Page 1 of 1

καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὑπάγετε

Posted: June 1st, 2014, 6:51 pm
by tjrolfs
[Administrator note: Please remember to sign with your first and last name...]

Matthew 8:32a

καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὑπάγετε MGNT

I like to reference Kenneth Wuest's English NT "expanded translation" from time to time regarding certain verses and chapters of the NT.

Wuest translates this section of the verse as:
And He said to them, Be gone, and keep on going.
Where as most other English translations just say some form of:
And he said to them, "Go!"
My question is:

ὑπάγετε is in the imperative mood, but does the fact that it is also present tense suggest the idea of continual or ongoing process with the command? Without moving into too much speculation, could this be a possible reason why Wuest chose to say, "Be gone, and keep on going," instead of just a simple "Go." This may be a reverse way of coming at the verse, but I would like to understand if this is a sound way of thinking about it. I guess in a sense it is also permissive though, because he is affirming their request from the previous verse.

Thanks

Re: καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὑπάγετε

Posted: June 1st, 2014, 7:29 pm
by Barry Hofstetter
The general wisdom is that the aorist imperative looks at the action as a whole, as an act, and the present imperative looks at the action as a process. This is normally implied in English by the context, so that it is an "over-translation" or a misplaced emphasis to add something like "Keep on" or "continue." If there really is such a nuance here, I think it would be more like "Be leaving..." or "time to go" rather than what Wuest says.

ὑπάγειν is always present

Posted: June 1st, 2014, 10:08 pm
by Stephen Hughes
tjrolfs wrote:ὑπάγετε is in the imperative mood, but does the fact that it is also present tense suggest the idea of continual or ongoing process with the command?
Barry Hofstetter wrote:The general wisdom is that ... the present imperative looks at the action as a process.
tjrolfs wrote:Wuest translates this section of the verse as:
And He said to them, Be gone, and keep on going.
I think that Wuest has forced a simplistic grammatical exactness onto the language. The general wisdom that Barry mentioned may be true in some verbs, BUT in the case of THIS verb, which ONLY occurs in the "present" (forms from the first principal part), I think it is forcing the issue.

Re: καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὑπάγετε

Posted: June 2nd, 2014, 6:10 pm
by tjrolfs
Thanks,

That makes sense. It seems Wuest "expanded" a little too much there.

Very helpful.