From: Mike Sangrey (msangrey@BlueFeltHat.org)
Date: Wed Jun 06 2001 - 11:02:06 EDT
My question is:
Tell me again why the first TO AUTO should be tagged as accusative;
Why not nominative?
Friberg and Friberg tags it as accusative. Is this right, if so
what's the justification? What are the arguments one can use to tag
it as nominative? What am I missing?
Thanks ahead of time.
Here's the text and my current meaning-based translation, which
assumes nominative tagging, so you have some indication as to my
Phil 2:2-3 is
PLHRWSATE MOU THN CARAN hINA TO AUTO FRONHTE,
THN AUTHN AGAPHN ECONTES, SUMYUCOI, TO hEN FRONOUNTES,
MHDEN KAT' ERIQEIAN MHDE KATA KENODOXIAN,
ALLA THi TAPEINOFROSUNHi ALLHLOUS hHGOUMENOI hUPERECONTAS hEAUTWN,
Please make me very happy by doing the following: You [singular,
generic] should make mutual love the priority, where harmony
holds and priorities the oneness. Not holding onto selfish
ambition nor holding onto empty pride, on the contrary, with
humility toward one another, hold as a controlling opinion the
surpassing value of each other.
 I take FRONEW as containing both the concepts of `thoughtfulness'
or `attitude' and `setting priority'. It almost seems to carry the
idea of `thoughtful planning'. I can see a project manager doing
FRONHMA in order to correctly structure a project.
 I think the word picture here is that of harmony reaching out its
hand and grabbing hold of oneness and lifting it up and displaying it
as something very important. Kind of like a competitor holding up the
"The first one last wins."
"A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth."
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 - 15:36:59 EDT