From: A. Brent Hudson (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Mar 30 1996 - 21:42:27 EST
-- [ From: A. Brent Hudson * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
Tom Launder wrote:
> In Morris page 354 footnote 47, he says: "Howard considers *logizomai eis
> sperma* a Semitism (M, II, p. 463).
I don't have Howard, but this usage is common with LOGIZOMAI (Rm. 2:26; 4:3,
5, 9, 22).
Bauer says (s.v. EIS):
8. The predicate nom. and the predicate acc. are somet. replaced by EIS w.
acc. under Semitic influence, which has strengthened Gk. tendencies in the
same direction: g. LOGIZESThAI EIS (Wsd 2:16; 1 Macc 2:52) Ro 4:3 (Gen 15:6
); cf. 2:26; 9:8. L. EIS OUThEN (Is 40:17; Wsd 3:17; cf. 9:6) Ac 19:27.
Thus, while it may be a Semitism, since there was already movement in this
direction in Greek it should not be overemphasized. Besides, there are
enough examples of this construction to understand its function. I would
classify it as a predicate accusative; however, I would be very interested
to know if Carlton Winbery would classify it this way, since his Syntax only
notes EIS + EIMI in this category.
-- A. Brent Hudson P.O. Box 90 Ohsweken, ON, N0A 1M0 CANADA ___________________________ Internet: firstname.lastname@example.org ___________________________ At McMaster University email@example.com ___________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:40 EDT