Romans 10:20: Are all English translations in error?
Richard
r.vandenhengel at hetnet.nl
Fri Nov 29 16:18:49 EST 2002
Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> It might even be argued that hEUREQHN in Rom 10:20 should be understood as a
> middle rather than a
> passive. BDAG includes under hEURISKW this note: "Pass. hEUREQHN TOIS EME
> MH ZHTOUSIN I have let myself be found by those who did not seek me Ro
> 10:20 (Is 65:1)." Certainly there's a close and deliberate parallel between
> hEUREQHN and EMFANHS EGENOMHN as between the two clauses generally.
>
> So also in Rom 7:10 what is emphasized by hEUREQH is the subject hH ENTOLH
> hH EIS ZWHN--or at any rate the paradox is underscored by the word order,
> such that I would English it as, "and what I found out was that ..."
> --
>
> 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/
Thank you for your contribution, Carl.
This is the first subject I placed in the Bible Greek Mailing List. I
enjoy listening to and learning from the different kinds of insights.
I have read about the verba deponentia (passives that have an active
meaning), but your contribution raises a new question to me: on basis of
what principle is it allowed to translate a passive by a middle mode?
Kind regards,
R. van den Hengel,
The Netherlands.
+ + + Don't blame me for making tranzlation errours. Blame those who built
the tower of Babel + + +
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list