[B-Greek] OUDE used with an explanatory nuance?
Chuck J Bumgardner
bumgardnerbunch at juno.com
Mon Feb 12 11:53:58 EST 2007
Hello, all,
In 2 Thess 3:7-8, the author uses the verb HTAKTHSAMEN followed by the
conjunction OUDE. Typically the conjunction seems to be translated
something like this: ". . . we did not live in a disorderly manner, NOR
did we eat anyone's bread freely [i.e., without paying for it]."
I realize that the meaning of the ATAKTWS word group is debated in this
passage. I am of the opinion that is retains its usual nuance of
"disorderly" here (as opposed to the popular "idle"). If that is the
case, it seems that what follows the conjunction specifies that to which
the verb is referring. I'm wondering if it is legitimate to understand
the conjunction OUDE to have an explanatory nuance, something like ". . .
we did not live in a disorderly manner, THAT IS, we did not eat anyone's
bread freely."
The conjunction KAI seems to have an explanatory nuance in v. 6: The
author speaks of those who walk ATAKTWS, then (in my opinion) uses KAI
with an explanatory nuance to specify what that looks like: "that is, not
according to the tradition which they received from us."
I do not find an explanatory nuance specified for OUDE in BDAG. Wallace
(GGBB, 673), however, lists DE as a possibility for this semantic
category, and BDAG (213b) concurs. It doesn't seem as if it would be a
stretch to consider that as a possibility for the negative form OUDE as
well.
Am I "out of order" to see an explanatory nuance as a possibility for
OUDE? If not, could someone refer me to a grammar which specifies this?
Robertson 1185 indicates that the various uses of KAI find parallels in
OUDE but I'd like something more specific if possible.
Thanks,
Chuck Bumgardner
Brooklyn Park, MN
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list