Page 1 of 1

Revelation Chaps. 2 and 3

PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:33 pm
by bingley
Chapter 2:17 [face=SPIonic] (O e)/xwn ou)=j a)kousa/tw ti/ to\ pneu=ma le/gei tai=j e)kklhsi/aij. Tw=? nikw=nti dw/sw au)tw=? tou= ma/nna tou= kekrumme/nou, kai\ dw/sw au)tw=? yh=fon leukh/n, kai\ e)pi\ th\n yh=fon o)/noma kaino\n gegramme/non o(\ ou)dei\j oi)=den ei) mh\ o( lamba/nwn. [/face]

Chapter 2 26-28 [face=SPIonic]Kai\ o( nikw=n kai\ o( thrw=n a)/xri te/louj ta\ e)/rga mou, dw/sw au)tw=? e)cousi/an e)pi\ tw=n e)qnw=n, kai\ poimanei= au)tou\j e)n r(a/bdw? sidhra=? w(j ta\ skeu/h ta\ keramika\ suntri/betai, w(j ka)gw\ ei)/lhfa para\ tou= patro/j mou, kai\ dw/sw au)tw=? to\n a)ste/ra to\n prwino/n. [/face]

Chapter 3:12-13 [face=SPIonic] (O nikw=n poih/sw au)to\n stu/lon e)n tw=? naw=? tou= qeou= mou, kai\ e)/cw ou) mh\ e)ce/lqh? e)/ti, kai\ gra/yw e)p' au)to\n to\ o)/noma tou= qeou= mou kai\ to\ o)/noma th=j po)lewj tou= qeou= mou, th=j kainh=j )Ierousalh/m, h( katabai/nousa e)k tou= ou)ranou= a)po\ tou= qeou= mou, kai\ to\ o)/noma/ mou to\ kaino/n. [/face]

Chapter 3:21 [face=SPIonic] (O nikw=n dw/sw au)tw=? kaqi/sai met' e)mou= e)n tw=? qro/nw? mou, w(j ka)gw\ e)ni/khsa kai\ e)ka/qisa meta\ tou= patro/j mou e)n tw=? qro/nw? au)tou=.[/face]

My problem here is the expression [face=SPIonic] o( nikw=n. [/face]I've looked at various translations to check my work, and they agree that [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n [/face]in 2:26 and 3:21 is the one to whom things will be given rather than the one who will do the giving. Similarly in 3:12 they make it refer to the one who will be made a pillar rather than the one who will do the making. If this is correct, why is [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] in the nominative rather than in the dative or accusative as necessary, as in 2:17?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:02 pm
by Koala
According to sources on the net, these are examples of "a pendant nominative construction" where a description of something within the clause is placed in the nominative case and moved forward ahead of the clause for emphatic reasons - this may be influenced by Semitic style.

Hope this helps

XAIPE

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:54 pm
by ThomasGR
Can it be a case of passive or active voice?

“Τω νικωντι” sounds like “He who has won”
whereas “Ο νικων” emphasizes “He who is winning”.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:01 am
by bingley
Koala, could you point me to those sources please?

Thomas, the difference is one of case, not active v. passive or present v. present perfect. [face=SPIonic] (o nikwn [/face] should agree with the subject of the sentence, which is I in [face=SPIonic] dwsw [/face] and [face=SPIonic] poihsw [/face]

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:49 am
by Koala
Hi Bingley! - the ones from google are:

lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/ b-greek/2004-March/028816.html

lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/ b-greek/2004-March/028809.html

www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=2070

www.bible.org/netbible/1jo5_notes.htm

these refer to the indentical construction in a passage from "1 John 5", and basically all make the same comment

Cheers

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:34 pm
by Skylax
This passage of the Revelation is strongly structured. It is poetry. There is like a succession of stanzas made on the same pattern. I would say that [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] acts here as the title of the concluding paragraph of each stanza.

The grammatical construction is always the same : first [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] then immediately after the verb in the 1st person singular (excluding instantaneously that [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] is a subject of the verb) then a pronoun that refers to [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] expressing the case that is needed.

This way of expression seems stronger than putting [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] directly in the needed case because the "victor"'s picture is presented more separately, not as a mere complement of the verb. It is more striking.

(By the way I saw that Article + Nominative can be used in the Koine as a vocative, but it is obviously not the case here)

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:59 pm
by bingley
Skylax wrote:
The grammatical construction is always the same : first [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] then immediately after the verb in the 1st person singular (excluding instantaneously that [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] is a subject of the verb) then a pronoun that refers to [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] expressing the case that is needed.


Now, you see this is what I don't understand. My first instinct was to translate [face=SPIonic] (O nikw=n dw/sw [/face]as I, the conquering one, will give .....

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:23 pm
by Skylax
Ah, yes, I had not envisage it, but in this case there would perhaps be no article. Aristophanes says somewhere [face=SPIonic]e)gw\ ta)lhqh= le/gwn...[/face] "I, the one who says the truth...". Moreover, in the context, this interpretation would be a dead end.

XAIPE

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
by Bert
Skylax wrote:This passage of the Revelation is strongly structured. It is poetry. There is like a succession of stanzas made on the same pattern. I would say that [face=SPIonic]o( nikw=n[/face] acts here as the title of the concluding paragraph of each stanza.


Skylax, I have read before that Revelation was written by someone who was not all that comfortable with the Greek language.
I have also read another view namely, it was written by someone who knew the language very well but wrote in simple Greek, with a few little mistakes, to make his readers feel more comfortable.

If he wrote something in poetry, the second option seems more likely.
Do you have any views on this.
Thanks.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:20 pm
by Skylax
Well, Bert, what I said has no scientific value. I described only the way the text appears to me. It implies nothing regarding the personality of the author. After all, everybody can be a poet sometimes (Do you remember the first time you saw her ?). I meant that in the text, there are poetic resources at work, but it is by no means "Greek verse".