[b-greek] Re: Is it Greek or English Grammar?

From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sat Dec 02 2000 - 20:54:53 EST


At 7:27 PM +0000 12/2/00, Mark Wilson wrote:
>The following comments by Stanley Porter got me
>thinking about how we can distinguish GREEK grammar
>from ENGLISH grammar.
>
>In other words, it seems that at times we translate a particular
>participle one way because it makes ENGLISH sense.
>
>Before I continue, here is Dr. Porter's comments on the
>"verb-modifying participle" and its syntactical relation
>to other elements:
>
>------
>These relations, however, are for the most part not grammaticalized but
>are inferred from context and tend to be subject to much discussion
>and debate. [p. 190]
>
>In some instances it may simply be better not to specify the relations
>between the participle and the other elements of the construction,
>since the context does not give specific indicators. [p. 191]
>-----
>
>Immediately after this statement (p. 191) he discusses CONCESSIVE
>participles. He translates Mt. 7:11 in this manner:
>
>hUMEIS PONHROI ONTES OIDATE DOMATA AGAQA DIDONAI
>
>"you, although you are evil, know to give good gifts." (Porter)
>
>Where perhaps a "literal" (GREEK?) translation might look thus:
>
>"you, being evil, know to give good gifts"
>
>To me, either translation makes sense, but which makes more
>sense to a Koine Greek reader? Which makes more sense
>to an English reader?
>
>My question is if we say this could be translated as a CONCESSIVE
>participle, is that because it makes good sense in ENGLISH?
>
>How do we know when we are defining GREEK GRAMMAR as
>opposed to translating according to ENGLISH GRAMMAR or sense?

This is a fair question; it is not unrelated to a point I've been trying to
make repeatedly about the nigh-unto-myriad subclassifications of the
adnominal/adjectival genitive: the genitive of a noun referring to another
noun. I've argued that it's a structural case, not a semantic one, and that
the distinctions made between subjective genitive, objective genitive,
genitive of possession, genitive functioning as an adjective, etc., etc.,
etc. are really crutches in a grammar book about Greek designed to assist
those converting Greek into another target language in terms of the
functions of the target language. I think that a fair portion of what is
called Greek grammar "beyond the basics" is provided to assist people with
their understanding not of the Greek but of the target language's modes of
expressing nuances of meaning which Greek doesn't distinguish.

And what you are saying about circumstantial participles, Mark, corresponds
to my own observation about the equivalence of Latin ablative absolutes and
CUM circumstantial clauses: one is taught that these may be understood as
TEMPORAL, CONCESSIVE, CAUSAL and a more general CIRCUMSTANTIAL. UNLESS
something in the context trips the balance and makes it clear that one of
these possibilities rather than another is at play, I don't think one can
be sure which of these categories of ENGLISH circumstantial constructions
is best used to convey the Greek (or Latin). I've suggested to my own
students of Latin, if they're unsure about a CUM circumstantial clause, to
start out with "the fact being that X - Y ..." and then think about how the
subordinate clauses helps make the main clause which it governs
intelligible. I think in effect one has to do the same thing which such
clauses as that above: "You, the fact being that you are evil, know how to
give good gifts." It's the context, stupid! (isn't it) You know how to give
good gifts and the fact is that you are evil; the fact that you're evil
doesn't stop you from knowing how to give good gifts. Do you have to convey
it as concessive? No, another possibility is: "Evil as you are, you know
how to give good gifts." And in fact, that would retain much more precisely
the 'structure' of the Greek even though a finite verb "you are" has taken
the place of the participle "being."

Ultimately, however, I think this comes down to something comparable to the
problem of the circular dictionary, wherein everything is ultimately
defined in terms of some other unknown. There's no question but that our
Greek reference grammars are structured essentially with a view to our
understanding how the Greek structures are related to or different from
target-language structures.

I am clearly out of my terrain here, and I'm sure that sooner or later an
authentic linguist will come and explain all this intelligibly.

--

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:43 EDT