[B-Greek] Mounce defines "cheir" as "hand," "arm," or "finger."
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Thu Feb 19 14:45:24 EST 2004
> Glenn:
>
> BDAG has in its article:
> The arm may be meant (as Hes., Theog. 150; Hdt. 2,
> 121, 5 Herodas 5, 83 =in my arms; Paus. 6, 14, 7;
> Galen, De Usu Part. 2, 2 vol. I p. 67, 1 Helmreich;
> Longus Mt 4:6; Lk 4:11 (both Ps 90:12; but s. above).
The "s. above" refers to the following:
"W. prepositions: the hand on or in which someth. lies or fr. which someth.
comes or is taken: EN THi CEIRI Mt 3:12; Lk 3:17. ... EPI THN CEIRA Rv 20:1.
EPI CEIRWN Mt 4:6; Lk 4:11 (both Ps 90:12)"
Since Ps 90(91):12 has a Hebrew word meaning "palm of the hand", I think the
sense of "hand" is more likely than the sense of "arm" in these two
instances.
> --- Glenn Evans <glenn at irr.org> wrote:
> > In the first-year Greek grammar, "Basic of Biblical
> > Greek" by William D.
> > Mounce "cheir" is defined as "hand," "arm," or
> > "finger." When I took
> > that class, I remember thinking that this definition
> > explains how Christ
> > was crucified through the wrist because of the wider
> > meaning of the
> > Greek term. But tonight I looked in three
> > dictionaries and found that
> > with only one exception the Greek word "cheir"
> > translates into English
> > as "hand." The only exception was in Luke 15:22
> > where "cheir" refers to
> > the finger, not to the hand, and therefore it is
> > necessary to translate
> > in most languages "put a ring on his finger."
> >
> > Why does Mounce gives "arm" as a possible
> > translation.
I don't really think that "finger" should be included among the senses of
CEIR. When a ring (DAKTULIOS) is put on the hand and sandals on the feet in
Luke 15:22, it is clear that it actually goes on one of the fingers on one
of the hands. That it may be more natural in English to *translate* this as
"put a ring on his finger" (which finger?) than "put a ring on his hand" as
KJV and RSV have, is a different matter. One may categorize this as metonymy
where the word hand is used to *refer* to finger, but still *means* hand.
On the other hand, I don't think we need to be strict on the hand only
extending to the wrist. It can well include at least the lower part of the
arm, and often it is not possible to distinguish between arm and hand. If a
person stretches out his hand, he has to stretch out his arm, too. If the
upper arm is in focus, I would expect to see either AGKALH (elbow, arm) or
BRACIWN (arm, shoulder).
Another aspect is the potential Hebrew influence in much of NT Greek. As far
as I know Hebrew has one term for the hand in the sense of the palm of the
hand, another term (yad) for the hand including the lower arm, and a third
term (zero') for the upper arm including the shoulder. In addition, yad has
the extended sense of authority, power whereas zero' has the extended sense
of strength, force. Likewise, Hebrew has one term for foot and leg, so at
times in NT Greek one can find the word for foot actually referring to the
leg or the leg including the foot.
Many different languages have one word for foot/leg and another for
hand/arm, so we need to be careful not to squeeze these terms into an
English mould. Some languages also use the same word for finger and toe
(DAKTULOS TOU PODOS - "finger" of the foot).
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list