[B-Greek] eyw eimi egw eimi Isaiah 43:25
Albert Pietersma
albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Mon Jan 2 17:39:46 EST 2006
On Jan 2, 2006, at 4:18 PM, Bert de Haan wrote:
>
>
> Albert Pietersma <albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>wrote;
>> To: "Bert de Haan" <b_dehaan at sympatico.ca>
>> CC: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] eyw eimi egw eimi Isaiah 43:25
>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 12:19:58 -0500
>>
>> Good question, the answer to which would seem to be No.
>> EGW EIMI EGW EIMI occurs three times in Esaias (Isaiah): 43:25, 45:19,
>> 51:12.
>> (1) In 43:25 Hebrew ANOCHI (2x) + HU + participle is rendered as EGW
>> EIMI
>> (2x) + article + participle.
>> (2) In 51:12 Hebrew ANOCHI (2x) + HU + participle + suffix is
>> rendered as
>> EGW EIMI (2x) + article + participle+ pronoun (acc).
>> (3) In 45:19 Hebrew ANI (1x) + noun + participle + noun is rendered
>> as EGW
>> EIMI (2x) + noun + participle + noun
>> Hebrew ANOCHI ANOCHI of 43:25 and 51:12 is commonly (perhaps
>> universally)
>> read as appositional rather than equative, therefore "I am i.e. I am"
>> rather than "I am = I am." Greek EGW EIMI EGW would more than likely
>> be
>> intended and understood likewise, though reading it as equative is
>> perhaps
>> no stranger that it is in English (I AM am I AM). What is no doubt
>> telling
>> is that in the very few Patristic comments TLG provided, so such use
>> is
>> made of it.
>> Of further interest is 45:19 where reading the repetition as equative
>> would
>> yield I AM am I AM (the) Lord when I speak righteousness.
>> Thus my No to Bert's first question. As for his second question:
>> Theoretically, making the one EGW EIMI arthrous and leaving the
>> second one
>> anarthrous would produce an S-V-SC. Perhaps the NETS translator of
>> Esaias
>> (who is on this list) has a view at variance with mine.
>> Al
>>
>>
>>
>> while in 45:19 MT has ANI (1x) + noun.
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2006, at 9:19 AM, Bert de Haan wrote:
>>
>>> Isaiah 43:25; EGW EIMI EGW EIMI hO EXALEIFWN TAS ANOMIAS SOU...
>>> Can the double EYW EIMI mean; I am (the) I am, the one washing your
>>> transgressions...or would it need an article before the second EYW?
>>> Thank you.
>>> Bert de Haan.
>>>
>>>
> Thanks for your reply.
> Maybe I misunderstook you when you wrote -> reading
>> it as equative is perhaps no stranger that it is in English (I AM am
>> I AM)
> This does sound strange in English but you have made it as two
> substantives
> joined by 'am'. This am would be then be unexpressed in Greek.
> What if it is, a subject (EGW) + verb (EIMI) and then the substantive
> (the
> second EGW EIMI)
> In English that would then not be I AM am I AM, but I am I AM.
The point I was trying to make (but made poorly) is that your
suggestion of "I am (the) I am who" etc presupposes an X = Y
structure, Y being a predication of X. Thus the question you raise
regarding EGW EIMI EGW EIMI is whether it can be read as X = Y.
Concretely, can we read it either as "I am" = "I am" / or as "I" = "I
am"? My answer: (1) the source text suggests No; (2) the Patristic
evidence suggests No; (3) 45:19 suggests No; (4) Greek usage suggests
No, since nominalized phrases are regularly arthrous (neuter). Thus
here one might in that case expect EGW EIMI TO EGW EIMI.
Thus what we have is nothing more than an instance of apposition (=
emphasis), hence quite different from Exod 3:14, which is clearly X = Y
Al
> ---
> 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
>
>
—
Albert Pietersma
Professor of Septuagint and Hellenistic Greek
Near & Middle Eastern Civilizations
University of Toronto
Home: 21 Cross Street,
Weston ON Canada M9N 2B8
Email: albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Homepage: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list