Stephen Carlson wrote:I don't have that product of Steve's, so I can't consult it. If I had to guess, I think Steve is going by the principle of natural information flow (PNIF), not Levinsohn's ordering principle (though they are often congruent). Levinsohn's default ordering principles are more descriptive than normative, and I'm not sure as far as his current thinking goes that he still holds to them exactly as formulated. (Further, in this case, it's not clear which constituent is the marked one when this principle is violated.)
What's a good definition/resource for the principle of natural information flow?
I think it is clear which constituent is marked for focus. Here's how I analyze it based on Levinsohn:
Here's how it is in James 2:18
κἀγώ / σοι / δείξω / ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου / τὴν πίστιν
The default word order from Default Ordering Principles #1 and #2 would be
Verb - Pronominal Constituents - Nominal Constituents - Core Constituents - Peripheral Constituents, or:
δείξω / σοι / (εγώ) / τὴν πίστιν / ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου
Runge, in his Lexham Discourse New Testament, marks κἀγώ as a Topical Frame, and σοι as a Spacial Frame to explain the fronting. Levinsohn calls this "Point of Departure" and shows this by underlining. Let's assume Runge's analysis is right. We now have:κἀγώ
/ δείξω / τὴν πίστιν / ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου
Marked Ordering Principle 5 says "To mark as focused a constituent whose default position is not the end of a clause or sentence, place it at the end of the clause or sentence." So if τὴν πίστιν is marked for focus, we have what we have in James 2:18.κἀγώ
/ δείξω / ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου / τὴν πίστιν
If ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου were to be marked for focus instead, it would have followed Marked Ordering Principle 6, where the focal constituent is moved "prior to the verb (following the point of departure, if present)." That would look like this:κἀγώ
/ ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου
/ δείξω / τὴν πίστιν
Does that sound right?