From: Moon-Ryul Jung (moon@saint.soongsil.ac.kr)
Date: Tue Feb 13 2001 - 11:39:35 EST
[Iver]
I was surprised that
> >both Carl
> >and Carlton suggested that the negative particle would govern an implied verb.
>
[Carl] It's not all very uncommon that it ends a sentence negating an
implied
> verb, for example, Mt 22:17 EIPE OUN hHMIN TI SOI DOKEI: EXESTIN DOUNAI
> KHNSON KAISARI H OU -- where the H OU must clearly represent H OUK EXESTIN?
>
> [Moon]
Here OU governs EXESTIN, because the contrast is between EXESTIN or OUK
EXESTIN, not because EXESTIN is the implied verb.
[Iver]
> >Matt 4:4 OUK EP' ARTWi MONWi ZHSETAI hO ANWRWPOS, ALL' EPI PANTI hRHMATI...
> >
> >"bread" - physical food - is contrasted with "every word" - spiritual
> >food. Not
> >only food, but words are we to "eat". It is not a matter of "eating" or "not
> >eating", but what you eat.
> >
> >Mat 7:21 OU PAS hO LEGWN MOI KURIE KURIE ...ALLA hO POIWN TO QELHMA TOU PATROS
> >MOU
> >
> >Here two potential subjects for "entering the Kingdom of God" are contrasted.
> >Not all who say Lord, but those who do the will of God.
> >
> >Mat 9:13 ELEOS QELW, KAI OU QUSIAN. OU GAR HLQON KALESAI DIKAIOUS ALLA
> >hAMARTWLOUS
> >
> >In the first part, the two objects for what God wants are contrasted:
> >"ordinary
> >sacrifice" or "mercy". It is true, of course, that the word QELW is implied in
> >the second part, so a full form would be ELEOS QELW, KAI OU QUSIAN QELW "I
> >want
> >mercy, and I do not want sacrifice." (A Hebrew way of saying: I would rather
> >have one than the other.)
> >The focus in the Greek (confer word order) is on the contrast, and to show
> >that
> >clearly in English we would have to change it to something like "It is mercy
> >that I want and not sacrifice."
> >
> >The second part also has a negative. In this case the negative occurs
> >before the
> >main verb, and since the main verb is the nucleus of the clause, it is the
> >whole
> >clause that is negated and contrasted with another potential clause. A
> >full form
> >of the second sentence would be:
> >OU GAR HLQON KALESAI DIKAIOUS ALLA HLQON KALESAI hAMARTWLOUS "For I did
> >not come
> >to call righteous people, but I came to call sinful people." Although
> >there is a
> >contrast between righteous and sinners, the focus is on the coming of Jesus -
> >for what purpose did he come. Again, an understanding of the function of word
> >order in Greek is crucial for a clear understanding of the focus and
> >contrasts.
[Carl]
>
> I think that the contrast in the above instances is clearly indicated by
> the ALLA joining the second clause to the first (or should I say
> "disjoining"?
>
[Moon]
In the following example, the contrasting pair is joined by KAI.
> >Mat 9:13 ELEOS QELW, KAI OU QUSIAN. OU GAR HLQON KALESAI DIKAIOUS ALLA
> >hAMARTWLOUS
[Iver]
> >Matt 12:29 EAN MH PRWTON DHSHi TON ISCURON "if he does not first bind the
> >strong one"
> >
> >It is not binding or not binding that is contrasted, but what is done
> >first. The
> >binding has to come before entering into the house.
> >
> >Mat 16:11 PWS OU NOEITE hOTI OU PERI ARTWN EIPON hUMIN
> >"How could you not-understand that I spoke to you not-about-leaves (but about
> >something else)"
>
[Carl]
> I am more inclined to think that here too the OU governs the verb EIPON
(or the
whole clause) rather than the prepositional phrase, PERI
> ARTWN, and that the position of PERI ARTWN is governed by its emphasis.
> Ordinary English, by the way, would convert that Greek to "How is it that
> you didn't understand that I was not talking to you about loaves?"
>
[Moon]
In the last two examples of Iver, it is not clear what are contrasted.
In Matt 12:29, MH seems to govern the whole verb phrase PRWTON DHSHi.
In the case of the example Carl mentioned, the contrast between
PERI ARTWN and something else is not clear. So in this case as well, OU
seems to govern the whole verb phrase.
[Carl]\
> Here I would raise a question that has a bearing upon yesterday's question
> (at least it was first raised yesterday) about the negation in OUC
> hARPAGMON hHGHSATO; I'd say that the OUC here, although placed before the
> noun hARPAGMON, actually negates the verb hHGHSATO--although I might be
> willing to accept the view that it negates the whole clause.
>
I agree.
Moon
Moon-Ryul Jung
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:50 EDT