[B-Greek] Romans 7.19, 20

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Oct 5 01:04:40 EDT 2007


Dear Mitch,

This is a case where indicating the accents is not only helpful, but essential, so I have added them 
below. The EGW is probably not original, but that is a minor point:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mitch Larramore" <mitchlarramore at yahoo.com>
To: "B Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 5. oktober 2007 01:18
Subject: [B-Greek] Romans 7.19, 20


19 OU GAR hO\ QELW POIW AGAQON, ALLA hO\ OU QELW KAKON
TOUTO PRASSW

 20 EI DE hO\ OU QELW [EGW] TOUTO POIW, OUKETI EGW
KATERGAZOMAI AUTO, ALLA hH OIKOUSA EN EMOI hAMARTIA
>
> In verse 20, can OU modify POIW and resume verse 19's
> point of NOT doing the good? Therefore, Paul says, "if
> I do not do the thing (AGAQON) I desire, it is no
> longer...

The three times hO\ is the relative pronoun in neuter accusative, referring to the objects of the 
verbs:
19: For I do not do (the) good which I want (to do), but (the) bad which I do not want (to do), that 
(is what) I practice,
20: But if what I don't want (to do), (if) that (is what) I do, it is no longer...

Because OU immediately precedes QELW and is inside a relative clause, it can only modify QELW. The 
relative clause hO\ OU QELW is a unit and cannot be split up.

>... but I see QELW EGW TOUTO as a unit
> between OU...POIW.

TOUTO is syntactically the object for POIW, not QELW.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list