2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 477
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen » April 4th, 2020, 2:52 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Snark comment: Why is it that nobody outside of a narrow range of NT people ever talk about Granville Sharp?
Snark answer: because they don't have any doctrine which they would defend with that.
1 x



Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3022
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Stephen Carlson » April 5th, 2020, 12:08 am

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Stephen Carlson wrote:
April 3rd, 2020, 7:01 pm
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 3rd, 2020, 7:35 am
In your first example, I think because it's not unusual for feminine abstract nouns to omit the article, and particularly in the oblique cases.
Never heard of this rule.
Of course you haven't heard of it, because I made it up. If you look at Smyth, he states that abstract nouns generally do have the article. But using παράκλησις as an example:

ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ εὐλαβὴς προσδεχόμενος παράκλησιν τοῦ Ἰσραήλ...(Lk 2:25)

Why no article? Would τὴν παράκλησιν mean anything different?

Now my rule (which you so summarily dismissed, humph) is based on impression formed over years of reading the language, and not on any scientific analysis, but it works for me... :).
It's the feminine part of your response that surprised me. I can't think of a reason why masculine abstracts would be exempt.

Even still, abstracts sometimes do have the article, so it's not really a rule or explanation but an observation to be explained.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
As for the second, I wonder if it isn't simply an Apollonius' Canon thing.
I'm wondering (and did wonder in this thread) the same.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Snark comment: Why is it that nobody outside of a narrow range of NT people ever talk about Granville Sharp?
Snark answer: parochialism goes both ways.
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1883
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Barry Hofstetter » April 5th, 2020, 9:51 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 12:08 am

It's the feminine part of your response that surprised me. I can't think of a reason why masculine abstracts would be exempt.
Good observation. I've noticed it with feminine abstracts, never really paid attention to masculine.
Even still, abstracts sometimes do have the article, so it's not really a rule or explanation but an observation to be explained.
That's a better way of expressing it.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
As for the second, I wonder if it isn't simply an Apollonius' Canon thing.
Stephen wrote:I'm wondering (and did wonder in this thread) the same.
"I wonder if" is code for "It most likely is."
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Snark comment: Why is it that nobody outside of a narrow range of NT people ever talk about Granville Sharp?
Stephen wrote:Snark answer: parochialism goes both ways.
Or maybe it's because people who read tons of Greek outside of the NT don't really need a special rule to explain it. I understood it intuitively long before I was exposed to Sharp.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.

nathaniel j. erickson
Posts: 60
Joined: May 16th, 2016, 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by nathaniel j. erickson » April 5th, 2020, 11:00 am

Or maybe it's because people who read tons of Greek outside of the NT don't really need a special rule to explain it. I understood it intuitively long before I was exposed to Sharp.
As far as I can tell, the reason Granville-Sharp gets talked about in "NT" Greek discussions so much is because NT scholars like to try to make Greek grammatical patterns do a great deal of theologizing. As there are several passages which are significant to arguments about christology that fall under this syntactic pattern, it gets a lot of press (Wallace discusses it for 20 pages in his grammar!).

Since most classicists do not seem to believe what they are studying has the same sort of import as NT scholars, these sorts of "high-powered" interpretive discussions which try to make the language yield far more specific details than there is any reason to believe it is actually intending to are more common among NT grammarians than classicists (as far as I can see; my experience with classics studies is as in interested dabbler).

The fact that most NT scholars don't read tons of Greek certainly contributes to the problem of trying to make Greek do more work than it can.
0 x
Nathaniel J. Erickson
NT PhD candidate, ABD
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
ntgreeketal.com
ὅπου πλείων κόπος, πολὺ κέρδος
ΠΡΟΣ ΠΟΛΥΚΑΡΠΟΝ ΙΓΝΑΤΙΟΣ

Daniel Semler
Posts: 187
Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Daniel Semler » April 5th, 2020, 11:18 am

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 9:51 am
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Snark comment: Why is it that nobody outside of a narrow range of NT people ever talk about Granville Sharp?
Stephen wrote:Snark answer: parochialism goes both ways.
Or maybe it's because people who read tons of Greek outside of the NT don't really need a special rule to explain it. I understood it intuitively long before I was exposed to Sharp.
I was pondering this a little yesterday and wondering whether that might have been the case.
So the interesting question then to me is this: how is understanding of a TSKS construction taught in the classics ?

Thx
D
0 x

Jason Hare
Posts: 696
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Jason Hare » April 5th, 2020, 12:50 pm

Daniel Semler wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 11:18 am
So the interesting question then to me is this: how is understanding of a TSKS construction taught in the classics ?
I know that there is a section in Smyth relating to it, but I just searched The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek (2019) and found NOTHING relating to it. That's fascinating!

Smyth says:
1143. A single article, used with the first of two or more nouns connected by and, produces the effect of a single notion: οἱ στρατηγοὶ καὶ λοχᾱγοί the generals and captains (the commanding officers) X. A. 2.2.8, τὰ̄ς μεγίστᾱς καὶ ἐλαχίστᾱς ναῦς the largest and the smallest ships (the whole fleet) T. 1.10, ἡ τῶν πολλῶν διαβολή τε καὶ φθόνος the calumniation and envy of the multitude P. A. 28a. Rarely when the substantives are of different genders: περὶ τὰ̄ς ἑαυτῶν ψῡχὰ̄ς καὶ σώματα concerning their own lives and persons X. A. 3.2.20.
It must be read, though, with the caveat of the next section:
1144. A repeated article lays stress on each word: ὁ Θρᾷξ καὶ ὁ βάρβαρος the Thracian and the barbarian D. 23.132 (here the subject remains the same), οἱ στρατηγοὶ καὶ οἱ λοχᾱγοί the generals and the captains X. A. 7.1.13.
It is interesting the Cambridge grammar does not mention it at all (as far as I have been able to search).
0 x
Jason A. Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1883
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Barry Hofstetter » April 5th, 2020, 1:16 pm

Jason Hare wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 12:50 pm
Daniel Semler wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 11:18 am
So the interesting question then to me is this: how is understanding of a TSKS construction taught in the classics ?
I know that there is a section in Smyth relating to it, but I just searched The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek (2019) and found NOTHING relating to it. That's fascinating!

Smyth says:
1143. A single article, used with the first of two or more nouns connected by and, produces the effect of a single notion: οἱ στρατηγοὶ καὶ λοχᾱγοί the generals and captains (the commanding officers) X. A. 2.2.8, τὰ̄ς μεγίστᾱς καὶ ἐλαχίστᾱς ναῦς the largest and the smallest ships (the whole fleet) T. 1.10, ἡ τῶν πολλῶν διαβολή τε καὶ φθόνος the calumniation and envy of the multitude P. A. 28a. Rarely when the substantives are of different genders: περὶ τὰ̄ς ἑαυτῶν ψῡχὰ̄ς καὶ σώματα concerning their own lives and persons X. A. 3.2.20.
It must be read, though, with the caveat of the next section:
1144. A repeated article lays stress on each word: ὁ Θρᾷξ καὶ ὁ βάρβαρος the Thracian and the barbarian D. 23.132 (here the subject remains the same), οἱ στρατηγοὶ καὶ οἱ λοχᾱγοί the generals and the captains X. A. 7.1.13.
It is interesting the Cambridge grammar does not mention it at all (as far as I have been able to search).
I read the entire section on the article in CGCG. Smyth has a lovely section on the omission of the article. CGCG does not. Don't toss your Smyth yet!
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3022
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Stephen Carlson » April 5th, 2020, 7:02 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 9:51 am
Stephen Carlson wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 12:08 am
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
As for the second, I wonder if it isn't simply an Apollonius' Canon thing.
I'm wondering (and did wonder in this thread) the same.
"I wonder if" is code for "It most likely is."
Well, it is certainly suggestive enough to generate a plausible hypothesis. As for its likelihood, that will take more rigorous research.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 9:51 am
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
April 4th, 2020, 12:02 pm
Snark comment: Why is it that nobody outside of a narrow range of NT people ever talk about Granville Sharp?
Stephen wrote:Snark answer: parochialism goes both ways.
Or maybe it's because people who read tons of Greek outside of the NT don't really need a special rule to explain it. I understood it intuitively long before I was exposed to Sharp.
I'm not using the term to refer to a rule, but merely to label the construction. Personally, I think Smyth gets the "rule" right, but he doesn't have a name for the construction. Stephanie Bakker's work on the noun phrase in Herodotus also refers to the construction but doesn't have a label and so has to resort to a cumbersome description. As far I can tell, the classicists don't have a name to label the construction and they probably won't use the NT label since they don't read NT exegetical works.
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Daniel Semler
Posts: 187
Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Daniel Semler » April 6th, 2020, 9:05 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
April 5th, 2020, 7:02 pm
I'm not using the term to refer to a rule, but merely to label the construction. Personally, I think Smyth gets the "rule" right, but he doesn't have a name for the construction. Stephanie Bakker's work on the noun phrase in Herodotus also refers to the construction but doesn't have a label and so has to resort to a cumbersome description. As far I can tell, the classicists don't have a name to label the construction and they probably won't use the NT label since they don't read NT exegetical works.
As Sharp describes it isn't his definition narrower than Smyth's ?

Thx
D
0 x

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3022
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 1:3 articulation within a Granville-Sharp construction

Post by Stephen Carlson » April 7th, 2020, 8:44 am

Daniel Semler wrote:
April 6th, 2020, 9:05 am
As Sharp describes it isn't his definition narrower than Smyth's ?
That's a reason why I like Smyth's better.
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”