1 Cor 16:21 Why does Paul use the genitive in his signature?

[Stephen Hughes]

Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου.

Why does Paul sign his signature (ὑπέγραψεν) in the genitive? The sender of a letter's name on the verso of a papyrus is usually written in the nominative.

[cwconrad]

Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου.

Why does Paul sign his signature (ὑπέγραψεν) in the genitive? The sender of a letter's name on the verso of a papyrus is usually written in the nominative.

At the risk of stating a truism, the case of a noun qualifying another noun is ordinarily the genitive.This is an emphatic statement: "in my own, i.e. Paul's, hand."

[Stephen Hughes]

Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου.

Why does Paul sign his signature (ὑπέγραψεν) in the genitive? The sender of a letter's name on the verso of a papyrus is usually written in the nominative.

At the risk of stating a truism, the case of a noun qualifying another noun is ordinarily the genitive.This is an emphatic statement: "in my own, i.e. Paul's, hand."

To fit the grammar of this sentence?

[cwconrad]

Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου.

Why does Paul sign his signature (ὑπέγραψεν) in the genitive? The sender of a letter's name on the verso of a papyrus is usually written in the nominative
.

At the risk of stating a truism, the case of a noun qualifying another noun is ordinarily the genitive.This is an emphatic statement: "in my own, i.e. Paul's, hand."

To fit the grammar of this sentence?

I'd assume an implicit verb like γέγραπται here; subject is ὁ ἀσπασμὸς, τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου qualifies the implicit verb γέγραπται.

[Stephen Hughes]

... the grammar of this sentence?

I'd assume an implicit verb like γέγραπται here; subject is ὁ ἀσπασμὸς, τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου qualifies the implicit verb γέγραπται.

ἀσπασμὸς / ἀσπαζεσθαι serves two functions - the " <your cousins all> say a (big) hello" function and the "hugs and kisses" function - within the composition of letters, (for which we use different words and structures in English). This ὁ ἀσπασμὸς, τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου is one of the "hugs and kisses" uses.


My question is perhaps really about whether, from the wording, there any hint as to how much of the phrase was written by the actual man Paul himself? How much of the phrase do you think was written by Paul ?

For my part, I think Paul just made his mark, and I think that the genitive for Παύλου is not related to the grammar of the passage, but it is genitive to describe Paul's mark, ie it describes the circumstances in which it was written. That is to say, that if Paul wrote it, it would be Παῦλος, but because he didn't, what mark he did make is described as Paul's. In Philemon 19, however, I think he writes the whole phrase, ἐγὼ Παῦλος ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί, ἐγὼ ἀποτίσω ("I will repay", the wording of a legal document (with a connotation like, "show this letter to a magistrate if you like"), rather than a personal promise (not a wishy-washy, "you know that I'm a reliable person")).

Of course it is a bit different, but in the papyi, when a notary public witnesses somebody testifying that the contents of a document are true and then they sign, the names of the undersigned are in the nominative. In the following extract from one papyrus, there are examples of someone literate who testifies and signs, and someone testifies but is illiterate (ὡς means "about", "approximately" and οὐλή followed by a dative of the place, is a "scar"):

ὑπογραφεῖς τοῦ
μὲν ὁμολ(ογοῦντος) Ἀ[πο]λλόνιος Πανεσνέως
25ὡ(ς) (ἐτῶν) κ̣α οὐλὴ χιρὶ (ie χειρὶ) ἀριστ(ερᾷ) (hand 2) καὶ Λεονίδης
Ζωίλου ὡ(ς) (ἐτῶν) κδ οὐλ(ὴ) μετόπωι(ie μετώπωι with iota adscript) ἐγ (ie ἐκ) δεξ(ιῶν).
...
(hand 2) Ἁκῶρις Ἁκώριος
40γέγοναι εἴς μαι (ie με) ἡ ὁμολ(ογία) κα[θ]ὼς πρόκιται (ie πρόκειται).
ἔγρ(αψεν) ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ Λεονίδης Ζωίλου διὰ τὸ
μὴ εἰδέναι αὐτὸ[ν γράμματα].

There is (later) evidence for both the possessive pronoun and the possessive adjective in this regard:

ὁ ἀσπασμός μου

ὁ ἐ[μὸς] ἀσπασμὸς

[cwconrad]

My question is perhaps really about whether, from the wording, there any hint as to how much of the phrase was written by the actual man Paul himself? How much of the phrase do you think was written by Paul ?

For my part, I think Paul just made his mark, and I think that the genitive for Παύλου is not related to the grammar of the passage, but it is genitive to describe Paul's mark, ie it describes the circumstances in which it was written. That is to say, that if Paul wrote it, it would be Παῦλος, but because he didn't, what mark he did make is described as Paul's. In Philemon 19, however, I think he writes the whole phrase, ἐγὼ Παῦλος ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί, ἐγὼ ἀποτίσω ("I will repay", the wording of [url=http://papyri.info/search?

Thanks for revealing what your question is (perhaps) really about. Evidently it was not really a question at all.

[Stephen Hughes]

My question is perhaps really about whether, from the wording, there any hint as to how much of the phrase was written by the actual man Paul himself? How much of the phrase do you think was written by Paul ?

For my part, I think Paul just made his mark, and I think that the genitive for Παύλου is not related to the grammar of the passage, but it is genitive to describe Paul's mark, ie it describes the circumstances in which it was written. That is to say, that if Paul wrote it, it would be Παῦλος, but because he didn't, what mark he did make is described as Paul's. In Philemon 19, however, I think he writes the whole phrase, ἐγὼ Παῦλος ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί, ἐγὼ ἀποτίσω ("I will repay", the wording of [url=http://papyri.info/search?

Thanks for revealing what your question is (perhaps) really about. Evidently it was not really a question at all.

Some questions arise from the inconnguities of applying the logic of one situation to another. Others because the logic doesn't seem to match the reference points. Still others for our need or in ability to understand our own thoughts and that is sometimes best done in the context of the thoughts of others.

Are there any questions that we ask that we haven't already guessed at the answer of. Part of the question forming process is using the theory of mind to consider how others will understand our questions and how they might respond to them.

Due to the process of question formation, the less naive the asker the less prepared the question. A simple question like, why is this genitive must probablise a yet to be revealed alternative view.