[B-Greek] STHKW e.g. Philippians 1:27

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Apr 13 08:04:42 EDT 2010


I'm only repeating in a different form what I said in my earlier comment on this matter:

The ordinary way to say "I am standing" (e.g. Luther, "Here I stand, I can do no other") in ordinary ancient Greek is hESTHKA. This is a perfect-tense verb form
used with a present-tense meaning.

What is so strange about turning this into a present-tense stem: STHKW?

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

On Apr 13, 2010, at 7:56 AM, Mark Lightman wrote:
> 
> 
> John Sanders wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> <There is only one verb here.  English does not have
> 
>  an equivalent verb used in the same way, so it may lead
> 
>  one to think that this verb is a strange animal of some kind.  It is
> not.>
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, John, and Hi, Stephen again,
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I'm inclined to think that a very strange animal is
> 
> exactly what STHKW is.  I might even call it a freak of
> 
> nature.  I think Stephen may have isolated a verb which
> 
> is absolutely unique in the Greek language in a pretty
> 
> fundamental way.  It is such a simple idea, to form a new
> 
> verb from the perfect, that I really expected there to be
> 
> more examples.  If you have STHKW you should have γνωκω
> 
> GNWKW.   You should have  βηκω (BHKW)  You should
> 
> even maybe have παιδευκω (PAIDEUKW)  Homer does
> 
> so many strange things to verbs that I would have
> 
> expected him to take a perfect and form a new verb
> 
> from it.  He does not, as far as I can tell, nor is there
> 
> any other example.  If I missed one, let me know. 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, in a sense, John is correct that STHKW is
> 
> not a new verb, but is just a form of hISTHMI.  But
> 
> what kind of a form?  What do we call it?  Bauer
> 
> calls it a "new creation from hESTHKA."  Thayer
> 
> calls it an "inferior Greek word."  Grundmann in
> 
> TDNT implies cryptically that it is derived from a non-
> 
> Attic dialect.  
> 
> 
> 
> In a sense you could just say that hISTHMI has
> 
> two different perfect forms, but (1) is there any other
> 
> verb that has two different perfect forms? and
> 
> (b) is there any other perfect with no reduplication?
> 
> and (c) is there any other perfect which has
> 
> the standard present endings?  That seems pretty
> 
> unique to me.  And is this a Second Perfect?  A Third?
> 
> It  looks  nothing like
> a  Second Perfect  (GEGRAFA)
> 
> and there is no Third Perfect,
> unless STHKW is the
> 
> only example of a  Third
> Perfect, in which case
> 
> this verb is even more of an odd
> duck.
> 
>  
> 
> As to what the verb means,  I
> like very much
> 
> what Grundmann says, whether it is true or not:
> 
> 
> 
> "The word STHKW seems to be preferred by Paul.
> 
> It is linked by him with the theological point...
> 
> that in faith man attains to a standing which
> 
> is not grounded in the world and in which he is set
> 
> by the Lord and will be upheld by Him, which gives
> 
> him freedom from the destructive powers of the
> 
> world, and which aims at fellowship in one spirit."
> 
>  
> 
> TDNT VII p. 638.
> 
> 
> 
> hISTHMI has to be the strangest verb in the Greek
> 
> NT.  If STHKW is merely a form of this verb,
> 
> alongside hESTHKA and ESTHN and ESTHSA, it is part of what
> 
> makes it so strange.  If STHKW is a different verb, it
> 
> is the second strangest verb in the Greek NT.
> 
> 
> 
> Carl has said that if you really want to understand
> 
> Greek verbs, you have to look at them as if they
> 
> were people, idiosyncratic members of an
> 
> extended, dysfunctional family.  If this is true,
> 
> hISTHMI/STHKW is like your crazy aunt that lives
> 
> in the basement. 
> 
> 
> 
> Grundmann notes that the verb survives in
> 
> Modern Greek as STEKW.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark L
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FWSFOROS MARKOS
> 
> --- On Sun, 4/11/10, Stephen Baldwin <stbaldwi at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Stephen Baldwin <stbaldwi at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [B-Greek] STHKW e.g. Philippians 1:27
> To: "B- Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Date: Sunday, April 11, 2010, 9:21 PM
> 
> 
> Ladies and Gentlemen:
> I was intrigued by the verb STHKW as found e.g. in Philippians 1:27.
> BDAG, BDF etc note that it is based on the perfect of hISTHMI -- which even a novice can at least detect ;-)
> 
> I would like to know how a verb like this is to be understood -- what nuances does such a verb bring, given that it is based on another verb, indeed how such verbs arise. It appears that the first occurrences of STHKW are in the NT.
> I did a brief comparison of hISTHMI versus STHKW in BDAG and to me, from the range of definitions given, that hISTHMI seems to carry "ingressive" nuances -- the initialisation of a state of standing etc. whereas STHKW seems to imply stative overtones -- that is, we are already in the state of standing or being committed.
> Is this a correct view of approaching the matter? It would seem to be at least from my example from Philippians -- that whether Paul comes or does not come to see them, that he might hear that they are [already] standing as/in one spirit etc.
> 
> How common is it to have a verb based off a particular stem of a [more common] verb? To the best of my recollection, this is the first time I have come across such a verb.
> I'm always a trifle disappointed that the more advanced commentaries that claim to focus more on the Greek [eg New International Greek Testament] more often than not, do not expound on these matters...
> 
> Stephen Baldwin
> stbaldwi at hotmail.com







More information about the B-Greek mailing list