[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