PASAN THN PISTIN
emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Thu Jan 18 14:38:59 EST 2001
>How would you then explain Acts 27:37: HMEQA DE hAI PASAI YUCAI EN TWi
I didn't save Carl's message on this, but I seem to recall him addressing
this construction. Namely, that such a construct as Art./Pas/Noun is
grammatically allowed, but it means something
entirely different than "the all."
I would roughly suggest something like:
"the entire group of people" were in the boat, 276 [in all]...
But more to my point, I have noticed a tendency of some to find
one or two exceptions to a rule, and thereby feel as if the rule
must be wrong. This was quite noticeable in our discussions on
the Granville Sharp rule.
To me, finding exceptions to a rule does not negate the rule.
Years ago, it was improper in English to split an infinitve, but
many broke the rule. But the grammatical rule was: to put the
adverb "outside" the infinitive.
Yielding: To run quickly will cause one to tire (i.e., it was
improper to write: "to quickly run...")
Which leads me to my question: Do rules that are sometimes broken or
have exceptions negate them ALTOGETHER?
Using Granville Sharp again. If there are a few exceptions, is
it poor scholarship to say the Granville Sharp's rule holds
98.3 percent of the time? (That is, if some writers "break" the
rule, does that negate an "almost universal observation of a rule"?)
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the B-Greek