Re: 2Clement 2:6 / 5:6

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Thu Feb 18 1999 - 12:23:07 EST

To bring closure on this thread for my own part (and I'm NOT saying that
anyone who has something new to say about it should refrain!), I want to
say that I am satisfied now with understanding ESTIN in our clause as an
equivalent of EXESTIN or PARESTIN; that is certainly not uncommon, and the
correlation of the TI that is object of POIHSANTAS with what's on the
other side of the EI MH really does not have any bearing on how the ESTIN
should be understood (as I was arguing yesterday when I said I thought
ESTIN must be a copula).

But enough already!

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

B-Greek home page:
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: []
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
To subscribe, send a message to

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:17 EDT