From: Paul Zellmer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Nov 28 1998 - 03:28:07 EST
James 1:13 says:
TI/S SOFOS KAI EPISTHMWN EN hUMIN; DEICATW EK THS KALHS ANASTROFHS
TA ERGA AUTOU EN PRAUTHTI SOFIAS.
As much as I would love to delve into the 3rd person imperative
here, I realize that we discussed that before. I just wish I knew a
better way of bringing the concept into another language! So I'm
bypassing that troublesome creature, and asking about the EK phrase.
An initial impression is that this phrase is describing the source
of the demonstation that is commanded. If this were the case, I
would probably handle the thought like does the NIV, supplying "it"
after the imperative. Yet I have a bit of a problem handling the TA
ERGA. *It* appears to be the object of the verb, i.e., *what* is
shown. If this is the case, the EK phrase seems to be the source of
the works. But the order of the parts of this sentence seem to go
against this, at least in my way of thinking. I would expect to see
the EK phrase come after ERGA AUTOU, perhaps even after SOFIAS.
NIV seemed to try to handle this by making the TA ERGA act almost
like a Genitive-Ablative, which it can't be. And I can't even make
enough sense out of command to ask a concise question. So I guess
I'm just looking for general ideas on what's happening here.
P.S. Carlton W., where's your book when I need it??? Someday I'll
get one sent over from the States.
-- Paul and Dee Zellmer, Jimmy Guingab, Geoffrey Beltran Ibanag Translation Project Cabagan, Philippines
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:08 EDT