[B-Greek] hH PERITOMH subject Phil. 3:3?

Carlton Winbery winberycl at earthlink.net
Tue Mar 3 18:23:34 EST 2009


>On Mar 1, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
>
>>  Phil. 3:2 ÉÝÉŠ¤¼ÉˆÉ-Ɉ É-ÉÕ?V É»ýÉÀÉøV, ɿɊ¤¼ÉˆÉ-Ɉ 
>>  É-ÉÕ?V
>>  ɻɸɻÉÕ?V ?ɦɡ¿É-ÉøV, ɿɊ¤¼ÉˆÉ-Ɉ É-?ÉÀ
>>  ɻɸÉ-ÉøÉ-ÉÕÉ ÐÉÀ.  3 ?É Éˆ?V É¡¿É¦ ?É-É ÉˆÉÀ ?
>>  ¼ÉˆÉ¦É«É-ÉÕÉ Ð, ÉÕ? ¼ÉÀɈýÉ ÉøÉ-É« ɐɈÉÕ?
>>  ÉŠÉøÉ-ɦɈýÉÕÉÀÉ-ɈV ɻɸ? ɻɸÉ"É'ÒÉ ÉˆÉÀÉÕÉ« ?ÉÀ 
>>  ɥɦɫÉ-É-?
>>  ?ɉÉ-ÉÕ? ɻɸ? ÉÕ?É» ?ÉÀ É-ɸɦɻ? ¼Éˆ¼ÉÕɫɐÞÉ-ɈV
>  >>> BLEPETE TOUS KUNAS, BLEPETE TOUS KAKOUS ERGATAS, BLEPETE THN
>  > KATATOMHN.  3 hHMEIS GAR ESMEN hH PERITOMH, hOI PNEUMATI QEOU
>>  LATREUONTES KAI KAUCWMENOI EN CRISTWi IHSOU KAI OUK EN SARKI
>>  PEPOIQOTES<<,
>>
>>
>>
>>  N.T. Wright, in his book on Justification (2009) claims that  hH
>>  PERITOMH is the subject because it has the article. I wonder what both
>>  traditional grammar and also text linguistics would have to say about
>>  this.
>
>
>Speaking only for traditional grammar, I would question why the verb 
>is 1 pl. if the subject is hH PERITOMH. For that matter, I'd also ask 
>why we have the emphatic pronoun hHMEIS at the front and why all the 
>apparently appositional substantival nominative plural participles.
>
>Carl W. Conrad
I agree the subject must be hHMEIS. Boy, Did Paul get the statement 
in v. 2 from his course on "How to win friends and influence people?" 
Especially THN KATATOMHN?

-- 
Carlton L. Winbery
Retired Professor of Religion
Louisiana College
318-448-6103
winberycl at earthlink.net



More information about the B-Greek mailing list