Re: APOKTEINW

From: Dale M. Wheeler (dalemw@teleport.com)
Date: Thu Feb 29 1996 - 15:05:28 EST


>In my rapid survey of the two lists (I didn't even look at your third
>paragraph until I'd checked the rfcs), I would deem every single instance
>an aorist, some of them in terms of the parallel verb in the aorist, others
>because they are quite clearly in secondary sequence, but all of them, and
>especially the three most questionable ones--those from the Parable of the
>Wicked Husbandmen--because the aorist clearly yields the more appropriate
>aspect in the context.

I agree...but you don't see any formal reason that they couldn't be parsed,
in the abstract, as Present Subj, do you ??

***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com
***********************************************************************



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:38 EDT