From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 07 1998 - 07:51:30 EDT
<x-rich>At 6:49 PM -0500 9/06/98, Paul Zellmer wrote:
>I didn't realize when I asked my question about the *H* in James 2:15
>this past weekend that this has been an area of debate in the past.
>However, I finally found the time to research it in Robertson's big
>yellow tome (did I get your term right, Jonathan?) and definitely got
>the impression that this is an isolated case of *H* serving as a
>conjunction that _combines_ two items, which would result in a plural
>subject. The other possibility he points out is Gal 1:8, but it does
>not appear as clearly there. Since ATR's book was written, have
>extra-biblical examples been found?
>In thinking about the James verse, however, another question came to
>Why is James _specifying_ the woman here? Is not the normal greek
>to treat the masculine form as possibly including the feminine, while
>the feminine form is locked into its gender? If that's the case,
>ADELFOS already gives the possibility for both, and H ADELFH is not
>really required. Two questions then arise: Are there other cases
>you all can recall where both the masculine and feminine are
>and what is the significance of such specification?
I did a quick search with Accordance and found several instances where
both ADELFOS and ADELFH are used. In addition to Jas 2:15 EAN ADELFOS H
ADELFH GUMNOI hUPARCWSIN KAI LEIPOMENOI THS EFHMEROU TROFHS ... the
most significant are:
Mt 12:50 (= Mk 3:35) hOSTIS GAR AN POIHSHi TO QELHMA TOU PATROS MOU TOU
EN OURANOIS AUTOS MOU ADELFOS KAI ADELFH KAI MHTHR ESTIN.
at 19:29 (= Mk 10:29-30) KAI PAS hOSTIS AFHKEN OIKIAS H ADELFOUS H
ADEFAS H PATERA H MHTERA H TEKNA H AGROUS hENEKEN TOU ONOMATOS MOU,
hEKATONPLASIONA LHMYETAI KAI ZWHN AIWNION KLHRONOMHSEI.
Lk 14:26 EI TIS ERCETAI PROS ME KAI OU MISEI TON PATERA hEAUTOU KAI THN
MHTERA KAI THN GUNAIKA KAI TA TEKNA KAI TOUS ADELFOUS KAI TAS ADELFAS,
ETI TE KAI THN YUCHN hEAUTOU, OU DUNATAI EINAI MOU MAQHTHS.
1Cor 7:15 EI DE hO APISTOS CWRIZETAI, CWRIZESQW: OU DEDOULWTAI hO
ADELFOS H hH ADELFH EN TOIS TOIOUTOIS; EN DE EIRHNHi KEKLHKEN hUMAS hO
In my judgment, the explanation for these is simple: even if ADELFOS is
the generic word and may technically imply ADELFH as well, I think that
ADELFH is specifically added in each of the above verses to exclude any
possibility that ADELFOS may be thought to indicate ONLY the male
sibling. This is surely the case with the passages from the Synoptic
gospels, where the listing of members of a nuclear family is clearly
intended to be inclusive. But I think it is quite clearly the intention
in 1 Cor 7:15 and Jas 2:15 as well,in both of which ADELFOS/ADELFH has
reference to a member of the body of Christ.
And as for your original question about the plural predicate adjective
and verb used with ADELFOS H ADELFH, I'm not sure what else you may
have found in your ATR research, but it strikes me that the )\H in this
instance may be used to indicate potentially inclusive alternatives,
like Latin VEL (as opposed to Latin AUT which disjoins exclusive
alternatives)--i.e. )\H in this instance especially must be understood
not to mean "or else" but "and/or"--and the "and" possibility is
sufficient occasion for the plural predicate adjective GUMNOI and
plural verb hUPARACWSIN.
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
email@example.com OR firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:59 EDT