[B-Greek] (B-Greek) Two in one bed

Iver Larsen iver at larsen.dk
Sat Jul 22 03:51:55 EDT 2006


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel L Christiansen" <dlc at multnomah.edu>


> Iver, you made some comments that virtually none of the English versions
> use the term "men." You also stated that DUO, in the absence of a contextual
> referent, must be understood as implying a modification of "the most generic
> noun." You then say "ANQRWPOI (people) is more generic than ANDRES (men)."
> Well, KJV, NKJV, NASB, Darby, Young, and ASV all specify "men" in the
> passage, so the history of English translation is hardly conclusive on the
> matter.

I looked at the 15 versions I have ready access to on my computer. Of these, only KJV had supplied [men], and my comment
there was that this is understandable, because "men" in those days included the sense of "people, human beings".
That the NKJV has kept "men" indicates that they have not updated the language to modern English.
The NASB you refer to must be an old version, since the version from 1995 has "there will be two in one bed". I don't
have access to the other versions you mention, but aren't they pretty old?
If you look at modern translations based on the Greek text, it is very rare to find one that keeps "men".
But I agree, that the deciding factor is not Bible translation tradition, but the Greek text.

> I am not aware that any such requirement as "most generic" may be
> applied to grammatical referents; even if there were to be such a
> requirement, it is not all clear that ANQRWPOI is more generic.

OK, this is one of the basic suggestions of lexical semantics. The more generic a word is, the less semantic content it
has. In terms of inanimate objects the most generic word is "thing" and in terms of human beings, the most generic is
"person/human being" or in older English "man".
When an adjective (here the specific kind of adjective called a numeral) is used substantively, the rule is as I stated
that either the implied noun is lifted from the previous context or the most generic noun is to be supplied, i.e. either
"thing" or "person", depending on the gender of the adjective.

> However, even though there are difficulties with the terms used and the
> translational equivalents desired, the rhetorical sense of the passage seems
> quite clear. I would have to agree with Carl, on two points:
>
> 1) The gender of the persons does not appear to be the point of the passage.
> While each of these words is certainly masculine in form, at least two
> issues need to be recognized in terms of the gender expectations raised by
> the form. First, masculine is a grammatical "default" for Greek: only if the
> person referred to were specifically conceived of as a female and NOT as
> male, would there be a reason to use the feminine form. Second, the
> accompanying example speaks of women, and specifically NOT of men, thus
> using the feminine forms. The most we can say, is that the referent is not
> required to include a woman, and must include at least one man. The persons
> involved may be grammatically identified as man/woman OR man/man; they
> cannot be woman/woman.
>
> 2) The contrapositioning of DUO with hEIS makes it clear there is one bed
> being shared by two persons. The point here is that the two persons involved
> are alike in their day-to-day activities and position. Such likeness serves
> to highlight the drastic difference in their ultimate experience.

You have explained it very well, and I totally agree with you on both points, which also means that I will have to
disagree with Cindy's comments. Although modern English culture dictates complete symmetry between genders, that was not 
the case in the time of the Greek language of the NT.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list