[B-Greek] Acts 22:17 Septuagintal construction of a sort?
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at ioa.com
Wed Jan 25 14:54:11 EST 2006
On Jan 25, 2006, at 2:12 PM, RRedden604 at aol.com wrote:
> Dr Conrad et al,
>
> I've enjoyed the scholarly insights given on this exchange. What
> I have to
> offer is just an interesting tidbit that is more illustrative than
> definitive.
>
> I perused the Hebrew and LXX examples given and others that I
> found, and I
> certainly see a Semitic influence present in Acts 22:17. Picking
> from many
> examples, I found a comparison of Gen. 4:8 in Hebrew and Greek
> very helpful.
> Delitzsch's translation of the NT into Hebrew is interesting. I
> realize,
> in general, translating the Greek into Hebrew does not tell us
> much about the
> Greek, but it is interesting to notice how easily the Greek of
> Acts 22:17 is
> translated into Hebrew. Delitzsch seems to make a very literal
> translation
> of the Greek into Hebrew (except for the final clause). "It came
> about when
> I returned to Jerusalem, that I prayed in the sanctuary and the
> hand of the
> Lord was upon me." (If my translation needs polishing, please let
> me know).
> The NAS translation of Gen 4:8 reads: "And it came about when they
> were in
> the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed
> him."
Gen 4:8 is of the type EGENETO + time-expression + KAI + indicative:
KAI EGENETO EN TWi EINAI AUTOUS EN TWi PEDIWi KAI ANESTH KAIN EPI
ABEL TON ADELFON AUTOU KAI APEKTEINEN AUTON. Here the substantive
infinitive clause is governed by a preposition EN and is not part of
the syntactical structure of EGENETO KAI ANESTH except as an
adverbial temporal phrase.
> I
> certainly can see the similarity of structure in these literal
> translations. I
> found this interesting although it may not contribute anything of
> importance to
> the discussion. (Cf. GKC section 111, esp. p. 327, for insights).
>
> For those who have studied the Acts speeches of Paul in Greek,
> could you
> tell us if those "quoted" speeches are more Semitic than Luke's
> own narration?
> I think this was recently touched on lightly, but would like more
> detail -
> if anyone has the time.
>
>
> Also, I would be interested in knowing how the versions handled the
> construction. The DRA is straightforward, but since I don't know
> Latin, I have no
> way of knowing if the Latin indicates a struggle with the Greek.
> I wonder,
> also, if those who are widely read in the Greek papyri could share
> with us any
> parallel examples that may indicate this theory of Semitic
> influence is not
> as significant as it seems.
Vulgate has: 17 factum est autem revertenti mihi in Hierusalem et
oranti in templo fieri me in stupore mentis 18 et videre illum --
interesting that BOTH participles are here put into the dative; this
reflects an understanding of the Greek as EGENETO DE MOI
hUPOSTREYANTI EIS IEROUSALHM KAI PROSEUCOMENWi EN TWi hIERWi GENESQAI
EN EKSTASEI 18 KAI IDEIN AUTON ... That is to say, the Latin
translator(s) have in fact produced what is clearly a more elegant
Latin formulation than the comparable Greek. If this proves anything
at all, it's only that they felt the genitive absolute was
inappropriate here, or else they would have transformed that into an
ablative absolute.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list