Col 1:4 Blahoslav Èíèel cbmost at iol.cz
Tue Sep 14 05:15:00 εδτ 1999
1 Cor 14:34 — λαλειν 1 Cor 14:34 — λαλειν God bless you all.ακουσαντεσ θν πιστιν hUMWN… και θν αγαφν… (Col 1:4)Usually it is translated “…we heard *of* your faith… and of your love” (or:*about*), but ι couldn’t find in my grammar handbooks why the preposition isadded. (May be ι 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 — λαλειν
Col 1:4 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Sep 14 07:06:22 εδτ 1999
1 Cor 14:34 — λαλειν θεοθσ-Col 2:9 At 11:15 αμ +0200 9/14/99, Blahoslav »ÌËel wrote:>God bless you all.> >ακουσαντεσ θν πιστιν hUMWN… και θν αγαφν… (Col 1:4)> >Usually it is translated “…we heard *of* your faith… and of your love”>(or:>*about*), but ι couldn’t find in my grammar handbooks why the preposition is>added. (May be ι 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?ακουω takes a genitive of the περσονσ heard or listened to, an accusativeof the σουνδ or ινφορματιον apprehended when heard. ι think this is amatter of “target-language” idiom; in English we can say “ι heard the news”but we don’t say “ι heard your arrival in the city”–rather we say, “Iheard αβουτ your arrival in the city.” ι 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 ω. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, μο, υσα 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, μο 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
1 Cor 14:34 — λαλεινθεοθσ-Col 2:9
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? William ε. Turner Jr. weturner777 at hotmail.com
Tue May 27 00:24:32 εδτ 2003
[] More Post-ντ Greek Stuff [] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? :ι am fresh out of second year Greek and ι am working through Colossians with the hopes of translation and diagramming. My questions deal with Colossians 1:4.First, is θν πιστιν and θν αγαφν a double accusative of the participle ακουσαντεσ? Secondly, in regards to θν αγαφν hHN εξετε is this another double accusative with θν αγαφν 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 ι 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 ι would be able to reference in comparing notes and checking my choices (often guesses) of the syntax? ι am looking for something more comprehensive than Wallace’s γγββ. 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-ντ Greek Stuff[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives?
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue May 27 06:27:25 εδτ 2003
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives? [] Latin/λχχ transl. At 12:24 αμ -0400 5/27/03, William ε. Turner Jr. wrote:>:> >ι am fresh out of second year Greek and ι 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:… ακουσαντεσ θν πιστιν hUMWN εν CRISTWi ιησου και θν αγαφν hHN εξετεεισ παντασ τουσ hAGIOUS …>First, is θν πιστιν and θν αγαφν a double accusative of the participle>ακουσαντεσ?Both are objects of the participle ακουσαντεσ, but the term “doubleaccusative” usually is used the two accusatives are both part of the samepredicate expression, e.g., ερωθσαμεν αυτουσ τα ερωθματα ταυτα, “we askedthem these questions”–an accusative of the person and an accusative of thething.>Secondly, in regards to θν αγαφν hHN εξετε is this another double>accusative with θν αγαφν 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 ι 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 εξετε in a subordinate relative clause, while θν AGAPHNis object of the participle ακουσαντεσ.>Lastly, in determining the syntax of various passages is there any tool>which ι would be able to reference in comparing notes and checking my>choices (often guesses) of the syntax? ι am looking for something more>comprehensive than Wallace’s γγββ. Besides parsing help is this what>Zerwick and Grosvenor provides?ι 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, ι think, the first step. Others may have somemore specific advice to offer.– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] Colossians 1:4 Double Accusatives?[] Latin/λχχ transl.