Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby cwconrad » November 12th, 2012, 7:51 am

Alan Patterson wrote:Randall,

You wrote:

Nevertheless, functional communication is able to take place. [spelling changed]

Would you say that people communicate at the prototypical level? I think there is far more functional clarity at this level but, of course, it lacks nuance or precision. Hence, Wittgenstein's comment: There are no genuine disagreements, only vague and undefined terms. [paraphrased]


Yup, yup! Means we talk past each other and neither hear/grasp what the other is saying/writing nor even know whether we agree or disagree. Reminds me of the time my wife woke up and declared, "I am looking at what I don't got!"

Heraclitus, fragment 1:
(τοῦ δὲ) λόγου τοῦδ' ἐόντος ἀεὶ ἀξύνετοι γίνονται ἄνθρωποι καὶ πρόσθεν ἢ ἀκοῦσαι καὶ ἀκούσαντες τὸ πρῶτον· γινομένων γὰρ (πάντων) κατὰ τὸν λόγον τόνδε ἀπείροισιν ἐοίκασι, πειρώμενοι καὶ ἐπέων καὶ ἔργων τοιούτων, ὁκοίων ἐγὼ διηγεῦμαι κατὰ φύσιν διαιρέων ἕκαστον καὶ φράζων ὅκως ἔχει. τοὺς δὲ ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους λανθάνει ὁκόσα ἐγερθέντες ποιοῦσιν, ὅκωσπερ ὁκόσα εὕδοντες ἐπιλανθάνονται
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
… ἐπειδὴ καὶ τὸν οἶνον ἠξίους
πίνειν, συνεκποτέ’ ἐστί σοι καὶ τὴν τρύγα Aristophanes, Plutus 1085
cwconrad
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » November 12th, 2012, 8:03 am

RandallButh wrote:...[ίδi] does not sound like an actual verb...

There are however forms like ἴδει, ἴδη, ἴδῃ, ἴδοι, οἴδει, which may be verbal forms. (Or even forms like ἔδει, ἔδη, ἔδῃ, ᾄδει - being considered here at least for their terminations).

RandallButh wrote:... the time period is critical. After 200 CE ...

Yet, in the case of Luke, we are speaking of 60-70 CE; I wonder if this could be relevant in any way.

RandallButh wrote:... "Koine ears"...

I wonder if the 'koine ears' of 200 BC could be assimilated with those of 200 CE. There was perhaps a continuous floating tendency, from few alterations at the beginning of koine era, to neraly what Modern Greek is today, by the end of it.

RandallButh wrote:... such precision in definition is rarely needed or helpful...

Yet, every article or chapter on Greek phonetics would define with relatively good precision certain standards concerning pronounciation; precision is needed and hepful, I believe, at least at the level of teaching. My concern would be simply what to choose from the wide variety of pronounciation practices of Koine era. If we consider its beginnings, there are few alterations, probably generated by non-Greeks living in various places of the Greek empire, who adopted the language; by that time, those people were not to be considered 'native speakers', I think. I expect teachers of Greek in those times would stick with the old ways in their teaching Greek as a foreign language, rather than with the changes which continually entered 'the market' and altered the old ways of pronounciation.

Take these two examples of how some people pronounce the English language of today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-QDrt-hyLM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCQvgOwBSSU

Such trends could very well be considered as a 'koinenisation' of English. Even though there is a significant number of teachers whose opinion is that in teaching a foreign language substitute sounds could very well be employed instead of some of the special sounds of the language under study, my opinion is that keeping up with the original is always more advisable. (Any language has but a few sounds that are really 'special' as compared with any other language).

As for Koine Greek, for any given period of time, if I have to choose between those who are bringing in new ways and those who advocate the old ways, I would always opt for the latter.
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby cwconrad » November 12th, 2012, 8:32 am

Vasile Stancu wrote:
RandallButh wrote:...[ίδi] does not sound like an actual verb...

There are however forms like ἴδει, ἴδη, ἴδῃ, ἴδοι, οἴδει, which may be verbal forms. (Or even forms like ἔδει, ἔδη, ἔδῃ, ᾄδει - being considered here at least for their terminations)..


Out of curiosity, I wonder where you have seen ἴδει or οἴδει? I've seen ῎Ιδη (proper name of a mountain near Troy) and I've seen οἰδεῖ (from οἰδέω) and εἴδει (plupf. of οἶδα), but I haven't seen ἴδη as a verb form. Accentuation makes a lot of difference.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
… ἐπειδὴ καὶ τὸν οἶνον ἠξίους
πίνειν, συνεκποτέ’ ἐστί σοι καὶ τὴν τρύγα Aristophanes, Plutus 1085
cwconrad
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » November 12th, 2012, 11:32 am

cwconrad wrote:...I wonder where you have seen ἴδει or οἴδει ... but I haven't seen ἴδη as a verb form...


I found them as I searched 'Diogenes' software, which shows as follows:

Perseus analyses of οἴδει:

οἰδάω (swell): pres imperat act 2nd sg (attic epic ionic)
οἰδάω (swell): imperf ind act 3rd sg (attic epic ionic)
οἰδέω (swell): pres imperat act 2nd sg (attic epic)
οἰδέω (swell): imperf ind act 3rd sg (attic epic)

Perseus analyses of ἴδει:

ῑδει,ἰδέω (know): imperf ind act 3rd sg (attic epic)
ἰδέω (know): pres imperat act 2nd sg (attic epic)
ἰδέω (know): imperf ind act 3rd sg (attic epic)

Perseus analyses of ἴδη:

ῑδη,ἰδέω (know): imperf ind act 3rd sg (doric aeolic)
ἰδέω (know): pres imperat act 2nd sg (doric aeolic)
ἰδέω (know): imperf ind act 3rd sg (doric aeolic)
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby cwconrad » November 12th, 2012, 11:57 am

Thanks, Vasile, for the information. I should have guessed that these would be dialect forms.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
… ἐπειδὴ καὶ τὸν οἶνον ἠξίους
πίνειν, συνεκποτέ’ ἐστί σοι καὶ τὴν τρύγα Aristophanes, Plutus 1085
cwconrad
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby RandallButh » November 12th, 2012, 2:32 pm

Alan Patterson wrote:Randall,

You wrote:

Nevertheless, functional communication is able to take place. [spelling changed]

Would you say that people communicate at the prototypical level? I think there is far more functional clarity at this level but, of course, it lacks nuance or precision. Hence, Wittgenstein's comment: There are no genuine disagreements, only vague and undefined terms. [paraphrased]


Ultimately one could claim that prototypicality provides for communication. However, as pointed out, that is an unnecessary hairsplitting at the macro level of most daily life.
You don't need prototypicality to discuss 'went' in "I went to the store." Even though my 'went' and your 'went' will surely differ somewhere in a few-million word sampling of our speech.
RandallButh
 
Posts: 571
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Jason Hare » November 17th, 2012, 8:30 am

Vasile Stancu wrote:
RandallButh wrote:... the time period is critical. After 200 CE ...

Yet, in the case of Luke, we are speaking of 60-70 CE; I wonder if this could be relevant in any way.


First, we do not have copies of Luke from 60-70 CE. Second, the claim that it was written so early is simply unfounded. It would be best not to use such assumptions as the basis for other arguments.
Jason A. Hare
Rehovot, Israel
Jason Hare
 
Posts: 378
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Rehovot, Israel

Previous

Return to Syntax and Grammar

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests