From: Bruce Terry (terry@bible.acu.edu)
Date: Thu Dec 07 1995 - 20:12:38 EST
On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>I've been thinking some more about the weird construction in Mk 2:20 and
>Mt's parallel 9:15): ELEUSONTAI DE hHMERAI hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
>NUMFIOS, KAI TOTE NHSTEUSOUSIN EN EKEINHi THi hHMERAi. It's pretty clear
>that the way Mark phrases this, the last clause is independent
>grammatically, while ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI and hOTAN APARQHi NUMFIOS are
>intimately linked. Yet it cannot be said that the latter clause is the
>protasis of a condition, nor the former clause an apodosis. We cannot
>really translate hOTAN here as "whenever," despite the fact that it is used
>with an aorist subjunctive.
>
>BAGD say, "... where hHMERAI hOTAN, 'days when,' belong together and TOTE
>is connected with KAI)," admitting that this cannot be construed as an
>instance of the common hOTAN w/ subjunctive constructions (what I have
>called in my earlier post, in accordance with one common terminology,
>"future more vivid" and "present general" conditional constructions.
>
>So what is it? The comment by BAGD is correct, that hHMERAI hOTAN belong
>together here and the hOTAN + subj. clause is not linked in a conditional
>construction with ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI. I'm not a linguist, but as a
>grammarian I'd say that the hOTAN APARQHi clauses can only be understood as
>a relative clause--and an adjectival clause wherein hOTAN really is
>equivalent to EN hAIS. Is there a better way to understand the function of
>this clause?
Carl, I think you are on to something. The word "when" can be used as a
pronoun in English where the antecedent is a time noun. I'm not sure I want
to call it a relative pronoun, since it fills an adverbial slot, not a noun
slot (i.e. subject or object). On reflection, my example was poorly chosen
because the hOTAN clause is modifying hHMERAI in an adjectival relationship,
limiting the meaning of "days." It is not in an adverbial relationship to the
clause ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI; this is easily seen because it cannot be moved to
precede this clause and still mean the same thing.
The reason why you aren't comfortable translating hOTAN "whenever" here is
bacause in English "when" can be used as a pronoun, but "whenever" is not.
I doubt that this is either a solecism or a Semitism since the same kind of
construction occurs in English. The possibility exists that it may have been
introduced to English via the translation of the Bible into English, but I
suspect that it is a feature of Indo-European grammars (of course, it would
have rather restricted usage, only occurring when the noun antecedent is a
time word). Can anyone give examples from other languages? Also, does the
same thing happen with hOTE in Greek?
Thanks for smashing my example, since it was ill-chosen; however, "future more
vivid" construction or not, I still am not convinced that I Cor. 13:10 says
that the thing in part will be done away with *after* the perfect comes.
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:34 EDT