Re: Col. 2:13-14--syntax perplexity

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Wed Mar 29 2000 - 12:28:33 EST

<x-html><!x-stuff-for-pete base="" src="" id="0" charset=""><!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: Col. 2:13-14--syntax
<div>At 11:44 AM -0500 3/29/00, Rodney J. Decker wrote:</div>
<div>&gt;I've noted that there is a significant difference in the
punctuation at the<br>
&gt;end of Col. 2:13. Some texts have a comma, some a period (or
colon). That<br>
&gt;is significant in that a major stop would force the first
participle in v.<br>
&gt;14 to go with the finite verb in v. 14 rather than with the
&gt;finite verb in v. 13. Complicating that is the KAI in the middle
of v. 14<br>
&gt;(and, to a lesser degree, the lack of a connective at the
beginning of v.<br>
&gt;14). It puzzles me as to how this KAI functions if there is a
period at the<br>
&gt;end of v. 13. (With a comma it connects the two finite verbs in
v. 13 &amp;<br>
&gt;14.) The comma seems to make the best sense of the syntax, and I
don't see<br>
&gt;anything that would have caused the newer texts (UBS3/4,
NA25/26/27) to<br>
&gt;change the more traditional comma (TR, majority text, WH) to a
&gt;AUTO TWi STAURWi.<br>
<div>&gt;Any explanations or suggestions are very much welcome!
<div><font color="#000000"><br>
</font><font color="#007700">For what it's worth, I agree with you,
Rod, that a period at the end of verse 13 doesn't really make much
sense--but what seems to me rather aggravating to an impatient
grammarian is the way these run-on sentences of Ephesians and
Colossians seem to force an editor to drop a period sooner or later
even if the movement of the thought doesn't seem to have come to a
natural resting point. This is a terrible thought, but I sometimes
wonder whether the editorial committee may have decided, "This is
where we'll have to start a new sentence in our target language, so
we might as well mark a period there for the reader's sake, to make
clear to him/her how we understand the diviision of major and minor
clauses in this long-winded sequence." Surely EXALEIYAS must depend
syntactically upon SUNEZWiOPOIHSEN and the KAI preceding AUTO HRKEN
must link that finite verb to the chain in SUNEZWiOPOIHSEN--but it
looks like the editors want us to understand the sequence as "And
erasing the IOU, he removed it and nailed it to the cross." So,
again I say, only for what it's worth, that's what it looks like
to me: that the punctuation is a translator's ploy that has less to
do with the syntax of the Greek text than with a suggestion of how to
piece together the elements in one target language or

<div>-- <br>
Carl W. Conrad<br>
Department of Classics/Washington University<br>
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018<br>
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649<br> </div>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:41:04 EDT