From: c stirling bartholomew (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat May 26 2001 - 14:23:12 EDT
REV 19:2c reads:
KAI EXEDIKHSEN TO AIMA TWN DOULWN AUTOU
EK CEIROS AUTHS.
The phrase EK CEIROS AUTHS presents us with a EK + genitive pattern that
appears to be semantically ambiguous. G.Beale (Rev, NIGTC page 928) points
out that the solution to this riddle should be sought in the OT, 2Kings 9:7
MT and Gen 4:11 LXX.
However, the phrase EK CEIROS AUTHS presents an intriguing test case for our
discussion of the semantic contribution of the prepositions and the case
Some linguists might argue that EK + genitive has a prototypical semantic
significance and that what is evident in REV 19:2c is a "skewed" use of this
pattern. However, the idea of a prototype and deviations from this
prototype does not seem well suited to explaining texts like the REV 19:2c.
There seems to be no way of relating this use of EK CEIROS AUTHS to any
prototype EK + genitive.
For this reason I would suggest that the lexical values of significant
constituents (EXEDIKHSEN, TO AIMA, TWN DOULWN AUTOU
CEIROS AUTHS) as they are collocated in this context, provide semantic
constraints which color the EK + genitive pattern and that the preposition +
case provides grammatical structural information but is semantically "washed
This combined with the OT examples of the idiom serves to explain how EK
CEIROS AUTHS functions in REV 19:2c. It is not at all clear to me how this
usage could be related to any prototypical semantic significance of EK +
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
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 - 15:36:57 EDT