[B-Greek] Rev. 19:21--names written on what??
webb at selftest.net
Fri Nov 24 18:39:39 EST 2006
Does it move you towards Lattimore and me for me to observe that John likes
using EXWN with a neuter singular subject?
KAI TO TRITON ZWiON ECWN TO PROSWPON hWS ANQRWPOU (Rev. 4:7)
KAI TA TESSARA ZWiA hEN KAQ hEN AUTWN ECWN ANA PTERUGAS hEX (Rev. 4:8)
KAI EIDON EN MESWi TOU QRONOU KAI TWN TESSARWN ZWiWN KAI EN MESWi TWN
PRESBUTERWN ARNION hESTHKOS hWS ESFAGMENON ECWN KERATA hEPTA (Rev. 5:6)
KAI EIDON KAI IDOU NEFELH LEUKH KAI EPI THN NEFELHN KAQHMENON hOMOION hUION
ANQRWPOU ECWN EPI THS KEFALHS AUTOU STEFANON CRUSOUN (Rev. 14:14) Or would
the attraction to the gender of ANQRWPOS be predicted in non-solecistic
KAI EIDON GUNAIKA KAQHMENHN EPI QHRION KOKKINON GEMONTA ONOMATA BLASFHMIAS
ECWN KEFALAS hEPTA KAI KERATA DEKA (Rev. 17:3)
KAI EPI THN KEFALHN AUTOU DIADHMATA POLLA ECWN ONOMA GEGRAMMENON hO OUDEIS
OIDEN EI MH AUTOS (Rev. 19:12)
KAI TO TEICOS THS POLEWS ECWN QEMELIOUS DWDEKA (Rev. 21:14)
Note that John is also capable of doing it right (either that, or somebody
has fixed it extremely early in transmission--it sounds about the same in
dictation, anyway, right?):
KAI EIDON EK THS QALASSHS QHRION ANABAINON ECON KERATA DEKA KAI KEFALAS
hEPTA (Rev. 13:1)
Now, on a totally different tack, can one take ECWN with what precedes? Thus
(observe the comma):
KAI EPI THN KEFALHN AUTOU DIADHMATA POLLA ECWN, ONOMA GEGRAMMENON hO OUDEIS
OIDEN EI MH AUTOS (Rev. 19:12)
Once again I guess the assumption would have to be that GEGRAMMENON is
singular because he's thinking distributively.
I'll be glad if any of this works, because those crowns want names on them.
From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu]
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 2:28 PM
Cc: 'B Greek'
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Rev. 19:21--names written on what??
On Nov 24, 2006, at 4:57 PM, Webb wrote:
> KAI EPI THN KEFALHN AUTOU DIADHMATA POLLA ECWN ONOMA GEGRAMMENON hO
> OIDEN EI MH AUTOS
> Given that neuter plural nouns are often treated grammatically as
> I immediately took the "name written" as inscribed on each of the
> crowns, thus:
> .and on his head are many royal crowns. They have a name (or names,
> implicitly, the singular functioning as distributive) written on
> them, which
> nobody knows but him."
The reason this won't do is that the participle ECWN is masc. sg.
nom. -- it cannot possibly modify DIADHMA sg. or DIADHMATA pl. It can
only refer to the rider of the horse, although it is awkwardly
positioned -- another of the grammatical irregularities of this book
that we commonly refer to as "solecisms."
> Looking at 35 English translations or so, I couldn't find a single
> one that
> took it that way. But then.I read Lattimore:
> "On his head are many diadems, inscribed with the name which no one
> except himself."
> I love it when Lattimore and I agree all by ourselves :)
> Can anyone tell me why Lattimore and I can't be correct?
> Webb Mealy
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
More information about the B-Greek