From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Jan 09 2001 - 19:58:24 EST
At 5:02 PM +0200 1/9/01, Kimmo Huovila wrote:
>Why would EZHMIWQHN be a clear example of a middle -QHN ending? I fail
>to see anything discrepant here with a true semantic passive (unless it
>is considered that if a passive is used, the subject needs to be a
>passive recipient, which I think is confusing linguistic terminology
>(passive voice) with a non-technical term (a passive person)). The
>passive voice does not say whether the subject is passive or not. It
>only describes what happens to the subject, whether from his own
>initiative or someone else's. Or am I just missing the obvious here?
I'm not sure that I have much more by way of reply to say than I said
below, but if it's not clear, let me say up front that I am taking the
stance that -QH- aorists are NOT simply passive but that they are
middle-passive; moreover, doing a quick check for ZHMIOW in the GNT I find
only 6 instances: 5 of them are aorist "passive" -QH- forms (Mt 16:26, Mk
8:36, 2 Cor 7:9, Phil 3:8) and the other (1 Cor 3;15) is future "passive."
L&N even gives this as a "deponent": ZHMIOOMAI, and so I would say that in
terms of traditional terminology (which I abhor!) it's a "passive
deponent". In Phil 3:8 EZHMIWQHN takes a direct object TA PANTA (Yes, of
course, traditionally one could call this an acc. of respect or
specification, but the traditional terminology really requires an awful lot
of gobbledygook for what is a relatively simply matter); This verb simply
has no middle form EZHMIWSAMHN, but EZHMIWQHN functions for that and must
mean (so I think, at least): "for whose sake I allowed everything to go
down the drain." And that's what I mean by saying it's really middle (and
clearly so).
>"Carl W. Conrad" wrote:
>>
>> At 2:57 AM +0000 1/4/01, Mark Wilson wrote:
>> >Phil. 3:8
>> >
>> >ALLA MENOUNGE KAI hHGOUMAI PANTA ZHMIAN EINAI DIA TO hUPERECON THS GNWSEWS
>> >CRISTOU IHSOU TOU KURIOU MOU DI hON TA PANTA EZHMIWQHN KAI hHGOUMAI SKUBALA
>> >hINA CRISTON KERDHSW
>> >
>> >Would it be acceptable to consider hHGOUMAI, being in the Present Tense, as
>> >indicating that Paul still considers all things (not just his
>>pre-conversion
>> >assets) as loss? This would include various "attainments" in his Christian
>> >experience.
>>
>> Yes, I think it reflects his ongoing attitude, but to a certain extent this
>> has to be recognized as a rhetorical ploy: I don't think he is calculating
>> exactly what it is that he values as worthless and what it is that he
>> values as worthy; it's a comparative judgment: everything else over against
>> the worth of the one thing. He's stating an ATTITUDE, I'd think.
>>
>> >Also, can we understand EZHMIWQHN as middle, not passive? A commentary I am
>> >reading suggests this but only cites that others have recently come to see
>> >this as a middle (maybe they have been reading Carl's posts on the -QH
>> >endings). [Carl, I seem to recall you affirming that practically any -QH
>> >verbs, although passive in form, are candidates for middles.]
>>
>> Yes, I'd think this is a pretty clear instance of a -QHN middle, however
>> much we might want to say that ZHMIOW is a fully transitive verb and has
>> all three voices distinct. I'd prefer to say that EZHMIWQHN here MUST be
>> understood of an action in which Paul personally played a primary role of
>> initiation: "I have allowed myself to suffer loss of everything ..."--and
>> it's a good instance of what I have argued is the
>> nigh-unto-indistinguishable association of "middle" and "passive"
>> functions; unless there is some clear indication of an instrument or agent
>> initiating the action referred to, the verb functions as a sort of
>> reflexive.
>>
>> >The idea then would be that Paul did not receive loss in some passive
>>sense,
>> >but chose to experience loss of his own doing. Any ideas as to why the
>> >switch to an Aorist, sandwiched between two Presents?
>>
>> I'd say he's referring with the aorist to a conscious, deliberate adoption
>> of an attitude which, in the presents, he affirms that he still now holds.
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:46 EDT