[B-Greek] 1 Jn 4:17 MEQ' hHMWN--Different from EN hHMIN?

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Thu Jul 10 15:39:59 EDT 2008


On Jul 9, 2008, at 4:06 PM, Webb Mealy wrote:

> You wrote:
>
> One could expect a counter argument to this along the lines that EN +
> Dative can also be found with an 'associative' semantic value.
>
> That's the nuance that I was thinking about. I think of Jn 1:14, for
> example:
>
> KAI hO LOGOS...ESKHNWSEN EN hHMIN.
>
> I don't doubt that ESKHNWSEN MEQ' hHMWN would mean something slightly
> different in the ear of a Koine Greek speaker, but I can't put my  
> finger on
> the difference with any confidence.
>
> Webb Mealy

Well, that is a different text.  F.Danker (BDAG page 929) under SKHNOW  
cites Jn 1:14 under dative of place. I think that is a clue to the  
distinction between EN + dative and META + Genitive. While  
acknowledging that it is extremely risky to try and say anything  
dogmatic about EN + dative, at the same time I don't think it is  
impossible to find a difference between the META + genitive of  
association and the EN + dative  of association. The  META + genitive  
when used of persons, appears to focus on the relational aspect, being  
together. The EN + dative of association seems to have at least a  
faint trace of a local semantic value, being in the same place with  
others. I am not going to undertake the project of proving this, but  
take a look at Danker under EN association.

A general comment about John's style, the variety of expression, use  
of "synonyms", and constituents with similar meaning/functions, is  
evidence that the author was concerned that his message be well  
understood. Saying more or less the same thing, employing three  
slightly different expressions with slightly different meanings, is  
not a bad policy if you want your message to be comprehend fully. It  
is a risk avoidance approach to written communication.

To understand this well, take any play by Sophocles and read it at the  
same time you are working in John's Gospel/Epistles. Sophocles never  
passes up an opportunity to leave something out that he assumes his  
audience can fill in from their shared cognitive framework/cultural  
context. You need to know the story in advance to make any sense out  
of it. The contrast between John and Sophocles is striking.

Elizabeth Kline







More information about the B-Greek mailing list