Brian E. Wilson wrote:
SNIP
Mt 8:5-10 is back-translated into Hebrew by M. Lowe and David Flusser
> of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research in ** ew Testament Studies
> 29.1, January.1983 **, page 29. Lowe and Flusser comment that the
> whole passage is ** translatable almost word for word into typical
> Hebrew of the period **. They back-translate EIPE LOGWi as as ** 'mor
> dabhar ** . Unfortunately this may not help us very much here, since **
> 'mor dabhar ** could also translate EIPE LOGON, and therefore throws no
> light on what sort of dative LOGWi is.
Brian,
Thanks for your helpful thoughts on this problem. I tried to run a search for
" ** 'mor dabhar **" hoping to se how the LXX would translate it. I got no
genuine hits so I'm wondering if I am not understanding the transliteration
correctly. I read this as alef mem waw res (also tried without the waw) -
dalet bet res. Have I gotten the forms wrong?
This back back translation is, of course, not an argument in support of the
"<<internal>> or <<cognate>> dative" as per Max Zerwick. the verbal root would
have to be DBR rather than 'MR for it to be cognate anything.
> If the official was a centurion, however, should we not also be
> considering whether the phrase might be a Latinism? The Vulgate
> rendering of EIPE LOGWi in both Mt 8:8 and Lk 7:7 is DIC VERBO.
>
> Now DIC VERBO can be literally translated - ** make a pronouncement by
> means of a spoken word ** .
>
> Equally, EIPE LOGWi can be literally translated -** make a pronouncement
> by means of a spoken word ** .
>
> It would seem, therefore, that in Mt 8:8 and Lk 7:7, LOGWi could be an
> instrumental dative in Greek reflecting an instrumental ablative in
> Latin. EIPE LOGWi may be Greek which has been given a deliberate Latin
> turn of phrase to befit a centurion.
> BRIAN WILSON
Your Latin connection is intriguing. I wonder if there might be evidence
in Latin Literature for Jonathan's speculation about a military idiom.
Thanks!
John M. Moe