infinitive -> finite verb
iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue May 21 02:41:54 EDT 2002
> 1TIM. 2:8 BOULOMAI OUN PROSEUCESQAI TOUS ANDRAS EN PANTI TOPWi EPAIRONTAS
> hOSIOUS CEIRAS CWRIS ORGHS KAI DIALOGISMOU. 9 hWSAUTWS [KAI] GUNAIKAS EN
> KATASTOLHi KOSMIWi META AIDOUS KAI SWFROSUNHS KOSMEIN hEAUTAS, MH EN
> PLEGMASIN KAI CRUSIWi H MARGARITAIS H hIMATISMWi POLUTELEI, 10 ALL' hO
> PREPEI GUNAIXIN EPAGGELLOMENAIS QEOSEBEIAN, DI' ERGWN AGAQWN. 11 GUNH EN
> hHSUCIAi MANQANETW EN PASHi hUPOTAGHi: 12 DIDASKEIN DE GUNAIKI
> OUK EPITREPW
> OUDE AUQENTEIN ANDROS, ALL' EINAI EN hHSUCIAi.
> There are at least three related issues I am exploring here; Topic, Focus
> and Point of Departure, as these terms are used in text linguistics. Let's
> look at verse 11.
> 1Tim 2:11 GUNH EN hHSUCIAi MANQANETW EN PASHi hUPOTAGHi
> GUNH is clause initial. It links what follows thematically to verses 9-10.
> Does that make it a Point of Departure? Is it the Topic of its clause? The
Well, Clay, I would be happy to call it a point of departure. After my
posting, I saw that Carl has indicated this by setting it apart, and Randall
calls it a contextual link. That's fine with me.
I am reluctant to comment on topic and focus, since I am not a fan of this
particular way of speaking. For me, all the words in 11 are part of the
"topic", i.e. woman, silence, learn, all, submission. I suppose I have a
holistic view of semantics, rather than a dichotomistic view that separates
something into two: topic and comment. Rather than "focus", I prefer to talk
about relative prominence. The five concepts in v. 11 are to me all part of
the "topic" and are ordered the way they are because of relative prominence.
I would ask five questions in a progressive order which basically follows
the word order: 1) Who are Paul talking about? - Women. 2) What does he say
about women? - Be in silence. 3) What should they do in silence? - Learn/be
taught. 4) What should their attitude be as they are taught in silence? -
Submission. 5) How strong a submission? - Full/complete/heartfelt. (The word
"all" is fronted within its phrase, because it is more prominent than the
noun it modifies. One needs to look at clause level prominence and phrase
level prominence as separate layers.)
> 1Tim 2:12 DIDASKEIN DE GUNAIKI OUK EPITREPW OUDE AUQENTEIN ANDROS, ALL'
> EINAI EN hHSUCIAi.
> One question lingers after we identify the pragmatic function of
> What then is the pragmatic function of AUQENTEIN? Does it share the
> pragmatic status of DIDASKEIN by virtue of being linked to it by OUDE?
It is not clear to me what you mean by pragmatic status or function, maybe
"point of departure"? But, yes, AUQENTEIN is a close parallel to DIDASKEIN.
Going back to the overhead illustration, these two should be looked at
together. The DIDASKEIN which Paul prohibits, is the kind of teaching that
is associated with or characterized by AUQENTEIN ANDROS. And this brings us
back to the "explicative" notion where the second word further explains or
delimits the first word. This function is common with the
more-or-less-Semitic KAI, and as Carl said, OUDE is equivalent here to KAI
More information about the B-Greek