[B-Greek] 2Cor. 11:5 LOGIZOMAI w/inf w/o acc

John Wilking jcwilking at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 19 11:14:54 EST 2009



--- On Wed, 12/16/09, Elizabeth Kline <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net> wrote:

From: Elizabeth Kline <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
Subject: [B-Greek] 2Cor. 11:5 LOGIZOMAI w/inf  w/o acc
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Date: Wednesday, December 16, 2009, 3:14 PM

2COR. 11:5 LOGIZOMAI GAR MHDEN hUSTERHKENAI TWN hUPERLIAN APOSTOLWN.
.
2Cor. 11:5 Λογίζομαι γὰρ μηδὲν  
ὑστερηκέναι τῶν ὑπερλίαν  
ἀποστόλων.
.
  PHIL. 3:13 ADELFOI, EGW EMAUTON OU LOGIZOMAI KATEILHFENAI· hEN DE,  
TA MEN OPISW EPILANQANOMENOS TOIS DE EMPROSQEN EPEKTEINOMENOS,
.
Phil. 3:13 ἀδελφοί, ἐγὼ ἐμαυτὸν οὐ  
λογίζομαι κατειληφέναι· ἓν δέ, τὰ  
μὲν ὀπίσω ἐπιλανθανόμενος τοῖς δὲ  
ἔμπροσθεν ἐπεκτεινόμενος,

M.J. Harris (2Cor NIGTC 2005 p746) concerning 2COR. 11:5 "There are no  
grammatical ambiguities in the verse." LOGIZOMAI with the infinititive  
hUSTERHKENAI does not require an accusative when the subject of the  
infinitive is the same as the subject of the main verb (BDF 392.1).  
However, in PHIL. 3:13 we see LOGIZOMAI with the infinitive  
KATEILHFENAI where EMAUTON is supplied.
What can we learn by comparing LOGIZOMAI w/inf in  2COR. 11:5 with   
EGW EMAUTON OU LOGIZOMAI KATEILHFENAI in PHIL. 3:13? I am not thinking  
about syntax. Both are well formed constructions in Koine Greek. Why  
would Paul use LOGIZOMAI without an acc. pronoun in 2COR. 11:5 but  
include EMAUTON in PHIL. 3:13. According to the linguistic framework I  
am using choices like this have reasons. They are not a matter of  
indifference.

JW  May I ask what linguistic framework you employ? 

Elizabeth Kline




---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list