On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Resources and techniques for teaching Greek composition
Post Reply
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Hughes » November 15th, 2016, 1:15 am

In the beginners' sub-forum composition was put up during a discussion of how to make a translation of it. I would like to address some comments about that composition to the (presently) unknown composer of the following sentence:
Jonathan Robie wrote:
koine1 wrote: ὁ κυριος κρινει ἡμας ἐν τῳ ερχεσθαι αυτον παλιν

From what I can gather it is: The Lord will come again to Judge us
You're missing some accents here. I'm guessing it should be something like this:

ὁ κύριος κρινεῖ ἡμὰς ἐν τῷ ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν πάλιν.
Using Jonathan's version with the diacritics, let me comment on both the inter and intra phrasal word orders of your composition.

The κρινεῖ happens within the (temporal) context of the ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν so it would generally come after it (ἔρχεσθαι being a concrete action that occurs in a place and at a time). The πάλιν (a narrative word) is the (thematic) context within which the ἔρχεσθαι happens, so it would be written before it. The pronouns ἡμάς and αὐτόν function as the expected elements within their respective verbal phrases (not at the syntax level of the whole phrase), so they would nestle in with the verbs as you have written in your composition. If you interpret the English to mean that the judgement is a process (temporal context) or event (thematic context), over which ὁ κύριος will preside or be a particular part of, then you should compose with the ὁ κύριος after the core verbal unit, but if you are thinking that κρινεῖ ἡμὰς is is just one of the functions / duties that ὁ κύριος will carry out, the you could leave it in front (there is scope for variability in the placement of the elements based on wider concerns).

Basically, you need to compose your Greek according to some sort of Greek word order guidelines. English regularly puts the temporal phrase at the end of a sentence, but Greek is basically the opposite, because the time - the time of day or the event which is used to mark time - is the (temporal) context, ie the thing within which the other events of the sentence occur. By putting the temporal phrase after the ὁ κύριος κρινεῖ ἡμάς, you have made ὁ κύριος κρινεῖ ἡμὰς the (thematic) context, within which the time occurs, but the time (indicated by event) is constructed into a prepositional phrase - which type of phrase is generally a contextualising structure. In other words, you have composed this with a contextualising phrase in a (specific) event position.

Reading it as you have composed it is to make the second coming dependent on the need for judgement. Like saying conceptually that it was out of a need for judgement that the second coming was planned.

Greek word order is quite straightforward, and it has some basic principles that we can follow. I wish you all the best in your future compositions.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3303
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Jonathan Robie » November 15th, 2016, 2:47 pm

ὁ κύριος κρινεῖ ἡμὰς ἐν τῷ ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν πάλιν.
Stephen Hughes wrote:The κρινεῖ happens within the (temporal) context of the (temporal) context of the ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν so it would generally come after it (ἔρχεσθαι being a concrete action that occurs in a place and at a time).
What are you using for reference? I think there are probably quite a few sentences where the main verb comes before this kind of infinitive construction, here's one that comes to mind:

καὶ ἐθαύμαζον ἐν τῷ χρονίζειν ἐν τῷ ναῷ αὐτόν. (Luke 1:21)
Stephen Hughes wrote:The πάλιν (a narrative word) is the (thematic) context within which the ἔρχεσθαι happens, so it would be written before it.
Not necessarily.

καὶ ἐλθὼν πάλιν εὗρεν αὐτοὺς καθεύδοντας, ἦσαν γὰρ αὐτῶν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ βεβαρημένοι. (Matthew 26:43)
καὶ ἀφεὶς αὐτοὺς πάλιν ἀπελθὼν προσηύξατο ἐκ τρίτου τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπὼν πάλιν. (Matthew 26:44)
Καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος πάλιν τὸν ὄχλον ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς· Ἀκούσατέ μου πάντες καὶ σύνετε. (Mark 7:14)
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

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

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Hughes » November 16th, 2016, 3:43 am

Jonathan Robie wrote:
ὁ κύριος κρινεῖ ἡμὰς ἐν τῷ ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν πάλιν.
Stephen Hughes wrote:The κρινεῖ happens within the (temporal) context of the (temporal) context of the ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν so it would generally come after it (ἔρχεσθαι being a concrete action that occurs in a place and at a time).
What are you using for reference?
There are two reference points, which I avoided stating - so as not to give the "answer" and to avoid discussing doctrine, but I suppose if a Martian asks it might be okay to say. The main point of reference is the way that the person who composed this didn't analyse or tree diagram the "when he comes again" as a VP including the adverb. "When he comes" is rendered with the possible ἐν τῷ ἔρχεσθαι αὐτὸν, then "again" is rendered by πάλιν. The second unstated point of reference is that the phrases "come again" and "second coming" are Christian rather than Biblical doctrines, and I assume that not all board members value the Nicene Creed in the same way, so rather than bringing that into a discussion on composition, I didn't mention the Creed.
Jonathan Robie wrote:I think there are probably quite a few sentences where the main verb comes before this kind of infinitive construction, here's one that comes to mind:

καὶ ἐθαύμαζον ἐν τῷ χρονίζειν ἐν τῷ ναῷ αὐτόν. (Luke 1:21)
Please notice that we are using different language to describe this within different frameworks of analysis. You are analysing the order of the parts of speech (main, ie finite verb) and the types of phrases (this (ie articular with preposition) kind of infinitive construction). I am talking about degrees of specificity. The basic pattern of Greek word order moves from general statements to specific details. Narrator knowledge is introduced early. It is a type of conceptual of thematic knowledge.

Parts of speech (such as main verb) and grammatical features such as number, case and gender show the grammatical relation between words. Greek is composed using the features you are talking, but I don't think they are useful for analysing word order.
Jonathan Robie wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:The πάλιν (a narrative word) is the (thematic) context within which the ἔρχεσθαι happens, so it would be written before it.
Not necessarily.

καὶ ἐλθὼν πάλιν εὗρεν αὐτοὺς καθεύδοντας, ἦσαν γὰρ αὐτῶν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ βεβαρημένοι. (Matthew 26:43)
καὶ ἀφεὶς αὐτοὺς πάλιν ἀπελθὼν προσηύξατο ἐκ τρίτου τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπὼν πάλιν. (Matthew 26:44)
Καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος πάλιν τὸν ὄχλον ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς· Ἀκούσατέ μου πάντες καὶ σύνετε. (Mark 7:14)
Yes. You are right. Perhaps, I should have stated more explicitly that πάλιν used in section of text following narrative rules is a narrative word. Matthew 26:44 is an exception. In the variant you have quoted, it in phrase final position, which seems to allowable in dialogue (spoken or written) to mean like before. To pass into a doctrinal area again, I am presuming that the composer did not mean Jesus woukd come again just like before - born of a young Jewish woman etc., but in power and great glory.

For the other two and a half examples, I'm not sure what seems so obvious that you don't need to say it. If you were reading my "before" as "immediately preceding", then perhaps you could try "before" as "sometime prior to". In the case of that composition, I think that the adverb was treated as a separate sentence element, rather than a verb phrase element. Let me walk through how I read those sentences, then perhaps you could say what you tell me what of that you were meaning.

καὶ signals a new section. ἐλθὼν sets the scene in which another action will take place, it is descriptive background information. πάλιν is narrator added information signalling a reference to a previous section of the narrative εὗρεν is the repeated part of the story that was signalled by the πάλιν. αὐτοὺς tells what or who was found. καθεύδοντας this is the most specific piece of information, ἦσαν this marks the type of statement that will follow. We will be looking for the thing as a substantive. γὰρ specifies the nature of the relationship between this section and the preceeding. It says that we will now have a general to specific sequence about the specific thing of the previous statement. αὐτῶν this possession refers to the whole person of which the eyes are a part. It forms the broad general context of the body part(s) that follow. οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ this is the thing. βεβαρημένοι is the specific piece of information.

καὶ signals a new section. ἀφεὶς αὐτοὺς sets the scene. A general background statement. πάλιν signals a reference to a previous section of the narrative. ἀπελθὼν (the order of the Byzantine text makes more sense here) sets the scene for the following verb. προσηύξατο the thing repeated from a prior part of the story ἐκ τρίτου specific information τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπὼν a phrase conveying the most specific information πάλιν the dialogue use of πάλιν, like English "again" with meaning but not discourse function (this πάλιν does not have a hint of the English "next" in it). (πάλιν is not in the Byzantine text). It is the most specific piece of information about the phrase τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπὼν. It would be much stronger and more specific like, "It was great, if you remember."

Καὶ signals a new section. προσκαλεσάμενος sets the scene / provides background information for the verb that follows πάλιν marks a reminder to something in the story before τὸν ὄχλον what is reminded of. ἔλεγεν the action αὐτοῖς some specific information about the action. Ἀκούσατέ the context within which understanding will take place μου πάντες some more specific information about the -τε καὶ this is in the flow of the sequence from vagueness to specificity σύνετε the specific thing that happens within the context of hearing.

Grammar provides the relationship between elements, but Greek word order is not parts of speech order.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3303
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Jonathan Robie » November 16th, 2016, 8:38 am

Stephen Hughes wrote:Grammar provides the relationship between elements, but Greek word order is not parts of speech order.
Sure, but I see a lot of claims about word order, and I'm asking how I can know if each of these claims is true or not. You claim that various word orders would not be used in Greek, and state a principle for each. How would I evaluate each of these principles to know if it is true?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

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

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Hughes » November 16th, 2016, 11:59 am

Jonathan Robie wrote:How would I evaluate each of these principles to know if it is true?
You need to design a test to your own satisfaction.

Read - do they work?

Ask yourself, could a six year old understand them?

Do you like Scott Joplin? You will like Hebrews.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2630
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Carlson » November 24th, 2016, 11:33 pm

I might prefer ... ἐν τῷ πάλιν αὐτὸν ἔρχεσθαι. See 2 Cor 2:1 for an example.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2630
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Carlson » November 24th, 2016, 11:38 pm

Jonathan Robie wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:Grammar provides the relationship between elements, but Greek word order is not parts of speech order.
Sure, but I see a lot of claims about word order, and I'm asking how I can know if each of these claims is true or not. You claim that various word orders would not be used in Greek, and state a principle for each. How would I evaluate each of these principles to know if it is true?
Our knowledge of Greek word order is not mature. In the past, the scholarship had to rely on talented people who read a lot of Greek for their intuition about word order, especially for when students used to do composition.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

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

Re: On the word order of the Vorlage of "translation".

Post by Stephen Hughes » November 25th, 2016, 2:35 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:I might prefer ... ἐν τῷ πάλιν αὐτὸν ἔρχεσθαι. See 2 Cor 2:1 for an example.
Ha ha. So the kid (location dependent on others αὐτὸν) thinks that when Dad (ἔρχεσθαι), who knows everything is around, stick on him, but when somebody with more importance, ie Grandpa (πάλιν), who knows EVERYTHING is on the scene, then HE is the one to stick with.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest