[B-Greek] The Grrek Lexicon Is Wrong
Dan Storm
danstorm at cablespeed.com
Thu Sep 27 00:25:52 EDT 2007
Webb,
Good question. To my mind the English "coarse jesting" is something like
gutter humor or dirty jokes, while EUTRAPELIA is wittier. My main point is
that modern translations are in a rut with regard to this word and should
re-consider.
But now I feel that we have belabored this thread too much.
Cheers,
DAS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Webb" <webb at selftest.net>
To: "'Dan Storm'" <danstorm at cablespeed.com>; <B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 5:44 PM
Subject: RE: [B-Greek] The Grrek Lexicon Is Wrong
Just out of curiosity, Dan--
Do you think that Paul objected to wit and humor as such? What is the
character of EUTRAPELIA that makes it "inappropriate"? If you think he's
referring to sexual innuendos--even cleverly crafted ones--mightn't the
subject matter itself be regarded as "coarse"?
Webb Mealy
-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Dan Storm
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:46 PM
To: Jeffrey B. Gibson
Cc: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] The Grrek Lexicon Is Wrong
My apologies for not adding more to my post. BDAG does indeed note, as J.
Gibson says, wittiness’, ‘facetiousness’, etc. But then the bold definition
is
coarse jesting, risqué wit.
It is that that I take issue with. I say that there is nothing coarse about
the word.
Cheers,
DAS
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeffrey B. Gibson
To: Dan Storm
Cc: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] The Grrek Lexicon Is Wrong
Dan Storm wrote:
A few years ago I posted that EUTRAPELIA does not mean coarse jesting,
but rather harmful witticism. It means something like a well-formed or witty
turn of phrase, but one that is at the expense of another. See Ephesians
5.4.
Umm .. are you saying that the lexicons do not note the meaning you say
the word bears?
If so, why is it then that we find the following in BDAG?
εὐτραπελία, ας, ἡ (Hippocr.+, mostly in a good sense: ‘wittiness’,
‘facetiousness’; so also Posidipp. Com. [III bc], fgm. 28, 5 K.; Diod. S.
15, 6, 5; Philo, Leg. ad Gai. 361; Jos., Ant. 12, 173; 214. Acc. to
Aristot., Eth. Nic. 2, 7, 13 it is the middle term betw. the extremes of
buffoonery [βωμολοχία] and boorishness [ἀγροικία]; acc. to Aristot., Rhet.
2, 12 it is πεπαιδευμένη ὕβρις) in our lit. only in a bad sense coarse
jesting, buffoonery Eph 5:4. M-M.*
And why do we find T.K Abbot (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, p. 149) saying this?
εὐτραπελία. Aristotle defines εὐτρ. as πεπαιδευμένη ὔβρις. οἱ ἐμμελῷ
παίζοντεͅ εὐτράπελοι προσαγορεύονται. But he adds that, since most persons
are pleased with excessive jesting, οἱ βωμολόχοι εὐτράπελοι προσαγορεύονται
(Eth. Nic. 414), i.e., as in many other cases, the extreme usurps the name
of the near. This would justify St. Paul’s usage, were there nothing else.
But for the adjective compare also Pindar, Pyth. 1178, μὴ δολωθῇς
εὐτραπέλοιͅκέρδεσσʼ and 4:104, where Jason boasts that he has never spoken
ἒποͅ εὐτράπελον. According to Dissen, the word was used “cum levitatis et
assentationis, simulationis notatione”; but this does not seem to be the
meaning here, where the context clearly points to licentious speech; see
ver. 5. Trench compares the history of the Latin “urbanitas” and the English
“facetious.” He notes that in the Miles Gloriosus of Plautus, the old man
who describes himself as “cavillator facetus” says: “Ephesi sum natus; non
enim in Apulis, non Animulae.”
And why is it that E. Best ( A critical and exegetical commentary on
Ephesians, p. 478) has this to say?
The final term, εὐτραπελία (the disjunctive ἤ before it marks it off as
a distinct vice from the preceding; Ellicott), is unusual in that it was
used in various ways (see P. W. van der Horst, ‘Is Wittiness Unchristian? A
note on εὐτραπελία in Eph. v. 4’, Miscellanea Neotestamentica II (SupNT 48),
Leiden, 1978. 163–77).
The formation of the word suggests it should have a good sense and it
often does; however as Van der Horst has shown it also had from the
beginning ‘negative overtones nearly as often as positive ones’ (173). It
has no necessary connection with speech and probably takes on this aspect
from its present context and might be translated ‘suggestive language’ or
‘smutty talk’, perhaps including humour with double entendre; it indicates
the type of humour to be found in a pornographic magazine. Its humour ‘is
often also at someone else’s expense’. It could describe ‘the way of life of
urbane high-society persons, the cultivated, no doubt well-to-do young men,
who could afford the life of a gentleman’. It can therefore have a bad
sense, probably associated with sex. To some extent the two sins of speech
here spell out the more general reference of 4:29. The condemnation of sins
of the tongue is a popular ethical theme (e.g. Ecclus 28:13ff; Jas 3:1ff)
And why do R. Bratcher and E.A. Nida (A Handbook on Paul's letter to the
Ephesians, p. 126) say this:
The third Greek noun originally had a favorable meaning of “ready wit,”
“pleasantry,” but it acquired a connotation of suggestive talk which employs
euphemisms and double meanings. So Barth “ribald talk” NIV“coarse joking”
TNT “suggestive language” Abbott “licentious speech.” So it means not just
jokes as such (as RSV“levity” suggests) but dirty jokes.
So if I've read you correctly, it doesn't look like you've researched your
claim very well or taken account of the context of Ephesians 5:4 and how it
makes in determining which of the (Lexicon noted) meanings with which the
word was used it bears in Ephesians 5:4)
JG
--
Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois
e-mail jgibson000 at comcast.net
---
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