[B-Greek] Greek Lexicon 1st century Eng-Greek
frjsilver at optonline.net
frjsilver at optonline.net
Sat Sep 2 09:34:44 EDT 2006
Dear Friends --
FWIW, I concur completely with Randall Buth.
The NT contains, what, about 2200 variously inflected words? And it's just a fat pamphlet compared to the Bible!
What 200-page book in, say, English containing a mere 2200 basic words could be even remotely considered representative of the language?!
Academic high schools in Greece even now require students to be familiar with prechristian authors as well as the NT. Native speakers of Modern Greek are more than aware that this ancient idiom is different, maybe about as different as Chaucer is to native speakers of Modern American English, but certainly not as inaccessible as Beowulf; maybe the Danes and Icelanders can read that without a dictionary....
In any event, the predictably much broader vocabulary of Modern Greek assists, rather than impedes, the access of native speakers to the NT. Occasional slippage actually makes for some humorous moments, but not as funny as some of those florid Byzantine hymns we use in the services! 'Double meaning' doesn't begin to describe some of the possible pitfalls!
All that being said, I think it would be interesting to back-form a lexicon of both the NT and the Greek 70, based on renderings already available in other languages, just to see how far the semantic fields have spread, and to make more imaginative options available to translators.
Sometimes, the days are just too short!
Peace and blessings to all.
Father James Silver
----- Original Message -----
From: Randall Buth
Date: Saturday, September 2, 2006 8:31 am
Subject: [B-Greek] Greek Lexicon 1st century Eng-Greek
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> George egrapsen
> >>If you really want this, it is doable with the electronic
> tools
> now available. Simply acquire a copy of BDAG from Logos and
> enter
> the English gloss you wish to find and BDAG as the target of the
>
> search.>>
> >Randall Buth wrote:
> I'd love to see a fairly comprehensive English-Greek
> lexicon/glossary
> for
> first century usage. BDAG gives zero, but might be reverse-
> engineerablesomewhere, and Louw-Nida is woefully inadequate.
> Anyone there with time, background, and interest to do something
> usable?ERRWSO>
>
> Unfortunately, current electronic tools are not adequate.
> Perhaps some expansion is necessary in order to grasp the scope
> of
> what is necessary.
>
> The reason why LouwNida is inadequate is the same reason why
> BDAG is
> inadequate. Both lexica are artificially limited to a small
> crosssection of the living language. Because of that, they do
> not
> adequately represent the choices of words that were available to
>
> first century authors at different registers of writing. Even in
> the
> fields of theology, ethics, and human behavior the two mentioned
>
> lexica do not provide a wide-enough scope. A back-engineered
> access
> to the english glosses of BDAG would be downright dangerous for
> students if they thought that they were seeing a picture of the
> options available. That is exactly the problem with Louw-Nida,
> which
> already provides its own inadequate English-Greek index (if one
> goes
> to the trouble of looking up the reference numbers to the
> English
> index). For example, would the student be aware that the choice
> between PRAUS 'modest', EULABHS 'cautious', EUSEBHS 'reverent'
> overlaps with a word like AIDHMWN 'modest, reverent'?
>
> There are several directions and implications for this. first,
> the
> dictionary should cover the language attested for the first
> century.
> this is quite large, and a rough and ready cut for this could be
>
> culled from the electronic tools, including TLG. Josephus,
> Philo,
> Epictetus, Dio Chrysostom, Plutarch must needs be included, for
> starts. some of this (Josephus/Philo) is already accesible in
> reverse-
> format. An attempt must be made to include all of the common and
>
> generic words, especially. Many of these are missing from the NT
> or
> early christian vocabulary, by accident, of course, not by
> design.
> XANQOS and KUANOUS/KUANEOS are basic colors that every four-
> year old
> Greek kid would have within his repertoire and which would form
> part
> of the matrix for evaluating any color-word. Not having them in
> NouwLida skews the ability of the tool to provide the proper
> framework for interpretation. The meaning of a word in any
> language
> is not only itself, but also NOT being the other available options.
> One method of lexicography that FORCES this issue is to require
> that
> the dictionary use the target language as the language of
> definition.
> Take the first century words and define them with first century
> words. The end result is a much more integrated knowledge base.
> It
> more closely approximates linguistic competence in a language
> user.
> Incidentally, this is taken for granted in most other fields of
> literature. French lit students have French-French dictionaries,
> but
> students of first century Greek have neither Greek-Greek
> dictionaries, nor even English-Greek dictionaries that even try
> to
> cover the reasonable bases. I would call these two items (Greek-
> Greek
> and English-Greek) major desiderata for the field. Their lack
> leaves
> the field stunted and dwarfed. The lack of recognition of the
> lack is
> almost scary in its implications. The ability of the field to
> make
> progress is a tribute to the adaptability of the human spirit.
> Mountain-climbing with a leg in a cast, racing in a wheelchair,
> Agassi in the third-round after a cortisone shot: these are a
> tribute
> to what people can do. We can add NT studies without adequate
> lexica
> and language control to this list. AND we should choose to move
> ahead
> and plan for a new field with new skills.
> ERRWSQE
> Randall Buth
>
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list