[B-Greek] PLHRHS

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun May 2 07:35:51 EDT 2004


At 9:59 AM +0300 5/2/04, Iver Larsen wrote:
>> [Carl:] BDAG has a note which I hesitate to cite in full, but it seems to
>> me important:
>>
>> s.v. PLHRHS 2: "In some of the passages already mentioned PLHRHS is
>> indecl., though never without v.l., and almost only when it is used w. a
>> gen., corresponding to an Engl. expression such as 'a work full
>> of errors':
>> THN ... DOXAN AUTOU ... PLHRHS (referring to AUTOU) CARITOS KAI ALHQEIAS J
>> 1:14 (cp. CTurner, JTS 1, 1900, 120ff; 561f). ANDRA PLHRHS PISTEWS Ac 6:5
>> (v.l. PLHRH). It is found as an itacistic v.l. in Mk 8:19; Ac 6:3, 5;
>> 19:28, and without a gen. 2J 8 v.l. (s. N.25 app.). Examples of
>> this use of PLHRHS w. the gen. are found fr. the second century BC, and
>fr. the first
>> century AD on it is frequently found in colloq. H.Gk.
>
>I see no reason why PLHRHS should refer to AUTOU rather than DOXAN. Normally
>such an apposition would refer to the head of the noun phrase, not one of
>its constituents. And it is not particularly helpful to talk about "some of
>the passages" and "almost only".

What I still don't understand (as I didn't understand it the first time
that you indicated you thought that PLHRHS should be construed with DOXAN)
is why the GLORY should be understood as "full of grace and truth" rather
than the LOGOS, which I take to be the antecedent of AUTOU in EQEASAMEQA
THN DOXAN AUTOU. So I think that the BDAG note makes more sense. Is it the
DOXA that is really "full of grace and truth" (or whatever one understands
this phrase to mean)? or is it rather He whose glory "we beheld" that is
"full of grace and truth"?

What Robertson's note says actually is: "Full  (PLHRHS). Probably
indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with DOXAN (or genitive with
MONOGENOUS) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, Grammar, p. 275).
As nominative PLHRHS can agree with the subject of ESKHNWSEN."

I can understand PLHRHS as grammatically construing with DOXAN; I just
don't, for my part, understand the sense of it; it's like saying "I know
this is water: I can feel its wetness, cold and refreshing." Is it the
"wetness" that is cold and refreshing, or is it the water? Perhaps one is
thinking in terms of metonymy or synecdoche?
-- 

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