From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Jan 04 2000 - 15:36:43 EST
At 1:11 PM -0600 1/4/00, Bill Ross wrote:
><Bill>.... and so I look for what might be a subtle but profound difference.
>
><Carl>
>Bill, I don't want to say nor do I mean that you're wrong about this, but I
>do think you ought to consider an alternative to what you're asserting
>here. Do YOU, in writing an e-mail or in conversation, sometimes say "since
>..." and sometimes say "because ..." without meaning any significant
>difference whatsoever?
>
><Bill>
>Than you, Carl, for your balancing point, which certainly applies to many
>situations where words are thoroughly interchangable. "Since" and "because"
>are indeed often used 100% synonymously with zero difference intended.
>
>On the other hand, DIA is so commonly used to mean "because" (ie: agency)
>that the sudden appearance of the words EF W (which appear only 4 times in
>the NT) I feel demand that the reader suspect that there is a reason. Glibly
>assuming that it is identical in meaning as "DIA" seem profoundly naive to
>me! Especially in the one verse in the NT that *seems to* be an explicit
>reference to "original sin."
>
>And as I showed its usage in Acts 7:33, it need not be idiomatic at all.
I'm going to come back to your original point in order to demonstrate more
precisely what I meant--and this time I shall have to say that I do indeed
think that your argument is fallacious.
You first wrote:
>For an inquiry into a very profound difference, look at the similar section
>in Romans 5:12
>
>Romans 5:12 DIA TOUTO WSPER DI ENOS ANQRWPOU H AMARTIA EIS TON KOSMON
>EISHLQEN KAI DIA THS AMARTIAS O QANATOS KAI OUTWS EIS PANTAS ANQRWPOUS O
>QANATOS DIHLQEN ****EF W**** PANTES HMARTON (breathing marks omitted)
>
>The words EF hW are commonly translated "because." I personally object to
>this. In the same sentence Paul uses DIA for that purpose.
In fact, however, DIA is not used so simply; DIA is used with TOUTO, TOUTO
referring to the proposition that Paul has just previously stated and DIA
TOUTO points backward to that proposition as the ground of what is now
being stated. So it's "For this reason (or 'because of this'), just as
through one man sin entered in ..." Although DIA may be used with a
relative pronoun that has fused with it (e.g. DIO = DI' hO\ = 'therefore'),
DIA doesn't ever function by itself as a causal adverb meaning 'because'
but rather as a preposition with an object, here TOUTO, 'because of this'
>The words are literally "upon which" as in Acts 7:33:
>
>Acts 7:33 EIPEN DE AUTWi hO KURIOS: LUSON TO hUPODHMA TWN PODWN SOU, hO
>GAR >TOPOS EF' hWi hESTHKAS GH hAGIA ESTI
EF' hWi here is only superficially comparable to the adverbial conjunctive
phrase EF' hWi; here EPI is the preposition used with a locative dative
"upon" and the hWi is in this instance a relative pronoun referring back to
the antecedent TOPOS.
>This leads me to the conclusion that, to Paul, the first phrase is the
>antecedent of the second, not the result. That is "all died, upon which [EF
>W] all sinned" not "all died, because [DIA] all sinned"
Here are the four GNT texts wherein EF' hWi appears, in every one of which
the prepositional phrase EF' hWi may legitimately be translated "because"
or "since":
Rom 5:12 DIA TOUTO hWSPER DI' hENOS ANQRWPOU hH hAMARTIA EIS TON KOSMON
EISHLQEN KAI DIA THS hAMAARTIAS hO QANATOS, KAI hOUTWS EIS PANTAS ANQRWPOUS
hO QANATOS DIHLQEN, EF' hWi PANTES hHMARTON ("... because/since they have
all sinned")
2 COR 5:4 KAI GAR hOI ONTES EN TWi SKHNEI STENAZOMEN BAROUMENOI, EF' HWi OU
QELOMEN EKDUSASQAI ALL' EPENDUSASQAI, hINA KATAPOQHi TO QNHTON hUPO THS
ZWHS. ("... because/since we don't want to strip naked but rather to put on
new clothes ...")
Phil 3:12 OUC' hOTI HDH ELABON H HDH TETELEIWMAI, DIWKW DE EI KAI KATALABW,
EF' hWi KAI KATELHMFQHN hUPO CRISTOU [IHSOU]. ("... because/since I too
have been gripped firmly by Christ [Jesus].")
Phil 4:12 ECARHN DE EN KURIWi MEGALWS hOTI HDH POTE ANEQALETE TO hUPER EMOU
FRONEIN, EF' hWi KAI EFRONEITE, HKAIREISQE DE. ("... because/since you were
indeed anxious (about me) but your timing was bad.")
In sum, there's all the difference in the world between DIA TOUTO and EF'
hWi; the former means "for this reason" or "because of this" or
"therefore", while the latter means "because" or "since" and functions as
an adverbial conjunction introducing the clause explaining the reason for
what was just asserted.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:53 EDT