Exploring the function of relative sentences in New Testament Greek

Abstract

The traditional view of the function of relative sentences in the Greek New Testament differed markedly from that in many modern languages. This view was challenged in the mid-1980s and a number of striking correspondences with a variety of modern (and some classical) languages were pointed out, despite some differences. The purpose of this article is, amongst others, to explore functional aspects of the relative sentence against this background, and to provide further substantiation for the new view and some new perspectives in the light of recent literature. The conclusion is that the view of the functions of the relative sentence, as developed in the mid-1980s, still seems valid. The view is also supported to a large extent by recent literature, especially with respect to the relative sentence's adjectival use, despite differences relating to nuances and terminology. However, recent New Testament grammars still distinguish so-called 'conditional', 'concessive', 'causal', 'final' and 'resultative' relative sentences as part of their adverbial use, despite strong evidence to the contrary. The conclusion reached is that relative sentences seem to have the following functions in New Testament Greek, which correspond to their functions in numerous modern languages: (1) Identifying a referent(s) with or without an overt nominal antecedent. (2) Providing background or additional information for a nominal or sentential antecedent in the form of a parenthesis, explanation or concession, or some combination of these. (3) Qualifying a verb with regard to time, location or manner. (4) Functioning as a conjoined sentence. Read online:Scan this QR code with your smart phone or mobile device to read online. IntroductionThe relative construction, which commonly consists of an antecedent and a relative sentence, is a pervasive phenomenon in the languages of the world, but occurs in a variety of syntactic forms. In view of this, Comrie (1989:142) argues that a functional (semantic, cognitive) definition should be given of the relative construction (in his terms, 'relative clause') which is independent of language-specific syntax. Assuming that restrictive relative sentences are more central to the notion of the relative construction than are non-restrictives, he defines the relative construction as consisting necessarily of a head and a restricting clause (Comrie 1989:143). Whereas the head has a potential range of referents, the restricting clause 'restricts this set by giving a proposition that must be true of the actual referents of the overall construction.' Compare his example, which is repeated here as (1) In (1), the head 'potato' has a range of potential referents, which is limited to one potato by the relative sentence, of which the proposition 'Hasan gave the potato to Sinan' is true (Comrie 1989:142). It should be noted that Comrie's definition includes not only relative constructions that contain finite relative sentences, but also non-finite (e.g. participial) constructions, such as 'leaving on Flight 738' in th...

On The Third Type of Headed Relative Clause in Post‐Classical and Early Byzantine Greek

“…2 Ancient Greek headed relative clauses have been subject to a great number of studies, among which see Probert (2015) for Archaic Greek; Monteil (1963), Adams (1972), Brunel (1977) for Archaic and Classical Greek;Biraud (1980), Chanet (1980), Pieters (1980), Rijksbaron (1981), Stelter (2004: 28-139), Perna (2013a;2013b), Luj an (2014) for Classical Greek; Vierros (2003) for Early Post-classical Greek; Kriki (2013) for Post-classical Greek; Du Toit (1986Toit ( , 2015Toit ( , 2016, Boyer (1988), Culy (1989), Petersen (2001) and Kirk (2012: 177-224) for New Testament Greek. 3 Fauconnier's (2014) study is concerned specifically with Classical Greek (V-IV BC).…”