Skip to content

Matthew 1:19

/////////////////////////////////////////// New Testament Re: λάθρᾳ in Matt 1:19

Posted: 10 Apr 2012 04:42 AM PDT http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bgreek/~3/ntKcQGESi0g/viewtopic.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

Dear Stephen,

How does thinking privately about divorcing Mary correspond with his unwillingness to put her to shame? Would a private decision lessen the public shame of the divorce? I don’t think so. Perhaps this context is the primary reason why, as far as I know, no major interpreter has ever construed λαθρα with εβολουθη.

Sincerely,

Jonathan C. Borland Statistics: Posted by jonathan.borland — April 10th, 2012, 7:42 am

/////////////////////////////////////////// Syntax and Grammar Re: The Instantaneous Imperfect???

Posted: 10 Apr 2012 12:41 AM PDT http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bgreek/~3/40Sta9xcR4A/viewtopic.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

MAubrey wrote: The segmentation of the text isn’t a reason. It’s a result. The imperfective nature of the verb allows for the pragmatic (usage) effect of text segmentation. It’s the closest you’re going to get a linguist to talk about style.

How’s that possible? Are you saying that a writer chooses the imperfect (over historical present or possibly aorist) for no reason, and it just happens to segmentate the text logically? Statistics: Posted by Eeli Kaikkonen — April 10th, 2012, 3:41 am

/////////////////////////////////////////// Syntax and Grammar Re: The Instantaneous Imperfect???

Posted: 09 Apr 2012 10:18 PM PDT http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/bgreek/~3/k26byQshfg4/viewtopic.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

David Lim wrote: MAubrey wrote:But, then, if that’s the case, I still have absolutely no idea why your Exodus example is at all relevant since it appears in a context that is clearly iterative. Conversely, these examples that appear in the middle of direct speech are not clearly iterative or continuous. Steve (and Levinsohn) are simply providing an arguing that demonstrates that they are.

I think we are talking about two different things. Indeed Steve and I are both saying that all imperfect verbs are really imperfective, but I am talking about the reason he gives for its function.

Ah! Gotcha. Well, the answer is that Steve isn’t giving a reason. The segmentation of the text isn’t a reason. It’s a result. The imperfective nature of the verb allows for the pragmatic (usage) effect of text segmentation. It’s the closest you’re going to get a linguist to talk about style. Statistics: Posted by MAubrey — April 10th, 2012, 1:18 am