[B-Greek] Linguists in the tower of Babel

malcolm robertson mjriii2003 at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 27 09:29:20 EDT 2005


Elizabeth Kline quoted:
 
"Within Functional Grammar (FG) topical reference to an inferred state 
of affairs plays a significant part in the analysis of information 
structure. (Helma Dik, Word Order in Ancient Greek, p.215)"

It light of the general discussion that has been going on over several topics that syntctical structure plays in the emphasis of the narrative within the sentence, I too am beginning to wonder if too much about too little is being forwarded here.  Language is (can be) alive and is such by the idiosyncrasies of individuals.  Emphasis is more of a stylistic animation to me.
 
For example, Cicero, Calvin and perhaps the German language in toto (generally speaking) can make the *BOOM WORD* (emphasis) come at the end of the sentence as well as the beginning.  The Greek language is quite capable of the same effect; whereas Iver has pointed out elsewhere the English language usually focuses the emphasis at the end of the sentence.  Doubtless in poetry this observation can be contradicted.
 
While my linguistic knowledge is limited, I wonder how one would understand the "topical reference to an inferred state of affairs" within the formal linguistic structure that Paul has chosen to use in Romans 9:16 within it's broader immediate context?
 
ARA OUN OU TOU QELONTOS OUDE TOU TRECONTOS ALLA TOU ELEWNTOS QEOU
 
Another example might be John's obvious suspension of proper syntactical structure for emphasis sake at Apocalypse 1:4f (cf vs 8).
 
IWANNAS TAIS hEPTA EKKLHSIAIS TAIS EN THi ASIAi  CARIS hUMIN KAI EIRHNH APO hO WN KAI hO HN KAI hO ERCOMENOS KAI APO TWN hEPTA PNEUMATWN hA ENWPION TOU QRONOU AUTOU
KAI APO IHSOU CRISTOU hO MARTUS hO PISTOS hO PRWTOTOKOS TWN NEKRWN KAI hO ARCWN TWN BASILEWN THS GHS. TWi AGAPWNTI hHMAS KAI LUSANTI hHMAS EK TWN hAMARTIWN hHMWN EN TWi hAIMATI AUTOU
 
Just stirring the pot - but wondering about the spills and boiling over.
 
Cordially in Christ,
 
Malcolm Robertson
 
______________________________________


Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:


On Jun 27, 2005, at 12:50 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:

> ... 
> This is a difficult problem
> since the authors of the standard books on NT Greek have for the 
> most part
> ignored the framework that Dik is employing in her thesis. 
> Levinsohn is an
> exception but while reading Dik I regularly consulted Levinsohn and 
> found
> that they were not tracking together. Just like Buth and Larsen on 
> this list
> are not tracking together. When you put two linguists in a room you 
> well get
> a half rack (12 bottles) of frameworks. If you put four linguists 
> in a room
> you will have chaos first followed by total silence.

Just about a month ago I had occasion (May 28, "Re: [B-Greek] 
Genitive vs Adjective") to note on this list my observation that 
professional linguists seem to me to work in and write from a sort of 
Tower of Babel, speaking and writing languages or dialects that 
differ from each other on so many basic assumptions and definitions 
and frameworks that non-professional language-students cannot be 
confident of understanding what they say or mean; indeed, Elizabeth's 
observation makes one wonder whether they understand each other. 
We've seen how difficult it is to talk about or understand Greek 
tense and verbal aspect, not just because the matters under 
discussion are difficult but because there is no consensus on 
preferable terminology or basic assumptions. I've found the same to 
be the case in some of the work by professional linguists on voice 
and this has been something of a hindrance to me in formulating an 
intelligible account of what I've discovered about the way voice in 
ancient Greek verbs really works. I suspect that what I have observed 
about professional linguists is more generally true of the social 
sciences: their claim to be "sciences" at all rests upon defining 
"science" in a way that means something altogether than what it means 
in the natural sciencs. Perhaps that's because the social sciences 
are dealing with human phenomena, which somehow do not yield data 
that are so readily quantifiable and subject to verifiable. Whatever 
the truth of this may be, it is particularly disturbing to read again 
and again propositions about how Greek worked at some particular 
point in its history that are put forth as if they were more than 
hypothetical.

Sorry about that, but it's a long-time peeve of mine that 
occasionally has to find expression.


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at ioa.com or cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek




		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Sports
 Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football


More information about the B-Greek mailing list