From: c stirling bartholomew (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Feb 23 2002 - 02:01:15 EST
> Fri, 22 Feb 2002 22:39:11 EST
> Mt 15.27
MATT. 15:27 H DE EIPEN: NAI KURIE, KAI GAR TA KUNARIA ESQIEI APO TWN YICIWN
TWN PIPTONTWN APO THS TRAPEZHS TWN KURIWN AUTWN.
> Reading this verse, which is given as an exercise to study different uses for
> the conjuctions KAI and GAR, it struck me that ESQHIEI is 3rd singular but
> the subject TA KUNARIA is nominative plural.
> Am I reading this correctly?
Yes, so far you are reading it correct.
>Is this common for a nominative and verb not to
> agree in number, or is there some intended effect from a lack of agreement?
It is common for a NEUTER plural to be the subject of a singular verb.
Nothing is intended by it. The TA KUNARIA may be viewed as a collective if
that makes it easier.
> BTW, I had decided that KAI was to be translated as "even" and GAR was to be
> translated as "now", being understood as a transition word.
> "Yes Lord, now even the dogs eat(s) from the crumbs which fall from the table
> of their master(s)."
> The effect of translating GAR as "now" rather than as "but" or as "yet" seems
> to me to give a sense of this poor woman making something of a object lesson
> point to Jesus, rather than her engaging in a witty polemic exchange.
Louw and Nida: 89.23 GAR: a marker of cause or reason between events, though
in some contexts the relation is often remote or tenuous . . .
Gn 2:5; 3:5; 4:25; 7:4; 9:5 conjunction used to express cause,
inference, continuation, or to explain; for, since, as (cause) Gn 2:5; for
(explanation) Gn 9:5; gar ... gar ... (introducing several arguments for the
same assertion) Sir 37:13; gar ... gar ... (one cl. confirming another cl.)
Jdt 7:27; with other particles and conjunctions: idou gar for, behold Jdt
5:23; kai gar for 2 Mc 1:19;
So you see that GAR can be used as a logical marker in argumentation. I
suspect that this is how it functions here. Perhaps your gloss "Now" is
suitable for this purpose, I am not certain, Ivar Larsen would better
equipped to handle that question.
> Does the lack of subject/verbal agreement, along with something of a lack of
> agreement between "table" (singular) and "of their masters" (plural) intend
> any hint of uneducation on the part of the woman?
Not at all. The woman is speaking according to the rules. There is no reason
why APO THS TRAPEZHS should agree with TWN KURIWN in any manner. Are you
mixing this up with adjective concord? TWN KURIWN is not an adjective.
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: [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 - 15:37:19 EDT