From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Oct 14 2001 - 23:48:16 EDT
At 4:25 PM -0500 10/14/01, Steven Lo Vullo wrote:
>In Rom 5.8 the Gramcord text of Accordance tags hOTI as a subordinating
>causal conjunction. But it seems more appropriate to take it as a nominal
>conjunction introducing a clause in apposition to AGAPHN. Which do you think
>is correct? Or are there other possibilities?
Text: SUNISTHSIN DE THN hEAUTOU AGAPHN EIS hHMAS hO QEOS, hOTI ETI
hAMARTWLWN ONTWN hHMWN CRISTOS hUPER hHMWN APEQANEN.
I've read Harold's response to this and I agree with his affirmation of the
tagging of hOTI as causal; it seems to me very much like a Latin QUOD
introducing an explanatory clause with the sense, "the fact being that ..."
= "inasmuch as ...". If the clause introduced by hOTI were to be understood
as appositional to AGAPHN as you suggest, Steven, I think it would be
introduced by hHi, i.e. "love whereby/with which ... ." Otherwise, I think
the hOTI clause, if nominal, might have to be linked to the preceding by
something like a TOUTWi which the hOTI would refer back to. I just don't
quite see how the hOTI clause can be appositional to an accusative noun, at
least in this instance.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
Most months: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
email@example.com OR firstname.lastname@example.org
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 - 15:37:09 EDT