[B-Greek] Kataphoric TAUTA (John 15:17)
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Sun Jan 14 14:41:38 EST 2007
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
>>
>> John 15:17 says: TAUTA ENTELLOMAI hUMIN hINA AGAPATE ALLHLOUS
> Iver, I don't question the accuracy of your research into usage of TAUTA and your conclusion that
> it is quite consistently anaphoric in almost all instances. Nor do I dispute your argument that
> AGAPATE ALLHLOUS is a single injunction, a single item of discourse. But it is also true that a
> substantival hINA clause of command following upon a verb of command (e.g. ENTELLOMAI,
> DIASTELLOMAI, EPITIMAW, PARAKALEW, KTL.).
Of these four verbs, John only uses the first one.
I just noticed that BAGD suggests that a hINA clause is the complement (object) of ENTELLOMAI in two
places (out of 15) in the NT, namely Mrk 13:34 and John 15:17. Is this changed in BDAG? The Mark
passage is straightforward, but if we take the hINA clause as object for the verb in John 15:17,
TAUTA is left hanging, and that is what you are trying to address below. John used ENTELLOMAI a few
verses earlier:
15:14 hA EGW ENTELLOMAI hUMIN. The hA is quite parallel to TAUTA, so it seems likely to me that
TAUTA is the object for the verb as hA was the object. So, I would disagree with BAGD for ENTELLOMAI
in John 15:17.
> BUT: it may just be that the TAUTA is not the direct object of ENTELLOMAI but adverbial in the
> sense "and so ... " See LSJ s.v. hOUTOS (http://tinyurl.com/y3vwzv):
>
> VIII. Adverbial usages:
> 1. TAUTA abs., therefore, that is why . . , Il. 11.694; TAUT' ARA Ar.Ach.90 ,Nu.
> 319, 335, 394, al., X.Smp.4.55; TAUTA DH A.Pers.159 , Pl.Smp.174a; TAUT' OUN S.Tr.550 ,
> Ar.V.1358, etc.; AUTA TAUTA hHKW, hINA . . Pl.Prt. 310e: TOUTO is rare in this sense, TOUT'
> AFIKOMHN, hOPWS ... EU PRAXAIMI TI S. OT1005 ; AUTO GAR TOUTO just because of this, Pl.Smp.204a.
>
> That just may be the answer to this otherwise anomalous TAUTA that seems to point forward to the
> command indicated in the hINA clause: it's not what it seems at all but rather an old adverbial
> usage: "And so I charge you to love one another" or "That's why I charge you to love one
> another." If that's correct, then it's an elliptical instance of anaphoric TAUTA after all.
Is this a Classical Greek usage since you say it is "old adverbial" or is it also found in
Hellenistic Greek? I confess that I am not familiar with the various text references in the quote
from LSJ. Is it significant that the TAUTA examples here are combined with discourse connectors like
ARA, DH and OUN? The examples look somewhat different from what we have here in John, and it seems
unlikely that John would use such a special and unusual sense of TAUTA. If John had wanted to say
"that is why, therefore" is it likely that he would have used TAUTA to express it? I would have
expected either DIA TOUTO or OUN (a favourite of John's).
Your suggestion is a third possibility that I had not considered and it may just be correct as you
say, but I still think it is unlikely when considering John's style in this section and in general.
Iver
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list