[B-Greek] Translation [Re: Philippians 1:14

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Aug 4 18:35:49 EDT 2009


I'll take a stab at it. Yes, PEPOIQOTAS is a "second" perfect  
participle; in fact, however, one doesn't find a PEPEIKWS in the GNT,  
nor, for that matter, in the LXX either. PEPOIQA is the intransitive  
perfect corresponding to the present middle PEIQOMAI rather than to  
the present active PEIQW. For my part I am inclined to think that  
PEPOIQA is comparable to OIDA and hESTHKA in that these verbs are  
genuinely stative: "I know," "I stand," "I have conviction." I think  
it is wrong to think of PEPOIQA as if it were a perfect passive of the  
active verb PEIQW. There is, after all, a perfect passive of PEIQW:  
PEPEISMAI; it appears 2x in the LXX, even if not at all in the GNT. I  
think that the sense "have confidence in" or "rely upon" is  
appropriate here.

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


On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:45 PM, Jennifer & Bruce McKinnon wrote:

> I posted this message a few days ago but it elicited no response.  Any
> assistance or comments for a translation plodder would be much  
> appreciated.
> Bruce McKinnon
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jennifer & Bruce McKinnon" <jennifer.bruce at telus.net>
> To: "B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 4:31 PM
> Subject: [B-Greek] Philippians 1:14
>
>
>> I've been pondering PEPOIQOTAS and how verse 14 should be translated.
>> Unless I'm badly mistaken (a real possibility), it is a second  
>> perfect
>> participle of PEIQW and this second perfect is usually translated  
>> as an
>> active verb such as "trust" [in], "have confidence" [in], etc.  On  
>> this
>> interpretation, the second perfect usage for this verb has not  
>> changed in
>> the NT from its typical meaning in the LXX and in classical Greek.   
>> This
>> is the meaning referred to in BDAG and in Moule's Cambridge Greek
>> Testament commentary.  Several other commentaries, however, are  
>> silent
>> about (or ignore) the fact that the participle is a second perfect  
>> (e.g.,
>> Sumney at p. 20)  O'Brien writes at p. 95 of his commentary:
>> "If the verb PEIQW is given its original meaning of 'convince',
>> 'persuade', and the full force of the perfect tense is pressed,  
>> then it
>> describes a conviction that began in the past and has continuing  
>> effects.
>> It is thus distinguished from the main verb TOLMAN ('dare'; a present
>> tense): already convinced they now continue to dare."
>> On this point, O'Brien's footnote 47 refers to the commentary by  
>> Collange,
>> to which I have no access.  (On page 94, he does, however,  
>> translate the
>> phrase as "And most of the believers have more confidence in the Lord
>> through my imprisonment...".)
>> In addition, several English translations treat this participle as  
>> if it
>> has the normal force of a perfect (e.g., RSV).  I've wondered  
>> whether I'm
>> making a distinction without a difference but receive comfort from  
>> the
>> traditional differentiation reflected in BDAG and by the implicit
>> importance O'Brien gives to the question whether this second perfect
>> participle of PEIQW should be given "the full force of the perfect  
>> tense".
>> If one translates the participle as being equivalent to a present  
>> active
>> participle, a possible translation might be:  "Most of the brethren
>> trusting in the Lord are bolder, because of my imprisonment, to  
>> speak the
>> Word without fear" -- although I've seen no one taking TOIS DESMOIS  
>> with
>> TOLMAN rather than with PEPOIQOTAS.
>> Any thoughts or comments?
>>
>> Bruce McKinnon







More information about the B-Greek mailing list