[B-Greek] Collective entity vs collection of individuals
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sat Jul 22 13:04:25 EDT 2006
George asked me to send this on to the list.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "gfsomsel at juno.com" <gfsomsel at juno.com>
> Date: July 22, 2006 2:26:22 PM EDT
> To: cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
> Subject: Re: Collective entity vs collection of individuals
> Perhaps you are thinking of something along the lines of what is
> called the "Pindaric Construction." A.T. Robertson, _A Grammar of
> the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp.
> 404-05 states
>
> 4. The Pindaric Construction. Another complication is possible
> [Page 405] when several subjects are united. If the predicate
> follows this compound subject, it is put in the plural nearly
> always. But the “Pindaric construction” (SXHMA PINDARIKON) puts
> the verb in the singular. Blass says German cannot do this, and he
> ignores the N. T. examples. In Jas. 5:2 f. we have a striking
> example: hO PLOUTOS hUMWN SESHPEN, KAI TA hIMATIA hUMWN SHTOBRWTA
> GEGONEN, hO XRUSOS hUMWN KAI hO ARGUROS KATIWTAI. Here KATIWTAI is
> natural like the English translation, ‘is cankered’ (A.V.). Note
> also Mt. 6:19, hOPOU SHS KAI BRWSIS AFANIZEI (‘where moth and rust
> doth corrupt,’ A.V.). Other examples are Mk. 4:41, KAI hO ANEMOS
> KAI hH QALASSA hUPAKOUEI AUTWi; 1 Cor. 15:50, hOTI SARC KAI hAIMA
> BASILEIAN QEOU KLHRONOMHSAI OU DUNATAI. Here the principle of
> anacoluthon suggested by Moulton will hardly apply. It is
> rather the totality that is emphasized by the singular verb as in
> the English examples.
>
> george
> gfsomsel
> _________
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list