[B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22

Richard Lindeman oblchurch at msn.com
Sun Mar 14 08:19:58 EDT 2010


John:

So then what you are saying is that KEFALHN is in fact a direct object noun 
in the accusative, second direct object(general object) in relationship to 
the verb EDWKEN.  But in relationship to the phrase AUTON EDWKEN... 
KEFALHN functions differently:  no longer as a noun, but as an adverbective? 
(Not quite, but almost an adverb in relationship to EDWKEN) and (Not quite, 
but almost an adjective in relationship to the noun AUTOS or not quite, but 
almost in apposition to KEFALHN). Does that sound right?

Rich Lindeman

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:55:59 +0800
> From: John Sanders <john.franklin.sanders at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
>
> Much water has passed under the bridge for this thread, but if I may, I
> would like to respond anyway.  It is not that I have anything significant 
> to
> add, but rather that going through the exercise of explaining a Greek 
> phrase
> is in itself useful, at least for me.  I will make my presentation 
> slightly
> different than what has been offered so far.  That is, I will begin with 
> the
> first word in the sentence and continue in a linear fashion, attempting to
> replicate how I attempt to read Greek.
>
> The sentence: ...AUTON EDWKEN KEFALHN hUPER PANTA THi EKKLHSIAi.
>
> AUTON is an ANTWUMIAI (antonym) referencing back to INSOU (see verse 17). 
> I
> see two roles that it plays in this phrase.  One is the role as topic 
> (also
> referred to as theme, some may call this old information others perhaps 
> that
> it is emphatic).  Japanese indicates the topic with a grammatical 
> particle,
> Greek and English do not (digression-well maybe, I suspect that the post
> positive particles in a general sense indicate topic, for instance, the
> particle DE indicates topic in the sense that the preceding word or phrase
> is the topic on which the discourse is being continued with).  It is just
> position that indicates it being topic, if a topic is indicated at all. 
> But
> Greek does mark grammatically the PTWSIS (case).  Here, ANTON is in the
> AITIATIKH PTWSIS (accusative case).  We have some general expectations of
> what to expect from this case, the specific we will not know until the 
> rest
> of the phrase is given, but we do have a general expectation.
>
> This brings us to the next word, EDWKEN.  Before we continue, we should
> spend some time with this word.  DOUNAI, DIDONAI (to give, to be giving) 
> has
> some peculiarities that are not shared by most other verbs.  Let me
> reference H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar, Textkit edition, section 1450a. 
> ?The
> dative derives its name (? ?????? ?????? (H DOTIKH PTWSIS), casus datiuus)
> from the use with ??????? (DIDONAI) (1469).
>
> Section 1469 reads in part, ?Many verbs take the dative as the indirect
> object together with an accusative as the direct object.?
>
> As Elizabeth has pointed out, BDAG indicates that two nouns in AITIATIKH
> PTWSIS (accusative case) are possible.  (I would venture that one of these
> two nouns will represent specific and the other a general or class, i.e., 
> he
> appointed her ambassador, I gave the photo as a memento,  she gave the 
> money
> as a donation, etc.).  One can potentially expect three complements to the
> verb DOUNAI, DIDONAI: two in AITIATIKH PTWSIS and one in DOTIKH PTWSIS.
>
> Returning back to the analysis, we have EDWKEN which gives us the subject,
> AUTOS who is DOUNAI the object, AUTON.  This is sufficient information to
> answer the question TINA EDWKEN?
>
> The next word is KEFALHN.  This is also in the AITIATIKH PTWSIS.  We 
> should
> not be surprised since we know that DOUNAI, DIDONAI can take two objects 
> in
> the AITIATIKH PTWSIS.  hUPER PANTA construes with KEFALHN.  This answers 
> the
> question TI EDWKEN?
>
> DOTIKH PTWSIS can usually be thought of as consisting three general
> subgroups, one set of prepositions will identify the locative subgroup,
> another set of prepositions the instrumentative subgroup, and no
> prepositions indicating the ?true dative?, which some will call the 
> indirect
> object and others the recipient (in koine Greek).  Since there is no
> preposition with THi EKKLHSIAi and DOUNAI can potentially have a DOTIKH
> PTWSIS, we can construe this as the third and DOTIKH complement to EDWKEN.
> This answers the question TINI EDWKEN?
>
> The verb DOUNAI, DIDONAI should, I think, be explained a little more
> carefully than other verbs because of its potential three complements, 
> that
> is there are three dimensions, TINA, TI, and TINI that can identify what 
> is
> the result of DOUNAI, DIDONAI.  This sentence is a beautiful sentence in
> that regard, that is it has all three potential complements.
>
> John Sanders
>
> Suzhou, China
>
 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list