[B-Greek] EIMI with no Predicate Nominative

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Oct 11 19:39:24 EDT 2008


On Oct 11, 2008, at 2:57 PM, Kenneth Litwak wrote:

>
> --- 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, I made a serious blunder myself by not examining the larger  
context of this verse within a chapter concerning David's treatment of  
the Levites. 1 Chron 23:3 reads καὶ ἠριθμήθησαν οἱ  
Λευῖται ἀπὸ τριακονταετοῦς καὶ  
ἐπάνω [KAI HRIQMHQHSAN hOI LEUITAI APO TRIAKONTAETOUS KAI  
EPANW]: "The Levites were numbered/counted from 30-year-old and  
upwards" -- meaning, evidently, that those younger than 30 years old  
were not counted in the tally. Looking now at verse 27, we see 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], and in the context of the larger unit, we recognize that  
ARIQMOS hUIWN LEUI ESTIN must be equivalent to HRIQHMHQHSAN hOI  
LEUITAI: "The tally of the Levites/sons of Levi is ... " = "The  
Levites were counted ... " The construction of verse 27 is more  
complicated than I thought when i first looked at it without  
considering its larger context. The phrase APO EKOSAETOUS KAI EPANW in  
verse 27 is predicative with ESTIN, while the phrase EN TOIS LOGOIS  
DAUID TOIS ESCATOIS is adverbial to the whole clause, explaining  
WHERE, or WITH REFERENCE TO WHAT, "the tally of the sons of Levi is  
'from 20-years-old and upwards'". I don't think this is a standard  
Greek construction, probably it's what Al Pietersma understands as  
"interlinear" style of literal translation from the Hebrew. Let's ask  
his opinion. I may be all wet on this, but I think ordinary Greek  
prose would have used a predicate genitive with ESTIN here; perhaps  
the APO EKOSAETOUS KAI EPANW repreents a partitive expression, but in  
any case, the phrse is predicative with ESTIN.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list