From: lakr (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 25 1997 - 18:30:17 EST
> lakr wrote:
> > I am studying participles in Mounce's textbook - chapter 30.
> > It starts with an exegetical example and uses
> > Rev 3:8 "QURAN HNEWGMENHN" as an example where the NIV,KJV
> > and NASB are "weak" and "inadequate". The commentator makes the
> > point that the perfect passive participle should be translated
> > "an opened door" as oposed to "an open door". This makes sense to
> > me, as I suppose in English this would be considered a past
> > participle.
> > Is there another side to this issue ?
> > Sincerely,
> > Larry Kruper
> I'm not sure exactly what other side issue you're looking for....but
> Rienecker helps in this way instead of translating it as "an opened
> door"....to get the sense of the participle he says "a door standing
> open." He also suggest that the perfect tense as you know...indicates
> not only the perfected action in past time but the "continuing
> condition." I guess a more 'elaborate' translation would be " a door
> which has been standing open." --to get the full effect of both the
> perf. and and the passive....
> Ronald Wong
> O'Brien, FL
I wanted to make sure that 'an opened door', considering the tense
form of the verb and the context was superior to 'an open door'
before I considered this verse as a possible 'litmus test' of the
quality of a particular translation.
As for the translation "a door standing open", I am not sure it
conveys more of a continuous thought to my mind than "an opened door",
but it does seem to lose the sense that _someone_ opened the door
as oposed to perhaps the wind blowing it open, or even that it may
have always been open.
I however, will reserve judgement at least until I have finished
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT