two models?

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Oct 24 08:27:08 EDT 2002


{CWC Disclaimer: I would just like to state explicitly what most will
probably readily understand: I am forwarding George's messages to the list
not because
I endorse their content in any way but only because he can't alter his
format settings in AOL to plain-text ASCII only.]

Forwarded for George Somsel <Polycarp66 at aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 01:07:38 EDT

In a message dated 10/23/2002 11:25:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
burer at bible.org writes:

>-----Original Message-----
><snip>
>GGBB is the book for folks who want to perpetuate the "Machen Model" for
>another 100 years. If you want live in the past this is the right
>choice.
><snip>
>------------------------------------
><snip>
>Let me put my cards on the table: Most all of my Greek has been taken
>under the tutelage of Wallace at Dallas Seminary. I am thoroughly
>steeped in morpho-syntactical analysis. I like to talk about objective
>and subjective genitives, gnomic presents, and the like. As I have
>progressed in my education I have tried to learn about discourse
>analysis and broader linguistic matters but I have not yet studied them
>in depth. I know that this field is growing, but I am not initiated into
>it yet.
>
>Here's what I would like to see someone succinctly state: What makes
>discourse analysis (or other comparable fields) better for studying NT
>Greek than the traditional methods that I imagine most of us learned?
>
>I'll make the first volley based upon what I know (which I'll admit is
>limited), and I look forward to being informed further on this matter: I
>do not see discourse analysis eclipsing morpho-syntactical analysis.
>Instead, I see them as complimentary or perhaps as a pyramid. One must
>learn accidence, morphology, and word formation in order to even start
>reading anything of a Greek text (or any foreign language text for that
>matter). Then one must learn syntax of words and clauses to make more
>sense of a Greek text. Finally, one must learn to handle the discourse
>on its broadest level to understand a Greek text. You can't learn Greek
>without studying the words, phrases, and clauses, but you should not
>stop there either.
>
>I recognize that it is entirely possible that I misunderstood the
>meaning of the quote I excerpted above, and if so I beg for correction
>on this matter. Even so, though, I think this topic needs to be
>discussed for myself and others who want to learn about these issues.
>


I would go further than even you go.  I don't see discourse analysis as
properly being a function of grammar at all.  Grammar deals with the
traditional subjects included in it for many, many years.  This is not to
disparage discourse analysis.  I think discourse analysis has a very
valuable contribution to make to an improved understanding of the text;
it's just that it is not grammar.

gfsomsel



More information about the B-Greek mailing list