[B-Greek] FW: Luke 4:7

Steve Runge srunge at logos.com
Wed Jun 13 09:30:32 EDT 2007


Iver,

I would strongly encourage you to write a detailed explanation of your theoretical framework for interpreting word order.  In your 2001 article you state:  "The more to the left an item occurs, the more prominent it is."

You then go on to suggest that readers refer to other publications on the matter, viz. Smith 1985, Callow 1983a, and Levinsohn 2000.  While it was beyond the scope of your article to provide a theoretical introduction, I believe that writing one would be worth your while.  

Of particular significance for you to incorporate would be a discussion of Bernard Comrie's claim (1989) that cross-linguistically the very opposite principle holds true:  that speakers tend to move from what is most known to what is least known.  This would, BY DEFAULT, place the new information (which is usually the most salient part of the utterance) as close to the end of the clause as the typology of the language allows.  

At the same time, there are pragmatic factors which can motivate a speaker to break from the expected norm, which has the effect of adding prominence to an element that it would not otherwise have had.  In other words, there is a MARKED position to place a constituent for added prominence.  You do not seem to acknowledge or incorporate this distinction in your framework, nor is there any way to determine how you resolve your interpretive framework with the broader linguistic literature.  

The kind of prominence achieved by pragmatically moving the constituent is dependant on the relationship of that information to the preceding discourse (cf. S.C. Dik's *Functional Grammar* (1980), K. Lambrecht's *Information Structure and Sentence Form* (1994) and Vallduví, E. & E. Engdahl's "The linguistic realization of information packaging." In *Linguistics*, Vol. 34, pp. 459-519 (1996).  This relationship provides the basis for distinguishing Buth's 'contextualizing constituent' and Levinsohn's 'Point of Departure' from emphasis proper.  This two-fold distinction is usually expressed by traditional Greek grammarians (e.g. BDF and A.T. Robertson) under the headings of 'contrast' and 'emphasis', respectively.

The principles that you have applied thus far, both on the list and in the article, fail to take into account very significant factors, and in fact contradict peer-reviewed, empirically-established, cross-linguistic principles.  Your position appears to take principles, which admittedly can be very messy at times in application, and reformulates them into rules that remove ambiguity.  

I appreciate your attempt to simplify ordering principles, but I think that you have removed too many parameters.

Steve
 

-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Iver Larsen Posted At: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:21 AM Posted To: bgreek
Conversation: [B-Greek] Luke 4:7
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Luke 4:7


----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>

On Jun 12, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:

> Carl,
>
> I checked S.H. Levinsohn (Discourse Features NTG, pp.16-17,37-67) and 
> he affirms that the initial slot may be used for focus. In his 
> glossary focus is defined as that part of an utterance which makes the 
> most important change in the hearer's mental representation. But the 
> final slot may also be used for focus.

Iver: That is one of the questionable claims in Levinsohn's analysis, and based on my own research and that of others I am pretty sure it is mistaken. I have studied all the references Levinsohn claims to exhibit final focus, and in each case an alternative and better analysis is possible. The final slot can be used for focus in English, but not in Greek, because of the extremely flexible word order in Greek as compared to English. If both initial and final order could be used for focus in Greek, the system would break down, because the writer would not be able to decide the word order choice and the reader would be confused in trying to analyze the text.

> LUKE 4:7 SU OUN EAN PROSKUNHSHiS ENWPION EMOU, ESTAI SOU PASA.
>
> I would say that SU is LUKE 4:7 while acquiring some added attention 
> in the initial slot, is not the focus of the utterance. I place the 
> focus of the utterance at the end, ESTAI SOU PASA. There is some 
> confusion at this point in my mind about clause level focus and 
> utterance focus. SU might be in focus for the protasis but not for the 
> utterance.

Carl: .... I'm glad that Elizabeth has called attention to ESTAI SOU PASA in this utterance of Satan; here's another instance where I have to say that, although the entire clause is powerful, the concluding PASA is especially emphatic -- in FINAL position. And wouldn't we have to say that PASA here is predicative (the implicit subject being EXOUSIA)? Something like, "It (the authority) will be yours -- entirely."

Iver: Why is PASA considered to be emphatic? I can see no pragmatic or grammatical reason for it to be. Greek word order emphasis is much simpler. In the clause ESTAI SOU PASA, the major focus is on ESTAI, because it appears first, and the least focus is on PASA. ESTAI in first position does not mean just "it/he will be", but rather "it/he will indeed be". Focus is on the fact that it will indeed happen, it will definitely come into existence. This is the focus of the promise by Satan in this clause.

The word PAS has a certain inherent lexical focus and is always placed to the left when there is emphasis on it.
Let us look at the context:
4:5 EDEIXEN AUTWi PASAS TAS BASILEIAS - he showed him ALL the kingdoms Within the noun phrase, there is emphasis on PASAS. (Not within the clause).

4:6 SOI DWSW THN EXOUSIAN TAUTHN hAPASAN - I will give YOU all this AUTHORITY Within the noun phrase functioning as object the focus is on the authority over all the aforementioned kingdoms. There is no focus on either TAUTHN nor hAPASAN, since both are simple back references to already known information (authority over all the mentioned kingdoms). At the clause level there is focus on SOI by way of its fronted position.

4:7 SU OUN EAN PROSKUNHSHiS ENWPION EMOU, ESTAI SOU PASA So, if YOU bow down in obeisance to me, all (that aforementioned authority) will indeed be yours.
(PASA is attributive to the implicit EXOUSIA hAUTH, but functioning substantively).
There is no need to have focus on PASA, since it is a back reference to THN EXOUSIAN TAUTHN hAPASAN. 
PAS/hAPAS occurs three times in this text. Only the first instance is emphatic, the rest are back references. As the story develops, the writer puts different emphases on different aspects by using relative fronting of grammatical elements within their scope (phrase or clause).

Iver Larsen

---
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