Re: Revelation 3:2

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Mon Mar 23 1998 - 15:56:30 EST

At 9:22 PM -0600 3/22/98, Theodore H. Mann wrote:
> Translations differ with regard to EMELLON APOQANEIN, in Rev.3:2,
>some translating the imperfect verb as "are about...," and others using
>"were about...." Is one or the other preferable, or are both
>acceptable? What is the rationale for either choice? Thanks.

This is one of those instances where there is no adequate explanation for
the use of the imperfect tense EMELLON where the context seems to require a
present tense (which would be MELLOUSI, but it's unattested). So what's
going on in the translations, I think, is that some translate the Greek of
the MSS and make it "were about ..." while others make the translation say
what seems to be called for by the context. It should be noted that there
are numerous "solecisms" in the text of Revelation--instances of
constructions that conform to what seems to be standard grammar.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649 OR

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:16 EDT