On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 07:55:26 -0600 "Carl W. Conrad" writes: > At 2:05 AM +0000 1/10/01, Mark Wilson wrote: > >hWN TO TELOS APWLEIA > >hWN hO QEOS hH KOILIA > >KAI hH DOZA EN THi AISCUNHi AUTWN > > > >Is the definite article with QEOS used > >to indicate its grammatical function? > > > >Could the second part above be translated: > >"whose belly [is] their god" > > Yes; of course "their" is implicit in the article; > since both hO QEOS and hH KOILIA have articles, > it doesn't matter which one you consider the > subject, and which the predicate noun. What seems particularly significant with the construction (articles on both the subject and the predicate nominative) is the identification of each with the other to the exclusive of all else: their god is their belly and their belly is their god. God is viewed as nothing else but their belly. Had there been no article on either KOILIA or QEOS, following the typical construction of articular noun ... anarthrous noun, indicating the subject and predicate respectively, then the most that could have been said is that the noun indicated by the article is part of the class indicated by the anarthrous noun, whether the nuance of the latter be indefiniteness or qualitativeness. Hence, hO QEOS KOILIA = God is bellyish (if qualitative), or God is a belly (if indefinitive). But, God could be something else, as well. Hence, the double articular construction argues that their belly and their belly alone is what they worship and serve. A serious indictment, indeed. Paul Dixon --- 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