[B-Greek] Nature of the Greek language

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Dec 8 07:03:38 EST 2003


At 10:45 PM -0600 12/7/03, Luke Hartman wrote:
>In a homiletics book I recently read (Homiletical Plot), the author
>sees Greek as very rigid. a language where words had definitions,
>contrasted with Hebrew, a verb-based language where words were
>descriptions. (he would thus favor a Semitic thought-process for his
>craft.) How accurate is his observation in describing the languages?
>Would any of you have anything to add by way of addition or critique?
>Perhaps the question could better be asked, "What are the fundamental
>differences between Greek and Hebrew as languages?"
>
>If this is deemed off-topic, please respond off-list.

I don't think this topic is at all improper for list discussion; it does
strike me as a very questionable proposition, at least in the format in
which it is stated by Luke Hartman. I do not feel competent to comment on
what might be perceived as "strengths and weaknesses" of Greek and Hebrew
relative to each other--I am not sufficiently competent in Hebrew for that.
Nevertheless, as formulated above, the assertion seems questionable to me
in what it claims about Greek of any era in antiquity. My inclination would
be to suppose that an intelligent and competent user of either Hebrew or
Greek in antiquity could formulate with reasonably clarity whatever he or
she intended to communicate, albeit with different grammatical and lexical
elements. It does strike me as odd that any one very familiar with ancient
Greek should claim that ancient Greek is NOT verb-based or that ancient
Greek words are more-precisely defined and less "descriptive" than Hebrew
or Semitic words. The only serious comparative study of Hebrew and Greek
thought based upon linguistic characteristics of the two languages was
published back in the 1950s as _Das Hebraeische Denken im Vergleich mit dem
Griechischen_ by Thorleif Boman; it was translated into English as "Hebrew
Thought Compared with Greek" in 1960 and that's the edition that I read--I
am somewhat surprised to find that it's still in print in a paperback
edition published by Norton in 2002! I thought then that it was a
fascinating discussion, particularly a chapter on implications of the verbs
EINAI and HaYaH for perspectives upon reality, but when I read it back in
the 60's I recall thinking that it was more informative about the way Plato
conceived reality than about the way that Greeks MUST conceive reality.

It looks like the book in question must be _The Homiletical Plot: The
Sermon As Narrative Art Form_ by Eugene L. Lowry, who is evidently an
emeritus professor of Homiletics at St. Paul School of Theology, a United
Methodist institution in Kansas City, also a jazz pianist and antique car
enthusiast, from what I can glean on internet sources. He must surely be an
outstanding preacher; how competent is he as a linguist?
-- 

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/



More information about the B-Greek mailing list