« Main Search

Greg Stafford: Clarity, Please...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Greg Stafford (152.163.207.54) on May 26, 1999 at 11:23:08
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greg Stafford:
In an attempt to get everyone on the same page, I would like Hartley to answer this question before I post my full reply. He wrote:

HARTLEY:
Why is it not a perfectly viable option for a singular count noun to exhibit the semantics of a mass noun? Stafford denies the possibility! I would like him to explain how this passage could exhibit his Q-I category without positing other beings having omnipresence.

STAFFORD:
Well, not only is Hartley apparently unaware that I reject his view of omnipresence (more on that later), but notice his response: "Stafford denies the possibility!"

Here is what I would like from Hartley, and which he regularly refuses to provide. Please cite an example of a singular count noun in the precopulative position, that CANNOT be indefinitized. In other words, his use of ANTHROPOS as meaning "human" cannot be disconnected from its signaling "a human being." If one is "human," unless we are using the term figuratively, then the referent is "a human."

The use of AGAPE in 1 John 4:8 is a clear instance of a mass noun that probably cannot be taken as signaling an indefinite sense, but SARX in John 1:14 certainly can, and does. But, remember, we are dealing with COUNT NOUNS, and Hartley is trying to legitimize what may be true for MASS NOUNS as also holding true for COUNT NOUNS.

So where do we find an example of a COUNT NOUN that cannot be taken as having an indefinite nuance?

Greg Stafford

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.  "Revisiting the Colwell Construction in Light of Mass/Count Nouns" by Donald E. Hartley Th.M, Ph.D (student), Dallas Theological Seminary.
2.  Don Hartley's Misunderstanding of My View of Qualitative Nouns and P. B. Harners JBL Article By Greg Stafford
3.  Hartley responds with "Hartley's Second Response To Stafford" on May 25, 1999.
4.  Partial Response to Hartley, By Stafford: 5/25/99
5.  Another Response to Stafford - 5/25/99 (third)
6.  Greg Stafford on 5/26/99 says: "Hartley's theory, regardless of what he tells you, is hopelessly without substantiation, as I will explain shortly."
7.  Greg Stafford to Hartley on 5/26/99: "Please cite an example of a singular count noun in the precopulative position, that CANNOT be indefinitized." in Clarity, Please...
8.  Specifically...I would like Hartley to list the 19 Q-class nouns to which he refers on page 65 of his thesis (par. 2, line 5), for our consideration.
9.  Greg Stafford on 6/3/99: Surrejoinder to Don Hartley: Q-Class Count Nouns , John 1:1c, and Other Related Matters

    Previous Top
1999 - 2007 Jehovah's Witnesses United. All rights reserved. Terms of Service
home-icon.gif (1K) Home:
About
Congregations
General News
Human Rights
Theocratese
Bookshelf
Study Tools
Site Search
Web Search
Webring
Contact
genexe-icon.gif (1K) EXEGESIS:
General
Greek
Hebrew
Patristic
Translation
Discussion
Study Links
genexe-icon.gif (1K) GENERAL:
Legal
Holocaust
Freedom
resources-icon.gif (1K) Resources:
Official
Defense
Trinity
Bloodless
Businesses