Re: Wallace: Beyond the Basics

From: clayton stirling bartholomew (
Date: Sun Aug 08 1999 - 23:40:39 EDT

Paul Dixon wrote
>Clay, would you care to give an example {snip}

One example and one only because this discussion will become something
like a dog chasing its tail.

Wallace page 78, N.B. last sentence

". . . as well as the profound exegetical significance that this case
can play in given texts, . . ."

This is a clear example of the "metaphysics of presence." The idea that
a case form can have "profound exegetical significance" is an idea that
I simply do not accept. In the system of semantics I am using the case
has next to no meaning at all. You could replace all the genitive,
dative, accusative case endings with the a single symbol and you could
define the function of this symbol as "limits something" and at that
point cease all discussion of these cases.

My statement of this matter is an over statement to make the point
clear. My wording of it is much more radical than what you will read in
S.E. Porter (Idioms) but Porter is closer to my statement than he is to

This is it. No more. We have been over all this territory before.


Capt. Willard:
They said that your methods are unsound.

Col. Kurtz:
Are my methods unsound?

Capt. Willard:
I don't see - - any method at all.

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 - 15:40:35 EDT