Re: The augment

Date: Tue Apr 08 1997 - 18:17:50 EDT

Don Wilkins wrote:

>I might argue that the argument is strictly
>a morphological marker for secondary endings. The evidence is voluminous...

I am likely overlooking something very simple. If your argument is correct,
why is there no augment in non-indicative forms?

Robert Brindle
M.Div. Student
Instructor of NT Greek
Nazarene Theological Seminary
Kansas City, MO

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:11 EDT