Re: THi ELEUQERIAi in Gal 5:1 (Concluding Unscientific PS)

From: Daniel Ria–o (
Date: Sun Jun 06 1999 - 19:28:05 EDT

Carl W Conrad wrote:

>Upon looking at Daniel's cited examples,
>it appears to me that these datives are regularly dependent upon a noun and
>usually a verbal noun, but the examples cited are NOT construed with verbs
>and don't seem therefore to me to be quite comparable to what we're
>presented with in the text of Gal 5:1 as printed in UBS4/NA27.

        Yes: A reasonable induction based on the incomplete data provided
by me. I must apologise for an omission in my last two postings: I only
quoted adnominal constructions because (a) I thought such examples had a
stronger probatory force than adverbal constructions (some of them with
possible alternative explanations), (b) They are far more common, (c) they
are usually shorter, (d) I am working on non genitive adnominal
constructions right now. But the adverbal examples do exist:

(quoting from the shorter examples given by Hoeckstra 1962: N.B. Copy the
text an apply the freeware SPIonic Font to see GREEK)

        *Il.*18.513 : lo/xw| d' u(peqwrh/ssonto [cf. *Il.*5.376 e)s
po/lemon qw/rh/sseto]
        *Il..*7.218 prokale/ssato xa/rmh|

>From Schenkeveld (1989):
        Antipho Or.5.8 tou=to u(ma=s dida/cw, ou) tw=| feu/gein a)\n to\
plh=qos to\ u(me/teron... a)ll' i(/na h)=| tekmh/ria u(mi=n ...

Note the coordination of the dative with the* i(/na* construction in
Antipho. Hummel, Pascale. "La syntaxe de Pindare." Ed Peeters.
Louvain-Paris, 1993 pp. 126-27 mentions as example "des multiples nuances
du dativus finalis" other passages from Pindar (the DF being considered an
example of a"Dativ compl'ement second du verbe"): Ol.8.43 , Fr.43.4,
Pi.8.67, 4.40-41, etc. Moorhouse, A.C. "The syntax of Sophocles." Leiden,
1982, pp. 80-81. gives further (but more polemical) examples from Sophocles.

>If I understood rightly what he reports,
>this "telic" dative is not instrumental or locative but a usage of the true
>PIE Dative.

        Probably my syntax gave place to the misunderstanding and I thank
the occasion for the necessary clarification: almost all the English/German
speaking authors I quoted in this thread consider (implicitly or
explicitly) the purpose dative to be a derivation of a local-directive IE
dative in the frame of the standard 8 cases IE reconstruction (some of them
didn't even know about the *PIE* hypothesis). My own (but not exclusive)
view about the case systems of IE (and PIE) is very different, and in any
case I (and probably Carl as well) don't think always necessary to find the
IE filiation of a case use to describe synchronically the syntactical
functioning of a given case use in Greek, when there is enough data in this

        And back to NT Greek...

Daniel Ria–o Rufilanchas
Madrid, Espa–a

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 - 15:40:29 EDT