[B-Greek] The emphasis of the first attributive position
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Sun Aug 5 02:50:07 EDT 2007
Hi Brian,
Some comments below:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Abasciano" <bvabasciano at gmail.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 4:15 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] The emphasis of the first attributive position
> The grammars seem to agree that that the first attributive position
> (article-adjective-noun) places greater emphasis on the adjective than on
> the substantive (so e.g., Robertson, 776; Wallace, 306; Smyth, section
> 1157; BDF, section 270).
Iver: Although I haven't studied all the references you give, the statement
is an oversimplification, at least for NT Greek. I only have BDF and they
fail to take into account the style of different authors. According to my
own little research over the years, if there is no article, then the order
adjective-noun may indicate greater relative emphasis on the adjective than
the noun as compared to the order noun-adjective. But it depends on the
author and also how many other modifiers are part of the noun phrase.
If there is an article, Matthew almost always uses the order
article-adjective-noun and Peter always does. Mark and John (including Rev.)
almost always use the order article-noun-article-adjective. Luke is
fifty-fifty. This means that the above statement does not apply to Matthew
and Peter and not necessarily to Luke. It is possible that there is Hebrew
interference for these authors, but I don't know. It is a topic that would
need a lot of empirical research both inside and outside of the GNT. I don't
know if anyone has done such thorough research.
The different style of authors can be illustrated by parallel passages as
for example:
Matt 13:23 hO DE EPI THN KALHN GHN SPAREIS
Mark 4:20 hOI EPI THN GHN THN KALHN SPARENTES
Luke 8:15 TO DE EN THi KALHi GHN
>
> Brian:
> To give some examples to try and flesh out what I am saying, when Matt 4:5
> speaks of Satan taking Jesus into the holy city, the holy character of the
> city receives emphasis over the city-ness (so to speak) character of it,
> or maybe better, over the fact that it was a city.
Iver: Not really, since Matthew ordinarily places the adjective before the
noun. "The Holy City" is a unit equivalent to Jerusalem and there is no
particular emphasis on its holiness.
This phrase is used twice in Matthew (4:5 and 27:53) and both times it is
EIS THN hAGIAN POLIN.
The phrase is used 4 times in Rev, and always with the order hH POLIS hH
hAGIA (11:2, 21:2,10, 22:19).
Since Matthew ordinarily places the adjective before the noun in an NP with
article and since John ordinarily places it after the noun, there is no
particular emphasis intended by the placements here. The order is not marked
(in technical language).
Brian: Or in Luke 6:45, Jesus speaks of the good man bringing out good from
the good treasures of his heart. Obviously, the important thing about the
man here is that he is good. That goodness is highlighted as the
distinguishing characteristic of the man in question over the fact of his
"male-ness". But it is still the man that is primarily spoken of.
Iver:
Luke 6:45 doesn't talk about a man, so male-ness is both irrelevant and
misleading. The text says hO AGAQOS ANQRWPOS, i.e. the good person. Luke
probably intends to place focus on the goodness since it is contrasted to
another person who is evil. A conclusion must be based on not just the word
order, but the context as well.
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list