On 28/12/08 13:35, Ben Schmidt wrote:
> Tony Mechelynck wrote:
>> On 28/12/08 11:40, Ben Schmidt wrote:
>> [...]
>>> What is your source for this, Tony? I can find no reference to any
>>> earlier or alternative spelling in the Koine Greek lexicon
>> [...]
>>
>> It's the kind of stuff that percolated into my mind over a lifetime of
>> being interested in everything. I had two years of Classical Greek in
>> high school before I switched from Latin-Greek to Latin-Math, and
>> already in Lucian (a writer of the Hellenistic period IIRC) there were
>> words spelled with eta replaced by iota. Don't ask me which, but that's
>> where the Greek teacher paused to draw our attention on the iotacism of
>> the Koinê and of subsequent times.
>>
>> Rather than a Koine Greek lexicon (which might already refer to a state
>> of the language posterior to the vowel shift), take a Classical (Attic)
>> Greek dictionary, and look in the Greek part for "khrêstos" the way I
>> spelt it in my previous post, or maybe for a verb which would have that
>> as a passive perfect participle (khraô or something maybe?); or in the
>> English part for the adjective "anointed" or the verb "to anoint".
>
> I already did, as I stated in my last post, consult Liddell and Scott,
> which is a standard Classical Greek lexicon and there is no mention of
> an alternative spelling for christos, nor an 'anointed' meaning for
> chrestos. Likewise chrima/chrema. Likewise verbs chrio (anoint)/chrao
> (use) (though the word in question doesn't have the form of a participle
> anyway). My Koine lexicon also tends to briefly list Attic uses and
> variants, and here they are conspicuous by their absence. And it is
> unlikely for a vowel shift to have happened before Classical Greek!
>
> All the Google results I can find that speak of chrestos in relation to
> anointing are doing so by drawing a distinction between christos and
> chrestos in the context of the early church, too, further suggesting
> that far from a shift occurring, those two words were quite different,
> though perhaps similar enough to be confused. Though obviously a quick
> Google search is far from proper research. (Of course, iotacism is more
> about sound than spelling, too, though obviously they are all affected
> and interrelated. In this case, that can easily explain the confusion
> between the two words, with no spelling change necessary.)
>
> So, it seems to me you've picked up a bit of folklore, unless we can
> find any actual evidence. I'm standing by χριστος meaning 'anointed' and
> χρηστος being a different word, with a couple of decent sources to back
> it up.
>
> I too have the problem of being interested in everything. Except, in
> terms of school subjects, Geography and Physical Education. I haven't
> been doing it as long as you, though.
>
> Grins,
>
> Ben.
Maybe I did pick some folklore; or maybe the folklore I picked was from
French-speaking sources while yours was English-speaking: in French, the
expression "le saint chrême" was used in the Ancien Régime for the oils
used for the consecration of the King of France, and I think it's still
used (in French) for the oily balm used to consecrate Catholic priests
or something (but never having been a Catholic myself, I can't be sure
of that).
Best regards,
Tony.
--
ARTHUR: Well, I can't just call you `Man'.
DENNIS: Well, you could say `Dennis'.
ARTHUR: Well, I didn't know you were called `Dennis.'
DENNIS: Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you?
The Quest for the Holy Grail (Monty
Python)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
