John 14:6 fronting
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Sep 30 07:46:01 EDT 2002
At 7:46 AM +0300 9/30/02, Iver Larsen wrote:
>> Iver and others
>>
>>
>> LEGEI AUTWi [hO] IHSOUS, EGW EIMI hH hODOS KAI hH ALHQEIA KAI hH ZWH.
>> OUDEIS ERCETAI PROS TON PATERA EI MH DI' EMOU
>>
>> Of these three characteristics, could one argue that the most
>> critical is ZWH? Is not Jesus saying that he is the way TO LIFE?
>> In other words, the hODOS is the means to the end, ZWH. (I realize
>> Jesus is saying he IS the way, and that he IS the truth, but these
>> two characteristics seem in some sense subordinate to LIFE.)
>
>One can always speculate, and if people continue to disagree with the basic
>and simple principle that word order in Greek indicates relative
>prominence - as Carl does, and he certainly has the right to do so - then
>the field is open for anything and everything. It becomes extremely
>subjective. I mean if the word order is very free and you can use both
>fronting and the opposite to indicate emphasis, then you can argue from word
>order for whatever you want.
>
>My approach is to start with the hypothesis that the first items mentioned
>in Greek are relatively more prominent. If that makes perfect sense of the
>text, I am satisfied. If it doesn't, then I may need to revise my
>hypothesis, or even abandon it. But I haven't yet seen convincing evidence
>to that effect. Luke 23:43 is certainly not such evidence.
>
>In the first sentence above, clearly the EGW is very emphatic. It is Jesus
>and no one else who is the way to life. Jesus said about the scribes that
>they were looking for life in the Scriptures, so looking for life is nothing
>new. Jesus told them that they did not find that life in the Scriptures
>because they did not recognize that the Scriptures talked about him as the
>Messiah. So, the crucial bit is not the search for life, but where to find
>it, and Jesus says that he is the way. And he is the true way, yes, the only
>way.
>
>The next sentence supports this in my opinion. There the focus is on NO ONE
>COMES (is able to come) to the father by any other way. So, the key point is
>really which is the only true way that leads to the Father. There is no
>particular emphasis on "through me" in the second, because that point was
>already made in the first sentence. It is merely a restatement. Of course, a
>restatement adds prominence to the overall point, but that is a matter witch
>is unrelated to word order.
>
>The principle of "what comes first is more prominent" can also be formulated
>as "unpredictable information first, predictable information last."
I really am not upholding any such notion as that Greek word-order is
willy-nilly "anything goes anywhere"--I do believe that there are patterns
of placement, some of them inviolable, others more flexible. I will readily
concede and do believe that there's a tendency for the underscored notion
to appear in front. But where Iver insists that it is a "law," I prefer to
think of this as a "tendency." Iver makes a plausible case for hH hODOS
being the more important of the three words in John 14:6 by pointing to the
OUDEIS ERCETAI clause following it. And yet ... there follows (v. 7) Jesus'
continuation: EI EGNWKATE ME, KAI TON PATERA MOU GNWSESQE, KAI AP' ARTI
GINWSKETE AUTON KAI hEWRAKATE AUTON. I am somewhat intrigued by the tense
shifts in this sequence: EGNWKATE perfect, GNWSESQE future, GINWSKETE
present, EGNWKATE perfect. What I discern here is a personal statement by
Jesus equivalent to what the evangelist stated back in chapter 1:18 QEON
OUDEIS hEWRAKEN PWPOTE: MONOGENHS QEOS hO WN EIS TON KOLPON TOU PATROS
EKEINOS EXHGHSATO. Jesus' claim is not expressed solely in terms of his
intention to take believers into the presence of the Father through his
person; it finds expression also in his intention to bring the Father into
the presence of believers in his own person. So this business of GINWSKEIN
TON PATERA proves to be a matter of GINWSKEIN TON IHSOUN, and GINWSKEIN is
intimately bound up with hORAN: one who has SEEN Jesus in the fullest sense
has SEEN Jesus' Father. Now I would ask: is the OUDEIS ERCETAI proposition
enunciated immediately after "EGW EIMI hH hODOS KAI hH ALHQEIA KAI hH ZWH"
weighted somehow more heavily that the EI EGNWKATE sequence? I don't really
think so. And this leads me to pose the question of prominence as Mark
Wilson originally proposed it anew: Mark suggested he thought that hH ZWH
was the key element in the "trinity" of hODOS, ALHQEIA, and ZWH; Iver on
the other hand insists that hODOS is the key word. I take a third course
and hold that these three nouns are equi-valent--not "equivalent" but equal
in "valence" or relevance to what Jesus is affirming here: "How do you get
to the Father? Through me. It's not a matter of going somewhere to see the
Father, but a matter of looking at me. Have you seen me and come to know
me? Then you've seen the Father ... and you are ALIVE." I'm just not
satisfied hH ZWH in this sequence is "predictable and therefore last." With
Mark I think it is supremely important, but I'm not convinced that it is
MORE important than hH hODOS or hH ALHQEIA.
In conclusion I would just ask: supposing that these three items were
("are") intended to be equivalent in significance/importance, how, in terms
of the theory of frontal prominence, would one give expression to that
equivalent signifcance/importance? Would one be obliged to repeat the whole
clause? EGW EIMI hH hODOS, EGW EIMI hH ALHQEIA, EGW EIMI hH ZWH? Or would
one then be tempted to argue that the first of these three clauses must be
more prominent?
And what might one say of the "chiastic" principle of positioning elements
in a sort of reversed-parallel sequence? That's been called a distinctly
"Semitic" cultural habit of thought and diction, but I would say it's
common enough in Greek tradition as well. Although I'm not altogether ready
to affirm dogmatically that the chiastic principle is akin to my notion
that frontal AND final positions can BOTH be places of prominence.
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
Most months: Most months: 1989 (was 1647) Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC
28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list