[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: What is a Greek Sentence?

Micheal Palmer wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>
 This is what linguists call a recursive syntactic process. For example, a
clause can contain a noun (N) and a verb (V). But it can also contain
another [subordinate] clause (C), which can contain an N and a V, or an N,
a V and a C, which can contain...

This ***recursive nature of the clause***, combined with the extensive
morphological marking for case and the intricate use of pronouns,
conjunctions, and other markers of cohesion means that the Greek sentence
can develop a level of complexity which often makes it indistinguishable
from the paragraph.

I do think, though, that there is a legitimate place for the notion
'sentence' when talking about hellenistic Greek. There are clear compenents
to most paragraphs. (As Carl has pointed out, the clarity varies
considerably from one author to another.) Some clauses in a paragraph hold
a much tighter semantic and syntactic connection with one another than with
other clauses in the same paragraph. While the sentence is difficult to
define in such a way that the definition covers every possible occurrance,
we can define the core of what a sentence is--as Carl put it, a subject and
a predicate (with or without a verb). . ***This is actually a definition of a
clause, but it can be expanded to include the sentence once we incorporate
Clayton's comments on recursion.***
>>>>>>>>

Are you saying here (see***) that K. Greek sentences are recursive but clauses are not? 

I think that I have located one major source of confusion (my own) on the subject of sentences in K. 
Greek. After reading Micheal's post I pulled out Stanely E. Porter (Idioms of the Greek New 
Testament, Sheffield, second edition, 1995) and read his chapters on clauses and his definition of 
clauses in the glossary. 

It appears that my working definition of a clause is eccentric. (Please hold your applause, laughter, 
whatever.) My working definition of a clause included the notion of recursion so that a *main 
clause*  attached to one or more dependent clauses was considered to *include* the dependent 
clauses as part of it's structure. This does not seem to be the way that Porter uses the term clause. 
Porter appears to view dependent clauses as *connected to* but not *part of* the main clause.

If this is the case then my problem of distinguishing a K. Greek sentence from a K. Greek clause 
might hinge on revising my working definition of clause to bring it into accord with common usage.

Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
Follow-Ups: