Casus pendens, non-verbal predicate and subject

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhay,

A rather frequent and marked syntactical structure in all Semitic languages is as follows:

(1) A "Casus Pendens", followed by
(2) A Non-Verbal Predicate, followed by
(3) The Subject

Examples of this syntactical structure from the Hebrew TaNaKh abound. In order to demonstrate that translational Greek (i.e., that of the LXX) followed this peculiar order word-for-word, I have presented an example below from the MSS and LXX: (more to come in the following days <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->)

Genesis 3:12

ydmv httn rH' hH'h (Casus Pendens)
'wh (Non-Verbal Predicate)
??vh ??m yl hntn (Subject)

hJ gun?? ??n ??dwav met ??mo?? (Casus Pendens)
a??tj (Non-Verbal Predicate)
moi ??dwken ???p?? to?? x??lou (Subject)

The woman that you put with me (Casus Pendens)
it was she (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that gave me (fruit) from the tree. (Subject)

Now, let's look at an example from the New Testament:

Yukhanan 12:48

[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]tllmd Flm[/font] (Casus Pendens)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Yh[/font] (Non-Verbal Predicate)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]0yrx0 0mwyb hl 0nyd[/font] (Subject)

?? l??gov ??n ??l???ljsa (Casus Pendens)
??ke??nov (Non-Verbal Predicate)
krine?? a??t??n ??n t?? ??sc???t?? ??m???r??? (Subject)

The word that I have spoken (Casus Pendens)
it is it (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that will judge him on the last day. (Subject)

<!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

[Rob]

Shlama Akhi Shaul,
This is interesting but wouldn't it be better if the Greek didn't follow it?

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Rob,

Why not have the Greek follow it? Isn't the point to demonstrate what translational Greek looks like?

You can search Classical Greek high and low, and you will never find a construction like these examples in any book originally written in Greek. This syntactical construct is quite foreign to all Indo-European languages. However, you can turn to any book and chapter in the LXX or GNT and find at examples like this.

And what do we know about the LXX? Well, first and foremost of course it is translational Greek. If we find similiar syntactical constructs in the GNT, and we do indeed, then it would logically follow that the GNT is translational Greek, as well.

It is this very imitation of Semitic syntactical structure that is a dead-giveaway that the GNT is a translation from a Semitic source....namely, the Aramaic NT.

I'll post another example tonight....

[nashama]

HI Paul:
I understand that the Greek New Testament is a translation of the Aramaic "autograph". I'm no scholar but I would like to make a few points that I hope will clarify (at least for myself) the Aramaic primacy of the "autograph" of the New Testament.

1) The use of the Aramaic grammar rule "Casus Pendens" demonstrates that translating the specific and contextual meanings in the Aramaic New Testament required a departure from Classical Greek.

2) To it's credit the Greek New Testament is more an interlinear translation than a paraphrase. The grammatical structuring of Classical Greek would be no more than a loose paraphrase of the Aramaic New Testament.

3) Classical Greek was rejected by the New Testament translators because it could not accurately illuminate the specific contextual meanings within the Aramaic New Testament.

Do you know of other specific Aramaic grammar rules, like Casus Pendens that show that the New Testament Greek follows the Aramaic?

Regards,
Stephen Silver.

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Stephen,

I think you hit the nail on the head. The translators of the Aramaic NT revered the text in front of them. They sought to produce a literal translation like the LXX....even at the expense of the Greek grammar. They followed the Aramaic almost word-for-word whenever they could get away with it and have SOMEWHAT of an understandable Greek.

Do you know of other specific Aramaic grammar rules, like Casus Pendens that show that the New Testament Greek follows the Aramaic?

Yes, there are many more rules that I will demonstrate on different posts. For now, I will show 4 or 5 examples of this rule then I will move on to others.

[Rob]

I guess what I'm trying to say is: Wouldn't it be better if the Greek tried *but* fell short of it? Since if they did follow this rule %100 it would make the Greek completely nonsensical.

I like this though, and I will cross examine Josephus for it.

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Rob,

I like that the Greek follows the Aramaic structure so closely. It makes making my point easier.

For any Greek-speaking person this is gibberish. No Greek speaker would ever communicate in this manner, not unless he liked being ignored and ridiculed.

As strange as the construction sounds to us in English, that's how it would sound to someone whose native language was Greek. But to a Semitic speaker (any Semitic language), this construction is very familiar and acceptable to the ear.

Let me know about your cross-examination of Josephus...

[Rob]

Ahh, I understand now. Translating word for word it is unavoidable. It is better if the Greek copies it.<!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> The NT is ridden with it. I posted an example.

[Rob]

Yes, Josephus is packed full of it.

"But wonderful it was/(what) a dream/I saw that very night"
The life of Josephus, 42 (208)

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhay,

As promised, another example:

Genesis 50:5

??vnk ??r'b yl ytyrk rH' yrbqb (Casus Pendens)
hmH (Non-Verbal Predicate)
ynrbqt (Subject)

@En t?? mujme???? ?? ??rnxa ??mant?? ??n g?? Canaan (Casus Pendens)
??ke?? (Non-Verbal Predicate)
me q???yeiv (Subject)

In my tomb which I dug for myself in the land of Canaan (Casus Pendens)
it is there (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that you shall bury me. (Subject)

Now, let's look at an example from the New Testament:

Yukhanan 14:10

[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]rm9 Ybd Nyd Yb0[/font] (Casus Pendens)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]wh[/font] (Non-Verbal Predicate)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Nylh 0db9 db9[/font] (Subject)

?? d?? Pat??r ?? ??n ??mo?? m???nwn (Casus Pendens)
a??t??v(Non-Verbal Predicate)
poie?? t?? ??rga (Subject)

My Father who dwells in me (Casus Pendens)
it is he (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that does these works. (Subject)

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhay,

"Casus Pendens" is our friend...

Genesis 15:4

??yvmm 'cy rH' ??v yk (Casus Pendens)
'wh (Non-Verbal Predicate)
??Hryy (Subject)

???ll ??v ??xele??setai ??k so?? (Casus Pendens)
o??tov (Non-Verbal Predicate)
kljrouom??sei se (Subject)

The one who shall spring from your loins (Casus Pendens)
it is he (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that shall be your heir. (Subject)

Now, let's look at an example from the New Testament:

Acts 17:23

[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]hl Jwtn0 Nylxd Jwtn0 Ny9dy f dkd Lykh wh[/font] (Casus Pendens)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]0nhl hl[/font] (Non-Verbal Predicate)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Jwkl 0n0 rbsm 0n0[/font] (Subject)

?? o??n ???gnoo??ntev e??sebe??te (Casus Pendens)
to??to(Non-Verbal Predicate)
??g?? katagg???llw ??m??n (Subject)

What therefore you worship without knowing (Casus Pendens)
it is this (Non-Verbal Predicate)
that I proclaim to you. (Subject)

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhay,

Another example...

Mattai 26:23

[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Fglb Ym9 hdy0 (bcd Nm[/font] (Casus Pendens)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]wh[/font] (Non-Verbal Predicate)
[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Ynml4n[/font] (Subject)

hO ??m???yav met@ ??o?? t??n ce??ra ??n t?? trubl???? (Casus Pendens)
a??t??v (Non-Verbal Predicate)
me parad??sei (Subject)

The one who has dipped his hand in the dish with me (Casus Pendens)
it is he (Non-Verbal Predicate)
who will betray me. (Subject)

[gbausc]

Shlama Akhi Paul,

Exactly what is a "Casus Pendens" ? I gather from Gesenius Hebrew Grammar that it involves a participle.

It seems that your subject always includes the main verb and that the non verbal predicate is usually a predicate nominative, renaming the subject in the previous category which you call casus pendens.

Please clarify. I am very interested in your Semitic syntax idea being used by The Greek. It seems to be valid. I just want to be sure of the grammatical argument involved.

Many blessings,

[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Fxrwb F0ygs[/font]

Dave B

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Dave,

Exactly what is a "Casus Pendens" ? I gather from Gesenius Hebrew Grammar that it involves a participle.

In traditional Semitic grammar a "casus pendens" is a fronted nominal element, usually an introductory comment, that constitutes a clause by itself.

It seems that your subject always includes the main verb and that the non verbal predicate is usually a predicate nominative, renaming the subject in the previous category which you call casus pendens.

Yes, exactly. There are many more syntactical constructions, like this, that are exclusive to Semitic literature and style. The idea is, of course, that if we can show the Greek NT to follow these odd (for Indo-European languages) constructs, like the LXX does, then it would naturally follow that the Greek translators of the Aramaic NT followed the same "protocol" as those Greek translators of the Hebrew OT.

They, most probably being Semites who were bilingual in Aramaic~Greek, viewed the original text in front of them as sacred. When translating, they (like the translators of the LXX) chose to remain ultra-literal to the underlying text, even at the expense of "good Greek grammar."

[Dave]

One of the first things Paul showed me on here was just how the greek was not real greek, it seemed to be a translation greek (which would account for the term 'koine' to justify this particular greek that was different from all other standard greek language).

"Thus saith The Lord,.." is not greek thought and traditional language usage. Paul utilized this particular phrase and explained it so simply to me.