[B-Greek] Acts 22:17 Septuagintal construction of a sort? (LONG)
Iver Larsen
iver at larsen.dk
Tue Jan 24 16:23:58 EST 2006
Carl Conrad (CC) said:
In some respects Iver has construed the elements of the sentence as I
did myself in my earlier message of January 23, 2006 1:30:48 PM EST
and 3:15:26 PM EST; he agrees that the dative participial phrase
hUPOSTREYANTI EIS IEROUSALHM must construe with the preceding MOI
which itself is a complement to EGENETO, and so, like myself, he does
NOT view this dative construction as any sort of "dative absolute." I
rather think, however, that he misunderstands the function of the KAI
linking the dative participial phrase with the genitive absolute
phrase. See below.
IL: I think we need to make a distinction between the Greek language as used in Acts and that used in Luke's Gospel. See
below.
>>> Acts 22:17 -- EGENETO DE MOI hUPOSTREYANTI EIS IEROUSALHM KAI
>>> PROSEUCOMENOU MOU EN TWi hIERWi GENESQAI ME EN EKSTASEI
<snip>
CC:
I quite agree that the KAI is awkward here if we understand it as an
ordinary Greek conjunction linking the two participial phrases. But I
believe that it serves rather the function of KAI in a standard
Septuagintal construction where it represents Hebrew W', an element
in a Hebrew paratactic construction commonly translated into English
and other languages as a subordinating conjunction, "that."
Note the following representative OT texts from the LXX:
Gen. 19:34 EGENETO DE THi EPAURION KAI EIPEN hH PRESBUTERA ... Heb.:
WaYeHiY MiMoChoRoTh
Gen. 20:13 EGENETO DE hHNIKA EXHGAGEN ME hO QEOS EK TOU OIKOU TOU
PATROS MOU KAI EIPA ...
Gen. 21:22 EGENETO DE EN TWi KAIRWi EKEINWi KAI EIPEN ABIMELEC ...
Gen. 22:20 EGENETO DE META TA hRHMATA TAUTA KAI ANHGGELH TWi ABRAAM ...
Ruth 3:8 EGENETO DE EN TWi MESONUKTIWi KAI EXESTH hO ANHR ...
2Sam. 17:21 EGENETO DE META TO APELQEIN AUTOUS KAI ANEBHSAN EK TOU
LAKKOU ...
Common in all these examples is that EGENETO DE is followed by a
temporal phrase and a KAI introducing what is in effect the clause
serving as the subject of EGENETO: "And it happened on the next day
that the elder girl said to the younger ... " (Gen 19:34); "And it
happened, when God had taken me out of my father's house, that I
said ... " (Gen 20:13); "And it happened, after they had left, that
they climbed up out of the well ..." (2 Sam 17:21).
I would contend that Luke is imitating the LXX construction and that
the KAI preceding the genitive absolute construction in Acts 22:17 is
actually a subordinating conjunction: "And it happened to me when I
had returned to Jerusalem THAT, as I prayed, I fell into a trance ..."
IL:
Note also that in all the above constructions, the KAI is followed by a finite verb and a nominative subject.
EGENETO is used in Acts 54 times, but not a single one of them is like these LXX constructions. However, they are fairly
common in Luke, which indicates that much of Luke has a semitic vorlage like the LXX. I don't think it is imitation as
much as literal translations from Hebrew.
It is easiest to restrict myself to sentences that start off with an EGENETO clause and has a temporal EN construction.
There are three in Acts:
9:37 EGENETO DE EN TAIS hHMERAIS EKEINAIS ASQENHSASAN AUTHN APOQANEIN
14:1 EGENETO DE EN IKONIWi KATA TO AUTO EISELQEIN AUTOUS EIS THN SUNAGWGHN ...
19:1 EGENETO DE EN TWi TON APOLLW EINAI EN KORINQWi PAULON DIELQONTA TA ANWTERIKA MERA ELQEIN EIS EFESON KAI EUREIN
All of these have an accusative with infinitive as the complement for EGENETO, and this is the standard in Acts.
When we turn to Luke, the situation is different. EGENETO is used 69 times, but again, let me restrict myself to the
clausal ones with an EN construction. There are 30 of them, so I'll only sample the three possible constructions:
Case A:
Lk 5:17 KAI EGENETO EN MIAi TWN hHMERWN KAI AUTOS HN DIDASKWN KAI HSAN KAQHMENOI FARISAIOI...
"And it happened in one of the days that he was teaching and Pharisees were sitting"
This is the Hebraic construction, indicated both by the initial KAI, rather than the DE in Acts, and the KAI before
AUTOS. The clause following the EGENETO clause always has the verb in the indicative rather than infinitive.
Case B:
Lk 17:14 KAI EGENETO EN TWi hUPAGEIN AUTOUS EKAQARISQHSAN
"And it happened in their returning (that) they were cleansed".
This is similar, except that the KAI is not present before the second finite verb.
Case C:
Lk 6:1 EGENETO DE EN SABBATWi DIAPOREUESQAI AUTON DIA SPORIMWN
"It happened in a sabbath (that) he was going through some grain fields"
Here we have the accusative with infinitive complement that we find in Acts.
Looking at all the cases in Luke, 11 of them are of type A with the KAI plus finite verb, 15 are of type B without the
KAI plus finite verb, and 3 are of type C with the accusative plus infinitive.
Two constructions may be of particular interest in comparing with the Acts 22:17 case:
Lk 3:21: EGENETO DE EN TWi BAPTISQHNAI hAPANTA TON LAON
KAI IHSOU BAPTISQENTOS KAI PROSEUCOMENOU
ANEWiCQHNAI TON OURANON
In this case it looks like we have a conflation of case A and C, however, it seems to me that this is really case C,
because the third line is the accusative with infinitive complement of EGENETO and there is no finite verb as required
in case A and B. Line 2 is a genetive absolute that is added to the EN clause by KAI as a subordinate clause to EGENETO.
"It happened after all the people had been baptized and as Jesus had been baptized and while he was praying that the
heaven was opened"
Lk 20:1: KAI EGENETO EN MIAi TWN hHMERWN DIDASKONTES AUTOU TON LAON EN TWI hIERWi KAI EUAGGELIZOMENOU
EPESTHSAN hOI ARCIEREIS....
This is case B with a finite verb, but no KAI. There is also a genetive absolute attached to the EGENETO.
"And it happened in one of the days while he was teaching the people in the temple and evangelizing them that the chief
priests came up...
To sum up, while I accept that the Hebraic flavored construction is used fairly regularly in Luke, I cannot see evidence
that it is used in Acts, and I still think that the complement (subject) for EGENETO in Acts 22:17 is the accusative
with infinitive rather than the KAI clause. This agrees with the quote below from Culy (My only difference is that I
would not call the KAI epexegetical, but simply additional):
"The conjoined infinitival clause (GENESQAI ... KAI IDEIN ... ), which
extends to the end of v. 18 functions as the subject of EGENETO,
which also has an indirect object (MOI) that is modified by a
temporal genitive absolute construction introduced by an epexegetical
KAI: lit. "It happened to me, who had returned to Jerusalem--
specifically, while I was praying in the temple--that I was in a
trance.'"
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list