[sword-devel] kjv2003: two splits needed?
10 Dec 2002 10:53:55 -0500
I apologize if I've added to the confusion in something I said which
Anyway, Moulton's statement surprised me, so I looked up some things in
Robertson's big tome. He mentions that "Moulton finds several examples
in late papyri of hO as relative," so hO as relative is fairly common in
the Koine. Moulton is claiming, though, it doesn't occur in the NT.
Robertson also mentions a scholar named Mayser as inclined to regard hO
KAI as relative. He also mentions that hO KAI was very common in NT
times with what he calls "double names". He cites Acts 13:9 where we
have "Saul, also Paul".
I think the issue really boils down to more of a translation issue than
a "how does one tag the Greek text" issue. It's about the differences
in language; that is, between the original Greek language and how we in
English do the same thing. In Greek they didn't need to use a relative
to do what John does in Rev. 1:9. They could simply say, EGW IWANNHS,
hO [KAI] ADELFOS hUMWN. How do we say the same meaning in English?
Well, we very likely would use the relative pronoun `who'. So, how do
you tag it then? As an article because that is the syntax the original
author is using? Or as a relative, since that is the meaning the
original author is using?
Robertson cites Rev. 1:4,8; 11:17 and says, "One either has to say that
here hO is used as a relative or that it is a relative. It all comes to
the same in the end."
And that really sums up the issue here. Some Sword users will want
searches on syntax (that is, a focus on the FORMS). Others will want to
search based on semantics (that is, a focus on MEANING). You need both
sets of tags and they need to be cleanly seperated--something no Greek
grammars have been able to do.
My recommendation, for what it might be worth: tag it as an article
since we don't have a clean separation between syntactic and semantic
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 08:48, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Keith Ralston wrote:
> > The article hO functions as a relative pronoun in this sentence. You should
> Do you have any proof for that? Moulton says in his grammar (syntax)
> that "There is no instance of the article as a reletive pronoun in the
> NT" (page 37). Nor does BAGD give it that meaning. Is that possible in
> Koine generally? If it is, then it might be so because our TR text adds
> "kai" which is not in USB NT and the syntax might be different.
> Is there anyone amongst us who really knows or is this just guessing? I
> don't know how competent you others are. I'm just an amateur.
> > > Leave a note, we'll tag it manually. It's much easier to
> I still leave it untagged with a note unless someone proves otherwise.
> > > > In Rev 1:9 there is "kai adelfos hymoon" which is translated "who also
> Sincerely Yours,
> Eeli Kaikkonen <firstname.lastname@example.org> Suomi Finland
"The first one last wins."
"A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth."