Re: Mark 1:19 kai *autous* en tw ploiw - attraction?

From: Jonathan Robie (
Date: Sat Feb 08 1997 - 12:50:12 EST

At 09:00 AM 2/8/97 -0600, Carl William Conrad wrote:

>No, it's no longer grammatical: now you have a NOMINATIVE that won't
>construe with that PARTICIPLE in the ACCUSATIVE; that's why I suggested
>the alernative view of AUTOUS ... KATARTIZONTAS as an indirect-discourse
>clause functioning as a second object of EIDEN.

Aha! You just put your finger on one source of my blindness - I wasn't
paying attention to that accusative participle. But I don't think I've
noticed this accusative + infinitive before...

>I have a sense that some NT grammars don't really deal with this, even if
>they do take up the accusative + infinitive type clause of indirect
>discourse used with a verb of speaking,etc., because it's enough like
>English that it doesn't seem worth singling out for discussion--and if you
>look at this whole sequence and read it as follows, it doesn't really seem
>so problematic, does it?
>"And he walked a bit further and saw James the son of Zebedee and his
>brother John--and them [better: them also] in the boat mending (their)
>nets." OR ALTERNATIVELY: "saw James ... and John, and that they were in
>the boat mending their nets."

Well, yes, it *is* a lot like the English, but sometimes that makes me
nervous. I actually understood the passage fine when I wasn't thinking about
it, but I started falling apart when I analyzed it. I know that English kind
of works that way, but I *didn't* know that Greek does...
>> Whoa! You just sent me off to the books again...this is advanced calculus
>> for me. I don't think I've ever run into this before.
> Is it conceivable that you've not ever run into this before? I learned
> this as "Indirect Discourse," "Oratio Obliqua"--with the distinction of
> two kinds of introductory verbs: verbs of "saying" taking acc. + inf.,
> verbs of "perceiving" taking acc. + ptc. I suspect that this is another
> instance of the NT grammarians inventing a terminology different from that
> of classical Attic grammar. I'll check in the office later and see what
> they call it.

Well, a *lot* of things are conceivable with self-taught people like me. I
try to expose a new corner of my ignorance every day - of course, these
days, I also make sure that my displays of ignorance are preserved
permanently in the archives ;->

Of course, when I do discover a useful piece of ignorance, I try not to let
go of it until it finds the knowledge it was designed to seek. This was
enough to get me going. I think that I found the right sections in
Blass-Debrunner-Rehkopf: sections 396-397 for the infinitive (especially
397.3), and section 416 for the participle. (These section numbers are
generally the same for Blass-Debrunner-Funk, which I don't have.)


Jonathan Robie
POET Software, 3207 Gibson Road, Durham, N.C., 27703
Ph: 919.598.5728 Fax: 919.598.6728
email:, <--- shockwave enabled!

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:05 EDT