[B-Greek] Adjectival and Adverbial Prepositional Phrases

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri May 13 17:15:02 EDT 2005


On May 13, 2005, at 3:30 PM, James Davis wrote:

> Concerning adjectival and adverbial prepositional phrases, I  
> appreciate so very much the comments of Carl W. Conrad, James  
> Tauber and Iver Larsen.
>
> I have understood from their comments that the case of the object  
> of the preposition does not govern whether a prepositional phrase  
> is adjectival or adverbial.
>
> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 23:43:55 -0400, Carl Conrad wrote:
> "META with the genitive can be an adjectival phrase ONLY if it is   
> found in a context where that prepositional phrase can be said to  
> characterize a noun.  In the sentence, HLQEN hO IHSOUS META TWN  
> MAQHTWN AUTOU, META TWN MAQHTWN AUTOU can only be construed with  
> HLQEN and so is adverbial.  On the other hand, if we have the  
> prepositional phrase within an article-noun phrase, hH MET' EKEINOU  
> TOU ANQRWPOU GUNH, the phrase MET' EKEINOU TWO ANQRWPOU is  
> adjectival--but I think the adverbial function is far more common.
>
> More controversial is the OT text cited by Paul in Rom 1:17 hO DE  
> DIKAIOS EK PISTEWS ZHSETAI.  Some will insist that EK PISTEWS is  
> adjectival and qualifies hO DIKAIOS, and it may well be the case  
> that this is how Paul understood it, but the case can be made for  
> the  proposition that EK PISTEWS is adverbial and qualifies  
> ZHSETAI.  Is it "will live as a result of faith" or is it "the one  
> who is righteous by faith will live"?
>
> Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 16:33:58 -0400, Carl Conrad wrote:
> "Whether the prepositional phrase is adjectival or adverbial  
> depends upon its syntactic usage in the clause in which it appears,  
> NOT upon the case of the object of the preposition."
>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 02:10:43 +0800, James Tauber wrote: "Whether  
> a particular prepositional phrase is adverbial or adjectival is, I  
> suspect, almost always something that has to be inferred from the  
> context rather than there being any syntactic rules.  Consider the  
> English sentence: 'I saw the man with my binoculars.'  The  
> prepositional phrase is ambigous in that it may be modifying the  
> verb 'saw' (Ihad the binoculars) or qualifying the noun phrase 'the  
> man' (he had the binoculars)."
>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 09:10:19 +0300, Iver Larsen wrote:  
> "Sometimes deep-structure, semantic distinctions are neutralized at  
> the surface level (the syntax) as here.
>
> Your sentence has two possible semantic interpretations:
>
> 1. the semantic verb is "see" which is divalent, i.e. expects two  
> participants. One participant is the agent "I", another is the  
> patient "man". A preposition at the surface level often corresponds  
> to adding a semantic role, thereby changing the semantic verb from  
> divalent to trivalent. In this case the role added is "instrument",  
> and the participant filling that role is "my binoculars".
>
> 2. The semantic verb "see" remains divalent and is connected to two  
> participants. But the patient role is filled not by the simple noun  
> "man", but by a complex noun phrase consisting of the head noun  
> "man" modified by a rankshifted clause "who had my binoculars". In  
> the semantic structure one needs to supply an implicit verb like  
> "have".
>
> ...The distinction between adjectival and adverbial is a  
> syntactical distinction only.  It does not apply to the semantic  
> level."
>
> The preceding comments are really very helpful.  It has been nearly  
> 60 years since I studied NT Greek.  The grammars that I have do not  
> really address the issue.
>
> Wallace argues;
> "There are exceptions to the adverbial force of prepositions.  Some  
> function at times adjectivally.  In general, the prepositions that  
> take accusative and dative case objects function adverbially, while  
> those that take a genitive case object often function  
> adjectivally.  ...A proper understanding of prepositions is vital  
> to exegesis.  Many an exegetical debate has turned on the use of a  
> particular preposition."
>
> My next question concerns Luke 9:39.   KAI IDOU PNEUMA LAMBANEI  
> AUTON KAI  EXAIFNHS KRAZEI KAI  SPARASSEI AUTON META AFROU KAI  
> MOGIS APOCWREI
> AP' AUTOU SUNTRIBON AUTON (My first attempt to transliterate Greek  
> text into B-Greek).
>
> English translation: "and behold a spirit takes him and suddenly he  
> cries out and it throws into convulsion him with foaming and with  
> difficulty departs from him bruising him.
>
> Now regarding the prepositional phrase "META + the genitive AFROU"  
> does it not characterize AUTOU, the preceding pronoun.  Is this not  
> a case where the evil spirit convulses and he foams. Mark 9:18  
> says: "and whersoever him it seizes, it dashes down him; and he  
> foams (KAI AFRIZEI).

I suppose you mean "does it not characterize AUTON?" No, I don't  
think so; rather I think that META AFROU is an adverbial phrase to be  
taken with SPARASSEI: "convulses him with accompanying foaming at the  
mouth." Nor do I think I've ever seen a prepositional phrase  
modifying an accusative pronoun. No doubt you've rightly understood  
what the sentence as a whole is saying, and yes, the spirit convulses  
the man and he foams--but the foaming is an attendant circumstance of  
the convulsion; it is not describing the man adjectivally.



More information about the B-Greek mailing list