Page 1 of 1
What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: March 22nd, 2015, 5:54 am
by Stephen Hughes
What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι during the Koine period?
While it seems to have been quite common in the classical period, there are only 3 instances of it in the New Testament corpus.
John 21:25 wrote:Ἔστιν δὲ καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ἅτινα ἐὰν γράφηται καθ’ ἕν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸν οἶμαι τὸν κόσμον χωρῆσαι τὰ γραφόμενα βιβλία. Ἀμήν.
Philemon 16-17 wrote:οἱ μὲν ἐξ ἐριθείας τὸν χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν, οὐχ ἁγνῶς, οἰόμενοι θλῖψιν ἐπιφέρειν τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. οἱ δὲ ἐξ ἀγάπης, εἰδότες ὅτι εἰς ἀπολογίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου κεῖμαι
James 1:17 wrote:Μὴ γὰρ οἰέσθω ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος ὅτι λήψεταί τι παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου.
Is the choice of this word designed to shock, or arouse disbelief or consternation or something else?
[cf. ὑπολαμβάνειν which seems to be emotionally neutral.]
Re: What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: March 22nd, 2015, 12:26 pm
by cwconrad
Stephen Hughes wrote:What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι during the Koine period?
While it seems to have been quite common in the classical period, there are only 3 instances of it in the New Testament corpus.
John 21:25 wrote:Ἔστιν δὲ καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ἅτινα ἐὰν γράφηται καθ’ ἕν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸν οἶμαι τὸν κόσμον χωρῆσαι τὰ γραφόμενα βιβλία. Ἀμήν.
Philemon 16-17 wrote:οἱ μὲν ἐξ ἐριθείας τὸν χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν, οὐχ ἁγνῶς, οἰόμενοι θλῖψιν ἐπιφέρειν τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. οἱ δὲ ἐξ ἀγάπης, εἰδότες ὅτι εἰς ἀπολογίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου κεῖμαι
James 1:17 wrote:Μὴ γὰρ οἰέσθω ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος ὅτι λήψεταί τι παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου.
Is the choice of this word designed to shock, or arouse disbelief or consternation or something else?
[cf. ὑπολαμβάνειν which seems to be emotionally neutral.]
It would seem to me that there's a difference between the first citation from Jn 21 and the other two from Philemon and James; the first is a matter of a "guesstimate" of a likelihood without any argument to back it up; the other two are assumptions about consequences serving as the basis for action undertaken. I would hesitate to answer the question raised on the basis of these instances; it ought to be possible to ascertain the frequency of usage of οἴεσθαι elsehwwhere in Hellenistic Koine -- apart, that is, from what we know to be Atticizing, authors.
Re: What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: March 22nd, 2015, 7:33 pm
by Stephen Hughes
cwconrad wrote:It would seem to me that there's a difference between the first citation from Jn 21 and the other two from Philemon and James; the first is a matter of a "guesstimate" of a likelihood without any argument to back it up; the other two are assumptions about consequences serving as the basis for action undertaken. I would hesitate to answer the question raised on the basis of these instances; it ought to be possible to ascertain the frequency of usage of οἴεσθαι elsewhere in Hellenistic Koine -- apart, that is, from what we know to be Atticizing, authors.
Yes, οἴεσθαι seems to need a wider context to understand it clearly. I haven't read widely enough to either estimate whether it is being used as a literary allusion or a popular usage. There are a number of references in BDAG to places where it is used (mostly Septuagintal anf early Christian - in keeping with the nature of the work).
Speaking of good Attic authours...For the James passage, consider what Socrates requests for his sons from right near the end of his speech..
Plato, [i]Apology of Socrates[/i], 41e wrote:καὶ οἴονταί τι εἶναι ὄντες οὐδενὸς ἄξιοι
and thinking that they are something when they are really nothing.
It seems to mean that in themselves they think (wrongly suppose) that, as opposed to a outwards show of being something a few phrases earlier ("καὶ ἐὰν δοκῶσί τι εἶναι μηδὲν ὄντες, or if they pretend to be something when they are really nothing," also from 41e). Perhaps something more than just supposing, but like thinking then believing their own conjectures / suppositions - Socrates here seems to be being portrayed as using οἴεσθαι with a negative connotation of some sort.
Re: What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: March 23rd, 2015, 7:18 am
by cwconrad
Stephen Hughes wrote:cwconrad wrote:It would seem to me that there's a difference between the first citation from Jn 21 and the other two from Philemon and James; the first is a matter of a "guesstimate" of a likelihood without any argument to back it up; the other two are assumptions about consequences serving as the basis for action undertaken. I would hesitate to answer the question raised on the basis of these instances; it ought to be possible to ascertain the frequency of usage of οἴεσθαι elsewhere in Hellenistic Koine -- apart, that is, from what we know to be Atticizing, authors.
Yes, οἴεσθαι seems to need a wider context to understand it clearly. I haven't read widely enough to either estimate whether it is being used as a literary allusion or a popular usage. There are a number of references in BDAG to places where it is used (mostly Septuagintal anf early Christian - in keeping with the nature of the work).
Speaking of good Attic authours...For the James passage, consider what Socrates requests for his sons from right near the end of his speech..
Plato, [i]Apology of Socrates[/i], 41e wrote:καὶ οἴονταί τι εἶναι ὄντες οὐδενὸς ἄξιοι
and thinking that they are something when they are really nothing.
It seems to mean that in themselves they think (wrongly suppose) that, as opposed to a outwards show of being something a few phrases earlier ("καὶ ἐὰν δοκῶσί τι εἶναι μηδὲν ὄντες, or if they pretend to be something when they are really nothing," also from 41e). Perhaps something more than just supposing, but like thinking then believing their own conjectures / suppositions - Socrates here seems to be being portrayed as using οἴεσθαι with a negative connotation of some sort.
Several examples of usage of οἱεσθαι from speeches of Lysias are cited at
http://logeion.uchicago.edu/index.html#οἱομαι, always involving hazardous assumptions, sometimes implying rashness, sometimes simply indicating that the validity of the assumption simply is/was not assured. You have cited Plato's
Apology, but perhaps the most significant antithesis between εἰδέναι and οἴεσθαι appears in one of the climactic sections of Socrates' speech, regarding the fear of death in 29a-b:
δεινόν τἂν εἴη, καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς τότ’ ἄν με δικαίως εἰσάγοι τις εἰς δικαστήριον, ὅτι οὐ νομίζω θεοὺς εἶναι ἀπειθῶν τῇ μαντείᾳ καὶ δεδιὼς θάνατον καὶ οἰόμενος σοφὸς εἶναι οὐκ ὤν. τὸ γάρ τοι θάνατον δεδιέναι, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἐστὶν ἢ δοκεῖν σοφὸν εἶναι μὴ ὄντα· δοκεῖν γὰρ εἰδέναι ἐστὶν ἃ οὐκ οἶδεν. οἶδε μὲν γὰρ οὐδεὶς τὸν θάνατον οὐδ’ εἰ τυγχάνει τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ πάντων μέγιστον ὂν τῶν ἀγαθῶν, δεδίασι δ’ ὡς εὖ εἰδότες \ὅτι μέγιστον τῶν κακῶν ἐστι. καίτοι πῶς οὐκ ἀμαθία ἐστὶν αὕτη ἡ ἐπονείδιστος, ἡ τοῦ οἴεσθαι εἰδέναι ἃ οὐκ οἶδεν; ἐγὼ δ’, ὦ ἄνδρες, τούτῳ καὶ ἐνταῦθα ἴσως διαφέρω τῶν πολλῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ εἰ δή τῳ σοφώτερός του φαίην εἶναι, τούτῳ ἄν, ὅτι οὐκ εἰδὼς ἱκανῶς περὶ τῶν ἐν Ἅιδου οὕτω καὶ οἴομαι οὐκ εἰδέναι·
Re: What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: March 28th, 2015, 8:01 pm
by Stephen Hughes
cwconrad wrote:perhaps the most significant antithesis between εἰδέναι and οἴεσθαι
You are probably right with that. Adding and removing negation to phrases seems to have to be done differently with verbs of thinking.
- He couldn't eat what he didn't have. -> He could eat what he had.
Without a car you need to take a taxi. -> With a car you needn't take a taxi.
Change from positive to negative simply enough, so could be used almost interchangeably and without changing the verbs, but in the case of verbs of thinking it is a little different:
- He didn't know there were still more apples in the fridge -> He supposed that there were no more apples in the fridge.
Re: What is the emotional effect of using οἴεσθαι?
Posted: May 7th, 2015, 10:29 am
by Stephen Hughes
If this was ever taken up again later, then ὑπονοεῖν could be put on the table for discussion alongside οἴεσθαι and ὑπολαμβάνειν too.