ἐάν τε γὰρ ζῶμεν, τῷ κυρίῳ ζῶμεν, ἐάν τε ἀποθνῄσκωμεν, τῷ κυρίῳ ἀποθνῄσκομεν.
ἐάν τε οὖν ζῶμεν ἐάν τε ἀποθνῄσκωμεν, τοῦ κυρίου ἐσμέν.
tdhigg01 wrote:But in the Romans passage, that compound verb, I believe, simply takes the dative.
timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:tdhigg01 wrote:But in the Romans passage, that compound verb, I believe, simply takes the dative.
I'm wondering what it means for a verb to "simply take the dative." Referring to the section you cited from Smyth, it appears that he's giving examples of verbs which — viewing Greek through the lens of English — take direct objects in the dative rather than the accusative. (Of course, it's nothing of the sort. These are not Greek verbs which take dative direct objects; they're Greek verbs whose relationship with their predicate arguments are expressed by using the dative rather than by using the accusative. It's merely coincidental that the English verbs used to translate them take direct objects in English.)
timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:But αποθνησκω is mostly (and specifically in this text) an intransitive verb. ἁμαρτίᾳ here is not an argument; it's an adjunct.
timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:And what does the compound nature of the verb have to do with anything?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest