1 Thess 2:15 ENANTIWN; LS

Paul S. Dixon dixonps at juno.com
Fri Oct 30 12:02:24 EST 1998

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:38:13 -0600 "Carl W. Conrad"
<cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> writes:

>>Carl, Michael:
>>Just a follow-up on our discussion on ENANTIWN
>>in 1 Thess 2:15.
>>Liddell-Scott does have ENANTIOW as a word in usage,
>>but quickly points out that the deponent form is far
>>more common.  I suppose that means Paul could have
>>had ENANTIOW in mind as the word behind ENANTIWN
>>in 1 Thess 2:15, making it a participle.  Ah, the beauty
>>of five participles versus participle, participle, participle,
>>adjective, participle.
>I hate to keep throwing in notes of "except that ...," but the form
>given in 1 Thess 2:15 is ENANTI/WN (with acute accent over the iota). If

>the editors had understood this to be a nominative m. ptc, they would
>printed ENANTIW=N (circumflex over the omega because it's a contract
>moreover the participial form we'd need in this instance would have to
>genitive plural, and that would be ENANTIW/NTWN (with acute accent over
>first omega).

That's interesting about the accenting (something I had not even
but it is of no serious consequence, except to say this is how the
took it.  There was no accenting in the original (just when the accenting
was introduced, perhaps you know).  Yet, the lethal blow is that we
expect the plural versus the singular form.  Good point.

>>But, this leads me to wonder more about deponent verbs
>>and their participial forms.  Though they are middle/passive
>>in form, they do function actively.  Any merit to the idea that
>>deponent verbs may tend to take on active forms in the
>Not in Greek; Latin deponents can have present active participles with
>active meaning (e.g. HORTOR, pres. act. ptc. HORTANS). In Greek,
>the participle of a particular "tense" form is going to have the voice
>it would have in any other mood or in the infinitive.


>Moreover, the way you put that proposition, Paul, "Though they are 
>middle/passive in form, they do function actively." is precisely the
>I have given for objecting to the term "deponent": it seems based on an 
>assumption that what's active in English is "really" objectively active
>is therefore the logical status of the Greek "deponent" form.

No, at least I do not make that assumption.  To me deponents have a
middle/passive form, but function actively, that is, they function in the
same way as active verbs do.  But, this is not saying they are 
"objectively active," which to me says they have an active voice.

>What would be 
>more accurate to say is that forms in the middle voice may readily take 
>objects and be transitive even if many middle-voice verbs are what we
>to be intransitive verbs of motion (e.g. ERCOMAI).

And, this is exactly what I mean by deponent verbs. 

>There's one common source of confusion that does, I think, bear on the 
>question you're raising here, Paul: that is that there are concurrent
>of the same verb functioning at a given time in Koine Greek (and in
>languages at any given time as well). A good example is EUAGGELIZW/OMAI,

>which is used in the active voice by some NT authors, while Luke tends 
>regularly to use it in the middle, EUAGGELIZOMAI. There are other 
>verbs like this also, but that's a very common one.

Thanks, Carl.

Paul Dixon

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

More information about the B-Greek mailing list