[B-Greek] Left order prominence? Or Contextual and focal differences?
Randall Buth
randallbuth at gmail.com
Tue Dec 26 18:07:19 EST 2006
shalom Iver,
it is nice to find out that we are closer than might have appeard on
specific readings.
> Randall, what you are opposing is not the theory that I am proposing.
. . .
> I don't have much problem accepting a theory that calls the prominence of hO LOGOS "topic" and the prominence of SARKS focus. It is a helpful distinction for a number of clauses.
. . .
>Finally, does your theory help to decide between the two proposed
analyses of Acts 18:18? If so, I'd
be interested to hear the result.
I haven't read all the postings. What influences my reading would be
ballast and 'case'-valence more than word order or information
marking.
It is fairly common to find a Participle + object/complement + verb,
where the object fits both verbs. A person can read the sentences
differently on different days.
Acts 18:18 has prosmeinas with 'sufficient days' as at least one
argument to the proposition, the time is probably the salient
argument because it answers the expectation set up by ETI 'still'. The
second participle apotaksamenos has a potential complement in
'brothers' (its fronting in this reading is non-focal (i.e.
contextualization). It also potentially fits as a second complement
with prosmeinas. But that would give prosmeinas two and apotaksamenos
zero complements. I read 'brothers' as a complement to apotaksamenos.
Even so, it may also be read as doing double duty with prosmeinas.
double duty? If so, sort of like Luke 10:35 where
EKBALWN EDWKEN DUO DHNARIA
'taking out he gave two denaria'
has one object doing double duty as a complement to both verbs.
ERWSO
Randall Buth
--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη
שלום לכם וברכות
ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il
randallbuth at gmail.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list