[b-greek] inverse attraction in Rom 6.17?

From: Steven Lo Vullo (doulos@merr.com)
Date: Tue Jan 22 2002 - 02:43:20 EST


<x-flowed>
Hi all:

Another pronoun question!

Rom 6.17: CARIS DE TWi QEWi hOTI HTE DOULOI THS hAMARTIAS hUPHKOUSATE DE
EK KARDIAS EIS hON PAREDOQHTE TUPON DIDACHS ...

I'm trying to determine the relationship between hON and TUPON.
According to Wallace, this is a case of "inverse attraction" (p. 339).
In other words, whereas a relative pronoun will sometimes be attracted
to the case of its antecedent, in this case (and others) the antecedent
is attracted to the case of the relative pronoun. This would mean that
TUPON is actually the object of hUPHKOUSATE, even though hUPHKOUSATE
would normally take a dative direct object, not an accusative. TUPON is
accusative because it has been attracted to the case of hON. On the
other hand, Robertson says that TUPON has been incorporated INTO the
relative clause. Which is the correct way to understand this
construction?
==========

Steven Lo Vullo
Madison, WI


---
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


</x-flowed>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:16 EDT