Re: Attention aspect geeks: John 15:6 EBLHQH, EXHRANQH

From: Jonathan Robie (
Date: Mon Apr 07 1997 - 15:00:11 EDT

At 12:28 PM 4/7/97 -0800, Don Wilkins wrote:

>I think they commit the same general fallacy that the
>venerable A. T. Robertson committed many years ago, in that Homeric Greek
>is used as an excuse to explain anomalies in much later Greek.
>...that the augment is generally used the same in inscriptions as it is in
>Greek, following established descriptive grammar.

I guess this means that I can't rely on A. T. Robertson to present what you
call "established descriptive grammar". Maybe you feel the same way about
Smyth. Which grammars do you feel best present established descriptive grammar?

This is *exactly* what I mean when I say that people like me have a hard
time knowing what to believe when experts seem to be saying different
things. I think that you know a *lot* about Greek, Don, and A. T. Robertson
seems to be one of those real giants for whom we both have respect, but you
seem to disagree here. Which leaves beginners like me in the position of
having to weigh the evidence and make up our own minds, because there just
isn't one established position in the grammars which experts have
recommended to me.

>Moreover, with the recent publication of PHI's CD
>7 we have a wealth of sources for inscriptions and papyri at our
>fingertips, so that further research is not only justified but also
>practicable (incidentally, I am almost finished with the next version of my
>computer program, and one of the things it will do is search the new CD's;
>you can also do this with Pandora, etc.).

Hey, almost finished? Great! What all will the program do?


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 - 15:38:11 EDT