[B-Greek] Use of TE solitarium

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Mon Nov 3 16:54:44 EST 2008


On Nov 2, 2008, at 1:25 AM, Iver Larsen wrote:
>
> In fairness to Levinsohn I want to quote his initial and basic  
> definition of TE from section 6.3,
> which I agree with:
> "TE solitarium, in contrast [to KAI], adds distinct propositions  
> that are characterized by SAMENESS,
> in the sense that they refer to different aspects of the same event,  
> the same occasion, or the same
> pragmatic unit."
> The problem is that he ALSO suggests a different function, which in  
> my view is unwarranted and
> not supported by the examples he quotes to support it.

I find Levinsohn's explanation of SAMENESS vague, so inclusive that it  
is hard picture how it could be put to any meaningful use. Something  
like ATR's "... TE indicates a somewhat closer unity than does KAI."  
A.T.Robertson 1178.

>>
>> JOHN 6:16 hWS DE OYIA EGENETO KATEBHSAN hOI MAQHTAI AUTOU EPI THN
>> QALASSAN  17 KAI EMBANTES EIS PLOION HRCONTO PERAN THS QALASSHS EIS
>> KAFARNAOUM. KAI SKOTIA HDH EGEGONEI KAI OUPW ELHLUQEI PROS AUTOUS hO
>> IHSOUS,  18 hH TE QALASSA ANEMOU MEGALOU PNEONTOS DIEGEIRETO.  19
>> ELHLAKOTES OUN hWS STADIOUS EIKOSI PENTE H TRIAKONTA QEWROUSIN TON
>> IHSOUN PERIPATOUNTA EPI THS QALASSHS KAI EGGUS TOU PLOIOU GINOMENON,
>> KAI EFOBHQHSAN.  20 hO DE LEGEI AUTOIS: EGW EIMI: MH FOBEISQE.  21
>> HQELON OUN LABEIN AUTON EIS TO PLOION, KAI EUQEWS EGENETO TO PLOION
>> EPI THS GHS EIS hHN hUPHGON.
>>
>> Note TE in v.18 hH TE QALASSA ANEMOU MEGALOU PNEONTOS DIEGEIRETO. I
>> think this illustrates several features of TE solitarium. TE attaches
>> "an event which is dissimilar to the previous one" (P.O'Rear). It
>> highlights a particularly salient aspect of the unfolding drama,  
>> while
>> it also leads into the next stage in the story (Levinsohn p.108). The
>> notion of increased salience involves the extra effort need to  
>> process
>> a marked form (TE is marked in reference to KAI) In support for this
>> Levinsohn cites Gutt:1991 [2] (pps.41,103).
>
> O'Rear is somewhat on the right track, unlike Levinsohn in this  
> quote (Levinsohn does in another
> context explain the correct and basic meaning of TE, see above.) The  
> TE solitarium is a conjoiner
> which must be analysed together with and in light of the previous  
> clause or sentence.
>
> KAI OUPW ELHLUQEI PROS AUTOUS hO IHSOUS,  18 hH TE QALASSA ANEMOU  
> MEGALOU PNEONTOS DIEGEIRETO
>
> Jesus had not yet come to them and (at the SAME time) the lake was  
> aroused with a strong wind
> blowing.
>
> The TE highlights the connection between the fact that they were in  
> great danger on the lake and
> that Jesus had not yet come to them.
>
> The TE solitarium indicates overlapping events which are closely  
> attached together. They are
> intertwined. The point is not that they are dissimilar, but that the  
> two clauses are twins and must
> be read and understood together.  For the TE and KAI, the two twin  
> events are those followed by TE
> on the one hand and preceded by KAI on the other. The translation  
> "both - and" tries to capture the
> twin events. TE is a tighter connection than KAI. I would not say it  
> is marked in relation to KAI,
> just because it is less commonly used, but rather that it has a  
> slightly different function. TE
> indicates that the previous event is not complete in itself, but  
> needs to be completed by the event
> introduced by TE. KAI can conjoin events which are less related or  
> intertwined.

Another example, this one from Luke 24:20  see Levinsohn:2000 p.109

Luke 24:18-21a
18 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ εἷς ὀνόματι  
Κλεοπᾶς εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν· σὺ μόνος  
παροικεῖς Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ οὐκ ἔγνως  
τὰ γενόμενα ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν ταῖς  
ἡμέραις ταύταις;  19 καὶ εἶπεν  
αὐτοῖς· ποῖα; οἱ δὲ εἶπαν αὐτῷ· τὰ  
περὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ, ὃς  
ἐγένετο ἀνὴρ προφήτης δυνατὸς ἐν  
ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἐναντίον τοῦ θεοῦ  
καὶ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ,  20 ὅπως τε  
παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ  
οἱ ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν εἰς κρίμα θανάτου  
καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν.  21 ἡμεῖς δὲ  
ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων  
λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ·

Luke 24:18-21a
18 APOKRIQEIS DE hEIS ONOMATI KLEOPAS EIPEN PROS AUTON: SU MONOS  
PAROIKEIS IEROUSALHM KAI OUK EGNWS TA GENOMENA EN AUTHi EN TAIS  
hHMERAIS TAUTAIS  19 KAI EIPEN AUTOIS: POIA hOI DE EIPAN AUTWi: TA  
PERI IHSOU TOU NAZARHNOU, hOS EGENETO ANHR PROFHTHS DUNATOS EN ERGWi  
KAI LOGWi ENANTION TOU QEOU KAI PANTOS TOU LAOU,  20 hOPWS TE  
PAREDWKAN AUTON hOI ARCIEREIS KAI hOI ARCONTES hHMWN EIS KRIMA QANATOU  
KAI ESTAURWSAN AUTON.  21 hHMEIS DE HLPIZOMEN hOTI AUTOS ESTIN hO  
MELLWN LUTROUSQAI TON ISRAHL:

Here we have KLEOPAS summarizing TA GENOMENA EN AUTHi EN TAIS hHMERAIS  
TAUTAIS. First he introduces the main character in the drama TA PERI  
IHSOU TOU NAZARHNOU with a breif description of word and deed hOS  
EGENETO ANHR PROFHTHS DUNATOS EN ERGWi KAI LOGWi ENANTION TOU QEOU KAI  
PANTOS TOU LAOU followed by a micro-narative [is it narative?] in  
verse 20 introduced by hOPWS TE.

**a digression** hOPWS TE is a pattern found elsewhere in Koine, e.g.,  
Josephus, Lucian. I have had some difficulty resisting the temptation  
to analyze hOPWS TE as a unit since this pair is found by the hundreds  
in TLG-E. Never the less, I will bow to the grammars which all (those  
on hand) seem to ignore this pairing. **end digression**

Keeping in mind that what we have here is a mixed genre, not really a  
narrative but including small segments of narrative material, the  
observation Iver rejects to seems to apply here:

> TE attaches
> "an event which is dissimilar to the previous one" (P.O'Rear). It
> highlights a particularly salient aspect of the unfolding drama, while
> it also leads into the next stage in the story.


The first point "an event which is dissimilar..."  is somewhat awkward  
to apply here since what precedes hOPWS TE ... is a summary of Jesus'  
public ministry, not a story. For that reason I am inclined to borrow  
from H.W.Smyth (#2968) "TE alone sometimes in prose links whole  
clauses or sentences which serve to explain, amplify, supplement, or  
to denote a consequence of, what precedes ...". The last part "to  
denote a consequence of" seems particularly appropriate to Lk  
24:19-20. It was the character of Jesus' public ministry summarized in  
verse 19 which lead to the consequence in verse 20. However, some may  
think that "consequence" is too strong a term to apply to TE in this  
context.

The second and third points "highlights a particularly salient aspect"  
and "leads into the next stage" seem so obvious that they don't need  
to be argued. Someone, not doubt, will disagree.


Elizabeth Kline







More information about the B-Greek mailing list