Lk 1:64 PARACRHMA
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Sep 10 19:31:28 EDT 2002
I am forwarding to the list the response of Mme. Chabert d'Hyères,
Englished as best I could muster, to my message of this morning:
In a message dated 9/10/02 7:41:18 AM, cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:
>>I suppose it might be possible to read the critical text as indicating
>>that the
>simultaneous events indicated by PARACRHMA are the unbinding of his mouth
>and of his tongue. But it seems to me rather that we should
>>understand TO STOMA AUTOU and hH GLWSSA AUTOU as shared subjects of ANEWiCQH
>(there is, of course, no violation of the concords here since hH GLWSSA
>AUTOU is a subject appended to the original subject-predicate sequence) and
>that the function of PARACRHMA here is to indicate that Zacharias spoke out
>in praise of God AS SOON AS he was able to speak.
Along with instantaneity, PARACRHMA seems to indicate the simultaneity of
two actions whereby a "sign" was discerned (Numb 6,9); elsewhere, apart
from Numb 12:4 and in the prophets it marks divine intervention or anger
falling upon the people unexpectedly (Is 29:5, 48:3). Luke took up anew
this "frightening" adverb, adapting it to his gospel where it served to
mark the exceptional character of healings occurring immediately upon a
word of Jesus (Lk 4:39D; 5:25; 8:44, 55; 13:13;18:43 etc.) or the imminent
arrival of the Kingdom (19:11). That is why the position of PARACRHMA in Lk
1 according to D05 seems to me better to correspond to Luke's habitual
usage, since it it underlines the moment when, as he confirmed the name of
his son, Zacharias recovered his speech according to the sign given by the
angel in Lk 1;20; in the others mss (critical text) simultaneity intervenes
between the same gestures of Zacharie (its mouth its lips and its prayer),
gestures which are not precisely unexpected or surprising.
S Chabert d'Hyères
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list