ALLHLWN

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Dec 17 21:41:06 EST 2002


At 12:57 PM +1100 12/18/02, Peter Kirk wrote:
>A question has come up on the b-trans list about ALLHLWN, in the context
>of a particular verse in the NT, which I will not specify as I want to
>restrict the discussion to this one point. But the context is
>(apparently) a command to all believers to do something (which I choose
>not to specify) ALLHLOIS.
>
>Another list member suggested an interpretation in which a sub-group of
>believers should do this to those not in the sub-group, but not vice
>versa. I objected, stating that the use of ALLHLWN implied vice versa.
>He wrote "I do not see this "vice versa" in the text." I replied: "The
>"vice versa" is represented in the text by the word ALLHLOIS, which is
>defined by Louw and Nida as "a reciprocal reference between entities -
>'each other, one another.'" This must imply mutuality... It cannot mean
>just that one subset must... to another subset." To which he replied
>"Why not?"

And BDAG says: "each other, one another, mutually,"

>So I now want to ask the b-greek list: Can ALLHLWN refer to what one
>subgroup of addressess does to others (English "some... others")? Or
>must it refer to what all addressees do to every other addressee
>(English "each other")?

For my part, I don't think so. I think the the responsibility rests upon
all who are addressed to each other. I think mutuality is inescapable in
this word.
-- 

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/



More information about the B-Greek mailing list