[b-greek] Re: some questions about Rom 3.27

From: Steven R. Lo Vullo (doulos@chorus.net)
Date: Mon Jan 08 2001 - 19:37:42 EST


On 1/8/01 10:30 AM, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:

>> Rom 3.27: POU~ OUN hH KAUCHSIS; EXEKLEISQH. DIA POIOU NOMOU; TWN ERGWN;
>> OUCI, ALLA\ DIA NOMOU PISTEWS.

> It seems that the usage of OUN is wider than to draw an inference from what
> precedes. OUN seems to mean "relative to what precedes" or " based on what
> precedes". So, any types of setences, e.g. questions, commands, can come after
> OUN.

That makes good sense. Thanks.

> [Moon]
>
> You have two choices from which to choose the subject or predicate, that
> is, POU and hH KAUCHSIS.

The major thrust of my question was whether there really are two choices.
What I'm driving at is whether it is legitimate to view an adverb (or
prepositional phrase) as either the subject or predicate when it may be
perfectly natural to take it as simply modifying a verb (in this case an
implied ESTIN). I realize that there are occurrences of adverbs (and
prepositional phrases) with the article that function substantivally, but is
it correct to understand a simple adverb to be the subject or predicate? If
so, how can one distinguish between an adverb that is simply modifying the
verb and one that is the subject or predicate?

>> I have seen in the past people propose adverbs or prepositional phrases as a
>> subject or predicate of a verb rather than a modifier of a verb.

> (By the way, what is "predicate of a verb"? )

What is the predicate of a verb? I wish I knew! What I had rolling around in
my mind when I wrote the above gaffe was the relationship between the
subject and a word in the predicate position vis-a-vis the copulative verb.
What came out was ... well, something really stupid! My word order somehow
got fouled up. I think what I must have been trying to say was something
like "I have seen in the past people propose adverbs or prepositional
phrases as subjects of the verb or as the predicate rather than as modifier
of the verb." I mindlessly lumped together "subject" and "predicate."
Thanks for catching that.

> In POU hH KAUCHSIS, POU is indefinite whereas hH KAUCHSIS is definite.
> In this pattern, the definite part is the subject and the indefinite part
> predicate, at least typically. I am not sure if there are no
> counter-examples.

Yes, I understand that when we have two words from which to choose, the more
definite one will be the subject. What I am really wondering, though, is
whether POU (as an adverb) is truly a candidate for either subject OR
predicate.

>> Fourth, how would you describe the function of OUCI? Is it absolute, perhaps
>> functioning as an interjection, or does it modify an elliptical EXEKLEISQH?
>> The diagram I consulted had the former; I had the latter.

> What is the difference?

Ultimately, the difference is not huge. But my thinking was that if it is an
interjection, it may be emphatic (or at least more emphatic) than if it
modifies an understood EXEKLEISQH).

Steve Lo Vullo,
Madison, WI



---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:46 EDT