[B-Greek] John 13:4-5 present tenses
Mike Sangrey
msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Thu Mar 13 11:18:56 EST 2003
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 09:47, Eric Weiss wrote:
> Stanley Porter seems to believe that time isn't a factor with ANY of the
> tenses, not even the indicative, as I recall from my reading of his
> Idioms book. In John 13:4-5, is this part of the explanation for the
> tenses here -- i.e., the present tense is being used to convey a
> continuous, deliberative activity, in contrast to the aorist tense which
> is simply stating the action?
I think that's a little overstated, at least as I understand Porter.
Though I haven't read as much of him as I would like to. It's pretty
hard to just toss time or to even pigeon-hole the various semantic
features of a verb into nice neat little semantically distinct boxes.
Cancelability (ala Fanning) exists, but it still seems to me the
features are more like distinct pieces of play dough somewhat smooshed
together.
Hmmmmm...it's hard for me to cut pieces away from your post so my reply
can be shorter. Ummmm...good job! <chuckle> More comments below.
>
> EGEIRETAI EK TOU DEIPNOU KAI TIQHSIN TA hIMATIA, KAI LABWN LENTION
> DIEZWSEN hEAUTON. EITE BALLEI hUDWR EIS TON NIPTHRA KAI HRXATO NIPTEIN
> TOUS PODAS TWN MAQHTWN KAI EKMASSEIV TWi LENTIWi hWi HN DIEZWSMENOS.
>
> "He [Jesus] rises (present m/p) from the supper and removes (present)
> his outer-garments, and after-taking (aorist ptc.) a towel he girded
> (aorist) himself; then he pours (present) water into the washbasin and
> he began (aorist) to-wash (present inf.) the feet of the disciples and
> to-wipe (present inf.) [them] with-the towel with-which he-is-girded
> (perfect ptc.)"
>
> Assuming I didn't make any transcription or copying or translation
> errors, is John depicting or conveying the actions of Jesus raising
> himself.and removing his outer garments and pouring the water and
> washing and wiping the disciples' feet as being more "vivid" or as
> continuous, protracted activities by his use of the present tense
> (indicative and infinitive) -- in contrast to the aorist for "he took a
> towel and girded himself" (and "began")?
I think there's something to the `vividness' idea. At least in the
sense that John brings certain actions more front and center. Kind of
like a painter fuzzying what he or she wants backgrounded and making
clear the central focus.
The aorist of hooking the towel around his waste indicates a
clarification of what happened. John is heading off a
mis-interpretation. It's not entirely clear to me what that
mis-interpretation is, perhaps having to do with modesty in some way.
But the main stream of action is carried along by the presents. I think
the intended affect is for the interpreter to follow along by way of the
presents but keep the aorists in the back of the mind as sort of
adjustments to the interpretation.
However, the aorist ARCW with the present infinitives is interesting. I
would probably translate that as: "...he entered into washing and
wiping the feet of the disciples..." The periphrastic nature of the
phrase, the additional seemingly unneeded words, and the lexical meaning
of ARCW ("begin") draws attention to itself. John wants his reader to
"linger" here.
> Normal English would probably translate this as: "Jesus rose from the
> supper and removed his outer garment, and took a towel and wrapped it
> around his waist. He then poured water into the washbasin and began to
> wash his disciples' feet and dry them with the towel he had wrapped
> around himself." All the presents would be changed to past tenses. Do we
> lose something by translating it into English this way, and if so, what
> do we lose -- i.e., what nuances or things did John mean to convey by
> these present tenses? Did he mean that Jesus slowly rose from the table,
> and carefully/methodically removed his outer garments, and slowly poured
> water into the washbasin, and slowly/deliberately/carefully washed and
> dried his disciples' feet?
I like to think of Porter's contribution as helping us to see the
difference between a journalist and a story teller. The journalist
reports the historic facts: "A man dressed in a towel entered the 5th
avenue delicatessen..." A story teller tells a story: "Get this, we're
sitting at our table at the 5th and in walks this guy dressed in a
towel..."
It's not that the historical facts are more right as a journalist
reports them. It's the involvement of the reader in the historical
facts that's different. As much as we would like to keep the Bible
objective, IT'S objective is to engage and change it's objects--us.
--
Mike Sangrey
msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Landisburg, Pa.
"The first one last wins."
"A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth."
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list