[B-Greek] Accusative in John 2:11

Rob Matlack united_by_truth at myrealbox.com
Thu Aug 7 11:39:07 EDT 2003


Carl and others, thanks for your answers.
I am still not clear on the question of a simple appositive probably because I was not
clear in my original question. If there was a text (and there isn't that I can find)
that said TOUTON EKALESEN TON MAQHTHN, I can see how this could be an
object-compliment "he called this one to be a disciple". However, could it, with or
without TON ever be a simple accusative "he called this one, who by the way is a
disciple". In other words, apart from context, is there a way to distinguish the
difference between a potential object-compliment construction and a potential object
with a simple appositive.

Carl, in studying your answer it occurs to me that perhaps the problem is that I am
allowing the demonstrative to function as a pronoun or stand alone which would be
required for a simple appositive construction.

Sorry if this makes no sense. Thanks for your help.
Rob Matlack	     united_by_truth at myrealbox.com
Stilwell, OK
"I can only say that I am nothing but a poor sinner, trusting in Christ alone for
salvation"--R. E. Lee
"It is not our task to secure the triumph of truth, but merely to fight on its
behalf."--Blaise Pascal

At 9:34 AM -0500 8/6/03, Rob Matlack wrote:
>TAUTHN EPOIHSE THN ARCHN TWN SHMEIWN hO IHSOUS EN KANA THS GALILAIAS
>I have two questions concerning this first clause of 2:11. First, the NET
>Bible note
>reads: "Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs. The sentence
>in Greek
>involves an object-complement construction. The force can be either 'Jesus
>did this
>as,' or possibly 'Jesus made this to be,' The latter translation accents
>not only
>Jesus' power but his sovereignty too. Cf. also 4:54." I can see how this
>could be
>construed as and object-compliment construction, but could it not also be
>a simple
>appositive, so the NIV and ESV.
>
>Second, some manuscripts omit the THN before ARCHN. Is there any significant
>difference in meaning? Does the presence of the article lend itself more
>to the simple
>accusative understanding?

I think you are raising more a question of the grammar of English
translation than of understanding the Greek text: TAUTHN THN ARCHN is a
unit and functions as the object of EPOIHSE--if that weren't so the TAUTHN
wouldn't be feminine. The reading TAUTHN ARCHN without the article is
intelligible but violates standard Greek grammar which calls for a
demonstrative such as hOUTOS always to be in a predicative position, which
in turn means that the article must appear with the noun. The Greek text
says, "performed this beginning of (his) miracles" although you could as
well translate TAUTHN THN ARCHN as "this first one."
--

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/03





More information about the B-Greek mailing list