Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitative?

Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitative?

Post by Scott Lawson »

What evidence is there that preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns are qualitative in force? Does qualitative mean the same thing now as it did when Robertson used the term? Robertson pg 794 (j)

Mark 6:35 Ἔρημός ἐστιν ὁ τόπος...

Is Ἔρημός a noun here or an adjective? BDAG refers to it as an adjective but how do we know?

In Greek, adjectives are often substantivized by the use of the definte article but what are the forces that make substantives adjectival?
Scott Lawson
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by David Lim »

Scott Lawson wrote:What evidence is there that preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns are qualitative in force? Does qualitative mean the same thing now as it did when Robertson used the term? Robertson pg 794 (j)

Mark 6:35 Ἔρημός ἐστιν ὁ τόπος...

Is Ἔρημός a noun here or an adjective? BDAG refers to it as an adjective but how do we know?

In Greek, adjectives are often substantivized by the use of the definte article but what are the forces that make substantives adjectival?
In my opinion "ερημος" is always internally an adjective but is often used to refer to such a place. In fact every substantive instance of "ερημος" comes with a definite article, and the instance you mention uses "ερημος" to describe "the place", suggesting that it is not in itself a referent to the place. The way I use to tell is first by the existence of declensions for all the different genders and second by syntax. "ερημον τοπον" just 3 verses above your instance shows clearly that it is adjectival. As for what can make a substantive adjectival, I haven't seen one. Do you have any examples?
δαυιδ λιμ
Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Scott Lawson »

David,

Thank you for your reply.

Philip B. Harner's paper on Qualitative Preverbal Anarthrous Predicate Nouns suggests that clauses as the one in John 1:1 are primarily qualitative in meaning. I've accepted that as accurate but I am now questioning it and searching for an answer as to how the Greek construction actually functions. I was hoping some on this forum may have already researched the subject and will point me to a more refined answer. I appreciate your insights.
Scott Lawson
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3777
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Jonathan Robie »

I think you are talking about this paragraph, in a section on predicate nouns?
Robertson (p. 794) wrote:(j) QUALITATIVE FORCE. This is best brought out in anarthrous nouns. So εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀνδρὶ γυναῖκα ἀπολῦσαι (Mk. 10:2; cf. 1 Cor. 7:10), παραδώσει ἀδελφὸς ἀδελφὸν εἰς θάνατον καὶ πατῆρ τέκνον—τέκνα ἐπὶ γονεῖς (13 : 12), ὡς μονογονοῦς παρὰ πατρός (Jo. 1:14), γονεῦσιν ἀπειθεῖς (Ro. 1:30). Cf. also Eph. 5:23, ἀνήρ ἐστιν κεφαλὴ τῆς γυναικός, ὁ Χριστὸς κεφαλὴ τῆς ἐκκλησίας and αὐτὸς σωτὴρ τοῦ σώματος. In αἱ γυναῖκες τοῖς ἀνδράσιν (verse 24) note the generic article, class and class. See υἱός—πατήρ (Heb. 12:7).
He doesn't really say what he means by "qualitative force", but there is a footnote that refers to page 82 of Moulton's Prolegomena, and I think Moulton is clearer about what he means. (He also refers to page 170 of Winer-Schmiedel, but I did not find that reference as helpful.)

Moulton is not calling these nouns adjectives, but he says there is a strong qualitative force.
Moulton wrote:Qualitative Force in Anarthrous Nouns
The lists of words which specially affect the dropped article will, of course, need careful examination for the individual cases. Thus, when Winer includes πατήρ in his list, and quotes Jn 1:14 and Heb 12:7, we must feel that in both passages the qualitative force is very apparent-“what son is there whom his father, as a father, does not chasten?" (On the former passage see RV margin, and the note in WM 151.) For exegesis, there are few of the finer points of Greek which need more constant attention than this omission of the article when the writer would lay stress on the quality or character of the object. Even the RV misses this badly sometimes, as in Jn 6:68.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Scott Lawson »

Jonathan,

Thanks so much!
Scott Lawson
Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Scott Lawson »

In continuance of my quest for a qualitative concrete substantive, I have come across Smyth's comments under the heading, FORMATION OF WORDS: SUBSTANTIVES: 10 ο, α : see 859. 1,2.

He says;

"b. Many feminine substantives expressing the abstract notion of the adjective are derived from the adjective stems (a few from substantive or verb stems). Many of these denominatives express QUALITY, cp. Eng. -ness, -hood."

What does he mean by "substantives expressing the abstract notion of the adjective"?
Smyth's comments are under the subheading at 840. NAMES OF ACTIONS AND ABSTRACT SUBSTANTIVES. Does this explain his comments? These would be noncount nouns because of being abstract substantives.
Scott Lawson
Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Scott Lawson »

In my quest for preverbal anarthrous qualitative predicate nouns, I have found a paper by Wallace that asserts that the object-complement of certain double accusative constructions is semantically equivalent to the subject-predicate nominative constructruction. This would seem to open up my search to anarthrous substantives acting as complements...does this seem right?
Scott Lawson
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3777
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Jonathan Robie »

Scott Lawson wrote:In my quest for preverbal anarthrous qualitative predicate nouns, I have found a paper by Wallace that asserts that the object-complement of certain double accusative constructions is semantically equivalent to the subject-predicate nominative constructruction. This would seem to open up my search to anarthrous substantives acting as complements...does this seem right?
Is the paper online? Can you give some examples from the paper?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Scott Lawson
Posts: 363
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by Scott Lawson »

Jonathan Robie wrote:Is the paper online? Can you give some examples from the paper?
Yes it is.: http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hil ... cs-gtj.doc

On page 102 Wallace wrote:


"The following lines of evidence establish, I believe, that the
object-complement construction is semantically equivalent to ;the
subject-predicate nominative construction. (1) By definition, both the
complement and the predicate nominative make an assertion about
.another noun in the same case. (2) The terms used to describe the
object-complement construction in most grammars strongly suggest
such semantic equivalence. As the reader will recall, it was mentioned
earlier that many of the major grammars call this construction an
object and predicate accusative construction.48 And Winer goes so far
as to call the construction an "accusative of subject and predicate
[italics mine]."49 (3) The infinitive of the copula occasionally occurs
in an object-complement construction, linking this construction to the
subject-predicate nominative construction semantically.50 (4) Many
of the verbs which take an object-complement also take a declara-
tive/recitative o!ti clause (and even, occasionally, some other use of o!ti
which involves its own subject-predicate nominative clause) in which
there is a subject-predicate nominative construction.51 (5) Occasion-
ally, the manuscripts even vacillate between an object-complement
construction and a subject-predicate nominative construction in a o!ti
clause,52 illustrating that the scribes probably considered the two con-
structions to be semantically equivalent. (6) As several grammars
point out, when a verb which takes an object-complement construc-
tion in the active is transformed into a passive, the object becomes
the nominative subject and the complement becomes the predicate

48 See the definition of terms above and n. 8.
49 Winer, Treatise, 285.
50 Cf. Matt 16:13; Mark 8:27, 29; Luke 9:20; 20:41; 23:2; Acts 5:36; 8:9; 16:5; 17:7; 19.35 (in D), 20.6, 28.6, Rom 1.22, 14.14, 15.8, 16.19, I Cor 7.7, 26, 32, 10.20, 2 Cor
11:16; Phil 3:8, etc.
51 Cf. John 4: 19; 10:34-36 (though a slightly different situation here); 20:31; Matt
21:26-Mark 11:32; Acts 16:3; Rom 8:18; Phil 2:11; etc.
52 Cf. Rom 10:9 (o[mologh<s^j . . . ku<rion ]Ihsou?n in most manuscripts; o[molo-
gh<s^j . . . o!ti ku<rioj ]Ihsou?j in B). We might add here that the biblical authors
occasionally vacillate between the two constructions. For example, Mark 11:32 has a
mixed construction (object-o!ti-predlcate nominative: ei#xon to>n ]Iwa<nnhn o@ntwj o!ti
profh<thj h#n) which parallels the object-complement in Matt 21:26 (w[j profh<thn
e@xousin to>n ]Iwa<nnhn). In John 10:34-35 there are parallel thoughts in which one is an
object-complement and the other is direct discourse (though not directly. introduced by
a recitative (o!ti: o!ti e]gw> ei#pa: qeoi< e]ste . . . ei] e]kei<nouj ei#pen qeou>j. Notice also v 36 in
which the thought is carried on: ui[o>j tou? qeou? ei]mi). Cf. also Rom 9:25 and I Pet 2: 10
for a similar parallel."
Scott Lawson
GlennDean
Posts: 77
Joined: March 3rd, 2012, 11:06 pm

Re: Preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns; are they qualitati

Post by GlennDean »

I'm not sure if I'm on the right track (in regards to your question), but if you're looking for examples of preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns that are qualitative and an example that is definite, here they are (taken from Wallace):

Example of preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns that is qualitative:

ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο (p 264 Wallace) "The word became flesh"

Example of preverbal anarthrous predicate nouns that is definite: John 1:1

Coldwell's Rule might be of interest, which states (paraphrasing from Wallace p. 257):
Part A) a definite preverbal predicate nouns is 87% of the time anarthrous
Part B) a preverbal anarthrous predicate noun need not be indefinite or qualitative, context determines it's type (for example John 1:1)

Glenn
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”