[B-Greek] 2 Cor 3:14b - subject of KATARGEITAI

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue May 19 02:00:51 EDT 2009

> "Paul is not linear in his thinking and writing ..."
> That was the main point of my last post. The argument that TO KALUMMA
> was the subject of the most recent finite verbs and should be
> understood as the subject of KATARGEITAI 2 Cor 3:14 assumes a linear
> development within Paul's argument.
> Elizabeth Kline

It appears that you mean something quite different by "linear development", and I don't understand 
the point you want to make.

What I was having in mind was the research done and documented by Dr. Robert B. Kaplan in his 1966 
article: "Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-Cultural Education", reprinted in "Landmark Essays in 
ESL Writing" (2001).

The Semitic circular thought pattern basically shows itself in three ways:

1. A tendency to repeat the same topic with different words for emphasis
2. A tendency to want to wrap up a theme even if linear chronology is then sacrificed. (The next 
theme picks up from a time preceding the end of the previous theme.)
3. A tendency to express a theme in 2 or 3 rounds, where the first round is sketchy like a headline, 
and the second is more detailed.

This is usually not indicated in the grammar, not even in Hebrew. It is not related to what is the 
grammatical subject of KATARGEITAI as this is a matter of Greek grammar, not Hebrew thought pattern.

Point 1 could explain why MH ANAKALUPTOMENON is repeated for emphasis and says essentially the same 
as TO AUTO KALUMMA MENEI. It reinforces that this veil is still in place, it has not been lifted up, 
even to this day ACRI THS SHMERON hHMERAS. It seems obvious to me that KALUMMA is the subject of all 
three: MENEI, ANAKALUPTOMEON, and KATARGEITEI, but it doesn't appear to be obvious to everybody.

Iver Larsen 

More information about the B-Greek mailing list