[B-Greek] Prep phrase and DA

George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Wed Nov 21 22:40:43 EST 2007


My initial reaction is to think that this might be due to the specificity of the noun in one case and the indefiniteness in another.  For example, in Mt 3.6 we see

6 καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ ποταμῷ ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ἐξομολογούμενοι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 

KAI EBAPTIZONTO EN TWi IORDANHi POTAMWi hUP' AUTOU ECOMOLOGOUMENOI TAS hAMARTIAS AUTWN

Wereas in Mt 3.11 we read 

11 Ἐγὼ μὲν ὑμᾶς βαπτίζω ἐν ὕδατι εἰς μετάνοιαν, ὁ δὲ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἰσχυρότερός μού ἐστιν, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς τὰ ὑποδήματα βαστάσαι· αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί· 

EGW MEN hUMAS BAPTIZW EN hUDATI EIS METANOIAN, hO DE OPISW MOU ERXOMENOS ISXUROTEROS MOU ESTIN, hOU OUK EIMI hIKANO TA hUPODHMATA BASTASAI AUTOS hUMAS BAPTISEI EN PNEUMATI hAGIWi KAI PURI

It appears that the Jordan is a specific river whereas the water can be any water (which happens to be in the river).  There is something of a problem with this formulation.  This regards the second part of 3.11 which has βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί·BAPTISEI EN PNEUMATI hAGIWi KAI PURI.  Here it would seem that the PNEUMA hAGION should be a specific indivitual entity.  It does seem that if the object is the NAME of a specific entity such as a person or a city then it does not require the article which may explain PNEUMA hAGION, but the Jordan would likewise seem to be a specific river and would not require an article.  What this amounts to is that Greek is not English and does not followi the rules of English.  As A. T. Robertson says regarding this

The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as ἐν οἴκῳ EN OIKWi. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in ἡ σοφία hH SOFIA, ὁ Παῦλος hO PAULOS. It is not a matter of translation. 

Robertson, A. (1919; 2006). A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (756). Logos.

 
george
gfsomsel
 
Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, 
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, 
defend the truth till death.
 
- Jan Hus
_________



----- Original Message ----
From: Mitch Larramore <mitchlarramore at yahoo.com>
To: B Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:22:27 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] Prep phrase and DA

Some prep phrases (prep + DA + Object) have the
definite article included, and some (prep + object) do
not. Is there a reason, semantically speaking, when
the DA is 1) there or 2) not there? I'm assuming at
times that it really doesn't matter, but I'm
interested in knowing when it does matter (either when
the DA is include or not).

I don't want to give a specific example because
sometimes responders zero in on that one example
rather than on the grammatical phenomenon (rule?).

Mitch Larramore
Sugar Land, Texas


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better pen pal. 
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.   http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better pen pal. 
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.  http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/


More information about the B-Greek mailing list