[B-Greek] basic and advanced refs. on spousal ANHR/GUNAIKOS without possessive markers

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sun Jul 5 08:46:18 EDT 2009


On Jul 4, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Steven Cox wrote:

>
> Hello all,
> I was going to entitle this [pdf needed on when "la femme" means "sa  
> femme" in Greek?] but decided that was probably a bit un-Bgreek :)
>
> This is actually two requests :
>
> 1. a good reference for a simple set of rules for when to translate  
> "man"/"woman", when to translate as "husband"/wife. Ideally this  
> would deal separately and simply with the various forms of  
> possessive, genitive, IDIOS, etc. and be of a level where I could  
> provide it to Bible students who might have some basic knowledge of  
> French "la femme" vs. "sa femme", Spanish "mujer" vs. "su mujer",  
> but know no Greek beyond Strong's numbers :).
>
> So I basically need a 1 page handout that I can use at a class to  
> demonstrate that ESV NRSV NIV etc. translators' decisions on  
> "man"/"woman" vs. "husband"/wife" aren't done on a coin-toss. And  
> shouldn't be undone on a coin-toss either.
>
>
> 2. an advanced study, preferably TLG based, on the use/absence of  
> such clear possessive, genitive, etc. markers for ANHR and GUNAIKOS  
> in Hellenistic period texts where (for example) in standard French,  
> German, Spanish we'd expect them.
>
> This basically is for my own use - occasionally in French, German,  
> Spanish you come across "la femme" "das Weib" "der Mann" etc. used  
> without possessives but clearly from context meaning a spouse: "[su]  
> mujer" "[seine] Frau" etc. Such uses tend in French, German, to be  
> either archaic or rural, dialect, but that appears not to be the  
> case from the NT usage, where 1Co7 (for example) shows that Paul is  
> far more inclined to drop the possessive, genitive markers once the  
> possessive context has been established.
>
> So I guess basically what I'm looking for is a benchmarking of  
> Paul's dropping of strict possessive/genitive markers for  
> "husband"/"wife" compared to the 'best' pagan Hellenistic writers.  
> Did all writers of the period do it, or is it, for example, a  
> 'Semiticism'? This question sounds like something someone from  
> Sheffield must have written a paper on, but a cursory search failed  
> to find anything.

I'm reminded of a recent experience wherein our 91-year-old uncle told  
us he'd been pondering who he could trust to carry out a chore about  
which he wasn't comfortable  with his immediate family; he said, "It  
came to me in the night: "Velma and her man." "Her man" is a rather  
quaint old-timey expression one might hear in these backwoods sections  
of the Blue Ridge where I have heard people use "holp" as a past tense  
of "help." There's no question as to what he intended by that  
expression, "her man" -- but

Steven, you've made your question about as clear as possible. Since  
you know what kind of analysis or analytical tool you want, I suggest  
you go out and prepare it yourself.
We've had discussions over the years about when GUNH and ANHR should  
be understood as "woman" and "man" and when they should be understood  
as "wife" and "husband." I may be naive, but I doubt very much that  
the question you're asking can be resolved to the satisfaction of  
every interpreter of NT texts where the right way to take those words  
is in question. On the other hand, I don't think that the convolutions  
of possessive pronoun and "man" in the lyrics of "Franky and Johnny"  
have much to do with the institution of lawful wedded marriage: "He  
was her man, but he done her wrong."

As a vehicle of communication language depends very much on an  
understanding between speaker/writer and listener/reader. Unless the  
speaker/writer seriously endeavors to make himself/herself absolutely  
clear by phrasing what is said with great precision, there will always  
be the possibility that the listener/reader will misunderstand an  
ambiguous expession. I personally think there are numerous passages in  
the Greek NT where the author has not taken pains to make his intent  
perfectly clear, for the simple reason that HE knows what he means and  
he expects YOU to know what he means.


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list