From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jan 06 1997 - 19:35:42 EST
At 6:21 PM -0600 1/6/97, Lou Schwing wrote:
>At 5:33 AM 1/6/97, Carlton Winbery wrote:
>>Jim Beale wrote;
>>>Both the 3rd edition and the 4th ed. of the UBS GNT has the form
>>>PNEU/MATI/ in Romans 1:9. This couldn't possibly be correct, could
>>Jim, the rule of accent is that if a word with an acute on the antepenult
>>(third from last syllable) or a circumflex on the penult (second from
>>last), it receives a second accent (acute) on the ultima (last syllable).
>But why isn't this usage universal? For example, Mark 1:8?
As I noted in my addendum to Carlton's note that I sent off at the same
time that I was receiving this, I said the rule applied because there was
an enclitic (MOU) following PNEUMATI in Rom 1:9. There is no enclitic
following PNEUMATI in Mk 1:8 but rather a regular adjective (hAGIWi) with
its own accent.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
email@example.com OR firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:01 EDT