[B-Greek] LOGIZOMAI as a process (BDAG2)
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Jan 16 19:37:49 EST 2009
Thanks for the engaging exchange on LOGIZOMAI; we may not reach any
full accord on "how this word means" -- but I think we've both gotten
a better mental handle on the range of its usage. I'll make just a few
more comments on this your latest response and then call it quits for
On Jan 16, 2009, at 4:13 PM, Kimmo Huovila wrote:
> On perjantai 16 tammikuu 2009, Carl Conrad wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 2009, at 11:42 AM, Kimmo Huovila wrote:
>>> Thank you for your comments. I agree that I had not given good
>>> labels or
>>> glosses for all the passages. "Taking into account" is a good gloss
>>> for some
>>> examples, as you suggest. That is BDAG 1a. This gives some
>>> confirmation to my
>>> suspicion that BDAG category 2 is not quite well written.
>> Compiling the data into an adequate lexical entry is not really very
> I agree. It is easier to find fault with someone else's
> categorization than do
> a better one. It is a lot of work, especially if one does not have
> fluency in speaking or writing the language (in all common and
> senses of the lexeme) and good tools to extract examples from a
>> I might do things differently, but I'd have to spend a lot of
>> time thinking through the evidence before proposing any major re-
>> ordering of things.
>> BDAG has:
>> λογίζομαι (λόγος) impf. ἐλογιζόμην; fut.
>> λογιοῦμαι LXX; 1 aor. ἐλογισάμην; pf.
>> λελόγιμαι LXX. Pass.: 1 aor. ἐλογίσθην; 1 fut.
>> λογισθήσομαι. Mid. dep. (B-D-F §311; Rob. 816; 819)
>> (Soph., Hdt.+) prim. a mathematical and accounting term, then of
>> cognitive processes. In our lit. esp. used by Paul.; s. GThomas, ET
>> 17, 1906, 211ff.
>> 1. to determine by mathematical process, reckon, calculate, freq. in
>> a transf. sense
>> a. count, take into account τὶ someth.
>> b. as a result of a calculation evaluate, estimate, look upon as,
>> 2. to give careful thought to a matter, think (about), consider,
>> ponder, let one’s mind dwell on τὶ someth.
>> 3. to hold a view about someth., think, believe, be of the opinion
>> I am inclined to think that I might prefer to see all of these as
>> subcategories of the single sense "calculate, reckon, submit to a
>> reasoning process" I think that some of those passages that Danker
>> in category 2 I would put in 1 a and some others of them into 1 b. I
>> think that I might make category 3 a new 1 c "reckon" in the sense of
>> the colloquial English usage, i.e. "I rather think" (that something
>> the case) or "I'm thinking that ... " -- not so much in the sense
>> one's mind is made up, but rather that "This is how I add up the
>> likelihoods right now." This new 1 c might then conceivably be
>> subdivided into "I conclude that ... " or "I have decided to ... "
>> "My considered opinion on this -- for now -- is ... "
> 1a should be subdivided. To count and to take into account are
> senses. I think 1 is worded in such a way that 1a does not fall
> under it. To
> take something into account is not necessarily a mathematical process.
> I'll give it a shot without putting a lot of time into it or having
> through all the evidence (benefiting from LSJ and BDAG). I am almost
> there are errors in it as it is not a result of a real corpus study,
> rather an imperfect reflection of my intuition, two dictionaries and
> a guess
> of linguistic probabilities. But it is a start nevertheless.
> 1) To reason
> 1a) To figure out (LOGISASQAI) or attempt to figure out (LOGIZESQAI)
> 1b) To take into account TI
> 1c) To infer. With hOTI or acc+inf
> 1d) Mathematics: to calculate
> 2) Also used of the conclusion of the reasoning process
> 2a) To hold a view. With hOTI or acc+inf
> 2b) To consider something to be something. With hWS and EIS.
> 3) To assign or consider fault or credit
> 3a) To assign something to someone's fault or credit. TI TINI.
> 3b) To consider something as someone's fault or credit. TI TINI.
> 3c) Accounting: To put into someone's account. TI TINI
I confess at the outset that I am not a professional linguist, whether
that's an advantage or a disadvantage. Just as I object to drawing up
lengthy categories and subcategories of grammatical case usage, so I
object to attempting a too sharply-delineated taxonomy of usage for a
verb like LOGIZOMAI. While I recognize the senses that you've listed,
I'm not really sure that they are so sharply distinguished one from
the other, just as one human being seems to have very different
notions of what it means to "reason" and "reckon" and "suppose" from
the notions held by another human being.
Louw & Nida, for what it's worth, locate LOGIZOMAI in four different
domains or sub-domains:
29.4 LOGIZOMAI b: to keep a mental record of events for the sake of
some future action — ‘to keep a record, to remember, to bear in
30.9 LOGIZOMAI a; LOGISMOS a, OU m: to think about something in a
detailed and logical manner — ‘to think about, to reason about, to
31.1 FRONEW c; KRINW d; LOGIZOMAI c; hHGEOMAI a; ECW c: to hold a view
or have an opinion with regard to something — ‘to hold a view, to
have an opinion, to consider, to regard.’
57.227 LOGIZOMAIι d: to keep records of commercial accounts, involving
both debits and credits — ‘to put into one’s account, to charge
one’s account, to regard as an account.’
>> The problem is closely involved with how the human mind works, much
>> more haphazardly than we sometimes represent it. In that regard,
>> there's a very interesting column in today's NYTimes by David Brooks;
>> he's talking about economic thinking, but what he has to say applies
>> to the way we think about far more than economic problems: "An
>> of Faith and Trust" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/opinion/16brooks.html
> A good grasp of the prototype theory of linguistic categorization
> will help
> tremendously (though much more the lexicographer than the
> economist :-) ).
I dunno. I sometimes think I only read the language and am incapable
of analyzing it.
>>> On perjantai 16 tammikuu 2009, Carl Conrad wrote:
>>>>> KH: Luke 24:1 D: THi DE MIAi TWN SABBATWN ORQROU BAQEWS EPI TO
>>>>> FEROUSAI hA hTOIMASAN KAI TINES SUN AUTAIS ELOGIZONTO EN hEAUTAIS:
>>>>> TIS ARA
>>>>> APOKULISEI TON LIQON.
>>>>> - This is one of the closest ones to the idea of meditation.
>>>>> This is
>>>>> attempt to figure out, not an attempt to meditate on a theme.
>>>> CC: Doesn't this really mean, "were wondering" -- "were asking the
>>>> question"? After all it is followed by the direct question, TIS ARA
>>>> APOKULISEI TON LIQON/
>>> KH: If so, this would be the lone (?) example of LOGIZOMAI meaning
>>> thinking of a
>>> question as such? Or were they trying to find an answer to the
>>> practical need
>>> they were about to face?
>> CC: Well, one might ask whether LOGIZOMAI here isn't equivalent to
>> more common DIALOGIZOMAI of internal/mental ratiocination/dialogue-
>> with-self, e.g. Mark 2:6 DIALOGIZOMENOI EN TAIS KARDIAIS AUTWN ...
>> Thinking, reasoning is so much a matter of weighing preponderances of
>> alternative "considerations" -- it's an internal "dialogue."
> This suggestion is a good possibility.
>>>>> KH: 1 Cor 13:11 hOTE HMHN NHPIOS, ELALOUN hWS NHPIOS, EFRONOUN hWS
>>>>> ELOGIZOMHN hWS NHPIOS.
>>>>> - I made childish conclusions, not necessarily that the thinking
>>>>> process was
>>>> CC: I can't see this; I don't think it means "I made childish
>>>> conclusions" (ELOGISAMHN) but rather "I reasoned the way a child
>>>> reasons" -- perhaps "jumping to conclusions" without reckoning in
>>>> that's relevant.
>>> KH: Very possible. This one is a little bit hard to say for sure,
>>> but I
>>> tried to
>>> show that it is not necessary to consider that this refers to the
>>> process as such.
>> CC: Well, for my part, I think it very much does refer to the thought
>> process of a child.
> After carefully reading the LSJ entry, I am more open to seeing a
> meaning of
> just "reasoning" as a process (but not a general 'to think about').
>>>>> KH: 2 Cor 10:2a DEOMAI DE TO MH PARWN QARRHSAI THi PEPOIQHSEI hHi
>>>>> TOLMHSAI (EPI TINAS TOUS LOGIZOMENOUS hHMAS hWS KATA SARKA
>>>>> - Result of thinking
>>>> CC: I don't think so; I think LOGIZOMAI and LOGIZOMENOUS here
>>>> must both
>>>> point rather to considering a course of action, not to a decision
>>>> act thus.
>>> KH: I would think that the object of LOGIZOMAI is TOLMHSAI. He
>>> that it
>>> this case dares to act with confidence (THi PEPOIQHSEI). The result
>>> is "TOLMW EN TINI PEPOIQHSEI". No?
>>> LOGIZOMENOUS was not under my consideration, as BDAG referred only
>>> to the
>>> LOGIZOMAI in this verse (a somewhat artificial way to limit the
>>> corpus to
>>> make the study a little bit faster).
>> CC: Well, I rather think that there's some deliberate intent to use
>> verb in a similar manner in both places in this text: if I had to
>> English it, I think I'd probably use "reckon" in both places, in my
>> category 1 c as suggested above, perhaps "count on doing, count on x
>> doing" ...
> "count on doing" sounds like there is a conclusion, not just a
> process of
Except that the English idiomatic sense of "count on" involves a
tentative conclusion rather than sealed-in-syllogism conviction.
My "concluding unscientific postscript," for what it's worth:
LOGIZOMAI can't really be pinned down much more than can DOKEW,
however "objective" the process referred to by LOGIZOMAI may seem to
be in contradistinction to the seemingly "subjective" process referred
to be DOKEW. I think that either one of the two verbs could be used to
convey the chief verb in the English expression, "I THINK that this is
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek