[B-Greek] Colossians 2:8
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at ioa.com
Tue Aug 9 14:35:53 EDT 2005
On Aug 9, 2005, at 1:44 PM, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:
> Dear Malcolm,
>
>
>> BLEPETE MH TIS hUMAS ESTAI hO SULAGWGWN DIA THS FILOSOFIAS KAI KENHS
>> APATAS KATA THN PARADOSIN TWN ANQROPWN KAI KATA TA STOICEIA TOU
>> KOSMOU KAI OU KATA CRISTON.
>>
>> My question is a simple one. The position of hUMAS strikes me as
>> quite awkard.
>>
>
> HH: You shouldn't judge Greek by English. Greek can do this, and the
> writer may have wanted to link DIA THS FILOSOFIAS KAI KENHS APATAS
> closely to the verb.
>
>
>> It could be understood as the direct object of hO SULAGWGWN, but
>> could it legitimately be by virtue of it's position in the text the
>> accusative of respect? In other words I know it can but is it more
>> probable and nature?
>>
>
> HH: If hUMas were an accusative of respect, I don't see that the
> meaning would be any different than if hUMAS were the direct object
> of the verb: "Beware lest anyone with respect to you be one deceiving
> . . . ." A direct object is just more natural.
And, truth to tell, an accusative of respect is just one particular
name put on the accusative which is always an adverbial limiting
usage of a substantive. When that adverbial limiting usage of a
substantive is with a transitive verb, it's standard to call it a
direct object.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list