[b-greek] Re: Lk 18:13; TWi hAMARTWLWi

From: Harry W. Jones (hjbluebird@aol.com)
Date: Sat Dec 01 2001 - 19:09:01 EST


Dear Steven,

I guess I didn't answer the last post from you clearly
enough, so let me clarify where I was obviously misunderstood.



> On Thursday, November 29, 2001, at 04:24 AM, Harry W. Jones wrote:
>
> > After I had sent my last post post off and after looking over Wallace's
> > classifications again I realized that it was "Simple Identification"
> > that I think about when I see a definite noun. That is, according to
> > Wallace's classifications. But of course I know that Wallace is going
> > farther with the "Par Excellence" classification. With the "Par
> > Excellence" classification he is indicating the extreme of a class.
> > That is, the best or worst case. And I agree that simple identification
> > normally warrants the article. But Wallace is going farther than simple
> > identification. What Wallace is proposing requires more than simply the
> > article. It requires additional information be added.

Here I was talking about the need for additional information being
given in any translation of TWi hAMARTWLWi if we go for a "Par Excellence"
understanding of TWi hAMARTWLWi. I would think the general reader
would need more information than simply "the sinner" to reach a
"Par Excellent" understanding . For example, "a sinner worst than
all sinners" or "the worst sinner of all". But, of course, I just simply
do not see a "Par Excellence" classification in the scriptural
references That Wallace gives.

>
> Greetings, Harry:
>
> No, what Wallace is proposing does NOT require more than simply the
> article as a modifier. The whole point of the par excellence sense of
> the article is that the ARTICLE, under the right conditions, conveys the
> idea of par excellence when construed with the nominal it is modifying.
> If more were required, such as an adjective to also modify the nominal,
> there would be no sense in even speaking of a par excellence usage of
> THE ARTICLE, since it would always be another modifier or other
> modifiers that conveyed the idea, not the article.
>
> Also, you say it is "simple identification" according to Wallace's
> classifications you think about when you see a definite noun. I don't
> know how you could regularly default to simple identification according
> to Wallace's definition of simple identification, since Wallace himself
> advises that this classification "should be used only as A LAST RESORT"
> (emphasis mine) because "not many examples of the article fit under this
> category ONLY" (p. 216; emphasis his).
>
> > If "the sinner" is simple identification then it could simply be
> > distinguishing the "sinner" from the "righteous" and could be
> > translated as "a sinner" in this passage. That's what my eight
> > translation NT does.
>
> Again, you claim to be following Wallace's classification without paying
> attention to Wallace. According to him, simple identification is "used
> to distinguish ONE INDIVIDUAL FROM ANOTHER" (p. 216). That this requires
> the English article in translation is abundantly clear from the examples
> he gives. In the case of Luke 18.13, simple identification according to
> Wallace's definition requires the definite article in translation, since
> it would indicate the tax collector distinguishing himself from the
> Pharisee, as Wallace himself relates in his comment on Luke 18.13:
>
> "If it is simple identification, this tax-collector is recognizing the
> presence of the Pharisee and is distinguishing himself from him by
> implying that, as far as he knew, the Pharisee was THE righteous one
> (between the two of them) and he was THE sinner" (p. 223; emphasis his).
>
> Please don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that Wallace is always right
> (he's not), or is even right in this case. But I think if you are going
> to appeal to his classifications to explain syntactical phenomena, it is
> important to properly understand and convey what he is saying. It is
> also important to understand that, just as Wallace is not infallible,
> neither are the translations in your eight translation NT. One of the
> advantages of knowing Greek is the ability to check translations against
> the original to determine whether the translation has accurately
> conveyed what the Greek indicates.

I have only a few translations, maybe 15 or 20 scattered around. But I
suspect that if everybody on the list started checking their tranlations
that they would find that almost all translated TWi hAMARTWLWi as
"a sinner". The literal translations might translate it as "the sinner"
though.

Another thing, and I know this is a low blow but please forgive for
the sake of truth, in all my grammar references I have not found one
reference to the "Par Excellence" classification.

> =============
>
> Steven Lo Vullo
> Madison, WI



In conclusion, I just don't see any alternative but to go along with the
majority of translations. Unless you can give me a better reason than
Wallances "Par Excellent" classification. For in the multitude of
counselors there is safety.

Best Regards,
Harry Jones

---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:13 EDT