From: Stephen C. Carlson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Nov 13 1996 - 19:20:52 EST
At 05:22 11/13/96 -0500, AAPRBAB@aol.com wrote:
>Thank you for your response. I did find one use of the third plural
>imperfect in Mark 12:31, but the fact that it is well attested in extra
>Biblical literature makes my arguement more valid.
>I looked at BAGD again and it lists a future, 2nd aorist, a distinct aorist
>3rd pl., a perfect, future passive, 1st aorist, perfect passive and a
>Why doesn't it list an imperfect form seeing as it is in the NT and is well
>attested? Am I expecting too much from BAGD?
Yes. I would expect BAGD to list the *irregular* forms of a verb. All
the forms cited for BALLW have only a single lambda, and some are in
replicated zero-grade, e.g. BEBLHKA. The imperfect to BALLW is regular.
Note: BAGD's policy is different from that of the Hebrew lexicon BDB,
which does list the attested forms.
-- Stephen C. Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, email@example.com : and songs chant the words. http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/ : -- Shujing 2.35
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:56 EDT