At 11:46 AM 4/11/2004 -0400, Maluflen@...
>In a message dated 4/11/2004 8:05:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, scarlson@... writes:
>>Also, EP' ALHQEIAS shows up 257 times in the TLG database, mostly in Koine
>>times, so I'd say that EP' ALHQEIAS is just an expression popular in Greek
>>at the time. Luke's usage is not so frequent, as a compared to Mark, to
>>make it a Lukanism.
>Thanks for the TLG database info, which is really helpful. My argument
>certainly demonstrates a case where the evidence is compatible with the
>Two-Gospel Hypothesis, and is even illuminated by it, even if the expression
>is ruled out on technical grounds as being a "Lukanism". Apart from Mark,
>Luke is the only NT author who uses the expression EP'ALHQEIAS, and he uses
>it as many as five times all together.
The problem is the relative lengths of the texts. Luke is already
longer than Mark and adding Acts to the mix makes the Lukan corpus
even longer. The frequency that Luke-Acts uses the expression has
to be adjusted for the relative lengths of the corpora. According
to Morganthaler, Mark (inc. 16:9-20) has 11242 words, while Luke has
19428 and Acts 18382. Thus, Luke-Acts is almost 2.5 times longer
than Mark. Crudely, this makes the comparison in terms of lengths
of text, only one in Mark per 10,000 words to two per 10,0000 words
of Luke-Acts. Not impressive.
>Mark only has the expression in a
>passage parallel to Luke, and in another passage in the same chapter, where
>he arguably was looking back to that passage as the beginning of a literary
>unit consisting of controversy stories. Recall that it is precisely an
>"unusual" word or expression that is usually regarded as most suitable
>material for a literary inclusion, and this has to rate as such, given the
>complete absence of the expression in the remainder of the NT, and in spite
>of the TLG data.
I don't see anything "unusual" about the expression. It is not
uncommon in Koine, and restricting the corpus to the NT, though
easy to do, is artificial. There just isn't even data to justify
any conclusion. The paucity of evidence makes this case "compatible"
with any synoptic theory, including the Two-Gospel Hypothesis.
Here's a list of words I once analyzed that I would consider "Lukan":
U(POSTRE/FW (0/0/21) Matt-100% Mark-100% Luke+151%
XA/RIS (0/0/8) Matt-100% Mark- Luke+151%
FI/LOS (1/0/15) Matt-083% Mark-100% Luke+135%
*)IEROUSALH/M (2/0/27) Matt-082% Mark-100% Luke+134%
*ZAXARI/AS (1/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+128%
EU)AGGELI/ZW (1/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+128%
DE/OMAI (1/0/8) Matt- Mark- Luke+123%
PI/MPLHMI (2/0/13) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+118%
E)PAI/RW (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
NOMIKO/S (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
SUNE/XW (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
E)/TOS (1/2/15) Matt-085% Mark- Luke+109%
PARAXRH=MA (2/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+109%
U(PA/RXW (3/0/15) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+109%
PLH=QOS (0/2/8) Matt-100% Mark- Luke+101%
QOBE/OMAI (1/1/8) Matt- Mark- Luke+101%
*MARIA/M (4/0/13) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+092%
E(/TEROS (10/0/32) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+091%
TE/ (3/0/9) Matt- Mark- Luke+088%
EI)RH/NH (4/1/14) Matt- Mark- Luke+085%
DE/KA (3/1/11) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
O(MOI/WS (3/1/11) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
R(H=MA (5/2/19) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
PLH/N (5/1/15) Matt- Mark-079% Luke+079%
SU/N (4/6/23) Matt-068% Mark- Luke+075%
A)NH/R (8/4/27) Matt-045% Mark- Luke+074%
LAO/S (14/2/36) Matt- Mark-083% Luke+074%
KLAI/W (2/3/11) Matt-067% Mark- Luke+073%
E)RWTA/W (4/3/15) Matt- Mark- Luke+071%
NU=N (4/3/14) Matt- Mark- Luke+067%
OU)XI/ (9/0/18) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+067%
*)ABRAA/M (7/1/15) Matt- Mark-081% Luke+064%
E)GGI/ZW (7/3/18) Matt- Mark- Luke+061%
POREU/OMAI (29/0/51) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+060%
A(MARTWLO/S (5/6/18) Matt-054% Mark- Luke+056%
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...