[B-Greek] rom 8:17
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at ioa.com
Mon Jun 6 08:29:24 EDT 2005
I would add what I hope is a clarification to what George has already
offered as a response to your question. My complaint
about Wallace is that he is classifying genitive (and other)
constructions in terms (it seems to me) of how they should be
translated into English or another target language rather than in
terms of how the Greek speaker/writer conceived these
constructions. But in fact, ALL adnominal genitive constructions are
essentially the same: the constructions in English
that come closest to paralleling the actual Greek construction of
KLHRONOMOI MEN QEOU SUGKLHRONOMOI DE CRISTOU
are:
1. "heirs of God" -- "co-heirs of Christ"
OR
2. "God's heirs" -- "Christ's co-heirs"
OR
"God-heirs" -- "Christ-co-heirs"
Each of these configurations tells you nothing more than that "God"
and "Christ" characterize the nouns "heirs" and "co-heirs"
respectively in the same manner as do adjectives, but none of these
configurations spells out precisely what the relationship
is between "God" and "heirs" and between "Christ" and "co-heirs."
The translators' decision to opt for the phrase "co-heirs WITH
Christ" instead of "co-heirs OF Christ" might be for clarity's sake
because we don't want to suggest that we inherit FROM Christ but
rather that LIKE Christ we inherit FROM God. The translator
wants to avoid phrasing that might be misleading to one who is
reading the phrase in a language other than the original.
On Jun 5, 2005, at 4:49 PM, nicholas runecrow wrote:
> "Carl has complained (well, I don't know that "complained" is quite
> the
> correct word) that some such as Dan Wallace have overly distinguished
> various usages of the cases. Perhaps your problem is that you take
> these
> distinctions too seriously. Yes, we can distinguish various usages
> for
> the genitive (please note the spelling), but to the Greek they
> would all
> have been simply genitive.
>
> george
> gfsomsel"
>
>
>>>>
>>>>
>
> Thanks for the reply George. I am basically wondering if there is
> something in the Greek construct that pushes for two different
> distinctions of the genItives. When you say "to the Greek, they
> would all have been simply genitive" you seem to be echoing what
> I've said- that there really wouldn't be a reason to translate
> these two cases with different English words.
>
> This is why I am trying to determine why virtually all English
> translations do make this distinction between the two genitives. I
> am certainly not at the level of knowledge of Greek that most
> translators have attained, and so I am left wondering what they are
> seeing that I am not to cause such a distinction.
>
> If I am understanding the thrust of your reply, you are saying that
> there is no reason for the use of differing English translations?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today -
> it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/
> direct/01/
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
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