Most translations I'm aware of translate this part of John 9:6 (e.g., NRSV "and spread the mud on the man's eyes") as if the genitive construed with ὀφθαλμούς or, with the same effect (because genitives are not necessary, like English, with body parts) as if it did not exist.John 9:6c wrote:. . . καὶ ἐπέχρισεν αὺτοῦ τὸν πηλὸν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλούς
I doubt that the αὐτοῦ is supposed to be with construed with ὀφθαλμούς because it is positioned syntactically just like a clausal clitic and so has a clausal meaning in some sense. BDF § 473(1) agrees with this analysis, stating "The forward position of the gen. of the pron. often corresponds to the unemphatic Indo-European dativus sympatheticus (Havers 195f.)." So, according to BDF, we have something like an ethical dative, but in the genitive. (The genitive will eventually replace the dative in Modern Greek, and it has been speculated that this construction assisted in that replacement.)
So, what would the clause mean if αὐτοῦ is an "ethical" genitive?
Stephen
P.S. Wallace does not discuss this verse. Robertson thinks the genitive construes with ὀφθαλμούς but in an unusual position.