Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3638
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 12th, 2012, 1:04 pm

Where do I find the antecedent of ὃς in Romans 4:25?
Romans 4 wrote:23 οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι’ αὐτὸν μόνον ὅτι ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ, 24 ἀλλὰ καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς οἷς μέλλει λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγείραντα Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ἐκ νεκρῶν, 25 ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν.
ὃς obviously must refer to Jesus, but I don't see a reference to Jesus that agrees with it in case.
0 x


ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Mark Lightman
Posts: 300
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:30 pm

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Mark Lightman » March 12th, 2012, 1:37 pm

Hi, Jonathan,

The case of the relative pronoun (ἡ πτώσις τοῦ ὑποτακτικοῦ ἄρθρου) agrees not with its antecedent (unless attraction occurs) but is determined by its function in its own clause.

Here τὸν κύριον, though accusative (αἰτιατικόν) is the antecedent of the ὃς, even though the latter is nominative (ὄνομαστικόν.)
0 x

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3638
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 12th, 2012, 1:51 pm

Ah, thanks - a rather basic mistake on my part. (Here's where Funk explains this.)
667.1 The relative pronoun agrees with the item in the inserted sentence which it replaces and the item in the matrix sentence to which it refers (they are the same item) in gender and number.

667.2 The relative pronoun takes its case from its use in its own clause (the inserted sentence), i.e. it takes the case the item it replaces had in the independent sentence.
670. It was stipulated in §667 that a relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender and number but takes its case from its use in its own clause. This is in fact not always the case. The relative is commonly attracted or assimilated to the case of its antecedent, especially where the relative ought to be accusative (by the rule) and the antecedent is genitive or dative. Attraction is understandably more common where other items do not intervene between antecedent and relative.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2864
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Stephen Carlson » March 12th, 2012, 2:28 pm

Mark Lightman wrote:The case of the relative pronoun (ἡ πτώσις τοῦ ὑποτακτικοῦ ἄρθρου) agrees not with its antecedent (unless attraction occurs) but is determined by its function in its own clause.
Your use of meta-language to explain this point is spot on! :D

Στέφανος
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Mark Lightman
Posts: 300
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:30 pm

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Mark Lightman » March 12th, 2012, 2:40 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Your use of meta-language to explain this point is spot on!

Στέφανος
As is the way you spelled τὀ ὄνομἀ σου. (hi, Jeffrey Requadt.)
0 x

cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by cwconrad » March 12th, 2012, 2:41 pm

Jonathan Robie wrote:Where do I find the antecedent of ὃς in Romans 4:25?
Romans 4 wrote:23 οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι’ αὐτὸν μόνον ὅτι ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ, 24 ἀλλὰ καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς οἷς μέλλει λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγείραντα Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ἐκ νεκρῶν, 25 ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν.
ὃς obviously must refer to Jesus, but I don't see a reference to Jesus that agrees with it in case.
ἆρα μὴ γέγραπται· Ὦ ἀνόητε, τίς σε ἐβάσκανεν, ᾧ κατ᾿ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη;

The antecedent of ὃς is ]Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν.
0 x
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

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

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3638
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 12th, 2012, 8:15 pm

cwconrad wrote:
Ὦ ἀνόητε wrote:Where do I find the antecedent of ὃς in Romans 4:25?
Romans 4 wrote:23 οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι’ αὐτὸν μόνον ὅτι ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ, 24 ἀλλὰ καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς οἷς μέλλει λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγείραντα Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ἐκ νεκρῶν, 25 ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν.
ὃς obviously must refer to Jesus, but I don't see a reference to Jesus that agrees with it in case.
ἆρα μὴ γέγραπται· Ὦ ἀνόητε, τίς σε ἐβάσκανεν, ᾧ κατ᾿ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη;
A pun on Galatians 3:1, of course:
Galatians 3:1 wrote:Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται, τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν, οἷς κατ᾽ ὀφθαλμοὺς ᾽Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη ἐσταυρωμένος;
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3638
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 12th, 2012, 8:30 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:Your use of meta-language to explain this point is spot on! :D
Could anyone give an equally good answer without meta-language? Or with meta-language in Greek?

Carl chose to use a graphical meta-language here:
cwconrad wrote:
Romans 4 wrote:23 οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι’ αὐτὸν μόνον ὅτι ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ, 24 ἀλλὰ καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς οἷς μέλλει λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγείραντα Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ἐκ νεκρῶν, 25 ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν.
But in his reluctance to use traditional meta-language, Carl didn't really address my misunderstanding, so it's good that Mark didn't have such inhibitions :lol: :lol: :lol:
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2864
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Stephen Carlson » March 12th, 2012, 8:45 pm

Jonathan Robie wrote:Could anyone give an equally good answer without meta-language? Or with meta-language in Greek?
I'd say it's impossible because your question included the meta-language term "antecedent."

Στέφανος
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3638
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Romans 4:25 - antecedent of ὃς

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 12th, 2012, 9:59 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Jonathan Robie wrote:Could anyone give an equally good answer without meta-language? Or with meta-language in Greek?
I'd say it's impossible because your question included the meta-language term "antecedent."
But that's a characteristic of language and discourse, not just a characteristic of my question.

It's hard for me to discuss the relationships among these clauses without some meta-language, because the fundamental confusion involves "cases" and "agreement" and identifying the antecedent", where everything in quotes is a term from the meta-language. Somehow, we need a way to discuss the relationship between these things to see "how" the text says something.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”