Date: Sat Mar 23 2002 - 23:09:36 EST
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 3/23/2002 9:56:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, email@example.com writes:
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR>MONON AXIWS TOU EUAGGELIOU TOU CRISTOU POLITEUESQE, hINA EITE ELQWN KAI IDWN
<BR>hUMAS EITE APWN AKOUW TA PERI hUMWN, hOTI STHKETE EN hENI PNEUMATI, MIAi
<BR>YUCHi SUNAQLOUNTES THi PISTEI TOU EUAGGELIOU
<BR>While I understood (though disagreed with) Manolis Nikolaou's position, I'm
<BR>afraid I still do not understand yours. You seem to be construing the hOTI
<BR>clause with POLITEUESQE, as a subordinate result clause. Manolis understood
<BR>that in order to construe AKOUW with APWN, there must be an elliptical
<BR>subjunctive verb for the hINA clause to function as a purpose clause. He
<BR>chose GNW as the elliptical verb, and understood the hOTI clause as the
<BR>object of GNW. In this case, the correlative clauses would be subordinate to
<BR>the elliptical GNW as well. It seems to me that if we eliminate AKOUW as the
<BR>subjunctive verb with hINA in the purpose clause, this is the route we must
<BR>follow. The way you seem to have construed the hOTI clause leaves us without
<BR>a purpose clause at all, since, in the end, there never is a subjunctive
<BR>verb to construe with hINA, explicit or implied. If hINA introduces a
<BR>purpose clause, and if the correlative clauses (EITE ... EITE) are
<BR>"parenthetical," and if hOTI introduces a result clause, what constitutes
<BR>the purpose clause? hINA alone? We certainly couldn't construe the hOTI
<BR>clause directly with hINA. Then we would have hINA ... hOTI, an impossible
<BR>construction. The correlative clauses are subordinate, and cannot in any
<BR>intelligible way form a purpose clause with hINA.
<BR>Let me translate so that my meaning might be clearer.
<BR>Only live worthy of the gospel of Christ so that, whether coming and seeing you or being absent I hear concerning you, that you stand in one spirit laboring together with one mind in the faith of the gospel . . .
<BR>Does this follow the nice neat categories of Greek grammar? No. Are we to contend that Paul and others only wrote "correct" Greek? I think not. I think that sometimes Paul got carried away with thoughts that popped into his mind. In such situations he may have forgotten his Strunk & White. It would be a mistake to insist that every sentence in the NT be grammatically correct.
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org]<BR>
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com<BR>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:21 EDT