[B-Greek] GINOMAI for EIMI (+Imperative form)
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Apr 19 21:35:48 EDT 2004
At 6:04 PM -0700 4/19/04, Mitch Larramore wrote:
>I understand that GINESQE (Imperative) takes the place
>of ESTE (Imperative) in Greek without exception, both
>in the Septuigint and GNT. Is there any "lexical" (or
>semantic) reason for this?
Who told you so? I've found 21 imperatives of EIMI in the GNT: 2sg ISQI
(5x), 3 sg ESTW (12x), HTW (2x), 3pl ESTWSAN (2x); or is it that GINESQE
takes the place of ESTE in the 2nd pl? GINESQE 2pl does appear 24x in the
GNT, GINOU 2sg 5x (also GINESQW 1x, GENESQW 1x, GENHQTE 2pl 1x, GENHQTW 3pl
7x). My guess is that the prevalence of GINESQE in the 2pl imperative has
to do with a difference of meaning: that EIMI is stative while GINOMAI is
essentially inchoative.
--
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/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list