1. 1 Jn 1: 5a "ÎºÎ±Î¹ ÎµÏƒÏ„Î¹Î½ Î±Ï…Ï„Î· Î· Î±Î³Î³ÎµÎ»Î¹Î± Î·Î½ Î±ÎºÎ·ÎºÎ¿Î±Î¼ÎµÎ½ Î±Ï€' Î±Ï…Ï„Î¿Ï…..."
My question concerns the case of the relative pronoun, Î·Î½. Since it refers back to Î±Î³Î³ÎµÎ»Î¹Î± I would have expected the pronoun to be in the nominative case since its referent is nominative. The only way I can make a little sense of it is to say that it is the direct object of Î±ÎºÎ·ÎºÎ¿Î±Î¼ÎµÎ½, but I'm guessing. What's dictating the case of Î·Î½?
2. Why does the lexicon put accents over the connecting vowel in some cases when the connecting vowel does not appear when the word is actually used? example: Î±Î³Î±Ï€Î±'Ï‰ when the word would be Î±Î³Î±Ï€Ï‰ (circumflex on Ï‰, sorry, I don't know how to get my word processor to accent properly)
3. I'm trying to understand the middle voice better. Mounce says the "...verb in the middle voice in some way affects the subject." Does any action done by the subject to itself require a middle voice?
for example: I hit the ball (active)
I hit my foot (middle?)
also, perhaps related to this; Mounce " In the majority of cases, the middle has the same meaning as the active. Either they are deponents, or their middle meaning is active to the English mind." Can any one elaborate on this to help me understand how the English mind might view the middle differently than the Greek mind?
Thanks for all responses.