Re: Plenary Genitive

From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Thu May 20 1999 - 10:50:27 EDT


At 9:31 AM -0400 5/20/99, Joseph Brian Tucker wrote:
>Greetings
>
>What is the basis for determining if a genitive is plenary. If the noun in
>the genitive is both subjective and objective isn't that theologizing
>grammer a little too much. What is the key for determining if plenary is
>acceptable. (2 Cor 5.14; Rev 1.1; Rom 5.5)

"Plenary" is a new and unfamiliar category of genitive to me, but I learn
new things on B-Greek all the time. Do you mean "BOTH subjective and
objective" by it? That's what you seem to be saying: so that in Rev 1
APOKLALUYIS IHSOU CRISTOU would be understood both as "what Jesus Christ
reveals" and as "what reveals Jesus Christ." It does seem to me in Rev 1:1,
given the fact that we have a relative clause immediately following that
must refer back to APOKALUYIS: hHN EDWKEN AUTWi hO QEOS ..., APOKALUYIS
IHSOU CRISTOU in this particular instance must be objective: it is GOD's
revelation OF Jesus Christ. Or am I missing something.

As there is no grammatical difference between a subjective or objective
genitive (the distinction is a functional one, this is the structural
"pertinentive" type of genitive that is defined most simply as the case of
a noun/substantive that is dependent upon another noun/substantive), I
don't see how there can be any criterion for calling a particular instance
of the genitive "subjective," "objective," or "plenary" (still seems a
strange term to me!) except by examination of the context. I've done that
for Rev 1:1 above.

In 2 Cor 5:14 hH GAR AGAPH TOU CRISTOU SUNECEI hHMAS, KRINANTES TOUTO, hOTI
hEIS hUPER PANTWN APEQANEN ... Here I personally would think that the
genitive is subjective, inasmuch as the context shows that the perception
governing this 'constraining' is discernment of the death of one (= Christ)
for all. Now I suppose that one might argue that the death of one for all
could evoke a responsive love FOR CHRIST that 'constrains us." I can't see
any objection to that as a legitimate reading of the syntax, but it does
seem to me a little less likely.

In Rom 5:5 hH AGAPH TOU QEOU EKKECUTAI EN TAIS KARDIAIS hHMWN DIA PNEUMATOS
hAGIOU TOU DOQENTOS hHMIN. In this instance two factors seem to me to
imply that TOU QEOU is subjective rather than objective: (1) whether or not
one views EKKECUTAI as middle ("is in full flood") or passive ("has been
made to gush" or the like), nevertheless the action/state is attributed to
the agency of the Holy Spirit, so that it seems less likely that our
initiative underlies the AGAPH; and (2) 5:6 makes the same point that 2 Cor
5:14 did in the relative clause: the factor responsible (GAR) for this
flooding of God's love in our hearts is the perception of Christ's death
for us in our infirmity. So this instance seems to me much like that of 2
Cor 5:14, and again here, one could make the argument that the syntax is
readable as an objective genitive just as well, and I couldn't refute
that--but I still don't think it very likely.

In sum, then, I don't think there is any clear objective criterion whereby
one can determine that a particular instance of a genitive of a proper name
with a verbal noun is "subjective" or "objective" or "plenary." One must
read the context as carefully as possible, consider the probabilities, and
decide where one thinks the preponderance lies. If it were Vergil or
Sophocles or Aeschylus, or any other poet of whom we are ready to look for
an ironic overtone or a deliberate 'double entendre,' I'd be willing to
wager that the so-called "plenary" genitive is in play, but I'd be far more
hesitant about making that judgment about an expository statement in prose
without having some clear indication that high rhetoric is at work in the
passage under investigation. I wouldn't rule that out in 2 Cor 5:14 and Rom
5:5, but I don't see how one could be confident of that as the writer's
intention.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
Summer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

---
B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:28 EDT