Acts 21:5

προπεμπόντων ἡμᾶς πάντων σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ τέκνοις ἕω PROPEMTONTWN hHMAS TANTWN SUN GUNAIXIn KAI TEKNOIS –Acts 21:5

I recently noticed a switch in translating SUN in Acts 21:35 from “and” to “including.” Since these are mutually exclusive meanings in English, I checked Perseus to see if Greek was any different. Sure enough:

8. including, “–” IG12.329.5, cf. 22.1388.85, 1407.12, al.; “–” Th.2.13, cf. 4.124, 5.26, 74, 7.42, 8.90, 95; “–” Ar.Fr.100; “–” Lys.21.4, cf. 2; “–” Is.6.33, cf. 8.8,35, 11.42,46, Aeschin. 2.162, D.19.155, 27.23,al., Arist.HA525b15,17, Ath.19.6, Hipparch. 1.1.9, al., PSI10.1124.14 (ii A.D.).

9. excluding, apart from, plus, “–” six with (but not including) me the seventh, A. Th.283; “–” Arist.HA 490a32; “–” D. 27.61; “–” together with . . , PEnteux.32.7, cf. 89.9 (iii B.C.); “–” Ev.Luc.20.1, cf. Ep.Gal.5.24.

(I deleted all the Greek text, but it can be read online at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=sun&la=greek#Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=su/n-contents)

My question is, what are the contextual clues that indicate whether SUN means “including” or “excluding?”

one of the examples for #8: Isaeus 6:33 “he sold some goats with their goat-herd” (indistinguishable) 8: 8 “giving her a dowry of twenty-five minae including raiment and jewelry” (whole, including parts) 8: 35 “the fittings of his private residence, worth, including the slaves, about thirteen minae” (whole, including parts)

Daniel Buck

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

4 thoughts on “Acts 21:5

  1. George F Somsel says:

    Your example doen’t really mean “excluding.”  It is “six men with me for a seventh”

      τοαῦτʼ ἐπεύχου μὴ φιλοστόνως θεοῖς, μηδʼ ἑν ματαίοις κʼγρίοις ποιφύγμασιν: οὐ γάρ τι μᾶλλον μὴ φύτης τὸ μόρσιμον.   ἐγὼ δέ γʼ ἀνδρας ἕξ ἐμοὶ συν ἑβδόμῳ   ἀντηρέτας ἐχθροίσι τὸν μέταν τρόπον εἰς ἐπτατειχεῖς ἐξόδους τάξω μολών, πρὶν ἀγγέλους σπερξνούς τε καὶ ταχυρρόθους λόγους ἱκέσθαι καὶ φλέγειν χρείας ὕπο.   TOAUT’ EPEUXOU MH FO;PSTPMWS QEOIS, MHD’ EN MATAIOIS K’GRIOIS POIFUGMASIN: OU GAR TI MALLON MH FUTHS TO MORSIMON.    EGW DE G’ ANDRAS hEC EMOI SUN hEBDOMWi   ANTHRETAS EXQROISI TON MEGAN TROPON EIS EPTATEIXEIS ECODOUS TACW MOLWN, PRIN AGGELOUS SPERXNOUS TE KAI TAXURROQOUS LOGOUS hIKESQAI KAI FLEGEIN XREIAS hUPO. 

    I must confess that I have a little problem with some of this.  I suppose I need to read some more Aeschylus. 

     george gfsomsel

    … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.

    – Jan Hus _________

    ________________________________ Sent: Mon, April 25, 2011 8:16:52 PM

    προπεμπόντων ἡμᾶς πάντων σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ τέκνοις ἕω PROPEMTONTWN hHMAS TANTWN SUN GUNAIXIn KAI TEKNOIS –Acts 21:5

    I recently noticed a switch in translating SUN in Acts 21:35 from “and” to “including.” Since these are mutually exclusive meanings in English, I checked Perseus to see if Greek was any different. Sure  enough:

    8. including, “–” IG12.329.5, cf. 22.1388.85, 1407.12, al.;  “–” Th.2.13, cf. 4.124, 5.26, 74, 7.42, 8.90, 95; “–” Ar.Fr.100;  “–” Lys.21.4, cf. 2; “–” Is.6.33, cf. 8.8,35, 11.42,46, Aeschin. 2.162, D.19.155, 27.23,al., Arist.HA525b15,17, Ath.19.6, Hipparch. 1.1.9, al., PSI10.1124.14 (ii A.D.).

    9. excluding, apart from, plus, “–” six with (but not including) me the  seventh, A. Th.283; “–” Arist.HA 490a32; “–” D. 27.61; “–” together with . . , PEnteux.32.7, cf. 89.9 (iii  B.C.); “–” Ev.Luc.20.1, cf. Ep.Gal.5.24.

    (I deleted all the Greek text, but it can be read online at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=sun&la=greek#Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=su/n-contents)

    My question is, what are the contextual clues that indicate whether SUN means “including” or  “excluding?”

    one of the examples for #8: Isaeus 6:33 “he sold some goats with their goat-herd” (indistinguishable) 8: 8 “giving her a dowry of twenty-five minae including raiment and jewelry” (whole, including parts) 8: 35 “the fittings of his private residence, worth, including the slaves, about 

    thirteen minae” (whole, including parts)

    Daniel Buck

  2. Daniel Buck says:

    So, the consensus seem to be that LSJM is wrong in listing a definition for SUN as “excluding, apart from” supported by the examples given.

    Looking at this definition’s NT examples:

    1) Luke 20:1 “Came to him the chief priests and the scribes σὺν the elders” The elders were excluded from the sets of chief priests and scribes, but included with those sets in the set of those who came to Jesus; joining things which can be separated. It is possible to crucify all the elders without crucifying any chief priests and scribes. Or, is it possible that the set of elders intersected with the other two sets and Luke was specifying that the set of those who came to Jesus included members of all three sets, beyond any intersections of the sets?

    2) Galatians 5:24 “Christ’s have crucified the flesh σὺν the passions and the lusts (thereof)” The passions and lusts are not exclusive of the flesh itself, which, like them, is intangible; joining things which cannot really be separated. It is not possible to crucify the flesh without crucifying its passions and lusts. Or is (thereof) exegetical, pinning down this meaning of SUN without the grammar requiring it?

    It seems as if one first has to come to an independent conclusion about the possible intersections of the groups being joined by SUN before one can conclude whether SUN is joining intersecting or non-intersecting sets. Therefore, one’s translation of SUN must be predicated on one’s exegesis of the interrelationship(s) between the parties thus joined.

    Daniel Buck

    ________________________________

    means “including” or “excluding?”>

    The problem is looking too much at the English text and not enough at the Greek. The first contextual clue is SYN. It groups “with” and includes and does not mean ‘excludes’. The SYN would need to group something with the ‘outgroup’ in order to “exclude”.

    See Luk 20.1 and Gal 5.24, the examples that LSJM give.

    Randall Buth

    Your example doen’t really mean “excluding.” It is “six men with me for a seventh”

    ἐγὼ δέ γʼ ἀνδρας ἕξ ἐμοὶ συν ἑβδόμῳ

    EGW DE G’ ANDRAS hEC EMOI SUN hEBDOMWi

    I must confess that I have a little problem with some of this. I suppose I need to read some more Aeschylus.

    george

    ________________________________ LSJM

    9. excluding, apart from, plus, “–” six with (but not including) me the seventh, A. Th.283; “–” Arist.HA 490a32; “–” D. 27.61; “–” together with . . , PEnteux.32.7, cf. 89.9 (iii B.C.); “–” Ev.Luc.20.1, cf. Ep.Gal.5.24

  3. George F Somsel says:

    Your example doen’t really mean “excluding.”  It is “six men with me for a seventh”

      τοαῦτʼ ἐπεύχου μὴ φιλοστόνως θεοῖς, μηδʼ ἑν ματαίοις κʼγρίοις ποιφύγμασιν: οὐ γάρ τι μᾶλλον μὴ φύτης τὸ μόρσιμον.   ἐγὼ δέ γʼ ἀνδρας ἕξ ἐμοὶ συν ἑβδόμῳ   ἀντηρέτας ἐχθροίσι τὸν μέταν τρόπον εἰς ἐπτατειχεῖς ἐξόδους τάξω μολών, πρὶν ἀγγέλους σπερξνούς τε καὶ ταχυρρόθους λόγους ἱκέσθαι καὶ φλέγειν χρείας ὕπο.   TOAUT’ EPEUXOU MH FO;PSTPMWS QEOIS, MHD’ EN MATAIOIS K’GRIOIS POIFUGMASIN: OU GAR TI MALLON MH FUTHS TO MORSIMON.    EGW DE G’ ANDRAS hEC EMOI SUN hEBDOMWi   ANTHRETAS EXQROISI TON MEGAN TROPON EIS EPTATEIXEIS ECODOUS TACW MOLWN, PRIN AGGELOUS SPERXNOUS TE KAI TAXURROQOUS LOGOUS hIKESQAI KAI FLEGEIN XREIAS hUPO. 

    I must confess that I have a little problem with some of this.  I suppose I need to read some more Aeschylus. 

     george gfsomsel

    … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.

    – Jan Hus _________

    ________________________________ Sent: Mon, April 25, 2011 8:16:52 PM

    προπεμπόντων ἡμᾶς πάντων σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ τέκνοις ἕω PROPEMTONTWN hHMAS TANTWN SUN GUNAIXIn KAI TEKNOIS –Acts 21:5

    I recently noticed a switch in translating SUN in Acts 21:35 from “and” to “including.” Since these are mutually exclusive meanings in English, I checked Perseus to see if Greek was any different. Sure  enough:

    8. including, “–” IG12.329.5, cf. 22.1388.85, 1407.12, al.;  “–” Th.2.13, cf. 4.124, 5.26, 74, 7.42, 8.90, 95; “–” Ar.Fr.100;  “–” Lys.21.4, cf. 2; “–” Is.6.33, cf. 8.8,35, 11.42,46, Aeschin. 2.162, D.19.155, 27.23,al., Arist.HA525b15,17, Ath.19.6, Hipparch. 1.1.9, al., PSI10.1124.14 (ii A.D.).

    9. excluding, apart from, plus, “–” six with (but not including) me the  seventh, A. Th.283; “–” Arist.HA 490a32; “–” D. 27.61; “–” together with . . , PEnteux.32.7, cf. 89.9 (iii  B.C.); “–” Ev.Luc.20.1, cf. Ep.Gal.5.24.

    (I deleted all the Greek text, but it can be read online at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=sun&la=greek#Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=su/n-contents)

    My question is, what are the contextual clues that indicate whether SUN means “including” or  “excluding?”

    one of the examples for #8: Isaeus 6:33 “he sold some goats with their goat-herd” (indistinguishable) 8: 8 “giving her a dowry of twenty-five minae including raiment and jewelry” (whole, including parts) 8: 35 “the fittings of his private residence, worth, including the slaves, about 

    thirteen minae” (whole, including parts)

    Daniel Buck

  4. Daniel Buck says:

    So, the consensus seem to be that LSJM is wrong in listing a definition for SUN as “excluding, apart from” supported by the examples given.

    Looking at this definition’s NT examples:

    1) Luke 20:1 “Came to him the chief priests and the scribes σὺν the elders” The elders were excluded from the sets of chief priests and scribes, but included with those sets in the set of those who came to Jesus; joining things which can be separated. It is possible to crucify all the elders without crucifying any chief priests and scribes. Or, is it possible that the set of elders intersected with the other two sets and Luke was specifying that the set of those who came to Jesus included members of all three sets, beyond any intersections of the sets?

    2) Galatians 5:24 “Christ’s have crucified the flesh σὺν the passions and the lusts (thereof)” The passions and lusts are not exclusive of the flesh itself, which, like them, is intangible; joining things which cannot really be separated. It is not possible to crucify the flesh without crucifying its passions and lusts. Or is (thereof) exegetical, pinning down this meaning of SUN without the grammar requiring it?

    It seems as if one first has to come to an independent conclusion about the possible intersections of the groups being joined by SUN before one can conclude whether SUN is joining intersecting or non-intersecting sets. Therefore, one’s translation of SUN must be predicated on one’s exegesis of the interrelationship(s) between the parties thus joined.

    Daniel Buck

    ________________________________

    means “including” or “excluding?”>

    The problem is looking too much at the English text and not enough at the Greek. The first contextual clue is SYN. It groups “with” and includes and does not mean ‘excludes’. The SYN would need to group something with the ‘outgroup’ in order to “exclude”.

    See Luk 20.1 and Gal 5.24, the examples that LSJM give.

    Randall Buth

    Your example doen’t really mean “excluding.” It is “six men with me for a seventh”

    ἐγὼ δέ γʼ ἀνδρας ἕξ ἐμοὶ συν ἑβδόμῳ

    EGW DE G’ ANDRAS hEC EMOI SUN hEBDOMWi

    I must confess that I have a little problem with some of this. I suppose I need to read some more Aeschylus.

    george

    ________________________________ LSJM

    9. excluding, apart from, plus, “–” six with (but not including) me the seventh, A. Th.283; “–” Arist.HA 490a32; “–” D. 27.61; “–” together with . . , PEnteux.32.7, cf. 89.9 (iii B.C.); “–” Ev.Luc.20.1, cf. Ep.Gal.5.24

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.