From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Oct 26 2000 - 13:09:23 EDT
Pretty surely this was meant for the list rather than for me privately (a
consequence of the way we have "returns" set automatically in our
list-software). But in forwarding it I'll append a couple comments.
>From: "Fred Weidmann" <email@example.com>
>Organization: Union Theological Seminary
>To: "Carl W. Conrad" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 12:44:49 +0000
>Subject: Re: [b-greek] Ex.15:18 LXX
>The most important matter you raise here is evidenced by the
>grammatically and otherwise suspect phrase, "Yanks in six." I'll
>suspend further comment on that one.
That is to say: ellipsis, I suppose (Regarding the Series, I must confess
that after the Mets did to my Cardinals the same thing that my Cardinals
did to the Braves, I'm enjoying watching the Yankees do to the Mets what
they did last year to the Braves).
>The old Conybeare/Stock grammar of LXX places this verse under para.
>80, "Misuse of the Participle." Interestingly, in terms of Conrad's
>raising of the notion of "Hebraism," they make a point of
>noting that this particular verse is not one in which such usage
>"arises from following the Hebrew."
I should have looked at Conybeare & Stock; it's a neat little compendium.
In a private response to me Don had noted that the Hebrew text here doesn't
use a participle; it strikes me, however, that as this usage of the
participle is NOT a standard traditional Greek construction but one that
DOES appear sporadically in Biblical Greek, there's a question of WHY the
Greek would be used in this illegitimate way. An answer to that sort of
question must be speculative, but I can't help guessing that it is that
usage of a Hebrew participle that may suggest this function for a Greek
>Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 05:54:34 -0500
>From: "Carl W. Conrad" <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: [b-greek] Ex.15:18 LXX
>Cc: Biblical Greek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>At 5:05 PM -0400 10/24/00, Larsendon@aol.com wrote:
>>Greetings. In his discussion of participles , Daniel Wallace (Greek Grammar
>>Beyond the Basics) includes a category of "Independent Verbal Participles."
>>These are participles "that function as though they were finite verbs and are
>>not dependent on any verb in the context for their mood... [they] may
>>function as either indicatives or imperatives, though both of these are
>>I think that Exodus 15:18 LXX is an example of this indepedent verbal
>>participle functioning as an indicative: KURIOS BASILEUWN TON AIWNA KAI EP'
>>AIWNA KAI ETI. "The LORD rules the age and over the age and beyond."
>>What do others think? Can the participle be explained in any other way?
>I think you're right, but isn't this really a Hebraism? Participle
>functioning as an ordinary present tense? On the other hand, I suppose that
>one could argue that there's an implicit ESTI here and that what we have is
>a periphrastic present tense--but it seems to me that the periphrastics
>with the present participle are more commonly found with tenses of EIMI
>other than the present, such as the Johannine HN ... ERCOMENOS or HN ...
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:39 EDT