Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea
Okay, tell me why you believe it to be a neuter singular nominative.
Because my sources show it to be masculine middle participle accusative, binding it to anthropon.
Again, I'm probably behind SEIQ on this one, so I apologize profusely. In fact, in all things intellectual, I am behind you three. It feels like a masculine middle participle in the accusative, even I suppose it could look like a singular neuter, but it just doesn't feel right.
Wouldn't you place erchomenon closer to fos if you wanted to emphasize fos?
|
Frankly, I like it better as a masculine accusative with anthropon. But the neuter nominative and masculine accusative forms are identical, and thus grammatically, it could go with either, and the reader is left with the judgment call of which it is. Proximity is one factor, as you note (though I've seen much larger gaps between participles and their antecedents before), while context and sense are others. Basically, which makes more sense, that the light gives light to every man as it comes into the world, or that it gives light to every man who comes into the world? Either could be right, and neither are wrong.