Acts:6-9 grammar help

[PeterD]

[face=SPIonic]Xai/rete pai=dej,[/face]

Holy Zeus! It's around 4am Saturday morning here in Montreal -- bad case of insomnia induced by Greek Grammar stress! So please bare with me if I'm a little incorent.

I have some questions about sentence patterns -- i.e., subordinate participial clauses, etc. -- and just plain grammar. For instance,

Acts 1:6: [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n ou)=n sunelqo/ntej h)rw/twn au)to\n le/gontej, Ku/rie, ei) e)n tw=| xro/nw| tou/tw| a)pokaqista/neij th\n basilei/an tw=| )Israh/l;[/face]
Here we have two subordinate participial clauses: [face=SPIonic]sunelqo/ntej[/face] and [face=SPIonic]le/gontej.[/face] Would the principal clause then be the entire verse [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n...tw=| )Israh/l[/face] or just the direct question: [face=SPIonic]Ku/rie, ei) ... tw=| )Israh/l[/face]?

Acts 1:8: ... [face=SPIonic]kai\ e(/wj e)sxa/tou th=j gh=j[/face] why is the adjective [face=SPIonic]e)sxa/tou[/face] in the neuter and not fem.?

Acts 1:9: [face=SPIonic]kai\ tau=ta ei)pw\n blepo/ntwn au)tw=n e)ph/rqh[/face]. I have here a genitive absolute subordinate participial clause: [face=SPIonic]blepo/ntwn au)tw=n[/face]. Since the finite verb in the main clause is in the aorist and the participle is in the present, can I translate this as "And when He had said these things, as they were watching Him, He was raised up" ? Why is [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] genitive plural and not genitive singular since we are saying HIM and not Them?

Thanks a million,

PeterD

[Bert]

Your first question I'll leave for someone more knowledgeable

Acts 1:8: ... [face=SPIonic]kai\ e(/wj e)sxa/tou th=j gh=j[/face] why is the adjective [face=SPIonic]e)sxa/tou[/face] in the neuter and not fem.?

My abridged lexicon (shorter Gingrich and Danker) has about [face=SPIonic]e)/sxatoj [/face]as a substantive " [face=SPIonic]to\ e)/sxatoj [/face]". It gives two examples Acts 1:8 and Acts 13:47.

Acts 1:9: [face=SPIonic]kai\ tau=ta ei)pw\n blepo/ntwn au)tw=n e)ph/rqh[/face]. I have here a genitive absolute subordinate participial clause: [face=SPIonic]blepo/ntwn au)tw=n[/face]. Since the finite verb in the main clause is in the aorist and the participle is in the present, can I translate this as "And when He had said these things, as they were watching Him, He was raised up" ? Why is [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] genitive plural and not genitive singular since we are saying HIM and not Them?

I think, " as they watched" is fine, but not " as they watched Him". [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] refers to 'they', the ones doing the watching.
I hope I was helpful.

[PeterD]

Thank you.

[klewlis]

Acts 1:6: [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n ou)=n sunelqo/ntej h)rw/twn au)to\n le/gontej, Ku/rie, ei) e)n tw=| xro/nw| tou/tw| a)pokaqista/neij th\n basilei/an tw=| )Israh/l;[/face]
Here we have two subordinate participial clauses: [face=SPIonic]sunelqo/ntej[/face] and [face=SPIonic]le/gontej.[/face] Would the principal clause then be the entire verse [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n...tw=| )Israh/l[/face] or just the direct question: [face=SPIonic]Ku/rie, ei) ... tw=| )Israh/l[/face]?

If I were diagramming this, I would consider the main clause to be:
[face=SPIonic]Oi( sunelqo/htej h)rw/twn au)to\n[/face]

Everything else modifies...

Acts 1:8: ... [face=SPIonic]kai\ e(/wj e)sxa/tou th=j gh=j[/face] why is the adjective [face=SPIonic]e)sxa/tou[/face] in the neuter and not fem.?

It's functioning as a substantival, not an adjective, and it's being modified by [face=SPIonic] th=j gh=j[/face] :)

Acts 1:9: [face=SPIonic]kai\ tau=ta ei)pw\n blepo/ntwn au)tw=n e)ph/rqh[/face]. I have here a genitive absolute subordinate participial clause: [face=SPIonic]blepo/ntwn au)tw=n[/face]. Since the finite verb in the main clause is in the aorist and the participle is in the present, can I translate this as "And when He had said these things, as they were watching Him, He was raised up" ? Why is [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] genitive plural and not genitive singular since we are saying HIM and not Them?

I believe Bert is right here. It may make more sense to see it quite literally: "during the watching of them".

[PeterD]

Makes sense. Thank you Canucks.

[Skylax]

Sorry I had not seen bert's and klewlis' fine replies before posting.

I have some questions about sentence patterns -- i.e., subordinate participial clauses, etc. -- and just plain grammar. For instance,

Acts 1:6: [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n ou)=n sunelqo/ntej h)rw/twn au)to\n le/gontej, Ku/rie, ei) e)n tw=| xro/nw| tou/tw| a)pokaqista/neij th\n basilei/an tw=| )Israh/l;[/face]
Here we have two subordinate participial clauses: [face=SPIonic]sunelqo/ntej[/face] and [face=SPIonic]le/gontej.[/face] Would the principal clause then be the entire verse [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n...tw=| )Israh/l[/face] or just the direct question: [face=SPIonic]Ku/rie, ei) ... tw=| )Israh/l[/face]?

I am afraid my parsing habits are not yours.
For me, a "clause" (in French "proposition") is made up of a subject and a verb (whatever the case of the subject), having a role AS A GROUP in the sentence. So I see [face=SPIonic]sunelqo/ntej[/face] as a participle in apposition to [face=SPIonic]oi([/face], the subject of the main verb [face=SPIonic]h)rw/twn[/face] and [face=SPIonic]le/gontej[/face] as a predicate of the same [face=SPIonic]oi([/face]. So, for me, the entire group [face=SPIonic]Oi( me\n ou)=n sunelqo/ntej h)rw/twn au)to\n le/gontej[/face] forms a clause introducing the direct discourse (which is not strictly speaking "subordinate"....)… if it is a direct discourse at all : yes, the vocative would denote a direct discourse but [face=SPIonic]ei)[/face] introduces an indirect question, so what ? In any case, I see two « clauses » in this sentence.

Acts 1:8: ... [face=SPIonic]kai\ e(/wj e)sxa/tou th=j gh=j[/face] why is the adjective [face=SPIonic]e)sxa/tou[/face] in the neuter and not fem.?

to\ e)/sxaton : the end (« the extreme thing »)

Acts 1:9: [face=SPIonic]kai\ tau=ta ei)pw\n blepo/ntwn au)tw=n e)ph/rqh[/face]. I have here a genitive absolute subordinate participial clause: [face=SPIonic]blepo/ntwn au)tw=n[/face]. Since the finite verb in the main clause is in the aorist and the participle is in the present, can I translate this as "And when He had said these things, as they were watching Him, He was raised up" ?

Yes, you can. It is right.

Why is [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] genitive plural and not genitive singular since we are saying HIM and not Them?

In your translation, [face=SPIonic]au)tw=n[/face] is translated by « they », it is the subject in the genitive of [face=SPIonic]blepo/ntwn[/face]. Him is added. The Greek expresses simply « as they were watching ».



[face=SPIonic]Xai=re kai\ su/, te/knon[/face]

[PeterD]

Nothing to be sorry about . Thank you as well for your input.

Have a great weekend all.