[B-Greek] Mt 1:18 hEUREQH EN GASTRI ECOUSA

Webb webb at selftest.net
Fri Feb 3 14:15:48 EST 2006


See my comments below.

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at ioa.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 10:22 AM
> To: webb at selftest.net
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Mt 1:18 hEUREQH EN GASTRI ECOUSA
> 
> 
> On Feb 2, 2006, at 12:29 PM, Webb wrote:
> 
> > In relation to Acts 8:40, I was thinking along the same lines as
> > HH. If one
> > takes the Philip story as analogous to the kind of thing storied about
> > Elijah and Ezekiel, then "Philip found himself at Azotus" makes
> > sense. The
> > author of Acts could be saying that, as far as Philip is concerned,
> > the
> > Spirit snatches him away and drops him in another place. Otherwise the
> > intent could just be "and Philip showed up in Azotus". But that's a
> > very
> > mundane thing to say, and not a very mundane way of expressing it.
> > There's
> > something mysterious about the Philip story (cf. v. 39) that makes
> > me prefer
> > the first sense.
> 
> I have no objection to "Philip found himself at Azotus." What
> disturbs me, however, is that the translation is pitched to make a
> theological point rather than to convey what the verb means by and of
> itself. Granted it's in a context, but can't the reader draw the
> conclusion for him/herself that you wnat him/her to draw?
I thought you had just gotten done concluding that hEUREQH, roughly "by and
of itself", has more content than just something happening; that
(interpreted as middle anyway) it conveys some flavor of a sudden or
surprising realization of a fact. A little story. Alfred Einstein went
walking in his neighborhood and was so deep in thought that he forgot where
he was going. When he came out of his reverie, he "found himself" two miles
from home. If that little story were narrated in Koine, perhaps hEUREQH
would be the perfect verb. 
All that said, I grant your point about Philip and Azotus. Using a weaker
(than the sense you were advocating) sense of hEUREQH, it still has an edge
of mystery about it if we just say, "and Philip showed up in Azotus." If we
strengthen it to "and Philip suddenly showed up in Azotus", I reckon it's
not a long ways from "and Philip found himself in Azotus". 
> 
> > As for how the word hEUREQH functions in Matt. 1, I have an
> > approach that
> > I'm not sure is any better than what's already been put forward:
> > After his mother Mary had become formally engaged to Joseph, but
> > before
> > their union, they discovered that she had conceived a child by the
> > Holy
> > Spirit. Joseph, her husband, was a man of integrity.  Not wanting
> > her to be
> > disgraced, he intended to divorce her secretly.
> > My main reason for rendering it "they discovered" is that the previous
> > sentence refers to Mary and Joseph, then "their" union,
> 
> i.e. their "non-union"?
> 
> > and immediately
> > comes hEUREQH EN GASTRI ECOUSA EK PNEUMATOS hAGIOU, then
> > immediately Joseph.
> > If M had said that she found out or he found out, that would have
> > raised the
> > question, how did Joseph find out? So M puts it in the indefinite,
> > to bridge
> > between the previous sentence, with the two of them, and the following
> > sentence, with Joseph.
> > L. Harris's argument seems potentially weighty, but it raises the
> > question
> > of how M could talk about Joseph's desire to "divorce her secretly"
> > and so
> > protect Mary from scandal, if she had just failed a formal legal
> > test of
> > purity. If the "finding" was formal and legal, how could a scandal be
> > suppressed?
> 
> Here I would object even more to a paraphrase that goes beyond what
> the Greek text says in order to emphasize an interpretation. 
I'm not sure what you're objecting strongly to. Is it "they discovered",
favoring the passive sense and trying to make some kind of smooth English?
In that case, maybe "she discovered" is better. Or is it "conceived a child
by the Holy Spirit", which perhaps sounds too churchy? If so, you yourself
said that the "simplest rendering of all" for the middle sense of hEUREQH EN
GASTRI ECOUSA was "she had conceived a child". If you have a more neutral
way of relating that to the Holy Spirit (hEUREQH EN GASTRI ECOUSA EK TOU
PNEUMATOS hAGIOU) besides using the English preposition "by", I'm ready to
hear it.
I'm a little confused. I'm pleased at the feedback that my rendering appears
to be paraphrasing in order to emphasize a [tendentious?] interpretation.
I'd certainly want to get rid of that sort of thing where possible. My
conscious intent was simply to render the Greek into spoken English in as
simple and understandable way as possible. I'd value a suggestion from you
as to how best to achieve my translation value goals without paraphrasing or
unduly emphasizing one interpretation over others.
> And your
> objection to L. Harrris' argument can be applied just as well to your
> own suggestion that the discovery is a joint one made by Joseph and
> Mary. After all, if Joseph realized that Mary was pregnant by the
> Holy Spirit, why would he be contemplating a quiet dissolution of
> their engagement?
Using my imagination within the story world created by the text, I'd say
that Joseph couldn't figure out how she (and he with her) could carry
through the betrothal process without a devastating scandal. He, according
to the laws of the time, could decide he didn't want to be married to her
for any reason and at any time. His plan appears to have been to cook up a
story that he changed his mind about getting married and divorce her with no
allegation of immorality, so that she could go into seclusion. 
Webb Mealy





More information about the B-Greek mailing list