Stephen Carlson wrote:Some of these aren't clausal clitics (e.g. John 9:13), so Wackernagel's Law wouldn't apply.
I guess that you mean that it is used adjectivally, and so doesn't affect the overal sense of the clause, but only the noun that it is with.
But how does that distincition of clausal v. (my suggestion of) adjectival work in Gal 1:13 Ἠκούσατε γὰρ τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν ποτε ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ, where on the face of it ποτέ is with a noun, but my gut tells me it is with the verb ἀναστρέφειν which has been nominalised for the sake of sentence construction. Should one go with what one percieves to be the underlying construction when deternining whether the clitic is clausal or not, or just with the sentence we have before us?
Stephen Carlson wrote:Gal 1:23a μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει,
Gal 1:23b μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν | ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει,
Stephen Carlson wrote:not in the usual position (Ὁ διώκων ποτὲ ἡμᾶς)
Looking at your alternative suggestions a and b here for our verse Galatians 1:23, you seem to be suggesting that to conform to Wackernagel's rule there ought to be either a change in accentuation or a change in punctuation, viz.
Gal 1:23a μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτέ νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει,
Gal 1:23b μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν, ἥν ποτέ ἐπόρθει,
If I haven't reversed your meaning.
With regard to the "usual position" statement, I understand that that statement was made by you to explain where the Wackernagel is, not to suggest that that is where you think it ought to be - you are decidedly more descriptivist about what is in the Greek, than I - being prescriptivist (and sometimes almost to the point of proscriptivist) - am in my handling of the text. But perhaps we need to consider that the personal pronoun has a stronger attraction to the verb than perhaps the Wackernagel position. What do you think? Can the Wackernagel position be displaced / delayed by one in the case of a pronominal object? If that were to be argued then perhaps your original hypothesis that the (first) ποτέ in Galatians 1:23 may be orthotonic, could be invalid. Is there any thinking on the balance between attraction of object pronoun to the verb v. the Wackernagel position?