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

From: Harry W. Jones (hjbluebird@aol.com)
Date: Sun Dec 02 2001 - 08:21:12 EST


Dear Iver,

I think that you have come to see things the way I have come to
see things that wheither or not we take TWi hAMARTWLWi as substantive
or attribitive, "me a sinner" is still an appropriate translation.

I appreciate all your helpful comments as well as Steven's and all the
others in this thread.

Now I really must get back to reading through Wallace's book.

Best Regards,
Harry Jones


> Dear Steven,
>
> Just a couple of linguistic comments to some of your statements.
> >
> > (1) hAMARTWLOS is used 47 times in the NT. According to Accordance, in
> > 38 of these instances, it is substantival, and in only 9 cases is it
> > adjectival (in those 38 instances Accordance actually tags hAMARTWLOS as
> > a noun). I think 9 is high, but I'm trying to be as fair as possible. So
> > hAMARTWLOS in the NT is far more likely to be a substantive than an
> > adjective.
>
> Although BAGD and L&N make a lexical sense distinction between this word as
> an adjective and as a noun, I see no compelling linguistic reason for doing
> so. Such a distinction is a reflection of the fact that German and English
> happen to have both an adjective "sinful" and a noun "sinner".
> It would be quite adequate to say that hAMARTWLOS is an adjective, full
> stop. Very often this adjective, like many other adjectives in Greek, and a
> few in English, is used with the head of the noun phrase implicit. Such an
> implicit head is either the generic semantic concept of "thing" or "person",
> or it may be supplied from the preceding context.
> There is no semantic difference between "a sinful person" and "a sinner".
> When hAMARTWLOS modifies an explicit noun, it is used in a way which is
> called adjectival. When the head noun is implied, it is used in a way which
> is called substantival.
> It is correct that this particular adjective is in the majority of cases
> used without an explicit noun to modify. This is because only people can be
> sinful. "A sinful one" is always "a sinful person"="a sinner".
> >
> > (2) Note the construction personal pronoun-article-noun (13 times not
> > counting Luke 18.13, which Accordance also tags as a noun: Mark 7.6;
> > Luke 11.39,42-43,46,52; 12.4; Acts 4.11; 1 Cor 4.9; Eph 2.11; 3.1; 4.1;
> > 2 Tim. 1.8). By the very nature of things, the article-noun
> > constructions in these verses cannot be attributive. They must be
> > appositive. This is important to remember as we move to the next point.
> >
> > (3) As far as I can tell, the construction personal
> > pronoun-article-adjective occurs 5 times in the NT (Luke 6.24; John
> > 6.70; Rom 15.1; Gal 6.1; Eph 3.8; as I said, Accordance tags hAMARTWLWi
> > in Luke 18.13 as a noun). Keeping in mind the analogy of personal
> > pronoun-article-noun above, I think we can see that understanding the
> > adjectives in these cases as substantival is not only perfectly
> > natural, but preferable. And, again keeping in mind the analogy, I think
> > taking them attributively involves thinking in English rather than
> > Greek. I can't think of one good reason why we should understand any of
> > these as attributive, especially with the analogy afforded us by the
> > construction with nouns above.
>
> You have some nice examples here. In addition to the adjectival-substantival
> contrast, you now focus on an apposition-attributive contrast. I don't see
> the strong opposition between these two as you seem to imply. I'd like to
> quote from your other post to Carlton, which I totally agree with. It was
> well said and worth repeating:
> You said: "Certainly the two substantives have to refer to the same person,
> but I
> don't think the appositive ever really expresses the totality of the
> noun to which it is in apposition. It sharpens the identification of the
> person or thing or restates the identification of the person or thing in
> a way that highlights a characteristic or attribute of the person or
> thing that may not be obvious from the noun to which it is in
> apposition. I don't think there is an attempt at an exhaustive
> restatement of the person or thing. Certainly, as you ask above, there
> is more to MOI than just being a sinner, but in his mind "the sinner" is
> an apt appellation for himself. "The sinner" in this case identifies the
> tax collector in a way that emphasizes that attribute or characteristic
> that defines him best under the circumstances."
>
> So, the pronoun serves to identify the referent, whether "me", or "you". The
> additional noun phrase emphasizes an attribute or characteristic of the
> referent that is relevant under the circumstances. In the case of Luke 18:13
> it is the fact that this person acknowledges himself to be a sinful person,
> one who has sinned against God.
> The text gives no indication that the tax collector compares himself to a
> Pharisee who stands far off. Jesus and Luke do that, and the Pharisee
> compares himself to the tax collector. The tax collector is described as
> looking down, repentant and talking to God without apparently being
> concerned about his surroundings.
> If you prefer to call the noun phrase TWi hAMARTWLWi an apposition to the
> pronoun, I can accept that as long as we agree that it "emphasizes that
> attribute or characteristic that defines him best". This sounds like
> attributive use to me. From a descriptive linguistics frame of reference I
> would prefer to call it a rankshifted verbless clause that modifies the head
> noun slot, which in this case is filled by a pronoun.
>
> I don't see a significant semantic difference between, say,
> "you rich ones" and "you who are rich"
> "you hypocrites" and "you who can be described as hypocrites"
>
> "you twelve" I would take as an apposition rather than a rankshifted
> verbless clause, but I am not sure whether I am influenced by the fact that
> in Danish a straightforward apposition seems to work better here than a
> rankshifted clause (you who are my 12 disciples).
>
> What I am trying to say is that I see these constructions with a pronoun as
> open to being appositions, but also open to be rankshifted clauses.
>
> Where we seem to have different perspectives is in our philosophies of
> translation, but I won't go more into these philosophies on this list. (See
> the Bible translation list).
>
> I do want to say two things, though:
> 1) If anyone insists that all these constructions MUST be translated with
> English appositions and that a relative clause or the use of the indefinite
> article in English or other languages are inaccurate translations, then I
> disagree.
>
> 2) I am afraid anyone - I am not thinking of any person in particular - who
> claim they can think about and describe Greek grammar without ever letting
> their mothertongue grammar influence their thinking, are fooling themselves.
>
> I admit that I am influenced by Danish and the other languages I have
> studied. Like Sabaot, where almost all attribution is done by rankshifted
> clauses. Or like Danish where no person would ever dream of saying "me, the
> sinner" even in the most literal translation. It is simply impossible. The
> literal translation from 1907 says "vær mig synder naadig" which in a
> literal English is "be to me sinner merciful". It is understandable, but not
> normal language. No Danish person would ever say that if they were not
> quoting from a literal translation of the bible. It sounds awkward because
> it is Greekish Danish, and I am sure much more awkward than the Greek would
> have sounded to those who spoke Koine Greek. The latest Danish idiomatic
> translation gives the sense of the Greek text in more natural language:
> "Have mercy on me. I am a sinner." A half-century old idiomatic translation
> says in my English rendering: "God, forgive in your grace such a sinner as I
> am."
>
> Thank you for the discussion,
> Iver Larsen

---
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