[B-Greek] Anarthrous Convertible Expressions

John Schwandt jschwandt at nsa.edu
Tue Feb 15 20:19:08 EST 2005


I agree with the qualitative or metaphorical meaning of FWS in 1 Jn 1:5, but
I would like to comment on some of the supporting arguments given.

Sheldon (included below) gave a great summary of what Daniel Wallace says in
his grammar on pp. 40-48 with special emphasis on page 45.  However, Wallace
may have left the impression that there can never be a convertible
proposition in Greek using the verb EIMI where the predicate nominative
precedes the copula (and is anarthrous). 

Wallace pg. 45 "When both substantives meet one of the three qualifications
for S, then they become interchangeable."

The three qualifications as Wallace lists are
1) Proper Name
2) Pronoun
3) Articular Noun

Now according to Colwell, every definite predicate nominative (PN) preceding
the copula will not have an article.  This would eliminate #3 from being
considered as a convertible in these situations.  So Wallace implies that
the only convertible preverbal PNs would be proper names or pronouns.

I haven't done much research on this, it seems like this does not do justice
to the grammatically possible definite meaning of an anarthrous preverbal
PN.  Since such word order can make the PN function as if it were articular,
shouldn't this open the possibility for a convertible anarthrous preverbal
PN construction.

I don't think Wallace would want disallow this since he could have used such
simple formulaic argument of word order to prove his case in John 1:1 rather
than an extended contextual case over pages 266-270.

There are also some examples that would not make me want to be so formulaic
about this issue.  I ran some basic searches in Logos to get this list.  I
would guess there are some clear examples that I overlooked.

I think the way Wallace interacts with 1 Cor 11:3 is informative.



Mark 2:28 KURIOS ESTIN O UIOS TOU ANQRWPOU KAI TOU SAFFATOU.  I don't think
that this verse is talking about the lord as a subset of a class of lords of
the Sabbath.  Granted it could be qualitative, but I don't think a definite
understanding (convertible) would be grammatically ruled out.

John 3:29 O ECWN THN NUMFHN NUMFIOS ESTIN, It is not uncommon to see
bridegroom translated definitely.  The flow of argument seems to push toward
something stronger than "has the qualities of a bridegroom".  BTW, I think
that is something has all the qualities of some something else and there is
no subset relationship, I think the must be the same thing.  (Obviously, I'm
not a Platonist.)

1 Cor 11:3 KEFALH DE GUNAIKOS O ANHR  Wallace takes KAFALH as the PN in his
footnote on page 45 and in this context it would be convertible.

Eph. 5:23 ANHR ESTIN KEFALH THS GUNAIKOS If seems to fit into the definite
area as a gnomic use, which would normally take an article.

Heb 9:15 DIAQHKHS KAINHS MESITIHS ESTIN I take this one as a convertible
expression of the implied subject.  "He is the mediator of the new covenant.
= the mediator of the new covenant is he.















-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of sheldon bryan
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 12:31 PM
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: RE: [B-Greek] 1 John 1:5

Two very important grammatical markers within this text help us to make 
decisions about its "literalness", both revolving around the semantic 
implications of the subject-predicate nominative relationship.
1.  FWS is an anarthrous pre-verbal predicate nominative... Research has 
shown that these are usually qualitative, not definite. So the verse is more

than likely speaking about a quality of  O QEOS not identifying O QEOS.
2. Further support for the qualitative idea is provided by the fact that 
within this particular subject-predicate nominative construction, only the 
subject, O QEOS, is articular and the predicate nominative, FWS, is not a 
pronoun nor is it a proper name.  Whenever this happens, the relationship 
expressed is a type of subset relationship with the predicate nominative 
being the general term, or metaphor and the subject expressing a type, 
clarification, or meaning of the general term. In this way, what is being 
expressed is not a mathematical truth O QEOS = FWS; FWS= O QEOS, but a way 
of perceiving, and presenting the qualities, nature of O QEOS.

Sheldon R. Bryan

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list