Matthew 28:17 oi(

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
Bert
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Matthew 28:17 oi(

Post by Bert » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:05 am

Matthew 28:17 reads; καὶ ιδόντες α?τὸν π?οσεκύνησαν, οἱ δὲ ?δίστασαν. I compared four translations all of which translate οἱ δέ ?δίστασαν as but some doubted.
I am wondering why some and not they.
It may seem a little bit of a strange situation; And when they saw him they worshiped him but they doubted but that is no justification to make it some is it? It could just as well be; they worshiped him, yet they doubted , in the sense of eventhough they doubted.
Or is eventhough not a waranted tranlation for δέ.

Chris Weimer
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:34 am

Post by Chris Weimer » Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:36 am

It's possible. With oi being a relative pronoun as such, it has the flexibility to stretch. I can't recall this in any other part of Matthew, so personally I'd do "they" instead of "some." "Some" is too much interpretation.

User avatar
Kopio
Global Moderator
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

Post by Kopio » Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:07 am

Blass, Debrunner, and Funk refer to this verse in section 250 of their grammar. They say hOI DE means "but others" and states that unlike the other examples it list that start with MEN and then are followed by DE that:
BDF wrote:in these two places (the other being Matthew 26:67) no differentiation is indicated at the beginning of the sequence, but with the appearance of hOI DE it becomes evident that what was siad first did not apply to all"
I know that quite often in Classical DE is simply used to denote a new sentence or idea. It could be that Matthew is Atticizing here. Just a guess.

Small sidenote....I was just saying how great I thought BDF was....and here they are the only Koine Grammar that deals with this specific verse. It could be that since they are writing a Koine Grammar coming from a Classical standpoint, that this sort of thing stuck out a bit more to them than some of the other modern grammars. Bert...I'm telling ya....if you don't own BDF you should!

User avatar
Skylax
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
Location: Belgium

Post by Skylax » Sun Mar 05, 2006 9:29 am

I support Kopio. When reading the sentence, the οἱ δέ suggests immediately a leading μέν, so in Greek the turn of phrase suggests that the οἱ are others than the ones who "worshiped". Otherwise, to render they worshiped him but they doubted it would have been rather like (καίπε?) π?οσκυνήσαντες α?τὸν ?δίστασαν, although other ways of expression are also possible.

χαί?ετε :)

ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Post by ThomasGR » Sun Mar 05, 2006 10:21 am

To have a full picture, one has to read the previous verses. From this short passage, the impression one gets is “some worshipped him, and some others doubted (hesitated)?. Generally, Kopio’s contribution is correct. It is an atticisim, having a poetical nuance. I wonder if the proper text spoken by ordinary people was “και/ενω αλλοι?.

Bert
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Post by Bert » Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:33 pm

Thanks to all of you.
Kopio, I have heard that BDF is very similar to Smyth except that it is geared towards koine.
You found οἱ δέ in BDF so I thought just maybe it will be in Smyth as well.
Lo and behold; There it is; Section 2838 b.
οἱ δέ, when opposed to a large number of persons or things, is often used without οἱ μέν, as ποελελυθότες ?πὶ χιλόν, οἱ δ' ?πὶ ξύλα. having gone for fodder, and some for fuel X.C.6.3.9.

Chris Weimer
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:34 am

Post by Chris Weimer » Sun Mar 05, 2006 4:20 pm

I suppose you are right, and Mt. 26.67 definitely is another example of such. There's no way you can read the expected reading into that line.

User avatar
IreneY
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
Location: U.S.A (not American though)
Contact:

Post by IreneY » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:12 pm

I'm in a bit of a hurry now but I think I know the possible answer to this one.

You see, I opened my Bible to look at the previous lines and to my surprise in 28:17 it says that Καί ιδόντες αυτόν, π?οσεκ?νησαν αυτόν; τινές δε εδίστασαν. Myriobiblos (the on-line library of the Greek Orthodox Church) has hoi de etc.

My Bible seems to follow an edition of the Oxford University Press of (probably) 1921.

Hope that helps

User avatar
Kopio
Global Moderator
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

Post by Kopio » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:47 pm

For the record.....what is your bible IreneY? You said that it follows the OUP version....I can't find any support for the TINES to be in there at all.

User avatar
IreneY
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
Location: U.S.A (not American though)
Contact:

Post by IreneY » Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:09 pm

I meant my copy of the bible.

Other than that I am afraid I don't really understand the question

Bert
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Post by Bert » Tue Mar 07, 2006 12:20 am



User avatar
IreneY
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
Location: U.S.A (not American though)
Contact:

Post by IreneY » Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:13 am

well, similar. More like other worshiped while others....

as for Kai and tines, I just copied them out of the book

ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Post by ThomasGR » Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:34 am

Bert: Do καί and τινές really have acute accents or did you mistype?

These signs are not accute neither grave accents, but signs where to put your stress in a syllable.

User avatar
Kopio
Global Moderator
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

Post by Kopio » Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:24 am

IreneY wrote:I meant my copy of the bible.

Other than that I am afraid I don't really understand the question
What I mean is....who is it published by. I am assuming it is a standard(?) modern Greek Bible. What version is it? Does that make sense? I guess it is a little different for me....I use a NIV (New International Version) for my day to day English Bible. I also really like the Philips translation, but then again, these are both translations...to where yours would be more of a version I guess. Do you own a critical Greek Text, like the NA27 or UBS4??

User avatar
IreneY
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:27 am
Location: U.S.A (not American though)
Contact:

Post by IreneY » Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:46 am

no, this is not a standard one. I don't own one right now (the Bibles have been split between 4 houses) but myriobiblos covers my needs as it is the official site of the Greek Orthodox Church so I assume that they have the 'approved' version.

As a side note, while there are, I think, translations in modern Greek, I am not aware if there is one 'approved' by the official Church.

Anyway, this copy appears to be the one my grandpa owned when he was in high-school in 1925.:)

They were not really particular in noting the details of publishing and edition back then (in Greece I mean) so here's what info I can give you.

It says on the first page that it was published in ΟΞΟ?ΙΑ :D (that must be Oxford or Oxfordshire) reducted (?) by the typesetter (prob) of the Academy, funded by the Brit Biblical Company for the purpose of spreading the word of God in GB and in Foreign countries

You'd probably understand all this better if I just write them in Katharevousa (still no accents so no accent means perispomeni, +H when needed and a rather 'ancient' way of writing the dative :) )

(Ε? ΟΞΟ?ΙΑ. Ετυπώθη δι' επιμελείας του τυποθέτου της Ακαδημίας δαπάνηι της Β?εττανικης Βιβλικης hΕται?είας π?ος διάδοσιν του Θειου Λόγου εν τε τηι Μεγάληι Β?εττανίαι καί τη Αλλόδαπηι)

Second page says as I wrote before the in was Printed in England at the Oxford University Press

Post Reply