Articular Demonstratives

[Geoff]

I can't find any articular Demonstratives in the NT and so far none of the grammars I've looked at discuss that use. Are there any such uses in other koine, attic, et al writings and if so what would be their signifigance?

I'm comparing the uses of autos and the demonstratives

[klewlis]

I can't find any articular Demonstratives in the NT and so far none of the grammars I've looked at discuss that use. Are there any such uses in other koine, attic, et al writings and if so what would be their signifigance?

I'm comparing the uses of autos and the demonstratives

I'm not familiar with the term "articular demonstrative". What is it?

[Geoff]

I meant a demonstrative pronoun immediately preceded by the definite article (i.e. attributive position)

[klewlis]

oh!

Wallace says:
"The article is used with the demonstratives in predicate position to indicate attributive function. Demonstratives cannot stand in attributive position (e.g., between the article and noun). If they are related to an anarthrous noun, they function independently, as pronouns. Only when they are in predicate position to an articular noun can demonstratives be considered dependent and attributive." (p241)

I don't know why it *cannot* be used in the attributive position, or whether that applies to classical as well... perhaps someone else here can shed some light.

[Geoff]

Thanks Klewlis

I've never seen any uses where the article went with that pronoun, and didn't suspect any. I couldn't get logos to return any, but I'm not great at running searches. The notes from Wallace are useful.

[Kopio]

I only found one occurence with a Gramcord search.....Luke 22:23.

Hope this helps

[Bert]

I don't think that Luke 22:23 is an example of a demonstrative in an attributive position.
[face=SPIonic] kai\ au)toi\ h)/rcanto suzhtei=n pro\j e(autou\j to\ ti/j a)/ra ei)/h e)c au)tw=n o( tou=to me/llwn pra/ssein.[/face]
[face=SPIonic]o([/face] and [face=SPIonic]tou=to [/face]don't refer to the same thing. The one is masc. the other neut.
I think that [face=SPIonic]tou=to [/face]is a substantive here meaning, this thing ie, the betrayal.
[face=SPIonic]o([/face] maybe refers to [face=SPIonic]ti/j[/face] ? So that it becomes:"....the one who....

I have no idea what to do with [face=SPIonic]to\[/face]. Does it go with [face=SPIonic]tou=to[/face]?

[Skylax]

I don't think that Luke 22:23 is an example of a demonstrative in an attributive position.

I agree with you

The [face=SPIonic]o([/face] goes with [face=SPIonic]me/llwn[/face] :
[face=SPIonic]o( me/llwn[/face] = "the one who is (or : was) on the point to..."

I have no idea what to do with [face=SPIonic]to\[/face]. Does it go with [face=SPIonic]tou=to[/face]?

In my mind, this [face=SPIonic]to\[/face] makes the indirect question a kind of substantive : they ask the (question) "who would it be"