Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3385RE: [gthom] Re: [gthomas] The Man Sayings

Expand Messages
  • Rick Hubbard
    Feb 13, 2001
      It seems to me that Chris is on to something here. While I certainly don't
      wish to represent myself as an authority on this matter, it might be useful
      to recall that the Coptic language was an adaptation of Hellenistic Greek to
      an Egyptian predecessor. One wonders if the authors/editors/compilers of
      GThom had any sense of the subtleties of whether or not the definite article
      was present in some of the phrases they adopted.

      Nevertheless, it is a rather fascinating phenomenon that Mike has called to
      our attention and could be worth discussing at greater length.

      Rick Hubbard
      Humble Maine Woodsman

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Christian G Jensen [mailto:cgj@...]
      Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:35 AM
      To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [gthom] Re: [gthomas] The Man Sayings

      I am convinced that the Coptic had no firm grammatical rules for the def
      art. It definitely isn't the same as English grammar. For awhile, I thought
      it was something like, "this and no other", but that won't fit all uses. The
      Greek as you know, uses prefixes and suffixes for syntax. The def art is
      used for emphasis. "The son of man" becomes "son the man". I think that it
      is up to the context to give the def art meaning in a sentence. Unless you
      can unearth some Coptic grammar book, that is all I can come up with.

      Another thought. Maybe the usage in the Coptic is an anomaly that shows up
      as part of the translation from an assumed Greek text of the GoT.


      To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
      To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic