[B-Greek] A.T. Robertson (was: Case definitions)
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Oct 9 11:47:09 EDT 2003
At 2:14 PM +0000 10/9/03, Mark Wilson wrote:
>Mitch:
>
>My recommendation is that you pay no attention to the terms. I believe these
>terms are taken from A. T. Robertson's Grammar. You are better off
>understanding how the cases function rather than hoping to decipher their
>meanings based on the ancient terms assigned to the cases. A. T.'s grammar
>is a bit odd, much like Fanning's Verbal Aspect, he assumes his readers are
>already fluent in Greek. When trying to show a particular nuance of a Greek
>phrase, he quotes the phrase without explaining what it is that he's trying
>to show his reader. In other words, he assumes you are already fluent in
>reading Greek. So....why the grammar?
>
>My thoughts,
What is true here is that A.T. Robertson's grammar is not intended as a
primer but as thoroughgoing exploration of the nature of the language of
the New Testament; I would hardly call it "odd" or even "a bit odd." I
wouldn't recommend it for beginners precisely because it is intended for
someone who has already achieved a reasonably sound grasp of Koine Greek
grammar; to that extent it is comparable to Wallace's _Greek Grammar Beyond
the Basics_. At any rate, ATR's classic work, _A Grammar of the Greek New
Testament in the Light of Historical Research_ was first published in 1914
and had gone through four editions by 1923; it has been reprinted
repeatedly and, to my knowledge, has never been out of print since then.
The fact that several generations of students of Koine Greek have found it
useful is reason enough, I think, not to discourage those who wish to
consult it with the expectation of learning from it. I first became
acquainted with it as a Sophomore at Tulane in 1953, exactly fifty years
ago, and was enormously pleased when I finally had a personal copy of it on
my reference shelf. There are a few interpretations of constructions in
Robertson that I might think could just as well or better be explained in a
slightly different way, but I haven't found many such. On the other hand,
I've found most of what I've tried to say in this forum about the middle
and passive voice in Koine Greek already clearly expressed in ATR with the
difference that ATR did not endeavor to substitute more adequate
descriptive terms for traditional grammatical categories such as
"deponents," although he stated clearly his view that such terms are
misleading if deemed "descriptive."
Mark has expressed his disdain for grammars and lexica previously in this
forum; sometimes he qualifies it by saying they are the starting points of
grammatical and lexical exploration rather than the final word. I wouldn't
argue with that at all if I didn't get the impression from what he says
that he really thinks they are starting points that we could readily skip.
I continue to think that skipping that step is exceedingly unwise. For that
reason I won't cease being profoundly grateful for the centuries of
students and scholars who have devoted themselves to the Greek literary
classics and scriptures composed in Greek and who have facilitated my own
and others' opportunity to learn from those classics and scriptures.
The Greek grammatical terms about which Mitch inquires were not invented by
ATR but are ancient. ATR does list and discuss them, indicating which he
thinks are helpful and descriptive and which he thinks are neither helpful
nor adequately descriptive. I think I would characterize ATR's approach to
a systematic treatment of Koine Grammar as Aristotelian in the best sense:
he sets forth on each successive question, just as did Aristotle in his
treatises on Physics, Metaphysics, Ethics, Poetics, etc., the most
significant and widely-held views and approaches to solution of the
question, evaluates them and proceeds to expound his own interpretation of
the evidence from earlier Greek and NT sources on the question.
In conclusion, I'd reiterate what I said at the outset. I would not ever
think of recommending A.T. Robertson's "big book" (1454 pages if one counts
the indexes) to beginners in NT Greek or to any who haven't already
achieved a fundamental grasp of Greek morphology and syntax, but for those
who don't need to consult parsing guides and who have found that Barclay
Newman's glossary is no longer helpful to them and that Mounce's (or any
other's) primer is no help with the questions they meet in the Biblical
Greek text, the time spent in consulting ATR, even reading through whole
chapters, is not wasted time and effort.
--
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