From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Thu Dec 20 2001 - 19:51:09 EST
CWC: I'm forwarding this message for Paul Wendland rather than wait for
reformatting of it because it's timely on the current thread on a
relatively inactive list.
>Reply-To: "Paul O. Wendland" <wendlanp@wls.wels.net>
>From: "Paul O. Wendland" <wendlanp@wls.wels.net>
>To: Biblical Greek <b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
>Subject: [b-greek] Re: Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon
>Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:42:09 -0600
>
>Harry:
>
>I don't think the problem is so much one of erroneous definitions. I
>think Thayer in many ways is a fine and useful dictionary. He did his
>work at a time before the results of the research in the papyri were
>widely accepted and thus at a time when many scholars were still clinging
>to the belief there was something especially exalted about the vocabulary
>and syntax of the New Testament. A kind of special Holy Ghost language.
>So Thayer identified a number of words as being "unique" to Biblical Greek
>which Diessman (Light from the Ancient East, chapter 2, p, 65ff )
>correctly points out as being used by very ordinary people writing on
>papyri. You still run across the same thing today at times when folks
>overstate the suppleness of the Greek language as if "only Greek" were
>capable of expressing such sublime thoughts.
>
>Thayer also has a particular love for etymologies--which I happen
>to enjoy, too, but which every linguist today knows aren't as helpful in
>detemining the boundaries of a word's semantic domain as its current
>usage. For example, he talks about ecclesia in terms of the "called out
>ones" and you can just imagine what tocattas and fugues of meaning this
>etymology has produced in some sermons I have heard. More modern
>dictionaries are far more subdued in this respect. This is why the papyri
>are so vital--they help establish the usage of words at the time of
>Christ. And yes, this does mean at times that Thayer does lack some
>definitions that more up to date dictionaries supply. For example, the
>expression epi to auto in Acts 2:47 very likely means "to the total"
>(since it's used with prostiqenai) and not "in the same place," or "to the
>same place" which are the only definitions you'll find for the expression
>in Thayer. Reason? This meaning was identified from a papyrus bill on
>which epi to auto clearly has the meaning "sum total," or "total" (see
>Moulton Milligan Vocabulary of the Greek NT, page 94). And either BADG,
>BDAG, or (I imagine even) BAG would have it. I checked Liddell & Scott 9,
>too, and I didn't find it (though I confess, it may be simply a case of
>bad eyesight.)
>
>Does Thayer err? Well, let's put it this way: if you don't have BAGD or
>BDAG, you won't be aware of some possible meanings that are out there.
>And you might, at times, be led into believing something wonderful about a
>word through Thayer's etymologizing, which nevertheless might not be true.
>Still, it all depends what you want from a dictionary, and how precise and
>complete you want it to be. My guess is that 99 times out of a 100,
>Thayer will be just fine. And if Thayer is all you have, and you like him
>(familiarity with a dictionary is also no mean thing), well then: use him
>with joy.
>
>Paul O. Wendland
---
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 - 15:37:14 EDT