ἀλλʼ ἤ seems to mean “but rather” in those verses. IMO, that would make ἤ here somewhat similar to the LSJ A.I.3 “or else, otherwise”, although not quite the same thing.
Thanks that makes sense Joel. The NETS which translates from the Septuagint has:
Not so, the impious, not so!
Rather, they are like the dust that…
And the LSJ entry for ἤ has this under the heading B. COMPARATIVE: after Advbs. or adverbial phrases, πλήν, πρίν, πρόσθεν, χωρίς (qq. v.), ἀλλά (v. ἀλλ᾽ ἤ）
And (I think) that also clears up another point about this text i.e. why ὐχ οὕτως is repeated in the Greek when the underlying Hebrew AFAIK doesn’t have repetition like this. I think the Greek would be better punctuated like this:
I see we have ἀλλ’ ἢ not only in 4 but already in 2, and it’s well attested in the Septuagint. It’s an oddity—seemingly no different from simple ἀλλά in sense, though it’s sometimes said to be “stronger.” I think there may well have been some sort of crosscontamination with ἄλλο ἤ, used after negatives in ordinary Greek (and in Aristophanes there can be uncertainty as to whether αλλ’ ἤ represents ἀλλὰ ἤ or ἄλλο ἤ), but that’s not a fully satisfactory explanation, since it doesn’t apply across the board and it doesn’t account for the uneven distribution.
Ah, I missed that in verse 2, thanks. But again the ἢ may have been included there to signal a comparison between the two behaviors described in verses 1 and 2. The reason I’m bringing this up is because I just finished reading Chapter 32 Comparison of the Cambridge Grammar and it says in section 32.6:
“Comparatives are usually construed with a genitive of comparison or with ἢ; in the latter case, the second member of the comparison (after ἢ) stands in the same case as the first.”
…which I think is what’s happening here. Does that make sense?
Yes but it’s the ἀλλ’ἤ combo—quite illogical on its face—that stands in need of explanation. Whatever its origin I think it just has to be accepted as a linguistic quirk.
I thought that this might just be something to do with the poetry here, and looked at how ἀλλ’ ἤ gets used elsewhere. A quick scan through Genesis and the early books of the LXX shows it mostly being used in the “standard” way, to mean “unless” or “except”. However, here is the same “but instead” or “but rather” as the Psalm, showing up in 1 Kings (1 Samuel):
“Do you believe that I came by to hand out Peace on Earth? I’m telling you, No way, until (I first bring) division.”
“Do you believe that I came by to hand out Peace on Earth? I’m telling you No way, but instead division.”
The usual translation is number 2. But the other makes quite a bit of sense and is closer both to Paul’s use and the more “standard” use in the LXX and wider Greek. Here’s an example from Genesis of exactly the same:
…which makes me wonder if the repetition of οὐχ οὕτως in Psalm 1:4 is perhaps another way of expressing an emphatic negative in Greek? In other words, maybe ἀλλ’ ἢ only means “but rather / but instead” when it is immediately preceeded by an emphatic negative?
You have two examples of the “but instead” meaning in the Psalm quote. I would say that neither appear to use an emphatic negative. And my post was an argument for not reading Luke 12:51 with this “but instead” translation. I suggest looking through all the LXX instances of ἀλλ’ ἤ, but I don’t believe that can be a real pattern.
