The movement of the story line and the imperfect (Mark 1:45-2:1)

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue Dec 31 03:37:32 EST 2002


>
> I want to test the following hypothesis by using Mark 1:45-2:1.
>
>  The main story of line of narrative is moved by the aorist tense.
>  In the story line, the imperfect explains the situation stated by
>  the aorist, by  adding background information or further details
>  to the situation.
>
> Mark 1:45-2:1.
>
> 1.45: hO DE EXELQWN HRXATO KHRUSSEIN POLLA KAI DIAFHMIZEIN TON LOGON,
> hWSTE
> MHKETI AUTON DUNASQAI FQNERWS EIS POLIN EISELQEIN, ALL' EXW EP'
>                                         infinitive
> ERHMOIS TOPOIS HN. KAI HRCONTO PROS AUTON PANTOQEN.
>              imperfect imperfect
> 2.1:  KAI EISELQWN PALIN EIS KAFARNAOUM DI' hHMERWN hKOUSQH hOTI EN OIKW
>                                         after a few days
> ESTIN.
>
>  The time flow of the above narrative is as follows:
>
>  (1) The man with leprosy began to spread the news against Jesus' warning.
>  (2) As a result, Jesus could not enter the city and remained [impf]
>      outside the city. The people came [impf] to him outside the city.
>  (3) After a few days, Jesus terminated his stay outside city and
>      entered the city again.
>
> Because the infinitive and the imperfect do not move the
> story line, the time focus of the story line at the beginning of the
> verse 2.1 is the time at which the man began to spread the news.
> So, DI' hHMERWN (AFTER A FEW DAYS) should be counted with respect to the
> current time focus. It means: it turned out that Jesus's stay outside
> city lasted A FEW DAYS.  But, here is my question, how the stay of
> A FEW DAYS outside the city can allow the narrator to say
> "Jesus no longer could enter the city freely and he stayed
> outside the city. Instead the people came to him from all
> directions." The stay of a few days seems to be too short to contain
> these events.
>
> The oddity I feel might be because I understand the imperfect tense
> incorrectly or I do not understand the meaning of temporal phrase
> DI' hHMERWN. Perhaps DI' hMERWN should be translated as " After
> quite a while" in this context?
>
> Moon
> Moon R. Jung

It seems to me that you understand the use of the imperfect very well. The
events covered must have occurred over several days in various locations
throughout Galilee. It is a prolonged and repetitive event.

Notice that EIS POLIN has no article, so it is not a question of not
entering Capernaum, but rather moving around in Galilee while avoiding the
cities. I assume he would enter the villages (KWMOPOLIS in v. 38 and KWMH in
6:56).

Notice also that there is no Greek word for "few". NIV, TEV, NCV and some
others add the word "few" since a word is needed in English. KJV, RSV, REB
add "some", and NLT adds "several". The Brown interlinear adds "many". The
Greek is quite unspecific as to how many days went by. It could be several
weeks, maybe even a couple of months.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list