Fw: "In the beginning was the word" (Jn 1:1a)
Joe A. Friberg
JoeFriberg at email.msn.com
Thu Feb 24 10:25:29 EST 2000
----- Original Message -----
From: <JAdkins264 at aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 6:05 AM
> Wayne wrote:
> > Can you think of any example sentences where English "word"
> > would have any other meaning, and post a few of them here?
>
> Jay writes:
> > How about the following?
> > "Now a word from our sponsors?"
> > "The word is out on him because he is such a jerk."
> > "That's the word, it will soon all come out in the open."
> > "Have you heard the word on the merger yet?"
> >
> > Do these work?
> >
> > I might also mention that there was a certain slang reference, popular
a
> > few years back, where the term 'word' was used for the term 'truth.'
> > Although I must admit I have not heard it used that way recently.
> >
> > After reading the various post on the topic, I am unconvinced there is
a
> > better translation for LOGOS in John 1:1 than 'Word.' Every gloss has
its
> > shortcomings.
>
> Joe writes:
> > I am not sure if you had access to my post of yesterday prior to your
post
> > below, but in any case, I will simply reiterate a few points.
> > [I have read all through 2/24/00, 6:00 AM EST]
> > In each example that you cite below, the usage is idiomatic; the
specific
> > idiom in each case is called to mind by specific frames and word
> > cooccurrences, such as:
> > -The definite article 'the' is used, unless the reference is anaphoric
(may
> > use 'that', etc.) or cataphoric (use 'a').
> > -prepositional phrases frequently accompany to specify source ('from'),
> > topic ('on'), content ('of'), etc.
> > -specific idiomatic phrases are frequently used 'is out', 'come out in
the
> > open', etc.
> > -specific verb frames such as: heard, received, etc.
> > -In each case, the context makes clear that there is a specific message
or
> > news item that is referenced.
>
> Agreed. Context does matter. No term is understood without it as to its
> proper connotation, so I fail to see the point. Please explain.
I am distinguishing between *grammatical* context and *pragmatic* context.
Given a particular grammatical frame--the direct association of a word with
other particular words within its phrase or clause, we can tell a lot about
the meaning.
If I say:
"I ran into Stuart yesterday"
without any further context, you will automatically interpret 'ran into' as
'circumstantial social encounter' rather than 'collision'. This will be
your first expectation. You do not need additional pragmatic context, such
as a subsequent "and he told me..." to make this initial interpretation.
How can I be so certain? Because we can make a joke out of this phrase by
following up with: "but he wasn't hurt too bad!" instead of giving the
expected subsequent event.
Now, how did that example work?
1. there are two *people* involved--Subj & Obj;
2. it is used as an introductory/opening remark, which is emphasized by the
temporal adv. 'yesterday'. A true collision would more likely be given in
narrative fashion, stating the time, then giving sequence of events. I
suppose the entire narrative *might* start with this as a summary statement,
but if so, the second statement would probably be "I mean *literally* ran
into him."
NOW (but no hags!), with respect to 'word', my point is that the presence of
certain Prepositional Phrases (and other grammatical markers) keys us in to
an alternative sense of 'discourse segment larger than a word'; the absense
of those *grammatical* markers leaves us assuming that 'word' means a word
(in the narrow sense!). The pragmatic context may prove us wrong in our
intitial assumption, or at least doubting that assumption, but why should it
be that way in Jn 1.1? Possible answers are:
1. poor translation practice--unnatural rendition in English
2. intended double-entendre; which is not the case here.
>
> As to your suggestions:
> > But, one-word options can be rather limiting, so, let me try out several
> > phrases:
> >
> > 'Communicative-Idea'
> > 'Revelatory-Message'
> > 'Revelatory-Plan'
> > 'Revelatory-Theme'
>
> Still seems like reinventing the wheel without just cause to me. I have
> already agreed that 'Word' fails at some point, yet, its failures hardly
seem
> less than 'Revelatory-Theme' (IMHO). Footnotes are a good option as I see
> it. Translation to me is only a beginning due to its inherent problems.
I
> don't see that as being lazy, only prudent when dealing with an ancient
> language and culture with so much importance as the 'Word' of God. [Bad
pun
> intended. ;-) ]
These may not be the best options--I'm still working on better ones!
I do think we can get better than "Word"!
>
> I have sent this off list as I feel that the list is probably getting
tired
> of the subject.
I hope not! I still have just a couple-more things to say!
Should you feel otherwise, you may post it.
>
> Sola Gratia,
> Jay
> Always Under Grace!
Amen!
God Bless!
Joe A. Friberg
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list