cwconrad wrote:I think personally that the most important thing is Barry's last sentence: "It's clear what it means." Understanding the meaning of a standard formulation like τύποι τοῦ ποιμνίου precedes the endeavor to explain how such a construction actually works. I wouldn't call this an "objective genitive" because I don't really think that τύπος in this instance is a verbal noun. I agree that the sense of it must be something like "models for the congregation to emulate," but I rather doubt that the metaphorical verbal foundation for this Greek noun (τυμπάνω, "stamp, impress, make an impression") is anywhere near the surface of the author's or reader's consciousness. We have often noted the futility of efforts to categorize all the ways that adnominal genitive expressions are used; they are as numerous as English ways of attaching prepositional phrases with "of" to nouns or as English ways of hyphenating or linking two nouns to form combination nouns. I don't know the preferred terminology for this, but it's easy to see that this usage of an adnominal genitive in Greek is a structural combination and not really a combination bearing a specific semantic relationship between the nouns involved. So, what kind of a genitive is τοῦ ποιμνίου in τύποι τοῦ ποιμνίου? The Greek phrase is simply an adnominal genitive; the many, many names given to this construction by grammarians who are more concerned with how to carry it over into English won't tell you anything about what the Greek construction "in and of itself" means. I think that the most fascinating of all of Wallace's many adnominal genitives is the "aporetic genitive." This always puts me in mind of the Abbot & Costello baseball routine, "Who's on first, what's on second, and I don't know who's on third." -- calling an adnominal genitive an "aporetic genitive" is as good as calling it an "I don't know what kind of genitive it is genitive." Enough that we discern instantly or quickly guess what the Greek phrase must mean. Explaining it is harder.
Very well stated, and I think you are right, Carl, as you usually are.