
Recent Posts
Category Cloud
Book Reviews Books Discourse Analysis English Ephesians Exegesis Grammar Greek Hebrew Hermeneutics Humor Language Language Learning Lexicography Linguistics Linking Logos Bible Software Mediations Morphology Musings news stories Other Pragmatics Questions Semantics Series Syntax Textual Criticism TNIV Translation
Librarything…
- Cognitive Linguistics (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics) by William CroftCambridge University Press (2004), Edition: 1St Edition, Paperback, 372 pages
- From Molecule to Metaphor: A Neural Theory of Language (A Bradford Book) by Jerome FeldmanThe MIT Press (2006), Edition: 1, Hardcover, 384 pages
- Concept, Image, and Symbol (Cognitive Linguistic Research) by Ronald W. LangackerMouton De Gruyter (2002), Edition: 2, Paperback, 395 pages
- Reframing Biblical Studies: When Language and Text Meet Culture, Cognition, and Context by E. J. Van WoldeEisenbrauns (2009), Hardcover, 402 pages
- Hittite and the Indo-European Verb by Jay H. JasanoffOxford University Press, USA (2005), Paperback, 284 pages
Blogroll
- Awilum
- Better Bibles Blog
- Chrisendoom
- Crypto-theology
- Dave
- Discipulus Scripturae
- Esteban Vázquez
- Fruit of His Lips
- Gegraptai
- Gentle Wisdom
- Greek Language and Linguistics
- Hesed we \’emet
- πᾶσα γραφὴ
- σφοδρα – exceedingly
- ΑΓΑΠΗΣΕΙΣ – You shall love
- Lexical-Functional Greek
- Lingamish
- New Testament Discourse
- New Testament Interpretation
- Nick Norelli
- nijay k gupta
- NT Gateway
- Pastoral Epistles
- Rico
- Son of the Fathers
- SportLinguist
- Stephen C. Carlson
- sunestauromai – living the crucified life
- Suzanne
- Text, Community
- Textual Criticism
All Rights Reserved
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
ἑός is not the 3rd person singular older Greek pronoun but a pronominal adjective. Rather the 3rd person singular is: gen. οὗ (enclitic οὑ – older ἕο, ἑο), dat. οἷ (enclitic οἱ), acc. ἕ (enclitic ἑ). The older root appears to be σϝε; this is related to the Latin reflexive and is the source of the aspiration in the 3rd-person reflexive ἑαυτοῦ/αὑτοῦ κτλ. Wiktionary is not altogether accurate. See Smyth §325 and the notes there; Smyth is much more reliable.
I wonder too about the way Italian and German use 3rd-person pronouns (and verbs) ‘lei’ and “Sie” in formal speech (as opposed to ‘tu’ or ‘voi’, ‘Du’ and ‘Ihr’).
Also, although it has always seemed to me an affectation, I’ve observed several instances of people referring to themselves and their actions in 3rd-person phraseology, sometimes even using a demonstrative: “This author has observed not a few instances of this obnoxious behavior on the part of XYZ.”
I have to say that I am rather skeptical of this sort of blanket generalization about languages; I always wonder how many the generalizer knows and how well he or she knows them.
Thanks for the correction on the 3rd person forms. My initial memory & instinct was that Classical Greek had three parallel personal pronouns, but in double checking, I went to the wrong place.
As for the use of speakers using the third person, it is quite clearly non-standard usage and could probably be explained relatively easily. For example, the use of the phrase “This author” seems to me a result of the distance between writer and read so that the writer (because he is not actually present) does not necessarily need to be viewed as an interlocutor. Authors also use the the plural “we” at times in writing, but I would never venture to say on the basis of that the it is unreasonable to claim that plurals 1st person pronouns across languages refer to multiple people.
I know you’re rather skeptical. Sometimes I understand it and sometimes I don’t. Personally, I’m more skeptical about supposed reconstructions of PIE than I am about typological statements. In any case, I’d venture a guess that Bhat knows at least five or six languages himself.