Paul Danove, «A Comparison Of The Usage Of Akouw And Akouw- Compounds In The Septuagint And New Testament», Vol. 14 (2001) 65-86
This study characterizes all occurrences of
a0kou/w and seven related verbs (a0ntakou/w,
diakou/w, ei0sakou/w,
e0nakou/w, e0pakou/w,
parakou/w, and u9pakou/w)
in the Septuagint and New Testament according to their semantic and
syntactic properties, develops a single set of rules to describe the
distribution of noun phrase objects of these verbs, and then compares the
patterns of usage of these verbs in the Septuagint and New Testament. A
preliminary discussion identifies the semantic and syntactic properties
necessary to describe all biblical occurrences of
a0kou/w and proposes a set of descriptive rules that govern the
syntactic case of its noun phrase objects. Further investigation then
indicates that this same set of rules with only one minor modification
also is adequate to describe the syntactic case of noun phrase objects of
the noted a0kou/w-compounds. The discussion
concludes by comparing the distribution of noun phrase objects in
particular syntactic cases within the Septuagint and New Testament.
A Comparison of the Usage of ajkouvw and ajkouvw-Compounds 85
NT; diakouvw appears only in Acts 23:35; eijsakouvw is limited to passive
usage (Matt 6:7; Luke 1:3; Acts 10:31; Heb 5:7) except for one occurrence
in a citation of Scripture (1 Cor 14:21; cf. Isa 28:12); ejpakouvw appears
only in a citation of Scripture (2 Cor 6:2; cf. Isa 49:8); and parakouvw
appears only three times (Matt 18:17a,b; Mark 5:36). The only frequent-
ly occurring ajkouvw-compound in the NT, uJpakouvw, however, indicates
significant changes in the distribution of usages: whereas in the LXX it fol-
lows modified rules #2 and 3 that permit a dative (instead of genitive) case
noun phrase object in a minority of occurrences for both [+speaker] (12
dative, 24 genitive) and [+response, –speaker] (2 dative, 21 genitive); in
the NT it consistently uses the dative case for noun phrase objects for
[+speaker] (12 dative) and [+response, –speaker] (1 dative). These obser-
vations indicate that the syntactic case of noun phrase objects of ajkouvw
and ajkouvw-compounds for the content construction in the LXX and NT
(1) may be described according to a unitary set of rules but (2) differ sig-
nificantly in distribution for ajkouvw [+response, –speaker] and for
upakouw #1 [+response, ±speaker).
J v
Paul DANOVE
Villanova University
800 Lancaster Avenue
Villanova, PA 19085-1699 (U.S.A.)
FOLLOW US