[B-Greek] Re: Sentence Particle H
moon at sogang.ac.kr
moon at sogang.ac.kr
Sun Apr 10 08:58:57 EDT 2005
Thanks, Carl.
I consulted the references you cited. But still, I wonder if there
are some papers written on the particle H (= H)\ ), the marker of an
alternative.
I wanted to investigate it, because I am trying to interpret 1 Cor 14:36.
The passage in which this verse occurs has been interpreted in two ways.
(1) View 1: The verses 34-35 is the position of Paul, and
the rhetorical question of v 36 aims at confirming this position.
verse 36.
(2) View 2: The verses 34-35 is the position of the Corinthian
or
a quotation from what some of the Corinthians said,
and the rhetorical question aims
at refuting the opinion in this quotation.
Many things are involved in this debate. One crucial issue is how to
take the "disjuntive particle" H in front of v. 36a.
View 1 considers H as a disjunctive particle, which expresses shock and
overturns what immediately precedes ("
What
! Did the word of God originate
with you men only?"). This view claims that
that H + S can be used to state statement S contrary to the
previous statement. In this case, statement S is conveyed by the
rhetorical question in v 36a. So, the S, which is "the word of God did NOT
originate with you men only", contradicts the position of the verses 34-35.
View 2 claims that there is no such use of H in Greek. H here means
"or else" ( the same sense as EI DE MH, IF NOT). Then, we have:
If you do not agree with the position of verses 34-35,
then, did the wordl of God originate with you only?
Because the Corinthian could not accept the conclusion, they should
have agreed with the proposition of verses 34-35.
I find it very hard to understand that H + S
simpliy instroduces statement S contrary to the previous statement.
But I though that there may be another way to support View 1, by
taking
H as "or rather, or precisely". This use of H is well attested. This
H
does not introduce an exclusive alternative to a previous statement or
question, but paraphrases it.
My hypothesis is:
H introduces either an exclusive
alternative phrase or statement/question or a related or similar phrae or
statement/question, which supplements the previous one (cf. BDAG,
SMYTH). This feature is quite visible when
H connects pharases, but there is no reason that H connects
statements/questions in a different way than phrases.
So, if we can take v 36, as "Or rather ( or in other words ),
did the word of God originate with you only?", we can still take
the verses 34-35 as the position of the Corinthians, which Paul
refutes by the rhetorical question of vesre 36.
However, there are many cases of Q; H+ Q occurs,
where Q = question.
And there are many cases of S; H+ Q, where H + Q
introduces
a rhetorical question which results in the conformation of S.
So, I will use my search engine to find cases of
S; H+Q where the rhetorical question Q paraphrases
the assertion of S or its implication.
But, I would like to hear whether I am on the right track.
Moon Jung
Sogang Univ,
Seoul, Korea
-----------------------
At 8:26 PM +0900 4/9/05, <moon at sogang.ac.kr> wrote:
>Hi,
>are there any comprehensive studies on sentence particle H?
>I am
interested in this study, because some exegetes argue
>that H +
rhetorical question can be used to discuss the ongoing
>argument from
another perspective. I always thought that H +
>rhetorical question
introduces an impossible alternative to the
>present statement, in order
to prove the validity of the present
>statement. It is a kind of a "proof
by contradiction".
Moon, you are aware, I assume, that there are two
very different particles,
which, using our conventional transliteration with
added accent markers,
are "H)=" (circumflexed with smooth-breathing) and
"H)\" (grave accent,
smooth breathing); the former is used both as an
affirmative and as an
interrogative particle ("surely"), the latter as a
disjunctive particle
used to introduce rhetorical questions or offer an
alternative question to
one already posed. Perhaps you should first be sure
that you have these
distinguished. BDAG has a pretty clear accounting for
the two, especially
the various usages of "H)\", inasmuch as "H)=" is far
less common in NT
Greek. You might find the accounts in Smyth §§2856-2863
helpful also. J.D.
Denniston's half-century-old work, _The Greek Particles_
has a discussion
of "H)=" of several pages, but I think it's probably the
usage of "H)\"
that you're most concerned with.
--
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