[B-Greek] Acts 26:2-3
Hugh Donohoe Jr.
justusjcmylord at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 1 19:56:43 EST 2008
In my read through Acts, I have stumbled across
another interesting instance of grammar. First let me
quote the verses.
v.2 PERI PANTWN hWN EGKALOUMAI hUPO IOUDAIWN, BASILEU
AGRIPPA, hHGHMAI EMAUTON MAKARION EPI SOU MELLWN
SHMERON APOLOGEISTHAI v.3 MALISTA GNWSTHN ONTA SE
PANTWN TWN KATA IOUDAIOUS EQWN TE KAI ZHTHMATWN, DIO
DEOMAI MAKROQUMWS AKOUSAI MOU.
When I was translating verse 3 I was a little
surprised by the accusative participle (ONTA) with SE.
A.T. Robertson notes in his Word Pictures that
commentators takes this accusative differently. Some
take it as a accusative absolute after old Greek
idiom. Some take it as anacoluthon or grammatical
inconsistency. These can be intentional or
unintentional (See Smyth, Greek Grammar p. 671-2).
Blass-Debrunner-Funk also considers this an instance
of a solecism (Section 137 (3)). BDF considers this an
instance of a dangling participle. Most who consider
this an error link it to the genitive SOU in the
previous verse and say the accusative participle "is
too soon".
While I was a little surprised to see the accusative,
it struck me as odd, not as wrong. This is not one of
those obvious instances of bad grammar like in the
Apocalypse (for me anyway). So would someone please
unpack what all the fuss is about.
Just off the top of my head. Could the SE be the
direct object of hHGHMAI. Could Paul consider himself
"blessed to give a defense before you" and consider
"you an expert". A sort of double accusative. Probably
not, but I'm just throwing it out there.
ex animo
Hugh Donohoe
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list