Luke 7:29-30 Jesus or Luke?

Cynthia Ann 97003834 at roehampton.ac.uk
Tue Apr 13 12:50:42 EDT 1999


Dear Clayton,

I read your exchange with Carl only yesterday, and was pressed for 
time and couldn't make an immediate response, though I had all kinds 
of reactions.  

I was as confounded as you were by Carl's first response.  
I don't know that you were at fault with your title. However, I 
think the terminology was technical and probably needed some 
definition for this list.  I had no difficulty at all following what 
you said, but sometimes I have trouble following other postings that 
have more technical vocabularies that are connected with other 
approaches. 

On the other hand, your list of 'verb attribute distribution' made 
it clear that you were talking about patterns in the grammar. I can't 
understand why observations about verbal patterns in the Greek would 
be considered off-topic. 

But then, Carl never really said it was off-topic.  Rather, he 
appeared to place some of the concerns of linguistics and discourse 
analysis under the rubric of 'higher  criticism', and asked whether 
the analysis of  lexis and grammar could answer the kind of question 
that you were asking.  That's a fair criticism, and I think that 
those of us who are working with discourse analysis need to take such 
challenges in stride. But I don't think  the placement of DA under 
the category of higher criticism is correct!  I see where one might 
think there is an overlap, but the connection is tenuous at best!

For my part, if these kinds of changes in the discourse are not 
signalled and realized by patterns in the lexis or grammar, they 
probably don't exist.

I'm not sure if 'texture' is exactly the term that you are after.  A 
change in texture indicates something that doesn't track or doesn't 
follow--as if it doesn't belong to the context or takes some kind of 
leap (yes, I can see why you may say that an insertion by Luke 
doesn't belong in the original context, but it does track with 
the immediate context of the text). I think that you're trying to set 
up criteria to detect a 'cohesion shift' which, in this case, 
hypothetically  sets apart vv. 29-30 as an embedded commentary from 
the surrounding speech.

I'm not very convinced by the argument that KAI PAS O LAOS  in the 
role of agent or actor serves as some kind of 'signpost' that the 
material is 'embedded in Luke's narrative'.  The sample is too small, 
and besides,it  doesn't appear to be established before this point in 
the narrative (though I haven't yet searched its occurence--I'm just 
going on what you said).

The kinds of verbal shifts that you found may seperate mainline 
material from background. 

To go further with this requires more time than I can spend.  
However, as always, I appreciated your  questions and 
observations.  

Cindy Westfall
PhD Student, Roehampton



> Date:          Sun, 11 Apr 1999 18:27:20 -0700
> Subject:       Re: Luke 7:29-30 Jesus or Luke?
> From:          "clayton stirling bartholomew" <c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net>
> To:            Biblical Greek <b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Reply-to:      "clayton stirling bartholomew" <c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net>

> > At 2:58 PM -0700 4/11/99, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:
> >>> I'd be willing to venture an opinion on this matter that this IS Luke's
> >>> comment, except that it strikes me that it is a text-critical question
> >>> rather than one that can be decided on the basis of the Greek text. Of
> >>> course the morphology and discourse features of the Greek do play a role
> >>> here--but wouldn't you be looking at the same features as you look at in a
> >>> translation of this passage into another language? It strikes me that this
> >>> question may be beyond definitive resolution: it may be that the evangelist
> >>> intends these verses to be understood as spoken by Jesus--but to determine
> >>> that requires making text-critical judgment, it seems to me, rather than a
> >>> judgment that is based strictly on the morphology and syntax of the Greek
> >>> here.
> >>>
> >>> Carl W. Conrad
> >>
> >>Carl,
> >>
> >>What are you saying here? This is off topic? Are you shutting down a
> >>thread which is not a thread yet and is not likely to be a thread?
> >>
> >>On the subject of TC, there is no mention of TC in my post at all.
> >>Nothing! There is a TC issue in LK 7:31 where the TR and M (margin)
> >>Vg(cl) Lat (f) have an insertion of EIPE DE hO KURIOS at the beginning
> >>of the verse. This would have some bearing on the discussion but wasn't
> >>brought up in my post.
> >>
> >>It is really difficult for me after two years to figure out what is on
> >>and off topic on this list. This does occasionally cause some
> >>frustration on my part. This frustration may be evident in the tone of
> >>my remarks here. No disrespect is intend.
> >>
> >>Are you essentially barring all discussion of Discourse Analysis? I find
> >>discourse analysis as a subject heading in all of the intermediate NT
> >>Greek grammars which have been published in the last decade. So why is
> >>it off topic?
> >>
> >>It seems to me that discourse analysis is just as much a language issue
> >>as syntax. In fact it is a form of syntax at a different level of the
> >>language. The manner in which discourse is marked is language specific.
> >>It is different in NT Greek than it is in English or in Hebrew. I really
> >>am at a loss to see why this is off topic.
> >>
> >>I would like to hear some comments on this from some of our local
> >>experts who are doing research on this issue. Do I need to go to a
> >>different list for this. What list?
> >>
> >>If this post sounds kind of feisty it is not intended to be rude. Just
> >>trying to figure out what we can talk about here.
> >
> > Clay, you're talking about textual criticism in the narrower sense of the
> > word; I'm talking about it in the broader sense, where it opens up into
> > so-called "higher criticism"--which is right on the border-line, whether or
> > not it has quite crossed in to it, between understanding the sense of the
> > text and determining the history, composition, sources, etc., etc. of the
> > text: and I mean specifically, such issues of form-criticism,
> > source-criticism, redaction-criticism which involve basic hermeneutical
> > presuppositions. To be precise: you have formulated your question in terms
> > of whether those two verses are to be understood as words of Jesus or as
> > words of Luke. And that's precisely the sort of question I don't think our
> > resources in Greek are sufficient to resolve; I think it's a question that
> > calls upon methodologies that, even if they depend upon competence in
> > Greek, go beyond mere competence in Greek. Is that so difficult to
> > recognize?
> 
> Carl,
> 
> Thanks for clearing this up.
> 
> I am at fault here for choosing the wrong topic line in my post. My real
> topic line should read something like: Can analysis of TEXTURE be used
> to resolve the issue of who is speaking in Luke 7:29-30? The question of
> who is speaking is not one interests me in the least. The question that
> does interest me is one of methodology. It is a question raised by
> reading:
> 
> Reed, Jeffrey T 3A discourse analysis of Philippians²  Sheffield
> Academic Press, 1997.
> 
> Reed states that we can discover the macrostructure of a NT Greek text
> by analysis of distributions of linguistic features.  So even though
> what I was asking might look like form criticism, then intent was
> different. My first question was: can we draw conclusions from Luke's
> typical use of PAS + LAOS in the semantic role of AGENT? I am suggesting
> that PAS + LAOS in the role of AGENT is a feature of the semantic
> TEXTURE of Luke/Acts which is only found in narrative, not in reported
> speech. I could be wrong but I don't think this is the way form critical
> questions are usually put. I don't think form criticism usually raises
> the question of semantic function. I don't think form criticism even
> uses the idea of TEXTURE.
> 
> It is quite possible that I have departed somewhat from the model used
> by J. Reed at this point. Perhaps the way I have formulated the above
> question is not in keeping with Reed's approach. I am just finding my
> way in this business without a guide.
> 
> The second question has to do with the distribution of verb attributes.
> The question is, do these patterns mean anything? I am not sure they do.
> But this is another question about TEXTURE.
> 
> 
> > I'm not ruling this out in advance, by any means, and I didn't think I said
> > that. I do question whether this question can be resolved by understanding
> > of the Greek alone. My own feelings about Discourse Analysis are wary, but
> > I hope open-minded; my sense is that the real difficulty with it is
> > agreeing about the legitimate presuppositions of an analysis.
> 
> Carl,
> 
> I am as skeptical about this methodology as you are. Probably more
> skeptical. But I am still at the stage of trying to understand the
> methodology so I have decided to suspend judgement until I understand it
> better.
> 
> I do think that there is a sort of "syntax" in a text above the level of
> the paragraph. I got this idea from reading J. P. Louw (The Semantics of
> New Testament Greek, Fortress 1982). And I do think that this level of
> "syntax" is language specific so falls within the proper scope of the
> b-greek list. The problem with this subject is that the "rules" of this
> level of "syntax" are far from being well defined. It is still a rather
> "dynamic" aspect of NT greek theory.
> 
> Thanks for putting up with my confusion of categories while I explore
> the fringe.
> 
> --
> Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
> Three Tree Point
> P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
> 
> Post Script:
> 
> As for Higher Criticism, I don't do that kind of stuff. See also Gerhard
> Maier  "Biblical Hermeneutics," Crossway 1993.
> 
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
> You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: 97003834 at roehampton.ac.uk
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-88332A at franklin.oit.unc.edu
> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 



More information about the B-Greek mailing list