ἐς φῶς σὸν

The forum for those who still struggle with morphology, syntax, and idiom, or who wish to discuss basic questions about the meaning of Greek texts, syntax, or words.
Forum rules
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

πάλι is a Modern Greek form

Post by Stephen Hughes » March 19th, 2014, 6:18 am

Mike Burke wrote:
Barry Hofstetter wrote:I assume you mean πἀλιν?
No, I meant πάλι, which is defined in my Greek dictionary as meaning "again."
Use a Classical Greek dictionary, not a Modern Greek one, when you read Euripides.
0 x


Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1474
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: ἐς φῶς σὸν

Post by Barry Hofstetter » March 19th, 2014, 7:30 am

Mike Burke wrote:
No, I meant πάλι, which is defined in my Greek dictionary as meaning "again."
Then you are citing a word which does not exist in ancient Greek. It's modern Greek, and derived from πάλιν, but not necessarily the same thing.
Mike Burke wrote:I can see how "set" (which seems to be the basic meaning of καταστήσω) plus "again" (or any word with a similar meaning) could mean "restore," but I don't see how you arive at that meaning without some such word in the surrounding context.
Because context is more than just certain key words which affect meaning (although the presence of key words can be a big part of the context). It's not simply enough to understand the lexical definition of an item that is used in a text, one must understand the text and the flow discourse, the structure, the overall message the author is attempting to communicate through the text. Then you can see how the usage under discussion fits the context perfectly. That is one reason I suggested you check published translations by classicists, experts on that particular play of Euripides, who know what they are about.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:BTW, there is no such thing as "inherent" meaning in a word -- only usage in context.
Mike Burke wrote:That's not true.

In certain contexts the word "dog" can mean a morally reprehensible person, or a sexually active male, but if I were asked the meaning of the word by someone just learning English, I would say "a furry, four footed animal."

That's the basic, literal meaning inherent in the word (and there even when a human being is figuratively compared to such an animal either favorably or unfavorably.)
No, this is not the case. Words do not have "inherent meaning." They are, after all, simply a sequence of sounds to which "'meaning" is assigned conventionally by speakers of the language. What you have is more or less frequent usages of the word in particular contexts. For your example, you simply cite the most frequent usage of the word. Other usages may derive from that one, but once they do so, they obtain, as it were, a life of their own, and those usages must be understood contextually apart from other usages.
The captain can run the ship with a run in her stocking while her crewmembers run a race on the run on deck 10.
What does run mean? :shock:

I suggest you pick up a good book on lexical semantics, such as Moises Silva's Biblical Words and their Meaning. http://www.amazon.com/Biblical-Words-Th ... 0310479819

Mike Burke wrote:I want to understand that citation better, and I'd like to know what you (and they) saw.

I'd like to know "why" you translated it "restore" in E.Alc.362, when (I assume) you wouldn't translate it that way in Matthew 25:21?
I have largely answered the question in the general sense above. It's context, more broadly understood. In the context of Alc. 362, Admetus is comparing what he would like to do with Alcestis with Orpheus and Eurydice. Orpheus attempted to bring back his wife from the underworld and very nearly succeeded, but failing at the last, and Admetus is saying that if he had the same chance, he would succeed in bringing her back. Do you see how the idea of "restore, bring back" fits the context (and a usage clearly established by the lexicographers)? Now let's look at Matt 5:21:

ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ· Εὖ, δοῦλε ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἦς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω· εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν χαρὰν τοῦ κυρίου σου.

First, check the overall context and structure of the narrative (the story) in which the statement takes place. What's being said? Secondly, there is a big syntactic clue here as to the use in context, and that is the prepositional phrase ἐπὶ πολλῶν with καταστήσω. This, particularly in the story we have here, limits the possible semantic choices to something like "set" or "appoint," "I will set/appoint you over many things," i.e., the servant will be in some sense in charge of them.
Mike Burke wrote:Are you saying that a return to some previous state or condition is part of the definition of καταστήσω?
No, I'm saying that this is one possible usage of the word if the context so allows.
Mike Burke wrote:I know some professing Christians who believe in the pre-existence of the soul, and I suspect they'd be delighted if ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἦς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω could legitimately be translated "you have been faithful over a few things, I will again set you over many."
We do not discuss theological issues on B-Greek. I will suggest that this particular story has little to contribute to such a discussion.
Mike Burke wrote:Is that a legitamate translation?

If not, why not?

If you could answer theses questions for an admitted novice here, I would be truly grateful.
Before attempting to validate a translation, you must understand what the Greek is actually saying...
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Clarification of the use of πάλι

Post by Stephen Hughes » March 19th, 2014, 10:33 am

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Mike Burke wrote:No, I meant πάλι, which is defined in my Greek dictionary as meaning "again."
Then you are citing a word which does not exist in ancient Greek. It's modern Greek, and derived from πάλιν, but not necessarily the same thing.
Barry, for the record, πάλι is a poetic variant in Ancient Greek, but it is the dictionary headword in a standard Modern Greek (δημοτική - dimiotiki) dictionary.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1474
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Clarification of the use of πάλι

Post by Barry Hofstetter » March 19th, 2014, 11:11 am

Stephen Hughes wrote:
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Mike Burke wrote:No, I meant πάλι, which is defined in my Greek dictionary as meaning "again."
Then you are citing a word which does not exist in ancient Greek. It's modern Greek, and derived from πάλιν, but not necessarily the same thing.
Barry, for the record, πάλι is a poetic variant in Ancient Greek, but it is the dictionary headword in a standard Modern Greek (δημοτική - dimiotiki) dictionary.
Picky, picky... Why don't you go parse out in the middle of a busy street... :mrgreen:
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

καθιστάναι as reinstate cf. ἀποκαθιστάναι

Post by Stephen Hughes » March 19th, 2014, 1:42 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:Picky, picky... Why don't you go parse out in the middle of a busy street...
Well, I suppose that is an indirect invitation to make a substantive contribution to the conversation. So let's try to do that by asking a slightly intelligent question...

καθιστάναι can be used in the sense of reinstate - not in LSJ explicitly, but it is in Woodhouse - as we can see from Mike's example. Would that "reinstate" sense of καθιστάναι be applicable in any of the NT examples of its use. Of the 21 instances, perhaps only 3 need to be considered (I have made clear in the translations how κατάστασις has the meaning of "state", "enduring condition"):
Romans 5:19 wrote:Ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, οὕτως καὶ διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.
Just as the masses were made to be into the state of being sinners through the failure to be obedient of one person, likewise also the masses were made back into the state of being righteous through the practiced obedience of (another) one.
James 4:4 RP2005 wrote:Μοιχοὶ καὶ μοιχαλίδες, οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ἔχθρα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν; Ὃς ἂν οὖν βουληθῇ φίλος εἶναι τοῦ κόσμου, ἐχθρὸς τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσταται.
You people who cheat on God in your daily lives!!, don't you know that an "affair" with the world is setting yourselves against God to the point of working against Him! Whoever wishes to be on good terms (in a mutually beneficial to-an-fro relationship) with the world has once again entered into the state of being an enemy of God.
I think one needs to appreciate that φιλία can have two meanings here - one related to μοιχοὶ καὶ μοιχαλίδες and the other related to ἔχθρα / ἐχθρὸς.
1Peter 1:8 wrote:Ταῦτα γὰρ ὑμῖν ὑπάρχοντα καὶ πλεονάζοντα, οὐκ ἀργοὺς οὐδὲ ἀκάρπους καθίστησιν εἰς τὴν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ ἐπίγνωσιν.
For when these things (at least) exist and (preferably) are in abundance for you, they do not put you into the state of being unemployed nor unfruitful (as you once were) with regards to the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
ἀποκαθιστάναι is the word that explicitly means "reinstate", "return to the state of being". This verbal form, together with the nominal ἀποκατάστασις πάντων are theologically important in the book of Acts (and in some parts of Patristic Theology) for interpreting the OT in the light of Christ's revelation.
Mike Burke wrote:I started this topic heading because I suspect it has been modified by context here, and I'd like to know which word does the modifying (as I don't see πάλι.)
Mike, the correct Greek of expressing "reinstate" explicitly is not to use the πάλιν that you are suggesting, but to use a preposition prefixed to the verb. The whole consideration of πάλιν is off track. Please ask questions like, "How does Greek express ...... ?". Rather than, "Where is the πάλιν?". If there is no need for the explication of the "again", then the ἀπο- is not used.

FYI, the Modern Greek idiom would probably be to add a ξανα- (from the Koine ἐξανα- which we see in a few NT words) to the front of a verb to express the idea of again - but that is not the case here in this verb. That is possibly because the theological importance of the ἀποκατάστασις in Byzantine theology has kept that form "alive".
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3577
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: ἐς φῶς σὸν

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 19th, 2014, 6:45 pm

Hey, this is the beginner's forum!

Could we perhaps take the advanced stuff elsewhere, and try to help beginners focus on what is most suitable to their needs?
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Mike Burke
Posts: 72
Joined: February 7th, 2014, 8:07 am

Re: ἐς φῶς σὸν

Post by Mike Burke » March 20th, 2014, 1:55 am

Stephen Hughes wrote: καθιστάναι can be used in the sense of reinstate - not in LSJ explicitly, but it is in Woodhouse - as we can see from Mike's example. Would that "reinstate" sense of καθιστάναι be applicable in any of the NT examples of its use.
Is it?

Stephen Hughes wrote: Of the 21 instances, perhaps only 3 need to be considered (I have made clear in the translations how κατάστασις has the meaning of "state", "enduring condition"):
Romans 5:19 wrote:Ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, οὕτως καὶ διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.
Just as the masses were made to be into the state of being sinners through the failure to be obedient of one person, likewise also the masses were made back into the state of being righteous through the practiced obedience of (another) one.
James 4:4 RP2005 wrote:Μοιχοὶ καὶ μοιχαλίδες, οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ἔχθρα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν; Ὃς ἂν οὖν βουληθῇ φίλος εἶναι τοῦ κόσμου, ἐχθρὸς τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσταται.
You people who cheat on God in your daily lives!!, don't you know that an "affair" with the world is setting yourselves against God to the point of working against Him! Whoever wishes to be on good terms (in a mutually beneficial to-an-fro relationship) with the world has once again entered into the state of being an enemy of God.
I think one needs to appreciate that φιλία can have two meanings here - one related to μοιχοὶ καὶ μοιχαλίδες and the other related to ἔχθρα / ἐχθρὸς.
2Peter 1:8 wrote:Ταῦτα γὰρ ὑμῖν ὑπάρχοντα καὶ πλεονάζοντα, οὐκ ἀργοὺς οὐδὲ ἀκάρπους καθίστησιν εἰς τὴν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ ἐπίγνωσιν.
For when these things (at least) exist and (preferably) are in abundance for you, they do not put you into the state of being unemployed nor unfruitful (as you once were) with regards to the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Are these legitimate translations?

Were the masses righteous at some time before coming to Christ, and brought back into that previous condition?

I haven't seen any translation of the New Testament that translates any of these passages the way you've rendered them here.

And does καθιστάναι carry this "reinstate" sense even without being modified by any word or phrase in the immediate context?
Stephen Hughes wrote:ἀποκαθιστάναι is the word that explicitly means "reinstate", "return to the state of being".
But you seem to be saying that καθιστάναι (even by itself, without being modified by anything in the context) carries the same meaning?

Am I misunderstanding you?
Stephen Hughes wrote:Mike, the correct Greek of expressing "reinstate" explicitly is not to use the πάλιν that you are suggesting, but to use a preposition prefixed to the verb. The whole consideration of πάλιν is off track. Please ask questions like, "How does Greek express ...... ?". Rather than, "Where is the πάλιν?". If there is no need for the explication of the "again", then the ἀπο- is not used.
But the ἀπο isn't used in Romans 5:19, James 4:4, or 2 Peter 1:8, so are you saying it isn't needed because καθιστάναι already (all by itself) carries the idea (of repetition)?
0 x

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

I see some progress, Mike.

Post by Stephen Hughes » March 20th, 2014, 8:50 am

Jonathan Robie wrote:Hey, this is the beginner's forum!

Could we perhaps take the advanced stuff elsewhere, and try to help beginners focus on what is most suitable to their needs?
Okay, Mike. Let me give you some simple answers without to many explanations and details.

The meaning of a sentence like, "She married her childhood sweetheart." is pretty clear, I guess.

What is the sense of "marry" in the phrase, "He reconciled with his ex-wife and married her in a private ceremony sometime last month."?

Of course it is that of "remarry", isn't it.

So "marry" can mean "remarry" if given the right circumstances and the right people being involved in the marrying. But that is not all...

What does marry mean in the sentence, "My uncle married us."?

Of course it means that he performed the marriage, doesn't it?

Important question: How do we know which meaning of marry (simple, re-marry, perform a marriage) should we understand?

Answer: It is how we understand it from the other information that we have about the people.
Wrong answer: It is because the verb is in the form "married"

I am very happy Mike, because you are making progress. Up until your last post, you have been looking at the form καταστήσω and thinking that somehow other places where the same form occurred would have the same meaning. Now you are beginning to look at the circumstances in which the verb occurs to find hints to the meaning. That is excellent. Well done!

Linguistic awareness (knowing that one language is not another) is one step on the way to language learning. The next step will be meta-linguistic awareness (learning grammar). Let's do an exercise to build on your linguistic awareness.

First do this exercise in English. You will be given 6 sentences. 3 of the sentences contain verbs that have the same meaning. Which sentences have the same meaning?
  1. The man saw a dog that was off its leash.
  2. The family saw their son off at the station.
  3. It will be a day or so before they know.
  4. They accompanied the new client as far as the door.
  5. He saw that the milk had gone off.
  6. They went together as far as the door.
The answers are at the bottom of this post. Check your answers against mine after you've done the exercise.

The basic form of the verb καταστήσω is καθιστάναι (that is called the infinitive) and it means in general "to put <somebody> into a state of being ...". I'm going to list 10 verses (a-j) and I want you to group them according to whether they have the same meaning of the verb (not the same form):
  1. Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his lord has set (κατέστησεν) over his household, to give them their food in due season?
  2. “Man, who made (κατέστησεν) me a judge or an arbitrator over you?” (Luke 12:14)
  3. "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will set over his household, ...?" (Luke 12:42)
  4. whom we may appoint (καταστήσωμεν / καταστήσομεν) over this business.(Acts 6:3)
  5. He made (κατέστησεν) him governor over Egypt and all his house. (Acts 7:10)
  6. Who made (κατέστησεν) you a ruler and a judge?’—God has sent (ἀπέστειλεν) him as both a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush. (Acts 7:35)
  7. For just as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made (κατεστάθησαν) sinners, even so thus also through the obedience of the one, the many will be made (κατασταθήσονται) righteous. (Romans 5:19)
  8. I left you in Crete for this reason, that you would set in order the things that were lacking, and appoint (ἵνα ... καταστήσῃς) elders in every city (1 Timothy 1:5)
  9. For the law appoints (καθίστησιν) men as high priests who have weakness (Hebrews 7:28)
  10. The world of iniquity among our members is (καθίσταται) the tongue, (James 3:6)
  11. Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself (καθίσταται) an enemy of God. (James 4:4)
[/list]

[Answer to the Quiz: 2, 4, 6 - They all mean "accompany somebody"]
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Mike Burke
Posts: 72
Joined: February 7th, 2014, 8:07 am

Re: ἐς φῶς σὸν

Post by Mike Burke » March 20th, 2014, 12:44 pm

What is the sense of "marry" in the phrase, "He reconciled with his ex-wife and married her in a private ceremony sometime last month."?
The answer is "joined"--he joined himself to his ex-wife last month.
Of course it is that of "remarry", isn't it?
If you want to be explicite, you could say "re-joined," or "remarried," but the idea of repetition isn't part of the basic meaning of either the word "married" or "joined."
So "marry" can mean "remarry" if given the right circumstances and the right people being involved in the marrying.
If something in the context indicates repetition?

Of course.

But repetition's not a basic part of the meaning of the word, is it?
But that is not all...

What does marry mean in the sentence, "My uncle married us."?
It means he "joined" you in holy matrimony, doesn't it?

Isn't a joining the basic meaning of the word "marry"?
Important question: How do we know which meaning of marry (simple, re-marry, perform a marriage) should we understand?

Answer: It is how we understand it from the other information that we have about the people.
You may need some context to determine who is being joined, who is doing the joining, and whether those being joined were ever joined to one another before, but you don't need any context to know that "joined" is the basic meaning of the word "married."
Now, what I'd like to know is whether the idea of repetition is part of the basic meaning of καταστήσω?
The basic form of the verb καταστήσω is καθιστάναι (that is called the infinitive) and it means in general "to put <somebody> into a state of being ...". I'm going to list 10 verses (a-j) and I want you to group them according to whether they have the same meaning of the verb (not the same form):

Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his lord has set (κατέστησεν) over his household, to give them their food in due season?
“Man, who made (κατέστησεν) me a judge or an arbitrator over you?” (Luke 12:14)
"Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will set over his household, ...?" (Luke 12:42)
whom we may appoint (καταστήσωμεν / καταστήσομεν) over this business.(Acts 6:3)
He made (κατέστησεν) him governor over Egypt and all his house. (Acts 7:10)
Who made (κατέστησεν) you a ruler and a judge?’—God has sent (ἀπέστειλεν) him as both a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush. (Acts 7:35)
For just as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made (κατεστάθησαν) sinners, even so thus also through the obedience of the one, the many will be made (κατασταθήσονται) righteous. (Romans 5:19)
I left you in Crete for this reason, that you would set in order the things that were lacking, and appoint (ἵνα ... καταστήσῃς) elders in every city (1 Timothy 1:5)
For the law appoints (καθίστησιν) men as high priests who have weakness (Hebrews 7:28)
The world of iniquity among our members is (καθίσταται) the tongue, (James 3:6)
Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself (καθίσταται) an enemy of God. (James 4:4)
In all the examples you gave, the basic meaning of the verb seems to be to "set," or "place," or "put."

And I don't see any example where the meaning is (necessarily) to "re-set," or "re-place," or "re-put," so that seems not to be part of the basic meaning of the verb.

Am I wrong?
0 x

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3577
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: ἐς φῶς σὸν

Post by Jonathan Robie » March 20th, 2014, 1:10 pm

Mike Burke wrote:You mean if something in the context indicates repetition?
Or in the grammar.
Mike Burke wrote:O.k., but that's not a basic part of the meaning of the word.
Right. It's not just context, it's also the way the grammar works. "He built a house" does not involve repetition. "He built houses" involves repetition. Same verb, same verb form.

Now you *really* need to read a few chapters in a New Testament Greek textbook about Greek tenses and how they interact with the basic meaning of a word. What New Testament Greek textbooks do you have?

I would like to be able to give you homework, things that you should read and try to understand, asking questions when you don't understand the textbook. I don't think B-Greek can substitute for a textbook.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Locked