[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #702
b-greek-digest Wednesday, 10 May 1995 Volume 01 : Number 702
In this issue:
Re: Son of Man in NRSV NT
Hellenistic Greek Lexicon
Re: The English Second Person Plural
Re: seminary questions
Son of Man, Again
Re: Gender [person as neutral]
Re: The English Second Person Plural
Re: HOMOIWMA
Re: The English Second Person Plural
Unsubscribe for the time being.
Inclusive Language
Searching for apples...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 16:57:23 -0600
Subject: Re: Son of Man in NRSV NT
>Tim Mclay wondered whether the NRSV avoided the title
>"Son of Man" in the NT as it does in Daniel 7:13.
>The NRSV translates with "Son of Man" consistently
>throughout the four gospels when Jesus uses the title
>of himself. In addition, the NRSV goes with "Son of
>Man" even at Revelation 14:14, where some find a
>Danielic allusion. It's amazing, then, that the
>NRSV goes with "human being" at Daniel 7:13.--Paul Moser,
>Loyola University of Chicago.
I wonder if it really is so amazing. The translators interpreted the phrase
to make it clear that the words in Dan 7:14 are not titular, as they appear
to be in the gospels. They do put the literal Aramaic in a note--without
capitalization. The title in the gospels is capitalized. I also noticed
that the NAB translates "a son of man"--without capitalization.
Having said that, I would still prefer to have the note and the text
reversed. I support what Carl Conrad said in his response.
For purposes of textual study the more literalistic translation would be
preferable. I suspect that the text as given in the NRSV is better for
liturgical reading, where the main purpose is to convey the sense--an
opinion sure to garner a good bit of response, I'm sure. :-)
An interesting comparison: Mark 2:12 and Matt 9:8. In Mark 2:12 the crowds
express amazement in the words "We have never seen anything like this!" In
Matt 9:8 they "glorified God who had given such authority to human beings
(ANTHROPOIS)." Is that a Matthaean interpretation of "Son of Man" in 9:6?
Edgar Krentz <emkrentz@mcs.com>
New Testament, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th St., Chicago, IL 60615
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 15:23:41 PDT
Subject: Hellenistic Greek Lexicon
Thanks to those who responded to my query about a lexicon for Hellenistic
Greek. I'd now like to add a follow-on question. Can someone please tell me
the features of the TLG? Thanks.
Ken Litwak
Emeryville, CA
------------------------------
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 17:54:13 -0600
Subject: Re: The English Second Person Plural
>On Sat, 6 May 1995, Ellen Adams wrote:
>
>>Someone else suggested earlier that we reinstitute the old English
>>werman, to specify the male. While were at it, could we add ifn when
>>ei..an introduce a subjunctive, and yall as the plural of you?
>
>Ellen--
>
>Y'all is the plural of you. It has been all of my life. Where are you from,
>anyway? :-)
>
>--Bruce (born and bred in Texas; another wacko from Waco)
>
>*******************************************************************************
>*
>Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
>Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
>Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
>*******************************************************************************
Bruce and Ellen,
If my meory serves me right, Bruce's Texan plural may be a local
dialectical variant. I recall someone from New Orleans telling me that "you
all" was plural, but "y'all" was applicable also to one addressee, as in
"Y'all come, now, hear?"
Local dialectical variation is an interesting study. Old St. Louisans did
not ride in cars, but machines. Their dishes were "greezy," not greasy. Or
take the variation in meaning for "soda"! In northern Indiana that was a
combination of ice cream and root beer or the like, but in St. Louis it was
the correct term for a soft drink, while Fort Wayners called that
"pop"--which led to those crude jokes about pop on ice.
Enough fun for now! ;-)
------------------------------
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 17:54:19 -0600
Subject: Re: seminary questions
>Could anyone on the list help my friend with answers to these
>questions (reply to me is fine). Thanks
>...
>>
>> 1. It is quite possible that Deborah and I could end up moving
>> to the Reston, Virginia area in the next couple of years. We
>> can't seem to think of any seminaries anywhere around D.C., but
>> there must be several. Do you know of any? Would you recommend
>> any ones in particular.
>>
>> 2. The American Geological Institute produces a book that lists
>> all the geology departments in North America. Do you know if
>> there is a book that lists seminaries?
2. Yes there is a book listing seminaries. Go to Garrett Theological
Seminary on the Northwestern campus and ask to see the Association of
Theological Schools list of members. That is the accrediting agency for
theological education. [The registrar's office will have that, for sure; so
will the dean of the faculty.]
1. There are a number of seminaries close to or in Washington, DC. Here are
two that occur to me right off.
Wesley Theological Seminary, 4500 Mass. Ave., NW, 20016 (Methodist)
Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Alexandria, VA 22304 (Episcopal)
That should do for a starter.
Edgar Krentz <emkrentz@mcs.com>
New Testament, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th St., Chicago, IL 60615
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Tue, 09 May 95 18:22 CDT
Subject: Son of Man, Again
Carl Conrad asked whether translators should favor
the likely understanding of an original audience over
a later, perhaps theologically enriched understanding.
That question is undeniably important, but it need not
be answered to find fault with the NRSV translation of
the Aramaic "bar nash" (or, "bar nasha'") in Daniel
7:13. The translators should have used "son of man"
(note the absence of caps) because it is more accurate
(even by the lights of the original audience) than
"human being" and it (unlike "human being") enables,
but does not require, a parallel with the obviously
titular use in the NT. Criticism of the NRSV here
does not require the reading of NT developments into
OT translation; it requires only a demand for
sufficiently accurate and specific translation that
enables clear parallel uses in the NT.
By the way, Howard Clark Kee's glossary entry for
"Son of man" in the Cambridge Annotated Study Bible,
NRSV, makes the false claim that outside the gospels,
the NT uses "Son of man" only in Stephen's vision
in Acts 7. Surely Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 should
have been added to Kee's list, especially since the
NRSV itself regards those uses as titular. It's
arguable, too, that the latter two uses are Danielic
in allusion. Hence, it seems that the NRSV blundered
in translating Daniel 7:13.--Paul Moser, Loyola University
of Chicago.
------------------------------
From: "Philip L. Graber" <pgraber@emory.edu>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 19:30:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Gender [person as neutral]
On Tue, 9 May 1995, Tom Blake wrote:
> If my sister is hurt by my words, then I should give up my words.
This is certainly the correct attitude, but in the current climate, it
may reduce us to silence. Hmmm.....
Philip Graber
------------------------------
From: Gary Meadors <gmeadors@epix.net>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 19:29:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: The English Second Person Plural
On Tue, 9 May 1995, Bruce Terry wrote:
> On Sat, 6 May 1995, Ellen Adams wrote:
>
> >Someone else suggested earlier that we reinstitute the old English
> >werman, to specify the male. While were at it, could we add ifn when
> >ei..an introduce a subjunctive, and yall as the plural of you?
>
> Ellen--
>
> Y'all is the plural of you. It has been all of my life. Where are you from,
> anyway? :-)
>
> --Bruce (born and bred in Texas; another wacko from Waco)
>
> ********************************************************************************
> Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
> Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
> Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
> ********************************************************************************
>
I learned Y'all as Ya'll. Southern IN migrant from Kentuck.
Gary Meadors
BBSPa
------------------------------
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 20:20:19 -0600
Subject: Re: HOMOIWMA
>On Tue, 9 May 1995 perry.stepp@chrysalis.org wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to find secular Greek references to HOMOIWMA, "likeness," for a
>> monograph on Rom 6.1-14 I'm revising for publication. BAGD and LSJ are of
>> little help on this particular word, and the only person I know who has
>>access
>> to the TLG is on vacation, so I thought I'd throw the question out to the
>>list.
>>
>> Perry L. Stepp, Baylor University
>
>Dr. Timothy L. Bratton bratton@acc.jc.edu
>Department of History/Pol. Science work: 1-701-252-3467, ext. 2022
>6006 Jamestown College home: 1-701-252-8895
>Jamestown, ND 58405 home phone/fax: 1-701-252-7507
>
>Dear Perry:
> I took a quick look at my old Liddell & Scott _An Intermediate
>Greek-English Lexicon_. The word is defined as "likeness, image,
>resemblance, counterfeit," and the classical authority cited was Plato.
>This sounds very much like Plato's ranting against artists who only
>imitate reality, so I would try his _Republic_ or any other treatise in
>which he criticizes the arts. In turn, this distinction might appear in
>Neoplatonic works also. Anyway, it's a start. Good luck!
I can add one or two other references, which you can track down in a major
academic library; but you probably have all of them by now. The term is
rare; I suspect you will not find dozens of passages.
There is a occurrence of the term in "a difficult context" in OGIS 669,
line 52, I century CE, according to Noultin & Milligan's_Vocabulary of the
Greek Testament_, s.b., p. 449. Reference also in LSJ
They also suggest a look at R. C. Trench, _Synonyms of the New Testament_,
p. 49. He calls attention Plato's _Phaedrus_ 250b, where HOMOIWMA and EIKON
seem to be used as synonyms.
LSJM, 9th ed., add the following references:Plato, _Sophist_ 266d,
Aristotle, _Rhet_ 1356a31, Epicurus,_Epistle_ 1, p. 10 Usener; _De rerum
natura 11.6
Back in 1964 Ernst Kaesemann noted in one of his lectures that the term
deserved a doctoral dissertation, given its appearance in Romans and the
Christ hymn in Philippians.
Edgar Krentz <emkrentz@mcs.com>
New Testament, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th St., Chicago, IL 60615
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752
------------------------------
From: "James D. Ernest" <ernest@mv.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 21:25:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: The English Second Person Plural
On Tue, 9 May 1995, Edgar M. Krentz wrote:
> If my meory serves me right, Bruce's Texan plural may be a local
> dialectical variant. I recall someone from New Orleans telling me that "you
> all" was plural, but "y'all" was applicable also to one addressee, as in
> "Y'all come, now, hear?"
AAAAK! One of my triggers! In my experience, "y'all" is used as
a singular only by Northerners trying very unsuccessfully to imitate
Suthrn. You might say "ya'll come" to one person, but then you
have just invited him to bring the whole clan along. --On the
other hand, who I am to argue with someone from Norlens?
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
James D. Ernest Joint Doctoral Program
Manchester, New Hampshire, USA Andover-Newton/Boston College
Internet: ernest@mv.mv.com Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
- --but raised in Virginny
------------------------------
From: JFantin@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 21:28:32 -0400
Subject: Unsubscribe for the time being.
Presently I am unable to keep up with computer mail due to other commitments.
Please unsubscribe. Thank you.
------------------------------
From: ATaranto@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 23:49:51 -0400
Subject: Inclusive Language
Current English usage seems to be that "man" refers to male persons, while
"human" refers to persons both male and female. Some, however, would point
out that "human" still has sexest connotations since the word "man" is
burried therein (just as some argue that "history" is a sexest term because
it is only "his story").
(As far as I can tell, there are no appreciable sexual biases in the Latin
cognates of "human," by the way.)
ANHR and ANQROPOS seem to be analogous to "man" and "human," respectively.
To my understanding, ANQROPOS can refer either to a male, exclusively, or a
sex-indeterminate person, but not to a female, exclusively. Is there
anything (etymologically speaking or otherwise) worth pursuing here?
Just a couple of cents on inclusive language in general. The most crucial
issue ought to be clarity in usage and not giving women/minorities/whatever
amends or amenities, as "inclusiveness" is often understood. For example,
the creed that refers to the salvation of men (with the conspicuous omission
of women) ought to be reworded since it is absurd to say that women have any
less chance of being saved than men (let alone that they cannot be saved at
all): "man," in this case, is ambiguous and misleading, though not
intentionally exclusive. I'm not familiar with the NRSV or the RSV, but I'm
sure that in the former, judging by everybody's (now _there_ is an inclusive
term) comments, much was accomplished in erasing ambiguity. At bottom, I'd
prefer "ambiguous" and "unambiguous," to "exclusive" and "inclusive," if for
no other reason than that I'm not a Barbara Streisand fan.
Andrew Taranto
------------------------------
From: Shaughn Daniel <zxmli05@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
Date: Wed, 10 May 1995 04:00:24 +0000
Subject: Searching for apples...
I'm wondering if anyone knows whether the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin word for
"apple" occurs in any ancient Hebrew, Greek, or Latin proverbs that would
mean "Like father/mother, like son/daughter" as found in the phrase "The
apple doesn't fall far from the tree".
<heb>tapuach</hb>
<grk>mhlon</gk>
<lat>malum</lat>
The reason I'm asking is from curiosity sparked from reading a very
interesting article found at
<http://ftp.utas.edu.au/docs/flonta/DP,1,1,95/APPLE.html> by Wolfgang
Mieder on the web. The author asserts that the phrase "the apple doesn't
fall far from the tree" is an original German proverb transported to
America, but there is enough discussion in his article to suggest to my
mind that a German->Yiddish->Hebrew background might be there:
<quote>The older German proverb was loan translated into
Yiddish and most likely spread among Jews that way
throughout Europe. Earlier Jewish immigrants but
perhaps especially those coming to America during
the Nazi holocaust carried the Yiddish version with
them. And perhaps we have a small folkloric irony
here in stating that the actual popularity of the
German proverb did not really establish itself widely
in America until after the Second World War, when the
new German and Jewish immigrants began to translate
the proverb into English.</quote>
Further, please excuse my ignorance, but since most of my ancient language
dictionaries are TARGET LANGUAGE-->ENGLISH and not the reverse, do I have
to wait around 10 years or so (assuming that I read a lot in Greek, Hebrew,
and Latin literature in the meantime) before I would be able to know what
the word "apple" was in Greek, Hebrew, or Latin or continue to go about
this in a roundabout way of English Bible->Hebrew Bible->LXX->Vulgata? In
other words, what dictionaries exist which are ENGLISH-->TARGET LANGUAGE
for ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew? (Louw & Nida's English-Greek index
does not have an "apple"; Cassell's Latin Dictionary has a handy
English->Latin section).
HEBREW BIBLE REFERENCES TO APPLE:
Proverbs 25.11 (NIV):
A word aptly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver.
Joel 1.12 (NIV):
The vine is dried up and the fig tree is withered;
the pomegranate, the palm and the apple tree--
all the trees of the field--are dried up.
Surely the joy of mankind is withered away.
Canticles 2.3,5 (NIV):
3 Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest
is my lover among the young men.
5 Strengthen me with raisins, refresh me with apples,
for I am faint with love.
Canticles 7.8 (NIV):
8 I said, "I will climb the palm tree; I will take hold of its fruit."
May your breasts be like the clusters of the vine,
the fragrance of your breath like apples,
9 and your mouth like the best wine.
Canticles 8.5
5 Under the apple tree I roused you;
there your mother conceived you,
there she who was in labor gave you birth.
Another thing here pops to mind in reading the passages in Canticles: was
it customary/romantic to make love or give birth under an apple tree? Could
this have any resemblance, either positively or negatively, to the
connotation of the English phrases "the backseat of a car" or "behind
closed doors"?
Sincerely,
Shaughn Daniel
Tuebingen, Germany
P.S. Please forgive any duplication which may result from your subscription
to one or more of these lists to which I'm sending this message.
*---------------------------------------------------------------*
| Shaughn Daniel zxmli05@student.uni-tuebingen.de |\
| Tuebingen, Germany | |
| ~~~~~ | |
| I put tape on the mirrors in my house so I don't accidentally | |
| walk through into another dimension.---Steven Wright | |
*---------------------------------------------------------------* |
\_______________________________________________________________\|
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #702
*****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu