[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