Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » October 28th, 2012, 5:03 am

This matter has already been discussed in the B-Greek forum; in addition to those already said, I should add that it seems to me that the sentence,

Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ βαπτισθῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαὸν καὶ Ἰησοῦ βαπτισθέντος καὶ προσευχομένου ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν ἐπ’ αὐτόν...

is in fact made up of two sentences interweaved together:

1. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ βαπτισθῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαὸν (...) ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ ...
2. καὶ Ἰησοῦ βαπτισθέντος καὶ προσευχομένου (...) εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν ἐπ’ αὐτόν ...

I think this is a very beautiful way to encompass a large picture - vivid indeed and dynamic - in relatively few words.
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » October 28th, 2012, 6:13 am

In the 'Subject', I meant to say 'Luke 3:21-22 infinitives'...

{Mod: fixed in the title. --scc}
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby David Lim » October 28th, 2012, 7:55 am

Vasile Stancu wrote:1. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ βαπτισθῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαὸν (...) ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ ...
2. καὶ Ἰησοῦ βαπτισθέντος καὶ προσευχομένου (...) εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν ἐπ’ αὐτόν ...


Hmm I can't see how your second line is a sentence. And why do you separate "σωματικω ειδει"? I only see one sentence:
Code: Select all
εγενετο δε ( εν τω βαπτισθηναι απαντα τον λαον ) ( και ιησου βαπτισθεντος και προσευχομενου )
{
  { ανεωχθηναι τον ουρανον }
  και
  { καταβηναι το πνευμα το αγιον ( σωματικω ειδει ) ( ως περιστεραν ) ( επ αυτον ) }
  και
  { φωνην εξ ουρανου γενεσθαι { συ ει ο υιος μου ο αγαπητος εν σοι ευδοκησα } }
}

"εν τω βαπτισθηναι απαντα τον λαον" restricts "εγενετο" to the period of time in which all the people were immersed.
"και ιησου βαπτισθεντος και προσευχομενου" further restricts to the point in time at which Jesus also had been immersed and was praying.
At that point three things occurred, written in the form of indirect statements (acc. + inf.).
"σωματικω ειδει", "ως περιστεραν" and "επ αυτον" all specify how the holy spirit came down.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 885
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » October 28th, 2012, 9:52 am

Indeed, my position is not correct: I wrongly took the form εἴδει as belonging to εἶδον. (In fact, I never felt the need to check this with a dictionary, probably because I was familiar with the existence of such a word (i.e. 'to see') in the similar pericopes in each of the other gospels).
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Barry Hofstetter » October 29th, 2012, 7:37 am

Vasile Stancu wrote:Indeed, my position is not correct: I wrongly took the form εἴδει as belonging to εἶδον. (In fact, I never felt the need to check this with a dictionary, probably because I was familiar with the existence of such a word (i.e. 'to see') in the similar pericopes in each of the other gospels).


Actually, εἶδον normally uses second aorist endings, so an ending in -ει is not possible. However, this is so close, that it might fool even native speakers if they weren't looking or listening to carefully, the kind of thing that contributes to text critical issues.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Barry Hofstetter
 
Posts: 637
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » October 29th, 2012, 12:56 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote: Actually, εἶδον normally uses second aorist endings, so an ending in -ει is not possible. However, this is so close, that it might fool even native speakers if they weren't looking or listening to carefully, the kind of thing that contributes to text critical issues.

Indeed, if I had been a copist in past eras, I would have produced some study material for the text critics of later times... The mechanism of my erratic explanation was something like this:
- While reading, I was, just like others, puzzled by the structure of this text;
- After repetitive infinitives and participles, I felt the need of a verb in the indicative;
- εἴδει was there, just ready to fill up the need; it is not a verb, but I unconciously assimilated it to a verb, because I had in mind the forms of 'to see' found in the books of Matthew, Mark and John (εἰδεν, τεθέαμαι), in relation with the same event.
- I concentrated on that part of the text that is related to the descent of the holy spirit;
- If I had had extended my interest on the part related to the γενέσθαι of the voice from heaven, I would have discovered that there was in fact no need of a verb in the indicative other than the initial ἐγένετο. <φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι> itself is (I believe...) subject to the same verb.
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby RandallButh » October 30th, 2012, 2:12 pm

Barry:
However, this is so close, that it might fool even native speakers if they weren't looking or listening too carefully, the kind of thing that contributes to text critical issues.


I like considering what a native speaker might think or infer because it can help with framing an interpretation according to Relevance Theory.

However, in this case two things pop up as additionally problematic to the suggestion.

Firstly, when listening, besides εἴδει [ίδi] 'appearance (noun)', [ίδi] does not sound like an actual verb and should be less likely to pop into mind for someone who does not parse but matches fitting wordforms from inventory with the flow of thought. Perhaps one might hear [ίθi] 'come on!', but a higher register imperative doesn't fit the context.

Secondly, the time period is critical. After 200 CE the sound [ίδi] is a homonym with ἤδη [ίδi] 'already' [Koine: eδe], and there are homonyms with several other verbs like ἴδῃ [ίδi] 'would see (subj.) [Koine: ιδe]' and ἤδει [ίδi] 'he had known (plup)' [Koine: eδι], though neither of these last two options fits context.

So for listening, I recommend "Koine ears".
RandallButh
 
Posts: 611
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Vasile Stancu » November 10th, 2012, 6:28 pm

RandallButh wrote:... what a native speaker might think or infer ...


I wonder what would qualify one to be a native speaker of Greek in the period of time of the 'koinenisation' of the language. Some examples of our times:
- I knew of at least one family of Polish origin, living in Romania (in 1960-70s): at home, they spoke Polish, as the language of their ancestors, Romanian, as the language of the country, and German, as a language which was considered to be a valuable asset in the education of their children. Were they 'native speakers' of all three languages? What would be the criteria by which they could be considered that?
- There used to be a significant community in my country of German origin (it is still there, but apparently much less numerous than before 1980s). Those living in large cities spoke a language that sounded almost identical to the language I heard Germans from Germany speak ('almost identical', in the sense that I could distinguish a certain Romanian accent in their pronounciation). Moreover, the German language spoken in the countryside in Romania was drastically different from that of Germany; in fact, I was told that TV documentaries about the German communities in Romania often needed subtitling in order to be understood by Germans from Germany. Obviously, all these three categories are 'native speakers' of German, but this language is not exactly the same for all three.

How about the koine world? Could there be any distinction between Greeks from Greece, Greeks living abroad and non-Greeks who adopted/learned the language, in their perception and use of Greek language?
Vasile Stancu
 
Posts: 36
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 3:13 am
Location: Timisoara, Romania

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby RandallButh » November 10th, 2012, 6:45 pm

Your examples deal with different dialects. Nothing requires a native speaker to sound like, or be like, any idealized norm.

Where dialects are different, speakers typically make adjustments when speaking with those outside of the dialect. These adjustments are natural and often unconscious.
Ultimately, your comments become a question about how one defines any one particular dialect and how widespread the definitions are valid.

If you want to press the point-- ultimately all languages are the internalized product of an individual. No one individual has exactly the same language in their head as any other individual. Nevertheless, functional communciation is able to take place. However, such precision in definition is rarely needed or helpful, especially at the macro-levels where daily life takes place.

3.1415926 is probably all the precision that you will ever, ever, need, and is the equivalent level of precision as declaring every speaker of Greek a unique dialect. Most of life get by on the first three levels of magnitude.
RandallButh
 
Posts: 611
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: Luke 3:21-22 infinitives

Postby Alan Patterson » November 12th, 2012, 7:13 am

Randall,

You wrote:

Nevertheless, functional communication is able to take place. [spelling changed]

Would you say that people communicate at the prototypical level? I think there is far more functional clarity at this level but, of course, it lacks nuance or precision. Hence, Wittgenstein's comment: There are no genuine disagreements, only vague and undefined terms. [paraphrased]
χαρις υμιν και ειρηνη,
Alan Patterson
Alan Patterson
 
Posts: 142
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 7:21 pm
Location: Emory University

Next

Return to Syntax and Grammar

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests