[Synoptic-L] Apologies and gegraptai and Kathws
- First of all let me apologize to the list, my comments about teaching Greek
were not intended for anyone save one person. I would be happy to teach or to be taught by anyone who loves the scripture and wants to understand it. Forgive me for sounding like the type of person I never want to be.
now in response to the questions concerning the translation
We do not have a way of expressing completed action in the past that was passive, in English, therefore the closest way to convey the meaning is to indicate that the action is in a completed state by the use of stands written. Meaning that the writing has long been in a stage of completeness and that the text did not write itself, but was the recepient of the anction of writing by an agent. Just to say it is written does not make clear that the writing is finished. Some people might think that Isaiah was still alive and his work was not yet completed writing or that this was a different Isaiah the prophet. There is also the possibility that the gospel is similar to the prohesy. All these issues are delt with by voice tense and mood in Greek. As silly as it may sound it is exactly why the Greeks made use of the perfect passive indicative. "Stands written" more clearly idicates that It was the recipient of completed action in the past. About adding "just as" and not as: The perfect tense in Greek also carries the sense of integrity. what was done was just as it needed to be done, just as instructed, just as was customary and so on. The integrity is strenthend by the combined conjuction of Kata and Hws. Kata adds weight to the integrity. It implies the sence of according to something or as I have rendered it "Just as" in the examples below Mark 11:6 and 14:6 are good examples of this point. Saying that what happened is as Jesus said it would is not the same as saying it happened just as he said it would.
Dr Gibson you took issue with my comment some time back that Mark never uses Kathws to introduce a quotation. You are confusing Kathws with hws and houtws. Kathws is a conjunction that combines kata and hws. When Mark employs this form it is never used to introduce a quotation. I have listed all of the instances where it is used below for your consideraton.
RSV Mar 4:33 With many such parables he spoke the word to them, as kathws they were able to hear it;
RSV Mar 9:13 But I tell you that Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever they pleased, as kathws it is written of him."
RSV Mar 11:6 And they told them what (kathws just as would be a better translation here) Jesus had said; and they let them go. The idea is that they repeated Jesus' exact words
RSV Mar 14:16 And the disciples set out and went to the city, and found it as kathws again I prefer just as he had told them; and they prepared the passover.
RSV Mar 15:8 And the crowd came up and began to ask Pilate to do as kathws he was wont to do for them. (here kathws assists in the sense of according as)
RSV Mar 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him, as (just as would be a more accurate rendering of kathws at this point) she told you."
It is extemely Important when translating a docuent to observe the way that particular writer makes use of the various forms within his document, and we do that from the similarities in the context. Mark means to say that the gospel stands written in the Isaiah the prophet, he is not introducing a quotation. All the English translations I am aware of have missed this point. What makes this very exciting is that the next few lines are direct address from writer to reader and convey where the Gospel was written and when. Mark uses the prophesy in Isaiah 40 to say that his good news paralles that of Isaiah after the destruction of Jerusalem. In the first line he gives us the book, in the direct address he gives us chapter and verse.
I recently noticed that the interlinear text of the Zondervan Greek English Interliear translates the perfect passive indicative of gegraptai, "it has been written". I am sure it is because "is written" is just not enough to convey the proper meaning of the text. I can't help but wonder if they have been reprimanded for adding words to their translation in order to make the meaning clear
The last time I attempted to post this it returned to my mail box incomplete I hope it all goes this time.
- RickR370@... wrote:
Dr Gibson you took issue with my comment some time back that Mark never uses Kathws to introduce a quotation. You are confusing Kathws with hws and houtws.
So far as I can see, I am doing no such thing.
Kathws is a conjunction that combines kata and hws. When Mark employs this form it is never used to introduce a quotation.That may be so. But the issue isn't, as you are putting it, whether or not Mark uses KAQWS to introduce a quotation .
The issue is what Mark's use of KAQWS with GEGRAPTAI + a citation/quotation (however badly attributed) indicates he is up to. And given the function that the exact same construction has when it is used elsewhere in the NT, in the LXX, in the DSS and Rabbinic literature, and by "secular" Greek writers (namely, to introduce a quotation), why would we expect, as you seem to think we should, that it was intended by Mark when **he** used it, as he most certainly does at Mk, 1:2, to have some function other than what contemporary usage shows it consistently had?
So I ask again if you have any evidence -- and assertion, mind you, is not evidence -- that KAQWS + GEGRAPTAI before a quotation ever functioned as anything but a citation formula?
I recently noticed that the interlinear text of the Zondervan Greek English Interliear translates the perfect passive indicative of gegraptai, "it has been written". I am sure it is because "is written" is just not enough to convey the proper meaning of the text. I can't help but wonder if they have been reprimanded for adding words to their translation in order to make the meaning clearLeaving aside the question of who would reprimand them, the real question is what makes you think anyone would have cause to do so, since "It has been written" adds *no* words to the proper translation of GEGRAPTAI. In fact, "it has been written" is exactly what GEGRAPTAI literally means. Or am I missing something?
Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
Chicago, IL 60626