Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Moon-Ryul Jung moon at saint.soongsil.ac.kr
Sun May 16 22:42:38 EDT 1999
Grammatical errors in Revelation? Grammatical errors in Revelation? Carl, do you mean that >> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR (1)is the same as >> hUPHNTHSEN DE ANHR AUTWi EXELQONTI EPI THN GHN .(2) . .except for the word order?Is the word order in (1) chosen to emphasize EXELQONTI?RespectfullyMoon-Ryul Jung, Assistant Professor,Dept of Computer ScienceSoongsil University, Seoul, Korea
Grammatical errors in Revelation?Grammatical errors in Revelation?
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Moon-Ryul Jung moon at saint.soongsil.ac.kr
Sun May 16 22:42:38 EDT 1999
Grammatical errors in Revelation? Grammatical errors in Revelation? Carl, do you mean that >> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR (1)is the same as >> hUPHNTHSEN DE ANHR AUTWi EXELQONTI EPI THN GHN .(2) . .except for the word order?Is the word order in (1) chosen to emphasize EXELQONTI?RespectfullyMoon-Ryul Jung, Assistant Professor,Dept of Computer ScienceSoongsil University, Seoul, Korea
Grammatical errors in Revelation?Grammatical errors in Revelation?
[] Luke 8:27 Rod Rogers rngrogers at earthlink.net
Thu Jun 28 23:45:56 EDT 2007
[] Luke 5:1 Infinitive of purpose introduced by KAI [] Luke 8:27 I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what ever?Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets the demoniac?One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative Participle Luke 8:27” back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.rod rogersBargersville, In
[] Luke 5:1 Infinitive of purpose introduced by KAI[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Fri Jun 29 02:13:13 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:45 PM, Rod Rogers wrote:> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27.Taking a somewhat different approach while not entirely ignoring your question …LUKE 8:26 KAI KATEPLEUSAN EIS THN CWRAN TWN GERASHNWN, hHTIS ESTIN ANTIPERA THS GALILAIAS. 27 EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS ECWN DAIMONIA KAI CRONWi hIKANWi OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIAi OUK EMENEN ALL’ EN TOIS MNHMASIN.EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN is before the main verb because it is a point of departure (v. Levinsohn:2000). It locates the new scene relative to what came immediately before, the arrival EIS THN CWRAN TWN GERASHNWN. The arrival in v.26 is also a point of departure which locates the demoniac pericope relative to the storm pericope. So Lk 8:26-27a is all staging for the demoniac pericope.EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can point them out.You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS …Note the repetition of AUTW.Elizabeth Kline
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 29 07:35:10 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Greetings, fellow Hoosier. The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would indicate his more immediate origin. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>To: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PMSubject: [] Luke 8:27I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what ever?Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets the demoniac?One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative Participle Luke 8:27” back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.rod rogersBargersville, In— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ ____________________________________________________________________________________TV dinner still cooling? Check out “Tonight’s Picks” on Yahoo! TV.http://tv.yahoo.com/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 29 10:16:25 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the participle as the nearer referent. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.> > The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The > participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main > verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct > regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object > here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it > also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would > indicate his more immediate origin.I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto the shore … “If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can> point them out.This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, who … “There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:> > LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK> THS POLEWS …> > Note the repetition of AUTW.Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> —– Original Message —-> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM> Subject: [] Luke 8:27> > > I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:> > > > EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS > EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA > OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.> > > > I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” > but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with > “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus > himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as > some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what > ever?> > > > Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) > the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. > Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets > the demoniac?> > > > One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that > the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the > MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text > of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t > hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a > certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?> > > > Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so > many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative > Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these > questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you > know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.> > > > rod rogers> > Bargersville, In ____________________________________________________________________________________Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 09:41:57 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.> > The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The > participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main > verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct > regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object > here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it > also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would > indicate his more immediate origin.I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto the shore … “If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can> point them out.This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, who … “There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:> > LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK> THS POLEWS …> > Note the repetition of AUTW.Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> —– Original Message —-> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM> Subject: [] Luke 8:27> > > I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:> > > > EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS > EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA > OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.> > > > I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” > but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with > “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus > himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as > some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what > ever?> > > > Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) > the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. > Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets > the demoniac?> > > > One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that > the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the > MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text > of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t > hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a > certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?> > > > Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so > many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative > Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these > questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you > know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.> > > > rod rogers> > Bargersville, In
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 10:31:55 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of > hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between > ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the > participle as the nearer referent.Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you offer for it’s being dative?Carl> > > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object>> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it>> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would>> indicate his more immediate origin.> > I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto> the shore … “> > If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> > I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>> point them out.> > This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,> who … “> > There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some> influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance> there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>> THS POLEWS …>> >> Note the repetition of AUTW.> > Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS>> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA>> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>> ever?>> >> >> >> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)>> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>> the demoniac?>> >> >> >> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text>> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t>> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a>> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >> rod rogers>> >> Bargersville, In> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Elliot Poe Elliot.Poe at gmail.com
Fri Jun 29 12:18:33 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27-correction Just out of curiosity, George, would you then suggest hUPHNTHSEN has an intransitive meaning?Yours,Elliot PoeGeorge F Somsel wrote:>While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the participle as the nearer referent.> >george>gfsomsel> >Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, >learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, >defend the truth till death.> >– Jan Hus>_________> > > >—– Original Message —->From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > >On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> > > >>Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >>The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The >>participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main >>verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct >>regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object >>here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it >>also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would >>indicate his more immediate origin.>> >> > >I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the >complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The >antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, >and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying >AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto >the shore … “> >If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial >clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is >looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we >will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> >I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > >On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > >>EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>>point them out.>> >> > >This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek >narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s >also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi >saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius >clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our >ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, >who … “> >There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some >influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance >there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> > > >>You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >>LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>THS POLEWS …>> >>Note the repetition of AUTW.>> >> > >Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER >and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might >lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative >absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is >that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here >(EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the >phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author >not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> >Carl W. Conrad>Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > >>—– Original Message —->>From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >>I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >>EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS >>EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA >>OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >>I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” >>but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with >>“Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus >>himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as >>some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what >>ever?>> >> >> >>Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) >>the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. >>Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets >>the demoniac?>> >> >> >>One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that >>the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the >>MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text >>of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t >>hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a >>certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >>Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so >>many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative >>Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these >>questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you >>know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >>rod rogers>> >>Bargersville, In>> >> > > > >____________________________________________________________________________________>Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. >Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.>http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html >—> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > >
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27-correction
[] Luke 8:27 Steve Runge srunge at logos.com
Fri Jun 29 11:55:48 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Carl, It would seem that EXELQONTI AUTWi is accomplishing the same kind of function as a genitive absolute in another context: it is establishing an attendant circumstance or state of affairs, where the subject of the participle is different from the subject of the main clause verb. The difference in subjects necessitates the use of a different case than the nominative, usually the genitive.Here in Luke 8:27, there is a grammatical relation between the subject of the participle and the main clause action, as you and Elizabeth have already pointed out. So it would seem reasonable for the writer to use the appropriate case for the attendant circumstance if it is available. Here, the case is dative. Whether that makes it a dative absolute is another matter. Take a look at some other examples where this type of relation is present between the participial subject and his/her role in the main verbal action.Mat 8:23; 9:27; Jesus is actually reiterated in the main clause using AUTWi.8:23 Καὶ ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ πλοῖον ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ9:27 Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἠκολούθησαν [αὐτῷ] δύο τυφλοὶ κράζοντες καὶ λέγοντεςIn George’s example of 14:6, Herod’s main clause relation to the action in dative (EN TWi MESWi).Mat 14:6 Γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ Ἡρῴδου ὠρχήσατο ἡ θυγάτηρ τῆς Ἡρῳδιάδος ἐν τῷ μέσῳ καὶ ἤρεσεν τῷ ἩρῴδῃMark 16:12, 14; the implicit relation of the disciples to Jesus is dative, him appearing to them.Mark 16:12 Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα δυσὶν ἐξ αὐτῶν περιπατοῦσιν ἐφανερώθη ἐν ἑτέρᾳ μορφῇ πορευομένοις εἰς ἀγρόν· Mat 16:14 Ὕστερον [δὲ] ἀνακειμένοις αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἕνδεκα ἐφανερώθη καὶ ὠνείδισεν τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν It looks like the same kind of function as a genitive absolute, in my opinion, just shifted in case because of the grammatical relation of the subject to the main verbal action. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck… Steve—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F SomselSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:02 AMTo: Carl W. ConradCc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27¡ Si, señor ! See Porter, _Idioms of the Greek New Testament_Mt. 14.6: γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ Ἡρῴδου (and when the birthday of Herod came about), a possible example of the dative absolute. Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (184). Sheffield: JSOT.Here also the focus is upon the temporal context. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:31:55 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of > hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between > ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the > participle as the nearer referent.Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you offer for it’s being dative?Carl> > > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The >> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main >> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct >> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object here. >> EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it also states >> that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would indicate his >> more immediate origin.> > I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the > complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The > antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, > and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying > AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto > the shore … “> > If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial > clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is > looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we > will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> > I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The >> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there >> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation >> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can >> point them out.> > This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek > narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s > also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi > saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius > clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our > ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, > who … “> > There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some influence > on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance there > should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK >> THS POLEWS …>> >> Note the repetition of AUTW.> > Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER > and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might > lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative > absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is > that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here > (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the > phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author > not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN >> DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA OUK >> EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with >> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as >> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what >> ever?>> >> >> >> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the >> direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets >> the demoniac?>> >> >> >> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that >> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the >> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of >> Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN >> ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a >> demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so >> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative >> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these >> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you >> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >> rod rogers>> >> Bargersville, In> > > > ______________________________________________________________________> ______________> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list > at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ ____________________________________________________________________________________Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 29 11:01:57 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27-correction [] Luke 8:27 ¡ Si, señor ! See Porter, _Idioms of the Greek New Testament_Mt. 14.6: γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ Ἡρῴδου (and when the birthday of Herod came about), a possible example of the dative absolute. Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (184). Sheffield: JSOT.Here also the focus is upon the temporal context. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:31:55 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of > hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between > ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the > participle as the nearer referent.Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you offer for it’s being dative?Carl> > > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object>> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it>> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would>> indicate his more immediate origin.> > I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto> the shore … “> > If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> > I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>> point them out.> > This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,> who … “> > There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some> influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance> there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>> THS POLEWS …>> >> Note the repetition of AUTW.> > Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS>> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA>> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>> ever?>> >> >> >> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)>> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>> the demoniac?>> >> >> >> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text>> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t>> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a>> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >> rod rogers>> >> Bargersville, In> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ ____________________________________________________________________________________Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
[] Luke 8:27-correction[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Webb webb at selftest.net
Fri Jun 29 12:25:34 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Dear All,Zerwick has something to say touching this subject, I think. In classical usage [the genitive absolute] construction is properly restricted to expressions whose subject does not occur in the main sentence, whether as subject or in any other function; if the subject of the subordinate phrase occurs in the principal sentence, the subordinate participle is simply put in agreement with the noun or pronoun of the main sentence to which it refers. Thus Mt in 5:1 instead of KAQISANTOS AUTOU PROSHLQON AUTWi it would have been more elegant to say KAQISANTI AUTWi PROSHLQON. Biblical Greek, para. 48, p. 18, 1963 edn.[end Zerwick quote]I’m not sure if this observation argues for or against dative constructions of this sort being characterized as “dative absolutes”. Webb Mealy—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Steve RungeSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:56 AMTo: George F Somsel; Carl W. ConradCc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27Carl, It would seem that EXELQONTI AUTWi is accomplishing the same kind of function as a genitive absolute in another context: it is establishing an attendant circumstance or state of affairs, where the subject of the participle is different from the subject of the main clause verb. The difference in subjects necessitates the use of a different case than the nominative, usually the genitive.Here in Luke 8:27, there is a grammatical relation between the subject of the participle and the main clause action, as you and Elizabeth have already pointed out. So it would seem reasonable for the writer to use the appropriate case for the attendant circumstance if it is available. Here, the case is dative. Whether that makes it a dative absolute is another matter. Take a look at some other examples where this type of relation is present between the participial subject and his/her role in the main verbal action.Mat 8:23; 9:27; Jesus is actually reiterated in the main clause using AUTWi.8:23 Καὶ ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ πλοῖον ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ9:27 Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἠκολούθησαν [αὐτῷ] δύο τυφλοὶ κράζοντες καὶ λέγοντεςIn George’s example of 14:6, Herod’s main clause relation to the action in dative (EN TWi MESWi).Mat 14:6 Γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ Ἡρῴδου ὠρχήσατο ἡ θυγάτηρ τῆς Ἡρῳδιάδος ἐν τῷ μέσῳ καὶ ἤρεσεν τῷ ἩρῴδῃMark 16:12, 14; the implicit relation of the disciples to Jesus is dative, him appearing to them.Mark 16:12 Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα δυσὶν ἐξ αὐτῶν περιπατοῦσιν ἐφανερώθη ἐν ἑτέρᾳ μορφῇ πορευομένοις εἰς ἀγρόν· Mat 16:14 Ὕστερον [δὲ] ἀνακειμένοις αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἕνδεκα ἐφανερώθη καὶ ὠνείδισεν τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν It looks like the same kind of function as a genitive absolute, in my opinion, just shifted in case because of the grammatical relation of the subject to the main verbal action. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck… Steve—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F SomselSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:02 AMTo: Carl W. ConradCc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27¡ Si, señor ! See Porter, _Idioms of the Greek New Testament_Mt. 14.6: γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ Ἡρῴδου (and when the birthday of Herod came about), a possible example of the dative absolute. Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (184). Sheffield: JSOT.Here also the focus is upon the temporal context. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:31:55 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of > hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between > ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the > participle as the nearer referent.Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you offer for it’s being dative?Carl> > > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The >> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main >> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct >> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object here. >> EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it also states >> that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would indicate his >> more immediate origin.> > I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the > complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The > antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, > and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying > AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto > the shore … “> > If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial > clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is > looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we > will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> > I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The >> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there >> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation >> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can >> point them out.> > This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek > narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s > also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi > saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius > clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our > ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, > who … “> > There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some influence > on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance there > should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK >> THS POLEWS …>> >> Note the repetition of AUTW.> > Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER > and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might > lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative > absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is > that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here > (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the > phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author > not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN >> DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA OUK >> EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with >> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as >> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what >> ever?>> >> >> >> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the >> direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets >> the demoniac?>> >> >> >> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that >> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the >> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of >> Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN >> ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a >> demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so >> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative >> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these >> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you >> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >> rod rogers>> >> Bargersville, In> > > > ______________________________________________________________________> ______________> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list > at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ ____________________________________________________________________________________Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27-correction Elliot Poe Elliot.Poe at gmail.com
Fri Jun 29 12:29:38 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Sorry for the mistake. Of course, the dative means the verb is being used intransitively already, but how can hUPHNTHSEN go without a dative compliment or a direct object?Yours,Elliot PoeElliot Poe wrote:>Just out of curiosity, George, would you then suggest hUPHNTHSEN has an >intransitive meaning?> >Yours,>Elliot Poe> >George F Somsel wrote:> > > >>While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the participle as the nearer referent.>> >>george>>gfsomsel>> >>Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, >>learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, >>defend the truth till death.>> >>– Jan Hus>>_________>> >> >> >>—– Original Message —->>From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>>Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>>Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>>Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >>On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:>> >> >> >> >> >>>Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>>> >>>The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The >>>participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main >>>verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct >>>regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object >>>here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it >>>also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would >>>indicate his more immediate origin.>>> >>> >>> >>> >>I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the >>complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The >>antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, >>and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying >>AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto >>the shore … “>> >>If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial >>clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is >>looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we >>will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.>> >>I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:>> >> >>On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> >> >> >>>EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>>confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>>but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>>for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>>>point them out.>>> >>> >>> >>> >>This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek >>narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s >>also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi >>saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius >>clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our >>ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, >>who … “>> >>There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some >>influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance >>there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”>> >> >> >> >> >>>You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>>> >>>LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>>THS POLEWS …>>> >>>Note the repetition of AUTW.>>> >>> >>> >>> >>Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER >>and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might >>lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative >>absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is >>that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here >>(EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the >>phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author >>not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.>> >>Carl W. Conrad>>Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)>> >> >> >> >> >>>—– Original Message —->>>From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>>To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>>Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>>Subject: [] Luke 8:27>>> >>> >>>I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>>> >>> >>> >>>EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS >>>EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA >>>OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>>> >>> >>> >>>I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” >>>but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with >>>“Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus >>>himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as >>>some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what >>>ever?>>> >>> >>> >>>Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) >>>the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. >>>Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets >>>the demoniac?>>> >>> >>> >>>One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that >>>the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the >>>MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text >>>of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t >>>hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a >>>certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>>> >>> >>> >>>Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so >>>many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative >>>Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these >>>questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you >>>know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>>> >>> >>> >>>rod rogers>>> >>>Bargersville, In>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>____________________________________________________________________________________>>Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. >>Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.>>http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html >>—>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>> mailing list>> at lists.ibiblio.org>>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>> >> >> >> >> > >—> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > >
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 29 12:31:54 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 No, not at all. It could be that the dat obj of hUPANTHSEN is understood or even that AUTWi performs double duty. georgegfsomsel Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Elliot Poe <Elliot.Poe at gmail.com>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>; at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:18:33 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27Just out of curiosity, George, would you then suggest hUPHNTHSEN has an intransitive meaning?Yours,Elliot PoeGeorge F Somsel wrote:>While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the participle as the nearer referent.> >george>gfsomsel> >Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, >learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, >defend the truth till death.> >– Jan Hus>_________> > > >—– Original Message —->From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > >On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> > > >>Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >>The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The >>participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main >>verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct >>regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object >>here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it >>also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would >>indicate his more immediate origin.>> >> > >I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the >complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The >antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, >and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying >AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto >the shore … “> >If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial >clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is >looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we >will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> >I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > >On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > >>EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>>point them out.>> >> > >This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek >narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s >also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi >saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius >clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our >ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, >who … “> >There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some >influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance >there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> > > >>You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >>LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>THS POLEWS …>> >>Note the repetition of AUTW.>> >> > >Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER >and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might >lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative >absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is >that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here >(EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the >phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author >not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> >Carl W. Conrad>Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > >>—– Original Message —->>From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >>I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >>EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS >>EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA >>OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >>I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” >>but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with >>“Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus >>himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as >>some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what >>ever?>> >> >> >>Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) >>the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. >>Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets >>the demoniac?>> >> >> >>One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that >>the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the >>MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text >>of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t >>hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a >>certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >>Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so >>many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative >>Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these >>questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you >>know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >>rod rogers>> >>Bargersville, In>> >> > > > >____________________________________________________________________________________>Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. >Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.>http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html >—> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > ____________________________________________________________________________________Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Rod Rogers rngrogers at earthlink.net
Fri Jun 29 12:35:24 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 >I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the>complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The>antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,>and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying>AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto>the shore … “Carl,One thing I didn’t know at the beginning is that hUPANTAW always takes thedative, at least it always takes the dative in the NT, it seems. That makesit understandable to me. Saying that, I don’t think we need to consider thisa dative absolute or anything else. It’s just the complement to the verbhUPHNTHSEN like you say.One of the main questions that I had with this verse is that Matthew 8:28say that “KAI ELQONTOS AUTOU EIS TO PERAN EIS THN XWRAN TWN GADARHNWNhUPHNTHSAN AUTW DUO DAIMONIZOMENOI EK TWN MNYMEIWN EXERXOMENOI”. Matthew8:28 says that two demon possessed met Him, Jesus, and they “come to/meethim” “from the tombs”. Luke 8:27 says “hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWSEXWN DAIMONIA”, a certain man from/out of the city goes to meet Him, Jesus.My question still remains, did the demoniac (in Luke 8:27) come out of thecity to meet Jesus or did the demoniac come out of the tombs to meet Jesus?Can EK be used here to say the demoniac was “of/from the city” (like I’m”from” Bargersville) or does it say that the demoniac goes to meet Jesus”from/out of” the city? That’s what I can’t decide. I have no problemtranslating each verse on it’s own grammar and rectifying theology aftertranslating. It seem some people want to translate Luke 8:27 “in light of”Matthew 8:28 and Mark 5:2.rod rogersPS Carl, sorry I sent this to your personal e-mail.—– Original Message —–From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: “George F Somsel” <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Cc: “Rod Rogers” <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:41 AMSubject: Re: [] Luke 8:27On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.> > The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land .” You are correct> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would> indicate his more immediate origin.I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is thecomplement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. Theantecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifyingAUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked ontothe shore … “If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbialclause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this islooking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how wewill English it rather than in its own syntactic context.I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can> point them out.This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greeknarrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’salso a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihisaepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illiusclarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about ourancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,who … “There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had someinfluence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchancethere should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:> > LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK> THS POLEWS …> > Note the repetition of AUTW.Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHERand repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that mightlead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dativeabsolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, isthat Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here(EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit thephrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the authornot been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> —– Original Message —-> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM> Subject: [] Luke 8:27> > > I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:> > > > EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.> > > > I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what> ever?> > > > Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets> the demoniac?> > > > One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?> > > > Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.> > > > rod rogers> > Bargersville, In
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Elliot Poe Elliot.Poe at gmail.com
Fri Jun 29 12:39:51 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Thanks for the response, George. I can see your point, but I’d have to disagree. I suppose that AUTWi could be understood, but I’m not sure the verb is ever used without a dative complement. At least in biblical texts it isn’t. And if AUTWi performs double duty, then I suppose we don’t really have a dative absolute so much as a dative semi-absolute.Yours,Elliot PoeGeorge F Somsel wrote:> No, not at all. It could be that the dat obj of hUPANTHSEN is > understood or even that AUTWi performs double duty.> > george> gfsomsel> > Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,> defend the truth till death.> > – Jan Hus> _________> > > —– Original Message —-> From: Elliot Poe <Elliot.Poe at gmail.com>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>; at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:18:33 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > Just out of curiosity, George, would you then suggest hUPHNTHSEN has an> intransitive meaning?> > Yours,> Elliot Poe> > George F Somsel wrote:> > >While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of > hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between > ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the > participle as the nearer referent.> >> >george> >gfsomsel> >> >Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,> >learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,> >defend the truth till death.> >> >- Jan Hus> >_________> >> >> >> >—– Original Message —-> >From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> >To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> >Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org> >Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM> >Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> >> >> >On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> > > >> >>Greetings, fellow Hoosier.> >>> >>The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The > >>participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main > >>verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct > >>regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object > >>here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it > >>also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would > >>indicate his more immediate origin.> >> > >>> >> >I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the > >complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The > >antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative, > >and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying > >AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto > >the shore … “> >> >If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial > >clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is > >looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we > >will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> >> >I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> >> >> >On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> > > >> >>EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The> >>confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there> >>but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation> >>for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can> >>point them out.> >> > >>> >> >This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek > >narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s > >also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi > >saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius > >clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our > >ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio, > >who … “> >> >There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some > >influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance > >there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> > > >> >>You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:> >>> >>LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK> >>THS POLEWS …> >>> >>Note the repetition of AUTW.> >> > >>> >> >Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER > >and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might > >lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative > >absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is > >that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here > >(EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the > >phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author > >not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> >> >Carl W. Conrad> >Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> > > >> >>—– Original Message —-> >>From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>> >>To: at lists.ibiblio.org> >>Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM> >>Subject: [] Luke 8:27> >>> >>> >>I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:> >>> >>> >>> >>EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS > >>EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA > >>OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.> >>> >>> >>> >>I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW” > >>but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with > >>”Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus > >>himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as > >>some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what > >>ever?> >>> >>> >>> >>Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) > >>the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. > >>Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets > >>the demoniac?> >>> >>> >>> >>One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that > >>the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the > >>MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text > >>of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t > >>hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a > >>certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?> >>> >>> >>> >>Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so > >>many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative > >>Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these > >>questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you > >>know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.> >>> >>> >>> >>rod rogers> >>> >>Bargersville, In> >> > >>> >> >> >> >____________________________________________________________________________________> >Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.> >Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.> >http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html> >—> > home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> > mailing list> > at lists.ibiblio.org> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >> > > >> > > ————————————————————————> Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48252/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC>, > not web links.
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 12:46:07 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 Just in case there were any doubt, I don’t for one second acknowledge the existence of a Dative Absolute. I understand the construction as I construed it in my first post on this thread.On Jun 29, 2007, at 12:39 PM, Elliot Poe wrote:> Thanks for the response, George. I can see your point, but I’d have to> disagree. I suppose that AUTWi could be understood, but I’m not > sure the> verb is ever used without a dative complement. At least in biblical> texts it isn’t. And if AUTWi performs double duty, then I suppose we> don’t really have a dative absolute so much as a dative semi-absolute.> > Yours,> Elliot Poe> > George F Somsel wrote:> >> No, not at all. It could be that the dat obj of hUPANTHSEN is>> understood or even that AUTWi performs double duty.>> >> george>> gfsomsel>> >> Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,>> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,>> defend the truth till death.>> >> – Jan Hus>> _________>> >> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Elliot Poe <Elliot.Poe at gmail.com>>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>> Cc: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>; b- >> greek at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:18:33 AM>> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27>> >> Just out of curiosity, George, would you then suggest hUPHNTHSEN >> has an>> intransitive meaning?>> >> Yours,>> Elliot Poe>> >> George F Somsel wrote:>> >>> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of>> hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between>> ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the>> participle as the nearer referent.>>> >>> george>>> gfsomsel>>> >>> Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,>>> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,>>> defend the truth till death.>>> >>> – Jan Hus>>> _________>>> >>> >>> >>> —– Original Message —->>> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>>> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>>> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27>>> >>> >>> On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:>>> >>> >>> >>>> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>>>> >>>> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>>>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>>>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct>>>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object>>>> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it>>>> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would>>>> indicate his more immediate origin.>>>> >>>> >>> >>> I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the>>> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The>>> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding >>> narrative,>>> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying>>> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto>>> the shore … “>>> >>> If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an >>> adverbial>>> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is>>> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we>>> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.>>> >>> I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:>>> >>> >>> On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>>> >>> >>>> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone >>>> else can>>>> point them out.>>>> >>>> >>> >>> This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek>>> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s>>> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi>>> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius>>> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about >>> our>>> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,>>> who … “>>> >>> There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some>>> influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if >>> perchance>>> there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under >>> “Latinisms.”>>> >>> >>> >>>> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>>>> >>>> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>>> THS POLEWS …>>>> >>>> Note the repetition of AUTW.>>>> >>>> >>> >>> Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER>>> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might>>> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative>>> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I >>> think, is>>> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here>>> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the>>> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the >>> author>>> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.>>> >>> Carl W. Conrad>>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)>>> >>> >>> >>>> —– Original Message —->>>> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>>>> >>>> >>>> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS>>>> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA>>>> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>>>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>>>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>>>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>>>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>>>> ever?>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)>>>> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>>>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>>>> the demoniac?>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>>>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>>>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text>>>> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t>>>> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a>>>> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… >>>> (Jesus)?>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>>>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>>>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>>>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>>>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> rod rogers>>>> >>>> Bargersville, In>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> ________________>>> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.>>> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.>>> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html>>> —>>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>>> mailing list>>> at lists.ibiblio.org>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ——————————————————————— >> —>> Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers>> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48252/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/ >> mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC>,>> not web links.> > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 12:57:39 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 On Jun 29, 2007, at 11:01 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> ¡ Si, señor ! See Porter, _Idioms of the Greek New Testament_> > Mt. 14.6: γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ > Ἡρῴδου (and when the birthday of Herod came about), a > possible example of the dative absolute.> > Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (184). > Sheffield: JSOT.i.e. GENESIOIS DE GENOMENOIS TOU hHRWDOUWell, I notice he calls it a “possible instance.” Pace Porter, I would not.On the other hand, it may be an infelicitous reformulation (assuming, as some may not wish to do, that Mt draws upon Mk) ofMark 6:21 Καὶ γενομένης ἡμέρας εὐκαίρου ὅτε Ἡρῴδης τοῖς γενεσίοις αὐτοῦ δεῖπνον ἐποίησεν τοῖς μεγιστᾶσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ …KAI GENOMENHS hHMERAS EUKAIROU hOTI hHRWDHS TOIS GENESIOIS AUTOU DEIPNON EPOIHSEN TOIS MEGISTASIN AUTOI KAI …If you believe it’s a Dative Absolute, well and good; I would still understand the dative EXELQONTI DE AUTWi as dative complement to hUPHNTHSEN, which, as others have noted, takes a dative complement every other time it appears in the GNT (10x or 9x, if we are inclined to believe tat Lk 8:27 is an exception.Carl> > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:31:55 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of>> hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between>> ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the>> participle as the nearer referent.> > Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see> EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you> offer for it’s being dative?> > Carl> >> >> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:>> >>> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>>> >>> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct>>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object>>> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it>>> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would>>> indicate his more immediate origin.>> >> I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the>> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The>> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,>> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying>> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto>> the shore … “>> >> If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial>> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is>> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we>> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.>> >> I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:>> >> >> On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>>> >>> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else >>> can>>> point them out.>> >> This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek>> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s>> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi>> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius>> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our>> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,>> who … “>> >> There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some>> influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance>> there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”>> >>> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>>> >>> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>> THS POLEWS …>>> >>> Note the repetition of AUTW.>> >> Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER>> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might>> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative>> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is>> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here>> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the>> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author>> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.>> >> Carl W. Conrad>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)>> >>> —– Original Message —->>> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>>> >>> >>> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>>> >>> >>> >>> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS>>> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA>>> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>>> >>> >>> >>> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>>> ever?>>> >>> >>> >>> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)>>> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>>> the demoniac?>>> >>> >>> >>> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text>>> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t>>> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a>>> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… >>> (Jesus)?>>> >>> >>> >>> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>>> >>> >>> >>> rod rogers>>> >>> Bargersville, In
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 13:10:11 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Luke 8:27 On Jun 29, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Steve Runge wrote:> Carl,> > It would seem that EXELQONTI AUTWi is accomplishing the same kind > of function as a genitive absolute in another context: it is > establishing an attendant circumstance or state of affairs, where > the subject of the participle is different from the subject of the > main clause verb. The difference in subjects necessitates the use > of a different case than the nominative, usually the genitive.> > Here in Luke 8:27, there is a grammatical relation between the > subject of the participle and the main clause action, as you and > Elizabeth have already pointed out. So it would seem reasonable > for the writer to use the appropriate case for the attendant > circumstance if it is available. Here, the case is dative. > Whether that makes it a dative absolute is another matter.> > Take a look at some other examples where this type of relation is > present between the participial subject and his/her role in the > main verbal action.> Mat 8:23; 9:27; Jesus is actually reiterated in the main clause > using AUTWi.> 8:23 Καὶ ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ > πλοῖον ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ > μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ> 9:27 Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ > Ἰησοῦ ἠκολούθησαν [αὐτῷ] δύο > τυφλοὶ κράζοντες καὶ λέγοντες> > In George’s example of 14:6, Herod’s main clause relation to the > action in dative (EN TWi MESWi).> Mat 14:6 Γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ > Ἡρῴδου ὠρχήσατο ἡ θυγάτηρ τῆς > Ἡρῳδιάδος ἐν τῷ μέσῳ καὶ ἤρεσεν > τῷ Ἡρῴδῃ> > Mark 16:12, 14; the implicit relation of the disciples to Jesus is > dative, him appearing to them.> Mark 16:12 Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα δυσὶν ἐξ > αὐτῶν περιπατοῦσιν ἐφανερώθη ἐν > ἑτέρᾳ μορφῇ πορευομένοις εἰς > ἀγρόν·> > Mat 16:14 Ὕστερον [δὲ] ἀνακειμένοις > αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἕνδεκα ἐφανερώθη καὶ > ὠνείδισεν τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν> > It looks like the same kind of function as a genitive absolute, in > my opinion, just shifted in case because of the grammatical > relation of the subject to the main verbal action. If it walks > like a duck, and quacks like a duck…I quite agree with every bit of this. The genitive absolute is so- called because it IS absolute, independent of any syntactic construction with an element in the main clause. Funk (BIGHG §847. “Genitive absolute. If the circumstantial participle does not refer to a noun (pronoun) elsewhere in the sentence, it is put in the genitive case, together with its complements, and called a genitive absolute (§845.1). It is called an absolute construction because it has no formal grammatical connection with the rest of the sentence”Carl> —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:- > bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F Somsel> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:02 AM> To: Carl W. Conrad> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > ¡ Si, señor ! See Porter, _Idioms of the Greek New Testament_> > Mt. 14.6: γενεσίοις δὲ γενομένοις τοῦ > Ἡρῴδου (and when the birthday of Herod came about), a > possible example of the dative absolute.> > Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (184). > Sheffield: JSOT.> > Here also the focus is upon the temporal context.> > > george> gfsomsel> > Therefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth, > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend > the truth till death.> > – Jan Hus> _________> > > > —– Original Message —-> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:31:55 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> While I can understand why you might take AUTWi as a complement of>> hUPANTHSEN, I think that the fact that it is sandwiched between>> ECELQONTI DE and EPI THN GHN dictates that it be taken with the>> participle as the nearer referent.> > Then do you too (et tu, George?) go along with those who might see > EXELQONTI AUTWi as a “Dative absolute”? If not, what account do you > offer for it’s being dative?> > Carl> >> >> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>> To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>>> Cc: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 8:41:57 AM>> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:>> >>> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>>> >>> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land …” You are correct>>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object >>> here.>>> EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it also >>> states>>> that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would indicate his>>> more immediate origin.>> >> I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the>> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The>> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,>> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying>> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto>> the shore … “>> >> If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial>> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is>> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we>> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.>> >> I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:>> >> >> On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>>> >>> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else >>> can>>> point them out.>> >> This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek>> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s>> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi>> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius>> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our>> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,>> who … “>> >> There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some >> influence>> on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance there>> should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”>> >>> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>>> >>> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>>> THS POLEWS …>>> >>> Note the repetition of AUTW.>> >> Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER>> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might>> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative>> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is>> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here>> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the>> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author>> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.>> >> Carl W. Conrad>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)>> >>> —– Original Message —->>> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>>> >>> >>> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>>> >>> >>> >>> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN>>> DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA OUK>>> EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>>> >>> >>> >>> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>>> ever?>>> >>> >>> >>> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the>>> direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>>> the demoniac?>>> >>> >>> >>> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the >>> text of>>> Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN>>> ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man >>> with a>>> demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>>> >>> >>> >>> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>>> >>> >>> >>> rod rogers>>> >>> Bargersville, In>> >> >> >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> _>> ______________>> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.>> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.>> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html>> —>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list>> at lists.ibiblio.org>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________> Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: > mail, news, photos & more.> http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] Luke 8:27[] Luke 8:27
[] Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jun 29 13:36:09 EDT 2007
[] Luke 8:27 [] Lining Out a Greek Text On Jun 29, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Rod Rogers wrote:> > >> I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the>> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The>> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,>> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying>> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto>> the shore … “> > Carl,> One thing I didn’t know at the beginning is that hUPANTAW always > takes the> dative, at least it always takes the dative in the NT, it seems. > That makes> it understandable to me. Saying that, I don’t think we need to > consider this> a dative absolute or anything else. It’s just the complement to the > verb> hUPHNTHSEN like you say.I’m glad you agree with that.> One of the main questions that I had with this verse is that > Matthew 8:28> say that “KAI ELQONTOS AUTOU EIS TO PERAN EIS THN XWRAN TWN GADARHNWN> hUPHNTHSAN AUTW DUO DAIMONIZOMENOI EK TWN MNYMEIWN EXERXOMENOI”. > Matthew> 8:28 says that two demon possessed met Him, Jesus, and they “come > to/meet> him” “from the tombs”. Luke 8:27 says “hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS > POLEWS> EXWN DAIMONIA”, a certain man from/out of the city goes to meet > Him, Jesus.(you need to be consistent with transliteration: you can’t use “X” for both Xi and Chi. I personally prefer to use “C” for Chi, “X” for Xi; nevertheless I think we can follow your transcribed text)> My question still remains, did the demoniac (in Luke 8:27) come out > of the> city to meet Jesus or did the demoniac come out of the tombs to > meet Jesus?> Can EK be used here to say the demoniac was “of/from the > city” (like I’m> “from” Bargersville) or does it say that the demoniac goes to meet > Jesus> “from/out of” the city? That’s what I can’t decide. I have no problem> translating each verse on it’s own grammar and rectifying theology > after> translating. It seem some people want to translate Luke 8:27 “in > light of”> Matthew 8:28 and Mark 5:2.I would be somewhat leery of trying to harmonize the synoptic accounts of the Gadarene demoniac(s), however many there may have been. I personally think it’s better methodologically to consider each account in the context of its own gospel narrative.Let’s consider Luke’s version more fully in context:Luke 8:27 ἐξελθόντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ὑπήντησεν ἀνήρ τις ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ἔχων δαιμόνια καὶ χρόνῳ ἱκανῷ οὐκ ἐνεδύσατο ἱμάτιον καὶ ἐν οἰκίᾳ οὐκ ἔμενεν ἀλλ᾿ ἐν τοῖς μνήμασιν.EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS ECWN DAIMONIA KAI CRONWi hIKANWi OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIAi OUK EMENEN ALL’ EN TOIS MNHMASIN.While ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS could conceivably construe with hUPHNTHSEN, it seems to me somewhat more likely that the phrase means “a man of (this) town” — i.e. “a Gadarene.” The succeeding description certainly indicates that he didn’t reside at home but rather in the tombs — that’s consistent with the Marcan and Matthaean accounts, even if Luke formulates the opening to his account somewhat differently.Carl> —– Original Message —–> From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>> To: “George F Somsel” <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>> Cc: “Rod Rogers” <rngrogers at earthlink.net>; <b- > greek at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 9:41 AM> Subject: Re: [] Luke 8:27> > > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 7:35 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> >> Greetings, fellow Hoosier.>> >> The AUTWi is the subject of the participle in this verse. The>> participial phrase tells you when the events narrated in the main>> verb occurred — “When he debarked on the land .” You are correct>> regarding the demoniac being the subject rather than the object>> here. EK THS POLEWS would indicate the origin of the man yet it>> also states that he “stayed in [among, near] the tombs” which would>> indicate his more immediate origin.> > I’d have to analyze this differently and say that AUTWi is the> complement of hUPHNTHSEN, the subject of which is ANHR TIS. The> antecedent of AUTWi is implicitly Jesus from the preceding narrative,> and EXELQONTI I would call a circumstantial participle qualifying> AUTWi. “A certain man encountered him (Jesus) as he disembarked onto> the shore … “> > If you’re analyzing AUTWi EXELQONTI as the equivalent of an adverbial> clause, there’s some validity to it. But it seems to me that this is> looking at the Greek construction from the point of view of how we> will English it rather than in its own syntactic context.> > I’d agree with Elizabeth on this:> > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:13 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:>> >> EXELQONTI AUTWi is the dative argument for hUPHNTHSEN. The>> confrontation is between Jesus and Legion, the disciples were there>> but the focus is on Jesus and the demoniac. That is one explanation>> for the AUTWi. There are other reasons for AUTWi but someone else can>> point them out.> > This is a by-no-means uncommon participial usage in older Greek> narrative; in my opinion Luke is probably emulating that usage. It’s> also a very common construction in Classical Latin, e.g. ‘mihi> saepenumero cogitanti de majoribus nostris in mentem venit illius> clarissimi Scipionis, qui …’ “To me many a time pondering about our> ancestors the thought has struck of that most distinguished Scipio,> who … “> > There are some who think that Latin prose usage has had some> influence on Hellenistic Greek prose; anyone interested (if perchance> there should be such) can consult the index of BDF under “Latinisms.”> >> You might find it worth while to look at the Majority Text:>> >> LUKE 8:27 EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN UPHNTHSEN AUTW ANHR TIS EK>> THS POLEWS …>> >> Note the repetition of AUTW.> > Yes; it looks like LXX imitation of a Hebrew construction with ASHER> and repetition of the pronoun; this is the sort of text that might> lead some to conjecture that we have such a thing as a “dative> absolute” in EXELQONTI AUTWi EPI THN GHN. The likelihood, I think, is> that Luke might very well have used a genitive absolute here> (EXELQONTOS AUTOU EPI THN GHN) had it not been so simple to fit the> phrase into the syntax of the hUPHNTHSEN clause — and had the author> not been aware of this sort of syntactic arrangement.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> >> —– Original Message —->> From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at earthlink.net>>> To: at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:45:56 PM>> Subject: [] Luke 8:27>> >> >> I’m having some problems translating Luke 8:27. Here is the text:>> >> >> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTW EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS>> EXWN DAIMONIA KAI XRONW hIKANW OUK ENEDUSATO hIMATION KAI EN OIKIA>> OUK EMENEN ALL EN TOIS MNHMASIN.>> >> >> >> I’m sure AUTW is part of the participial phrase “EXELQONTI DE AUTW”>> but I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with>> “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus>> himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as>> some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what>> ever?>> >> >> >> Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA)>> the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me.>> Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets>> the demoniac?>> >> >> >> One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that>> the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the>> MNHMASIN. I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text>> of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t>> hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a>> certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet…… (Jesus)?>> >> >> >> Sorry for so many questions but I’m reluctant to disagree with so>> many translations. Carl, I have read your comments on “Dative>> Participle Luke 8:27″ back in 1999 but I’d still like to ask these>> questions if you don’t mind. I guess what I don’t know is how you>> know AUTW is the subject of EXELQONTI.>> >> >> >> rod rogers>> >> Bargersville, In> > > > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Luke 8:27[] Lining Out a Greek Text
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sun May 16 13:54:47 EDT 1999
Word Order Signifigance: Mark 3.1 Limerick: Mark 3.1 Luke 8:27 starts out:EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dativeabsolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I setabout to try and figure out why not.I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an objectfor hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for therole of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the caseending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participleconstruction would not be absolute.There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.What is it?–Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
Word Order Signifigance: Mark 3.1Limerick: Mark 3.1
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sun May 16 14:43:49 EDT 1999
Limerick: Mark 3.1 Dative Participle Luke 8:27 > Luke 8:27 starts out:> > EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .> > I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dative> absolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I set> about to try and figure out why not.> > I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an object> for hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for the> role of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the case> ending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participle> construction would not be absolute.> > There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.> What is it?> A quick glance at Matt 8:28 seems to settle this issue. In that contextAUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSAN. So it would appear that AUTWi in Luke8:27 is doing double duty. I know someone is going to say that this is aperfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek but it still causes meto stop and ponder when I run into it in the NT.Perhaps I still don’t have this right, if not let me know.–Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
Limerick: Mark 3.1Dative Participle Luke 8:27
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sun May 16 13:54:47 EDT 1999
Word Order Signifigance: Mark 3.1 Limerick: Mark 3.1 Luke 8:27 starts out:EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dativeabsolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I setabout to try and figure out why not.I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an objectfor hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for therole of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the caseending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participleconstruction would not be absolute.There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.What is it?–Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
Word Order Signifigance: Mark 3.1Limerick: Mark 3.1
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sun May 16 14:43:49 EDT 1999
Limerick: Mark 3.1 Dative Participle Luke 8:27 > Luke 8:27 starts out:> > EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .> > I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dative> absolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I set> about to try and figure out why not.> > I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an object> for hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for the> role of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the case> ending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participle> construction would not be absolute.> > There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.> What is it?> A quick glance at Matt 8:28 seems to settle this issue. In that contextAUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSAN. So it would appear that AUTWi in Luke8:27 is doing double duty. I know someone is going to say that this is aperfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek but it still causes meto stop and ponder when I run into it in the NT.Perhaps I still don’t have this right, if not let me know.–Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
Limerick: Mark 3.1Dative Participle Luke 8:27
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun May 16 14:59:34 EDT 1999
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Grammatical errors in Revelation? At 11:43 AM -0700 5/16/99, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:>> Luke 8:27 starts out:>> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .>> >> I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dative>> absolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I set>> about to try and figure out why not.>> >> I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an object>> for hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for the>> role of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the case>> ending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participle>> construction would not be absolute.>> >> There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.>> What is it?>> > >A quick glance at Matt 8:28 seems to settle this issue. In that context>AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSAN. So it would appear that AUTWi in Luke>8:27 is doing double duty. I know someone is going to say that this is a>perfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek but it still causes me>to stop and ponder when I run into it in the NT.> >Perhaps I still don’t have this right, if not let me know.Just before any one else leaps at this, I DO want to say that “this is aperfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek” and I’d go a step furtherand add that I don’t think it’s out of the ordinary for more literatenarrative style in Koine. Even the word order, I might add, is easy enoughto carry over into English without altering the emphasis (though theconstruction is altered): “And as he went out onto the land, he was met bya man …” It really is quite common for a participial phrase in agreementwith a noun or pronoun that serves as the direct complement of the verb tostand out in front of the verb which is then followed by its subject.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Dative Participle Luke 8:27Grammatical errors in Revelation?
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun May 16 14:59:34 EDT 1999
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Grammatical errors in Revelation? At 11:43 AM -0700 5/16/99, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:>> Luke 8:27 starts out:>> >> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR . . .>> >> I was tempted at first to call EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN a dative>> absolute, but I discovered that no one agreed with me on this so I set>> about to try and figure out why not.>> >> I think perhaps the answer is connected with the absence of an object>> for hUPHNTHSEN. But I find AUTWi rather an unlikely candidate for the>> role of object since it is clearly tied to the participle by the case>> ending. If AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSEN then the participle>> construction would not be absolute.>> >> There must be a perfectly obvious answer to this which I am overlooking.>> What is it?>> > >A quick glance at Matt 8:28 seems to settle this issue. In that context>AUTWi is the object of hUPHNTHSAN. So it would appear that AUTWi in Luke>8:27 is doing double duty. I know someone is going to say that this is a>perfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek but it still causes me>to stop and ponder when I run into it in the NT.> >Perhaps I still don’t have this right, if not let me know.Just before any one else leaps at this, I DO want to say that “this is aperfectly normal way to do things in Attic Greek” and I’d go a step furtherand add that I don’t think it’s out of the ordinary for more literatenarrative style in Koine. Even the word order, I might add, is easy enoughto carry over into English without altering the emphasis (though theconstruction is altered): “And as he went out onto the land, he was met bya man …” It really is quite common for a participial phrase in agreementwith a noun or pronoun that serves as the direct complement of the verb tostand out in front of the verb which is then followed by its subject.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Dative Participle Luke 8:27Grammatical errors in Revelation?
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon May 17 06:43:18 EDT 1999
Use of Greek in Email and Chatrooms for Teaching 1st Year Greek Luke’s Semitic Style At 10:42 PM -0400 5/16/99, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:>Carl, do you mean that> >>> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR (1)> >is the same as> >>> hUPHNTHSEN DE ANHR AUTWi EXELQONTI EPI THN GHN .(2) . .> >except for the word order?> >Is the word order in (1) chosen to emphasize EXELQONTI?I think I’d want to say that EXELQONTI receives considerable emphasis byposition within a larger context: (a) I think it is a very common wordorder, and (b) if we look at the larger context, we note that 8:26succinctly sets the stage for the narrative to follow by telling of thevoyage across the lake and its destination, then describing the location,then that 8:27 describes rather fully the demoniac and his relevantbackground history but emphasizes at the outset that this man so describedis the very first thing encountered by Jesus as he disembarks from theship. It seems to me then that the opening of the pericope is verycarefully organized to suggest the DESTINED nature of this confrontation.Although Luke does not say so in so many words, he seems to suggest (1)that Jesus crossed the lake for the PURPOSE of meeting the demoniac, and(2) that the demoniac either had foreknowledge of Jesus’ arrival or spiedhis ship from afar and hastened to meet him immediately upon hisdisembarking.Although I don’t want to offer any comment on the priority of the threesynoptic versions of this pericope (Mt 8:28-34; Mk 5:1-20; Lk 8:26-39), acareful examination of the way the pericope opens in each does make clear,I think, the superior care taken by Luke in the initial set-up of thisnarrative.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Use of Greek in Email and Chatrooms for Teaching 1st Year GreekLuke’s Semitic Style
Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon May 17 06:43:18 EDT 1999
Use of Greek in Email and Chatrooms for Teaching 1st Year Greek Luke’s Semitic Style At 10:42 PM -0400 5/16/99, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:>Carl, do you mean that> >>> EXELQONTI DE AUTWi EPI THN GHN hUPHNTHSEN ANHR (1)> >is the same as> >>> hUPHNTHSEN DE ANHR AUTWi EXELQONTI EPI THN GHN .(2) . .> >except for the word order?> >Is the word order in (1) chosen to emphasize EXELQONTI?I think I’d want to say that EXELQONTI receives considerable emphasis byposition within a larger context: (a) I think it is a very common wordorder, and (b) if we look at the larger context, we note that 8:26succinctly sets the stage for the narrative to follow by telling of thevoyage across the lake and its destination, then describing the location,then that 8:27 describes rather fully the demoniac and his relevantbackground history but emphasizes at the outset that this man so describedis the very first thing encountered by Jesus as he disembarks from theship. It seems to me then that the opening of the pericope is verycarefully organized to suggest the DESTINED nature of this confrontation.Although Luke does not say so in so many words, he seems to suggest (1)that Jesus crossed the lake for the PURPOSE of meeting the demoniac, and(2) that the demoniac either had foreknowledge of Jesus’ arrival or spiedhis ship from afar and hastened to meet him immediately upon hisdisembarking.Although I don’t want to offer any comment on the priority of the threesynoptic versions of this pericope (Mt 8:28-34; Mk 5:1-20; Lk 8:26-39), acareful examination of the way the pericope opens in each does make clear,I think, the superior care taken by Luke in the initial set-up of thisnarrative.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Use of Greek in Email and Chatrooms for Teaching 1st Year GreekLuke’s Semitic Style
Paul L. King Dan Irving I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what ever?Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets the demoniac?One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the MNHMASIN.
I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet?
Paul L. King Dan Irving I’m not sure how to understand AUTW. Is it a simple dative with “Gaderene” as it’s antecedent or is it emphatic meaning “He (Jesus himself) came out (of the boat) or could it be a dative of time as some grammars suggest (after He came out of the boat)….. or what ever?Also, several translations seem to make the ANHR (EXWN DAIMONIA) the direct object instead of the subject. Sounds confusing to me. Shouldn’t it be that the demoniac meets Him (Jesus) not Jesus meets the demoniac?One last thing. Several translations make EK THS POLEWS imply that the demoniac was once a citizen of the city but now resides in the MNHMASIN.
I’m not debating where the demoniac resides but the text of Luke 8:27 is not saying that with EK THS POLEWS. Isn’t hUPHNTHSEN ANHR TIS EK THS POLEWS EXWN DAIMONIA saying that a certain man with a demon comes out of the city to meet?
EK could mean either from the city or out of the city. Since I have been to the region of Gerasa (modern day Jerash in Jordan) recently in January, I can visualize the scene. it is a hilly and mountainous area. The city, as it has been from the times of Jesus was a large Roman city of the Decapolis (10 cities). Many of the Roman pillars and carvings are still there. There are many caves in the mountains outside the city where the tombs were located. Don’t think American graveyards. Think burial caves. The demoniac man would not have been living in the city. The language “alla” indicates strong contrast–not in a house (clay, brick, stone, or rock hewn houses in the city–all of which I saw) but in strong contrast among the tombs. With his behavior he would have been shunned and thrown out. He would have been living among the burial caves. Probably pagan caves, not Jewish burial caves. People would have put out food for the spirits of the deceased, as well as to appease evil spirits, so he was likely living on that food. Significantly, the chief spirit of the many spirits in the man was named “Legion.” The city would have been occupied by legions of Roman soldiers. Further, the phrase “os eixe daimonia,” frequently translated as “demon-possessed,” literally means “who had demons.” “eixe” from “echo”–to have. The man had many demons. This is the common language for demonization regardless of what ever level or spiritual state–believer or non-believer.
Does the Greek then proves demons could be next to Jesus hence also in a born-again believer (who has allowed it)?
EK could mean either from the city or out of the city. Since I have been to the region of Gerasa (modern day Jerash in Jordan) recently in January, I can visualize the scene. it is a hilly and mountainous area. The city, as it has been from the times of Jesus was a large Roman city of the Decapolis (10 cities). Many of the Roman pillars and carvings are still there. There are many caves in the mountains outside the city where the tombs were located. Don’t think American graveyards. Think burial caves. The demoniac man would not have been living in the city. The language “alla” indicates strong contrast–not in a house (clay, brick, stone, or rock hewn houses in the city–all of which I saw) but in strong contrast among the tombs. With his behavior he would have been shunned and thrown out. He would have been living among the burial caves. Probably pagan caves, not Jewish burial caves. People would have put out food for the spirits of the deceased, as well as to appease evil spirits, so he was likely living on that food. Significantly, the chief spirit of the many spirits in the man was named “Legion.” The city would have been occupied by legions of Roman soldiers. Further, the phrase “os eixe daimonia,” frequently translated as “demon-possessed,” literally means “who had demons.” “eixe” from “echo”–to have. The man had many demons. This is the common language for demonization regardless of what ever level or spiritual state–believer or non-believer.
Does the Greek then proves demons could be next to Jesus hence also in a born-again believer (who has allowed it)?