Multiply-Anteceded Dem. Pronouns

From: Roe (
Date: Thu May 04 2000 - 07:21:18 EDT

Dear B-Greekers,

On May 1, 2000 I posted with the subject line "Re: dem. pronouns w/
multiple antecedents" (under the thread I originally titled "Gender &
number: GOMORRA, SODOMA").

My posts on this thread have been rather vague allusions toward the
assortment of my own grammatical disorientation, rather than clear
questions. I am a novice having never properly studied Greek. I would
like to again pose part of my questions (more coherently, I hope), now
that I have somewhat sorted them out [below]. I know: I should have
sorted them out before ever posting. My apologies.

I began by wondering what gender SODOMA (in Jude 7) really is, with
Bauer, Louw/Nida and Fribergs' AGNT showing it to be neuter, while
BibleWorks' version of the CATSS-morphed LXX text shows it to be
feminine. I then wondered why Fribergs' show Jude 7's OhUTOS to be
masculine (TOUTOIS), when it has the same declension ending as the
neuter: -OIS. My wonder is not because I think Fribergs are wrong, but
because I don't know what rules or methodology are involved. When
Fribergs see TOUTOIS in a Greek text, I don't what criteria is used to
decide whether it is masc. or neuter.

Next, I reasoned that TOUTOIS could be neuter in Jude 7 if it refers to
SODOMA, GOMORRA and POLEIS (instead of AGGELOUS in vs. 6), and sought
support for that possibility. I found that multiply-anteceded pronouns
(pronouns having more than one antecedent) stand in the neuter gender
when the gender of their antecedents do not agree with one another, and
showed Gal 5:17; Acts 7:49 and John 6:9 as examples. Thus, a neuter
TOUTOIS in Jude 7 appeared possible (but only if SODOMA, GOMORRA and
POLEIS were not *all* feminine).

I questioned the seeming anomaly to my newly discovered possibility of
required neuter pronouns in the text of Hebrews 11:13 (KATA PISTIN
APEQANON OhUTOI [masc.] PANTES...), which, I assumed, included Sarah
(fem.) as an antecedent. (Someone not on the forum has since suggested
that OhUTOI in masculine could refer to OhI PRESBUTEROI of Heb. 11:2.)

My dabbling in this thread has revealed my ignorance, and has left me
more concerned about what general rules are involved than with the
exegesis of Jude 7 or any of the other passages I've stumbled across.
So, I will state my questions in order of their general priority for me.
Of course, you know I wouldn't mind comments on every one of them... ;-)

My questions:

1) What is the prescribed gender for demonstrative pronouns having more
than one antecedent, each of which has a different gender?

2) What is the prescribed gender for demonstrative pronouns having more
than one antecedent, each of which has the *same* gender -- say,

(Heb. 10:17-18 seems to prove that the gender would agree with that of
the multiple antecedents, though we have the same morphological problem,
mentioned in the next question, in determining whether TOUTWN really is
feminine or is neuter, as both have the same declension ending. KAI TWN

3.a) Must the "morpher" of an analytic text *sometimes* rely on
extra-grammatical considerations when determining whether TOUTOIS be
masc. or neuter?

3.b) Is this the case of Jude 7, where Fribergs morph it masculine?

4) Is SODOMA neuter or feminine? and, if feminine, why do you suppose
Bauer et al. show it to be neuter?

5) Does OhUTOI in Heb. 11:13 more likely refer in a general way to an
unnamed group whose members have heterogeneous genders (as I think the
masculine can refer)? Or does OhUTOI in Heb. 11:13 more likely refer
specifically to OhI PRESBUTEROI of Heb. 11:2 (or even -- precipitately
-- to XENOI KAI PAREPIDHMOI of verse 13)?

Much thanks for your time and consideration!


D. W. Roe
Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany

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 - 15:36:24 EDT