From: Moon-Ryul Jung (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 21:20:46 EST
> >Right, Carl, OU MONON EK PISTEWS and OU EK PISTEWS MONON mean the same.
> >But we need to decide where to position the implied verb DIKAIOUNTAI
> >relative to OU MONON EK PISTEWS/ OU EK PISTEWS MONON, either (1) or (2):
> >(1) (justified) not only by faith.
> >(2) not (justified) only by faith.
> >If we accept (1), we would have: justified not only by faith but also
> >by works.
> >If we accept (2), we would have: justified by works, not just by faith.
> >Is there any way to resolve this problem?
[Carl]> I would have thought so; as I see it, the OU is implicitly
> DIKAIOUTAI either way. I understand that you were saying the OU governs
> MONON if it were written OU MONON EK PISTEWS, but I don't really think
> that's true. I would say that the more common position for MONON is
> following what it limits, so that the phrasing in our text as given OUK EK
> PISTEWS MONON is what's to be expected, but I think that if the adverbial
> MONON precedes PISTEWS, we would still want to say that the OU(K) governs
> an implied DIKAIOUTAI carried forward from the preceding clause.
I am sorry that I was not so clear.
We have hORATE hOTI EX ERGWN DIKAIOUNTAI ANQRWPOS
KAI OUK EK PISTEWS MONON.
I agree with you that it would make no difference even if we have
OU MONON EK PISTEWS instead of OUK EK PISTEWS MONON. But there seems to be
an issue how to interpret the sentence.
(1) We can supply the implied verb and parse it as follows:
hORATE hOTI EX ERGWN DIKAIOUNTAI ANQRWPOS
KAI [ OUK [EK PISTEWS MONON DIKAIOUNTAI] ].
(1): man is justified by works and not (justified only by faith). It
the claim that man is justified only by faith.
(2) We can think that the original sentence means the same as follows:
hORATE hOTI [EX ERGWN KAI OUK EK PISTEWS MOMON] DIKAIOUNTAI ANQRWPOS
(2): man is justified by works and not just by faith.
It turns out that both interpretations mean the same thing.
But in general, these two ways of construing OU, e.g. negating the whole
proposition (equivalently, the verb phrase) and negating other parts of
(e.g. adverbials), should not be the same. Here, we have the same results
because the verb DIKAIOUNTAI is the topic whose means the author wants to
about: the issue or focus in question is its means: whether by works as
well or only by faith. So, from the viewpoint of discourse analysis, OU
negates EK PISTEWS MONON rather than the whole clause EK PISTEWS MONON
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:50 EDT