Col 1:4 Blahoslav Èíèel cbmost at iol.cz
Tue Sep 14 05:15:00 EDT 1999
1 Cor 14:34 — LALEIN 1 Cor 14:34 — LALEIN God bless you all.AKOUSANTES THN PISTIN hUMWN… KAI THN AGAPHN… (Col 1:4)Usually it is translated “…we heard *of* your faith… and of your love” (or:*about*), but I couldn’t find in my grammar handbooks why the preposition isadded. (May be I missed it.)It is only because to say “… we heard your faith…and your love” is at leastunusual, or there is some grammatical reason to do it?Thanks,Blahopastor, Most, Czech rep.
1 Cor 14:34 — LALEIN1 Cor 14:34 — LALEIN
Col 1:4 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Sep 14 07:06:22 EDT 1999
1 Cor 14:34 — LALEIN QEOTHS-Col 2:9 At 11:15 AM +0200 9/14/99, Blahoslav »ÌËel wrote:>God bless you all.> >AKOUSANTES THN PISTIN hUMWN… KAI THN AGAPHN… (Col 1:4)> >Usually it is translated “…we heard *of* your faith… and of your love”>(or:>*about*), but I couldn’t find in my grammar handbooks why the preposition is>added. (May be I missed it.)> >It is only because to say “… we heard your faith…and your love” is at>least>unusual, or there is some grammatical reason to do it?AKOUW takes a genitive of the PERSONS heard or listened to, an accusativeof the SOUND or INFORMATION apprehended when heard. I think this is amatter of “target-language” idiom; in English we can say “I heard the news”but we don’t say “I heard your arrival in the city”–rather we say, “Iheard ABOUT your arrival in the city.” I think that will apply to whatyou’re noting about the translation of Col 1:4 above. Differences inidiomatic usage between the original language and the target languageaccount for an inordinate number of the problems we have in understandingGreek texts–or, for that matter–texts in other languages alien to us.This is so obvious that we often fail to take it sufficiently into accountwhen we have difficulties with a Greek text.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
1 Cor 14:34 — LALEINQEOTHS-Col 2:9
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? William E. Turner Jr. weturner777 at hotmail.com
Tue May 27 00:24:32 EDT 2003
[] More Post-NT Greek Stuff [] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? :I am fresh out of second year Greek and I am working through Colossians with the hopes of translation and diagramming. My questions deal with Colossians 1:4.First, is THN PISTIN and THN AGAPHN a double accusative of the participle AKOUSANTES? Secondly, in regards to THN AGAPHN hHN ECETE is this another double accusative with THN AGAPHN functioning as the object and then hHN functioning as the complement or should it be seen as a predicate accusative? Wallace seems to rule out a predicate accusative since he states that they must be joined by either an equative participle or infinitive (190-192). Or am I completely wrong on both accounts? In short, how does this passage function syntactically?Lastly, in determining the syntax of various passages is there any tool which I would be able to reference in comparing notes and checking my choices (often guesses) of the syntax? I am looking for something more comprehensive than Wallace’s GGBB. Besides parsing help is this what Zerwick and Grosvenor provides?Your thoughts (and corrections) would be greatly appreciated,Will Turnerweturner777 at hotmail.com
[] More Post-NT Greek Stuff[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives?
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue May 27 06:27:25 EDT 2003
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? [] Latin/LXX transl. At 12:24 AM -0400 5/27/03, William E. Turner Jr. wrote:>:> >I am fresh out of second year Greek and I am working through Colossians>with the hopes of translation and diagramming. My questions deal with>Colossians 1:4.It would help to have the whole verse transcribed for the sake of context:… AKOUSANTES THN PISTIN hUMWN EN CRISTWi IHSOU KAI THN AGAPHN hHN ECETEEIS PANTAS TOUS hAGIOUS …>First, is THN PISTIN and THN AGAPHN a double accusative of the participle>AKOUSANTES?Both are objects of the participle AKOUSANTES, but the term “doubleaccusative” usually is used the two accusatives are both part of the samepredicate expression, e.g., ERWTHSAMEN AUTOUS TA ERWTHMATA TAUTA, “we askedthem these questions”–an accusative of the person and an accusative of thething.>Secondly, in regards to THN AGAPHN hHN ECETE is this another double>accusative with THN AGAPHN functioning as the object and then hHN>functioning as the complement or should it be seen as a predicate>accusative? Wallace seems to rule out a predicate accusative since he>states that they must be joined by either an equative participle or>infinitive (190-192). Or am I completely wrong on both accounts? In>short, how does this passage function syntactically?In this instance the accusative hHN of the relative pronoun functions asobject of the verb ECETE in a subordinate relative clause, while THN AGAPHNis object of the participle AKOUSANTES.>Lastly, in determining the syntax of various passages is there any tool>which I would be able to reference in comparing notes and checking my>choices (often guesses) of the syntax? I am looking for something more>comprehensive than Wallace’s GGBB. Besides parsing help is this what>Zerwick and Grosvenor provides?I think what you need to do first (until you recognize without thinking howthe clauses fit together) is to analyze sentences at the clause level andrelate them to each other. You may find it helpful to diagram sentences orto survey some of the diagramming materials available on-line; at any rate,distinguishing clauses and key elements of the subjects and predicates atthe clause level has to be, I think, the first step. Others may have somemore specific advice to offer.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives?[] Latin/LXX transl.