride
> pf. ptc. MEMNHSMENH of the woman engaged, betrothed Lk 1:27 D.
>
> The surprise to me here is that this verb is in fact derived from the
root
> MNA/MNH "remember" and is a special extended usage of that root.
> Nevertheless two factors still seem to me to make this reading in D05
> problematic: (1) why the perfect passive of a verb that only appears
in
> the
> middle voice and that is used of the man courting a woman? and (2)
> according to LSJ-G (s.v. MNAOMAI II. 2), after Homer, the verb is used
in
> the sense, "sue for, solicit a favor, office, etc."
>
> At 9:01 PM -0400 8/22/02, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> >>9 - Lk 1:27 NA27/USB4: EMNHSTEUMENHN ANDRI hWi ONOMA IWSHF; D05:
> >>MEMNHSMENHN instead of EMNHSTEUMENHN
> >>Selon D05 Marie était simplement "promise en mariage" ; selon les
autres
> >>manuscrits qui reprennent le terme du Dt, elle était "officiellement
> >>fiancée" . Quelles conséquences dégager du choix de l'un ou de
l'autre
> >>terme? Autre question: pourquoi le parfait? ["According to D05 Mary
was
> >>simply 'promised in marriage'; according to the other MSS which echo
the
> >>term from Deuteronomy, she was 'officially engaged.' What follows
from
> the
> >>choice of the one over the other term? Another question: Why the
perfect
> >>tense?"]
> >
> >I don't understand how MEMNHSMENHN can be understood as "promise en
> >mariage" or "promised in marriage." This perfect MP participle can
only
> be
> >derived from MIMNHSKOMAI which is regularly middle in later Greek and
> ought
> >to be understood as middle in this form: "remembering" (or "having
> >remembered"). While the form doesn't normally have that -S- in the
stem,
> >the -S- is often enough added to vowel-stems before non-thematic
endings.
> >This really looks to me like an error for EMNHSTEUMENHN.
> --
>
> 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