Paul Derouda wrote:I would put it the other way round: διδοναι η αγαπη
Paul Derouda wrote:I'd still leave διδοναι without the article... I must confess I'm not so good with Attic/Koine, I mostly know Homeric Greek, but still I think I'm right
So I'd say either "η αγαπη διδοναι εστιν" or "διδοναι η αγαπη".
Check Goodwin's Grammar:
There are some examples at § 1517 (under title "Infinitive without the article"). E.g. "το γνωναι επιστημην λαβειν εστιν"; λαβειν is analogous with διδοναι in my phrase, I think.
Also check § 956, "A predicate noun or adjective seldom takes the article"; I think this applies here, διδοναι being a kind of verbal noun.
It's an Attic grammar, but I wouldn't think that Koine's that different in this regard.
Please, please correct me if I am "the" error!
(the article "the" being ok in this English phrase, I hope, Finnish being my native tongue... )
Paul Derouda wrote:Thinking a bit further, the article often actually serves to point which word is subject and which word predicate - something that in English is expressed with word order.
"η αγαπη διδοναι" or "διδοναι η αγαπη" - love is giving
"το διδοναι αγαπη" or "αγαπη το διδοναι" - giving is love
Now if I'm wrong about this, I really want to corrected!
calvinist wrote:I think we need to keep in mind that this is a short proverb. Greek does not require definite articles to make something 'definite', even with abstract nouns. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the NT use abstract nouns and infinitives without articles at times? The article becomes assumed from context the same way as εστιν and the explicit use of the articles becomes more of a stylistic issue. Correct me if I'm wrong. The article can be used to distinguish subject/predicate as it is in John 1:1, but again I thought this was up to the author's style and whether or not he thought the phrase would be ambiguous.