[B-Greek] DOKIMOS GENOMENOS in JAMES 1:12
iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Jul 27 02:39:41 EDT 2007
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
> JAMES 1:12 MAKARIOS ANHR hOS hUPOMENEI PEIRASMON, hOTI DOKIMOS
> GENOMENOS LHMYETAI TON STEFANON THS ZWHS hON EPHGGEILATO TOIS
> AGAPWSIN AUTON.
> This verse is easy enough to read, but I am wondering if there is
> more than one way DOKIMOS GENOMENOS might be analyzed. In light of
> our recent discussion of fronted participle clauses, would we see
> DOKIMOS GENOMENOS as a temporal clause describing a process that must
> take place or perhaps a state that must be attained prior to LHMYETAI
> TON STEFANON ... ?
I would not consider this temporal just because of the participial clause. I
was suggesting that for fronted dative clauses. However, the participle
GENOMENOS connects to the verb LKMYETAI in the following clause. Since the
participle is aorist, the expectation is that this will have happened before
the action of the indicative verb it connects to. That it is fronted in my
view only suggests that there is a greater emphasis on this condition
relative to the result than if it had not been fronted. In English the
normal way of translating such a subordinated clause is by using When (when
he has become approved, he will receive...).
> Another question, does the nominative participle clause fill a
> syntactical slot in the following clause? Is it the subject of
> LHMYETAI or is the subject of DOKIMOS GENOMENOS coreferential with
> the subject of LHMYETAI?
> Elizabeth Kline
>From the standpoint of general descriptive linguistics, every verb has a
subject, but it may be implicit or only marked by an affix on the verb.
A clause does not fill a subject slot except possibly in special
circumstances of infinitives and impersonal constructions. The way I would
analyze this text, the subordinated clause doesn't fill any syntactical slot
in the following clause, since it is not a constituent of that clause, but a
subordinate clause in its own right. (Constituents of clauses are phrases.)
There is no explicit subject for LHMYETAI except the third person suffix.
The implicit subject for both this verb and the participle is ANHR, which is
carried over from the previous clause, and this word could have been
repeated. However, there is no need to repeat it.
This is a complicated sentence because it has embedded and rankshifted
First the main clause: MAKARIOS ANHR
Then an rankshifted relative clause that is a constituent in a noun phrase
and modifies the head noun ANHR:
hOS hUPOMENEI PEIRASMON
(It is called rankshifted, because of the ranking hierarchy where a sentence
consists of clauses, clauses consists of phrases and phrases consists of
words. A relative clause can function at the level of a modifying word like
an adjective, so it is a consitutent of a phrase rather than of a sentence.
It is shifted two ranks down.)
Then a subordinated reason clause: hOTI LHMYETAI TON STEFANON THS ZWHS
The head noun of the object noun phrase is modified by a rankshifted
relative clause which is a constituent in the noun phrase:
hON EPHGGEILATO TOIS AGAPWSIN AUTON
And we have another level of rankshifted clause here in that the dative
beneficient has an implicit relative clause: (those) who love him. The
article in Greek can often function to introduce a relative clause.
But there is another embedded (not rankshifted) clause subordinated to the
Clauses can be either coordinated or subordinated. I am happy to call it a
subordinate circumstantial clause, which is very general description.
More information about the B-Greek