From: Jonathan Robie (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Feb 07 1998 - 22:48:01 EST
At 10:17 PM 2/7/98 EST, Paul S. Dixon wrote:
>I copy and paste from the first paragraph of the conclusion to my Th.M.
>thesis, "The Significance of the Anarthrous Predicate Nominative in John"
>The use of the anarthrous predicate nominative in John is significant.
>It is qualitative in 65 out of 74 occurrences, or 88% probability. When
>the anarthrous predicate nominative precedes the verb it is
>qualitatative in 50 of 53 occurrences, or 94% probability. When it
>follows the verb the anarthrous predicate nominative is qualitative 13
>of 19 occurrences, or 68%.
So KAI QEOS HN O LOGOS would have a 94% probability of meaning "and the
Word was divine", but a 6% probability of meaning "and the Word was God"?
And KAI O LOGOS HN QEOS would have a 68% probability of meaning "and the
Word was divine", but a 32% probability of meaning "and the Word was God"?
Then in all probability, using your model, they have the same meaning,
which is qualitative.
(I'm still holding out for well-defined tests of qualitativeness before I
take a stand on this one...)
Jonathan Robie email@example.com
Little Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine
Little Greek 101: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine/greek/lessons
B-Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek Archives: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:02 EDT