re: Fundamentally flawed

From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Sat Mar 21 1998 - 17:23:36 EST


At 12:00 PM 3/21/98 -0600, Richard Lindeman wrote:
>So then, if we view context as the undercurrent of language... then tense,
>voice, mood, aktionsart, aspect, and everything else that we understand
>about syntax... and also morphology, are all derivatives of context. In
>fact, we probably would be better off to define them all with *contextual
>terminology*. Then we we might actually be able to see better how they
>really do interact with each other in dealing with context.

This sounds like Porter. The problem is, "context" is built from "tense,
voice, mood, aktionsart, aspect, and everything else that we understand
about syntax". If there is nothing that can be said about the primitives
from which the context is built, there is also little that can be said
about context.

I do not think it is possible to discuss a verse by appealing to context
alone, without discussing the meanings of words and grammatical
constructions. Whatever we want to say about the context, we have to look
at more concrete things in order to say it.

Jonathan
___________________________________________________________________________

Jonathan Robie jwrobie@mindspring.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 - 15:39:17 EDT