Re: Grammatical Meaning

From: Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Date: Mon Jan 22 1996 - 18:39:09 EST


Alan Brehm wrote;
>In reply to Kenneth Litwak's query about syntax categories and grammatical
>meaning, it seems to me that the basic difference between Blass-Debrunner or
>Porter on the one hand, and A. T. Robertson or Brooks and Winbery on the other
>hand, is that BDF and Porter separate the functions of nouns with the
>preposition from those functions that relate primarily to the case of the noun,
>while ATR and B-W incorporate the two into one system (although ATR also treats
>the prepositions separately).

This is certainly an accurate observation. I would add to it that Danta &
Mantey deals only with the syntax of case in the section on nouns. Their
syntax of prepositions is really what you would get in a good lexicon. I
do not think that you can really separate the function of prepositions from
that of case.

>Of course, Porter's criticism of the 8-case system applies here--if one defines
>case based on function, then one will ostensibly have dozens of syntax
>categories. So [in reply to Kenneth's question] you might find yourself in a
>situation in your doctoral exam where the members of your panel assume that a
>"dative of advantage" does not exist, but rather it is an instance of the
>dative
>case occurring with a preposition that expresses advantage.

I have also criticized the 8 case system. Why not nine (instrumental of
association and instrumental of means seem fairly distinct to me)? We did
the syntax book back in the seventies when most of our students at New
Orleans and Fort Worth came from Baptist colleges where AT Robertson was
considered next to God. We did take care to cross reference the Ablative,
locative, and instrumental to the five case system which we both preferred.
We also clearly distinguish the categories used with and without
prepositions.

The statement that some might say that the "dative of advantage does not
exist, but rather it is an instance of the dative case occurring with a
preposition that expresses advantage" is interesting in light of the fact
that this category can be illustrated both with and without the
preposition. Compare Rev. 21:2 and Mark 14:6.

>On the other hand, the benefit of ATR and B-W is that it is a much more
>workable
>system for teaching [NT] Greek in the classroom. I find that the more concrete
>I can make the teaching of syntax and grammatical functions, the better my
>students can get a handle on what sometime we Ph. D. types must admit are fine
>distinctions.
>
>On the other hand, as a former student of Jim Brooks, IMHO I think that the
>strength of their approach is its weakness--the very systematic nature of their
>book leads students to think that there is a category for every
>construction and
>every construction fits neatly into some discreet category.

I emphasize in my use of our Syntax that every instance does not fit neatly
into a given category. We intentionally looked for illustrations that did
not fit neatly so as to raise questions. I often say, "Jim must have
picked that one."

>For this reason, I
>have experimented with combining the best of both worlds--at first I tried
>using
>Porter to expose the students to the ambiguities of dealing with syntax
>but also
>using a system like B-W to give them some structure. That did not work well
>because Porter is written at a level that only those with substantial knowledge
>of Greek can follow it.
>
>At present I am using B-W as a foundation, but have augmented their set of
>categories by referring to other functions in BAGD, ATR, and BDF. I make one
>important [IMHO] distinction, however--I indicate which of these functions
>occur
>only with prepositions, and which occur with the noun alone. In this way I try
>to do justice to the fact that many of the categories in B-W relate more
>closely
>to the prepositions than to the case of the nouns per se [of course, I would
>expect that Carleton Winbery might have something to say about that, and would
>welcome his comments]. Nevertheless, I try to preserve the benefit of B-W,
>which is to give students a concrete framework to begin their struggle to
>wrestle with the text.

I must agree with most of what Alan has said. Prepositions are difficult
to deal with in almost any language and Greek is not exception. I would
express my feeling that in the Hellenistic period the use of prepositions
was in a state of transition. I tend to think that prepositions do not
have dictionary meanings but must be dealt with as functions and indicators
in the language.

Carlton Winbery
Chair Religion/Philosophy
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
fax (318) 442-4996 or (318) 487-7425



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:36 EDT