[B-Greek] PARARREW's root word (in Hebrews 2:1)?
Elizabeth Kline
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Sun Feb 3 16:18:43 EST 2008
On Feb 3, 2008, at 12:43 AM, Sarah Madden wrote:
> To all:
> I have a question about cognates and how to decide their connection
> to root
> words.
>
> Heb. 2:1
> DIA TOUTO DEI PERISSOTERWS PROSECEIN hMAS TOIS *AKOUSQEISIN* MHPOTE *
> PARARUWMEN*.
> ("For this reason, it is much more necessary for us to pay
> attention to the
> things that were heard lest we drift away.")
>
> Since this injunction is for us to pay attention to what was
> *heard* (and
> thus what was *said*), is there any significance that this
> particular word
> (PARARREW) was chosen for "drift away" (from what was said and
> heard)? Is
> PARARREW's connection to its root word (REW), which means "flow"
> in the
> active but apparantly "say" in the passive, merely tangential, or
> is it
> significant? Or is there even a connection between "say" and and
> PARARREW?
> Trenchard lists the aorist passive of LEGW as ERREQHN, but he shows
> PARARREW
> and REW as cognates (pg. 97), and I have seen at least one software
> program
> (Tony Fisher's Web site) state that the root of ERREQH (passive
> voice, "it
> was said") is REW ("I flow" in the active but apparently "I say" in
> the
> passive). Arggh!
>
> The fact that PARARREW is a hapax in the NT doesn't help ... but if
> the
> word, indeed does mean "say" in the passive, this word choice is
> even more
> powerful for the warning that was given!
>
> --
> Sarah Madden
I don't have Trenchard. The word in question is found in the LXX and
extra-biblical literature and for that reason there doesn't appear to
be much justification for extreme measures like analysis of cognates.
There are several exegetical "issues" in regard to PARARUWMEN in Heb
2:1. One mundane issue is how to parse the form. The 2nd Aor. Subj.
Pass. fst. pl. seems to be the current consensus. This raises the a
second issue in regard to the semantic significance of the passive.
For that see Carl's extensive comments on middle-passive.
Another issue is the live/dead metaphor question which is somewhat
related to your question. Since we find the metaphor weakened long
before the GNT I would be inclined to agree with Ellingworth and
Spicq (Heb.Comm.) that this is a dead metaphor in Heb 2:1 contra
B.F.Westcott and others.
LSJ:1996, p1322 "slip off or out" Soph. Ph. 653
EI MOI TI TOXWN TWND' APHMELHMENON
PARERRUHKEN, hWS LIPW MH TWi LABEIN.
See also LSJ:1996 supp. p240 "drift from course, err."
The word is also found in LXX PRO. 3:21 and IS. 44:4
PRO. 3:21 hUIE MH PARARRUHiS THRHSON DE EMHN BOULHN KAI ENNOIAN
IS. 44:4 KAI ANATELOUSIN hWSEI CORTOS ANA MESON hUDATOS KAI hWS ITEA
EPI PARARREON hUDWR
The Isa. 44:4 appears at first glance to support the live metaphor
reading whereas for PRO. 3:21 LEH gives "to be careless, to neglect"
Elizabeth Kline
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list