Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Dan Monroe
Posts: 7
Joined: August 22nd, 2013, 3:09 pm

Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Dan Monroe »

Mt. 14.20: ἦραν τὸ περισσεῦον τῶν κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις.
Mk. 6.43: SBL notes alternatives κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα WH NIV ] κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πληρώματα Treg; κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις RP.
Luke 9.17: ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα. Vulg Luke 9:17: et sublatum est quod superfuit illis fragmentorum cofini duodecim.
Vulg Mk. 6.43: et sustulerunt reliquias fragmentorum duodecim cophinos plenos et de piscibus.

I take Luke 9.17 ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα to mean "it was taken up the left-over to them, [namely,] twelve baskets of fragments," i.e. "their left-over [food] was twelve baskets of fragments." So τὸ περισσεῦσαν is nom, in apposition with κόφινοι δώδεκα.
Jerome avoids what could be a clunky asyndeton with a relative clause, but I still want to punctuate him with a comma, too-- et sublatum est [id] quod superfuit illis[,] fragmentorum cofini duodecim.

Mk. 6.43 presents two challenges.
First, the fragments are in the nom./acc., not the gen. & dependent on the baskets. If ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων is to have a parallel, we have too suppose κλάσματα = κλάσματα [ἄρτων].
Second, πληρώματα, which has for its radical meaning "that which fills," but seems to = πλήρεις (cf. the SBL notes below), which would buy us the gen. case of δώδεκα κοφίνων. Jerome certainly took πληρώματα = plenos, i.e. he translated a noun as an adjective.
Lust et al. define πληρώματα as "contents" in the LXX lexicon, which develops in a sensible way the radical meaning and suggests "they gathered up the fragments [of bread] and of fish, [which were] the contents of twelve baskets. Does that work?

Thanks for elucidating comments.
Dan Monroe
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Let me ask a few questions that could widen your search...
Dan Monroe wrote:Luke 9.17: ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα. Vulg Luke 9:17: et sublatum est quod superfuit illis fragmentorum cofini duodecim.
Who do you take the αὐτοῖς in Luke 9:17 to refer to? And which verbal form does it go with?
Mark 6:43 SBL wrote:καὶ ἦραν ⸂κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα⸃ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων.
Dan Monroe wrote:Mk. 6.43: SBL notes alternatives κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα WH NIV ] κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πληρώματα Treg; κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις RP.
I realise that case is not marked with the δώδεκα, but anyway let's ask; What "case" is the δώδεκα in these 3 varients do you think? Is δώδεκα considered to be an adjective or a noun in the grammar of these varients?

[It's a bit left of field, but you may also like to consider whether filling could be being expressed (perhaps incorrectly for this period) by the accusative instead of the genitive, cf. Modern Greek γεμάτος]
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Dan Monroe
Posts: 7
Joined: August 22nd, 2013, 3:09 pm

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Dan Monroe »

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Stephen. Let me ask a few questions that could widen your search...

Dan Monroe wrote:Luke 9.17: ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα. Vulg Luke 9:17: et sublatum est quod superfuit illis fragmentorum cofini duodecim.

Stephen. Who do you take the αὐτοῖς in Luke 9:17 to refer to? And which verbal form does it go with?
αὐτοῖς cannot be personal agent (upo + gen.), or dat. of agent (which favors the pf. or plpf. tense), so all that's left seems to be the dat. of possession relative to τὸ περισσεῦσαν.

Mark 6:43 SBL wrote:καὶ ἦραν ⸂κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα⸃ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων.

Dan Monroe wrote:Mk. 6.43: SBL notes alternatives κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα WH NIV ] κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πληρώματα Treg; κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις RP.


Stephen. I realize that case is not marked with the δώδεκα, but anyway let's ask; What "case" is the δώδεκα in these 3 variants do you think? Is δώδεκα considered to be an adjective or a noun in the grammar of these variants?
Dan. δώδεκα will agree with its noun. In δώδεκα κοφίνων, we may take it to be gen. pl.

[Stephen. It's a bit left of field, but you may also like to consider whether filling could be being expressed (perhaps incorrectly for this period) by the accusative instead of the genitive, cf. Modern Greek γεμάτος]
[Dan. Classical Greek seems pretty clear about this. As Smythe says, the thing filled is put in the accusative, the thing filling in the genitive. He cites the example of filling the sea [acc.] with triremes [gen.]. But Mark puts the things filled in the gen. (δώδεκα κοφίνων) alongside the more legitimate things filling (ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων).]
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Stephen Hughes »

To quote someone in this way;
Dan Monroe wrote:Body of the quotation
you can type this;
Dan Monroe wrote:Body of the quotation


NB. I have put an extra "space" character between the double inverted commas and the closing square brackets - " ] - which you will have to remove.
then you will get the neat indentation and the beige coloured backgrounds that will lift the presentational quality of you posts to match their content.

If you want to insert an URL the way to do that beautifully is to highlight the text that will become the hyperlink and push the URL button at the top of this textbox we are typing in, then go to the [url] that you will find inserted in your text and add an equals sign and the address so that it becomes for example;

[url=http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/sea ... ive_topics]

which is the URL for the active topics list of B-Greek.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Dan Monroe
Posts: 7
Joined: August 22nd, 2013, 3:09 pm

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Dan Monroe »

Stephen Hughes wrote:To quote someone in this way;
Dan Monroe wrote:Body of the quotation
you can type this;
Dan Monroe wrote:Body of the quotation


NB. I have put an extra "space" character between the double inverted commas and the closing square brackets - " ] - which you will have to remove.
then you will get the neat indentation and the beige coloured backgrounds that will lift the presentational quality of you posts to match their content.

If you want to insert an URL the way to do that beautifully is to highlight the text that will become the hyperlink and push the URL button at the top of this textbox we are typing in, then go to the [url] that you will find inserted in your text and add an equals sign and the address so that it becomes for example;

[url=http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/sea ... ive_topics]

which is the URL for the active topics list of B-Greek.
[/quote]

I prefer to cast prompts and responses dramatically in order to make myself re-read everything more carefully. But all the same I thank you for the tips, as I have never read them before.
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Dan Monroe wrote:
Luke 9.17 SBL wrote:ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα.
Luke 9:17 Vulg wrote:et sublatum est quod superfuit illis fragmentorum cofini duodecim.
Dan Monroe wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:Who do you take the αὐτοῖς in Luke 9:17 to refer to? And which verbal form does it go with?
αὐτοῖς cannot be personal agent (upo + gen.), or dat. of agent (which favors the pf. or plpf. tense), so all that's left seems to be the dat. of possession relative to τὸ περισσεῦσαν.
Here we, in your own words we are dealing with "oddities", so we need to think outside the box (the grammar book) a little - categories need to be extended and things that are not usually considered "good Greek" need to be allowed for.

In text chosen by the SBL, if αὐτοῖς were a personal agent (which is possible in Luke, and more possible in the other Gospels), then it would go together with the verb ἤρθη, and the αὐτοῖς would refer to the disciples. In which case, counter-intuitive as it may at first seem, I would tentitively say that the κλασμάτων would be with the τὸ περισσεῦσαν, because there would have to be a special reason for moving the pronoun so far from the verb - and that special reason would be to group the κλασμάτων together with the τὸ περισσεῦσαν that the αὐτοῖς is made to physically separate from it.

If αὐτοῖς referred to the people who ate to satisfaction, "which were above their needs" then it would be a dative of respect going with the articular aorist participle τὸ περισσεῦσαν. In that case, I would say that the κλασμάτων goes with the κόφινοι, but let's explore in what way that is possible.
Luke 9:17 SBL wrote:κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα
We seem to have narrowed things to the Lucan account, so let's take it from there... If we assume that the αὐτοῖς goes with the starving now sated multitudes, then SBL's κλασμάτων κόφινοι δώδεκα could either be taken with the δώδεκα as genitive plural, then it would mean that each of the disciples got back and they went, "Wow! So, you got 12 extra pieces. So did I. That's a miracle.", or with the δώδεκα as nominative plural with the κόφινοι, which is like, "Duh, there are 12 of us, and we've each got a basket with left overs", which could be a significantly different version of the story from the account that we are also considering in Mark. If we were to take this understanding derived from Luke's account and combine it together with the account in Mark (rather than taking the sense of "full" and reading it directly into Luke, then that would imply smallish hand-baskets which would be "full" with just 12 pieces (perhaps a quarter of loaf for each family??).
Dan Monroe wrote:Mk. 6.43: SBL notes alternatives κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα WH NIV ] κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πληρώματα Treg; κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις RP.
We sort of left it behind, but if we go back to the original group of 3 varients, then ... If we continue that the δώδεκα (as an adjective) could be either of plural cases that occur near it, then let's consider the varients in Mark 6:43 (WH NIV) κλάσματα δώδεκα κοφίνων πληρώματα in which if the δώδεκα is neuter accusative plural ie. κλάσματα δώδεκα "twelve torn off bits" which is then explained as κοφίνων πληρώματα "which was enough to fill each of their baskets". For the Treg (what's that mean?) κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πληρώματα in which case κοφίνους might me an accusative of respect with πληρώματα. Then the third one from RP, κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις which if δώδεκα is genitive would mean "12 pieces, which are each basket-fulls"
Dan Monroe wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:Is δώδεκα considered to be an adjective or a noun in the grammar of these variants?
δώδεκα will agree with its noun. In δώδεκα κοφίνων, we may take it to be gen. pl.
Still on the consideration of oddities, what if δώδεκα were not being thought of simply as an adjective, what else could it be? There are two other possibilities as a noun - a group of twelve - "a dozen", or as twelve things, that could not really form a recognisible group (except that they had been counted together), or as the abstract number and it's graphical representation "12". It might be useful to consider those three options alongside of "twelve" as and adjective that you will have found it in the dictionary. cf.in English the difference between (adj) "there are 12 boats on the harbour" and (noun) "12 is a significant number in Christian numerology" (not a personal interest of mine - but something that comes up from time to time in different eras). If in grammar 12 was considered as a noun, then it might need a genitive to go with it to be able to use it. I don't think that takes us anywhere here, but it is one of the things that could be considered when dealing with numbers. It is pushing the envelope of Greek and implying that the number itself would have been considered to exist and then find definition in an object - which I don't personally feel is worth exploring - but it's a possibility never-the-less.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Dan Monroe wrote:I prefer to cast prompts and responses dramatically
If you wanted to embolden the names of the various dramatis personæ you could highlight them and then press the B button at the top of the text-input box.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Dan Monroe
Posts: 7
Joined: August 22nd, 2013, 3:09 pm

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Dan Monroe »

Constraints of time limit me to two questions you seem to pose; I will return to other points you suggest in a few days.

Is αὐτοῖς the dative of respect?
Smythe: “The dative of manner may denote the particular point of view from which a statement is made. This occurs chiefly with intransitive adjectives but also with intransitive verbs (Dative of Respect).” His examples are unexceptionable. Eg., th fwnh traxus = harsh of voice.
Blass et al. observe that “the dative of respect in the NT is far more frequent than the accusative of respect, while in Classical usage the ratio is reversed." One of the examples given comes from Acts 16.5, which comes close to our puzzle: ἐπερίσσευον τῷ ἀριθμῷ.
If we accept Smythe and Blass, we cannot reckon αὐτοῖς as a dative indicating the respect in which τὸ περισσεῦσαν is true.

Is αὐτοῖς dative of agent?
Blass says that there “is perhaps only one genuine example in the NT and this with the perfect [which Smythe would have predicted]: Lk. 23:15.” If we construe αὐτοῖς as agent, then we enter the Twilight Zone of post-Classical and perhaps post-Koine Greek.

Just to clarify--what do you make of plhrwmata?
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Clarification of what I make of πληρώματα

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Dan Monroe wrote:πληρώματα, which has for its radical meaning "that which fills," but seems to = πλήρεις (cf. the SBL notes below), which would buy us the gen. case of δώδεκα κοφίνων. ...

Lust et al. define πληρώματα as "contents" in the LXX lexicon, which develops in a sensible way the radical meaning
I did see this part of your question, but I don't have a strong opinion on this word. My hunch (an unprovable inclination) - and let's not call it any more than that - is that πλήρωμα is in the accusative plural πληρώματα to indicate that each individual basket was full - "each one to fullness", like πληρώματα καθ' ἑκαστόν (where the ἑκαστός could be referring to the disciples, the baskets to both or the distinction wouldn't have been made anyway).

The biggest difference that I find between using the noun πληρώματα to express that each one is full, and πλήρεις is that using the adjective is "better" Greek, and looks more like a polished text. I think that the Byzantine traditional manuscripts are the best for students to work from - they have a lot of these sort of things worked out of them. In any case, if πληρώματα was a "mistake" or a colloquialism it would usually have to be smoothed out / "corrected" / conformed to "standard" literary language when a translation was to be made. One can't really be writing a colloquialism like "(real) fullies" in a translation to standard form of English (or another language).
Dan Monroe wrote:Jerome certainly took πληρώματα = plenos, i.e. he translated a noun as an adjective.
Please take this answer that I'm about to give you with a grain of salt, because it is beyond my competence to really answer your question, textual criticism being something I have only read about, but not applied myself to...

I found our word "certainly" a little worrisome here. Jerome was well-lettered, and somebody of his erudition is sure to have worked from a number of manuscript sources not just the one - the best sources available. Your statement seems to assume that Jerome was translating from a single manuscript that read πληρώματα. It is also possible that the manuscript (or the majority of manuscripts or the favourite manuscript and the basic Old Latin manuscript used Brixianus?) that Jerome translated from had the form πλήρεις in it. If you wanted to look into how the Old Latin handled the Greek you could consider looking into that in company with someone more competent in Latin than I am.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Dan Monroe
Posts: 7
Joined: August 22nd, 2013, 3:09 pm

Re: Oddities in Luke 9:17 and Mark 6:43

Post by Dan Monroe »

I concede without demur your point about Jerome. Of course I have no idea what texts he was working from.
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”