[B-Greek] re: Genitive in 2 Cor 1:5, H GENIKH PTWSIS
R Yochanan Bitan Buth
ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il
Fri Jun 4 08:45:47 EDT 2004
E. Mishoe EGRAPSE
>How can we keep the number of Genitives
>to a workable size?
By starting with 1.
Then by grouping according to structure rather than by interpretation in
another language.
E.g., similarly to what Carl did, but a little differently:
1 ONOMA META GENIKOU ONOMATOS [KAI/H ANTWNUMIAS KAI/H EPIQETOU],
a noun with a genitive noun [inc. pronouns/adjectives](marks possession or
relationship to be determined by context)
2 RHMA META GENIKOU ONOMATOS,
a verb with a genitive noun object (idiomatic to the verb, or less
affected than an AITIATIKON ONOMA [accusative])
3 PROQESIS META GENIKOU ONOMATOS,
a preposition with a genitive noun (idiomatic to the preposition)
4 GENIKON META METOXHS
a genitive with a participle (this is most frequently an adverbial use of
the genitive mentioned immediately below, and is traditionally called
'genitive absolute' in English)
5 GENIKON "EPIRRHMATWS", META PROTASEWS
a genitive 'adverbially', with a clause (idiomatic, like TAXEWS 'quickly'.
The GENIKON META METOXHS above is a common use of this, though usually with
more than one word)
EPEITA Afterwards (!) someone may profitably subcategorize these by semantic
structure, especially 1, depending on whether the ONOMATA are animate (human
and being humanized as a speaker/participant, or non-human), or thing,
transitive process (e.g., writing, loving, etc., where the genitive may
refer to either side/end of the process), intransitive process (e.g.,
walking, growing old), quality (e.g., brightness), thought process (e.g.,
calculation), result (e.g., victory, defeat [see 'process']), etc. This is
the legitimate function of someone writing a reference grammar, or of
someone collecting examples in pedagogical material, though the naming of
categories is not normally a detailed part of learning a language. It is
normally part of looking at a language after a foundation is internalized
and is in extensive use.
In general, the GENIKH PTWSIS is used where either
(a) the relationship is inferrable from the context, and/or
(b) ambiguity can be tolerated because the main point is elsewhere and the
writer/speaker did not want to distract from the main point by using extra
energy to make some relationships specific.
These last two points are very important for properly interpreting a
message. They are part of what is called 'pragmatics' and 'relevance' within
linguistic theory. They are a very useful 'rule of thumb' to remind one to
keep a proper perspective. Greek readers get to enjoy their Greek.
These last two points are also quite tricky for translation into another
language because clarifying them can skew the focus of a message if care is
not taken, yet not clarifying them can block a message, or misdirect a
message. Translators earn their living! And Greek readers get to enjoy their
Greek.
[[Btw. APO THS KRHTHS? OUXI. DIAMENW MEXRI THS KURIAKHS. TA ARNIA
EUFRAINESQW KAI AGALLIASQW!]]
ERRWSQE
Randall Buth
Randall Buth, PhD
Director, Biblical Language Center
www.biblicalulpan.org
and Director, Biblical Studies in Israel
Hebrew University, Rothberg International School
ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list