[B-Greek] A last question on John 1:1
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Nov 26 06:33:20 EST 2004
At 4:25 AM +0000 11/26/04, chuckles77 at juno.com wrote:
>Dear list members,
>
>Thank you for your notes and comments, both those posted on the list as
>well as those sent to me personally. I have appreciated your insights,
>which have been very helpful. Of particular help has been Carl Conrad's
>suggestions and personal thoughts, which were extremely insightful. I
>have enough materials and resources sent to me to keep me busy for quite
>some time! ;-)
>
>I realize that sometimes topics such as these can be difficult to discuss
>due to a number of reasons. I view B-Greek as a place where civil
>discourse is possible and encouraged, even on issues that, though fitting
>within the parameters of the list's discussion topics, have been
>historically difficult for folks to communicate with charity and humility.
>My thanks goes to you who have done so.
>
>I do have one final question relating to the Greek text of John 1:1. The
>second part of the verse is thus:
>
>KAI hO LOGOS HN PROS TON QEON KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS
>
>My question is, does the word order in this line produce a chiastic
>structure by the placing of LOGOS and QEON/QEOS? And if so how does this
>affect the understanding of the verse and its translation? (I'm a bit new
>to the ASCII format so please forgive any errors in the verse above).
You will find this question addressed as well as your others in that
lengthy listing of threads on John 1:1c in our archives, but the simple
answer to your question (if there's a simple and definitive answer to any
such question) is:
(a) yes, it is generally believed that there's a structure, not exactly a
chiasmus (most commonly used only of four terms in an ABBA pattern), but
what's called a "staircase" pattern, with successive clauses using as the
first word what was the final word in the preceding clause:
EN ARCHi HN hO LOGOS
KAI hO LOGOS HN PROS TON QEON
KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS
(b) the word-order does NOT really have any impact on the semantics of the
third clause (1c); but (1) it's a fairly common--but by no means
universal--pattern that a predicate word precedes the copula and the
subject, and this may be because the speaker/writer wishes to highlight
that predicate word by prominence in the initial position; and (2) ordinary
syntax requires that the noun with the article be the subject, so that the
clause would have the same fundamental meaning whether it were phrased as
it is or as KAI hO LOGOS HN QEOS or KAI hO LOGOS QEOS HN or even KAI hO
LOGOS HN QEOS.
>P.S. I receive B-Greek in digest format, so if there's been any further
>developments in the discussion, I won't be aware until the next digest
>goes out. Thanks!
Well, direct responses to your question will have your e-address in the cc
line of the headers, so that you'll get your response before the digest is
distributed (normally at noon Eastern time from Chapel Hill, NC). Of course
this depends upon individual respondents' preference settings for "reply to
sender only" or "reply to all"--my own preferred setting and that of many
others).
--
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