[B-Greek] syntax & information structure James 3:2-3 (was Syntax of Col 1:22)
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Mon Aug 17 21:22:30 EDT 2009
On Aug 17, 2009, at 6:32 PM, Yancy Smith wrote:
> Indeed, it seems like the difference between one and the other is in
> terms of efficacy of explanation, not so much the content of the
> explanation. So, language can be understood apart from linguistics?
> That sounds ... premodern. Alford's explanation also accounts well
> for the article with CALINOUS, "the bits (which are in common use:
> the bits, of which everyone knows)." Spanish uses the article in the
> same way, and, sometimes, so does the English!
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> ] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Kline
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 5:18 PM
> To: greek B-Greek
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] syntax & information structure James 3:2-3
> (was Syntax of Col 1:22)
>
> Carl has cleared up the question about Col 1:22. While doing my
> research on this I came across a different question. What about
> preposed genitive nouns modifying a head noun in a following
> prepositional phrase? Looking into this I came across James TWN hIPPWN
> in James 3:2-3, a somewhat difficult passage. You will notice that my
> direction changes here, leaving the original question behind and heads
> off towards questions about information structure.
>
> .
> James 3:2 πολλὰ γὰρ πταίομεν ἅπαντες. εἴ
> τις ἐν λόγῳ οὐ πταίει, οὗτος
> τέλειος ἀνὴρ δυνατὸς χαλιναγωγῆσαι
> καὶ ὅλον τὸ σῶμα. 3 εἰ δὲ τῶν ἵππων
> τοὺς χαλινοὺς εἰς τὰ στόματα
> βάλλομεν εἰς τὸ πείθεσθαι αὐτοὺς
> ἡμῖν, καὶ ὅλον τὸ σῶμα αὐτῶν
> μετάγομεν.
> .
> JAMES 3:2 POLLA GAR PTAIOMEN hAPANTES. EI TIS EN LOGWi OU PTAIEI,
> hOUTOS TELEIOS ANHR DUNATOS CALINAGWGHSAI KAI hOLON TO SWMA. 3 EI DE
> TWN hIPPWN TOUS CALINOUS EIS TA STOMATA BALLOMEN EIS TO PEIQESQAI
> AUTOUS hHMIN, KAI hOLON TO SWMA AUTWN METAGOMEN
> .
> In James 3:3 we see an example of a preposed genitive noun TWN hIPPWN.
> One way to read it, TWN hIPPWN modifies TA STOMATA (J.Huther) which is
> within a prepositional phrase EIS TA STOMATA. Another reading, TWN
> hIPPWN modifies TOUS CALINOUS. J.B. Mayor suggests TWN hIPPWN modifies
> both TOUS CALINOUS and TA STOMATA. Alford suggests that TWN hIPPWN
> might mean something like "in the case of horses" thus linking ideas
> CALINAGWGHSAI ... SWMA from the immediately preceding context.
> Alford's suggestion is interesting in light of proposals in recent
> text-linguistics about fronted constituents. S.Levinsohn talks about
> TWN hIPPWN in Js. 3:3 (Discourse Features SIL, 2000, p63). Levinsohn
> suggests that TWN hIPPWN is preposed to indicate a shift from talking
> about people to talking about horses. What I find interesting here, is
> that Alford in the second half of the nineteenth century had a very
> similar reading without the trappings of text-linguistics. The
> terminology is quite different and Levinsohn certainly frames the
> question differently, nevertheless ... draw your on conclusions about
> this.
Well, for what it's worth, my first inclination upon seeing this --
before seeing these accountings -- is that the usage of hIPPWN is
partitive , and not really related to CALINOUS or STOMATA: "If, in the
matter of horses, we put bits into their mouths to make them obey us,
we gain conrol as well over their whole frame(s)."
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list