[B-Greek] Col. 1:13a causal pronoun FOLLOW Up2

Dr Dale M Wheeler dalemw at multnomah.edu
Sat Apr 17 14:27:31 EDT 2004


At 08:51 AM 4/16/2004 -0400, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>At 4:55 AM -0700 4/16/04, Mitch Larramore wrote:
> >This is my final follow up to this line of
> >questioning, since it seems so "unEnglish" to me.
> >
> >Dr. Wheeler wrote:
> >
> >> Relative Pronouns,....   But then
> >> can also be used to indicate argument development
> >> (means, manner, purpose,
> >> result, reason, condition, concession) in a passage.
> >
> >Could someone provide me with as many examples as your
> >time permits of these kinds of functions
> >(semantic/pragmatic) of relative pronouns? I would
> >like to gain a familiarity and actually see some of
> >these pronouns functioning as means, result,
> >concession, condition!!!!, and so on. Whenever I see a
> >relative pronoun, my thinking does not go beyond an
> >equal sign (and to which noun/pronoun it is equal).
> >But this I realize stems from my limited exposure to
> >both Greek and English. At this stage, I am not
> >interested in relative ADVERBS. Thank you so much!
>
>Mitch, I have no intention of disputing what Dale Wheeler has said on this
>matter. I will only say that interpretation of these nuances may well be a
>matter of reading between the lines and guessing intelligently at what's
>going on in the mind of the writer; remember that in conversation--and
>often enough in writing also--we often have to "divine" what the person
>we're talking with is thinking about. In the first two chapters of
>Galatians I think there's need for a lot of such intelligent guesswork
>required in order to perceive what's implicit but left unspoken. At any
>rate, I don't really think this is something that can be cataloged in a
>neat list to be committed to memory; I think rather it's a matter of
>reading lots and lots more of Greek texts and attaining an intimate sort of
>familiarity with the substance of the larger text. But let me suggest that
>KIND of thing that I think Dale is suggesting, in conversational
>English--without attempting to draw upon or create examples in Greek:
>
>         "I'm going to let Dale, who'll give you a much better explanation
>that I
>         can offer, describe a couple instances of this "adverbial" 
> function of
>         relative clauses ..."
>
>Here the clause "who'll give you a much better explanation ..." is,
>technically speaking, an adjectival clause describing Dale. But from the
>context it is reasonably evident that the clause gives a reason for my
>deferring the description to Dale; i.e. "who'll give you ... " implicitly
>means "because he'll give you ... " Does that help any?
>--

Deciding on the semantic force of otherwise semantically neutral structural 
markers is no different than the process we'all go through to figure out 
the semantic force of circumstantial participles.  There are no absolute 
clues in circumstantial participles to tell us whether they should be 
means, manner, purpose, result, reason, condition, or concession; tense 
helps narrow down the options, but not absolutely.  We figure it out by 
juxtaposing the two clauses connected by the ptc., and then going through 
the options until we arrive at the one that makes the most 
sense.  Beginners do this slowly...old timers can do this for the most part 
instantly and intuitively; its still exactly the same process, with the 
only difference being the time it takes to do it because of experience.

So to figure out how relative pronouns are functioning--when you're sure 
they are not just purely adjectival or providing blocking for the 
(sub-)structure--is to do what you do with ptcs.  Uebung macht den Meister!

Some adverbial examples from Ephesians (which I'm teaching thru right 
now...I'm sure some with quibble with some examples):

Result:  Eph 1:23 - The result of God appointing the Messiah to be head of 
the Church is that He, as universal Sovereign, controls/fill the Church.

Means:  Eph 3:11b - The means by which God accomplished His eternal plan 
was in the Messiah.

Result: Eph 3:12 - The result of the accomplishment of Gods plan is that 
the church has access to God.

Reason: Eph 3:13b - The reason the Ephesians should not become discouraged 
at Paul's imprisonment is because its for their "glory" (choose your option 
as to what DOXA means here)

But they are not all adverbial; in Eph 1:7-11 they are used to block the 4 
praiseworthy salvific deeds of the Son, and in 1:14 its used to block the 
two praiseworthy salvific deeds of the Holy Spirit.

On other semantically neutral structural markers, one should read 
Translating the Word of God by Beekman and Callow, eg., their discussion on 
Rhetorical Questions; for example:

Statement: 1Cor 9:1a - Paul (rhetorically) claims to be (just as) free (as 
any believer).

Reason:  1Cor 9:1b - The reason Paul can claim that he is (even more) free 
(than other believers to choose to do as he pleases) is because he's an 
Apostle.

Reason: 1Cor 9:1c-3 - The reasons Paul can claim to be an Apostle is 
because he was personally commissioned by Jesus and has started the 
Corinthian church.

Hope this helps...

Blessings...


**************************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Ph.D.
Asst. Prof., Biblical Languages/Bible  Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street                       Portland, OR  97220
V: 503-251-6416    F:503-251-6478     E: dalemw at multnomah.edu
**************************************************************************





More information about the B-Greek mailing list