[B-Greek] Jn. 8:40

gfsomsel at juno.com gfsomsel at juno.com
Tue Nov 23 13:53:56 EST 2004


On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:20:26 -0500 "Carl W. Conrad"
<cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> writes:

> At 12:46 PM -0500 11/23/04, gfsomsel at juno.com wrote:
> >
> >OK.  I think I understand now.  I believe that would be called
> >"anacoluthon" (basically meaning "it does not follow").
> 
> The term anacoluthon is normally used to refer to a sentence wherein 
> an
> incomplete sentence (a sentence fragment) is followed by a 
> grammatical
> construction that cannot properly construe with it. But that's 
> hardly what
> we have here. Nobody will fault the sentence in English, "When 
> you've all
> read the pamphlet, please return it to me, who brought it here for 
> all to
> share." The subject of "brought" is "who", which takes the place in 
> this
> relative clause of the subject "I" of a simple sentence that would 
> be "I
> brought it here for all to share."
> 
> If you have to have a name to ascribe to every linguistic 
> phenomenon, your
> grammatical categories are going to fill a pretty large book. What
> Aristotle did in the Nicomachean Ethics when he found that he could
> describe a vice that was either the excess or deficiency of a known 
> virtue,
> he called it ANWNUMOS. If you care to English that, it's "anonymous" 
> or
> "nameless." There's something of a philosophical problem in 
> supposing that
> things don't exist unless we can assign them proper names. According 
> to
> Genesis 2 God brought all the creatures to hA-ADAM to give names to, 
> but it
> seems to me that biologists are still making a practice of assigning 
> names
> to newly-discovered plants and animals. And so too there appears to 
> be some
> dira cupido to assign names to every conceivable grammatical 
> feature, lest
> it be thought otherwise to want existence.
> -- 
> 
> 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/
> ---

Yes, but he is concerned with the problem of having (if I may
overliteralize the translation)

"Now you seek to kill me, a man who ** I told you the truth ** "

where the 3 s is transformed into 1 s.  Your example seems somewhat
different in that the "me", while 1 s. functions as the object and is
continued by the 3 s.  

george
gfsomsel



More information about the B-Greek mailing list