Discourse Use of Καί
Posted: August 9th, 2013, 11:34 am
I realise this thread is way old, but i didnt want to start a new discussion if there was already a thread. {Mod note: Actually, this involves a different sense of the word καί, so I would have split it anyway. --scc}
Im working through Runge's Discourse Grammar and Wallaces Grammar at the same time and am thoroughly enjoying the contrasting approaches. Regarding και, im still trying to assimilate Steve's points about it being 'unmarked' for semantic continuity/discontinuity. Im going to explain what i think is going on, so could someone correct me where im wrong. Thanks.
Basically, traditional Grammars, like Wallace, will give the 'meanings' of και, e.g. 'and', 'but', 'even' etc. On this approach, when we encounter a 'και', we ask, "is this και Connective, Contrastive, Explanatory, Corellative, etc. The problem is that while these labels are helpful when attempting to translate, enabling an English equivalent to be found, none of them really belong to 'και', that is, they explain distinctions that are only made explicit in an English (or other) translation. When an author uses και, they simply mean to express some form of linkage between terms of 'equal status'. It is unmarked for anything other than 'connectivity' i guess.
In this sense, while it is common to talk about the wide semantic range of και and how it is more 'complex' than 'and' (in a quote in a previous post somewhere"), is it not the case that it is actually less complex. An author could drop a και in there and the word itself would not mark any distinction between Connective, Contrastive, Explanatory, Corellative etc as English would. DOes this not mean it actually has less semantic content rather than more? It seems to me like this kind of problem comes from thinking 'και' means X, Y, and Z in English, rather than thinking what και means in Greek.
Also on a different note, according to Runge and Levinsohn, in Koine narrative, και is the default connective between the units in a narrative. However, in seminary i studied Mark's gospel in Greek and was regularly told that και was likely to be a 'semitism' and thus regularly had no 'translatable force' in English. Both lead to the same conclusion (και will not always be translated into English as the default connector for units of English narrative is Asyndeton) but wont the motivation behind the choice to use και effect our analysis of the discourse (if choice implies meaning).
Im working through Runge's Discourse Grammar and Wallaces Grammar at the same time and am thoroughly enjoying the contrasting approaches. Regarding και, im still trying to assimilate Steve's points about it being 'unmarked' for semantic continuity/discontinuity. Im going to explain what i think is going on, so could someone correct me where im wrong. Thanks.
Basically, traditional Grammars, like Wallace, will give the 'meanings' of και, e.g. 'and', 'but', 'even' etc. On this approach, when we encounter a 'και', we ask, "is this και Connective, Contrastive, Explanatory, Corellative, etc. The problem is that while these labels are helpful when attempting to translate, enabling an English equivalent to be found, none of them really belong to 'και', that is, they explain distinctions that are only made explicit in an English (or other) translation. When an author uses και, they simply mean to express some form of linkage between terms of 'equal status'. It is unmarked for anything other than 'connectivity' i guess.
In this sense, while it is common to talk about the wide semantic range of και and how it is more 'complex' than 'and' (in a quote in a previous post somewhere"), is it not the case that it is actually less complex. An author could drop a και in there and the word itself would not mark any distinction between Connective, Contrastive, Explanatory, Corellative etc as English would. DOes this not mean it actually has less semantic content rather than more? It seems to me like this kind of problem comes from thinking 'και' means X, Y, and Z in English, rather than thinking what και means in Greek.
Also on a different note, according to Runge and Levinsohn, in Koine narrative, και is the default connective between the units in a narrative. However, in seminary i studied Mark's gospel in Greek and was regularly told that και was likely to be a 'semitism' and thus regularly had no 'translatable force' in English. Both lead to the same conclusion (και will not always be translated into English as the default connector for units of English narrative is Asyndeton) but wont the motivation behind the choice to use και effect our analysis of the discourse (if choice implies meaning).