[B-Greek] LInguistic question on Luke 1:1

Ann Nyland accuratebibles at ozemail.com.au
Mon Jul 21 17:57:32 EDT 2003


To understand precisely what a NT lexicographer does, I recommend the book
by Silva which was cited on this list a couple of days ago coupled with the
paper I cited, and I would add the short paper:
G.H.R. Horsley, "Towards a lexicon of the New Testament with documentary
parallels", Atti del XXII Congresso Internationale di Papirologia, Firenze
1998; Instituto Papirologico <<G.Vitelli>> Firenze, 2001.

Kent, I hope these help. Lexicographers do far more than make up a lexicon,
and even in that regard, current lexiographers are producing work which will
be an enormous advance on the available lexica. (By the way, I should add
that it is documentary evidence rather than literary which is the focus of
N.T. lexicography, and has been for the last 100 years, since Deissmann.)

Ann Nyland

----- Original Message -----
From: "kent lee" <k-lee7 at students.uiuc.edu>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 5:55 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] LInguistic question on Luke 1:1


>
>    I find some of this recent discussion odd, namely, the a priori
> dismissal of the relevance of current linguistics to matters of biblical
> interpretation. Lexicography is a sort of applied linguistics, and the
> information that it can provide on word meanings is probably sufficient
> for many students of biblical Greek or biblical scholars. However, its
> domain is more restricted to denotational meaning in literary contexts,
> and some scholars have questions that go beyond what lexicons can provide.
> In such cases, it is necessary to turn to other relevant fields for
> methods that can help answer those questions.  Such is the case here, and
> we can't dismiss a priori other relevant paradigms that can help us.
>    For a case like this, this is a valid area of linguistic inquiry, where
> semantics, pragmatics, and discourse analysis can be helpful to understand
> how the original audience might have understood the meaning of a biblical
> text or a particular word, based on the interaction of semantics and
> context, i.e., pragmatics, and how these interacted with genre and
> reader/listener expectations in shaping interpretation (pragmatics and
> discourse analysis).
>    For semantics, the functional/cognitive approaches to semantics would
> be more practical for biblical scholars. For this, works by John Taylor
> (_Linguistic categorization) or Cliff Goddard (_Semantic analysis: a
> practical introduction_) would be a good, easily accessible introduction,
> especially Goddard, who also discusses pragmatics. M.M. Turner & Peter
> Cotterell (_Linguistics and interpretation_, InterVarsity Press, 1988)
> discuss pragmatics and biblical interpretation. For more theoretical
> pragmatics, a good but sometimes more difficult reading is G. Green's
> _Pragmatics and natural language understanding_.
>    These linguistic paradigms can be very useful to biblical scholars and
> language scholars, and can provide well grounded methodologies that can be
> brought to bear on interpretive questions, and can help us avoid the
> linguistic abuses of two dangerous extremes, of excessive literalism or
> unbridled deconstructionism.
>
>
> kent lee




More information about the B-Greek mailing list