I tend to mark up my electronic NA28 and BDAG in Olive Tree with interesting quotes from journal articles or books. Here is one I came across today from when I read Albuquerque in his Book Presupposition and [e]Motion pg 68-69 that I am really not convinced by
Albuquerque, Roque N.. Presupposition and [E]motion: The Upgraded Function and the Semantics of the Participle in the New Testament . Peter Lang. Kindle Edition.The analysis of these clauses must include the largest discourse spectrum to grasp a fair understanding of the use of the participles in these passages. All three evangelists present the authority of the exalted Son of God as the main point in this discourse involving a healing story. The paralytic healing is used as a means to show the authority of the Son of Man to forgive sins. The verb of perception (εἰδῆτε) places the focus of all these parallel passages (“in order to know”) on the fact that Jesus Christ has the authority to forgive, something that only the true God has. The complement of the primary clause comes with a complex clause having one subordinate clause followed by one embedded clause with the infinitive. The perception of “forgiving sins” cannot be directly perceived by the readers. They need to reflect about it, and decide if they would take as a “true proposition” or not. The use of the infinitive indicates that they did not accept the utterance of forgiveness as a true proposition, so something else would be necessary to make such an assumption into a real accepted proposition. ←68 | 69→ The movement from an abstract reflective world with the infinitive changes into the author’s assessment in the direct discourse uttered by Jesus. From a presuppositional world (infinitive), a material process is described by a combination of imperatives ἔγειρε καὶ ἆρον … καὶ περιπάτει (three imperatives in Mark 2:9, and two imperatives ἔγειρε … καὶ περιπάτει in both Matthew 9:5, and Luke 5:23. The direct discourse unfolds by showing that what Jesus compares is an indirect perception with a direct grasp of his powerful ministry. After asking what is the easiest, Jesus moves on to address the paralytic with another three imperatives in the book of Mark (2:11) ἔγειρε ἆρον … καὶ ὕπαγε.
His argument is based off an opposition at the level of the verb between mood (+attitude) and infinitives/participles -attitude/+presupposition. He then divides the participles and infinitives with participles being +factive and infinitives being -factive
With this analysis he argues that the author invites the reader to participate in the construction of the meaning and decide whether they accept it as true or not. This invitation to participate is based off the -attitude element of infinitives here, with the lack of person marking in the infinitive contributing to this.
I would just read this as a complementary infinitive to indicate the content of "εἰδῆτε" and am not entirely sure what else he could have used. A participle doesnt seem like it would fit here, so that removes an element of choice in the =factive - factive opposition. Given a lack of choice between the two (unless I am wrong), I can't see how this can be part of the author's meaning