[B-Greek] Genitive in Romans 6:6c

George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Sat Jul 15 09:01:37 EDT 2006


Please note that I did not question Iver's understanding of the passage.  What I was questioning was his statement of his methodology.  One cannot begin with understanding the meaning of a passage (semantics) before he understands how it "hangs together" (syntax).
   
  ___________
  

"Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> wrote:
  I certainly don't find anything questionable in the examples cited by 
Iver nor in their interpretation. Moreover, after a careful review of 
the instances of KATARGEW in the GNT, I think that Iver is right on 
target in saying that an "ablatival" usage of the genitive with this 
verb is not found among them. Linguistic history is as much a factor 
here is semantics and syntax: prepositions have come to be employed 
regularly with some verbs and in some contexts when the sense is 
ablatival or partitives -- and that's true with the genitive as well 
as with the dative -- think of the (surprising -- to one more 
familiar with classical Attic) instances of EN + dative that are 
instrumental rather than locative.

Text: Rom 6:6 TOUTO GINWSKONTAS, hOTI hO PALAIOS hHMWN ANQRWPOS 
SUNESTAURWQH, hINA KATARGHQHi TO SWMA THS hAMARTIAS, TOU MHKETI 
DOULEUEIN hHMAS THi hAMARTIAi

" ... since we understand that our old self has been crucified (in 
company with Christ) so that our sinful self may cease to function -- 
so that we are no longer slaves to Sin."

With regard to the verb KATARGEW, I would consider it among those 
verbs that are essentially middle (ergative) and it probably should 
be lemmatized KATARGOUMAI. The active KATARGEW is essentially the 
causative for KATARGOUMAI; KATARGHQHN is simply the aorist of 
KATARGOUMAI. It can be Englished as a passive (e.g. "be rendered in 
effective") but there's really no difference in meaning from the 
intransitive middle "become ineffectual."

On Jul 15, 2006, at 7:50 AM, George F Somsel wrote:

> I find this almost incomprehensible. How can one begin with 
> semantics (meaning) before one has first determined what is 
> actually being said (syntax).
>
> ______________
>
>
> Iver Larsen wrote:
> 
>
> I find it helpful to start from semantics rather than just syntax. 
> I make a distinction between primary semantic roles
> and secondary roles. Secondary roles are additional and optional, 
> while primary roles are required, although they can be
> left implicit in some contexts. Let me illustrate by an example of 
> a verb that requires the genitive case for a primary
> role,
> such as METECW:
> BAGD explains this verb as "share, have a share, participate w. 
> gen. of the thing in or of someth."
> Compare:
> 1 Co 10:21 OU DUNASQE TRAPEZHS KURIOU METECEIN KAI TRAPEZHS DAIMONIWN
> (You cannot share [in] the Lord's table and (also) [in] demons' table)
> The agent is "you" and the patient is one or other of these 
> "tables" - a metonymy)
>
> Heb 5:13 PAS GAR hO METECWN GALAKTOS (for every one who is drinking 
> milk)
> The agent is PAS and the patient is milk (in genitive, governed by 
> the META of the verb).
>
> 1 Cor 10:30 EI EGW CARITI METECW
> (if I eat/partake with thanksgiving)
> The agent is "I" and the patient is not specified, but implied from 
> the previous context. The dative CARITI adds a
> secondary
> semantic role, indicating an attendant circumstance or manner (BDF 
> 198: "associative dative"). It is equivalent to a
> preposition with EN.
>
> There is a so-called "genitive of separation" (BDF 180), but BDF 
> says that this "has been driven out for the most part
> by APO and EK." APALLOTRIOW (Eph 2:12, 4:18) is an example. It is a 
> small group of verbs that take such genitives and
> most of them have APO as part of the verb. KATARGEW does not belong 
> to this group, and there is no way the genitive
> hAMARTIAS in Rom 6.6 can be considered a primary role for the verb.
>
> I hope this clarifies a bit,
>
> Iver Larsen
>
>
> george
> gfsomsel
> _________
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ---
> 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


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/





george
gfsomsel
_________
 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


More information about the B-Greek mailing list