[B-Greek] ACTS 15:1 TWi EQEI TWi MWUSEWS

Randall Buth ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il
Mon Jul 31 03:42:18 EDT 2006


 > ACTS 15:1 KAI TINES KATELQONTES APO THS IOUDAIAS EDIDASKON TOUS
ADELFOUS hOTI, EAN MH PERITMHQHTE TWi EQEI TWi MWUSEWS, OU DUNASQE
SWQHNAI.

Barrett (ICC Acts) and Parsons/Culy (Acts Handbook) seem to be in a
muddle about what to call this dative. Lets forget about giving it a
lable/name (who cares?). Would someone like to explain how this
dative is functioning in this context. The gloss "in accordance
with ..." seems to be  standard, but what can we say about this
dative beyond creating an overly specific category which IMHO
accomplishes nothing (e.g. Parsons/Culy "dative of rule", after
D.Wallace).

I have the grammars there is no need to quote them. What for example,
would a linguist from the functional school say about TWi EQEI TWi
MWUSEWS?

Of course non-linguists are welcome to speak up as well.

I really didn't have any problem with this dative when I read it
initially, the problem arrived when I looked into Barrett, Parsons/
Culy, ...
Elizabeth Kline>

Elisabet XAIREIN

I like your question and aversion to namepasting. It is also good  
that you list both TW EQEI and TW MWUSEWS, since we have two datives  
here. (the second TW adds an [appositional]  description about EQEI  
'custom' and loosely connects it to a genitive 'Moses', which is  
apparently a metanomy for the Torah.)

Meaning, of course, is negotiated within a system and one way to  
approach a somewhat unclear context is to consider what was not chosen.
Also, it is important to recognize that verbs control the "arguments"  
to their predication. That is, noun phrases relate to the valency  
fields provided by verbs. Idiomatically, the verb PERITEMNESQAI would  
expect a person who gets cut, other items being optional additions.

#1: PERITMHQHTE 'you would be circumcised' could have stood alone  
without any serious ambiguity. (Josephus APION 1:169 has  
PERITEMNONTAI ... TA AIDOIA, where the non-Jewish context benefits  
from specifying what gets cut-around, here accusative/AITIATIKH, TA  
AIDOIA 'shame-parts')
#2: The passive may be taken as middle in the sense of "get yourself  
circumcised"
#3: No preposition is added. The extra precision available through  
using explicit prepositions was not considered necessary.
#4: EQOS 'custom, practice' is an abstract process that is being  
related to this verb.
#5: a genitive/GENIKOS EQOUS would have been equally ambiguous to the  
dative, perhaps adding an idea of source or basis.
#6: an accusative AITIATIKH EQOS, would have been confusing because  
AITIATIKH is soometimes used with this verb to specify either who is  
being circumcised (with active verbs) or what is being circumcised  
(see Josephus above).
#7: we are left with a general relationship between 'to be  
circumcised' and Mosaic practice. [From background knowledge we and  
the readers should know that circumcision is part of Mosaic practice  
and it is partially described in Mosaic books and in oral Jewish  
teaching.]
The dative/DOTIKH might add a sense of interaction, of circumcision  
answering to or being a part of this custom (in comparison to GENIKH  
and AITIATIKH).

If the above helps, good. [Otherwise, we can always call this the  
Dative of [Mosaic] Custom and add it to the other 753 kinds of datives.]
ERRWSO
Randall Buth 
  



More information about the B-Greek mailing list