[B-Greek] Position of Prepositional Phrases in Paul
Elizabeth Kline
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Tue May 18 17:52:28 EDT 2010
Reading this post an hour or two later I can already think of several possible objections to almost every analysis presented in what follows. Keep that in mind. If you disagree, I would probably agree with you or at least allow for a different analysis. I am posting this "as is" and reserve the option to change my mind instantaneously on any or all of the statements in this post.
On May 16, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Kristan Slack wrote:
> In particular I've been trying to isolate prepositional phrases which sit between a noun and come before the verb to which the noun is related (that is, NOUN + PREP + VERB) - such that the preposition is sandwiched between the two items).
>
> An example is found in Romans 5:8
>
> CRISTOS hUPER hHMWN APEQANEN
>
>
>
> I've tried (to no avail) to find information about the placement of prepositional phrases (both in general and of this particular kind), both in searching the b-greek archives but also in grammars.
>
> I was just wondering if the list had wisdom about this kind of usage?
>
> (I've noticed a few things myself: it occurs with EIMI verbs, especially in John; 1/3 of the ones I found across the NT are with passives or middle forms).
>
> My more general question is, has anything been written regarding the positioning of prepositional phrases, or of idiolect and prepositional phrases?
Your text Rom. 5:8 just happens to fall in with a treatment of "Tragic ways of Dying: Word Order in the Clause" chapter three in Helma Dik's "Word Order in Greek Tragic Dialogue". The topic is constituent order within the clause. In other words, prepositional phrases are treated, if at all, as a constituent which is preverbal or postverbal. Prepositional phrases are not singled out for independent study, however there are several prepositional phrases that feature as focus constituents.
Just for fun (this isn't science) I searched for hUPER with APOQNHSKW within Paul and the rest of the GNT, reading one again H.Dik's chapter on "Tragic ways of Dying" to see what might be said about Pauline ways of dying.
To anticipate an obvious objection that Tragedy, H. Dik focuses mainly on Sophocles, is the wrong genre for comparing with Paul, we should note that H.Dik (pp. 42-43) begins her demonstration by stating that she is going to treat Sophocles just like prose, ignore trimeter and other poetry related issues. She cites two passages from Plato to illustrate the general principles. In other words, word order in the clause can be treated independent of genre. I noticed that she does have some footnotes in this chapter on enjambment and later in the book there is a whole chapter devoted to trimeter analysis.
On page 42 H.Dik lays down the information pattern she will use for analysis:
(setting) -- topic -- focus -- verb -- remainder
The verb will at times fill the focus slot. The full structure is often not explicit. Topic can be reduced to verb inflection. Setting and remainder are optional elements. The titles for the elements in the pattern she uses are more or less standard in the literature. The sequence of the elements is by no means fixed and is a matter of some disagreement among those who use more or less the same framework for analysis. Not all clauses are topic-focus "articulations" of the greek sentence and like everything else, there is disagreement on how this is determined.
Rom. 5:8 again to illustrate the pattern:
hOTI ETI hAMARTWLWN ONTWN hHMWN CRISTOS hUPER hHMWN APEQANEN
(setting) ETI hAMARTWLWN ONTWN hHMWN
topic CRISTOS
focus hUPER hHMWN
verb APEQANEN
Reading through Tragic ways of Dying, the first in focus prepositional phrase is found on page 49.
Soph. Electra 523-527
Ἐγὼ δ' ὕβριν μὲν οὐκ ἔχω, κακῶς δέ σε
λέγω κακῶς κλύουσα πρὸς σέθεν θαμά.
Πατὴρ γάρ, οὐδὲν ἄλλο, σοὶ πρόσχημ' ἀεὶ
ὡς ἐξ ἐμοῦ τέθνηκεν· ἐξ ἐμοῦ, καλῶς
ἔξοιδα· τῶνδ' ἄρνησις οὐκ ἔνεστί μοι·
EGW D' hUBRIN MEN OUK ECW, KAKWS DE SE
LEGW KAKWS KLUOUSA PROS SEQEN QAMA.
PATHR GAR, OUDEN ALLO, SOI PROSCHM' AEI
hWS EX EMOU TEQNHKEN· EX EMOU, KALWS
EXOIDA· TWND' ARNHSIS OUK ENESTI MOI·
R.C. Jebb (revised)
I am guilty of no insolence; I do but return the taunts that I often hear from you.
Your father- this is your constant pretext- was slain by me. Yes, by me- I know it well; it admits of no denial;
According to H.Dik the first EX EMOU, in the clause hWS EX EMOU TEQNHKEN, is in focus. The repetition of EX EMOU supports this. The pattern:
topic PATHR
focus EX EMOU
verb TEQNHKEN
more from romans 5:
Rom. 5:6 Ἔτι γὰρ Χριστὸς ὄντων ἡμῶν ἀσθενῶν ἔτι κατὰ καιρὸν ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν ἀπέθανεν. 7 μόλις γὰρ ὑπὲρ δικαίου τις ἀποθανεῖται· ὑπὲρ γὰρ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ τάχα τις καὶ τολμᾷ ἀποθανεῖν·
Rom. 5:6 ETI GAR CRISTOS ONTWN hHMWN ASQENWN ETI KATA KAIRON hUPER ASEBWN APEQANEN. 7 MOLIS GAR hUPER DIKAIOU TIS APOQANEITAI· hUPER GAR TOU AGAQOU TACA TIS KAI TOLMAi APOQANEIN·
v6
(setting) ONTWN hHMWN ASQENWN ETI KATA KAIRON
topic CRISTOS
focus hUPER ASEBWN
verb APEQANEN
Note that topic and setting are not in the standard order. There are several possible explanations for the positon of XRISTOS. Leave that for someone else.
v7a
topic TIS
focus hUPER DIKAIOU
verb APOQANEITAI
Note that topic and focus are not in the standard order. It would be difficult to justify reading TIS as the focus element. Same issue in the next clause:
v7b
topic TIS
focus hUPER GAR TOU AGAQOU
verb TOLMAi APOQANEIN
1Cor. 15:3 παρέδωκα γὰρ ὑμῖν ἐν πρώτοις, ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον, ὅτι Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς
1Cor. 15:3 PAREDWKA GAR hUMIN EN PRWTOIS, hO KAI PARELABON, hOTI CRISTOS APEQANEN hUPER TWN hAMARTIWN hHMWN KATA TAS GRAFAS
Topic CRISTOS
verb APEQANEN
focus ?
I think that hUPER TWN hAMARTIWN is not in focus here.
More from Sophocles Electra:
S.El 1493-96
{ΑΙ.} Τί δ' ἐς δόμους ἄγεις με; πῶς, τόδ' εἰ καλὸν
τοὔργον, σκότου δεῖ, κοὐ πρόχειρος εἶ κτανεῖν;
{ΟΡ.} Μὴ τάσσε· χώρει δ' ἔνθαπερ κατέκτανες
πατέρα τὸν ἀμόν, ὡς <ἂν> ἐν ταὐτῷ θάνῃς.
S.El 1493-96
{AI.} TI D' ES DOMOUS AGEIS ME; PWS, TOD' EI KALON
TOU)RGON, SKOTOU DEI, KOU) PROCEIROS EI KTANEIN;
{OR.} MH TASSE· CWREI D' ENQAPER KATEKTANES
PATERA TON AMON, hWS <AN> EN TAU)TWi QANHiS.
S.El 1493-6 translation by Helma Dik
Ae.
Why do you force me into the house? If this act is honorable,
why must it be in darkness. and why are you not ready to kill me?
Or.
Give me no orders! Go to where you killed
my father, so that you may die in the same place!
the second half of the last line hWS <AN> EN TAU)TWi QANHiS
topic [Aegisthus] zero encoding i.e. verb inflection
focus EN TAUTWi
verb QANHiS
The crucial issue is not *that* Aegisthus will be killed *where* Aegisthus will be killed and why.
A couple of examples from John's Gospel.
John 11:50 οὐδὲ λογίζεσθε ὅτι συμφέρει ὑμῖν ἵνα εἷς ἄνθρωπος ἀποθάνῃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ ἔθνος ἀπόληται. 51 τοῦτο δὲ ἀφ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ οὐκ εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ ἀρχιερεὺς ὢν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου ἐπροφήτευσεν ὅτι ἔμελλεν Ἰησοῦς ἀποθνῄσκειν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους,
John 11:50 OUDE LOGIZESQE hOTI SUMFEREI hUMIN hINA hEIS ANQRWPOS APOQANHi hUPER TOU LAOU KAI MH hOLON TO EQNOS APOLHTAI. 51 TOUTO DE AF᾿ hEAUTOU OUK EIPEN, ALLA ARCIEREUS WN TOU ENIAUTOU EKEINOU EPROFHTEUSEN hOTI EMELLEN IHSOUS APOQNHiSKEIN hUPER TOU EQNOUS,
In verse 50a
topic hEIS ANQRWPOS
focus hEIS
verb APOQANHi
remainder hUPER TOU LAOU
v 50b
topic hOLON TO EQNOS
forcus hOLON
verb APOLHTAI
v 51d
topic IHSOUS
verb APOQNHiSKEIN
remainder hUPER TOU EQNOUS
I can see several problems here. There is a contrast between hEIS and hOLON. Perhaps topic and focus should be identical hEIS ANQRWPOS and hOLON TO EQNOS. I could also see someone making an argument in favor of taking hUPER TOU LAOU and hUPER TOU EQNOUS as focus constituents but I don't think that argument should prevail.
John 18:14 ἦν δὲ Καϊάφας ὁ συμβουλεύσας τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ὅτι συμφέρει ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ἀποθανεῖν ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ.
John 18:14 HN DE KAIAFAS hO SUMBOULEUSAS TOIS IOUDAIOIS hOTI SUMFEREI hENA ANQRWPON APOQANEIN hUPER TOU LAOU.
from Hebrews,
Heb. 2:9 τὸν δὲ βραχύ τι παρ᾿ ἀγγέλους ἠλαττωμένον βλέπομεν Ἰησοῦν διὰ τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφανωμένον, ὅπως χάριτι θεοῦ ὑπὲρ παντὸς γεύσηται θανάτου.
Heb. 2:9 TON DE BRACU TI PAR᾿ AGGELOUS HLATTWMENON BLEPOMEN IHSOUN DIA TO PAQHMA TOU QANATOU DOXHi KAI TIMHi ESTEFANWMENON, hOPWS CARITI QEOU hUPER PANTOS GEUSHTAI QANATOU.
(setting) CARITI QEOU
topic [IHSOUS]
focus hUPER PANTOS
verb GEUSHTAI
remainder QANATOU
I have several reasons to suspect that this analysis of Heb. 2:9 is wrong.
Elizabeth Kline
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list