[B-Greek] Ephesians 2:20 - What kind of Genitive construction?
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Feb 8 11:28:22 EST 2005
At 10:29 AM -0500 2/8/05, Rod Rogers wrote:
>Kelton and Carl,
>
>Looking at this a little closer after Kelton Graham's post I feel that
>everyone is right, including Mr. Wallace, except me. Well, maybe I was only
>half wrong. I was reading Wallace' comments on p 98 in his foot note #69 and
>thought he was referring to AUTOU IHSOU CRISTOU as being in apposition which
>he evidently was not. Later Wallace does list Eph 2:20 as a Genitive
>Absolute on p 655 under Rom 7:3).
>
>Bottom line, Kelton and Mr. Wallace were right in that Wallace is referring
>to TWi QEMELIWi to be in apposition to APOSTOLWN KAI PROFHTWN, Carl was
>right in identifying ONTOS AKROGWNIAIOU AUTOU IHSOU CRISTOU as a Genitive
>Absolute and I was at least right in seeing this also as a Genitive
>Absolute. I was wrong in misquoting Mr. Wallace. Sorry.
>
>Thanks Kelton and Carl.
>
>rod rogers
>bargersville, in
There's still some sort of a contradiction here, as the two interpretations
of the construction seems (to me, at least) to be contradictory: a genitive
absolute is by nature grammatically independent and therefore cannot stand
in apposition to anything. We may say that the cornerstone is related to
the structure being built as is the foundation, but it still seems to me
that the genitive absolute functions as an independent and syntactically
unrelated 'clause.'
--
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