[B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22

Richard Lindeman oblchurch at msn.com
Sun Mar 14 13:47:10 EDT 2010


Thanks Carl,

I was not intending to be serious with the term "adverbective".
I suppose it was my dry sense of humor combined with a lack of knowing the 
correct terminology on my part.

Rich Lindeman

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Carl Conrad" <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 8:20 AM

> On Mar 14, 2010, at 8:19 AM, Richard Lindeman wrote:
>> 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?
>
> An "adverbective"? And we speak of the off-the-wall neo-grammatical 
> coinages of academic linguists?
> The usual term for the function KEFALHN serves in conjunction with EDWKEN 
> AUTON
> is "predicate accusative." Academic linguists might prefer to call it an 
> "object complement."
>
> Here'an example that I found at 
> http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/objects.htm
> =====
> An object complement follows and modifies or refers to a direct object. It 
> can be a noun or adjective or any word acting as a noun or adjective.
> • The convention named Dogbreath Vice President to keep him happy. (The 
> noun "Vice President" complements the direct object "Dogbreath"; the 
> adjective "happy" complements the object "him.")
> • The clown got the children too excited. (The participle "excited" 
> complements the object "children.")
> ======
>
 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list