[B-Greek] Double Negation with Subjunctive
frjsilver at optonline.net
frjsilver at optonline.net
Fri Jan 4 19:59:50 EST 2008
Bravo, Professor Conrad!
Don't you love the hOMOSUMPHONIA and ONOMATOPOIEIA of PTUE? It's made it's way even into English!
Father James
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Conrad
Date: Friday, January 4, 2008 7:33 pm
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Double Negation with Subjunctive
To: Tim Davis
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> On Jan 4, 2008, at 5:38 PM, Tim Davis wrote:
>
> > --- Carl Conrad wrote:
> >
> >> 1. OU MH with an aorist subjunctive is a very strong
> >> injunction.
>
> Objection has been offered to my term "very strong injunction."
> My
> dictionary offers for "injunction": "an authoritative warning or
>
> order." What I meant by that term was a negative command that is
> much
> stronger than a simple negated imperative, e.g. MH PTUE ("don't
> spit",
> printed on the walls of the rapid transit from Piraeus to
> Athens, as I
> observed years ago), compared with OU MH PTUSHiS "don't you EVER
>
> spit!"). Now, it's true that you may find OU MH + subjunctive in
> a
> very strong assertion, generally about the future, usually in
> the
> first or second person.
>
> >> 2. I don't really think "mood of possibility" is
> >> quite adequate as a
> >> description of the subjunctive; it quite often bears
> >> a force of
> >> urgency or imperative. It might be better to think
> >> of it in terms of
> >> non-factuality. As such it appears in constructions
> >> regarding what may
> >> or could or should be true or happen.
> >
> > Thanks for both answers above. The "mood of
> > possibility" was the description given in one of my
> > formal classes, and I'm glad to get direction in an
> > attempt to move beyond the basics (no pun on Daniel
> > Wallace intended).
>
> I wonder if this means you have read what Wallace said on the
> matter
> and didn't find it satisfactory. I think BDAG would be worth
> consulting on this (s.v. MH 4.):
> 4. marker of reinforced negation, in combination w. οὐ [OU], μή
>
> [MH] has the effect of strengthening the negation (Kühner-G. II
> 221–
> 23; Schwyzer II 317; Mlt. 187–92 [a thorough treatment of NT
> usage];
> B-D-F §365; RLudwig: D. prophet. Wort 31 ’37, 272–79; JLee, NovT
>
> 27, ’85, 18–23; B-D-F §365.—Pla., Hdt. et al. [Kühner-G. loc.
> cit.]; SIG 1042, 16; POxy 119, 5, 14f; 903, 16; PGM 5, 279; 13,
> 321;
> LXX; TestAbr A 8 p. 85, 11 [Stone p. 46]; JosAs 20:3; GrBar 1:7;
>
> ApcEsdr 2:7; Just., D. 141, 2). οὐ μή is the most decisive way
> of
> negativing someth. in the future.
> a. w. the subj.
> α. w. aor. subj. (TestAbr A 17 p. 99, 7 οὐ μὴ δυνηθῇς
> θεάσασθαι OU MH DUNHQHiS QEASASQAI; JosAs 20:3; ParJer 2:5;
> 8:5; ApcSed 12:5; 13:6; Just., D. 141, 2; Ael. Aristid. 50, 107
> K.=26
> p. 533 D.: οὐ μὴ ἡμῶν καταφρονήσωσι OU MH
> hHMWN KATAFRONHSWSWI; Diogenes, Ep. 38, 5; UPZ 62, 34; 79, 19)
> never,
> certainly not, etc. Mt 5:18, 20, 26; 24:2; Mk 13:2; Lk 1:15;
> 6:37ab;
> 10:19; J 8:52; 10:28; 11:26; 13:8; 1 Cor 8:13; Hb 8:12 (Jer
> 38:34);
> 13:5; 1 Pt 2:6 (Is 28:16); Rv 2:11; 3:12; 18:21–23 al.—Also in a
>
> rhetorical question, when an affirmative answer is expected οὐ
> μὴ
> ποιήσῃ τὴν ἐκδίκησιν OU MH POIHSHi THN
> EKDIKHSIN; will he not vindicate? Lk 18:7. οὐ μὴ πίω
> αὐτό OU MH PIW AUTO; shall I not drink it? J 18:11. τίς οὐ
> μὴ φοβηθῇ TIS OU MH FOBHQHi; who shall not fear? Rv 15:4.—
> In relative clauses Mt 16:28; Mk 9:1; Ac 13:41 (Hab 1:5); Ro 4:8
> (Ps
> 31:2); cp. Lk 18:30.—In declarative and interrogative sentences
> after
> ὅτι Mt 24:34; Lk 22:16 (οὐκέτι οὐ μή OUKETI OU MH
> v.l.); J 11:56; without ὅτι hOTI Mt 26:29; Lk 13:35.—Combined w.
>
> οὐδέ OUDE: οὐδ᾿ οὐ μὴ γένηται OUD' OU MH
> GENHTAI (Mitt-Wilck. I/2, 122, 4 [6 AD]) Mt 24:21 (B-D-F §431, 3).
> β. w. pres. subj. Hb 13:5 v.l. ἐγκαταλείπω EGKATALEIPW
> (accepted by Tdf., whereas most edd. read ἐγκαταλίπω
> EGKATALIPW)
> b. w. fut. ind. (En 98:12; 99:10; TestAbr A 8 p. 85, 11 [Stone
> p. 20]
> οὐ μή σοι ἀκολουθήσω OU MH SOI AKOULQHSW; GrBar
> 1:7 οὐ μὴ προσθήσω OU MH PROSQHSW; ApcEsdr 2:7 οὐ
> μὴ παύσομαι OU MH PAUSOMAI) οὐ μὴ ἔσται σοι
> τοῦτο OU MH ESTAI SOI TOUTO Mt 16:22.—Hm 9:5; s 1:5; 4:7. Cp.
> Mt 15:6; 26:35; Lk 10:19 v.l.; 21:33; J 4:14; 6:35b; 10:5
> (ἀκολουθήσωσιν AKOLOUQHSWSIN v.l.); Hb 10:17.
> οὐκέτι οὐ μὴ εὑρήσουσιν OUKETI OU MH
> hURHSOUSIN Rv 18:14. οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει OU
> MH KLHRONOMHSEI Gal 4:30 (Gen 21:10 v.l. ); but the tradition
> wavers
> mostly betw. the fut. and aor. subj. (s. Mlt. and B-D-F loc.
> cit.).—
> DELG. M-M. EDNT.
>
> >> 3. You may find a future indicative with OU MH,
> >> although the
> >> subjunctive is more common.
> >
> > How would this construct be understood in relation to
> > the one with the aorist subjunctive?
>
> My impression is that the future indicative usage is in part a
> reflection of LXX Greek translating the future imperatives as
> future
> indicatives; I don't think there's really any special nuance of
> difference; the aorist subjunctive is probably the usage taught
> in
> schools, the future indicative more common in colloquial speech -
> - but
> that's just my surmise.
>
> > As for having been taught about double negatives as
> >>
> >> to be avoided,
> >> remember that rules you have learned regarding
> >> English do not
> >> necessarily apply to other languages. French uses
> >> two negative
> >> particles regularly, e.g. "je ne sais pas" -- where
> >> both "ne" and
> >> "pas" are negative particles/adverbs. Colloquial
> >> English, for that
> >> matter, whether or not the grammarians forbid it,
> >> commonly enough uses
> >> the double negative: "I ain't never gonna do that."
> >
> > I was attempting to do some newbie hazing of myself by
> > using a double negative in my statement about being
> > taught to not use double negatives. But like any
> > attempt at humor, if you have to explain it, it must
> > not have truly been funny. Oh, well.
>
> I confess I didn't recognize the humor. The problem is that it
> is very
> common for beginning students to suppose that Greek grammar
> "more or
> less" conforms to what one has been taught of English grammar;
> the
> real challenge is to become so intimately familiar with the
> Greek
> usage that one doesn't think in terms of English equivalent
> structures. But that takes a certain degree of inundation in the
> Greek
> texts.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
> ---
> 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