[B-Greek] Kataphoric TAUTA (John 15:17)
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Jan 15 09:05:15 EST 2007
On Jan 14, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:
> ----- 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.
It was hardly an exhaustive list, as I meant to indicate with the
KTL. (= "etc."). There's ERWTAW in John 4:47 and 17:15 (2x) and
19:31; ENTOLAS is followed by an epexegetic hINA clause in John
11:57; in 13:34 a hINA clause follows ENTOLHN; similar is 15:12 hAUTH
ESTIN hH ENTOLH hH EMH, hINA AGAPATE ALLHLOUS KAQWS HGAPHSA hUMAS. in
1 John 3:11 hOTI hAUTH ESTIN hH AGGELIA hHN HKOUSATE AP' ARCHS, hINA
AGAPWMEN ALLHLOUS. Similar are:
1John 3:23 KAI hAUTH ESTIN hH ETOLH AUTOU, hINA PISTEUWMEN TWi
ONOMATI TOU hUIOU AUTOU IHSOU CRISTOU KAI AGAPWMEN ALLHLOUS, KAQWS
EDWKEN ENTOLHN hHMIN.
1John 4:21 KAI TAUTHN THN ENTOLHN ECOMEN AP' AUTOU, hINA hO AGAPWN
TON QEON AGAPAi KAI TON ADELFON AUTOU.
2John 5 KAI NUN ERWTW SE, OUC hWS ENTOLHN KAINHN GRAFWN SOI ALLA hHN
EICOMEN AP' ARCHS, hINA AGAPWMEN ALLHLOUS.
It certainly appears that ENTELLOMAI and ENTOLH are preferred in the
Johannine literature.
> 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.
Homer (Iliad), Aristophanes, Xenophon, Aeschylus, Plato; yes, they
are all 5th and 4th century authors, and not trifling ones. By "old
adverbial usage" I meant that it's well-attested in earlier Greek
literature. I think it might be difficult to search this in
Hellenistic authors in TLG, since TAUTA is so very common in so many
different contexts -- it would require a very laborious effort of
sorting out what's relevant from what isn't.
> 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).
Worthwhile questions, but not so readily answered.
> 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.
I'm not very comfortable with ANY of the alternatives that have been
suggested for TAUTA and the hINA clause in John 15:17. I don't really
think that the TAUTA is anaphoric here but must concede that it
generally is so; I don't like the plural TAUTA as kataphoric with the
hINA clause, but I do think that the hINA clause surely must function
as complementary to ENTELLOMAI. I find the notion that TAUTA here
means "and that's why ... " very attractive, but I would concede the
evidence for Hellenistic usage thus is not handy (on the other hand,
it always disturbs me to see claims about what standard Hellenistic
usage is that are based upon the GNT corpus only). It may well be
that Webb's suggesting that this TAUTA is somehow BOTH anaphoric and
kataphoric is a sensible one: "(All) that (which I've been telling
you) is what I charge you with: to love one another." It does make a
nice conclusion to the entire sequence of 15: 9-16.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list