[B-Greek] THIASARCH once only
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Thu Dec 27 13:06:42 EST 2007
On Thursday, December 27, 2007, at 10:57AM, "Daniel Goepfrich" <pastor at oaktree.cc> wrote:
>I have a question that springs from something Dr. Conrad said below:
>
>But it doesn't matter; the meaning of QIASARCHS is perfectly
>clear from its elements. In this instance there's little to guess at in
>the meaning of the elements QIASOS and ARCH of which the word
>is compounded.
>
>Frequently on the list we read that the etymology of compound words does not
>necessarily give the true meaning of the compound. Yet here, it's "perfectly
>clear from its elements".
>
>Other than by just knowing the meanings of compounds, is there a way to tell
>which parts make up the whole and which don't?
The problem really only arises if a word is quite rare or even a hapax (a word
appearing only once in a work or in extant texts). Words that are commonly
used often have a history of usage and it's quite clear that some words in the
context of a particular time and place do not derive their meanings from the
original root meaning of its elements. For instance, MUSTHS evidently
derives from MUW, a verb meaning "close and open the eye(s), wink"; it
would be an error to suppose that the "real" meaning of MUSTHS in any
classical or Koine text means "eye-opener" (whether in a literal sense or
in the common English usage of that word): it is the term for an initiand in
a mystery rite.
In the case of QIASARCHS, we know that QIASOS is regularly used for
a cultic group, a band of worshipers; we know also that the ending -HS
in a first-declension masculine noun tends to be an agent noun, and we
know that the verb-root ARC means "be first, have primacy, lead." If the
meaning "leader of a band of worshipers" fits the context well, then we
should judge that it's a reasonable surmise.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (ret)
>
>On 12/27/07, Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, December 27, 2007, at 08:12AM, "Anita Clerke" <
>> clerke at humanperformance.cc> wrote:
>> >Thank you Elizabeth for doing that search. It is much appreciated.
>> >
>> >Thank you too George for clarifying that the search I performed on
>> >CCE Library yielded a result that, although to me at first sight
>> >seemed to have been another early christian writers comment on the
>> >death of Polycarp, was in fact just a chapter from a book written
>> >just over a hundred years ago:
>> >History of the Origins of Christianity. Book VI. The Reigns of
>> >Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. (A.D. 117-161)Author: Renan, Joseph
>> >Ernest (1823-1892).
>> >
>> >I did realise at the time it wasn't the original MPol, that is: The
>> >letter of the Smyrnaeans or the Martyrdom of Polycarp
>> >Translated by J.B. Lightfoot. Adapt. and mod. (c) 1990. ATHENA DATA
>> >PRODUCTS http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/martyrdompolycarp-
>> >lightfoot.html 23/12/2007; but I certainly had thought the chapter
>> >titled "The Martyrdom of Polycarpus" was from an early Christian
>> >source. Thanks again.
>> >
>> >I am amazed that THIASARCH appears only once in all of Greek
>> >literature, Christian and non-Christian.
>> >Could it be that Lucian made a portmanteau in this particular
>> >instance? Given his extraordinary imagination I presume this is
>> >possible. At odds with this is the thought that if he had made a new
>> >word at this point, he may have been unlikely to have been so modest
>> >about it.
>>
>> It's hardly reasonable to suppose that Lucian is the only author who
>> ever used this word -- and George said that clearly enough. It's hardly
>> the case that all the Greek literature of any period whatsoever has
>> survived. But it doesn't matter; the meaning of QIASARCHS is perfectly
>> clear from its elements. In this instance there's little to guess at in
>> the meaning of the elements QIASOS and ARCH of which the word
>> is compounded. A rather similar word is ARCHGOS in the GNT --
>> my memory may not be correct (I'm away from my home library at
>> the moment -- my recollection is that it appears only once in the GNT
>> -- in Hebrews 11 -- and that it's not seen elsewhere.
>>
>> >Are there any other words used by Lucian that do not appear in any
>> >other extant literature?
>> >
>> >Did any of the Greek writers within a few hundred years of Lucian
>> >produce new words, and made a point of indicating that they had in
>> >fact done so?
>>
>> You really do have to take into account that the evidence from which
>> we must make judgments about this sort of thing is really far too
>> scanty, proportionately speaking.
>>
>>
>> Carl W. Conrad
>> Department of Classics, Washington University (ret)
>> ---
>> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/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