From: RUSSELL RANKIN (rrankin@isd.net)
Date: Tue Jan 16 2001 - 19:17:26 EST
Harold,
From your reply, I think I was unclear in my comments. I am looking at KAI
in the beginning of v.1 and v.3 as Hebraisms introducing a new thought. I
see the other KAI's in vv.1-2 as connecting ideas. Therefore, I was placing
a comma or semi-colon at the end of v.1 and making v.2 a completion of the
thought begun in v.1. Is this grammatically possible according the Greek
structure?
What I see done sometimes in English translations is that a long Greek
sentence is broken down into several sentences. I wonder if this is
possibly the case in vv.1-2?? The Kurt Aland Text does this with vv.3-4;
they place a period after KAI...ETI. Then KAI HO QRONOS begins a new
thought with a comma at the end of v.3 implicating the KAI's in v.4 are
connecting the ideas begun in v.3. Some English translations separate it
differently.
Is it just too unnatural a reading of the Greek to see vv.1 and 2 a one
thought related to the "river"? What would not allow this? Maybe the word
AUTHS?
Thanks for your patience.
Russ
-----Original Message-----
From: Harold R. Holmyard III [mailto:hholmyard@ont.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 7:01 AM
To: Biblical Greek
Subject: [b-greek] RE: Rev.22:2
Dear Russell,
You write:
The Kurt Aland, and others, Text also breaks v.1 from v.2 but
>are not consistent in their use of KAI as the beginning of an new sentence.
>I realize KAI can, and does have more than one use, one being a Hebraism
>introducing a new thought, anther connecting ideas, and still another
>linking a sentence together.
>
>What about KAI in Rev.22:1 introducing v.1 with v.2 as one unit? Then KAI
>introducing v.3? The same with v.4, v.5, and v.6 respectively beginning a
>new thought with KAI? Verses 1-2 then list the things EDEIZEN MOI ("he
>showed me"): river, throne, street, tree of life/leaves? Is this
>grammatically possible?
No, I do not think so. The KAI at the start of Rev 22:1 cannot connect
verse 1 with verse 2.
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
Dallas, TX
>
>I see that "are" can be understood and have no difficulty with supplying
it,
>but wonder about other possibilities.
>
>Thanks to you and others for explaining.
>
>Russ
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harold R. Holmyard III
>Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 9:49 PM
>To: Biblical Greek
>Subject: [b-greek] RE: Rev.22:2
>
>
>Dear Russell,
>
>You ask:
>>
>>I notice some translations supply "were" in the last of Rev.22:2. Others
>>"are". Is there a need for an understood verb in KAI TA FULLA TOU CULOU
>EIS
>>QERAPEIAN TWN EQNWN (and the leaves of the trees for healing the nations)?
>>Or is a verb understood by or dependant upon an earlier verb or the tense
>of
>>the participles in the context?
>
>The UBS Greek NT editors thought that the sentence ended between 22:1 and
>22:2. That does seem a good logical break. If verse 1 was supposed to
>continue, one would expect at least a word like KAI ("and") at the
>beginning of 22:2. Yet I wondered if there might be a series with three
>main items (river of life, tree, no curse: v. 1, v. 2, and v. 3). However
>both verses 1 and 3 have main verbs; it seems odd that the middle item in a
>series would lack the verb. No, I think that verse 2 should have a verb
>supplied.
>
> Yours,
> Harold Holmyard
> Dallas, TX
---
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 - 15:36:47 EDT