[B-Greek] EIMI with no Predicate Nominative
Kenneth Litwak
javajedi2 at yahoo.com
Sat Oct 11 14:57:31 EDT 2008
--- On Sat, 10/11/08, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] EIMI with no Predicate Nominative
> To: javajedi2 at yahoo.com
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Date: Saturday, October 11, 2008, 2:43 AM
> On Oct 10, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
>
> > It is common for a nominativve noun/adjective with
> ESTI(N) to be
> > followed by a predicate nominative. If there is not a
> predicate
> > nominative, but one or more prepositional phrases, how
> can one
> > determine which prepositional phrase is modifying or
> related to the
> > supplied form of EIMI? So, for example,
> >
> > (OTI EN TOIS LOGOIS DAUID TOIS ESCATOS ESTIN (O
> ARIQMOS (UIWN LEUI
> > APO EIKOSAETOUS KAI EPANW
>
> Upon first reading it appeared that ESCATOS was a predicate
> noun, but
> the passage wasn't cited accurately. It would help a
> lot if the
> passage were cited accurately and referenced properly. It
> is LXX 1Chr.
> 23:27
> ὅτι ἐν τοῖς λόγοις Δαυιδ τοῖς
>
> ἐσχάτοις ἐστὶν ὁ ἀριθμὸς
> υἱῶν
> Λευι ἀπὸ εἰκοσαετοῦς καὶ
> ἐπάνω
> [hOTI EN TOIS LOGOIS DAUID TOIS ESCATOIS ESTIN hO ARIQMOS
> hUIWN LEUI
> APO EIKOSAETOUS KAI EPANW]
>
snip
>
> Your terminology is also somewhat confusing: EIMI
> doesn't ever take an
> object; it may take a predicate nominative, to be sure, but
> in this
> instance, EN TOIS LOGOIS DAUID TOIS ESCATOIS is the
> predicate
> expression used with EIMI in its existential
> ("exist") rather than its
> copulative ("be equivalent to") sense. You've
> understood the sense of
> the sentence, but evidently it's the grammar of it
> that's bothering
> you. This is the very same usage as in John 1:1a Ἐν
> ἀρχῇ ἦν
> ὁ λόγος [EN ARCHi HN hO LOGOS]: "The Logos
> existed at the
> beginning" -- so, "The number ... exists in the
> final words of David."
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Carl,
Sorry for the transcription error. I know that EIMI does not take an "object" but I am unsure what everything else but predicate nominatives (or EIS + accusative, which functions that way) are to be called with verbs like EIMI, GINOMIA, and (UPARHW. That aside, why does the number exist in the last words of David rather than the alternative, the number in the writings of David is from twenty years and up? Is this just a matter of deciding what seems to make more sense, or is there a grammatical rule that governs whether to see EIMI as going with the EN-based prepositional phrase versus the APO-based prepositional phrase? Perhaps I'm just looking for science where there is only art. I'd like to be able to give my students something better than "it makes more sense this way." Thanks.
Ken
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list