Page 1 of 1

ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν "to remind (with the nuance of yet again)"

Posted: April 22nd, 2014, 2:15 am
by Stephen Hughes
This thread is to discuss the idea of whether it is beneficial or detrimental to our understanding of the language that the meaning of ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν be derived by "adding" the meaning of the prefaced preposition ἔπι- to an already compound verb ἀναμιμνήσκειν.

Are we justified to read ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν (occuring once in the New Testament) as "to remind (with the nuance of yet again = as you will remember me doing previously)" in
Romans 15:15 wrote:Τολμηρότερον δὲ ἔγραψα ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, ἀπὸ μέρους, ὡς ἐπαναμιμνήσκων ὑμᾶς, διὰ τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ
This is based, not on context, but because from Plato down to Modern Greek ἔπανα- can have that meaning, (and of course it does fit the context well in that verse).

In other words, is it too strong to explicate that the nuance carried by the verb is that the backdrop of this current reminding is the previous reminding(s) rather than the very first time they heard the things mentioned? Will teaching a student to add the meaning of the prefaced preposition ἔπι- ("over against" / "with reference to")dynamically lead to a better understanding or to a forced emphasis that was not intended?

Looking at that from the other perspective; Is NOT splitting and adding the preposition from the front of the word, and teaching a student that ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν unthinkingly means "to remind somebody of something again" going to lead to a better understanding of the language?

Re: ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν "to remind (with the nuance of yet again

Posted: April 22nd, 2014, 3:02 am
by Stephen Carlson
To get a feel for this word, isn't it best to read this and related words in context, or rely on someone who did (e.g. Danker)? Surely, the best guide to meaning is usage.

Re: ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν "to remind (with the nuance of yet again

Posted: April 22nd, 2014, 7:57 am
by cwconrad
Stephen Carlson wrote:To get a feel for this word, isn't it best to read this and related words in context, or rely on someone who did (e.g. Danker)? Surely, the best guide to meaning is usage.
I think that's undoubtedly true, but my understanding of SH's intention is that he wanted to explore the utility of "splitting compound verbs": can we pinpoint the semantic content of the prefixed elements sufficiently to ascertain whether they can be detached from the root/stem of the verb? I'm inclined to doubt it: the prefixed elements surely do qualify adverbially the meaning of the verbal root/stem, nevertheless, as George Somsel reminds us ad nauseam, "context is king." And I rather think that the nuance of ἐπανα- in ἐπαναμιμνήσκειν is to add the adverbial element "ad nauseam" to the key sense "remind" in μιμνήσκειν.

The "usage" mantra fell silent and left me looking for answe

Posted: April 22nd, 2014, 9:49 am
by Stephen Hughes
Stephen Carlson wrote:Surely, the best guide to meaning is usage.
The question is whose usage? The authour's existing texts preserved from antiquity, or the reader's own ability to use the language.

In fact, I get what you are saying, and two months ago, I would have agreed with you. Now, however, the rhythm of the "usage" mantra sounds muffled and distant.

The works that I've been reading on vocabulary acqisition say that mastering vocabulary means having a mastery of the vocabulary. In learning-teaching (at the level when this word would learnt that basically means facilitating the students own natural acquisition) of vocabulary, exercises are often used to develop mastery of vocabulary, even when the ultimate aim is only passive understanding.
Stephen Carlson wrote:To get a feel for this word, isn't it best to read this and related words in context ...
"Context" ultimately means "educated guessing". Experienced readers make better guesses. Context educates our guesses. Many contexts for the same meaning are beneficial, too.

It has been suggested that about 6 contexts for each meanings of a polysemic wohird are adequate to teach and consolidate a lexical item. That poses problems of adequacy of contexts for most of the New Testament lexical stock - and broadly for Classical Greek as a whole. Even words that occur six times or more may be being used in the same context - collocated with the same words, or even in the same set phrases over and over again.

Another thing that educates our guessing is our understanding of morphology. The better we understand grammar, the better we are at guessing. Not only the grammar that we use for parsing, but also the grammar that allows us to form and predict the various parts of speech associated with a word. Like CCW says, that is the point if my question, invitation to discussion.

If we accept that it is possible to teach words directly, some concept questions we might ask after explaining the meaning are:
Have the listeners heard these thing before?
Ουχ οι ακροατές ήδη ήκουσαν τα ρήματα αυτά; (Μάλιστα)
Has the author reminded them before?
Ουχ ο συγγραφεύς αυτός ανεμιίμνισκεν αυτούς;
Is he reminding them of something he thinks they should already know and not need continuous reminding of?
Those are sort of leading questions.

After asking them, the learners could go a writing, and/or speaking exercise if they have someone to speak with. After that, they may have some mastery of the usage.