Julia Falling Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Instant details say that ειωθει is a pluperfect of εθω. Both BDAG and Mounce Analytical say it's a perfect. It's late. I'm tired. Haven't done any more digging, but there is a conflict. I'll dig around some more tomorrow. Just thought I'd point out the discrepancy here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Simpson Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 OK - this looks like it might be an issue, I'd love to hear the scholars on this. According to LSJ... pf. εἴωθα Il.5.766, etc., Ep. and Ion. ... plpf. εἰώθειν, (“ἔθω,” LSJ, 480.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Λύχνις Δαν Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Because I like morphology and I'm unable to resist such a question here's my 0.02. I suspect the ε is significant. MBG (Morphology of Biblical Greek) lists all pluperfect forms in section 45.6c. There you have εἰώθειν and others like it. Doing a search of the GNT-28 for ερχομαι@[verb pluperf] returns 4 instances of ἐληλύθει which are all tagged as pluperf. And a search for *@[verb third sing act pluperf] reveals 43 hits all ending in ει. Of course that might only mean the tagger was consistent. BBG also in a brief para reports that pluperfects can be both reduplicated and augmented and use secondary endings. That was what it looked like was happening. But the really interesting part is Mounce records ει as the connecting vowel. That would lead directly to and ending of ει in the third singular active. As to the BDAG citation the first sing pp is εἰώθειν which makes sense in light of the above from BBG. Very cool - never really looked at it before. thx D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now