[B-Greek] RE: Acts 22:6 Revisited (cont.)

Martin Culy MCuly at briercrest.ca
Tue Apr 13 11:30:50 EDT 2004


Carl Conrad wrote:

Far be it from me to disparage illuminating new approaches to Greek
grammar; God knows I have not found much support for my notions about how
middle and passage voice in ancient Greek are best understood. Moreover, I
haven't read the Professor Culy's above-referenced paper and I'd like to do
so before offering any comment on the general worth of his proposition.

I would add also that I quite agree that we ought NOT to analyze the
grammatical construction of a Greek phrase or sentence in terms of how we
translate it into any target language; I've repeatedly questioned the
distinction between "subjective" and "objective genitive" as categories
having any foundation in the Greek usage itself rather than being
categories formulated for the sake of translators.

Nevertheless I am troubled by this notion that POREUOMENWi and EGGIZONTI in
Acts 22:6 are to be understood as ATTRIBUTIVE or ADJECTIVAL rather than as
PREDICATIVE or ADVERBIAL participles. The Greek text in question is cited
above from Eddie Mishoe's original message. Now let me cite the note on
this text from Culy/Parsons:

" POREUOMENWi. Pres. dep ptc masc dat sg. POREUOMAI. The use of participles
rather than infinitive ... is unusual. While there is no question that a
good English translation will render the two participles using a temporal
expression, strictly speaking the participles cannot be adverbial since
they have no verb to modify (both EGENETO and PERIASTRAYAI have different
subjects). Instead, they are clearly attributive modifiers of MOI (see Culy
2004; contra, e.g. Rogers and Robers 291). The use of participles rather
than the more usual infinitives probably serves to keep the focus on Paul
himself rather than the background events: 'There I was, going along and
nearing Damascus at about noon, when a bright light from the sky suddenly
flashed around me!'"

The article cited in the parenthesis has evidently not yet been published
(indicated in the Bibliography of Culy/Parsons as 2004 although cited above
as 2003), and so is not available. Nevertheless, although I approve
wholeheartedly of the English version given at the end of the passage I've
cited from the _Handbook on the Greek Text of Acts_, and although I think
it admirably represents the efficacy of the word-order (the fronted
participial phrase headed by MOI) it clearly does NOT represent the
syntactical structure of the Greek sentence. I myself would understand the
syntactic structure of the sentence thus: the infinitive phrase EK TOU
OURANOU PERIASTRAYAI FWS hIKANON PERI EME functions as the subject of
EGENETO MOI; the participial phrase POREUOMENWi KAI EGGIZONTI THi DAMASKWi
still seems to me to be adverbial and to set forth the circumstances of the
predicate EGENETO MOI; the adverbs PERI MESHMBRIAN EXAIFNHS could be taken
either with PERIASTRAYAI or with EGENETO MOI, but I think I would prefer to
understand them with EGENETO MOI as part of the adverbial clarification of
those two words of the predicate.

Professor Culy says that "strictly speaking the participles cannot be
adverbial since they have no verb to modify (both EGENETO and PERIASTRAYAI
have different subjects)." Technically speaking, that is, of course, true:
EK TOU OURANOU PERIASTRAYAI FWS hIKANON PERI EME is the subject of EGENETO
MOI and FWS hIKANON is the subject of PERIASTRAYAI.

But wouldn't it make more sense to understand EGENETO MOI ... PERIASTRAYAI
FWS as a passive transformation of an active formulation such as EPAQON
FOWS PERIASTRAYAI or EIDON FWS PERISASTRAYAN? And IF we should understand
the construction as such as passive transformation, then wouldn't the
subject of that active verb EPAQON or EIDON or the like be such as to bear
the participles in the nominative POREUOMENOS KAI EGGIZWN THi DAMASKWi:
"experienced/saw, as I journeyed and approached Damascus, a bright light
suddenfly flash about me"? And wouldn't we understand the participles in
such a construction as circumstantial, i.e. adverbial? And if so, aren't
those participles just as much adverbial in the sentence as it appears in
Acts 22:6?

It seems to me that this very vivid expression of Paul's experience is
structured carefully so as to underscore the personal experience; note the
beginning and end: EGENETO DE MOI ... FWS hIKANON PERI EME. To be sure,
Paul narrates this experience in such a way as to make clear its OBJECTIVE
nature: it was not something he dreamed but a personal experience, and in
what follows immediately he breaks into the active voice: EPESA ... KAI
HKOUSA ... I think that the force of those participles in 22:6 is not at
all merely attributive but adverbial: "it happened TO ME, WHILE I WAS
WALKING AND NEARING DAMASCUS, SUDDENLY, AT NOON , that a bright light
flashed ... "

I don't think that I am understanding the meaning of the narrative
statement otherwise than as does Professor Culy; but we evidently have a
very different understanding of the syntax of the verse.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)

______________________

I appreciate Dr. Conrad's thoughtful interaction with my analysis of the
participles in Acts 22:6 and his openness to consider non-traditional ways
of looking at Greek syntax.  His helpful analysis of "deponent" verbs
certainly attests to the latter.  His proposed derivation of the text in
Acts 22:6 is certainly intriguing, but our understanding of the participles
remains different.  First, let me clarify that the article cited in
Culy/Parsons was actually published prior to the target date set by the
journal (a rare phenomenon!) and did appear at the end of 2003. 

Now to Acts 22:6.  The only place that we differ from Dr. Conrad in our
analysis of this text relates to the syntax of the participles.
Culy/Parsons analyzes the infinitive clause in the same way that Dr. Conrad
has above.  In his comment, Dr. Conrad concedes that technically it is
correct to say that the participles have no verb to modify.  He then goes
through a hypothetical derivation of the text as it stands.  While being
aware of passive transformations can be very helpful to students of Greek,
passivization involves the transformation of an active clause (with a
transitive verb) into a passive clause. In Acts 22:6 we are dealing with a
stative verb (EGENETO), not a passive verb.  I am not sure what basis there
could be for seeing a passive transformation here or for claiming a
relationship between EGENETO and EIDON or any other verb.  Thus, while I can
see certain logic in the argument, it does not fit with the text as it
stands.  I find the attributive participle analysis far less cumbersome.
There are simply too many "ifs" in the proposed derivation.  (Dr. Conrad's
comments on the structural focus on Paul's personal experience, on the other
hand, are right on the mark.)  Ultimately, it is important to clarify what
exactly we mean by "adverbial" and "adjectival" when used as labels of
participial functions.  If the proposed derivation is abandoned, and I think
it should be in light of the lack of connection between the putative
underlying active text and the text as it stands, what syntactic basis
remains for viewing the participles as adverbial? I would suggest that the
only basis relates to English translation rather than Greek syntax.  In the
syntax, the participles modify MOI; there is no verb, either explicit or
implicit, for them to modify. If "adjectival" elements modify constituents
like nouns and pronouns, while "adverbial" elements modify verbs, I prefer
to label these participles, which go with a pronoun, adjectival and to then
ask how that syntax affects our understanding of the text. I look forward to
additional reactions to the full article, which I can make available in
digital form to those who write to me directly.  

Martin Culy
Associate Professor of New Testament
Briercrest Biblical Seminary

--------------------------------------

This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged proprietary material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, or distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or authorized to receive the information from the recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.



More information about the B-Greek mailing list