Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Are you learning Koine Greek, the Greek of the New Testament and most other post-classical Greek texts? Whatever your level, use this forum to discuss all things Koine, Biblical or otherwise, including grammar, textbook talk, difficult passages, and more.
Post Reply
uberdwayne
Textkit Fan
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by uberdwayne »

Here's an interesting question (or maybe not): "Μετὰ ταῦτα", "Μετὰ τοῦτο" and "Μετὰ ταῦτον" are all used in the NT to introduce another sequence in narrative.

"Μετὰ ταῦτα" is by far the most frequent, used in the Gospel of John and Revelation most frequently and in Acts 3 times.

"Μετὰ τοῦτο" is only used 5 times in the NT. John 2:12; 11:7; 11:11; 19:28 and Rev 7:1 (this is peculiar to John)

"Μετὰ ταῦτον" is only used one in Acts 5:37

All three appear to be used in much the same way as each other, so what would be the reason for using one form of τοῦτο over the other in this phrase? I checked for variant readings in Acts 5:37 and there is nothing to suggest that the lone "Μετὰ ταῦτον" isn't original. Is it purely stylistic between authors, or is there a nuance I'm missing?
μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Qimmik »

Doesn't Acts 5:37 read μετὰ τοῦτον, "after this man", i.e., after Theudas, mentioned in the preceding verse? I realize you prefer a different text, but I've never encountered the form ταῦτον--this may be my ignorance of NT Greek, however.

Smyth 328 N mentions the form ταὐτόν, which is an alternative form of crasis for τὸ αὐτό, "the same" (neut.), but ταῦτον seems very strange.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0007

uberdwayne
Textkit Fan
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by uberdwayne »

Doesn't Acts 5:37 read μετὰ τοῦτον, "after this man", i.e., after Theudas, mentioned in the preceding verse? I realize you prefer a different text, but I've never encountered the form ταῦτον--this may be my ignorance of NT Greek, however.
Somehow I missed that :oops: How embarassing!

So what about Μετὰ ταῦτα and Μετὰ τοῦτο. Thoughts?
μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Qimmik »

So what about Μετὰ ταῦτα and Μετὰ τοῦτο.
Personally, I wouldn't give much thought to this. It depends on whether the author was viewing what preceded as a single event or a number of events. But I'm not familiar with the discourse analysis literature on NT Greek. Stirling might have some insight into this.

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Qimmik wrote:
So what about Μετὰ ταῦτα and Μετὰ τοῦτο.
Personally, I wouldn't give much thought to this. It depends on whether the author was viewing what preceded as a single event or a number of events. But I'm not familiar with the discourse analysis literature on NT Greek. Stirling might have some insight into this.

Not much insight. I looked at Levinsohn (2000:82-92) where he discusses asyndeton and points of departure in Johannine narrative. He doesn't highlight any distinction between the singular and plural form and refers to them as Μετὰ τοῦτο/ταῦτα. If I were pressed to explain the difference I might "wing it" by saying that the singular is slightly more anaphoric in flavor and the plural rather vague. But that is a stretch.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

uberdwayne
Textkit Fan
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by uberdwayne »

Qimmik wrote:Personally, I wouldn't give much thought to this.
I can understand the sentiment, in my own reading, it appears that there is little difference in meaning between the two. However, As hair splitting as it is, it may be there's a reason why John would depart from the standard "Μετὰ ταῦτα" and use "Μετὰ τοῦτο" (Which only occurs in John's writings). within Johns writings, Μετὰ τοῦτο seems to be "marked" (in Runge's terminology) since typically, the plural form is used more often.

if there is no semantic meaning, perhaps there are other influences on John that are not on the other Gospel writers:

Could there be a semetic influence on John that is not on the others?
Maybe its a regional phrase used in Galilee?

τι Νομιζετε;
μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

uberdwayne wrote:...it appears that there is little difference in meaning between the two...
Hi, Dwayne.

I want to continue this discussion. You have piqued my interest. But let me try something first.

Two maintenance guys are doing safety inspections in an apartment complex. One guys says to the other, "Man, these inspections are taking longer than I thought." The other guy says, "Yeah, I know. And what do we have to do after this?" Now the guy could have said "And what do we have to do after these things?" Grammatically, that would even have been more correct, since the safety inspections are plural. But would you agree that in English, for some reason, "after this" sounds right here, while "after these things" does not? Would you agree that in 2014 America, while you hear both "after these things" and "after this," the latter is more common, and there are odd instances where you use the one and not the other, but that you cannot really formulate rules that will predict or explain the usage. Even more strangely, for some reason you can say "After these things that have been happening in the Middle East, I am getting really upset," but you can't say "After this that has been has been happening in the Middle East, I am getting really upset." I mean, you can say this, but doesn't it sound a little odd? Why does it sound odd?

If you wrote a book in English discussing the 2014 differences in meaning between "after this" and "after these things" it would be a very long book, and only someone who was fluent in English would get much out of it, and WOULD BE IN A POSTION TO JUDGE ITS ACCURACY. It would BEGIN with the basic fact that "after this" is FORMALLY singular and "after these things" is FORMALLY plural, but it would acknowledge that this in no way can explain all the usage. I think this much applies to Μετὰ ταῦτα/Μετὰ τοῦτο as well. Our study would include the fact that "after these things" is slightly more formal on the one hand and is less common on the other hand; there is even a sense in which "after these things" is falling out of the language. Maybe you can say something similar in regard to Μετὰ ταῦτα/Μετὰ τοῦτο as well, but at this point it starts getting harder. In English, regional differences and interference from other languages (if nothing else, from British English) often come into play. How much more so with Koine.

Let's continue to discuss.

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

I think we've been here before, Markos... :)

I think you're exaggerating the difficulties here. μετὰ ταῦτα is used when, in some way or the other, the narrator refers to several preceding events and μετὰ τοῦτο when he or she refers to one. I think that's really all there is to it. Probably there's some overlap between the two, I don't know, because probably in many instances it really depends on how the narrator sees it. And perhaps in some contexts you would translate μετὰ ταῦτα "after all this". I think Markos is way too fluent in Greek not to note the difference at least unconsciously, although he feigns ignorance. ;) Actually, I think it's typical that when you're fluent, you don't actually know exactly why things are as they are, you just know how it is.

As for "After this that has been has been happening in the Middle East", the problem is that you can't say "this that" in English, so you have to change it to "these things that".

Or that's how I see it.

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

Paul Derouda wrote:μετὰ ταῦτα is used to when, in some way or the other, the narrator refers to several preceding events and μετὰ τοῦτο when he or she refers to one. I think that's really all there is to it.
Hi, Paul. I recognize that, as Bill already pointed out, this is the FORMAL difference between the two, but in reading Greek I have noticed that formal differences are not always maintained in actual usage. In John 2:12 μετὰ τοῦτο is used after reference to the miracle at Cana, possibly even picking on the ταύτην in the ταύτην ἐποίησεν ἀρχὴν τῶν σημείων ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐν Κανὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίας in verse 11. On the other hand, μετὰ ταῦτα is used in John 3:22 after the discussion with Nicodemus. I am prepared to accept that the sign of the miracle is seen as more singular than the extended discourse with Nicodemus about Jesus.

But what about John 11:11? ταῦτα εἶπεν, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο λέγει αὐτοῖς... This follows more theological discourse. Are we to believe that the theology in chapter 3 is somehow more plural than the theology of chapter 11? Also, I don't see how one versus several events comes into play in the difference between John 19:28 and 19:38. And what singular event precedes Rev 7:1?

Now, it is quite possible that in general the distinction holds, but that there are exceptions. The sample size in the NT seems too small. I am not denying (at this point) that this could be the semantic distinction, but I remain skeptical. The NET note to John 3:22 says "This section is related loosely to the preceding section by μετὰ ταῦτα, an indefinite temporal reference." Does this mean that μετὰ τοῦτο is less definite? I don't know. Is one more emphatic than the other? I don't know, and that is my only point, that we don't know.

About half of the English versions make no distinction, rendering both phrases with "after this." (Again, this could be because "after these things" has become a bit stilted in contemporary English.) The Hebrew versions typically make the distinction as אחרי כן versus אחרי הדברים האלה.
Paul Derouda wrote: As for "After this that has been has been happening in the Middle East", the problem is that you can't say "this that" in English, so you have to change it to "these things that".
Yes, I agree with you on this, and it proves my point. That you can't usually say "this that" in 2014 English is an oddity of the language that can only be picked up by fluent speakers. There may be some similar non-semantic (euphonic?) oddity that determines the use here, something that we can never know about, given that we don't have enough of the language to go by. (Reading all the papyri might help.) That does not NECESSARILY mean we should not try.

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Paul Derouda wrote:I think we've been here before, Markos... :)

I think you're exaggerating the difficulties here. μετὰ ταῦτα is used when, in some way or the other, the narrator refers to several preceding events and μετὰ τοῦτο when he or she refers to one. I think that's really all there is to it. Probably there's some overlap between the two, I don't know, because probably in many instances it really depends on how the narrator sees it. And perhaps in some contexts you would translate μετὰ ταῦτα "after all this". I think Markos is way too fluent in Greek not to note the difference at least unconsciously, although he feigns ignorance. ;) Actually, I think it's typical that when you're fluent, you don't actually know exactly why things are as they are, you just know how it is.

As for "After this that has been has been happening in the Middle East", the problem is that you can't say "this that" in English, so you have to change it to "these things that".
Idiomatic English (West Coast USA) "After what has been happening in the Middle East"

The Roehampton Circle (Phd candidates under S. E. Porter late 1990s), I suspect they were following M. A. K. Halliday, used to suggest that surface structure variations like singular/plural are motivated by choices about how to present the narrative/discourse. I am not sure exactly what this means but the way I read it is: every alternative e.g. aorist/perfect/present or singular/plural represents a choice about how to present the idea in the language used. This doesn't imply that authors deliberated in their mind about the choice, just that the option to use another form is present if they want to use it.

Applying this to the situation at hand, the singular seems to reflect a more definite antecedent action/event than the plural. When the singular is used in Jn 2:12 if follows a scene which begins with a temporal setting Jn 2:1 Καὶ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ … 2:12 Μετὰ τοῦτο κατέβη εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

Markos wrote:But what about John 11:11? ταῦτα εἶπεν, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο λέγει αὐτοῖς...
ταῦτα refers to what has been said, plural because the utterance contains several points (more or less...). On the other hand, I think τοῦτο in μετὰ τοῦτο refers just to ταῦτα εἶπεν, not to the content of the preceding speech in its several points, but the just act of speaking (εἶπεν) as a whole.

I think usually μετὰ ταῦτα and μετὰ τοῦτο are to be translated just the same: "after this". You can't make the distinction in English most of the time. Sometimes you can try with "after these things", but most of the time you will be wrong. I think we're actually being misled here, because the reason why you can't say "this that" in English is a problem of another sort, though I can't say exactly what is.

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:...the singular seems to reflect a more definite antecedent action/event than the plural.
This may well be the case (it sort of works for John 19:28 versus 38,) but (1) I'd like to see it tested on a larger sample size. I'm actually surprised to find out that μετὰ ταῦτα/μετὰ τοῦτο is as rare in the GNT as it is. I think they must be common in secular Greek, maybe even in Homer? (they seem really common to me.) (2) what you are saying about the distinction is different from what Paul and Bill (initially) said.

Today's Greek Version makes the distinction ύστερα versus ύστερα απ' αυτά.
Paul Derouda wrote:...Actually, I think it's typical that when you're fluent, you don't actually know exactly why things are as they are, you just know how it is.
It sounds, Paul, like you are becoming a semantic minimalist. :D

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

Markos wrote:I think they must be common in secular Greek, maybe even in Homer? (they seem really common to me.)
I just remembered, of course, where I have seen these so often. The Anabasis has very often not only μετὰ ταῦτα, but also μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα and μετὰ τοῦτον as transitions, both within and between narrative segments. I'd be curious to see if there is a pattern and if it matches the ones that have been proposed.

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Markos wrote:
Markos wrote:I think they must be common in secular Greek, maybe even in Homer?
Look in Thucydides for μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα, μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο, μετὰ τοῦτο, μετὰ ταῦτα. Keeping in mind that not all the samples will be narrative temporal points of departure.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

Markos wrote:
C. S. Bartholomew wrote:...the singular seems to reflect a more definite antecedent action/event than the plural.
This may well be the case (it sort of works for John 19:28 versus 38,) but (1) I'd like to see it tested on a larger sample size. I'm actually surprised to find out that μετὰ ταῦτα/μετὰ τοῦτο is as rare in the GNT as it is. I think they must be common in secular Greek, maybe even in Homer? (they seem really common to me.) (2) what you are saying about the distinction is different from what Paul and Bill (initially) said
I think this is true (that the singular reflects a more definite antecedent), but I don't think there's really a contradiction.

The Anabasis seems to be full of examples. I quote here bits I found. They're very long, sorry, but you can't interpret these without the context. I think μετὰ ταῦτα here always refers more vaguely to what precedes, while μετὰ τοῦτο refers to the one event that precedes.

At 7.3.15 τοῦτο refers to Σεύθῃ εἶπεν, while ταῦτα would have referred to the whole assembly – you could translate "when he had spoken", while μετὰ ταῦτα would be "after the assembly". I think in this context, μετὰ τοῦτο makes the following event more immediate than μετὰ ταῦτα would – it's almost like "Immediately after he had spoken".

At 6.1., we are told about a party. There are number of performances that follow one another in succession. μετὰ τοῦτο is used, as is expresses the transition from one show to the next.

From Anabasis 7.3:
ἀκούσαντες ταῦτα καὶ δεξιὰς δόντες καὶ λαβόντες ἀπήλαυνον: καὶ πρὸ ἡμέρας ἐγένοντο ἐπὶ στρατοπέδῳ καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν ἕκαστοι τοῖς πέμψασιν. [2] ἐπεὶ δὲ ἡμέρα ἐγένετο, ὁ μὲν Ἀρίσταρχος πάλιν ἐκάλει τοὺς στρατηγούς: τοῖς δ᾽ ἔδοξε τὴν μὲν πρὸς Ἀρίσταρχον ὁδὸν ἐᾶσαι, τὸ δὲ στράτευμα συγκαλέσαι. καὶ συνῆλθον πάντες πλὴν οἱ Νέωνος: οὗτοι δὲ ἀπεῖχον ὡς δέκα στάδια. [3] ἐπεὶ δὲ συνῆλθον, ἀναστὰς Ξενοφῶν εἶπε τάδε. ἄνδρες, διαπλεῖν μὲν ἔνθα βουλόμεθα Ἀρίσταρχος τριήρεις ἔχων κωλύει: ὥστε εἰς πλοῖα οὐκ ἀσφαλὲς ἐμβαίνειν: οὗτος δὲ αὑτὸς κελεύει εἰς Χερρόνησον βίᾳ διὰ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ὄρους πορεύεσθαι: ἢν δὲ κρατήσαντες τούτου ἐκεῖσε ἔλθωμεν, οὔτε πωλήσειν ἔτι ὑμᾶς φησιν ὥσπερ ἐν Βυζαντίῳ, οὔτε ἐξαπατήσεσθαι ἔτι ὑμᾶς, ἀλλὰ λήψεσθαι μισθόν, οὔτε περιόψεσθαι ἔτι ὥσπερ νυνὶ δεομένους τῶν ἐπιτηδείων. [4] οὗτος μὲν ταῦτα λέγει: Σεύθης δέ φησιν, ἂν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἴητε, εὖ ποιήσειν ὑμᾶς. νῦν οὖν σκέψασθε πότερον ἐνθάδε μένοντες τοῦτο βουλεύσεσθε ἢ εἰς τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ἐπανελθόντες. [5] ἐμοὶ μὲν οὖν δοκεῖ, ἐπεὶ ἐνθάδε οὔτε ἀργύριον ἔχομεν ὥστε ἀγοράζειν οὔτε ἄνευ ἀργυρίου ἐῶσι λαμβάνειν, ἐπανελθόντας εἰς τὰς κώμας ὅθεν οἱ ἥττους ἐῶσι λαμβάνειν, ἐκεῖ ἔχοντας τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ἀκούοντας ὅ τι τις ἡμῶν δεῖται, αἱρεῖσθαι ὅ τι ἂν ἡμῖν δοκῇ κράτιστον εἶναι. [6] καὶ ὅτῳ γε, ἔφη, ταῦτα δοκεῖ, ἀράτω τὴν χεῖρα. ἀνέτειναν ἅπαντες. ἀπιόντες τοίνυν, ἔφη, συσκευάζεσθε, καὶ ἐπειδὰν παραγγέλλῃ τις, ἕπεσθε τῷ ἡγουμένῳ. [7]

μετὰ ταῦτα Ξενοφῶν μὲν ἡγεῖτο, οἱ δ᾽ εἵποντο. Νέων δὲ καὶ †παρ᾽ Ἀριστάρχου ἄλλοι† ἔπειθον ἀποτρέπεσθαι: οἱ δ᾽ οὐχ ὑπήκουον. ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ὅσον τριάκοντα στάδια προεληλύθεσαν, ἀπαντᾷ Σεύθης. καὶ ὁ Ξενοφῶν ἰδὼν αὐτὸν προσελάσαι ἐκέλευσεν, ὅπως ὅτι πλείστων ἀκουόντων εἴποι αὐτῷ ἃ ἐδόκει συμφέρειν. [8] ἐπεὶ δὲ προσῆλθεν, εἶπε Ξενοφῶν: ἡμεῖς πορευόμεθα ὅπου μέλλει ἕξειν τὸ στράτευμα τροφήν: ἐκεῖ δ᾽ ἀκούοντες καὶ σοῦ καὶ τῶν τοῦ Λακωνικοῦ αἱρησόμεθα ἃ ἂν κράτιστα δοκῇ εἶναι. ἢν οὖν ἡμῖν ἡγήσῃ ὅπου πλεῖστά ἐστιν ἐπιτήδεια, ὑπὸ σοῦ νομιοῦμεν ξενίζεσθαι. [9] καὶ ὁ Σεύθης ἔφη: ἀλλὰ οἶδα κώμας πολλὰς ἁθρόας καὶ πάντα ἐχούσας τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ἀπεχούσας ἡμῶν ὅσον διελθόντες ἂν ἡδέως ἀριστῴητε. [10] ἡγοῦ τοίνυν, ἔφη ὁ Ξενοφῶν. ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἀφίκοντο εἰς αὐτὰς τῆς δείλης, συνῆλθον οἱ στρατιῶται, καὶ εἶπε Σεύθης τοιάδε. ἐγώ, ὦ ἄνδρες, δέομαι ὑμῶν στρατεύεσθαι σὺν ἐμοί, καὶ ὑπισχνοῦμαι ὑμῖν δώσειν τοῖς στρατιώταις κυζικηνόν, λοχαγοῖς δὲ καὶ στρατηγοῖς τὰ νομιζόμενα: ἔξω δὲ τούτων τὸν ἄξιον τιμήσω. σῖτα δὲ καὶ ποτὰ ὥσπερ καὶ νῦν ἐκ τῆς χώρας λαμβάνοντες ἕξετε: ὁπόσα δ᾽ ἂν ἁλίσκηται ἀξιώσω αὐτὸς ἔχειν, ἵνα ταῦτα διατιθέμενος ὑμῖν τὸν μισθὸν πορίζω. [11] καὶ τὰ μὲν φεύγοντα καὶ ἀποδιδράσκοντα ἡμεῖς ἱκανοὶ ἐσόμεθα διώκειν καὶ μαστεύειν: ἂν δέ τις ἀνθιστῆται, σὺν ὑμῖν πειρασόμεθα χειροῦσθαι. [12] ἐπήρετο ὁ Ξενοφῶν: πόσον δὲ ἀπὸ θαλάττης ἀξιώσεις συνέπεσθαί σοι τὸ στράτευμα; ὁ δ᾽ ἀπεκρίνατο: οὐδαμῇ πλεῖον ἑπτὰ ἡμερῶν, μεῖον δὲ πολλαχῇ. [13]

μετὰ ταῦτα ἐδίδοτο λέγειν τῷ βουλομένῳ: καὶ ἔλεγον πολλοὶ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ὅτι παντὸς ἄξια λέγει Σεύθης: χειμὼν γὰρ εἴη καὶ οὔτε οἴκαδε ἀποπλεῖν τῷ τοῦτο βουλομένῳ δυνατὸν εἴη, διαγενέσθαι τε ἐν φιλίᾳ οὐχ οἷόν τε, εἰ δέοι ὠνουμένους ζῆν, ἐν δὲ τῇ πολεμίᾳ διατρίβειν καὶ τρέφεσθαι ἀσφαλέστερον μετὰ Σεύθου ἢ μόνους, ὄντων ἀγαθῶν τοσούτων. εἰ δὲ μισθὸν προσλήψοιντο, εὕρημα ἐδόκει εἶναι. [14] ἐπὶ τούτοις εἶπεν ὁ Ξενοφῶν: εἴ τις ἀντιλέγει, λεγέτω: εἰ δὲ μή, ἐπιψηφιῶ ταῦτα. ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐδεὶς ἀντέλεγεν, ἐπεψήφισε, καὶ ἔδοξε ταῦτα. εὐθὺς δὲ Σεύθῃ εἶπεν, ὅτι συστρατεύσοιντο αὐτῷ. [15]

μετὰ τοῦτο οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι κατὰ τάξεις ἐσκήνησαν, στρατηγοὺς δὲ καὶ λοχαγοὺς ἐπὶ δεῖπνον Σεύθης ἐκάλεσε, πλησίον κώμην ἔχων.


From Anabasis 6.1:
[5] ἐπεὶ δὲ σπονδαί τε ἐγένοντο καὶ ἐπαιάνισαν, ἀνέστησαν πρῶτον μὲν Θρᾷκες καὶ πρὸς αὐλὸν ὠρχήσαντο σὺν τοῖς ὅπλοις καὶ ἥλλοντο ὑψηλά τε καὶ κούφως καὶ ταῖς μαχαίραις ἐχρῶντο: τέλος δὲ ὁ ἕτερος τὸν ἕτερον παίει, ὡς πᾶσιν ἐδόκει πεπληγέναι τὸν ἄνδρα: ὁ δ᾽ ἔπεσε τεχνικῶς πως. [6] καὶ ἀνέκραγον οἱ Παφλαγόνες. καὶ ὁ μὲν σκυλεύσας τὰ ὅπλα τοῦ ἑτέρου ἐξῄει ᾁδων τὸν Σιτάλκαν: ἄλλοι δὲ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν τὸν ἕτερον ἐξέφερον ὡς τεθνηκότα: ἦν δὲ οὐδὲν πεπονθώς. [7] μετὰ τοῦτο Αἰνιᾶνες καὶ Μάγνητες ἀνέστησαν, οἳ ὠρχοῦντο τὴν καρπαίαν καλουμένην ἐν τοῖς ὅπλοις. [8] ὁ δὲ τρόπος τῆς ὀρχήσεως ἦν, ὁ μὲν παραθέμενος τὰ ὅπλα σπείρει καὶ ζευγηλατεῖ, πυκνὰ δὲ στρεφόμενος ὡς φοβούμενος, λῃστὴς δὲ προσέρχεται: ὁ δ᾽ ἐπειδὰν προΐδηται, ἀπαντᾷ ἁρπάσας τὰ ὅπλα καὶ μάχεται πρὸ τοῦ ζεύγους: καὶ οὗτοι ταῦτ᾽ ἐποίουν ἐν ῥυθμῷ πρὸς τὸν αὐλόν: καὶ τέλος ὁ λῃστὴς δήσας τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ τὸ ζεῦγος ἀπάγει: [9] ἐνίοτε δὲ καὶ ὁ ζευγηλάτης τὸν λῃστήν: εἶτα παρὰ τοὺς βοῦς ζεύξας ὀπίσω τὼ χεῖρε δεδεμένον ἐλαύνει. μετὰ τοῦτο Μυσὸς εἰσῆλθεν ἐν ἑκατέρᾳ τῇ χειρὶ ἔχων πέλτην, καὶ τοτὲ μὲν ὡς δύο ἀντιταττομένων μιμούμενος ὠρχεῖτο, τοτὲ δὲ ὡς πρὸς ἕνα ἐχρῆτο ταῖς πέλταις, τοτὲ δ᾽ ἐδινεῖτο καὶ ἐξεκυβίστα ἔχων τὰς πέλτας, ὥστε ὄψιν καλὴν φαίνεσθαι. [10] τέλος δὲ τὸ περσικὸν ὠρχεῖτο κρούων τὰς πέλτας καὶ ὤκλαζε καὶ ἐξανίστατο: καὶ ταῦτα πάντα ἐν ῥυθμῷ ἐποίει πρὸς τὸν αὐλόν. [11] ἐπὶ δὲ τούτῳ ἐπιόντες οἱ Μαντινεῖς καὶ ἄλλοι τινὲς τῶν Ἀρκάδων ἀναστάντες ἐξοπλισάμενοι ὡς ἐδύναντο κάλλιστα ᾖσάν τε ἐν ῥυθμῷ πρὸς τὸν ἐνόπλιον ῥυθμὸν αὐλούμενοι καὶ ἐπαιάνισαν καὶ ὠρχήσαντο ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς προσόδοις. ὁρῶντες δὲ οἱ Παφλαγόνες δεινὰ ἐποιοῦντο πάσας τὰς ὀρχήσεις ἐν ὅπλοις εἶναι. [12] ἐπὶ τούτοις ὁρῶν ὁ Μυσὸς ἐκπεπληγμένους αὐτούς, πείσας τῶν Ἀρκάδων τινὰ πεπαμένον ὀρχηστρίδα εἰσάγει σκευάσας ὡς ἐδύνατο κάλλιστα καὶ ἀσπίδα δοὺς κούφην αὐτῇ. ἡ δὲ ὠρχήσατο πυρρίχην ἐλαφρῶς. [13] ἐνταῦθα κρότος ἦν πολύς, καὶ οἱ Παφλαγόνες ἤροντο εἰ καὶ γυναῖκες συνεμάχοντο αὐτοῖς. οἱ δ᾽ ἔλεγον ὅτι αὗται καὶ αἱ τρεψάμεναι εἶεν βασιλέα ἐκ τοῦ στρατοπέδου. τῇ μὲν νυκτὶ ταύτῃ τοῦτο τὸ τέλος ἐγένετο. [14].

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Paul Derouda wrote: I think this is true (that the singular reflects a more definite antecedent), but I don't think there's really a contradiction.

The Anabasis seems to be full of examples. … I think μετὰ ταῦτα here always refers more vaguely to what precedes, while μετὰ τοῦτο refers to the one event that precedes.
I think the question of "a more definite antecedent" is more or less ignored by discourse grammars. They tend to focus on markers of discourse features which give structure to the narrative. So μετὰ ταῦτα would be discussed along with other temporal points of departure.

While it should be understood that Thucydides tells us little or nothing about Johannine use of μετὰ ταῦτα, I looked at some samples from Thucydides. In Thucydides temporal points of departure are ubiquitous. μετὰ ταῦτα in various forms appears over a 100 times but that is small percentage of temporal points of departure. The bare μετὰ ταῦτα is temporally vague and Thucydides adds qualifiers:

Book 1, chapter 56, section 1, line 1
Μετὰ ταῦτα δ' εὐθὺς καὶ τάδε ξυνέβη γενέσθαι τοῖς
Ἀθηναίοις καὶ Πελοποννησίοις διάφορα ἐς τὸ πολεμεῖν.

Book 1, chapter 111, section 2, line 1
μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον χίλιοι
Ἀθηναίων ἐπὶ τὰς ναῦς τὰς ἐν Πηγαῖς ἐπιβάντες (εἶχον δ'
αὐτοὶ τὰς Πηγάς) παρέπλευσαν ἐς Σικυῶνα Περικλέους τοῦ
Ξανθίππου στρατηγοῦντος, καὶ ἀποβάντες Σικυωνίων τοὺς
προσμείξαντας μάχῃ ἐκράτησαν.

Book 1, chapter 118, section 1, line 1
Μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ ἤδη γίγνεται οὐ πολλοῖς ἔτεσιν ὕστερον
τὰ προειρημένα, τά τε Κερκυραϊκὰ καὶ τὰ Ποτειδεατικὰ καὶ
ὅσα πρόφασις τοῦδε τοῦ πολέμου κατέστη.

Book 8, chapter 57, section 1, line 1
Τισσαφέρνης δὲ εὐθὺς μετὰ ταῦτα καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ χει-
μῶνι παρέρχεται ἐς τὴν Καῦνον, βουλόμενος τοὺς Πελο-
ποννησίους πάλιν τε κομίσαι ἐς τὴν Μίλητον καὶ ξυνθήκας
ἔτι ἄλλας ποιησάμενος,

The discourse function of καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα appears to be distinct from μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα or Μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ in that μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα appears mostly at the beginning of sections[1] which mark significant temporal breaks in narrative. Where as καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα appears to mark temporal movement within a discourse unit. The evidence is ambiguous at best.

Book 3, chapter 103, section 2-3
ἐν δὲ τῇ ἀναχωρήσει ὑστέροις Ἀθηναίων τοῖς
ξυμμάχοις ἀναχωροῦσιν ἐπιτίθενται οἱ ἐκ τοῦ τειχίσματος
Συρακόσιοι, καὶ προσπεσόντες τρέπουσί τε μέρος τι τοῦ
στρατοῦ καὶ ἀπέκτειναν οὐκ ὀλίγους. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἀπὸ
τῶν νεῶν ὁ Λάχης καὶ οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι ἐς τὴν Λοκρίδα ἀπο-
βάσεις τινὰς ποιησάμενοι κατὰ τὸν Καϊκῖνον ποταμὸν τοὺς
προσβοηθοῦντας Λοκρῶν μετὰ Προξένου τοῦ Καπάτωνος
ὡς τριακοσίους μάχῃ ἐκράτησαν καὶ ὅπλα λαβόντες ἀπε-
χώρησαν.
In the retreat, the allies retreating after the Athenians were attacked by the Syracusans from the fort, and a large part of their army routed with great slaughter. 3.103.3 After this, Laches and the Athenians from the ships made some descents in Locris, and defeating the Locrians, who came against them with Proxenus, son of Capaton, upon the river Cacinus, took some arms and departed.


translation, Perseus @ UChicago

Book 4, chapter 52, section 2-3
καὶ οἱ Μυτιληναίων φυγάδες καὶ τῶν ἄλλων
Λεσβίων, ὁρμώμενοι οἱ πολλοὶ ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου καὶ μισθω-
σάμενοι ἔκ τε Πελοποννήσου ἐπικουρικὸν καὶ αὐτόθεν ξυνα-
γείραντες, αἱροῦσι Ῥοίτειον, καὶ λαβόντες δισχιλίους στατῆρας
Φωκαΐτας ἀπέδοσαν πάλιν οὐδὲν ἀδικήσαντες· καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο
ἐπὶ Ἄντανδρον στρατεύσαντες προδοσίας γενομένης λαμβά-
νουσι τὴν πόλιν. καὶ ἦν αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια τάς τε ἄλλας
πόλεις τὰς Ἀκταίας καλουμένας, ἃς πρότερον Μυτιληναίων
νεμομένων Ἀθηναῖοι εἶχον, ἐλευθεροῦν, καὶ πάντων μάλιστα
τὴν Ἄντανδρον· καὶ κρατυνάμενοι αὐτὴν (ναῦς τε γὰρ εὐπορία
Meanwhile, the Mitylenian and other Lesbian exiles set out, for the most part from the continent, with mercenaries hired in Peloponnese, and others levied on the spot, and took Rhoeteum, but restored it without injury on the receipt of two thousand Phocaean staters. 4.52.3 After this they marched against Antandrus and took the town by treachery, their plan being to free Antandrus and the rest of the Actaean towns, formerly owned by Mitylene but now held by the Athenians.


translation, Perseus @ UChicago

Book 6, chapter 97, section 5, line 1

προσπεσόντες οὖν αὐτοῖς τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ ἀτακτότερον καὶ
μάχῃ νικηθέντες οἱ Συρακόσιοι ἐπὶ ταῖς Ἐπιπολαῖς ἀνεχώ-
ρησαν ἐς τὴν πόλιν· καὶ ὅ τε Διόμιλος ἀποθνῄσκει καὶ τῶν
ἄλλων ὡς τριακόσιοι. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι τροπαῖόν
τε στήσαντες καὶ τοὺς νεκροὺς ὑποσπόνδους ἀποδόντες τοῖς
Συρακοσίοις, πρὸς τὴν πόλιν αὐτὴν τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ ἐπικατα-
βάντες, ὡς οὐκ ἐπεξῇσαν αὐτοῖς, ἐπαναχωρήσαντες φρούριον
ἐπὶ τῷ Λαβδάλῳ ᾠκοδόμησαν, ἐπ' ἄκροις τοῖς κρημνοῖς τῶν
Attacking in this way in considerable disorder, the Syracusans were defeated in battle at Epipolae and retired to the town, with a loss of about three hundred killed, and Diomilus among the number. 6.97.5 After this the Athenians set up a trophy and restored to the Syracusans their dead under truce, and next day descended to Syracuse itself; and no one coming out to meet them

translation, Perseus @ UChicago
,

Book 7, chapter 79.4-5
ἀναπαυομένων δ'
αὐτῶν ὁ Γύλιππος καὶ οἱ Συρακόσιοι πέμπουσι μέρος τι τῆς
στρατιᾶς ἀποτειχιοῦντας αὖ ἐκ τοῦ ὄπισθεν αὐτοὺς ᾗ προε-
ληλύθεσαν· ἀντιπέμψαντες δὲ κἀκεῖνοι σφῶν αὐτῶν τινὰς
7.79.5.1
διεκώλυσαν. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πάσῃ τῇ στρατιᾷ ἀναχωρή-
σαντες πρὸς τὸ πεδίον μᾶλλον οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι ηὐλίσαντο.
While they were resting Gylippus and the Syracusans sent a part of their army to throw up works in their rear on the way by which they had advanced; however, the Athenians immediately sent some of their men and prevented them; 7.79.5 after which they retreated more towards the plain and halted for the night.

translation, Perseus @ UChicago
Here is a counter example:

Book 7, chapter 6, section 1
καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα, ἐπειδὴ καιρὸς ἦν, αὖθις ἐπῆγεν αὐτούς. ὁ δὲ
Νικίας καὶ οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι νομίζοντες, καὶ εἰ ἐκεῖνοι μὴ ἐθέλοιεν
μάχης ἄρχειν, ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι σφίσι μὴ περιορᾶν παροι-
κοδομούμενον τὸ τεῖχος (ἤδη γὰρ καὶ ὅσον οὐ παρεληλύθει
τὴν τῶν Ἀθηναίων τοῦ τείχους τελευτὴν ἡ ἐκείνων τείχισις
After this he embraced the first opportunity that offered of again leading them against the enemy. Now Nicias and the Athenians were of opinion that even if the Syracusans should not wish to offer battle, it was necessary for them to prevent the building of the cross wall, as it already almost overlapped the extreme point of their own, and if it went any further it would from that moment make no difference whether they fought ever so many successful actions, or never fought at all.

translation, Perseus @ UChicago
another one

Book 8, chapter 58, section 5, line 1
Αἱ μὲν σπονδαὶ αὗται ἐγένοντο, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα παρε-
σκευάζετο Τισσαφέρνης τάς τε Φοινίσσας ναῦς ἄξων,
This was the treaty. After this Tissaphernes prepared to bring up the Phoenician fleet according to agreement, and to make good his other promises, or at all events wished to make it appear that he was so preparing.

translation, Perseus @ UChicago


Another example which is hard to evalutate:

Book 8, chapter 14, section 3, line 1
καὶ γενομένων λόγων ἀπό τε τοῦ Χαλκιδέως καὶ Ἀλκιβιάδου ὡς
ἄλλαι [τε] νῆες πολλαὶ προσπλέουσι καὶ τὰ περὶ τῆς πολιορ-
κίας τῶν ἐν τῷ Σπειραίῳ νεῶν οὐ δηλωσάντων, ἀφίστανται
Χῖοι καὶ αὖθις Ἐρυθραῖοι Ἀθηναίων. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα τρισὶ
ναυσὶ πλεύσαντες καὶ Κλαζομενὰς ἀφιστᾶσιν.
and after speeches from Chalcideus and Alcibiades stating that many more ships were sailing up, but saying nothing of the fleet being blockaded in Spiraeum, the Chians revolted from the Athenians, and the Erythraeans immediately afterwards. 8.14.3 After this three vessels sailed over to Clazomenae, and made that city revolt also; and the Clazomenians immediately crossed over to the mainland and began to fortify Polichna, in order to retreat there, in case of necessity, from the island where they dwelt.
translation, Perseus @ UChicago


[1] sections are the work of editors so they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Did some more work on Thudydides looking at examples where Μετὰ ταῦτα appears without either δὲ or καὶ.

Book 8, chapter 23, section 6, line 1

τῇ ἀποστάσει. ὡς δὲ αὐτῷ τὰ ἐν τῇ Λέσβῳ πάντα ἠναν-
τιοῦτο, ἀπέπλευσε τὸν ἑαυτοῦ στρατὸν πεζὸν ἀναλαβὼν
ἐς τὴν Χίον. ἀπεκομίσθη δὲ πάλιν κατὰ πόλεις καὶ ὁ τῶν
ξυμμάχων πεζός, ὃς ἐπὶ τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ἐμέλλησεν ἰέναι.
καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐν Κεγχρειᾷ ξυμμαχίδων Πελοποννησίων νεῶν
ἀφικνοῦνται αὐτοῖς ἓξ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐς τὴν Χίον. οἱ δὲ
Ἀθηναῖοι τά τ' ἐν τῇ Λέσβῳ πάλιν κατεστήσαντο καὶ
πλεύσαντες ἐξ αὐτῆς Κλαζομενίων τὴν ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ Πολί-
χναν τειχιζομένην ἑλόντες διεκόμισαν πάλιν αὐτοὺς ἐς τὴν
ἐν τῇ νήσῳ πόλιν, πλὴν τῶν αἰτίων τῆς ἀποστάσεως·

8.23.5 As, however, everything went against him in Lesbos, he took up his own force and sailed back to Chios; the land forces on board, which were to have gone to the Hellespont, being also conveyed back to their different cities. After this six of the allied Peloponnesian ships at Cenchreae joined the forces at Chios. 8.23.6 The Athenians, after restoring matters to their old state in Lesbos, set sail from thence and took Polichna, the place that the Clazomenians were fortifying on the continent, and carried the inhabitants back to their town upon the island, except the authors of the revolt, who withdrew to Daphnus; and thus Clazomenae became once more Athenian.

It seems that here μετὰ ταῦτα is probably not a point of departure but simply an adverbial with ἀφικνοῦνται. However the English translation appears to reorder the clause and put the adverb up front. On the other hand, is it possible that the referent of ταῦτα in μετὰ ταῦτα is one of the groups of warriors? Or perhaps we have hyperbaton καὶ … μετὰ ταῦτα.

Keep in mind I am not by any means a Thudydides aficionado.

Apologies to Dwayne for sidetracking.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

In Genesis 22:1 we find
Gen. 22:1: וַיְהִי, אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, וְהָאֱלֹהִים, נִסָּה אֶת-אַבְרָהָם

and in Gen 22:20 we have
וַיְהִי, אַחֲרֵי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, וַיֻּגַּד לְאַבְרָהָם

The LXX renders the former with καὶ ἐγένετο μετὰ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ὁ θεὸς...and the latter with ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα καὶ ἀνηγγέλη τῷ Ἀβρααμ... I for one cannot find a pattern here.

When Johannine hearers heard μετὰ ταῦτα, did they hear an echo of Thucydides/Xenophon or of the LXX, or neither or both? That's another thing we can't know.
C. S. Bartholomew wrote:Here is a counter example...
It's a question I struggle with. How many counter examples does there have to be before these putative patterns become suspect?

uberdwayne
Textkit Fan
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by uberdwayne »

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:Apologies to Dwayne for sidetracking.
No worries, I've been enjoying the conversation!

So it seems there is no one size fits all, and like a lot of grammatical ideas, there are lots of "exceptions" to the rule. It seems that analysis of other writings doesn't really answer the question of any difference between Μετὰ ταῦτα and Μετὰ τοῦτο.
Qimmik wrote:It depends on whether the author was viewing what preceded as a single event or a number of events.
Are there any examples of when one would expect to find the singular but find the plural, or vice versa? as I've said before, Μετὰ ταῦτα, is what is mostly used in the NT, with only about 5 instances of Μετὰ τοῦτο.

Textually, they all have the variant Μετὰ ταῦτα in some manuscripts, however they are negligible in all cases and the reading is very likely Μετὰ τοῦτο. On an interesting side note, Μετὰ τοῦτα [sic] is a variant in Rev 7:1. Almost as though the scribe copying it was thinking ταῦτα, but conflicting with what would be the odd form τοῦτο (at least to the scribe anyway). Presumably because ταῦτα was the more "normal" usage to introduce a new topic. Maybe ταῦτα was THE normal way in Byzantine Greek? I'm sure this would result in some "cross talk" between the mind of the copying scribe and writing of the manuscript before him.

Its still, in my mind, an odd thing that only John would use it in the NT. I'm beginning to think that there really is no discernible difference between the two in koine. I wonder if John thought of them as synonyms.
μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Markos wrote: When Johannine hearers heard μετὰ ταῦτα, did they hear an echo of Thucydides/Xenophon or of the LXX, or neither or both?
I would be more interested in what the author heard not what his audience heard. I would assume that John had not seen a copy of Homer, Sophocles, Thucydides, Plato, Xenophon … whatever. But to just study patterns in NT/LXX is closed feedback loop. NT is full of LXX like language. We need to compare it to some standard. Some would prefer a Koine standard to a "Classical" one. Attic narrative seems like a good place to start.

Didn't find Μετὰ ταῦτα in Homer or Attic Tragedy (once in fragment of Aeschylus). Lots of examples in Thucydides, Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Markos wrote:In Genesis 22:1 we find
Gen. 22:1: וַיְהִי, אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, וְהָאֱלֹהִים, נִסָּה אֶת-אַבְרָהָם

and in Gen 22:20 we have
וַיְהִי, אַחֲרֵי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, וַיֻּגַּד לְאַבְרָהָם

The LXX renders the former with καὶ ἐγένετο μετὰ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ὁ θεὸς...and the latter with ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα καὶ ἀνηγγέλη τῷ Ἀβρααμ... I for one cannot find a pattern here.
Not in the LXX perhaps. But in Thucydides there seems to be a pattern. A narrative point of departure may begin with μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα occasionally μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ (ignore number ταῦτα/τοῦτο) and καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα does at times fill the same slot but it occasionally shows up embedded within a major narrative unit. I am not claiming that μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα marks a new major narrative unit since it is found at several levels of the narrative structure.

One of the problems is understanding narrative structure of Thucydides, that is no small assignment. You cannot assume that it is just a flat linear sequence of events narrated one after another. So to understand how structuring elements work you need to have mastered the structure of the narrative. This itself is a feed back loop. Your discourse analysis method impacts the data which is basis of your method.

I am using the books chapters and sections as a guide. I understand this isn't a perfect method. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα is found more often at beginning of a chapter than καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα. However, there are enough examples of καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα filling this slot to undermine the whole project. In other words it doesn't really look like there is a strong preference for one form over the other at major transitions in the narrative. I suspect that R. Buth would say I am barking up the wrong tree.

The contrast between δὲ and καὶ is summed up by Buth:
a system where one has a simple switch to mark (δε) "+change, +connection" and another (και) that just marks "+connection"…

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/vie ... 1ac#p17388
This is a different question than the one I am looking at, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα vs. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα as points of departure at major transitions in narrative discourse. However Buth's (δε) "+change, +connection" in an indirect fashion supports the notion that μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα would be preferred at transitions.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

uberdwayne wrote:Its still, in my mind, an odd thing that only John would use it in the NT. I'm beginning to think that there really is no discernible difference between the two in koine. I wonder if John thought of them as synonyms.
No, why would they be synonyms? μετὰ τοῦτο "after this thing", refers to one event – the last event mentioned before. μετὰ ταῦτα "after these things", refers to a number of preceding events. In English, you don't say "after this thing" and "after these things", unless you're producing a very heavy translationese – you say "after this", so the distinction is lost. Still, they don't mean the same. The dual and the plural in Attic are usually translated the same into English, but it doesn't mean they are interchangeable in the Greek.

I'll quote again an example I gave above, from Xenophon's Anabasis. While I don't think there's really much of a difference between the two forms, I think in this case μετὰ τοῦτο is more dramatic than μετὰ ταῦτα would be. That's lost in the translation. μετὰ ταῦτα would mean "after all this, the troops went into camp...", the nuance being that the troops going into camp is the final result of a long series of deliberations; on the other hand, μετὰ τοῦτο makes the next event the direct and immediate consequence of the previous event, which is Xenophon speaking to Seuthes. Note also that he had spoken to Seuthes εὐθὺς, immediately.

Anabasis 7.3.14-15.
[14] ἐπὶ τούτοις εἶπεν ὁ Ξενοφῶν: εἴ τις ἀντιλέγει, λεγέτω: εἰ δὲ μή, ἐπιψηφιῶ ταῦτα. ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐδεὶς ἀντέλεγεν, ἐπεψήφισε, καὶ ἔδοξε ταῦτα. εὐθὺς δὲ Σεύθῃ εἶπεν, ὅτι συστρατεύσοιντο αὐτῷ. [15] μετὰ τοῦτο οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι κατὰ τάξεις ἐσκήνησαν, στρατηγοὺς δὲ καὶ λοχαγοὺς ἐπὶ δεῖπνον Σεύθης ἐκάλεσε, πλησίον κώμην ἔχων.
Translation from Perseus:
[14] After that Xenophon said: “If any one holds a contrary opinion, let him speak; if not, I will put this question to vote.” And as no one spoke in opposition, he put the matter to vote, and this plan was decided upon. So he told Seuthes at once that they would take service with him. [15] After this the troops went into camp by divisions, but the generals and captains were invited to dinner by Seuthes in a village he was occupying near by.

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Markos »

1. Paul: what kind of a pattern do you detect in the Anabasis with μετὰ τοῦτο versus μετὰ τοῦτον.
2. Bill and John W. What are you thoughts on any patterns in Thucydides?
3 Are there some other texts we should look at with a good mix of the two (or three?)
4. Dwayne: What about διὰ ταῦτα versus διὰ τοῦτο in the Greek NT?

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

μετὰ τοῦτον seems more straightforward than μετὰ τοῦτο/μετὰ ταῦτα to me. I suppose refers most of the time or always to a person, "after him".

Anabasis 5.1.:
[3] ταῦτα ἀκούσαντες οἱ στρατιῶται ἀνεθορύβησαν ὡς εὖ λέγει: καὶ ἄλλος ταὔτ᾽ ἔλεγε, καὶ πάντες οἱ παριόντες. ἔπειτα δὲ Χειρίσοφος ἀνέστη καὶ εἶπεν ὧδε. [4] φίλος μοί ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες, Ἀναξίβιος, ναυαρχῶν δὲ καὶ τυγχάνει. ἢν οὖν πέμψητέ με, οἴομαι ἂν ἐλθεῖν καὶ τριήρεις ἔχων καὶ πλοῖα τὰ ἡμᾶς ἄξοντα: ὑμεῖς δὲ εἴπερ πλεῖν βούλεσθε, περιμένετε ἔστ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ ἔλθω: ἥξω δὲ ταχέως. ἀκούσαντες ταῦτα οἱ στρατιῶται ἥσθησάν τε καὶ ἐψηφίσαντο πλεῖν αὐτὸν ὡς τάχιστα. [5]

μετὰ τοῦτον Ξενοφῶν ἀνέστη καὶ ἔλεξεν ὧδε. Χειρίσοφος μὲν δὴ ἐπὶ πλοῖα στέλλεται, ἡμεῖς δὲ ἀναμενοῦμεν. ὅσα μοι οὖν δοκεῖ καιρὸς εἶναι ποιεῖν ἐν τῇ μονῇ, ταῦτα ἐρῶ.

Cheirosophus first gets up to speak. Then, Xenophon gets up to speak after him.

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by jeidsath »

I read Theages this weekend, and thought of this thread several times.
καὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς ῥᾷστον ἡμῖν τοῦτο γίγνεται, ὅσοι τὴν γῆν γεωργοῦμεν, τὸ παρασκευάσασθαι πάντα τὰ πρὸ τοῦ φυτεύειν καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ φυτεῦσαι· ἐπειδὰν δὲ τὸ φυτευθὲν βιῷ, μετὰ τοῦτο θεραπεία τοῦ φύντος καὶ πολλὴ καὶ χαλεπὴ καὶ δύσκολος γίγνεται.
This next isn't exactly μετὰ ταῦτα, but it's very similar.
ὁρᾷς, ὦ πάτερ; ὁ Σωκράτης οὐ πάνυ μοι δοκεῖ τι ἔτι ἐθέλειν ἐμοὶ συνδιατρίβειν—ἐπεὶ τό γ’ ἐμὸν ἕτοιμον, ἐὰν οὗτος ἐθέλῃ—ἀλλὰ ταῦτα παίζων πρὸς ἡμᾶς λέγει.
And here's a challenge!
νῦν οὖν ταὐτὰ ταῦτα αὐτὸς πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ποιῶν θαυμάζεις
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Qimmik »

2. Bill and John W. What are you thoughts on any patterns in Thucydides?
Markos, this isn't something I focused on when I read through Thucydides. One of the many interesting things about Th., however, is that the texture is not at all homogeneous throughout. Books 2-4 form a unit, with many different events marked by summers and winters (as he tells us he is going to do). Certain events are brought to prominence by an extended narration, while others are told briefly. Books 6-7 are more or less continuous narratives of the events in Sicily. Book 5 is somewhat disjointed with various treaties and draft treaties inserted into the text and the Melian dialogue at the end, which is a dramatic back-and-forth, Book 8 is again a narrative of many different events, with no speeches, but very different from Books 2-4, more akin to Xenophon's Greek History (of which I've only read a little). It ends mid-sentence. I'm afraid this doesn't give a very good picture of the whole.

Bill

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Μετὰ ταῦτα vs Μετὰ τοῦτο vs Μετὰ ταῦτον

Post by Paul Derouda »

jeidsath wrote:I read Theages this weekend, and thought of this thread several times.
καὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς φυτοῖς ῥᾷστον ἡμῖν τοῦτο γίγνεται, ὅσοι τὴν γῆν γεωργοῦμεν, τὸ παρασκευάσασθαι πάντα τὰ πρὸ τοῦ φυτεύειν καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ φυτεῦσαι· ἐπειδὰν δὲ τὸ φυτευθὲν βιῷ, μετὰ τοῦτο θεραπεία τοῦ φύντος καὶ πολλὴ καὶ χαλεπὴ καὶ δύσκολος γίγνεται.
I think this is a very nice example. μετὰ τοῦτο refers to ἐπειδὰν δὲ τὸ φυτευθὲν βιῷ, one event, and certainly not the preparations before that.

Translation from Perseus:
In regard to the plants, as you know, we who cultivate the earth find it the easiest part of our work to make all our preparations that are needed before planting, and to do the planting itself; but when the plant begins to grow, thenceforward we have a great deal of difficult and vexatious business in tending the new growth.

Post Reply