emphasis#2

Matthew R. Miller biblicalscribe at hotmail.com
Wed Nov 14 12:28:43 EST 2001


In my studies, I would agree that unusual word order is not always used
for emphasis, in Greek, and in other languages. It appears that,
sometimes, unusual word order adds a certain poetic elegance to a text,
without necessarily changing the emphasis. Also, unusual word order
sometimes changes the point of view of the speaker, without necessarily
emphasizing a certian word. Thanks, Matt


> This message is in MIME format.  Since your mail reader does not understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
> 
> ----__JNP_000_160c.39e3.6266
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii  
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> Many thanks to Dennis Hukel, Jeff Smelser, Iver Larsen, and 
> Carl Conrad for their responses (some on list, some off ) to 
> my question about emphasis.  
> 
> May I ask a corollary before returning to my usual lurking
> mode?
> 
> Concerning emphasis and word order, A.T.Robertson says:
> "This is one of the ruling ideas in the order of words.   This
> emphasis may be at the end as well as at the beginning of 
> the sentence, or even in the middle in case of antithesis.   
> The emphasis consists in removing a word from its usual position 
> to an unusual one."    He provides several illustrations.
> (Grammar, 147f.)      
> 
> ATR goes on to explain that emphasis alone does not explain 
> every unusual order of words in a Greek sentence (419,420), 
> and, as Carl pointed out, ATR mentions the large amount of 
> personal liberty that was exercised in the trajection of words.
> 
> If I am not misunderstanding ATR, he differs rather 
> emphatically (pardon the pun) with modern scholarship on
> this issue.    Of course, I readily acknowledge that ATR may
> be the one in error, but I'm wondering:   was ATR's position 
> once the generally accepted position?    In any case, what 
> brought about the change of view?   And how can the interested
> observer who is NOT a Greek scholar know which view is
> right?    Is it a matter of standing on the shoulders of giants
> and getting a better view?
> 
> Please understand that I'm not quibbling w. anyone's answer 
> to my question; I suspect that Dennis Hukel is correct in saying
> that context must determine emphasis.    I don't lose any sleep
> over the disagreement between scholars, but I'm curious about 
> this rather common problem where one scholar dogmatically 
> affirms a view that another scholar denies.
> 
> Thanks again for your help.
> 
> Rick Duggin
> Murfreesboro, TN
> 
>     
> ----__JNP_000_160c.39e3.6266
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii  
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 topMargin=3D0 rightMargin=3D3>
> <DIV>Many thanks to Dennis Hukel, Jeff Smelser, Iver Larsen, and </DIV>
> <DIV>Carl Conrad for their responses (some on list, some off ) to </DIV>
> <DIV>my question about emphasis.&nbsp; </DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>May I ask a corollary before returning to my usual lurking</DIV>
> <DIV>mode?</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>Concerning emphasis and word order, A.T.Robertson says:</DIV>
> <DIV>"This is one of the ruling ideas in the order of words.&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
> This</DIV>
> <DIV>emphasis may be at the end as well as at the beginning of </DIV>
> <DIV>the sentence, or even in the middle in case of antithesis.&nbsp;&nbsp;=
> =20
> </DIV>
> <DIV>The emphasis consists in removing a word from its usual position </DIV>
> <DIV>to an unusual one."&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; He provides several=20
> illustrations.</DIV>
> <DIV>(Grammar, 147f.)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>ATR goes on to explain that emphasis alone does not explain </DIV>
> <DIV>every unusual order of words in a Greek sentence (419,420), </DIV>
> <DIV>and, as Carl pointed out, ATR mentions the large amount of </DIV>
> <DIV>personal liberty that was exercised in the trajection of words.</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>If I am not misunderstanding ATR, he differs rather </DIV>
> <DIV><EM>emphatically</EM> (pardon the pun) with modern scholarship on</DIV>
> <DIV>this issue.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Of course, I readily acknowledge that =
> ATR=20
> may</DIV>
> <DIV>be the one in error, but I'm wondering:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;was ATR's =
> position=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV>once the generally accepted position?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In any case, =
> what=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV>brought about the change of view?&nbsp;&nbsp; And how can the=20
> interested</DIV>
> <DIV>observer who is NOT a Greek scholar know which view is</DIV>
> <DIV>right?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Is it a matter of standing on the shoulders =
> of=20
> giants</DIV>
> <DIV>and getting a better view?</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>Please understand that I'm not quibbling w. anyone's answer </DIV>
> <DIV>to my question; I suspect that Dennis Hukel is correct in saying</DIV>
> <DIV>that context must determine emphasis.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I don't lose =
> any=20
> sleep</DIV>
> <DIV>over the disagreement between scholars, but I'm&nbsp;curious about </=
> DIV>
> <DIV>this rather common&nbsp;problem&nbsp;where one scholar&nbsp;=
> dogmatically=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV>affirms&nbsp;a view that another scholar denies.</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>Thanks again for your help.</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>Rick Duggin</DIV>
> <DIV>Murfreesboro, TN</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV></BODY></HTML>
> 
> ----__JNP_000_160c.39e3.6266--
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.



More information about the B-Greek mailing list