I can also see how something like the τὸ μύρον could be described as εὔωδες, (or κόπρος could be δυσώδης) when it is described adjectivally in itself, not in terms of the effect it can have (i.e. the smell it gives off). But, however, how does an abstract noun like εὐωδία (or δυσωδία) give off a smell? It has come up in Ephesians 5:2, (also in Philippians 4:18 and the LXX)John 12:3 wrote:ἡ δὲ οἰκία ἐπληρώθη ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς τοῦ μύρου.
It doesn't seem to fit the previous paraphrase pattern, because it is the θυσία that has the smell, i.e. θυσία ἐκπέμπει ὀσμήν, and the ὀσμή has the quality of εὐωδία (ἡ ὀσμὴ ἔχει (/ ... ἔχουσαν) τὴν ἰδιότητα τῆς εὐωδίας). Why is that constructed with a genitive?Ephesians 5:2 wrote:ὁ χριστὸς ... παρέδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν τῷ θεῷ εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας.
———
Another thing... Do I understand correctly that as a general tendency in meaning patterns verbs like εὐωδεῖν (or δυσωδεῖν) mean have a sweet (or foul, bad) smell - like when you put your nose to them (i.e. like σκόρδον δύσωδες ἐστιν), while a verb like εὐωδιάζειν means the thing causes a sweet smell in the area around them (i.e. like κεκαρυκευμένον ὀπτὸν ἄρνειον κρέας ὀριγάνῳ καὶ δενδρολιβάνῳ καὶ κυμίνῳ καὶ σελίνῳ καὶ πιπέριδι κοκκίνῳ καὶ πιπέριδι καὶ κρομύῳ καὶ σκόρδῳ καὶ ἡδυόσμῳ καὶ πιπερορίζῃ ἐκπέμπει ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας)? Or is that too simple a delineation?
[BTW: On a (slightly) related point, in the Modern idiom at least, words related to / derived from βρῶμος (cf. Job 6:7) are in more everyday usage than a literary word like ὀσμή. Is that a register distinction that can be traced to the Hellenistic period?]