New Testament Greek

[KingHarvest]

Can you do that in Greek? (Greek just became a lot cooler if you can lol)

Greek loves making compound words almost as much as Sanskrit does.

[modus.irrealis]

Ah ok -- since NT Greek is all I need for now is there any other way a New Testament text would mark direct quotes or is ὅτι the only one?

The other possibility is nothing at all, like English. Modern editions will punctuate it off of course, in my experience usually with the semicolon, but I've even seen quotations marks used that way. As far as I can tell they're both common in the New Testament, together with the pleonastic λέγων that KingHarvest mentioned. Also, ὅτι = "that" to introduce indirect speech, and sometimes it can be ambiguous.

[KingHarvest]

Nestle-Aland doesn't use quotation marks, do you know of another edition of the whole NT? Because, frankly, Nestle-Aland is crap.

[modus.irrealis]

At least in Classical Greek, the person heard is in the genitive (there's a circumflex on the omega but I don't have polytonic script). Is it different in NT Greek, modus?

Not as far as I know and a quick glance suggests the usual genitive of person, accusative of thing is followed.

ἐκήρυσσον σοί οἱ ἀδελφοί ἡμῶν τοὺς ζωῆς λόγους αὐτῶν

To add here, there's ἐκήρυσσον σοί and ἐκήρυσσόν σοι. In the latter σοι is enclitic (hence the second accent) and there's no emphasis -- it's similar to the difference between having and not-having the subject pronoun.

ἡ καρδία μου πείθεται ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ κυρίου ἠμῶν καὶ ἡ ζωή μου ἔχει ὁ ειρήνην ὑμῶν

I'd guess that they wanted πιστεύει because I don't think huhmzah's learned the middle voice yet. And τὴν εἰρήνην.

οὐ σώσει ὑμᾶς καὶ με ἡ διδαχή τῶν ἀκαθάρτων νεανιῶν τοῦ

I think it needs ἐμέ as the "strong" form of the pronoun in this context (here my feeling's based on Modern Greek but I don't know how far ἐμέ vs. με parallels εμένα vs. με).

διδάσκω αὐτοῖς τὰς γραφάς περὶ τῶν καλῶν λεξῶν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἀλλ’ οὐ δοξάσουσιν ἀυτόν.

I think you want λέξεων, but as huhmzah doesn't seem to have covered that declension yet, they probably do want λόγων, even if it's inaccurate to say λόγος = "word".

Do you think this might be better if you put ἕκαστον ἔργον as a genitive absolute and then just switched the verb over to a 2nd person middle, modus? Also comment on that use of ὑπὲρ, I'm not sure that's very natural (though perhaps it's an idiom in NT Greek?)

How do you mean the genitive absolute? The middle would seem a lot more natural, I agree. Although it's a little academic for huhmzah at this point with him not having learned these things. About ὑπέρ, even in the NT as far as I know, it can only mean "for" in the sense of "on behalf of", not this "for". Although, the NT can have some odd grammar, so maybe I shouldn't make that strong a statement. I mean, when you can have things like ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ("the was"?? It must have been on purpose.)

huhmzah, about the accent, get into the habit of making the acute on the last syllable of words a grave unless it's followed by a punctuation mark or an enclitic, in which case the acute is preserved. And no Greek word is accented before the third-to-last syllable. That explains why you have things like ὁ ἄγγελός μου, because μου being enclitic basically forms a single word with ἄγγελος which would then be accented on the fourth-to-last syllable.

[modus.irrealis]

Nestle-Aland doesn't use quotation marks, do you know of another edition of the whole NT? Because, frankly, Nestle-Aland is crap.

I only have an older UBS edition and a Greek Orthodox edition (which isn't a critical edition of course). I have to admit that I'm not too interested in the textural criticism stuff so I haven't really looked for a really good edition. About quotation marks, I can't recall where I've seen them -- I do have a copy of Plato's Apology that uses them, but that might mean I just misremembered and that I haven't seen them with the NT specifically.

[KingHarvest]

I think it needs ἐμέ as the "strong" form of the pronoun in this context (here my feeling's based on Modern Greek but I don't know how far ἐμέ vs. με parallels εμένα vs. με).

Yeah, that "you and me" looks wrong to me, too, but I can't quite put my finger on what about it doesn't quite sound right and was tempted to correct it to a "...τε καί..."

I think you want λέξεων, but as huhmzah doesn't seem to have covered that declension yet, they probably do want λόγων, even if it's inaccurate to say λόγος = "word".

Christ, I was conflating Modern Greek λέξη with λέξις (which isn't a good choice here, either, now that I think about it), haha. Of course, έπος would probably be the best word to use anyway, but he probably hasn't gotten to third declension nouns yet.

How do you mean the genitive absolute?

In the sense of, "With each deed you prepare yourself ktl." I think this is an acceptable usage of the genitive absolute, but perhaps this is a too Latin-y ablative absolute usage.

About ὑπέρ, even in the NT as far as I know, it can only mean "for" in the sense of "on behalf of", not this "for". Although, the NT can have some odd grammar, so maybe I shouldn't make that strong a statement. I mean, when you can have things like ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ("the was"?? It must have been on purpose.)

Yeah, I really need to get my hands on a NT Greek dictionary/grammar (and for that matter, one for Koine and the Septuaginta) and not just rely on the LSJ and Smythe.

I have to admit that I'm not too interested in the textural criticism stuff so I haven't really looked for a really good edition.

I reserve a special place in my heart for textual criticism, so I've been searching high and low for an edition of the NT with editors who didn't feel they needed to reinvent the wheel in order to properly edit the text and put together the apparatus criticus.

About quotation marks, I can't recall where I've seen them -- I do have a copy of Plato's Apology that uses them, but that might mean I just misremembered and that I haven't seen them with the NT specifically.

I'm sure you've seen them all over the place. OCT, Cambridge Student Editions, Loeb, and Budé (Teubner I'm sure as well, though I've never used any of their editions) all use quotation marks for direct discourse in the classical languages. I've never seen an (critical) edition use them for the NT, Vulgate, or Septuaginta (the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia doesn't use quotation marks either, now that I think about it), though, so I don't know what the religious scholars have against them that Classicists don't. It's not like introducing all of the other punctuation, spaces between words, and diacritic marks isn't anachronistic anyway.

[modus.irrealis]

Christ, I was conflating Modern Greek λέξη with λέξις (which isn't a good choice here, either, now that I think about it), haha.

I thought that might be it . (And just in case, these word still have the ancient declensions in the plural: οι λέξεις, etc.)

Yeah, I really need to get my hands on a NT Greek dictionary/grammar (and for that matter, one for Koine and the Septuaginta) and not just rely on the LSJ and Smythe.

A while ago, I picked up a used copy of an older edition of the BAG lexicon and it's proven to be really useful, even if it's been superseded by later editions. There doesn't seem to be a really good NT or Septuagint grammar, though.

[KingHarvest]

I thought that might be it . (And just in case, these word still have the ancient declensions in the plural: οι λέξεις, etc.)

I know, I was thinking that λέξη itself was ancient and therefore declined like a normal 1st declension noun

[huhmzah]

Thanks for you guys' help again! Admittedly I was totally lost in those last few posts (I'm still in the
fetal stage with Greek grammar and know nothing about modern Greek ). Today I learned the pluperfect and attempted to translate this paragraph which I'd like you guys to look at (I also have questions on the bottom)

ὅ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὅ ἀκηκόαμεν ἀπαγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθ’ ἡμῶν. καὶ ἡ κοινωνία ἡμῶν μετὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐστιν. καὶ ταύτα γράφομεν ἡμεῖς ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς γινώσκητε τὸν θεὸν καί τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν ἠ ἀγγελία ἥν ἀκηκόαμεν ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ άπαγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν ὅτι ὁ θεὸς φῶς ἐστιν καὶ σκοτία οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ.

"We declare to you that which was from the beginning which we have heard so that even you may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with our Lord Jesus Christ. And these things we write so that even you may know God and our Lord Jesus Christ. And this is the message from the Lord and we bring it to you because God is light and darkness is not in him."

Questions:
1) with "ὅ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὅ ἀκηκόαμεν ἀπαγγέλλομεν" <-- What exactly is going on with the sytax here? Could the ὅ also get marked for case (like, what's ᾦ?) and if so then are the two opening phrases the "subject" of this sentence?
2) Is the repetition of the καὶ in imitation of an actual scriptural feature or are they just throwing it in to drill the word into my mind? If it is imitating a stylistic feature in the NT then is that in imitation of the vav-consecutive "sound" in the Hebrew bible or is ancient Greek "kai-heavy" like this as well?
-----------------------

And here are today's translation sentences. I'm beginning to understand the accent rules better but still have a hard time always predicting them in their right places. I thought in the interest of time I'd spare you guys from the agony of misplaced accents in today's exercise (unless it's needed for clarity):

You have trusted in the work of the son of God =
πεποιθας το ἐργον του υἱου του θεου

The peace of the soldiers has sent the children to Christ =
ἡ εἰρηνη των στρατιωτων πεπομφεν τα τεκνα εἰς Χριστου

We have known both the truth of the Lord and the glory of Jesus =
ἐγνωκαμεν και την ἀληθειαν του κυριου και την δοξαν του Ἰησου

The disciple has learned about the ways of our covenant =
μεμαθηκε ὁ μαθητης περι του ὁδου του διαθηκης ἡμων

You knew that the hypocrites were teaching in the evil temple =
ᾖδεις ὅτι οἱ ὑποκριται ἐδιδασκον ἐν τῷ πονηρῳ ἱερᾳ

I have not heard the teaching about the gifts of life =
οὐκ ἀκηκοα την διδαχην περι των δωρως ζωης

The strong woman has not prepared her heart for the kingdom =
οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης ὑπερ της βασιλειας

We have believed the words of the gospel =
πεπιστευκαμεν τους λογους του εὐαγγελιου

I have sinned, but He has saved me =
ἡμαρτηκα ἀλλὰ σεσωκε με αὐτος.

They know that the crowd has not believed them =
οἰδασιν ὁτι οὐ μεμιστευκε αὐτους ὁ ὀχλος.

----------------------------

And two comprehension questions:

1) ἐγω ἑωρακα τὰς ἐπιστολὰς ὅτι ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐγέγραπτο πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις αὐτῶν.
I translated it: "I have seen the letters that the apostle had written to the brothers in their houses."
The only verb-conjugations the book's taught me so far are the imperfect and aorist active indicative and the perfect and pluperfect active indicatives, so what exactly is this verb? I would think "he had written" would be something like -- ἐγέγραφει?

2) σὺ ἔγνωκας πιστὰ καὶ ἐγὼ ἔγνωκα πιστά: "You have known faithful-ones and I have known the faithful ones?" --> πιστὰ looks like the neuter plural accusative for something like τεκνα but could that be? Is it some other word I haven't learned yet?

[KingHarvest]

This passage they had you translate would be completely ungrammatical from the standpoint of Classical Greek and stretches the boundaries of how the various structures it's using would normally be understood. With that said, the following are explanations for your divers questions!

1) with "ὅ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ὅ ἀκηκόαμεν ἀπαγγέλλομεν" <-- What exactly is going on with the sytax here? Could the ὅ also get marked for case (like, what's ᾦ?) and if so then are the two opening phrases the "subject" of this sentence?

Hopefully you remember that modus mentioned that you can also form possessives in the following fashion: ο άγγελος ο του κυρίου. Think of this structure as something like this. Here the two ὅ's function so that the first is the antecedent of the second, they correlate in this way, "We announce that that thing which was from the beginning, which we have heard...", i.e. "We announce that the thing we've heard from the beginning..."

If it is imitating a stylistic feature in the NT then is that in imitation of the vav-consecutive "sound" in the Hebrew bible

Yes, though καί is used a lot with a lot more nuance in its meaning in Classical Greek.

And these things we write so that even you may know God and our Lord Jesus Christ.

This would be better rendered as "...so that you also..."

I thought in the interest of time I'd spare you guys from the agony of misplaced accents in today's exercise (unless it's needed for clarity):

The accents frequently can clear up ambiguity, but, besides that, Greek looks surreal without diacritic marks

πέπεισσαι τω ἐργω του υἱου του θεου

If they haven't taught you the middle or passive yet, though, perhaps NT Greek uses πείθω very differently.

ἡ εἰρηνη των στρατιωτων πεπομφεν τα τεκνα εἰς Χριστον

ἐγνωκαμεν και την ἀληθειαν του κυριου τε και την δοξαν του Ἰησου

Have they not taught you τε yet?

τῷ πονηρῳ ἱερᾳ

I would strongly prefer κακός here. And that should be an omega with a iota subscript there.

οὐκ ἀκηκοα την διδαχην περι των δωρων ζωης

οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης ὑπερ της βασιλειας

Again with that ύπερ! ύπερ can only be used as "for" in the sense of "on behalf of" or "in place of."

so what exactly is this verb?

It is a pluperfect middle. That's quite mean of them to introduce middles to you randomly in the pluperfect, where there's no thematic vowel. It means something along the lines of "he wrote down for himself/of his own accord."

2) σὺ ἔγνωκας πιστὰ καὶ ἐγὼ ἔγνωκα πιστά: "You have known faithful-ones and I have known the faithful ones?" --> πιστὰ looks like the neuter plural accusative for something like τεκνα but could that be? Is it some other word I haven't learned yet?

It could be interpreted two different ways. It could be interpreted as "You have known the truth and I have known the truth" or it could mean "You truly know and I truly know."

As a note to the perfect: your textbook is presenting it far too simply. It cannot be simply translated as "I have <blank>, etc." And you will also find that the aorist can not simply be translated as "I <blanked>ed." There is far more overlap between the two when you need to translate them into English.

[huhmzah]

Thanks KingHarvest! Just a couple of follow up questions:

This passage they had you translate would be completely ungrammatical from the standpoint of Classical Greek and stretches the boundaries of how the various structures it's using would normally be understood.

And from the standpoint of NT-Greek? (Or do you mean NT-Greek by Classical Greek?)

I thought in the interest of time I'd spare you guys from the agony of misplaced accents in today's exercise (unless it's needed for clarity):

The accents frequently can clear up ambiguity, but, besides that, Greek looks surreal without diacritic marks

Really?! I was under the impression that traditionally NT-Greek isn't accented! In fact one of my colleagues who works on the New Testament said that I should train myself now to already not rely on accents because most of the texts/manuscripts we'll be looking at aren't marked (and apparently are written without spaces and in capital letters..? Or was he pulling my leg?). I'm going to try to get the accents back in but the semester's starting in one week and I really have to cram in a LOT of grammar before then so I thought I'd skip out on thinking about accents right now because being a beginner it's still kind of confusing and is really slowing me down . In any case, all the texts in my books are accented so I'm still paying attention to them as I go, especially where they make a semantic difference.

ἐγνωκαμεν και την ἀληθειαν του κυριου τε και την δοξαν του Ἰησου

Have they not taught you τε yet?

Nope, so if I got this right to get the sense of "both" you a τε before the second και?

οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης ὑπερ της βασιλειας

Again with that ύπερ! ύπερ can only be used as "for" in the sense of "on behalf of" or "in place of."

Ok. So now how do I say "The strong woman hasn't prepared her heart for [the sake of] the kingdom" in NT-Greek? Should I use the dative case?: οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης τῇ βασιλείᾳ? Also?, maybe it's just me but "for the sake of" and "on behalf of" seem to cover a very similar semantic range -- these verses seem to be using "ύπερ" in a way similar to the above sentence:
"ἀνθρώποις παραδεδωκόσιν τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ." (Act: 15:26) or "ἐπροφήτευσεν ὅτι ἔμελλεν Ἰησοῦς ἀποθνῄσκειν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους" (John 11:15) etc

[KingHarvest]

In fact one of my colleagues who works on the New Testament said that I should train myself now to already not rely on accents because most of the texts/manuscripts we'll be looking at aren't marked

What, you're starting to read manuscripts from antiquity already???? That doesn't make any sense. I can't see anyone letting you anywhere near them, no offense. Even if you were to be working with manuscripts, they'd be from the Middle Ages when diacritics and spaces between the words were already used consistently.

And from the standpoint of NT-Greek? (Or do you mean NT-Greek by Classical Greek?)

The latter. It's often difficult to say anything consistent about NT Greek grammar because it's written by non-native speakers over a long period of time, and Greek grammar, Koine, wasn't particularly structured and coherent at this time anyway.

Ok. So now how do I say "The strong woman hasn't prepared her heart for [the sake of] the kingdom" in NT-Greek

I'm not sure that that sentence makes a lot of sense in English or in Greek.

οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης τῇ βασιλείᾳ

Yes.

ἀνθρώποις παραδεδωκόσιν τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
ἐπροφήτευσεν ὅτι ἔμελλεν Ἰησοῦς ἀποθνῄσκειν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους

"They delivered up their souls to the men on behalf of the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"
"He prophesied that Jesus intended to die for the sake of his people."

[modus.irrealis]

There's no such thing as training yourself to not rely on accents. Once you know the language well enough, the absence of accents won't be a problem, and I doubt they do much disambiguating anyway (that's what you can safely ignore them). Even the spaces won't cause much problem -- icons (like this one) often have no spaces and, although there have been tricky case, I can always make it out in the end. Abbreviations can be problematic, though, if you're not familiar with them, and I understand these occur a lot in manuscripts as well. I've also read that manuscripts are full of irregular spellings, like ει and ι being interchanged because they were pronounced the same way. But again, these things won't pose problems once you know the language well.

About ἑτοιμάζω I looked into its usage and the dative seems to be used only with people, as in prepare something for someone, while for with things is rendered using εἰς, although the related adjective ἕτοιμος also uses προς. That makes sense as the dative meaning for is prototypically used with animate entities.

About ὑπέρ, think of it as being backwards-looking, so it can give motive for example (dying or praying for someone), but not forwards-looking. There may be some cases where context allows a forward-looking meaning but I don't know of any that demand it.

[huhmzah]

In fact one of my colleagues who works on the New Testament said that I should train myself now to already not rely on accents because most of the texts/manuscripts we'll be looking at aren't marked

What, you're starting to read manuscripts from antiquity already???? That doesn't make any sense. I can't see anyone letting you anywhere near them, no offense.

Hmm... well, I'd say no offense taken but considering we don't know each other at all I'm curious why would you make such a statement with so much surety ? I could be a manuscript dealer for all you know. The only personal detail you know about me (from my picture and where I'm from) is that I'm not Caucasian and not an American so in that case yea, that's kinda offensive.

I'm a PhD student in Near Eastern Historiography at Cornell. If I don't look at manuscripts it kinda totally defeats the purpose of doing a PhD. I'm not sure who these "anyones" are that would be keeping me from getting "anywhere close" to the manuscripts but in case you're interested about the procedure the department calls the necessary person at the collection and they hand me gloves and a foam pillow .

Ok. So now how do I say "The strong woman hasn't prepared her heart for [the sake of] the kingdom" in NT-Greek

I'm not sure that that sentence makes a lot of sense in English or in Greek.

Okie... thanks for the help.

About ὑπέρ, think of it as being backwards-looking, so it can give motive for example (dying or praying for someone), but not forwards-looking. There may be some cases where context allows a forward-looking meaning but I don't know of any that demand it.

Thanks modus! That actually made perfect sense, I think I got it now.

[KingHarvest]

Hmm... well, I'd say no offense taken but considering we don't know each other at all I'm curious why would you make such a statement with so much surety ? I could be a manuscript dealer for all you know. The only personal detail you know about me (from my picture and where I'm from) is that I'm not Caucasian and not an American so in that case yea, that's kinda offensive.

I'm a PhD student in Near Eastern Historiography at Cornell. If I don't look at manuscripts it kinda totally defeats the purpose of doing a PhD. I'm not sure who these "anyones" are that would be keeping me from getting "anywhere close" to the manuscripts but in case you're interested about the procedure the department calls the necessary person at the collection and they hand me gloves and a foam pillow .

Ok, calm down with the racist accusations. I just assumed you were an undergraduate student, and moving on to reading manuscripts when you've just started Greek is a bit of overkill.

OUt of curiosity, why are you even bothering with manuscripts, especially in the age of microfiche? Even textual critics and papyrologists don't use the actual manuscripts all that often.

[huhmzah]

Ah, apologies! Maybe I got a little trigger-happy with those racism accusations. (Didn't think anyone would assume someone my age was an undergrad). For the record: I get some strange reactions from people who think my ethnicity and what I study are somehow mutually exclusive lol.

Hmm, as for your question about why someone would bother with manuscripts in the age of micorfiche -- you're right, but most of the manuscripts relevant to my area (Abbasid era era Graeco-Arabic documents) aren't available digitally or as a microfiche -- most of the attention in that regard (understandably) goes to the more 'mainstream' Christian or European manuscripts which have a wider appeal in academic circles in the US and Europe. In any case I'm not a professor -- I'm still training so learning how to work with a manuscript is kind of a basic skill set a grad. student in my field is just expected to have (maybe your program is different). Also (if you've ever worked with a manuscript I'm sure you've realized) that if your project's focused on a single manuscript then the amount of information you can "lift" from the actual thing can't be compared to looking at a microfiche. Also, I guess the faculty (textual critics and papyrologists) you're around have a different methods but the professors at my end, even when a microfiche or digital scans are available, at some point or another will always fly out to see the actual manuscript relevant to their project -- it might be for no other reason than the fact that it's more fun that way .

So what program are you in? What type of New Testament Greek course(s) did you take? Unfortunately my school offers no courses for it :-/ (all the focus is on Arabic, Hebrew & Aramaic). This semester my department's doing a New Testament Greek Grad. seminar but since I just began looking at Greek this past month it's going to be wayy to advanced for me. All the regular classes are on classical or modern Greek [neither of which I'm in any mood to study or have any use for in my area ].

[KingHarvest]

Didn't think anyone would assume someone my age was an undergrad

I have no idea how old you are

So what program are you in?

Right now I'm in limbo so to speak. I completed my BA in Classics in the spring, and now I'm taking a couple years off before I go back to grad school for Classics.

What type of New Testament Greek course(s) did you take?

I never did. If you know Classical Greek, you can read and understand NT Greek just fine (though I've heard that it's much more difficult for NT Greek learners to transition to reading Classical Greek, so that might be incentive for you to take a Classical Greek course anyway. As far as I know, it's not too common for there to be courses for learning specifically NT Greek outside of seminary -- it's far more common to learn Classical Attic Greek first and then later on take classes that would focus specifically on Koine and/or NT Greek).

[ego]

Anger is strong but love is eternal =
ἰσχυρὸς ἡ ὀργή, ἀλλ’ αἰώνιος ἡ ἀγάπη

Shouldn't it be ἰσχυρὰ ἡ ὀργή?

οὐχ ἡτοιμακε ἡ ἰσχυρα την καρδιαν αὐτης τῇ βασιλείᾳ

what about διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν? or πρὸς τὴν βασιλείαν?