[b-greek] Re: Axioms of NT Greek Grammar

From: Dave Washburn (dwashbur@nyx.net)
Date: Sun Jun 24 2001 - 20:21:02 EDT

> > Harry,
> > > When I spoke of the," Axioms of NT Greek Grammar" I simply ment the
> > > established rules of NT Greek grammar that's not based on inductive
> > > reasoning. We of course get these rules from modern Greek as well as
> > > sources closer to our time than NT Greek. I guess you could call these
> > > rules, the "Mechanics" of the language.
> >
> > I don't know of any grammars that actually apply rules of modern
> > Greek to NT Greek, but perhaps you've seen some works that I
> > haven't since I've spent the last several years focusing more on
> > Hebrew than on Greek. Nevertheless, modern Greek can only tell
> > us so much, ditto for Byzantine Greek; induction is pretty much
> > the only approach we have available for figuring out the mechanics
> > of a dead language, whether Koine Greek, Palestinian Aramaic,
> > Ugaritic or any other such language. I don't think it's correct to
> > write off something simply because it's arrived at by an inductive
> > approach, because I haven't seen any demonstration that an
> > inductive approach is incorrect.
> >
> > Dave Washburn
> <snip>
> Hi Dave!
> No Dave, I never said that inductive reasoning and statistical analysis
> didn't have a place in NT Greek or in other fields of interest. I only
> indicated that there was no certainty to results of these methods.
> Nows here's the problem Dave. I sit down with someone who doesn't
> believe in God. I then point to Titus 2:13 and say to him Sharps
> rule(actually a theory) proves this to teach that Jesus is God.

I'm not sure where this came from, I certainly didn't bring it up
because I do my best to avoid theology per the rules of the list.
For me the question isn't a theological one, it's purely a
grammatical one.

> now, he would be well within reason to reject that assertion. But
> if I sat down with someone and said the Greek adjective agrees with
> the noun it modifies, why that would be different. I believe Colwell's
> rule(theory) as well a Sharp's rule have too small of a statistical
> data base anyway for any high probability that they may be true. Also
> you might want to take a look at those List articles on breaking
> Sharp's rule.

I've looked at them, Harry. I found them unconvincing. By the
approach you suggest, there's little if anything that we can know
about Koine Greek because we have too small of a statistical
base. I can't buy that. YMMV. That's pretty much everything I
have to say on this topic since it's clear we're getting nowhere. I'm
will to agree to disagree.

Dave Washburn
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."

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 - 15:36:59 EDT