Omission of the copula

Biblical Greek morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Omission of the copula

Post by Jason Hare »

Stephen Carlson wrote: September 23rd, 2021, 2:50 am
Jason Hare wrote: September 23rd, 2021, 2:00 am Is it really impossible for these authors (who were not from the Classical period) to have been influenced by the Septuagint or to have picked this phrase up from Hellenistic Jews or Christians?
It’s never impossible (what really is?) but these two are good Greek writers which renders a Semitism an unnecessary hypothesis
There would be nothing prohibiting a great English writer today from using a Yiddish phrase. I think it's entirely possible that Jewish expressions had simply entered the vernacular in the same way that we all know what schlep and mensch means because of Yiddish, even people who aren't Jewish.
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
Devenios Doulenios
Posts: 230
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 5:11 pm
Location: Carlisle, Arkansas, USA
Contact:

Re: Omission of the copula

Post by Devenios Doulenios »

Could it be that this is just an example of a coincidental linguistic parallel? I remember when browsing Moule's Idiom Book of New Testament Greek some years ago that he gave several examples when looking at supposed Hebraisms in the New Testament. He found several parallels to them in the papyri. ( I will have to check my copy for the reference.)
Dewayne Dulaney
Δεβένιος Δουλένιος

Blog: https://letancientvoicesspeak.wordpress.com/

"Ὁδοὶ δύο εἰσί, μία τῆς ζωῆς καὶ μία τοῦ θανάτου."--Διδαχή Α, α'
Jean Putmans
Posts: 152
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Omission of the copula

Post by Jean Putmans »

I have checked some old translations of the Gospel-Instances of the expressions
τι ημιν και σοι (Mt 8:29; Lk 4:34, Mk 1:24) and τι εμοι και σοι (Lk 8:28; Mk. 5:7, John 2:4)

Vetus Latina and Vulgate-Jerome:
τι ημιν και σοι > quid nobis et tibi (all! Only VL-a has in Lk 4:34: quid nobis est et tibi)

τι εμοι και σοι
Lk 8:28 and John 2:4 quid miha et tibi est (all!; e, f and q omit 'est' in John 2:4).
Mk 5:7: quid mihi et tibi (all!)

Gothic
τι ημιν και σοι > Hva uns jah thus (= What - to us - and - to you)
τι εμοι και σοι > Hva mis jah thus (= What - to me - and - to you)

Old English (Ed. Liuza: The Old English version of the Gospels, 1994: Bosworth-Waring 1888)
τι ημιν και σοι
Lk 4:34, Mk 1:24: hwaet is us and the;
Mt 8:29: hwaet ys the and us gemaene
(Whyclife 1389: What to us and to thee)

τι εμοι και σοι
Hwaet is me and the (All instances)
(Whyclife 1389: What to me and to thee)

In Old High German

Tatian (ca 830 CE): Mt 8:29 uuaz ist uns inthi thir
Heliand (before 840 CE:) John 2:4 : huat ist mi endi thi
863/870, Otfrid writes his Gospelbook: John 2:4: was drifit sulih zi uns zuein” (literal: “what moves this against the two of us?” > “Why should this bother the two of us?”.

As these versions all have exactly the same expression, in all instances, I would conclude, this must have been a common expression in Indogermanic languages; if not: what would germanic readers/listeners have made of this - in that case to them strange - expression?
I just cannot believe, that only Otfried had the possibility to find some other fitting expression.
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Jean Putmans
Posts: 152
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Omission of the copula

Post by Jean Putmans »

Addition : In the Latin Corpus (https://app.sketchengine.eu/#dashboard? ... latinise_4) I just found "christian" instances with the latin expression "quid mihi/nobis et tibi".

I still wonder, if someone (like me, and probably most germanic people in those old times) without any knowledge of Hebrew, could understand this expression as "what do I/we have to do with you" instead of "why should I/we and you bother (about that/him etc.)"

By the way: Isn't this latter translation (= Otfrids Translation) the only plausible translation of John 2:4; unless we accept the translation, that Jesus says to Maria: "what do I have to do with you", that sounds quite unpolite! If I would have used this expression to my mother, she would have boxed my ears!
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Post Reply

Return to “Greek Language and Linguistics”