From: Paul Toseland (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Oct 06 2000 - 12:43:45 EDT
Sorry, but Lyris List Manager did not find your email address
listed as a member of b-greek.
Only members of b-greek are allowed to contribute messages.
Because Lyris List Manager could not confirm that you are a member of
your message was not accepted.
Received: from blueyonder.co.uk ([220.127.116.11]) by
franklin.oit.unc.edu with SMTP (Lyris List Manager SOLARIS/SPARC version
4.0); Fri, 06 Oct 2000 10:19:33 -0400
Received: from toseland.f9.co.uk ([18.104.22.168]) by blueyonder.co.uk
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19);
Fri, 6 Oct 2000 15:20:52 +0100
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 15:17:20 +0100
From: Paul Toseland <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Reply-To: clayton stirling bartholomew
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; U)
To: Biblical Greek <email@example.com>
Subject: 'Intensive' KAI?? (2 Cor 3:6)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
2 Cor 3:6
hOS KAI hIKANWSEN hHMAS DIAKONOUS KAINHS DIAQHKHS ...
My interest is in the syntactical function of KAI.
The NASB takes KAI in the sense 'also': 'who has also made us adequate
as servants of a new covenant'. The difficulty then is to determine the
antecedent of KAI. The language of 2:16b (KAI PROS TAUTA TIS hIKANOS?)
echoes Exod 4:10 LXX, Moses' call narrative, and the hIKANOS language is
picked up again in 3:5, as well as 3:6; so perhaps the implication might
be that, just as God made Moses competent for his ministry, so also he
has made Paul competent for his. But there is no *explicit* reference to
Moses in the preceding context (2:14-3:5), and this would demand quite a
lot of the readers.
The NRSV ignores KAI altogether: 'who has made us competent to be
ministers of a new covenant' - as do e.g. NIV, and many commentators.
The NEB seems to take KAI as adding emphasis to hOS: 'It is he who has
qualified us to dispense his new covenant ...' Thrall* suggests that the
function of KAI is actually to emphasize the whole relative clause.
I suspect that KAI should be understood as confirmatory: 'Our competence
is from God, who has indeed made us competent ...'; and the confirmation
then has the *effect* of emphasizing the relative clause. However,
Levinsohn** defines KAI as an additive particle, and makes no mention of
an emphatic role. Nor does BAGD mention such a category.
I would like to canvass opinion on the notion of 'Intensive KAI'. Is KAI
ever purely intensive? Does KAI ever have the role of adding emphasis to
to a following (or preceding) word or phrase, or a whole clause, other
than as a consequence of introducing a confirmation of a point already
* Thrall, M. E., 1994, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Vol. 1, ICC, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, pp
230-31 n 288.
** Levinsohn, S. H., Discourse Features of New Testament Greek, 2nd
edition, SIL 2000, pp 95-106.
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.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 - 15:36:38 EDT