[B-Greek] Question concerning syntax

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Thu Jan 29 14:25:41 EST 2009


On Jan 28, 2009, at 4:53 PM, learngreek at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 1/28/2009 7:09:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> cwconrad2 at mac.com writes:
>
> If it's  a matter of understanding the difference between two
> categories or  subcategories of genitive usage, we might be able to
> help you, but  from what you have told us, it appears that you have  
> not
> the first  idea of how the categories of genitive usage differ from
> each other  and you are, in effect, asking list-members to do your
> homework for  you when you have no idea how to begin doing it. My  
> first
> inclination upon reading your message was to suggest: If you can
> translate MUSTHRION THS ANOMIAS as "mystery of lawlessness," and
> understand what that phrase means, you really don't need to go any
> further: it is an adnominal (= adjectival) genitive wherein the noun
> in the genitive indicates something pertaining to the noun on which   
> it
> depends. Some grammars call that "possessive"; I've learned to  call  
> it
> "pertinentive"; most grammars tend to subdivide the  "possessive" or
> "pertinentive" into a slew of subcategories never  dreamed of by Greek
> speakers or writers. I don't know what Dana  & Mantey's subcategories
> might be nor even what their preferred  term for an adnominal genitive
> is. If you really don't understand  D&M's account of genitive
> constructions, then you probably need  to go back to your first-year
> textbook and review everything said  about genitive constructions
> there. Again, my own sense of MUSTHRION  THS ANOMIAS is that if you  
> can
> English it as "mystery of  lawlessness" or as "lawlessness mystery",
> then you don't really need  to go any farther than that. But I would
> guess that's not the sort  of solution that your homework assignment
> envisions.

> Thanks for your answers.
> I do understand first year Greek ok ( I used Mounce & also Machen),   
> it's
> just that sometimes I'll go through these categories and not be able  
> to  discern
> what the correct answer is.
> I thought it was a starlight forward Genitive of description. But  
> wasn't
> sure you seem to say it was a possessive, I didn't think it was that  
> one, but
> just a straight forward. But I wanted to ask you all (the b-greek  
> list  who
> would know)
> Thanks for the other's who also answered me, I do appreciate it.
> It seems D & M don't explain as good as D. Wallace, after I posted  
> I  went
> there, and he seemed to help me understand much better these sub   
> categories. He
> explains to ask the text questions, and also translate the text  using
> certain key phrases.
> Thanks again my friends!
> Jay Johns

I'm glad that you find Wallace helpful with the categories of  
genitives. I confess that I think he makes matters much more complex  
than they really are, primarily because his categories are conceived  
-- as are the grammatical categories and subcategories of many  
standard grammarians -- in terms of how a Greek expression is to be  
translated into English, rather than in terms of how the Greek  
expression functions in its own context.

When you say that you thought that the genitive in your text was "a  
starlight forward Genitive of description," I suppose you meant to say  
"straightforward Genitive of description." And yes, I think that is  
precisely how most grammarians would pigeonhole it within their  
standard repertory of categories and subcategories. I really did not  
mean to say that it was a Genitive of Possession; it's just that this  
is what most grammarians seem to call the standard adnominal genitive  
-- the genitive of a noun qualifying another noun. What I was trying  
to say is that if you recognize THS ANOMIAS in MUSTHRION THS ANOMIAS  
as  an adnominal genitive and can English it without further ado as  
"mystery of lawlessness" or "lawlessness mystery," -- and you have no  
trouble understanding what that means in its context -- then there's  
no real purpose in proceeding to figure out which category or  
subcategory to pigeonhole it in. I question the pedagogical value of  
analyzing a Greel construction that one can understand without  
analyzing it.

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






More information about the B-Greek mailing list