επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Semantic Range, Lexicography, and other approaches to word meaning - in general, or for particular words.

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby David Lim » August 3rd, 2012, 1:29 am

I just found a book to which I have access, "Greek Prepositions: From Antiquity to the Present" by Pietro Bortone in 2010 (I note that it was mentioned at http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2010-July/053896.html), that says:
5.4.5 wrote:This applies to most other prepositions too. Similar semantic equivalences can be seen (cf. Blass and Debrunner 1979: 185) in

διά + accusative / διά + genitive (the dative not being a possibility altogether)
ὑπό + accusative / ὑπό + genitive (the dative not being a possibility altogether)

The results are equivalences such as

(5.28) ἐπί + accusative:

   ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον καθήμενος   (Rev. 4:2)

   ‘sitting on the throne’

(5.29) ἐπί + genitive:

   καθήμενον ἐπὶ θρόνου   (Isa. 6:1)

   ‘sitting on the throne’

(5.30) ἐπί + dative:

   καθήμενος ἐπὶ τῳ̑ θρόνῳ   (Rev. 21:5)

   ‘sitting on the throne’

5.5 wrote:In summary, in post‐classical usage we see the tendencies detected in Classical and pre‐Classical Greek strengthened:

• cases have a long history of syncretism, and the dative now looks particularly weak;

• at earlier stages, plain cases sufficed to express spatial meanings, but now spatial meanings are expressed by prepositions (added to cases);

• however, cases appear to be losing their individual significance; this is also happening when they are inside a prepositional phrase;

• there are very many prepositions (of different date), including many synonyms;

• prepositions fall into two groups, and the “improper” type (ex‐adverbs), which is the newer group, is being used more and more frequently (at times even compounding the “improper” prepositions with a “proper” one); their inventory is also expanding, thanks to new creations;

• “proper” prepositions are, to some extent, ousting one another (i.e. a number are becoming obsolete), but are mainly replaced by “improper” prepositions;

• most importantly, the “improper” prepositions tend to have a spatial sense, while the “proper” ones that are replaced by “improper” ones in spatial uses are increasingly confined to non‐spatial uses.

So I try to distinguish between the uses of different cases as far as possible, but I see no reason to assume that there must always be a difference, given the widespread occurrence of apparently equivalent formulations, even as others such as Pietro mentioned. I would be interested to see what BDF says that Pietro quoted, since I don't have access to it. In particular I think "δια + acc." / "because of" is clearly distinct from "δια + gen." / "through (direction / channel)" in the NT.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 660
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby Louis L Sorenson » August 11th, 2012, 12:52 pm

I think there is one place each the synoptic writers use a different case of ἐπί in the same passage referring to the same object, but I can't find that passage for now. Here are some more examples of ἐπί's case becoming irrelevant....the classical distinction is movement towards (acc.) and position on (gen./dat.). I personally find it hard to predict the use of the dative versus the genitive. Anyways, here are some more examples:

Mk 6.48 ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης *var. τὴν _ην
Mt 14.25 ἦλθεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν.
Jn θεωροῦσιν τὸν Ἰησοῦν περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης *var. τὴν _ην

Mt 14.19 καὶ κελεύσας τοὺς ὄχλους ἀνακλιθῆναι ἐπὶ τοῦ χόρτου,
Mk 6.39 καὶ ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ.

Mt 15.35 καὶ παραγγείλας τῷ ὄχλῳ ἀναπεσεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν
Mk 8.6 καὶ παραγγέλλει τῷ ὄχλῳ ἀναπεσεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς·
Louis L Sorenson
 
Posts: 452
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 9:21 pm
Location: Burnsville, MN, USA

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby David Lim » August 11th, 2012, 11:49 pm

Louis L Sorenson wrote:I think there is one place each the synoptic writers use a different case of ἐπί in the same passage referring to the same object, but I can't find that passage for now. Here are some more examples of ἐπί's case becoming irrelevant....the classical distinction is movement towards (acc.) and position on (gen./dat.). I personally find it hard to predict the use of the dative versus the genitive.


I think the relevance of the case depends on the semantic domain. For example it seems that only the accusative is used for "to (destination / target)" (Mt 3:13, 6:27, 10:34, 12:49, 21:19, 22:9, 24:16, Mk 5:21, 6:53, 15:22, ...), including "επι το αυτο" = "together (location)" (Mt 22:34, Lk 17:35, Acts 1:15, 2:1,44, 3:1, 4:26, 1 Cor 7:5, 11:20, 14:23), and "against (opposition)" (Mt 10:21, 12:26, 24:7, 26:55, Mk 3:24,25,26, 10:11, 13:8,12, 14:48, ...).

Louis L Sorenson wrote:Anyways, here are some more examples:

Mk 6.48 ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης *var. τὴν _ην
Mt 14.25 ἦλθεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν.
Jn θεωροῦσιν τὸν Ἰησοῦν περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης *var. τὴν _ην

Mt 14.19 καὶ κελεύσας τοὺς ὄχλους ἀνακλιθῆναι ἐπὶ τοῦ χόρτου,
Mk 6.39 καὶ ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ.

Mt 15.35 καὶ παραγγείλας τῷ ὄχλῳ ἀναπεσεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν
Mk 8.6 καὶ παραγγέλλει τῷ ὄχλῳ ἀναπεσεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς·


Thanks for this! I missed Mt 15:35 and Mk 8:6. I am guessing that there could be a slight difference between the dative and the genitive for location. I am guessing that perhaps the dative is used when specifying a position relative to another object, while the accusative and genitive are used interchangeably for generic location (when there are no ambiguities due to other semantic domains). Thus you should never see "επι τη γη". However, for some things like "grass" both mean essentially the same, "right on the grass" and "on the grassy place" respectively, thus the apparent interchangeability. I am compiling as complete a list, specifying which semantic domains are covered by which cases, and I will post it when I am done. This is what I have so far, covering all of Matthew and Mark and a few other places (parallels with different case, if any, are noted in the second line):

Accusative
{ onto / on } (direction of action)
(Mt 3:16, 5:39,45, 10:13,29, 12:28, 13:5,7,8,20,23,48, 17:6, 21:44, 23:36, 26:7,39, Mk 1:10, 4:5,16,20, 15:24?)
on (location of action or object)
(Mt 4:5, 5:15,23, 9:9,18, 7:24,25,26, 11:29, 12:18, 13:2, 14:19,28,29, 18:12, 21:5, 23:4, 24:2, 26:50, 27:25,29,45, Mk 2:14, 4:21,38, 8:25, 10:16, 11:13, 14:46, 15:33, 16:18, Jn 3:36)
(Mt 14:19(Byz); dat. in Mk 6:39; gen. in NU) (Mt 14:26(Byz); gen. in 25(Byz),26(NU), Mk 6:48) (Mt 15:35; gen. in Mk 8:6) (Mt 19:28; gen. in 28, Lk 20:30) (Mk 11:2; dat. in 7(Byz)) (Lk 5:36; dat. in Mt 9:16, Mk 2:21) (Rev 14:14; gen. in Rev 14:15)
to (destination / target)
(Mt 3:13, 6:27, 10:34, 12:49, 21:19, 22:9, 24:16, Mk 5:21, 6:53, 15:22,46, 16:2, Jn 19:33, Acts 11:21, 2 Tim 4:4)
against (hostile opposition)
(Mt 10:21, 12:26, 24:7, 26:55, Mk 3:24,25,26, 10:11, 13:8,12, 14:48)
before (in the presence of someone)
(Mt 27:27, 2 Thes 1:10)
(Mt 10:18; gen. in Mk 13:9)
for (period of time)
(Mt 9:15, 25:40,45)
upon (occasion in time)
(Mk 15:1(Byz), Lk 10:35, Acts 3:1, 4:5)
{ on / in } (object of thought)
(Mk 9:12,13, Acts 9:42, 11:17, 16:31, 22:19, 27:43, Rom 4:5,24)
(Mt 15:32, Mk 8:2, 9:22; dat. in Mt 14:14, Mk 6:34(Byz))
for (objective)
(Mt 3:7)
over (in authority)
(Mt 25:21; gen. in 21)
επι το αυτο
= together (location) (adv.)
(Mt 22:34, Lk 17:35, Acts 1:15, 2:1,44, 3:1, 4:26, 1 Cor 7:5, 11:20, 14:23)

Dative
upon (on the basis of / in reliance on) (basis)
(Mt 4:4, 16:18, 18:5, 19:9, 24:5, Mk 1:22, 9:37,39, 13:6, Lk 5:5)
(Heb 10:28; gen. in 1 Tim 5:19, 2 Cor 13:1)
on (position of the object)
(Mt 14:8,11, Mk 6:25,28,39,55, 13:2)
(Mt 9:16, Mk 2:21(Byz); acc. in Lk 5:36, Mk 2:21(NU)) (Mk 2:4(Byz); not in NU) (Mk 5:33(Byz); not in NU) (Mk 6:39; acc. in Mt 14:19(Byz); gen. in Mt 14:19(NU)) (Mk 11:7(Byz); acc. in 2,7(NU))
just at (location)
(Mt 24:33, Mk 13:29, Jn 5:2)
{ upon / besides } (in addition to) (addition)
(Mt 25:20,22)
{ on account of / over } (reason)
(Mt 7:28, 18:13, 22:33, Mk 3:5, 10:22,24, 11:18, 12:17, Acts 13:12, Rom 10:19, 2 Cor 7:13)
{ on / in } (object of thought)
(Mt 18:26,29, 27:42, Mk 6:52?, Lk 24:25, Rom 9:33, 10:11, 1 Tim 1:16, 1 Pet 2:6)
(Mt 14:14, Mk 6:34(Byz); acc. in Mt 15:32, Mk 6:34(NU), 8:2, 9:22)
for (objective)
(Mt 26:50(Byz); acc. in NU)
over (in authority)
(Mt 24:47; gen. in 45)
upon (occasion in time)
(Jn 4:27)

Genitive
on (location of action or object)
(Mt 4:6, 6:10,19, 9:2,6, 10:27, 16:19, 18:18,19, 21:19, 23:2,9,35, 24:3,17,30, 25:31, 26:12,64, 27:19, 28:18, Mk 2:10, 4:1,26,31, 6:47, 7:30, 8:4, 9:3,20, 11:4, 13:15, 14:35,51)
(Mt 14:25(Byz), Mk 6:48,49; acc. in Mt 14:25(NU),26(Byz)) (Mt 19:28; acc. in 28) (Mk 8:6; acc. in Mt 15:35) (Rev 14:15; acc. in Rev 14:14)
upon (on the basis of / in reliance on) (basis)
(Mt 18:16, Mk 12:14,32, 2 Cor 13:1)
(1 Tim 5:19, 2 Cor 13:1; dat. in Heb 10:28)
before (in the presence of someone)
(Mt 28:14)
(Mk 13:9; acc. in Mt 10:18)
in the time of (era of time)
(Mt 1:11, Mk 2:26)
over (in authority)
(Mt 2:22)
(Mt 24:45; dat. in 47) (Mt 25:21; acc. in 21)
on (topic)
(Mk 12:26)
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 660
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby David Lim » August 12th, 2012, 5:22 am

David Lim wrote:I think the relevance of the case depends on the semantic domain. For example it seems that only the accusative is used for "to (destination / target)" (Mt 3:13, 6:27, 10:34, 12:49, 21:19, 22:9, 24:16, Mk 5:21, 6:53, 15:22, ...), including "επι το αυτο" = "together (location)" (Mt 22:34, Lk 17:35, Acts 1:15, 2:1,44, 3:1, 4:26, 1 Cor 7:5, 11:20, 14:23), and "against (opposition)" (Mt 10:21, 12:26, 24:7, 26:55, Mk 3:24,25,26, 10:11, 13:8,12, 14:48, ...).


Apparently the second is wrong; the accusative is used in Mt 10:21, Mk 13:12 and the latter half of Lk 12:53 while the dative is used in Lk 12:52 and the first half of Lk 12:53!
[Byz] διαμερισθησεται πατηρ επι υιω και υιος επι πατρι μητηρ επι θυγατρι και θυγατηρ επι μητρι πενθερα επι την νυμφην αυτης και νυμφη επι την πενθεραν αυτης
[NU] διαμερισθησονται πατηρ επι υιω και υιος επι πατρι μητηρ επι θυγατερα και θυγατηρ επι την μητερα πενθερα επι την νυμφην αυτης και νυμφη επι την πενθεραν
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 660
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby Tony Pope » August 15th, 2012, 6:18 am

David Lim wrote:Accusative
{ onto / on } (direction of action)
(Mt 3:16, 5:39,45, 10:13,29, 12:28, 13:5,7,8,20,23,48, 17:6, 21:44, 23:36, 26:7,39, Mk 1:10, 4:5,16,20, 15:24?)
on (location of action or object)
(Mt 4:5, 5:15,23, 9:9,18, 7:24,25,26, 11:29, 12:18, 13:2, 14:19,28,29, 18:12, 21:5, 23:4, 24:2, 26:50, 27:25,29,45, Mk 2:14, 4:21,38, 8:25, 10:16, 11:13, 14:46, 15:33, 16:18, Jn 3:36)
(Mt 14:19(Byz); dat. in Mk 6:39; gen. in NU) (Mt 14:26(Byz); gen. in 25(Byz),26(NU), Mk 6:48) (Mt 15:35; gen. in Mk 8:6) (Mt 19:28; gen. in 28, Lk 20:30) (Mk 11:2; dat. in 7(Byz)) (Lk 5:36; dat. in Mt 9:16, Mk 2:21) (Rev 14:14; gen. in Rev 14:15)
to (destination / target)
(Mt 3:13, 6:27, 10:34, 12:49, 21:19, 22:9, 24:16, Mk 5:21, 6:53, 15:22,46, 16:2, Jn 19:33, Acts 11:21, 2 Tim 4:4)


I've not had time to look through your categories in great detail but I’d like to make two suggestions.

Many of the verses listed in your second Accusative category really belong in the first. This is important because otherwise, although you are probably right that there is confusion of the cases in some examples, you may be missing distinctions that are still maintained in NT Greek. I believe you should pay closer attention to the kind of verb that occurs in the clause. For example, in Matt 4.5 the verb is a causative form of the motion verb ἵστημι, meaning “to cause to stand”, “to set”. Although in such a case ἐπί is to be translated in English as “on”, it is not location of action but direction of action, just as you get with an ordinary motion verb like ἔρχομαι in Matt 3.16. Similarly with τίθημι in Matt 5.15, προσφέρω in Matt 5.23, etc. Thus, IMO, your second category should be markedly less populated than at present.

Secondly, there are some examples where ἐπί refers not to superposition “on, onto” but immediate juxtaposition “by, up to”. For example, I wonder if you are construing ἐπ’ αὐτὴν in Mark 11.13 with the verb εὗρεν “he found”, so as to give location of action. I suggest on considerations of phrase order that grammarians and commentators are right when they construe it with the preceding motion verb ἐλθὼν. “When he came right up to it, he found …” This example seems to go in your third category, destination/target. It’s used for situations where the motion ends right up close to the target but, unlike εἰς, not inside it. Mark 16.2 is another example. In contrast, when the motion is targeted to a person, the usual preposition is, of course, πρός (implying face to face), but you can also get ἐπί with a person, as in Mark 5.21 or John 19.33, again with the nuance of immediate juxtaposition (so the lexica, even if it is not discernible in the English versions).
Tony Pope
 
Posts: 25
Joined: July 14th, 2011, 6:20 pm

Re: επι - Matt 14:14, 15:32; 4:6, 14:11

Postby David Lim » August 15th, 2012, 11:24 pm

Tony Pope wrote:[...]

I've not had time to look through your categories in great detail but I’d like to make two suggestions.

Many of the verses listed in your second Accusative category really belong in the first. This is important because otherwise, although you are probably right that there is confusion of the cases in some examples, you may be missing distinctions that are still maintained in NT Greek. I believe you should pay closer attention to the kind of verb that occurs in the clause. For example, in Matt 4.5 the verb is a causative form of the motion verb ἵστημι, meaning “to cause to stand”, “to set”. Although in such a case ἐπί is to be translated in English as “on”, it is not location of action but direction of action, just as you get with an ordinary motion verb like ἔρχομαι in Matt 3.16. Similarly with τίθημι in Matt 5.15, προσφέρω in Matt 5.23, etc. Thus, IMO, your second category should be markedly less populated than at present.


Yes I noted this, but I decided to categorize them as I did because of instances like Matt 6:5, 12:46-47, 16:28, 18:2, Mark 10:16, 15:47, 16:6, where the verb is clearly not one indicating direction but a location.

Tony Pope wrote:Secondly, there are some examples where ἐπί refers not to superposition “on, onto” but immediate juxtaposition “by, up to”. For example, I wonder if you are construing ἐπ’ αὐτὴν in Mark 11.13 with the verb εὗρεν “he found”, so as to give location of action. I suggest on considerations of phrase order that grammarians and commentators are right when they construe it with the preceding motion verb ἐλθὼν. “When he came right up to it, he found …” This example seems to go in your third category, destination/target. It’s used for situations where the motion ends right up close to the target but, unlike εἰς, not inside it. Mark 16.2 is another example. In contrast, when the motion is targeted to a person, the usual preposition is, of course, πρός (implying face to face), but you can also get ἐπί with a person, as in Mark 5.21 or John 19.33, again with the nuance of immediate juxtaposition (so the lexica, even if it is not discernible in the English versions).


Yes, if taken that way, it would be under the category of "to (destination / target)". I am not sure there is unambiguous reason for taking "επ αυτην" to modify "ελθων", and had not read it that way, since many times "ελθων" is used just by itself, thus my classification, though your suggestion is certainly possible.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 660
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Previous

Return to Word Meanings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest