[B-Greek] Use of TO with Infinitive

Albert Pietersma albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Sun Jan 9 16:20:08 EST 2011


Thanks, Mark. Yes Judg 6:11B is to be added. It seems to me, though,  
that in the LXX we are still dealing with an instance of negative  
transfer.
Albert
On Jan 9, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Mark Lightman wrote:

> Carl wrote
>
> <One last remark, after which I hope to bid a final farewell to this  
> thread.>
>
> Parting is such sweet sorrow.
>
> <Forgive me for  being skeptical -- it may be so, but I'm from  
> Missouri.
> Are instances cited of infinitives as objects of preposition without  
> an
> article?>
>
> No, Dana/Mantey do not cite the verses, but refer to secondary  
> literature, both
> of which are available on line: Votaw, Infinitive in Biblical Greek  
> and Allen,
> Infinitive in Polybius.
>
>
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=NjUJAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=votaw+infinitive&source=bl&ots=Ogu08jg3aY&sig=7dDaecPJoJWqgcLn1tuLRbSyKNU&hl=en&ei=5XkoTd8qgsawA5bf3aYH&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v 
> =onepage&q&f=false
>
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=9E9DAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Allen+infinitive+in+Polybius&source=bl&ots=cIP7l_OBnA&sig=6r6FnobrBBtPPce8K4n5v87BP2w&hl=en&ei=1XooTdmyMI3ksQPTjqClBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v 
> =onepage&q&f=false
>
>
> Votaw page 17, in addition to the instances you and Albert came up  
> with, gives
> another one with EIS,  Judges 6:11 (Vaticanus)
>
> και Γεδεων υιος αυτου ραβδιζων σιτον  
> εν ληνῳ εις εκφυγειν (EIS EKFUGEIN) απο
> προσωπου του Μαδιαμ.
>
> (Note Alexandrinus has του εκφυγειν here.)
>
> Plus he gives several with hEWS and hEWS hOU and MECRI hOU, though  
> he admits
> that these can be considered either improper prepositions or  
> temporal adverbs.
>
> All I could find from Polybius  in Allen is one instance of an  
> anarthrous
> infinitive with PLHN, which Allen himself calls an adverb.
>
> So, I would say your show me! skepticism is fairly well-founded.
>
> Bill Yates wrote
>
> <  Is there such a thing as  a 'catalogue' which tells us which  NT/ 
> Septuagint
> texts are universally accepted and those which are more in  dispute?>
>
> Hi, Bill,
>
> What do you mean by accepted and in dispute?  Elaborate, please.
>
> Mark L
> Φωσφορος
>
>
> FWSFOROS MARKOS
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> To: Blue Meeksbay  <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 11:01:31  AM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Use of TO with Infinitive
>
>
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Blue Meeksbay wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dr. Conrad,
>>
>> Since the grammar could go either way, the reason why I thought the  
>> simple
>> infinitive was being used as a purpose infinitive in verse 20 was  
>> because of
>> the
>>
>> context. The context of the section, beginning in I Cor. 11:2,  
>> seems to
>> indicate
>>
>> they were following the traditions Paul left with them, one of them  
>> being to
>> assemble together in order to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. The  
>> problem,
>> however,
>>
>> was the way they were doing it.
>>
>>
>> Also the context of verses 18 and 19 indicate Paul is chastising the
>> Corinthians
>>
>> for their divisiveness and class distinctions. The Lord’s Supper  
>> was supposed
>> to
>>
>> be showing the complete opposite – oneness and equality.  
>> Therefore, it seems
>> Paul is telling them, *Hey, you guys the purpose of your getting  
>> together into
>
>> one place is to eat the Lord’s Supper, demonstrating your oneness  
>> and equality,
>>
>> and yet when you get together you are doing the complete opposite!  
>> Don’t forget
>>
>> the purpose of your coming together is to eat the *Lord’s*  
>> Supper,  not
>> your *own* supper.
>>
>>
>> Thus my conclusion that  FAGEIN should be understood as a purpose  
>> infinitive in
>>
>> verse 20.
>>
>> On the other hand, if the only purpose infinitive of FAGEIN in the  
>> section is
>> found in verse 33, then it seems the understanding of the RSV and  
>> the NET would
>>
>> be correct for then it would explain why Paul would change the simple
>> infinitive
>>
>> FAGEIN  of verse 20 into a clear purpose infinitive in verse 33  
>> with the
>> addition of EIS TO, thereby showing your conclusion, that the  
>> infinitive in
>> verse 20 was a *substantive in a nominal clause with OUK  ESTI.*
>>
>> As George S. always says, *Context is king.* The problem, however,  
>> is that
>> sometimes context can lead us into two different directions, each  
>> equally
>> legit,
>>
>> (as seems to be the case here), that is, unless there is a specific  
>> grammatical
>>
>> rule that would prohibit one of the directions…thus my enquiry  
>> into the reason
>
>> for the change to the articular infinitive.
>>
>> Thanks again, for your observation and your recollection  of the  
>> *Homeric
>> formula BH D' IENAI – "he strode to go."*
>
> One last remark, after which I hope to bid a final farewell to this  
> thread. I
> responded to Mark's comment originally because it seemed to me that  
> he was
> implying that whether or not a Greek author used the article with  
> the infinitive
>
> or not was altogether arbitrary rather than a matter of (more or  
> less) standard
> usage. I would want to affirm neither that usage  with respect to  
> the infinitive
> in Koine Greek was rigidly conformable to a clearly-understood set of
> grammatical rules nor that it was altogether arbitrary. With regard  
> to 1 Cor
> 11:20 I'm still inclined to think that it's not an infinitive of  
> purpose, but
> it may be that it is -- and that's why I added the note about the  
> Homeric
> formula.
>
> I still believe that a discussion of infinitive usage such as found  
> in Funk's
> BIGHG, to which I referred previously, is helpful for orientation.  
> Some might
> prefer the fuller and lengthier discussion in Wallace's GGBB. I have  
> a mind
> myself to re-read A. T. Robertson's Chapter on the Infinitive in his  
> big
> grammar,
> pp. 1049ff., precisely because I find Robertson's historical survey  
> of the
> developing usage of particular items of form and usage informative;  
> I suspect
> that his approach may drive some others up the walls, if what  
> they're looking
> for is a "quick and dirty" answer to  the question they're raising.  
> But I'm not
> so sure that there are very many "quick and dirty" answers to the  
> serious
> grammatical questions about Greek.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
>
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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

—
Albert Pietersma PhD
21 Cross Street,
Weston ON Canada M9N 2B8
Email: albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Homepage: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm




More information about the B-Greek mailing list