[B-Greek] Eph 6:17 hO and gender agreement

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Feb 5 14:54:42 EST 2007


Hi, George,

I suggest that we need to make a clear distinction between the fixed expression hO\ ESTIN, which
means "that is, i.e." and other uses of the relative pronoun with ESTIN. hOS ESTIN means "who is", 
not "that is" and the hOS would refer back to a masculine entity. There is no requirement that hO\ 
ESTIN can only be used when translating a phrase.

I had several examples of hOS ESTIN in my original list.

Of course, if the antecedent noun is neuter you have a potential ambiguity of hO\ ESTIN which might
be resolved by context.

In Ephesians alone there are three examples of hO\ ESTIN which illustrate the usage:

1:13-14 ESFRAGISQHTE TWi PNEUMATI THS EPAGGELIAS TWi hAGIWi, hO ESTIN ARRABWN
5:5 H PLEONEKTHS, hO ESTIN EIDWLOLATRHS
6:17 THN MACAIRAN TOU PNEUMATOS, hO ESTIN RHMA QEOU

In the first of these the hO probably refers back to the neuter PNEUMA and further describes what
the Spirit is. But it could also refer to the whole idea of being sealed with the promised Spirit.
(As an aside, English versions don't agree on using "who" or "which" for this hO\). In the second,
we have the fixed phrase where the hO does not agree with its masculine antecedent. In the third we
again have the fixed phrase where hO does not agree with its feminine antecedent MACAIRAN. One way
of signifying the difference in English is to say that the fixed phrase can be translated "which
means" whereas the others are best translated as "who/which is".

Iver

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George F Somsel" <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>


While you may appeal to the concept of a frozen expression, this is not quite correct.  Note that in
Eph 6.17 this is not a question of giving a translation of a phrase in another language, but rather
an interpretation.

Mt 27.33 KAI ELQONTES EIS TOPON LEGOMENON GOLGOQA hO ESTIN KRANIOU TOPOS

It seems to support your concept that this is a frozen expression, does it not?  Look again.
GOLGOQA with which one would expect it to agree is fem and would thus seem to support your position.
KRANIOU TOPOS is masc in TOPOS, but neut in KRANIOU.  The neut hO could well be an assimilation to
KRANIOU which immediately follows it.

Cf. Lk 2.11  hOTI ETEXQH hUMIN SHMERON SWTHR hOS ESTIN XRISTOS KURIOS EN POLEI DAUID

Here both SWTHR, with which one would expect the relative to agree, and XRISTOS are both masc and
voilá, the relative is also masc.  If hO ESTIN were a frozen expression which is therefore not going
to vary from one context to another the one would expect that the fact that it is flanked by two
masc terms would have no effect upon it -- but it does.

george
gfsomsel
_________


----- Original Message ----
From: Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
To: B-Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2007 2:37:49 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Eph 6:17 hO and gender agreement


You are misrepresenting what Carl stated. He gave two options, not one.

We were talking about the fixed phrase hO ESTIN. So, let me repeat the examples I gave, so you can
have another chance of looking at them:

Mrk 12:42 EBALEN LEPTA DUO, hO ESTIN KODRANTHS (that is)
Mrk 15:16 APHGAGON AUTON ESW THS AULHS, hO ESTIN PRAITWRION (that is)
Mrk 15:42 HN PARASKEUH, hO ESTIN PROSABBATON (that is)
Eph 5:5 H PLEONEKTHS, hO ESTIN EIDWLOLATRHS (that is)
Col 1:24 hUPER TOU SWMATOS AUTOU, hO ESTIN hH EKKLHSIA (that is)

Notice how the hO as part of "hO ESTIN" is neither attracted to the following noun, nor does it
agree with an antecedent noun, but rather with an antecedent concept or phrase.
That is why I prefer to go with Carl's first option rather than the second as he stated it: "In my
view the hO\ as neuter relative either (a) refers to the whole idea of THN MACAIRAN TOU PNEUMATOS or
(b)..."

Iver Larsen





More information about the B-Greek mailing list