[B-Greek] More on APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU in Rev 13:8 and 17:8

Rolf Furuli furuli at online.no
Mon Nov 7 15:03:05 EST 2005


Dear Elisabeth,

I was somewhat surprised when I read your words that GEGRAPTAi is a state. 
But perhaps we look at the situation from two different angles. In any case, 
it is good to discuss terminology, in order to ascertain wether we use 
descriptive statements in the same sense.

In my view the distinction between stative and fientive verbs should be done 
in connection with their lexical meaning. Verbs whose default interpretation 
is stative can in some contexts have a fientive meaning, but the reverse is 
not always true. For example, verbs that are marked for dynamicity 
(=change), or durativity, or telicity cannot loose this property. A verb 
that is "born" dynamic cannot be changed into a state. As I see it, GRAFW is 
marked for dynamicity, and it therefore cannot become a state.

I often stress for my students that communication means "from a meaning 
potential to make something visible for the audience and to keep everything 
else invisible". This visibility principle is very important, and it can be 
achieved by lexicon, grammar, syntax, and by a knowledge of the world and 
other pragmatic factors, but mostly it is achieved by a combination of these 
factors. The Greek "tenses" (this is a misnomer, but I have no better word) 
are powerful tools for making things visible. I agree with you that the 
Greek perfect GEGRAPTAi indicates an action that is completed, and what is 
made visible by the use of this form is the completion of the action (its 
coda) and the resultant state. So, the verb is still dynamic, but the verb 
GRAFW + perfect make visible a resultative situation, which can be described 
as a state.

If GEGRAPTAi was applied collectively, the writing was completed at the 
"foundation of the world," and only the resultant state has continued up to 
the time the words were uttered. But it seems to me that the use of the 
preposition APO together with the singular relative pronoun suggests that 
the writing is viewed individually. If this is true, the words could mean 
that individuals have all the time from the foundation of the world and 
until the words were uttered been written in the book of life. In each case 
the action of writing was completed, and the resultant state has continued 
to hold for that individual.

There is one problem, however, that at least should be kept in mind, namely, 
that the clause is negative. The names have *not* been written in the book. 
Linguistically speaking, the rules governing a positive proposition do not 
necessarily apply to a negative one. But that is of course another 
discussion, and I think my arguments above illuminate the expression under 
discussion.


Best regards

Rolf Furuli Ph.D
University of Oslo


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline-dekooning at earthlink.net>
To: "Albert & Julia Haig" <albert_and_julia at yahoo.com.au>
Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] More on APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU in Rev 13:8 and 17:8


>
> On Nov 7, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Albert & Julia Haig wrote:
>
>> So to rephrase the question: does the phrase OU
>> GEGRAPTAi have a special technical meaning that
>> restricts its meaning in a way that the perfect
>> passive generally (such as EKKECUMENON) isn't
>> restricted when connected to APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU?
>
> GEGRAPTAi is semantically not a process it is a state. Do a search on
> it in the GNT, LXX etc. Look at how it is used. It does not describe
> an on going activity.
>
>
> Elizabeth Kline
>




More information about the B-Greek mailing list