Skip to content

Matthew 9:32

Dear all,

This is just my guess, since I am only learning.. I do not see any difference in meaning but at most a slight difference in emphasis.. since “anqrwpon kwfon daimonizomenon” seems to mean “[a] man”, “[a] dumb man”, “[a] dumb man who is demon-possessed”, and does not necessarily imply cause and effect but merely two facts describing the man. I believe that “daimonizomenos tuflos kai kwfos” likewise means “[one] who is demon-possessed, [this one also being] blind and dumb”. It seems that the participle is put first in place of the missing noun so that what the adjectives modify is clear. If the word-order were changed to “tuflos kai kwfos daimonizomenos”, may it mean “[a] blind [one] and [a] dumb [one] who is demon-possessed” (assuming the context does not indicate which possibility is correct)?

Regards, David Lim

On 29 March 2011 23:50, wrote:

> > > 29 March 2011 > > Friends: > > I was wondering about a matter of emphasis that may or may not be implied > in the word order of Matthew 9:32: > > Αὐτῶν δὲ ἐξερχομένων ἰδοὺ προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ ἄνθρωπον κωφὸν δαιμονιζόμενον > > AUTWN DE EXERCHOMENWN IDOU PROSHNEGKAN AUTWi ANQRWPON KWFON DAIMONIZOMENON > > Does the word order of the adjective κωφὸν (KWFON) before the participle > δαιμονιζόμενον (DAIMONIZOMENON) communicate, as an older commentator like > Alfred Plummer thinks it does, that the man’s muteness is primary, while the > fact that he is demon-possessed is secondary? Or is that pressing the Greek > word order too far? For the sake of discussion, I’d like to note Matthew > 12:22: > > Τότε προσηνέχθη αὐτῷ δαιμονιζόμενος τυφλὸς καὶ κωφός. > > TOTE PROSHNECHQH AUTWi DAIMONIZOMENOS TUFLOS KAI KWFOS. > > In this case, would the placement of the participle before the two > adjectives indicate that the demon-possession of the man contributed to the > person’s blindness and muteness, demon-possession being primary? > > These are specific textual questions. However, my larger question has to do > with whether word order or word placement in a sentence indicates nuances of > meaning. In this context, I thought I’d quote A. T. Robertson and W. Hersey > Davis: > > “It is possible in Greek to express the most delicate shades of an idea by > means of voice, tense, mode, cases, prepositions, particles, conjunctions. > Often an idea in Greek can be expressed in various ways that are > substantially alike, but yet differ in ways that the sensitive Greek mind > understands. So the Greek has liberty where the Latin has bonds. The Greek > may use coordinating clauses or subordinating clauses with conjunctions, or > the infinitive, or the particple. His sentences may be short or long. He may > use prepositions freely or not. Only do not accuse a Greek of using one > construction for another. Freedom is the glory of the Greek language. Each > writer has his own style and flavor” (A New Short Grammar of the Greek > Testament, 10th ed. [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1958], pp. 318-319). > Robertson doesn’t specifically mention worder order or word placement here > as a factor in nuanced Greek, but might it be a factor? > > This matter of word order or word placement interests me, but I don’t have > many recent resources dealing with the topic. I’d be interested in the > comments of list members. > > Best wishes, > Jeremy Spencer > — > B-Greek home page: > B-Greek mailing list > > >