From: Larsendon@aol.com
Date: Tue Feb 23 1999 - 23:44:11 EST
Greetings! I note that Matthew uses a participle in Mt.27:35 where Mark (and
Luke and John) use a verb in the indicative mood. Mt.27:35 reads:
STAURWSANTES DE AUTON DIEMERISANTO TA hIMATIA AUTOU. The Marcan parallel
(Mk.15:24) uses an historical present: KAI STAUROUSIN AUTON KAI DIAMERIZONTAI
TA hIMATIA AUTOU. Both Luke and John use the aorist ESTAURWSAN. I take
Matthew's construction as a participle of attendant circumstance, and would
translate "And they crucified him and they divided his garments," rather than
treating the participle adverbially: "And after having crucified him, they
divided his garments." In either approach, Matthew's participle seems to me
to carry a weaker force than the finite verb Mark employs. Matthew's
construction seems weaker than Mark's - and this, at a crucial (sorry) moment
in the passion narrative. I accept that Matthew had Mark in front of him. So
why the weaker expression? Or is this attendant circumstance participle a
Matthean trait?
Don Larsen
Hartford, CT
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:17 EDT