From: Carl W. Conrad (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Feb 29 1996 - 14:55:52 EST
On 2/29/96, Dale M. Wheeler wrote:
> Here's another parsing problem where the tools disagree. I've already
> decided for myself, but I'd sure like some second opinions in case I missed
> something obvious (honestly its so I can blame you'all if someone says I've
> made a mistake :-) ):
> Is APOKTEINWSIN Pres or Aor Subj (Matt 26:4; Mark 14:1; John 11:53; 12:10;
> Acts 23:12; 27:42; Rev 9:5, 15); or is it possible that some of these are
> Aorist and some are Present ??
> Is APOKTEINWMEN Pres or Aor Subj (Matt 21:38; Mark 12:7; Luke 20:14; Acts
> 23:14) or some one and some the other ??
> One additional note; the NT writers do seem otherwise to have an aversion to
> the use of APOKTEINW in the Present (3x, all ptcs: Matt 23:37; Luke 12:4;
> 13:34; the other presents are based on the lemma APOKTENNW [Matt 10:28; Mark
> 12:5; 2Cor 3:6; Rev 6:11...there are some textual problems involved]).
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.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
firstname.lastname@example.org OR email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:38 EDT