[B-Greek] EXESTAKENAI in Acts 8:11: transitive or intransitive?

Randy Leedy Rleedy at bju.edu
Fri Mar 11 17:34:33 EST 2005


Carl, I appreciate your labors. It is fascinating that LSJ gives
transitive meanings for the -A- forms. It's also interesting that they
don't entirely exclude the -H- forms from being transitive: does this
suggest that this may be a subtle point that gave the Greeks themselves
some trouble? Especially I note that there's a textual variant with -H-
in the EXESTAKOTA occurrence cited under point 4.

Anyway, you've certainly put substance to your suggestion that the A
may be relevant, and I think I'm pretty well ready to view the
transitive interpretation as the better one now. I do like it in terms
of the sense of the passage. The directness of the transitive meaning
gives a much livelier tone to the statement: "They listened to him
because for a long time he had astounded them with his magical powers"
sounds much better to me than "They listened to him because for a long
time they were astounded..." A focus on what Simon had been doing,
rather than on the people's response to him, makes best sense. (The
earlier transitive statement weighs in on this point also.) The people's
response is already stated in PROSEICON; it seems to me to make the best
sense to understand the explanatory clause as turning the attention to
Simon. Would I say "I listened to his sermons carefully because I was
impressed with his insight", or "I listened to his sermons carefully
because he impressed me with his insight"? The difference is subtle, but
it seems to me to be real. If the overall focus of the passage were on
myself, I would opt for the former, but if the focus were on the
preacher, I would opt for the latter. In Acts the overall focus focus is
clearly on Simon, so the latter impresses me as better. [I wish I could
say it impresses me as more insightful, but that's just not the right
word. :-)]

I think I'm about ready to close the case now, though I'm still
interested in anything you may get from your friend Mr. Danker. It's
been an interesting and, I think, profitable exercise; thanks for your
attention and patience.

Randy Leedy

>>> "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> 03/11/05 4:27 PM >>>
I've a bit more fuel to fan the flames of uncertainty over the question
of
the transitivity of EXESTAKENAI in Acts 8:11. I've just been reviewing
hISTHMI and its compounds in the GNT and I can find no instances of
hISTHMI
or its compounds in the perfect that could be construed as transitive
other
than our form EXESTAKENAI. However, in the LXX I've found THE FORM
AFESTAKA
in a clearly transitive active sense--and note that the root vowel is
A
here rather than H:

Jer 16:5 TADE LEGEI KURIOS: MH EISELQHiS EIS QIASON AUTWN KAI MH
POREUQHiS
TOU KOYASQAI KAI MH PENQHSHiS AUTOUS hOTI AFESTAKA THN EIRHNHN MOU APO
TOU
LAOU TOUTOU.

I've also been hunting through LSJ. Under hISTHMI we find this entry
for a
transitive causal sense:

hISTHMI (cf. hISTAW, hISTANW)

 I. causal, make to stand, imper. hISTH  Il.21.313 , E.Supp.1230, 
KAQISTA 
Il.9.202 : impf. hISTHN , Ep. hISTASKE  Od.19.574 ; 3pl. hISTAN 
B.10.112 :
fut. STHSW, Dor. STASW   Theoc.5.54 : aor. 1 ESTHSA, Ep. 3pl. ESTASAN
for
ESTHSAN dub. in Od.18.307, 3.182, 8.435, al. (v. ESTASAN): hence, in
late
Poets, ESTASAS, ESTASE, AP9.714,708 (Phil.): aor. 1 Med. ESTHSAMHN
(never
intr.), v. infr.A.111.2, 3: pf. hESTAKA Cerc.3 , ( [KAQ-] ) Hyp.Eux.28,
UPZ
112.5 (ii B.C.), ( [PERI-] ) Pl.Ax.370d, ( [AF-] ) LXXJe.16.5, ( [PAR-]
)
Phld.Rh. 1.9S., al., ( [SUN-] ) S.E.M.7.109; also hESTHKA (v. infr.)
in
trans. sense, ( [DI-] ) Arist.Vent.973a18, ( [AF-] ) v.l. in LXX l.c.;
hESTAKEIA trans. in Test.Epict.1.25.

Note the hESTAK- forms cited for the causal transitive sense.

And LSJ has this entry for EXISTHMI in a causal transitive sense:

EXISTHMI
A. causal in pres., impf., fut., aor I: displace; hence, change, alter
utterly, TAN FUSIN Ti Locr. 100c, Arist EN 1119a23, cf. Plot. 6.2.7;
THN
POLITEIAN Plu. Cic. 10; E.THS POIOTHTOS TON OINON Id. 2.702a.
2. metaph., EXISTANAI TINA FRENWN drive one out of his senses, E. Ba
850;
NOU OINOS EXESTHSE ME E. Fr. 265; TOU FRONEIN X. Mem. 1.3.12; TAUTA
KINEI,
TAUTA EXISTHSIN ANQRWPOUS AUTWN D. 21.72; simply E. TINA drive one out
of
his senses, confound, amaze, Hp. coac. 429; EXISTANTA KAI FOBOUNTA
TOUS
ANQRWPOUS MUSON. FR. 8P.35H.; EXISTHSI diverts the attention, Arist Rh
1408b23; excite, ib. 36, Ev. Luc 24.22 TON LOGISMON, THN DIANOIAN, Plu
Sol.
21, Crass. 23; also E. TINA TWN LOGISMWN Id. Fab 5; EIS APAQEIAN E.
THN
YUCHN Id. Publ. 6.
3. get rid of, dispose of the claims of a person, Sammelb. 5246.14 (i
B.C.), etc.
4. EXESTAKOTA (EXESTHKOTA cod.); EIS DIKHN KEKLHKOTA Hsch.

Under EXISTHMI it is #4 that is noteworthy, in particular that the
transitive perfect form indicated is with A rather than H; it's
unclear
whether it's an editor who has marked it that way, but it is certainly
a
transitive causative usage of the perfect of the same verb we're
talking
about in Acts 8:11.
-- 

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