attributive genitive in Luke 16

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Sep 17 13:08:29 EDT 2001


At 12:41 PM -0400 9/17/01, Rbsads at aol.com wrote:
>Carl writes:
>I don't believe there's an ounce of difference in this instance between TON
>OIKONOMON THS ADIKIAS  and TON OIKONOMON TON ADIKON in 16:8 or between EK TOU
>MAMWNA THS ADIKIAS and EK TOU MAMWNA TOU
>ADIKOU in 16:9. And yes, I do think these are attributive genitives.
>
>
>Dear Carl,
>
>Thank you.
>
>I guess there is no need to make the reading any more difficult than
>unrighteous manager and unrighteous mammon.
>
>Is there any anyway to determine whether the attributive genitive is
>describing a quality of a type of mammon (the unrighteous type of mammon) or
>is describing a quality that is common to all mammon (all mammon is
>unrighteous)?
>
>Is either interpretation possible, and then is the choice a matter only of
>personal understanding?

I do think that which subcategory of an adnominal genitive one recognizes
as most appropriate has more to do with translating into a target language
than it does with distinctions in the Greek original.

As for the possibility that there might be some righteous mammon, I'm
reminded of a line in "The King and I" where the king responds to Anna's
saying that the assertion that he is a barbarian is "a lie" with, "Not only
is it a lie, it is a FALSE lie." So it may well be that the descriptive
adjective "unrighteous" is more rhetorical than anything else.

Does any list-member want to argue for the sort of distinction Richard is
suggesting?
-- 

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
Most months: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/



More information about the B-Greek mailing list