Luke 24:33

masc/feminine plural participle richard smith rbsads at aol.com
Wed Apr 10 19:24:46 EDT 2002

 

Kata masc/feminine plural participle Someone had suggested that the fellow walker with Cleopas on the road toEmmaus might be Cleopas’ wife. The surmise was based on John 19:25.My question concerns whether the masculine participle in Luke 24:33 wouldallow the possibility for the antecedents to be husband and wife. Or woulda male and female require a neuter modifier?Lk 24:33 KAI ANASTANTES AUTHi THi hWRA hUPESTREYAN EIS IEROUSALHMThanks,Richard SmithChattanooga, TN

 

Katamasc/feminine plural participle

masc/feminine plural participle Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Apr 10 19:42:04 EDT 2002

 

masc/feminine plural participle masc/feminine plural participle At 7:24 PM -0400 4/10/02, richard smith wrote:>Someone had suggested that the fellow walker with Cleopas on the road to>Emmaus might be Cleopas’ wife. The surmise was based on John 19:25.> >My question concerns whether the masculine participle in Luke 24:33 would>allow the possibility for the antecedents to be husband and wife. Or would>a male and female require a neuter modifier?> >Lk 24:33 KAI ANASTANTES AUTHi THi hWRA hUPESTREYAN EIS IEROUSALHMI think the participle, though masculine in form, could be used of a manand a woman together, but it seems to me that this is quite hypothetical. Iwouldn’t base any guesses on such an understanding of the fellow walker inLk 24:33 on a Johannine text such as that, although, as I’ve said already,there’s nothing grammatically in the participle that rules that possibilityout.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

 

masc/feminine plural participlemasc/feminine plural participle

masc/feminine plural participle Kevin W. Woodruff cierpke at prodigy.net
Wed Apr 10 20:54:53 EDT 2002

 

masc/feminine plural participle Lk 24.17, PAROIKEW Some times a plural masculine substantive can cover both male and femalesconsidered together as a group, for example Luke 2:41 hOI GONEIS.Kevin W. WoodruffChattanooga, TNAt 07:24 PM 4/10/02 -0400, you wrote:>Someone had suggested that the fellow walker with Cleopas on the road to>Emmaus might be Cleopas’ wife. The surmise was based on John 19:25.> >My question concerns whether the masculine participle in Luke 24:33 would>allow the possibility for the antecedents to be husband and wife. Or would>a male and female require a neuter modifier?> >Lk 24:33 KAI ANASTANTES AUTHi THi hWRA hUPESTREYAN EIS IEROUSALHM> >Thanks,> >Richard Smith>Chattanooga, TN> >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/>You are currently subscribed to as: [cierpke at prodigy.net]>To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > > Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div.Library Director/Reference LibrarianProfessor of New Testament GreekCierpke Memorial LibraryTennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary1815 Union Ave.Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404United States of America423/493-4252 (office)423/698-9447 (home)423/493-4497 (FAX)Cierpke at prodigy.net (preferred)kwoodruf at utk.edu (alternate)http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm

 

masc/feminine plural participleLk 24.17, PAROIKEW

masc/feminine plural participle sandra hack polaski shpolaski at btsr.edu
Thu Apr 11 11:13:49 EDT 2002

 

Lluke 24:15 Lluke 24:15 I’ve argued for some time that the travelers to Emmaus are Cleopas and hiswife, but not primarily because of the “wife of Clopas” mentioned in John.Rather, the logic of the Lukan story itself seems to me to fit the travelersbeing a married couple going home and inviting the fellow-traveler intotheir home. The Greek does not dictate this, of course; but it makes itpossible, and the story is least convoluted if understood this way.–Sandra Hack Polaski> —–Original Message—–> From: Biblical Greek digest [mailto: at franklin.oit.unc.edu]> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:00 AM> To: digest recipients> Subject: Re: masc/feminine plural participle> From: “Kevin W. Woodruff” <cierpke at prodigy.net>> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:54:53 -0400> X-Message-Number: 11> > Some times a plural masculine substantive can cover both male > and females> considered together as a group, for example Luke 2:41 hOI GONEIS.> > Kevin W. Woodruff> Chattanooga, TN> > At 07:24 PM 4/10/02 -0400, you wrote:> >Someone had suggested that the fellow walker with Cleopas on > the road to> >Emmaus might be Cleopas’ wife. The surmise was based on John 19:25.> >> >My question concerns whether the masculine participle in > Luke 24:33 would> >allow the possibility for the antecedents to be husband and > wife. Or would> >a male and female require a neuter modifier?> >> >Lk 24:33 KAI ANASTANTES AUTHi THi hWRA hUPESTREYAN EIS IEROUSALHM> >> >Thanks,> >> >Richard Smith> >Chattanooga, TN> >> >—>>

 

Lluke 24:15Lluke 24:15

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>