adverbial use of prepositional phrase in Luke 23:43?

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 26 09:58:19 EDT 2002


At 7:09 AM -0500 9/26/02, Kevin Buchs wrote:
>I'll post the background first since I am so slow in replying and then
>my question follows.
>
>My original question:
>> Is it possible to understand the phrase  MET EMOU in Luke 23:43 as
>> modifying the verb ESH ?   It seems the common understanding is to
>> take it as a parallel direct object along with EN TW PARADEISW .
>
>Steven Lo Vullo wrote:
>>ESHi is a future form of EIMI, a verb of being. Such verbs do not
>take
>>an object, but a predicate nominative, as well as other kinds of
>>complements such as prepositional phrases. So, both MET' EMOU and EN
>>TWi PARADEISWi are adverbial complements with ESHi. Most purists
>would
>>balk at speaking of an adverbial "modfier" for EIMI, and would prefer
>>the term "complement."
>
>Steven, thanks for helping me with the terminology.
>
>Carl Conrad wrote:
>>Who takes it as a direct object? and of what? I see no other way of
>>understanding the phrase than as an adverbial complement of ESHi EN
>TWi
>>PARADEISWi.
>
>I think the question mostly comes from my mistaken terminology.  See
>next question.
>
>My Question:  The verb of being (ESHi) takes a complement that gives
>the state or place of being, in this case, EN TWi PARADEISWi.  Steven
>suggests the MET' EMOU is also a adverbial complement of ESHi while
>Carl identifies it as the complement of ESHi EN TWi PARADEISWi.
>English translations typically read, for me at least, with "with me"
>and "in paradise" being parallel.  Syntactically, I see something
>different about MET' EMOU in that it preceeds the verb.  Could this
>prepositional phrase be understood to serve a different adverbial
>function?  Could it answer questions such as, what is the antecedent
>condition to the verb taking effect, or under what conditions would
>the verb take effect?  In my simplistic thinking on grammer, I see "in
>paradise" clearly serving as identifying the state/place of being.
>"With me" could also certainly do that, but I would then imagine that
>would be better indicated by this prepositional phrase following the
>verb as the other does, not preceeding it.  English translations do
>not follow this ordering.  Does it not communicate something different
>in English to say, "today with me you will be in paradise." ?

I would say that MET' EMOU and EN TWi PARADEISWi are indeed parallel
adverbial phrases functioning as complements to ESHi: one indicates WHERE
you shall be, the other obviously WITH WHOM. And yes, I think that the
phrase MET' EMOU does have some emphasis by virtue of its position ahead of
ESHi.
-- 

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