From: Stephen C. Carlson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Apr 24 1998 - 01:33:19 EDT
At 10:03 4/22/98 -0500, Benjamin Raymond wrote:
>I've a question if anyone is interested. In Mark 16:6 we find the
>NEANISKOS saying IDE hO TOPOS to the women. All the other imperatives here
>are in the plural, yet this is singular. On top of that, the following
>object(?) is nominative.
>1. Why does the object (if it is indeed an object proper) take the
>nominative in Mark? I understand this is not unknown in the NT (e.g., Mark
>3:34), but it still seems rather strange to me.
>2. Why does Mark use the singular imperative?
These answers are related. IDE here is an example of a frozen imperative,
like AGE and FERE, in which it acts more like a particle like IDOU than a
true imperative. This explains both why IDE does not agree in number with
the women (it is no longer a declinable imperative) and why the hO TOPOS
is in a parenthetical nominative. See BDF $ 144, p. 80 (Funk's notes).
>Matthew seems to have altered this with the smoother IDETE TON TOPON, but
>Mark's account remains nevertheless.
Whether Matthew "altered" Mark's IDE would be a good topic for the new
Synoptic-L list, but I note that Matthew is not adverse to using IDE with
the plural at 26:65 IDE NUN HKOUSATE THN BLASPFHMIAN (Mk14:64 omits IDE
-- Stephen C. Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, email@example.com : and songs chant the words. http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/ : -- Shujing 2.35
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:36 EDT