[B-Greek] hPER DE

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri May 29 06:33:54 EDT 2009


A small comment below:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Runge" <srunge at logos.com>
To: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>; "BG" 
<b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 28. maj 2009 18:34
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] hPER DE


> Elizabeth,
>
> I am not sure what of Levinsohn you have read, but your rendering here is 
> within the scope of how he describes DE, marking the next step or development 
> of the story or argument. The presence of contrast is not a bench mark that he 
> has set, but instead is found more in traditional explanations. I maintain 
> that neither KAI nor DE indicate the presence of semantic continuity or 
> discontinuity, as do AND and BUT in English. Your description fits well with 
> the view of DE marking the next development or stage of the discourse.
>
> As horrified as you may be about this (in the cataphoric sense), you may agree 
> with Levinsohn more than you think.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org 
> [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Kline
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:27 AM
> To: BG
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] hPER DE
>
> Iver,
>
> TOUTWN KAI TWN KATA MEROS and what is said in the preceding context are 
> coreferential. The fact that different levels of detail are suggested doesn't 
> override the fact that they point to the same thing.
>
> DE can be used to introduce contrast, but it is commonly used as a bland 
> conjunction with a function of "addition" which seems to be the most obvious 
> way to understand it here. To read here a note of contrast between the 
> "executive summary" and the promised KAI TWN KATA MEROS seems a bit forced. On 
> this topic, and its details, I have read S.Levinsohn numerous times over 
> fifteen years and will have to admit that I find his treatment of DE difficult 
> to accept.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Elizabeth Kline

Just a point of clarification. I did not say that DE is used to introduce a 
contrast, but a change. The contrast is indicated by the fronting. I do not 
necessarily follow Levinsohn in his treatment of DE, at least not in all 
details, but he does not say that DE indicates contrast. He has a more complex 
discourse discription of its various functions.
I believe it is generally recognized that one cannot equate DE with English 
"but".

What I said was:
"The DE in 20 introduces a new paragraph, a change from the general to the 
specific and
from what has been done to what will be done in that he says: Concerning the
details of these matters, my representatives (who carry the response) and yours
will discuss it. In my view, the fronting contrasts the general response already
given in the letter to the specific and detailed discussion to come later."

Iver

>
> On May 27, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:
>
>>>
>>> While working through the Iver's comments on PERI DE in Paul, I was
>>> reading Helma Dik:2007 [1] and her discussion of themes, topics, and
>>> so forth. Rather than use her examples from Thucid. which might not
>>> go down well here, I found a passage 2Mac. 11:20 which illustrates a
>>> fronted constituent, introduced by hPER DE, which is used to link the
>>> following statement with the shared information from the preceding
>>> context.
>>>
>>> 2Mac. 11:20 ὑπὲρ δὲ τούτων καὶ τῶν κατὰ μέρος ἐντέταλμαι τούτοις τε
>>> καὶ τοῖς παρ᾿ ἐμοῦ διαλεχθῆναι ὑμῖν
>>>
>>> 2MAC. 11:20 hUPER DE TOUTWN KAI TWN KATA MEROS ENTETALMAI TOUTOIS TE
>>> KAI TOIS PAR᾿ EMOU DIALECQHNAI hUMIN
>>>
>>> The fronted constituent  hUPER DE TOUTWN KAI TWN KATA MEROS is
>>> anaphoric, summing up what has been said in the immediately preceding
>>> context and therefor can be assumed to be shared information. It
>>> serves to tie the former statements to ENTETALMAI TOUTOIS TE KAI TOIS
>>> PAR᾿ EMOU DIALECQHNAI hUMIN.
>>
>> I think this illustrates that hUPER can function in certain contexts
>> like PERI, but it not as common a PERI. There is also a PERI DE TOUTWN
>> in 2 Mac 4:43, where the TOUTWN is anaphoric as it usually is, but
>> PERI points forward to the charges leveled against Menelaos.
>>
>> Although TOUTWN is anaphoric the new theme introduced is shown by KATA
>> MEROS. I am afraid I do not agree that the hUPER phrase as a whole is
>> anaphoric, nor that it sums up the preceding context.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> NRSV has the following translation of the letter concerned:
>> "16 The letter written to the Jews by Lysias was to this effect:
>> “Lysias to the people of the Jews, greetings. 17 John and Absalom, who
>> were sent by you, have delivered your signed communication and have
>> asked about the matters indicated in it. 18 I have informed the king
>> of everything that needed to be brought before him, and he has agreed
>> to what was possible. 19 If you will maintain your goodwill toward the
>> government, I will endeavor in the future to help promote your
>> welfare. 20 And concerning such matters and their details, I have
>> ordered these men and my representatives to confer with you. 21
>> Farewell.
>> The one hundred forty-eighth year, Dioscorinthius twenty- fourth.”
>> (164 BC)
>>
>> Verses 16 to 19 gives the "executive summary" of Lysias' response
>> without details. He acknowledges receipt of their letter, and after
>> having discussed it with the king gives a promise of support, if the
>> Jews show goodwill.
>> The DE in
>> 20 introduces a new paragraph, a change from the general to the
>> specific and from what has been done to what will be done in that he
>> says:
>> Concerning the
>> details of these matters, my representatives (who carry the
>> response) and yours
>> will discuss it. In my view, the fronting contrasts the general
>> response already given in the letter to the specific and detailed
>> discussion to come later.




More information about the B-Greek mailing list