[B-Greek] aorist participle of subsequent action
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at ioa.com
Mon Nov 7 06:09:08 EST 2005
On Nov 6, 2005, at 9:04 PM, kgraham0938 at comcast.net wrote:
> Acts 16:6 DIHLQON DE THN FRUGIAN KAI GALATIKHN CWRAN KWLUQENTES
> hUPO TOU AGIOU PNEUMATOS LALHSAI TON LOGON EN THi ASIAi
> doing a paper on Galatian contraversy, came across the argument by
> Wallace that the aorist participle KWLUQENTES could be taken
> subsequent to the action of DIHLQON.
> They went through the Phrygian-Galatian region, but were then
> forbidden by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia.
> You think this is possible? Not doubting Wallace, I just don't
> know if this is something to support a southern view.
We had a thread on this matter of aorist participles indicating
simultaneous or subsequent action a few years back; I'll see if I can
locate it; my recollection is that it does indeed appear to happen
and particularly when the aorist participles FOLLOWS rather than
precedes the relevant finite verb; but the argument is inconclusive.
See Sept 30-Oct 1 1998, Oct 4, 8-9 1998, (all "Adverbial aor ptcs of
subsequent time") and finally Oct 14, 1998 my exploration ("Adverbial
aor ptcs of subsequent time -- LONG"). KWLUQENTES in Acts 16:6 is
discussed there--I stated there that I do NOT think KWLUQENTES in
that instance should be taken as an aorist participle of subsequent
time, and I think only very rarely can an argument be made for an
"aorist participle of subsequent time."
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
More information about the B-Greek