[B-Greek] PLHRHS
Mitch Larramore
mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 30 11:42:35 EDT 2004
Dr. Conrad:
Sorry again. I misunderstood Iver's question. I
thought he was asking you IF we take PLHRHS as
INDECLINABLE, could it modify DOXAN. To which I
thought you said "Hardly." I think I just
misunderstood Iver's question and therefore I took
your response wrong.
Now I understand you to say that if we take PLHRHS as
a two-termination adjective, then the acc. sing. form
would not be PLHRHS (as Iver was asking), but PLHRH.
Mitch
--- "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
wrote:
> At 6:58 AM -0700 4/30/04, Mitch Larramore wrote:
> >John 1:14 KAI hO
> >> >> LOGOS SARX EGENETO KAI ESKHNWSEN EN hHMIN, KAI
> >> EQEASAMEQA THN DOXAN AUTOU,
> >> >> DOXAN hWS MONOGENOUS PARA PATROS, PLHRHS
> CARITOS
> >> KAI ALHQEIAS.
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >Iver asked:
> >>Could PLHRHS in John 1:14 possibly be an
> accusative
> >(feminine), and
> >>therefore relate to DOXAN?
> >
> >Dr. Conrad replied:
> >Hardly! Even if we should understand PLHRHS as a
> >2-termination
> >adjective
> >(PLHRHS mf/PLHRES n), it would have to be PLHRH in
> the
> >acc. sg. fem. As
> >noted above, the only way to understand it as
> >construing with DOXAN is
> >as
> >an INDECLINABALE adjective. And perhaps that's what
> it
> >is, as the
> >evidence
> >offered in BDAG seems to indicate, but I must say,
> it
> >surely seems
> >"passing
> >strange" to me--very idiomatic, perhaps like
> American
> >English
> >colloquial
> >idioms, "the whole nine yards" or "lock, stock, and
> >barrel."
> >
> >I note:
> >What do we make then of Robertson:
> >
> >Full (PLHRHS). Probably indeclinable accusative
> >adjective agreeing with DOXAN (or genitive with
> >MONOGENOUS) of which we have papyri examples
> >(Robertson, Grammar, p. 275).
> >
> >Does this note not say that there ARE papyri
> examples
> >of this adjectival usage of PLHRHS modifying a noun
> >such as DOXAN (which I assume Robertson means that
> >there are papyri examples of PLHRHS modifying an
> >accusative noun)?
>
> Mitch, I thought I'd made myself clear, but
> evidently I didn't. PLHRHS in
> John 1:14 and Acts 6:5 may be construed with an
> accusative m. or f. noun
> ONLY if we understand PLHRHS as indeclinable, NOT as
> a regular
> 2-termination adjective. That is to say, if the
> adjective is understood by
> the user as indeclinable, he/she could write PLHRHS
> ONOMATA and it would
> mean "full names." "Indeclinable" means precisely
> that it has no distinct
> case/number/gender forms.
> --
>
> 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/
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list