From: Mike Sangrey (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat May 13 2000 - 14:15:42 EDT
Carl Conrad email@example.com said:
> HSAN TETAGMENOI is within a relative clause (hOSOI TETAGMENOI HSAN
> ...) which functions as the subject of the aorist verb EPISTEUSAN.
> Although it's possible to understand TETAGMENOI HSAN as a true
> pluperfect in the sense that the "appointing" had to precede their
> believing, I think it better to understand HSAN TETAGMENOI as a
> stative form that's equivalent to an imperfect:"those who were in the
> state of being 'slated' ... did come to faith."
Does this not highlight the interaction between tense and the lexical meaning?
My thought is: The person performing the action, the "appointing", performed
the action in the past and completed that action in the past. However,
"appoint", by its very nature, is a stative verb. In a sense, I suppose, we
could say the action done by the subject resulted in a state realized by and
continuing in the object of that action. The imperfect HSAN, because of the
stative nature of the verb, would then emphasize this lexical idea.
Is this at least a good way of looking at this?
There is no 'do' in faith, everywhere present within it is 'done'.
B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:25 EDT