Paul-Nitz wrote:Why is the accent ἔπαρον and ἔξελθε (on the antepenult - proparoxytone) when the general rule for verbs is that an accent cannot move past the division between the compounding preposition and the root?
Stephen Carlson wrote:Whose "general rule" is this? The rules in Smyth § 426, a and b, are different.
Paul-Nitz wrote:. . .
2) Five very common verbs have irregular accents in the Aorist imperative:
εἰπέ say, ἐλθέ come, εὑρέ find, ἰδέ see, λαβέ take.
Their plurals are messed up, too. εἰπέτε, ἐλθέτε, etc.;
But, compounds using these verbs are accented normally, κάτειπε, ἄπελθε, ἔφευρε, παράλαβε,
[not κατειπέ or παραλαβέτε, as might be expected]
(cf. Smyth 424)
Stephen Carlson wrote:I would have to say that you can't trust moveable nus in editions of the Greek New Testament. The usage is now editorial and not based on manuscripts, which vary widely. (I think Westcott and Hort tried to follow the manuscript usage, but that practice has been abandoned by later editors.)
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest