Grammatical and Pragmatic Implications of Conjunction Placement in 2 John 11
This exegetical study of the grammatical and pragmatic implications of conjunction placement in 2 John 11 is based on a b-greek discussion from January 20th, 2014. The initial query focused on the unusual position of the postpositive conjunction γὰρ in the NA28 text of 2 John 11, where it appears after the participial phrase ὁ λέγων rather than in the more common second position (e.g., ὁ γὰρ λέγων), as found in some other textual traditions.
The main exegetical issue centers on whether such variations in word order, particularly concerning postpositive particles, carry significant semantic or pragmatic implications in Koine Greek. This investigation navigates the complexities of grammatical description versus prescription, considers the nuances of textual criticism, and explores how modern linguistic approaches, such as discourse analysis and intonational phonology, can illuminate the interpretative landscape of the New Testament text. It prompts a critical evaluation of whether apparent grammatical “roughness” in authors like John might still convey subtle meaning, or if certain placements represent stylistic choices without necessarily altering fundamental sense.
Greek text (Nestle 1904)
ὁ λέγων γὰρ αὐτῷ χαίρειν κοινωνεῖ τοῖς ἔργοις αὐτοῦ τοῖς πονηροῖς.
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- For 2 John 11, the SBLGNT (2010) text aligns with the Nestle 1904 and NA28 readings: ὁ λέγων γὰρ αὐτῷ χαίρειν.
- The primary textual variant under discussion, therefore, is not between NA28/Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT, but with other traditions, particularly the Byzantine Majority Text, which often reads ὁ γὰρ λέγων.
- Some Byzantine manuscripts also show variation regarding the inclusion or omission of αὐτῷ after χαίρειν, though this is a secondary concern to the γὰρ placement in the current discussion.
Textual Criticism (NA28), Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The NA28 text presents the reading ὁ λέγων γὰρ, which places the postpositive conjunction γὰρ in the third position within the phrase ὁ λέγων. This contrasts with the more typical second position (e.g., ὁ γὰρ λέγων) often observed in classical and even other Koine Greek texts, including the Byzantine textual tradition. Textual critics, in affirming the NA28 reading, rely on the strength of early and geographically diverse manuscript evidence. The textual variant is a minor one, but it prompts a significant grammatical and pragmatic inquiry.
Lexical Notes:
- γὰρ: (BDAG 188) A postpositive conjunction, functioning primarily to express cause, explanation, or assent. It often introduces a reason for a preceding statement or offers a logical consequence. Its usual position is second in a clause. (KITTEL Vol. 1, 658-661, discusses its various uses and positions).
- λέγων: (BDAG 589-593) The present active participle of λέγω, meaning “to say,” “to speak,” or “to call.” In this context, it functions substantivally as “the one who says/speaks.”
- χαίρειν: (BDAG 1072-1073) The present active infinitive of χαίρω. While literally “to rejoice,” it is commonly used as a form of greeting, equivalent to “hail!” or “greetings.”
- κοινωνεῖ: (BDAG 554) Third person singular present active indicative of κοινωνέω, meaning “to share in,” “to participate in,” or “to have fellowship with.”
- ἔργοις: (BDAG 390-392) Dative plural of ἔργον, “work,” “deed,” “action.” Here, it refers to wicked actions.
- πονηροῖς: (BDAG 851-852) Dative plural adjective from πονηρός, meaning “evil,” “wicked,” “bad,” “malignant.”
The discussion highlights the ongoing debate within discourse analysis regarding the principle that ‘choice implies meaning.’ While some argue that every linguistic choice, including word order, carries an informational nuance (Levinsohn, Discourse Features of the New Testament Greek, p.viii), others suggest that some variations, especially in less formal writing styles, may not always convey significant semantic or pragmatic differences. The characterization of Johannine Greek as sometimes “sloppy” or “crude” but still effective underscores this tension. However, the phenomenon of “split focus” (as seen in discussions of John 2:11) suggests that even seemingly dislocated elements can be intentionally separated for rhetorical effect, challenging the assumption that only contiguous elements form a coherent unit.
Translation Variants
The varying placement of γὰρ in 2 John 11 presents a fascinating case for grammatical and rhetorical analysis, particularly when considering the phonological dimension. The postpositon of γὰρ after the participle λέγων in the NA28 text (ὁ λέγων γὰρ) deviates from the more conventional order ὁ γὰρ λέγων found in some other traditions. This raises questions about constituency and potential pragmatic impact.
Grammatically, if ὁ λέγων is perceived as a single conceptual unit (a substantival participle), then γὰρ retains its postpositive function, albeit in a third position rather than the typical second. This might suggest a slightly looser grammatical structure or a stylistic preference. From a rhetorical perspective, discussions on intonational phonology (e.g., Devine and Stephens) suggest that different word orders could have corresponded to different pitch accents in Koine Greek. It has been proposed that in ὁ γὰρ λέγων, the highest pitch might fall on λέγων, while in ὁ λέγων γὰρ, it might shift to χαίρειν or be otherwise distributed. Such subtle intonational differences, if historically reconstructable, would have added a layer of pragmatic meaning, perhaps emphasizing different elements within the explanatory clause.
However, some scholars argue against over-interpreting every grammatical variation, suggesting that some differences might be stylistic or reflect varying levels of grammatical precision (or ‘linguistic choice’ vs. ‘authorial choice’), particularly in non-atticistic Koine. The possibility that the placement of γὰρ in the NA28 text is simply characteristic of Johannine style, without necessarily carrying a profound semantic distinction, cannot be entirely dismissed. Yet, the existence of such a variant compels a translator to consider if a subtle emphasis or rhetorical flow is intended.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The textual variant concerning the placement of γὰρ in 2 John 11, specifically ὁ λέγων γὰρ (NA28) versus ὁ γὰρ λέγων (Byzantine), prompts an investigation into the interplay of grammar, style, and pragmatic meaning in Koine Greek. While the NA28 reading might be considered less “formal” by classical standards, it remains grammatically comprehensible. The potential intonational implications, if reliable, suggest a subtle shift in emphasis within the phrase. In the absence of definitive historical phonological data, a translator must weigh the grammatical acceptability against the likely communicative intent and stylistic nuance of the author. The choice of rendering depends on whether one prioritizes a literal reflection of word order or a more natural idiomatic expression of the causal relationship.
-
“For the one who says ‘Greetings’ to him shares in his evil deeds.”
This translation prioritizes a natural English flow while maintaining the causal link and the sense of the substantival participle. It does not attempt to replicate a potential subtle emphasis that might be implied by the Greek word order. -
“Indeed, the one who says ‘Greetings’ to him, that one shares in his evil deeds.”
This rendering uses “Indeed” to subtly echo the explanatory function of γὰρ and slightly rephrases for a potential emphasis on “the one who says,” acknowledging the particle’s postpositive placement without making it overly awkward. -
“The person who offers him a greeting, because of that, participates in his wicked works.”
This option makes the causal connection more explicit and slightly delays the consequence, attempting to reflect a possible rhetorical pause or emphasis implied by the NA28 word order. It also uses “person who offers” to fully unpack the participial phrase.