[B-Greek] Rev 1 1 => Main Clause
George F. Somsel
gfsomsel at juno.com
Sun Oct 31 16:40:05 EST 2004
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:21:04 +0100 "Peter Streitenberger"
<ps2866 at bingo-ev.de> writes:
> Dear George,
>
> for the greek I actually had in mind:
>
> main verb => ESHMANEN
> direct accusative object=> hOSA EIDEN
> indirect dative object => TWi DOULWi AUTOU IWANNHi
>
> Was it the missing "to" after "indicated" that makes the difference
> in the English and puts John into accusative ? Then the failure was
> due to my poor english. Thank you for correcting me!
>
> The revised version then would be:
>
> And he indicated to his servant John - who bore wittness to the word
> of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ - the things he (John) saw,
> sending by his angel.
>
> Does that make sense ?
> Peter
>
> ---
Peter,
Yes, it makes sense, but you're leaving out a bunch and that is what
makes the difference. You have read it thus
APOKALUYIS IHSOU CRISTOU hHN EDWKEN AUTWi hO QEOS TOIS DOULOIS AUTOU hA
DEI GENESQAI EN TACEI, KAI ESHMANEN APOSTEILAS DIA TOU AGGELOU AUTOU TWi
DOULWi AUTOU IWANNHi [. . .] hOSA EIDEN.
This omits the crucial appositive to TWi DOULWi AUTOU IWANNHi, namely hOS
EMARTURHSEN TON LOGON TOU QEOU KAI THN MARTURIAN IHSOU XRISTOU. Then
comes hOSA EIDEN. It would be very strange to have the object so far
removed from the verb I should think. It would be far more natural to
understand hOSA EIDEN as being an relative clause to TON LOGON TOU QEOU .
. . IHSOU XRISTOU as Harold, Carl and I have stated.
george
gfsomsel
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list