[b-greek] Re: "Syntactical Chiasmus"

From: Stephen C. Carlson (scarlson@mindspring.com)
Date: Tue Jan 30 2001 - 13:19:21 EST


At 10:40 AM 1/30/01 -0600, Steven Craig Miller wrote:
>Here the answer is simple. Given the FACT
>that he did not indicate a change in subject, normal Greek syntax would
>assume that the subjects of 6c and 6d are the same. Why do you dismiss this
>interpretation out of hand?

I have never "dismiss[ed] this interpretation out of hand." I have
merely expressed doubts that "normal Greek syntax" is sufficient to
decide the issue without investigating the very real possibility that
an authentic Semitic poetical form is being used here.

It is true that you do not appear to have been convinced by me and
others that there is an authentic Semitic poetical form in Matt 7:6,
but I'm not here to educate you on Semitic poetry. If you are truly
interested, you'd do better to read a book like C.C.Burney's THE
POETRY OF OUR LORD than to listen to me anyway.

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@mindspring.com
Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35

---
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 - 15:36:49 EDT