From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Feb 03 1997 - 10:12:09 EST
At 8:58 AM -0600 2/3/97, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>At 08:05 AM 2/3/97 -0600, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>>Here's where the ACCENTS are important, Jonathan. It's: hO\. Unless the
>>article hO is followed by an enclitic (e.g. hO/ GE), it NEVER has an
>>accent; when you see a hO with an accent and there's NO following enclitic,
>>it can only be a relative pronoun, as it is in fact here: n.sg. relative
>>pronoun acc., object of NOHSAI, and I think I would explain this as an
>>anticipatory relative clause in apposition to THN SUNESIN MOU, deeming PROS
>>as having THN SUNESIN MOU as its chief object.
>OK, I admit it, I don't pay much attention to accents on one-syllable
>words...I've been burned more than once on this.
>I'm bogging down when I try to figure out what you mean here, Carl. I think
>you are saying that:
>PROS - THN SUNESIN MOU: The object of PROS is THN SUNESIN MOU.
>NOISAI hO/ DUNASQE ANAGIWSKONTES: hO/ is the object of NOHSAI
>But I still can't get this to turn into a meaningful sentence...
hO DUNASQE ANAGINWSKONTES NOHSAI is parenthetical. I'd understand the
"But as for my understanding in the mystery of Christ--as you can grasp as
you read--, the mystery was revealed to me by revelation ..."
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 - 15:38:04 EDT