Recently, I read a 547-page dissertation that is a commentary on Aristotle's Book III of his Rhetoric. The author of the thesis asked me to be the main Greek reader of his dissertation committee, which I was. So, for that, I also re-read all of Aristotle's Rhetoric (and much of his Poetics) in Greek, and the former in two different English translations. I also read feminist rhetoric translation stuff, and whether the writer liked it or not, had to pay attention to how much feminists must pay attention to Aristotle and his rhetoric and even Book III of his female-denigrating treatise. Whew. We the committee members suggested changes, the doctoral candidate made them, and we read the whopping paper all over again. Then, I'm happy to say that the dissertation writer not only passed his defense but did so with distinction as determined by the consensus of the committee. He has a doctor of philosophy in rhetoric and is the world's expert on the Greek in Book III of Aristotle's Bible on Rhetoric. Whew again.
So now the writer emails me today with an "easy" question:
"BTW, just a question: do you think that πνευματικῇ (as at Colossians 1:9) is formed or functions as a noun in a similar manner as rhêtorikê?"So what would you say? How much else would you read to give your answer?