[B-Greek] 1 Sam 2:26

Kenneth Litwak javajedi2 at yahoo.com
Sun Dec 28 02:38:37 EST 2008


--- On Sat, 12/27/08, b-greek-request at lists.ibiblio.org <b-greek-request at lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:

> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 02:12:02 -0500
> From: Albert Pietersma
> <albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 1 Sam 2:26 AGAQON
> To: javajedi2 at yahoo.com
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:
> <BLU0-SMTP4525B99568C5A18A0C16C1F3E80 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252;
> format=flowed;
> 	delsp=yes
> 
> 
> On Dec 27, 2008, at 1:51 AM, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> 
> >  I'm looking at 1 Sam 2:26 in both Hebrew and
> Greek.  Part of the  
> > Greek says SAMUHL EPOREUETO KAI EMEGALUNETO KAI AGAQON
> KAI META  
> > KURIOU KAI META ANQRWPWN, which seems to mean
> something like "Samuel  
> > was going and was growing also good both with the Lord
> and with  
> > people.  However AGAQON translates a Hebrew participle
> and therefore  
> > it seems that this might not be what is meant. I'm
> pondering whether  
> > to try to force the Greek to have a meaning similar to
> the Hebrew  
> > (since this part of the LXX is fairly
> "literal" in its rendering of  
> > the Hebrew text as opposed to, say, Isaiah or Micah)
> or to try to  
> > come up with a reasonable translation of the Greek on
> its own,  
> > supposing that most who used the OG did not know the
> underlying  
> > Hebrew.  Any comments?
> "Literal" or not, the Greek means what a speaker
> of Greek would take  
> it to mean. Put differently, a translation equivalent does
> not take on  
> an 'usual' sense unless that sense can be shown to
> be part of the  
> living language. NETS (Bernard Taylor) translates the verse
> as  
> follows: "And the boy Samouel kept going and became
> great and was in  
> favor with the Lord and with people."
> Al
> 
Perhaps I am missing something but "was in 
favor" seems like a lot to get out of KAI AGAQON KAI.  It is certainly true that it is necessary at times to add a copula but this does not look like one of those times (there is not a noun immediately precedig or following AGAQON that would lead one to a reasonable expectation of the need to supply a copula because AGAQON is serving as a predicate adjective).   So isn't the NETS translation being governed to some extent by the underlying Hebrew?  I could see "and good also with God..." or "and good both with God..." but not "was in favor with God..."  What identified grammatical construct would lead a native Greek speaker to take it this way?  Thanks.

Ken


      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list