Lk 2:42: age of Jesus in the Temple (Luke in Codex Bezae issue)

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Sep 25 16:50:06 EDT 2002


For George Somsel:

>From: Polycarp66 at aol.com
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:43:49 EDT
>
>In a message dated 9/25/2002 12:26:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:
>
>>[D05; L, 579; pc] : KAI hOTE EGENETO AUTW ETH DWDEKA
>>[NA27] : KAI hOTE EGENETO  ETWN DWDEKA
>>
>>Chabert: I would summarize as follows the rule governing indication of
>>years of age in Greek: (1) With EINAI (frequently implicit) and the
>>genitive followed by a cardinal number, often modalized by  insertion of
>>hWS; indicates the year in which one is currently (e.g., the twentieth
>>year, prior to reaching one's  twentieth birthday); (2) With GIGNOMAI and
>>the accusative of duration followed by the cardinal number; indicates  time
>>elapsed; twenty years elapsed and the twenty-first year begun. In view of
>>these rules, how should we interpret the reading of NA27 with GIGNOMAI and
>>the genitive?
>>
>
>
>In NA27 the use of GIGNOMAI with the specification of age would seem to
>follow upon v. 41 where it is specified that POREUONTO hOI GONEIS AUTOU
>KAT' ETOS EIS IEROUSALHM . . .  What GIGNOMAI would do would be to signify
>that it was not until he had become 12 that this took place.  DWDEKA is
>the object of GIGNOMAI with ETWN functioning either as a partitive
>genitive ("twelve of years") or as a genitive of time within which it
>occurred.  Both BAGD and BDAG cite Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, 1.2.40 which
>reads
>
>LEGETAI GAR ALKIBIADHS, PRIN EIKOSIN ETWN EINAI
>
>Unfortunately, EIKOSIN is indeclinable and PRIN can take either a genitive
>or an accusative so it is dependent upon the relationship of EIKOSIN to
>the verb EINAI to reveal that it must be an accusative.
>
>My inclination is to take it a a partitive genitive.
>
>gfsomsel





More information about the B-Greek mailing list