[B-Greek] The Unattractiveness of Attraction?
George F Somsel
gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 3 23:49:08 EST 2010
Robertson has considerable to say regarding attraction, but it is scattered
about. I will give a couple of his comments.
10. Attraction of the Relative. A word only is needed about the attraction of
the relative, a matter treated properly in the chapter on Pronouns, which see.
Here it may only be noted that the genitive (as of other oblique cases) of the
relative sometimes appears with a verb when the case is due, not to the verb,
but to the antecedent. Thus we note
Regarding ὅστις he states
6. Case. There is little here that calls for comment. We do not have attraction
or incorporation. As a matter of fact only three cases occur (nom., gen., acc.).
The stereotyped phrase p 729 with ἕωςand the genitive, ἕως ὅτου, occurs five
times. Cf. Mt. 5:25; Lu. 12:50 (Luke three times, Matthew and John once each).
This is the only form of the shortened inflection. The LXX once (2 Macc. 5:10)
has ἥστινος, elsewhere ὅτου. The accusative is found in the N. T. only in the
neuter singular ὅτι(absent from modern Greek). But see (note 6, p. 728)
occasional ὅντιναand ἥντιναin the papyri. So Lu. 10:35, ὅτι ἂν προσδαπανήσῃς.
Cf. ὅτι ἄν, Jo. 2:5; 14:13; 15:16; ὅτι ἐάν, Mk. 6:23; 1 Cor. 16:2 f.; Col. 3:17;
ὅτιalone, Jo. 8:25; Ac. 9:6. The other examples are all in the nominative. In
Ac. 9:6 the clause is nominative. (pp 728-29)
… search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.
- Jan Hus
From: Stephen Baldwin <stbaldwi at hotmail.com>
To: B- Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 9:19:46 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] The Unattractiveness of Attraction?
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am perplexed and perhaps a little cynical about the concept of "attraction" in
One example [among several] occurs in Philippians 1:27-28 where, in Mounce's
Graded Reader, he quotes Fee (NICNT) saying that the hHTIS in v28 refers back to
the preceding clause refers back to the whole preceding clause (admittedly I do
not have Fee's work, I am quoting Mounce quoting Fee) and is in the feminine
because it is "attracted" to the gender of ENDEIXIS
hHTIS ESTIN AUTOIS ENDEIXIS
1:27-28: THi PISTEI TOU EUANGGELIOU KAI MH PTUROMENOI EN MEDENI hUPO TWN
[trust the transliteration attains the minimal acceptable standard]
I have consulted my grammars -- I even hoped, after my recent questions whether
A.T. Robertson might rise to the occasion, since there is precious little in any
of my other works on this subject. Alas he sits on the table in accordance with
Lightman's suggestion, awaiting a job holding down papers in the next tornado.
So is this thing called "attraction" apparent or real? Perhaps I am
uncomfortable with the terminology -- it is as if the words have a mind of their
own rather than a writer deliberately choosing the appropriate and grammatically
correct lexical form? If attraction is real, what purpose does it serve?
Or is "attraction" a catch-all when all logical, semantic, and grammatical
attempts to explain the case of a word have failed?
"oh it is not a,b,c,d therefore it is 'attraction'"
Any references, comments, clues welcomed!
stbaldwi at hotmail.com
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
περὶ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησεν(Lu. 3:19), an idiom common in Luke, but rare elsewhere,
as ἀστέρων οὓς εἶδες(Rev. 1:20). (p 512)
More information about the B-Greek