I'm not attempting to teach you anything about linguistics, but I do
want to address a few points in your submission.
---Rolf Furuli wrote:
>
> Dear list-members,
>
> The word "entropy" is a measure of disorder, related to the second
law of
> thermodynamics. Simply stated, this law tells that everything
deteriorates,
> and it also applies to the transfer of information; some information
is
> lost or distorted on the way.
[SNIP]
>What prompted me to
> write this post, is the book "Linguistics for Students of New
Testament
> Greek", 1995, by D.A. Black, which I recently got hold of. A very
fine
> book in many ways, but the treatment of "Word and Concept" (p 123)
leaves
> much to be desired. Or put differently: Theology, which James Barr
pointed
> out has no legitimate place in word studies, is by Black smuggled back
> through the backdoor. This is seen by his definition of "concept".
> The author tells that DIKAIOS,AGAQOS,hAGIOS, KAQAROS,KALOS and hOSIOS
> constitute *one* concept, which he expresses by the *English* word
> "righteous". He does of course not suggest that the original readers
knew
> English, and therefore must his argument imply that there is a Greek
> counterpart to the English "righteous", i.e. a Greek "
umbrella"-concept
> (or word) under which the mentioned words can be subsumed. But what
is this
> Greek concept, where is it, and how was it recognized?
While I am probably on the same page with you linguistically, I also
understand Black's point. He notes: "All languages have several ways
of expressing a concept, and rarely does a concept consist of one
word" (Black 123).
Notice that Black does not say that one word never expresses a
concept: he only writes that it is a rare phenomenon. Furthermore,
Black exclaims that all languages have several ways of expressing a
concept. Greek is no different. This can be easily demonstrated by the
Grecian concept of love. The Hellenistic concept of love is not, nor
was it (in times of antiquity) expressed by one word. There are a
number of words used to express the concept of love in Greek. The
concept does not "consist of one word."
Black correctly writes: "A word study of DIKAIOS alone, therefore,
would hardly be sufficient as a basis for discussion of the full and
complete concept of "righteous" in the New Testament" (123).
>The problem is that
> "meaning" is recognized by the human mind as words or other signs,
and to
> recognize a word we must know what it sounds like, its role in the
clause,
> and its sense. But there is no Greek word serving as an umbrella
term for
> the mentioned words, being equivalent to the English "righteous"
(BTW,
> what is "equivalent" in this context?).
I may be misunderstanding your argument here, but I don't think that
Black is saying that A Greek word serves as an umbrella concept for
the word "righteous." As a matter of fact, he seems to be saying the
opposite:
"In treating individual words as if they were concepts, it [TDNT]
implies (incorrectly) that the words themselves contain the various
theological meanings assigned to them. But the meaning of the words,
as we have seen, is determined from the way they are used in context"
(123.
>So the semantic domain model as
> described by Black postulates a *concept* which has no foundation
> whatsoever, and which is tied up neither with sounds nor with
grammar nor
> with sense. But Black explicitly states that the foundation of this
broad
> *concept* is theology; thus theology is introduced into lexical
semantics.
I would respectfully disagree here, Rolf. Black's work MUST be read in
its context. It is a book designed for students of the Greek NT. So,
of course, it is tinged with theology. This doesn't mean, however,
that Black feels that theology should either control or necessarily
influence lexical semantics proper:
"These larger literary contexts, and not words, are the real
linguistic carriers of theological meaning. The point is that we learn
much more about the doctrine of the church from a study of the Book of
Ephesians than from a word study of EKKLHSIA" (123).
> I am aware of no scientific studies yielding data indicating the
existence
> of concepts ( in the linguistic sense) of such a broad nature as
those
> mentioned by Black, but there are a host of studies suggesting that
*every*
> word signals *one single* concept (See P Cotterell, M Turner, 1989,
> "Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation" p 146-). The seven concepts
> signalled by the seven words above may be very close in meaning, but
in
> each case is there a distinction in sound and in sense.
I don't think that Black is denying the distinction between the seven
words in question. I think he is simply saying that all seven words
help us to understand and express the concept of righteousness. This
could also be illustrated with the English word "sin." While it is
true that hAMARTIA can and does express the concept of "sin," there
are other Greek words that also express this concept. The concept of
"sin" is not tied to only one word. This is Black's point.
Regards,
Edgar Foster
Lenoir-Rhyne College
Classics Major
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com