[B-Greek] MONON as a special particle

Mark Wilson emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 31 10:47:04 EST 2003


Moon:

This came across my email system rather strange in format. I could not tell 
whether you were responding to someone or asking a question or just what 
this email was all about.

Some time back, this very issue was raised. A response by Alan Thomas, as 
far as I am concerned, has settled the issue on this verse as it relates to 
the adverb. I believe you were involved in that discussion.

I say this here for those who know how to check quickly the archives for 
Alan's response. It was in my opinion nothing short of billiant. I have 
since read a book by Z. Hodges on James. He takes the same position.

My thoughts

Mark Wilson







>From: moon at mail.sogang.ac.kr
>Reply-To: moon at mail.sogang.ac.kr
>To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>Subject: [B-Greek] MONON as a special particle
>Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 22:23:59 +0900
>
>Hi, all.
> >
> > > Recently I studied James 2:24, and was puzzled over MONON.
> > I read that Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New 
>Testament,
> > p. 125,224, talk about an occasional "confusing" of the adverb MOMON
> > with the adjective MONO" in the NT.
> > Mark 6:8, Acts 11:19, 2 Tim 4:8, Heb 12:26, Jas 1:22, Mt 5:47,
> > Mt 10:42, Gal 3:2, Rom 3:29 can be cited as examples when the
> > adverb is used instead of the adjective, yet having the force
> > of the adjective. This conclusion seesm to be based on the fact that
> > in these examples MONON modifiers nouns.
> >
> > In James 2:24, we have
> >
> > hORATE hOTI EK ERGWN DIKAIOUNTAI ANQRWPOS KAI OUK EK PISTEWS MONON.
> >
> > It seems that Blass, DeDrunner, and Funk would think that MONON modifies
> > PISTIS here, so that they would diagram EK PISTEWS MONON as
> > OUK [ EK [PISTEWS MONON] ]
> > NOT FROM FAITH ALONE.
> >
> > But is it right to think that MONON as an "adverb" can "modify" noun 
>within
> > a prepositional phrase? My hypothesis is that as an adverb, MONON can 
>modify
> > a predicate or a subpredicate within a predicate. This usage is like
> > that of OU (the negative operator, which is also called an "adverb"), 
>which
> > can "negate" any part of speech in a sentence. I would like to use 
>English
> > examples to explain what I am up to, because I believe that Englsih ONLY
> > works in the same way as MONON. Also note that it is best to treat
> > ONLY as a special particle rather than as an 'adverb".
> >
> >
> > (1) Dictators respect only force; they are not moved by words.
> > (2) Dictators only respect force; they do not worship it.
> > .
> >
> > In (1), ONLY "modifies" noun FORCE and in (2), ONLY "modifies" verb 
>RESPECT.
> > ONLY seems to be a special particle that can modify any part of
> > speech. Although I said ONLY modifies noun FORCe and verb RESPECT,
> > what really happens is better explained by parapharsing (1) and (2):
> >
> > (1)' Dictators respect nothing but force.
> > (2)' What dictators do with respect to force is nothing but respect.
> > It implies that ONLY is a sentential operator which may be placed
> > anywhere within a sentence and is placed in front of a constituent
> > that it wants to focus on.
> >
> > The above Greek examples show that MONON can focus the object of a
> > verb. It makes sense because MOMON in this case focuses on the role
> > of the object of a given predication. But in the case of a
> > prepositional phrase like "On the park only", it is extremely
> > difficult for ONLY to modify THE PARK, because THE PARK itself
> > is not a part of a predication. If we think that ONLY modifies
> > the whole prepositional phrase ON THE PARK, then ONLY
> > focus on ON THE PARK in relation to the predication in which ON THE
> > PARK plays a role.
> > >
> > The following example may be a counterexample for my hypothesis.
> >
> > > (3) Room for only one passenger.
> > >
> > But here ONLY ONE as a whole is a predication which modifies PASSENGER.
> >
> > The conclusion: MONON, like ONLY in English, is used to focus on a
> > constituent which plays a role in a surrounding predicate. If this
> > hypothesis is right, then OUK EK PISTEWS MONON should be
> > diagrammed as:
> > >
> > [ OUK [ [EK PISTEWS] MONON ] ]
> >
> > [EK PISTEWS] is a constituent playing a role in the surrounding
> > predication. Hence MONON can modify it.
> > >
> > Then a question is raised.
> > Why not OUK MONON EK PISTEWS? Then there would have been
> > no confusion.
> > >
> > Sincerely
> > Moon
> > Moon R. Jung
> > Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea
>
>
>
>
>
>---
>B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
>B-Greek mailing list
>B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek


_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail



More information about the B-Greek mailing list