0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
Whom say ye that I am?
In the Authorized Version, Jesus says in Mark 9, "Whom say ye that I am?" Shouldn't it be "who"? I was under the impression that, at least in King James's time, the complement of "be" must be in the nominative. So what's going on here? Is "that" the real complement of "be"? then what case is "whom"?
Top answer
" Shouldn't it be "who"? I ... in the nominative.
- " Shouldn't it be "who"?
- I ...
- in the nominative.
- So what's going on here?
- Is "that" the real complement of "be"?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
[nq:1]In the Authorized Version, Jesus says in Mark 9, "Whom say ye that I am?" Shouldn't it be "who"? I ... in the nominative. So what's going on here? Is "that" the real complement of "be"? then what case is "whom"?[/nq]
According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
00
[nq:2]In the Authorized Version, Jesus says in Mark 9, "Whom ... the real complement of "be"? then what case is "whom"?[/nq]
[nq:1]According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.[/nq]
As for "what's going on", it looks like the
translator mistook that "whom" for the object
of the verb "say".
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
[nq:1]According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.[/nq]
As for "what's going on", it looks like the
translator mistook that "whom" for the object
of the verb "say".
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
00
Mark 8, innit?
[nq:2]According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.[/nq]
[nq:1]As for "what's going on", it looks like the translator mistook that "whom" for the object of the verb "say".[/nq]
Possibly influenced by the Vulgate, "quem me dicitis esse", literally "whom do you(pl.) say me to be". This uses the ordinary Latin construction for an indirect
[nq:2]According to Fowler (MEU s.v. Who & Whom 3), it was changed to "who" in the RSV.[/nq]
[nq:1]As for "what's going on", it looks like the translator mistook that "whom" for the object of the verb "say".[/nq]
Possibly influenced by the Vulgate, "quem me dicitis esse", literally "whom do you(pl.) say me to be". This uses the ordinary Latin construction for an indirect
00
[nq:1]In the Authorized Version, Jesus says in Mark 9, "Whom say ye that I am?" Shouldn't it be "who"? I ... in the nominative. So what's going on here? Is "that" the real complement of "be"? then what case is "whom"?[/nq]
There's a rare usage of "whom" in predicate nominative position: an old Webster's explains it as meant to avoid misinterpreting it as the subject.
The AV translators may
There's a rare usage of "whom" in predicate nominative position: an old Webster's explains it as meant to avoid misinterpreting it as the subject.
The AV translators may
00
[nq:2] As for "what's going on", it looks like the translator mistook that "whom" for the object of the verb "say".[/nq]
[nq:1]Possibly influenced by the Vulgate, "quem me dicitis esse", literally "whom do you(pl.) say me to be". This uses the ordinary Latin construction for an indirect quotation, with accusatives aplenty. Anyone with better Greek than mine care to have a go at the Koine?[/nq]
[nq:1]Possibly influenced by the Vulgate, "quem me dicitis esse", literally "whom do you(pl.) say me to be". This uses the ordinary Latin construction for an indirect quotation, with accusatives aplenty. Anyone with better Greek than mine care to have a go at the Koine?[/nq]
0
Related Questions