[B-Greek] STHKW e.g. Philippians 1:27
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Apr 13 08:04:42 EDT 2010
I'm only repeating in a different form what I said in my earlier comment on this matter:
The ordinary way to say "I am standing" (e.g. Luther, "Here I stand, I can do no other") in ordinary ancient Greek is hESTHKA. This is a perfect-tense verb form
used with a present-tense meaning.
What is so strange about turning this into a present-tense stem: STHKW?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
On Apr 13, 2010, at 7:56 AM, Mark Lightman wrote:
>
>
> John Sanders wrote:
>
>
>
> <There is only one verb here. English does not have
>
> an equivalent verb used in the same way, so it may lead
>
> one to think that this verb is a strange animal of some kind. It is
> not.>
>
>
>
> Hi, John, and Hi, Stephen again,
>
>
>
> Actually, I'm inclined to think that a very strange animal is
>
> exactly what STHKW is. I might even call it a freak of
>
> nature. I think Stephen may have isolated a verb which
>
> is absolutely unique in the Greek language in a pretty
>
> fundamental way. It is such a simple idea, to form a new
>
> verb from the perfect, that I really expected there to be
>
> more examples. If you have STHKW you should have γνωκω
>
> GNWKW. You should have βηκω (BHKW) You should
>
> even maybe have παιδευκω (PAIDEUKW) Homer does
>
> so many strange things to verbs that I would have
>
> expected him to take a perfect and form a new verb
>
> from it. He does not, as far as I can tell, nor is there
>
> any other example. If I missed one, let me know.
>
>
>
> Of course, in a sense, John is correct that STHKW is
>
> not a new verb, but is just a form of hISTHMI. But
>
> what kind of a form? What do we call it? Bauer
>
> calls it a "new creation from hESTHKA." Thayer
>
> calls it an "inferior Greek word." Grundmann in
>
> TDNT implies cryptically that it is derived from a non-
>
> Attic dialect.
>
>
>
> In a sense you could just say that hISTHMI has
>
> two different perfect forms, but (1) is there any other
>
> verb that has two different perfect forms? and
>
> (b) is there any other perfect with no reduplication?
>
> and (c) is there any other perfect which has
>
> the standard present endings? That seems pretty
>
> unique to me. And is this a Second Perfect? A Third?
>
> It looks nothing like
> a Second Perfect (GEGRAFA)
>
> and there is no Third Perfect,
> unless STHKW is the
>
> only example of a Third
> Perfect, in which case
>
> this verb is even more of an odd
> duck.
>
>
>
> As to what the verb means, I
> like very much
>
> what Grundmann says, whether it is true or not:
>
>
>
> "The word STHKW seems to be preferred by Paul.
>
> It is linked by him with the theological point...
>
> that in faith man attains to a standing which
>
> is not grounded in the world and in which he is set
>
> by the Lord and will be upheld by Him, which gives
>
> him freedom from the destructive powers of the
>
> world, and which aims at fellowship in one spirit."
>
>
>
> TDNT VII p. 638.
>
>
>
> hISTHMI has to be the strangest verb in the Greek
>
> NT. If STHKW is merely a form of this verb,
>
> alongside hESTHKA and ESTHN and ESTHSA, it is part of what
>
> makes it so strange. If STHKW is a different verb, it
>
> is the second strangest verb in the Greek NT.
>
>
>
> Carl has said that if you really want to understand
>
> Greek verbs, you have to look at them as if they
>
> were people, idiosyncratic members of an
>
> extended, dysfunctional family. If this is true,
>
> hISTHMI/STHKW is like your crazy aunt that lives
>
> in the basement.
>
>
>
> Grundmann notes that the verb survives in
>
> Modern Greek as STEKW.
>
>
>
> Mark L
>
>
>
>
>
> FWSFOROS MARKOS
>
> --- On Sun, 4/11/10, Stephen Baldwin <stbaldwi at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Stephen Baldwin <stbaldwi at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [B-Greek] STHKW e.g. Philippians 1:27
> To: "B- Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Date: Sunday, April 11, 2010, 9:21 PM
>
>
> Ladies and Gentlemen:
> I was intrigued by the verb STHKW as found e.g. in Philippians 1:27.
> BDAG, BDF etc note that it is based on the perfect of hISTHMI -- which even a novice can at least detect ;-)
>
> I would like to know how a verb like this is to be understood -- what nuances does such a verb bring, given that it is based on another verb, indeed how such verbs arise. It appears that the first occurrences of STHKW are in the NT.
> I did a brief comparison of hISTHMI versus STHKW in BDAG and to me, from the range of definitions given, that hISTHMI seems to carry "ingressive" nuances -- the initialisation of a state of standing etc. whereas STHKW seems to imply stative overtones -- that is, we are already in the state of standing or being committed.
> Is this a correct view of approaching the matter? It would seem to be at least from my example from Philippians -- that whether Paul comes or does not come to see them, that he might hear that they are [already] standing as/in one spirit etc.
>
> How common is it to have a verb based off a particular stem of a [more common] verb? To the best of my recollection, this is the first time I have come across such a verb.
> I'm always a trifle disappointed that the more advanced commentaries that claim to focus more on the Greek [eg New International Greek Testament] more often than not, do not expound on these matters...
>
> Stephen Baldwin
> stbaldwi at hotmail.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list