In a sentence that consists of two parts it is common to have the verb omitted from the second part.
1 Tim. 4:18 seems to have this happen with the direct object.
ῥύσεταί με ὁ κύριος ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔγου πονηροῦ καὶ σώσει εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐπουράνιον· με is omitted in the second half of the sentence, but it seems to be the object here as well.
Is this a comon thing? I can't recall seeing it before.
Implied direct object. (2 Tim. 4:18)
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
- klewlis
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:48 pm
- Location: Vancouver, Canada
- Contact:
are you sure that the object is the same in both clauses??
(just kidding, I'm sure it is)
I don't think it's REALLY common but I'm sure I've seen Paul at least doing it here and there. But I can't name any instances off the top of my head. :(
(just kidding, I'm sure it is)
I don't think it's REALLY common but I'm sure I've seen Paul at least doing it here and there. But I can't name any instances off the top of my head. :(
First say to yourself what you would be; then do what you need to do. ~Epictetus
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: Belgium
Here what I found in Aeschines, 2, 68 on Perseus
κάλει δέ μοι )αμύντορα )ερχιέα καὶ ἐκκλήτευε, ἐὰν μὴ θέλῃ δευρὶ παρεῖναι
"if you please, call Amyntor of the deme Herchia; if he does not come hither voluntarily, serve summons upon him." (Translation from Perseus)
The "upon him" matches the implied direct object of ἐκκλήτευε
κάλει δέ μοι )αμύντορα )ερχιέα καὶ ἐκκλήτευε, ἐὰν μὴ θέλῃ δευρὶ παρεῖναι
"if you please, call Amyntor of the deme Herchia; if he does not come hither voluntarily, serve summons upon him." (Translation from Perseus)
The "upon him" matches the implied direct object of ἐκκλήτευε