Re: MPol 10: Grammar questions

From: Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Date: Wed Jan 17 1996 - 10:28:28 EST


> In spite of the assurances I've received that the Didache and MPol are
>easy Greek (how depressing), I have a question or two about the
>text of MPol 10.
>1. 10:2. I'm unsure of what DEDIDAGMEQA is. I am guessing it is from
>DIDASKO, but I've no lexicon or pony which gives any of the perfect forms
>of DIDASKW. If, as I'm guessing, this is the Perf mid./pass ind, then
>it would be "we have been taught" I think, but I'm not sure, because I'm
>not sure it's indicative.

DEDIDAGMEQA is perf. pass. ind. and you have translated it well.

>2. 10:1, PROSPOIEI is rendered by Bauer and Lightfoot, "You pretend".
>I have a problem with that. This form could be either the 3ms Pres act ind.
>or it could be the 2ms Pres act imperative. The former makes no sense, but
>the latter would be a command, not a statement. Does non-NT Greek use the
>imperative for the indicative regularly (remember this is supposed to be
>easy Greek)?

The punctuation in the two texts that I have are punctuated with the
circumflex on the ultima, clearly pres. act. indicative. That is the only
possible form that will fit. Polycarp is presented as saying that the
Proconsul says, "He pretends to be ignorant of me, who I am." In Lightfoot
this is turned into an indirect statement in English.

>3. 10:2, SU MEN KAN LOGOU HXIWSA. Bauer renders this "I should have
>counted you
>worthy" and I add "of the word". Unless I'm mistaken, this is an indicative.
>Where does the "should" come from?

SU MEN KAN LOGOU HXIWSA should be rendered literally "I should have (KAN,
contrary to fact) considered you worthy of a word." LOGOS here probably
refers to a "discussion."

>4. 10:2, KATA TO PROSHKON. When I saw the KATA TO I expected an articular
>infinitive, not a prepostion+article+participle. Bauer says this means
>"as is fitting". Can someone explain this construction to me?
>
The infinitive APONEMEIN is used with DEDIDAGMEQA, "we have been taught to
give honor. KATA TO PROSHKON simply indicates that such action is what is
proper, "according to what is fitting." This does not expect an infinitive
to complete it since TO PROSHKON functions as a noun in the accusative
case.

Carlton Winbery
Chair Religion/Philosophy
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
fax (318) 442-4996 or (318) 487-7425



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:36 EDT