From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 12 1996 - 15:48:00 EST
>At 2:50 PM 1/12/96, Bruce Terry wrote:
>>On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>>
>>>At 1:38 PM 1/12/96, Bruce Terry wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 11 Jan 1996, Kenneth Litwak wrote (in part):
>>>>
>>>>>4. Finally, II:7 says ou mishseis panta anqrwpou. I think this says
>>>>>"You shall not hate every person", while Lightfoot translates it as
>>>>>"thou shalt not hate any man". I don't think I accept translating pas as
>>>>>"any". that's what tis is for. Comments?
>>>>
>>>>The rule of thumb here is to translate PAS as "any" when used with a
>>>>negative.
>>>>This is because Greek PAS is used with different meaning than English "all"
>>>>with negatives. If you translate this, "You shall not hate every person,"
>>>>some English speaker is bound to say, "I don't hate every person; it's just
>>>>so-and-so that I hate."
>>>
>>>Nevertheless, Bruce, I think this must be a Semitism. In Attic Greek PANTA
>>>ANQRWPON used thus would have to mean "every person." I really think this
>>>derives from Hebrew QOL's usage. BDF note this as "Hebraizing" at #302.
>>
>>My point, Carl, is that the English is capable of sustaining two meanings, one
>>of which I don't think the Greek contains (but perhaps I am wrong; you have
>>read much more extensively in Classical Greek than I). English "every person"
>>can mean not only "each and every person" viewed individually (i.e. "each and
>>every person you shall not hate" or "you shall not hate any person at all"),
>>but also "all the people" viewed collectively ("you shall not hate every
>>single last person" or "you shall not hate the sum total of the people"). If
>>I am not mistaken, the Greek only allows the former. The reason for
>>translating PAS as "any" does not have to do with what Greek or Hebrew means,
>>but with the ambiguity in the English. Does this ambiguity also exist in the
>>Greek? Can PANTA ANQRWPON mean "all the people" as English can?
>>
>>The meaning is obviously the former in the passage at hand, but the convention
>>of translating PAS as "any" is to reduce the ambiguity and keep some wit from
>>taking the other possible meaning in English.
>
>I think I see your point, but I wonder whether you're expressing it as
>clearly as it might be put (more likely I'm misunderstanding, I guess). Is
>it really that _English_ is capable of sustaining two meanings or that the
>Greek PAS is thus capable. It seems to me that English normally uses
>either the indirect article (a, an) or "any," which, I think, is another
>form of the indirect article) to express what Greek normally expresses
>using TIS. PAS in Greek normally expresses wholeness singly or plurally. I
>think it's where the Hellenistic or specifically Hebraizing Greek uses PAS
>for "any" that English-speakers have problems. The phrase we have in the
>Didache above,
>OU MISHSEIS PANTA ANQRWPON is, in fact, not "normal idiomatic Greek"--not
>even, I believe, normal Hellenistic idiomatic Greek. Rather one would find
>OU MH MISHSHiS MHDENA ANQRWPON (in fact, I think that even the use of the
>future indicative with MH is a Semitism). So I think it's the use of PAS
>in the Greek that's the anomaly, rather than something ambiguous in
>English.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:35 EDT