A Comparison of the Usage of ajkouvw and ajkouvw-Compounds 77 parts, cite classical rules and then describe divergences in LXX and NT usage 27: 1. that of or about which one hears is in the accusative, 2. the person speaking appears in the genitive, 3. the sound which one hears is in the genitive, unless it is a speech, logo", which may be in either the genitive or the accusative. v Attempts to adapt these rules for the study of the LXX and NT are of limited use 28: Rule #1: that of or about which one hears is in the accusative. The analysis of sec. 1.2.1. revealed that the accusative case requirement of the topic construction extends to all objects, including those charac- 27 Many grammarians cite these or similar classical rules before qualifying their appli- cability to the NT: H. W. Smyth, Greek Series for Colleges and Schools (New York: American Book Company, 1916), p. 322; F. Blass, A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 95; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples, trans. Joseph Smith (Rome: Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1963), p. 24; N. Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. III: Syntax (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963), pp. 233-234; R. Kühner and B. Gerth, Ausführliche Grammatik der Griechische Sprache, Vol. 2 (Munich: Max Hueber, 1963), pp. 357-359; H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 324-325; and S. E. Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), p. 97; cf. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1914), pp. 448-449. 28 The lack of rigor in accounting for the distribution of the syntactic case of objects has led to various approaches to the problem. Turner accepts a semantic distinction between the genitive and accusative objects in John (the genitive with the meaning, «obey,» [John 5:25, 28; 10:3, 6; etc.] and the accusative with the meaning, «hear,» else- where in John) and a possible distinction in the similar occurrences in Acts 9:7 and 22:9 but finds no semantic basis for a general distinction in case usage [Syntax, pp. 233-234]. Mueller suggests that there is no real difference in meaning between the two cases and that «the different usages could be due to dialectal influences or represent the speaking habits of different socio-economic groups» [New Testament Greek: A Case Grammar Approach (Fort Wayne, Indiana: Concordia Theological Seminary Press, 1978), p. 46]. This proposal, however, fails to address the fact that both structures can appear in the same author and on the lips of the same character (Acts 22:7, 9). Joseph Smith offers rules patterned on the classical rules which highlight semantic considerations associated with the object: the accusative designates «what is directly grasped by the hearing (sound, news, what is said)» (e.g., John 3:8; 5:37; Rev 19:1); and the genitive designates «the source of what is heard, whether the person speaking or a voice conceived not as a sound but as speaking,» (e.g., John 5:25; 10:3; 18:37; Acts 11:7; 22:7; Rev 11:12) [in Zerwick, Biblical Greek, p. 24]; cf. Blass, Debrunner, Funk, Greek Grammar, p. 95]. These rules do not account for apparent examples (1) of the genitive relating that which is said (Luke 6:18; John 7:40; 12:47) or (2) of the accusative referring to a speaking voice (Acts 9:4; 26:14). H. R. Moehring adds a new dimension to the discussion by citing classical examples which do not conform to the proposed classical rules [«The Verb AKOYEIN in Acts IX 7 and XXII 19,» Novum Testamentum 3:1-2 (1959) 87-88].