[B-Greek] re: Genitive in 2 Cor 1:5, H GENIKH PTWSIS
Mitch Larramore
mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Sat Jun 5 06:43:54 EDT 2004
--- R Yochanan Bitan Buth <ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il>
wrote:
> E. Mishoe EGRAPSE
> >How can we keep the number of Genitives
> >to a workable size?
>
> By starting with 1.
>
> Then by grouping according to structure rather than
> by interpretation in
> another language.
>
> E.g., similarly to what Carl did, but a little
> differently:
>
> 1 ONOMA META GENIKOU ONOMATOS [KAI/H ANTWNUMIAS
> KAI/H EPIQETOU],
> a noun with a genitive noun [inc.
> pronouns/adjectives](marks possession or
> relationship to be determined by context)
> 2 RHMA META GENIKOU ONOMATOS,
> a verb with a genitive noun object (idiomatic to
> the verb, or less
> affected than an AITIATIKON ONOMA [accusative])
> 3 PROQESIS META GENIKOU ONOMATOS,
> a preposition with a genitive noun (idiomatic to
> the preposition)
> 4 GENIKON META METOXHS
> a genitive with a participle (this is most
> frequently an adverbial use of
> the genitive mentioned immediately below, and is
> traditionally called
> 'genitive absolute' in English)
> 5 GENIKON "EPIRRHMATWS", META PROTASEWS
> a genitive 'adverbially', with a clause
> (idiomatic, like TAXEWS 'quickly'.
> The GENIKON META METOXHS above is a common use of
> this, though usually with
> more than one word)
>
> EPEITA Afterwards (!) someone may profitably
> subcategorize these by semantic
> structure,
Doesn't this bring us full circle to the problem
again? It seems to me that the problem is how does one
reduce the number of SEMANTIC subcategories, even if
there were only 1 Structural category. Would not ALL
of Wallace's SEMANTIC subcategories fit nicely under
one (or more) of these 5 Structural categories?
=====
Mitch Larramore
Spring Branch, Texas
Student/Memorial High School
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list