οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι δι’ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον, καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου·
Gal. 4:13
The canon of Apollonius Dyscolus states that, "usually when a noun is modified by another noun in the genitive case, both nouns will have the article prefixed to them or neither will have the article." http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-gr ... 055383.html
The phrase δι’ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς in Galatians violates that canon. By contrast, the parallel phrase in Romans 6:19 does not violate the canon: ἀνθρώπινον λέγω διὰ τὴν ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν.
Troy Martin (Whose Flesh? JSNT, 1999) says that there is a possible explanation for this difference in N. Turner, 'Syntax', in J.G. Moulton, A grammar of New Testament Greek, III (1963) p. 180, but frustratingly, he does not share any explanation. I do not have access to this text. Nor do I have an explanation for the difference.
Would anyone like to comment on this problem? Is there any difference in meaning between these two parallel texts specifically related to following the canon or not?
Gal. 4:13 and the canon of Apollonius Dyscolus
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.
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.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: May 23rd, 2015, 10:09 pm
Gal. 4:13 and the canon of Apollonius Dyscolus
Last edited by Stephen Carlson on July 3rd, 2015, 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Corrected spelling in the title.
Reason: Corrected spelling in the title.
-
- Posts: 611
- Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
- Location: Finland
- Contact:
Re: Gal. 4:13 and the canon of Apolonins Dyscolus
I'm not going to write the whole section "Absence of Article before a noun which governs a genitive" here. It's also difficult to decide what part is most relevant. But it says:
Turner is famous for using semitism as explanation for NT grammar/syntax. Mostly he hasn't been followed, so the explanation may not be correct, although the notion is.But the canon must be modified to this extent, that the governing noun may be anarthrous while while the governed is articular [...] ; this through Heb. influence.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: May 23rd, 2015, 10:09 pm
Re: Gal. 4:13 and the canon of Apolonins Dyscolus
Thanks Eeli!