EXERA(S)MA 2Peter 2:22
Clwinbery at aol.com
Clwinbery at aol.com
Sat Jan 5 17:12:30 EST 2002
In a message dated 1/4/02 9:59:45 AM, tichy at cmtfnw.upol.cz writes:
On 2 Jan 02 at 20:15, Thomas J. Kraus wrote:
>> Dear colleagues,
>> there is a minor textcritical issue related to 2Peter 2:22 where most
>> the best of the witnesses read
>> TO IDION EXERAMA
>> However, there is quite a number of minuscules together with Codex Bezae
>> TON IDION EXERASMA
>> [A third alternative is TON IDION EMETON in some minuscules and presented
>> some fathers, which is no problem to be explained].
>> Well, the form EXERASMA has made me ponder for a while: where does it
>> originate from? All my tools did not have a satisfying answer. Definitely,
>> EXERAMA derived from EX+ERAW, is very rare (Disc. de venen. 19).
>> Furthermore, there is EXERASIS, -EWS (vomiting; Eust. 1856.5) which
>> help to find out more about EXERASMA. But no matter how I try I cannot
>> EXERASMA in a clear etymological or morpholical line to explain its
>> Of course, there is the same root to count on. Maybe, the scribes made
>> mistake (I doubt that because of the features of the several witnesses)
>> they mixed up paradigmata of word formation from EX+ERAW to EXERASMA
>> But how?
>> I welcome any comment on that. Up to now I have not found any other
>> EXERASMA in literal texts, inscriptions, or documentary papyri.
>> Thomas J. Kraus (in need of help)
>EXERAMA is formed regularly from the verb EXERAW. EXERASMA, which I
>could not find in any dictionary, would be derived from the verb
>*EXERAZW or *EXERASSW.
I think that EXERASMA would come from EXERAW in the same way that KELEUSMA
(an order of command) comes from KELEUW (to give an order or command).
The difference between the two choices in the mss, etc. would be a matter
of choice. The S before a suffix starting with M or Q is called an epenthetic
S, i.e., used to smooth the pronunciation of the word. In some cases, at
least, the transformation of a verb to a noun by adding the suffix MA,
MATOS makes the noun refer to the thing done, hence the verb EXERAW (to
eject, vomit) with the addition (S)MA refers to that which is ejected.
It seems I remember Carl talking last week about the addition of S in such
cases. I haven't had time to check. My wife says that I can't remember
people unless they lived 2000 years ago. I hope that's not medically
More information about the B-Greek