[B-Greek] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Feb 18 00:27:06 EST 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: <lws39 at juno.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 17. februar 2008 07:29
Subject: [B-Greek] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis
> Galatians 2:8
> O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS TA EQNH
> My question pertains to the phrases:EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS and EIS TA EQNH.
> I would have expected an ellipsis of the accusative APOSTOLHN followed by the genitive TWN EQNWN.
> Instead it is EIS TA EQNH.
> Is there any significance to the difference here?
> Thank you.
> Walt Seevers
> Missoula Montana
It is not clear to me what you would have expected. You are correct that there is an ellipsis of the
word APOSTOLH. The full form would have been:
O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS, ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS APOSTOLHN TWN EQNWN
The apostleship idea is shared between the two clauses, whereas there is a contrast between Jews and
Gentiles, so it is natural to not repeat APOSTOLH in the second clause. If you keep EIS and remove
APOSTOLH, then EQNH has to be in the accusative following EIS.
Were you thinking of also eliding EIS? In that case, I suppose it might be:
O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS, ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI TWN EQNWN
I don't know if this is possible. It looks strange and ungrammatical to have a hanging genitive like
that.
Iver
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list