From: Carlton L. Winbery (email@example.com)
Date: Thu May 23 1996 - 10:08:46 EDT
Perry Stepp wrote:
>I am in the process of reviewing the revised edition of Ray Summers's
>*Essentials of New Testament Greek* (and the accompanying student's guide/
>workbook), and I must say that I like it quite a bit. I think it would be a
>good introductory grammar for the type of situation you describe, and it costs
>less than half of what Machen goes for these days.
>The approach is somewhere between the traditional introductions (e.g., Machen)
>and the modern introductions (e.g., Mounce). The reviser (Thomas Sawyer,
>"mean, mean pride") has kept some of the characteristic features of the old
>edition (eight-case system, etc.), while completely updating the language for
>readability and adding sections on word order, basic (*extremely* basic)
>linguistics, etc. Oh, and he moved the discussion of the article to earlier in
>the book--the original Summers didn't discuss the article until the end of the
>The only glaring weakness (IMHO) is that the reviser has omitted all English to
>Greek translation exercizes: I may be the only person around who thinks that
>that particular pursuit is important, though.
Thomas Sawyer has made some significant improvements in Summer's grammar.
One of the most notable is that he left out the explanation of AKOUW with
its object in the genitive or accusative related to Acts 9:7 and 22:9 from
p. 51 of the old grammar. That theory is disproven by the context (see
There are still some problems in the appendices and chart in the back as
there was with the original. He gives APWLESA as the aorist active of
APOLLUMI when forms built on the stem of APWLOMHN appear in the NT.
Elsewhere he gives the second aorist stem first and the stem with A endings
in parenthesis. EFANHN is listed as the aorist active of FAINW when it is
clearly aorist passive. HKA is the perfect of HKW not AGW p. 186. He gives
EBALON and (EBALA) p. 186 so why not HLQON and (HLQA) on p. 187.
On the fold out chart in the back, he left out the 2 aorist passive form
from the old chart ELIPHN which does not exist but included another one
that does not exist ELABHN. The aorist passive of LAMBANW is ELHMFQHN. A
better example of the 2 aorist passive would be EXARHN from XAIRW. There
is no such word like he used for the liquid aorist active EFHNA. The aorist
of FAINW is EFANA. Careful use of the Aland concordance could help
eliminate such bogus forms and help prevent students from learning forms
that do not exist in the NT.
Fogleman Prof. Religion
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:43 EDT