From: Stephen C. Carlson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Sep 05 2001 - 09:06:21 EDT
At 12:57 AM 9/5/2001 -0500, Steven R. Lo Vullo wrote:
>But if parenthetic, wouldn't it have been more natural to express this in a
>genitive absolute clause with OUSHS as the participle, in order to
>distinguish SARRA from the subject of the main clause?
Actually, some MSS witnesses of Heb 11:11 have done this, by
reading OUSA after STEIRA (P 075 104 256 263 365 436 459 1319
1573 1912 2127 L597 arm eth).
>May this be one of
>the reasons some have taken the Semitic route? I haven't been able to read
>the reasons given for the Semitic proposition, so I'm not sure what the
>arguments for it are.
It's just that Hebrew tends to use coordinating clauses (parataxis), where
good Greek prefers subordinating clauses (hypotaxis). That's all
really. You see this in Heb 1:5, which is a quotation from the LXX.
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:email@example.com
Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
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 - 15:37:06 EDT