Would six years of undergrad and graduate Greek work come close enough that I have your permission to comment? Not to mention two years of exegesis.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Eeli Kaikkonen > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 4:27 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [sword-devel] kjv2003: two splits needed? > > > On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Keith Ralston wrote: > > > I had placed the question of implied verbs to the group. No > one responded. > > In each of these cases, I am comfortable with my method for handling the > > tags. I am looking for consensus in order that we might have > consistency. > > > > Consistency is very important if we want our work to be reliable for any > use. As far as I know KJV is famous for being consistent considering > words and syntax. Readers have to know that we have consistent tagging > everywhere. > > > Myself and many others interested in the project use it for research. I > > want it tagged correctly. > > Of course. That's why I was asking in the first place :) I just meant > that usually the Greek/KJV relation is quite clear, but interpretations > about meaning and shades of syntax may vary a lot. Maybe I am talking > too much... > > > The approach taken by the KJV interpreters is > > clear. They treated the article as a pronoun. > > Still I'm not convinced. But don't take mee too seriously, I'm stubborn. > I left a note with this verse and you can contribute by telling your > opinion. > > > > Meddling with semantics would be for experts only. > > > > You keep referring to experts. What is your criteria for an expert? > > > > I can read Greek Testament, Moulton's grammar, BAGD lexicon etc. as you > have seen. I have also soon done my first Greek course in university. > Still I don't consider myself as an expert. Expert has read many books > and articles about grammar and have understood most of what they have > said. He also has access to specialized books and articles to solve > questions like this. He can speak fluently about grammar and other > things with scholarly terms. > > You have seen what kind of discussion arises when we talk about > different interpretations of syntax. If we tried to explain Greek > syntax (e.g. subject, object, predicative, relative clause, main clause) > I wouldn't be able to do that. There would be too much advanced > questions and discussion. The skills I mentioned would be needed for > that kind of things. > > But I really don't know how "expert" you all are or how many "experts" > there are amongst you. Maybe doing basic Greek grammar tagging is > possible. Subordination of words and clauses might not be too > complicated and time-consuming. > > Please notice that I'm not talking about this project here. We will have > good usable module here if we have consistent tagging and justifications > for our decisions. Tagging the grammar or something like that would take > much more effort. > > > > Sincerely Yours, > Eeli Kaikkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Suomi Finland >
