7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

1/13

19

1. Syntactic, Semantic, and Lexical Requirements of Verbs that Par-ticipate in Melding

Verbs of communication in the Septuagint and New Testament havemultiple usages associated with differing connotations; and each usageimposes on its complements specific syntactic, semantic, and lexicalrequirements. Most of the frequently occurring verbs of communicationhave a usage which requires completion by three complements that desig-nate the agent of communication, the experiencer of communication, and

the content of communication.

2

In the active voice, the subject designatesthe agent, the indirect object designates the experiencer, and the directobject designates the content. The most common verb with this usage is (say):3

MELDING IN THE SEPTUAGINTAND NEW TESTAMENT

PAUL DANOVE

This study investigates the grammatical phenomenon, melding,which arises in particular contexts in which two or three verbs of commu-nication, one of which usually is , govern the same object complement.The study establishes the syntactic, semantic, and lexical requirements ofthe verbs of communication that participate in melding, develops thedistinctive characteristics of this phenomenon, and considers its implica-tions for translation and the formulation of lexicon entries for the Greek

words of the Septuagint and New Testament.1

1This study develops topics introduced in P. Danove, Linguistics and Exegesis in theGospel of Mark: Applications of a Case Frame Analysis and Lexicon (Sheffield 2001)85-90.

2A majority of the verbs that have these requirements also have a second usage whichrequires three complements that designate the agent, the experiencer, and the topic aboutwhich something is communicated. Generally this topic receives lexical realization as anaccusative case noun phrase (N+acc) or as a prepositional phrase (P). A few of these verbsalso have a third usage which requires an agent, an experiencer, and both a topic and con-tent. The second (topic) usage does not participate in melding. The third (topic pluscontent) usage twice participates in melding with respect to the content component;

and these are treated under the first usage.3The analysis employs A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta(Stuttgart 1935) and K. Aland et al., The

Greek New Testament(Stuttgart 1993). Codex Vaticanus [B] serves as the basic text for theLXX; and contributions from other manuscripts [Sinaiticus (S), A, R, V, Syro-hexaplaris(Sy)] are noted when they diverge from B.

Filologa Neotestamentaria - Vol. XVI - 2003, pp. 19-31Facultad de Filosofa y Letras - Universidad de Crdoba (Espaa)

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

2/13

20

; And God said to Cain,Where is Abel your brother? (Gen 4:9)

, ... But I say to you, Love your en-emies... (Matt 5:44)

... A messenger of the Lord saidto Gad to say to David... (1 Chr 21:18)

... And they said nothing to anyone... (Mark 16:8)

In the first two examples, the direct objects relate the exact content ofGods and Jesus speech through quotes; whereas, in the latter two exam-ples, the third complements (to say to David... and nothing) designate

the content of discourse. This usage of may be represented by thefollowing syntactic, semantic, and lexical description:

SYN. 1 (2) [3]* * 1=subject, 2=indirect object, 3=object, ( )=indef. null com., [ ]=def. null com.

SEM. Agt Exp Con** ** Agt = agent, Exp = experiencer, Con = content

LEX. N N/P N/V***

*** N = noun phrase, V = verb phrase, P = prepositional phrase

This description characterizes the requirements of in the activevoice according to its syntactic (syn.), semantic (sem.), and lexical (lex.)properties. The subject or first complement, 1, lexically realizes the agent

(Agt) either by a noun phrase (noun or pronoun, N) or by the verbalending. The indirect object or second complement, 2, lexically realizesthe experiencer (Exp) by a noun phrase (N) or a prepositional phrase (P).The direct object or third complement, 3, lexically realizes the content(Con) by a noun phrase (N) or by a clause or other verb phrase (V). Theparentheses, ( ), in the syntactic description indicate that the second com-plement may be omitted (null) even when the preceding linguistic contextdoes not specify its semantic content. In such cases, the indirect object isgranted an indefinite interpretation, someone or whoever might hear:4

4Indefinite null complements receive development in Charles J. Fillmore, PragmaticallyControlled Zero Anaphora, Berkeley Linguistics Society12 (1986) 95-107, and are treated

in other linguistic approaches under the designations, unspecified noun phrase deletionin Bruce Fraser and John R. Ross, Idioms and Unspecified N[oun] P[hrase] Deletion,Linguistic Inquiry1 (1970) 264-5, and pragmatically controlled model-interpretive nullanaphora in Ivan Sag and Jorge Hankamer, Toward a Theory of Anaphoric Processing,Linguistics and Philosophy7 (1984) 325-45.

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

3/13

21

... The Lord said [ to whoever might hear], FromBashan I will bring [them] back... (Ps 67:23)

... . But some of themsaid [to whoever might hear], By Beelzebul...he casts out the demons. (Luke 11:15)

The brackets, [ ], indicate that the third complement may be omitted(null) onlyif the preceding linguistic context specifies its definite seman-tic content:5

, . And the plain will be destroyedjust as the Lord said [that it would be destroyed] (Jer 31:8)

, . He did not want

to enter, but his father, going out, was urging him [to enter] (Luke 15:28)

2. Melding as a Distinct Grammatical Phenomenon

melding occurs with verbs of communication that have a usagewith exactly the same syntactic and semantic requirements as those notedfor , including the requirement that an omitted third complementmust have its definite semantic content specified in the previous context.6

5Definite null complements receive development in Charles J. Fillmore, U-Semantics,Second Round, Quaderni di Semantica7 (1986) 49-58, and are treated in other linguisticapproaches under the designations, definite object deletion in Anita Mittwoch, Idiomsand Unspecified N[oun] P[hrase] Deletion, Linguistic Inquiry2 (1971) 255-9, latent ob-ject in Peter Matthews, Syntax(Cambridge, 1981) 125-6, and contextual deletion in D.J. Alletron, Valency and the English Verb(New York 1982) 34, 68-70.

6Thus, this study does not address verbs of communication that require three argumentsbut permit their third complement to be omitted even when its semantic content has notreceived prior clarification: (cry out, cf. 1 Kgs 12:24t; Ezek 9:1; Mark 1:24; Luke23:18); (declare solemnly: Gen 43:3b; Exod 19:23; 2 Kgs 17:13; Zech 3:6; Acts2:40; 20:23; Heb 2:6); (teach: Jer 38:34; Matt 5:2; Heb 8:11); (confess:Isa 45:24); (pledge: Deut 29:18); (preach the good news: Jer 20:15; Rev14:6); (pray: 2 Macc 9:13); (call: 2 Sam 19:5; Matt 8:29; 14:30; 15:22; 20:30, 31;21:9; 27:23; Mark 3:11; John 1:15; 7:28, 37; 18:40; 19:6, 12; Acts 16:17; 19:28; Rev 6:10; 7:2, 10;18:2, 18, 19; 19:7); (speak: Gen 17:3; 23:8; 34:8, 20; 39:17; 41:9, 17; 42:22; 43:19; 50:4;Exod 6:12, 29; 7:9; 12:3; 14:1; 16:11, 12; 15:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 31; 31:1, 12; 32:7, 13; 40:1; Lev 1:1;4:1, 2; 5:14, 20; 6:1, 12, 17, 18; 7:22, 23, 28, 29; 8:1; 9:3; 10:8, 19; 11:1, 2; 12:1; 13:1; 14:1, 33; 15:1;17:1; 18:1; 19:1; 20:1; 21:1, 16; 22:1, 17, 26; 13:9, 23, 24, 26, 33, 34; 24:1, 13; 25:1; 27:1; Num1:1, 48; 2:1; 3:5, 11, 14, 44; 4:1, 17, 21; 5:1, 5, 6, 11; 6:1, 22, 23; 8:1, 5, 23; 9:1, 9, 10; 10:1; 13:1;15:17, 35; 16:5, 20, 23, 24, 26; 17:9, 16; 18:25; 19:1; 20:7; 23:26; 24:12; 25:10, 16a, 16b; 26:1, 3,

52; 27:6, 8, 18; 28:1; 30:2; 31:3, 25; 33:50; 34:1, 16; 35:1, 9; Deut 1:6; 2:17; 9:13; 20:5; 27:9; 32:48;Josh 20:1, 2; 22:15, 21; Judg 7:3; 9:1; 1 Sam 18:22; 25:40; 26:14; 2 Sam 3:18; 7:7; 19:12; 24:12;1 Kgs 5:19; 8:15; 9:5; 12:3, 7, 10a, 10b, 12, 14, 24d, 24r; 13:12, 18, 22; 18:29, 31; 20:2, 6, 19,23; 22:13; 2 Kgs 1:3, 7; 7:8; 8:1, 4; 9:2; 20:2; 21:10; 1 Chr 21:9, 10; 2 Chr 6:4; 10:7, 9, 10, 12, 14;18:12; 32:6; Esth 3:8; Odes 7:36; Hagg 2:1; Zech 2:8b; 6:8; Isa 7:10; 20:2; 28:11; Jer 25:3; 34:12,

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

4/13

22

It is restricted to verb phrases that have four characteristics: (1) a verb ofcommunication is followed by (or another verb of communication)or even by two verbs of communication; (2) at most one of the verbs isfinite in form and the other[s] participial in form; (3) the verbs are notcoordinated by a conjunction; and (4) only the last verb has its thirdcomplement lexically realized.

melding is deemed a distinctive grammatical phenomenon ba-sed on the unique manner in which it links the syntactic, semantic, andlexical requirements of its participating verbs. In the Septuagint and theNew Testament, only melding and coordination (by a conjunction)permit a second (and, on occasion, a third) verb to intrude prior to thelexical realization of the initial verbs required third complement when

this complements definite semantic content has not received prior con-textual clarification. It differs from coordination, however, in placing anovel restriction on the lexical realization of the verbs second (experi-encer) complements.

Like coordination, melding permits one or two verbs to intrudebetween an initial verb of communication and the lexical realization ofthe third complement whose definite semantic content has not receivedprior clarification. melding has 591 occurrences (419 in LXX and172 in NT) in association with 21 verbs of communication: (ask); (announce, tell); (announce, tell); (answer, respond); (ask, beg); (reveal, inform); (discuss); (explain); (command); (command); (promise); (ask); (ask);

(urge, order); (proclaim); [a second] (say); (implore); (command); (urge); (command); and (command).7Among these, 576 occurrences

16; 51:25; Bar 2:20; Ezek 33:10, 30a, 30b; 37:11; Dan 3:36; OGDan 3:36; OGBel 34; Matt 13:3;14:27; 23:1; 28:18; Luke 14:6; John 8:12; Acts 8:26; 26:31; 28:25; Rev 4:1; 17:1; 21:9); (testify: John 1:15, 32); (swear: Gen 24:7; Josh 14:9; Judg 15:13 [A]; 21:1, 18; 1 Sam 6:2;19:6; 28:10; 2 Sam 3:35; 1 Kgs 1:13, 17, 30; 2:8, 23, 35n; 1 Macc 7:15, 35; Jer 45:16; 47:9; Heb6:13); (pray: 2 Chr 30:18; Tob 3:1; Isa 37:15; 38:2; 44:17; Jer 39:16; Matt 26:42;Luke 22:41); (prophesy: 1 Kgs 22:12; 2 Chr 18:11; 20:37; Jer 33:9; 39:3; 44:19; Jude14); (speak with: Luke 4:36; Acts 7:26); and (call: Mark 10:49; Luke 8:54;Acts 16:28; Rev 14:18); (testify falsely: Mark 14:57).

7The study omits four verbs of communication whose rare occurrence prevents a deter-mination whether their null third complements must be definite: (insist: Luke22:59); (urge, press: Gen 19:3, 9; Deut 1:43; 1 Sam 28:23; 2 Kgs 2:17; 5:16;

Amos 6:10; Jon 1:13; Luke 24:29); (advise: 2 Macc 7:25, 26 [R]; 3 Macc 5:17; 7:12[A]; Acts 27:9); and (advise: 4 Macc 12:2). Five verbs of communication withthe same syntactic and semantic properties as do not appear with intruding verbs ofcommunication: (tell), (explain), (command), (say inadvance), and (say).

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

5/13

23

(410 in LXX and 166 in NT) appear in the format, verb of communica-tion + . The intrusion of a verb of communication other than between an initial verb of communication and its third complement alsoappears on eleven occasions (7 in LXX and 4 in NT): + [asecond] ; + or (reply) or (say); (ask) + ; and + . Finally,on four occasions (2 in LXX and 2 in NT), two verbs of communicationintrude between an initial verb and its third complement: + + [a second] ; and + [a second] + .

melding differs from coordination in that it imposes a restric-tion on the number of second complements that may receive lexical re-alization among linked verbs. For two linked verbs, coordination permits

the lexical realization of neither, one, or both second complements evenwhen they have the same lexical realization. This is apparent in the co-ordination of two verbs that permit their second complements to receivelexical realization as a dative case noun phrase:8

... Moses commanded Joshua andsaid to him, Be brave... (Deut 31:23)

... Jonathan re-sponded to Saul and said to him, David requested... (1 Sam 20:28)

melding, in contrast, imposes the restriction that, among linkedverbs with the same lexical realization for their second complements, atmost one verb may have its second complement lexically realized. For

example, on 503 occasions, melding links a verb of communicationand ; and the verb of communication, like , permits the lexicalrealization of its second complement as either a dative case noun phrase(N+dat) or a prepositional phrase (P/). In these occurrences,either the first verb (234) or (103) or neither verb (166) but neverboth verbs have their second complement lexically realized.9The same

8See also Gen 42:7; Exod 6:2; 2 Sam 4:9; 24:13; 2 Kgs 25:24; 2 Chr 23:14; 1 Macc 13:35.9Second complement of the verb of communication lexically realized and second com-

plement of null (234 occurrences = 209 in LXX and 25 in NT): (N+dat:Gen 45:26; Exod 13:8; Lev 14:35; 2 Sam 11:10; 17:16; 1 Kgs 21:17 [A]; 2 Kgs 6:13; 7:10;8:7); (N+dat: Gen 38:24 [R]; 47:1; Num 11:27; 1 Sam 19:2, 11; 25:14; 2 Sam 2:4;17:16 [A]; 1 Kgs 12:6 [R]; 21:17; 2 Kgs 4:31; 6:13 [R]; 2 Chr 34:18; 1 Macc 5:38; P/: 2Sam 15:13); (N+dat: Gen 23:14; 41:16a; Deut 1:14, 41; Josh 1:16; 7:20; 9:24; 1

Sam 9:8, 19; 20:3; 21:5; 22:14; 25:10; 2 Sam 15:21; 19:44; 1 Kgs 1:36; 2:1; 12:16; 2 Kgs 7:19;1 Esdr 6:12; Job 1:7; 40:1; Zech 1:11; Matt 12:38; 14:28; 20:13; 21:27; 25:37, 45; Mark 3:33;9:19; 10:51; 11:33; 15:2, 9; John 1:26; Acts 8:34; 25:9; P/: Gen 23:5; 1 Sam 14:12; 2 Sam19:43; 2 Chr 10:16; Hab 2:2; Luke 6:3); (N+dat: Josh 4:7); (P/:Mark 11:31; Luke 20:14); (N+dat: Mark 8:15); (N+dat: Gen 2:16;

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

6/13

24

restriction holds in the eight occurrences in which a verb of commu-nication is linked with a verb of communication other than and

28:1, 6; 32:5, 18, 20; 43:16; 44:1; Lev 6:2; Num 28:2; 34:13; 36:5; Deut 1:16; 2:4; 3:18, 21;27:11; 31:10, 25; Josh 1:10, 11; 3:3, 8; 4:17; 6:10; 8:4, 18; Judg 19:30; 21:10, 20; Ruth 2:15; 1Sam 18:22; 2 Sam 11:19; 13:28a; 18:5a, 12; 1 Kgs 2:35l; 13:9, 17; 22:31; 2 Kgs 5:5; 16:5; 17:35;22:12; 23:21; 2 Chr 18:30; 34:20; Tob 14:3 [S]; Sir 24:8; Amos 2:12; Jer 42:6; 43:5; 45:10; Ezek10:6; 1 Macc 5:19, 42; Matt 17:9; P/: 2 Chr 19:9; Luke 14:5); (N+dat: 1 Esdr9:53); (N+dat: Gen 8:15; 9:8; 23:3; 39:14; 42:14, 37; 43:3a, 5; 50:24; Exod 3:12; 6:6; Josh1:1; 2:4; 4:1, 15; 6:7; Judg 8:9 [A]; 13:6; 15:13; 1 Kgs 2:30; 12:23, 24y; 13:31; 2 Kgs 17:26; 2Chr 32:12; Ezra 8:22; Ps 70:10; Jer 35:1; 50:26; 51:20; 1 Macc 2:17; Mark 8:28; 12:26; P/:Gen 21:22; 31:29; 34:4; 47:5; Exod 5:10; 6:10; 7:1, 8; 9:8; 10:1; 12:1, 43; 13:1; 19:21; 35:4; Lev23:1; Num 3:40; 7:4; 14:7, 26; 15:1, 37; 17:27; 18:1; 20:23; 28:2; 32:2, 25; Deut 1:9; Josh 2:3;9:11; 21:2; Judg 19:22; 1 Sam 7:3; 11:14; 12:6; 26:6; 2 Sam 3:17; 17:6; 1 Kgs 1:11, 13; 12:23,

24y; 13:21; 20:17; 2 Kgs 22:10; 2 Chr 11:3; Job 34:31; Hagg 2:2, 20, 21; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:8a;3:4; 4:4, 6; 7:3; Jer 33:12; 35:13; Luke 14:3); (N+dat: 1 Kgs 12:6; Matt 10:5); and (N+dat: Gen 26:11; Exod 1:22; 5:6; 31:13; Josh 4:3; Jer 39:13). Second complementof the verb of communication null and second complement of lexically realized (103occurrences = 46 in LXX and 57 in NT): (N+dat: Gen 27:37, 39; 31:14, 31, 43;40:18; 42:22; Num 22:18; 23:26; Deut 27:14; Ruth 2:11; 1 Sam 1:17; 1 Kgs 2:22; Ezra 10:2;Tob 2:14; 5:1, 10; Cant 2:10; Joel 2:19; Isa 14:10; Dan 2:5, 26; 3:16; 5:13; 6:13; 7:16; DanTh2:5, 26, 47; 3:14, 16a; 1 Macc 2:17; 15:33; Matt 11:4; 12:39, 48; 13:11; 15:3, 15, 28; 16:2, 17;17:4; 19:27; 21:21, 24; 22:29; 24:2, 4; 25:26, 40; 26:33; 27:21; 28:5; Mark 6:37; 8:29; 9:5; 10:3,24; 11:14, 22; 14:48; 15:12; Luke 1:19, 35; 3:11, 16; 4:8, 12; 7:22; 10:41; 11:45; 13:2, 8, 14,25; 15:29; 17:37; Acts 19:15; Rev 7:13; P/: Judg 18:14; 1 Sam 26:6; 2 Sam 14:18; 2 Kgs1:10; 2 Chr 34:15; Amos 7:14; Zech 1:10; 3:4; 4:5, 6, 11; 6:4; Matt 3:15; Luke 5:22, 31; 7:40;8:21; 20:3; 24:18; Acts 4:19); (N+dat: Luke 13:27; P/: 1 Sam 20:21; Luke 20:2).Second complement of the verb of communication null and second complement of null(166 occurrences = 117 in LXX and 49 in NT): (N+dat: Mark 6:25); (1Sam 27:11; 2 Sam 19:9); (2 Kgs 9:18, 20; 10:8; 1 Macc 5:14; Acts 5:22; 22:26);

(Gen 18:9, 27; 24:50; Exod 4:1; 19:8; 21:5; 24:3; Num 11:28; 32:31; Deut 21:7;25:9; 26:5; 27:15; Josh 24:16; Judg 7:14; 20:4; Ruth 2:6; 1 Sam 1:15; 4:17; 9:21; 10:12; 14:28;16:18; 22:9; 1 Sam 26:14b, 22; 30:22; 2 Sam 1:16; 13:32; 19:22; 20:20; 1 Kgs 1:28, 43; 3:26, 27;18:24; 21:4, 11; 2 Kgs 1:12; 3:11; 7:2, 18; 2 Chr 29:31; Ezra 10:12; Neh 8:6; Tob 2:3; 5:3, 13[S]; Esth 7:3; Job 1:9; Hag 2:12, 13, 14; Zech 1:6, 12; 6:5; Isa 21:9; Jer 11:5; 51:15; Ezek 9:11;Dan 2:7; 4:30; DanTh 2:7, 8, 10, 27; 3:95; 4:19a, 19b, 30; 5:10 [A], 17; 6:14; 1 Macc 1:19; 8:19;10:55; 13:8; Matt 4:4; 11:25; 13:37; 15:13, 24, 26; 16:16; 17:11, 17; 19:4; 20:22; 21:29, 30; 25:9,44; 26:23, 25, 66; 27:25; Mark 12:35; Luke 1:60; 5:5; 7:43; 9:19, 20, 41, 49; 10:27; 11:7; 17:17;19:40; 20:39; 22:51; 23:40; Acts 5:29; 8:24, 37; 15:13); (Matt 16:7; 21:25; Luke5:21; 12:17); (2 Macc 7:6); (2 Kgs 14:6; 17:27; 2 Chr 25:4); (Heb 12:26); (Exod 32:5; 36:6; 2 Chr 36:22; Ezra 2:20; Esth 6:9, 11; Jon 3:4; Matt10:7; Mark 1:7); (Gen 17:17; 23:10b; Exod 15:1; 32:12; Num 11:27; 14:15, 17; Deut 9:4,28; Judg 15:2; 1 Sam 10:18; 20:18; 27:1; 2 Chr 32:17; Hagg 1:2; Jer 35:11; 37:2; 50:2a; Ezek16:44; 28:9; Luke 7:39); (Ezra 1:1); and (Exod 36:6; Deut 27:1).The verb, with the connotation rebuke, requires only two complements, an agentand a patient (what is acted upon) and so does not constitute a verb of communication asdefined above. Thus, the occurrence of + in ... (he rebuked the unclean spirit saying to it..., Mark 9:25) does notconstitute an instance of melding; and the occurrence of + + in ... (but the other responding, rebukinghim, was saying..., Luke 23:40) constitutes an occasion of melding only with respectto the first and third verbs.

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

7/13

25

both verbs have the same lexical realization of their second complements:either the initial verb of communication (2), the following verb of com-munication (3), or neither verb (3) but never both verbs have their secondcomplement lexically realized.10The restriction even holds in the threeoccurrences of three linked verbs that permit the same lexical realizationof their second complement: only the first (1) or second (2) but never twoverbs have their second complement lexically realized.11Thus, in these514 occurrences, two or three linked verbs that permit the same lexicalrealization of their second complement never appear with more thanone of these complements lexically realized; and both or all three verbsgovern the same concluding third complement. This indicates that theirsyntactic, semantic, and lexical requirements not merely are linked as in

coordination but are melded in such a manner that both or all three verbslexically realize only one first, second, and third complement as if theyconstituted a single verb.

The same restriction, however, does not extend to the second comple-ment when the linked verbs do not permit the same lexical realizationof their second complements. This appears with 77 occurrences of melding in which the initial verb, unlike , permits the lexical reali-zation of its second complement only as an accusative case noun phrase(N+acc), a genitive case noun phrase (N+gen), or an prepositionalphrase (P/); and the final verb, like , permits its lexical realizationonly as a dative case noun phrase (N+dat) or a prepositional phrase(P/). In the 76 occurrences of two such linked verbs, either the initialverb (70 occurrences) or second verb (2 occurrences) or neither verb (2

occurrences) or both verbs (2 occurrences) may appear with their secondcomplement lexically realized.12 The one occurrence of melding

10 Second complement of the initial verb lexically realized and second complementof the second verb null (2 occurrences in NT): + (N+dat: Luke 23:3)and + (N+dat: Heb 6:13). Second complement of the initial verb nulland second complement of the second verb lexically realized (3 occurrences in LXX): + (N+dat: Jdth 6:17); + [a second] (1 Sam10:16a; 22:22). Second complement of the initial verb lexically realized and second comple-ment of the second verb null (3 occurrences = 2 in LXX and 1 in NT): + (Matt 8:8); + (2 Macc 7:8); + [a second] (Judg 14:12).

11Second complement of the initial verb lexically realized and second complement ofthe second and third verb null (1 occurrence in LXX): + + (P/:Gen 23:10). Second complement of the initial and third verb null and second complementof the second verb lexically realized (2 occurrences in NT): + + (N+dat: Matt 22:1); + + (P/: Luke 14:3).

12Second complement of verb of communication lexically realized and second comple-ment of null (70 occurrences = 38 in LXX and 32 in NT): (N+gen: Deut 3:23;1 Kgs 8:47; 2 Chr 6:37; Luke 5:12); (N+acc: Gen 24:23; 43:7; 2 Kgs 19:10 [A]; Jer

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

8/13

26

with three verbs has the second complement of only one verb lexicallyrealized.13These occurrences clarify that melding restricts the lexi-cal realization of the second complement of two or three linked verbs onlywhen these complements permit the same lexical realization.

3. Melding and Verbs of Indirect Discourse

Thirteen of the 21 verbs that participate in melding have thecapacity to express direct discourse (i.e., a quote) through the lexical rea-lization of its third complement as a clause with a finite verb (V+finite)both inside and outside of the context of melding: ;

; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; and .14These

23:33; Matt 12:10; 17:10; 22:23, 41; 27:11; Mark 9:11; 12:18; 14:60; 15:4; Luke 3:10, 14; 9:18;18:18; 20:21, 27; 21:7; Acts 5:27; P/: Judg 1:1; 18:5 [R]; 20:18 [A], 27 [A], 28); (N+acc: Gen 24:47; 32:18, 30 [R]; 37:15; 40:7; 44:19; Exod 3:13; 13:14; Deut 6:20; Josh 4:6,21; 1 Sam 19:22; Jer 43:17; P/ 2 Sam 5:19; 1 Chr 14:10; Matt 15:23; 16:13; Luke 23:3;John 4:31; 9:2, 19; 12:21; Acts 1:6; P/: Judg 20:18, 23; 1 Chr 14:14); (N+acc: Gen24:37; 50:5, 25; Exod 13:19; 1 Sam 14:28; 1 Kgs 2:42; 2 Kgs 11:4); (N+acc: Deut13:7; Matt 8:31; 18:29; Mark 5:12, 23; Luke 7:4; Acts 2:40). Second complement of verb ofcommunication null and second complement of lexically realized (2 occurrences inLXX): (P/: Zech 4:4, 14). Second complement of verb of communicationnull and second complement of null (2 occurrences in NT): (Luke 22:64); (Acts 16:15). Second complement of verb of communication lexically realizedand second complement of lexically realized (2 occurrences = 1 in LXX and 1 in NT): (N+acc / N+dat: Mark 8:27); (N+acc / P/: 2 Macc 7:21).

13In the melding of + + (Gen 43:7), the second hasits second complement lexically realized as N+acc. This singular occurrence also conformsto the restriction that only one of the two verbs that permit the same lexical realization ofthe second complement have it lexically realized.

14On at least one occasion, each of these thirteen verbs expresses direct discourse out-side of the context of melding through the lexical realization of its complement asa clause with a finite verb (V+finite) that accommodates a quote: (Exod 19:3;20:22; Judg 13:10; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 18:11; Ps 51:1; Amos 3:9 [R]; Jer 4:5, 16; 26:14; 27:2); (Gen 46:31; Judg 13:10 [A]; 14:2; 1 Sam 14:43b; 2 Sam 11:5; 13:34; 17:21 [R]; 2Kgs 4:7; 5:4; Amos 3:9; Isa 48:20 [A,S]; Luke 8:20); (Gen 29:26 [R]; Judg 5:29,29b [A]; 1 Sam 9:17; 12:3a; 20:28; 21:6; 23:4; 29:9; 2 Sam 4:9; Ps 101:24; Job 3:2; Cant 6:1;Isa 3:7; Dan 4:19; 5:17; Mark 7:28; 9:17; Luke 4:4; 8:50; 13:15; 17:20; John 1:21, 48, 49, 50;2:18, 19; 3:3, 5, 9, 10, 27; 4:10, 13, 17; 5:7, 11, 17, 19; 6:7, 26, 29, 43, 68, 70; 7:16, 20, 21, 46,47, 52; 8:14, 19, 33, 34, 39, 48, 49, 54; 9:3, 11, 20, 25, 27, 30, 34, 36; 10:25, 32, 33, 34; 11:9;

12:23, 30, 34; 13:7, 8, 26, 38; 14:23; 16:31; 18:5, 8, 20, 23, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37; 19:7, 11, 15, 22;21:5; Acts 3:12; 5:8; 9:13; 10:46; 11:9; 21:13; 22:8, 28; 24:10, 25; 25:12); (Acts 21:39); (Mark 2:6); (Lev 24:2; Num 34:2; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:9; Judg 4:26;2 Kgs 11:15; 2 Chr 23:14; Neh 7:2; Tob 14:8 [S]; Ps 118:4; Lam 1:10; Matt 4:6; Acts 13:47); (Gen 38:21; 1 Sam 14:37; 17:56; 2 Kgs 8:9; Jdth 10:12; Sus 40; 2 Macc 7:7; 14:5;

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

9/13

27

verbs account for 576 (97.5%) of the 591 occurrences of melding.The eight remaining verbs that participate in melding account foronly fifteen occurrences (2.5%) and always appear as the first of two oras the first and second of three linked verbs: ; ; ;; ; ; ; and . Out-side of the context of melding, however, these verbs express onlyindirect discourse and permit the lexical realization of their third com-plement only as verb phrases that can accommodate indirect discourse: clauses (V+); clauses (V+ ); (co)relative clauses (V+ ); in-terrogative clauses (V+ ); manner clauses (V+ ); clauses (V+); infinitive phrases with subject accusatives (V+i), or complementaryinfinitive phrases (V-i).15In their fifteen occurrences in melding,

however, these eight verbs are followed by a concluding verb of directdiscourse whose third complement is lexically realized as a clause witha finite verb (V+finite) that accommodates a quote: (Mark 6:25); (Josh 4:7); (2 Macc 7:6); (Mark 8:15); (Heb 6:13; 12:26); (1 Esdr 9:53); (Exod36:6; Deut 27:1); and (Gen 26:11; Exod 1:22; 5:6; 31:13; Josh4:4; Jer 39:13). This indicates that melding permits an extension ofthe typical usage of verbs of indirect discourse to accommodate a thirdcomplement quote of direct discourse.

4. Implications of Melding for Translation

This discussion resolves the verbs that participate in meldinginto three groups and considers guidelines for translation according tothe semantic requirements of each group.

Among the 591 occurrences of melding, 576 link two or threeverbs that accommodate the expression of direct discourse; and both or

Matt 22:35; Mark 5:9; 7:5; 8:23, 29; 9:16, 21, 28, 33; 10:17; 12:28; 13:3; 14:61; 15:2; Luke 8:30;18:40; John 18:7); (Gen 43:27; Judg 4:20; 13:6; Ezra 5:9; Tob 6:7; 7:3; 1 Macc 10:72;Isa 41:28; Jer 6:16; 18:13; 31:19; Mark 8:5; Luke 14:18, 19; 19:31; John 1:19, 21, 25; 5:12; 16:5;Phil 4:3); (Prov 1:21; Hos 5:8; Zeph 3:14; Dan 3:4; Matt 3:1; 4:17; Rev 5:2); (Gen 15:2; Exod 2:13; Tob 3:10; Amos 1:6; Dan 2:27; and many others); (Num 5:19,21; Neh 13:25); (1 Sam 10:17; Dan 3:4); and (Esth 5:1e; 1 Macc13:3; Isa 13:2; 35:4; Matt 8:5; Acts 9:38; 16:9; 1 Cor 4:16; 1 Thess 5:14; 1 Pet 5:1).

15The eight verbs elsewhere permit only the following lexical realizations of verb phrasethird complements: (V+; V+i; V-i); (V+; V+ ); (V+ ; V+; V+; V+ ); (V+ ); (V-i); (V-i); (V+i;V-i); and (V+ ; V+i; V-i). These verbs also permit the lexical realization oftheir third complement as noun phrases (N) and prepositional phrases (P).

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

10/13

28

all three verbs permit the same lexical realization for their third com-plement. Among these, 499 occurrences are associated with eight verbsof direct discourse that also permit the same lexical realization of thesecond complement and meld in such a manner that both or all threeverbs together appear with only one first, second, and third complementlexically realized: ; ; ; ;; ; ; and . English style, in contrastto Greek style, avoids multiple verbs of communication that govern thesame object complement and, in general, prohibits the repetition of thesame verb with the same complement (as in two consecutive forms of). Thus, English style recommends a simplification of two or threesuch linked verbs in translation. Since the linked Greek verbs function as

a single predicator and each of these linked verbs has at least one Englishtranslation with the same syntactic, semantic, and lexical requirements asthe translations of the other linked verbs, stylistic considerations recom-mend that these 499 occurrences of linked Greek verbs be translated by asingle English verb that governs all of the lexically realized complementsof the linked Greek verbs. The linked Greek verbs then would be transla-ted according to three hierarchical rules: (1) never is translated and is translated only when both of two linked verbs are forms of ;(2) the finite verb is translated unless it is or in which case thefirst participle is translated as a finite verb; and (3) when the finite verbof the clause is not a verb of communication (and so doesnt participatein melding) and the linked verbs of communication are partici-ples, the first participle is translated.16The following examples illustrate

translations according to these rules, with the untranslated Greek wordsunderlined:17

16Although these rules respect the semantic requirements of the participating verbs,this discussion recognizes that literary, rhetorical, or other considerations may recommendthe translation of more than one linked verb in particular contexts. The inclusion of thethree occurrences of in the first two rules reflects its identical function to inthese contexts.

17The remaining six verbs follow the same rules of translation: e.g., (and Jonathan told David, Saul isseeking to kill you, 1 Sam 19:2); , ...(and they were discussing among themselves, If we say..., Mark 11:31); (and you were commanding the prophets, Donot prophesy!, Amos 2:12); (but going forth proclaim, The reign of [the] heaven[s] has come near, Matt10:7); [] (but they said to him,[He is] John the Baptist, Mark 8:28); and , ... (Jesus sent these twelve com-manding them, Do not go forth onto a road of Gentiles..., Matt 10:5).

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

11/13

29

. and they announced tohim, Your son Joseph is alive (Gen 45:26)

, ;and Jesus responded to the lawyers and Pharisees, Isit permitted or not [permitted] to heal on the Sabbath? (Luke 14:3).

The 77 occurrences of melding associated with the remainingfive verbs of direct discourse consistently appear with lexical realizationsfor their second complement that differ from those of the previous eightverbs: ; ; ; ; and . Each ofthese verbs, however, may be translated by an English verb whose lexicalrealizations for the second complements are in accord with those of the

previous eight verbs. As a result, the distinction between the first eight andthese five verbs does not carry over into English. Thus, these verbs may betranslated by a single verb according to the rules for the first group withthe additional rule that (#4) redundant second complements are reducedto a single second complement, with the more specific lexical realizationof the second complement being maintained if they differ in specificity.Again, two examples illustrate the application of these rules:18

. , ...he begged him, Lord, if you wish... (Luke5:12)

, ;he was asking his disciples, Who do human beings say that I am? (Mark 8:27)

The remaining fifteen occurrences of melding appear with eightGreek verbs that are restricted elsewhere to the expression of indirectdiscourse. All of these verbs, however, may be translated by English verbsthat accommodate both direct and indirect discourse. As a result, the dis-tinction among these and the first two groups of Greek verbs disappears.Thus, they too may be translated according to the same four rules:19

18The remaining three verbs follow the same rules of translation: e.g., , , ... (and his disciples asked him, Rabbi, whosinned...?, John 9:2); , ...(and Joseph begged the sons of Israel, On the visitation..., Gen 50:25); and , ... (but the demons were urging him, Ifyou cast us out..., Matt 8:31).

19The remaining six verbs follow the same rules of translation: e.g., ,

... (she asked, I want that you give me immediately..., Mark6:25); , (Mosesstated clearly, And he will comfort his slaves, 2 Macc 7:6); , ... (but now he has promised, Once again I will shake..., Heb 12:26); , , (and the

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

12/13

30

...

and youwill inform your son, The Jordan River left off... (Josh 4:7)

, , ... and he was ordering them, Watch,beware... (Mark 8:15)

These considerations indicate that the semantic requirements of all591 occurrences of the linked verbs that participate in meldingmay be satisfied by the reduction of two or three linked verbs to a singleEnglish verb and translation according to the same four rules.

5. Implications of Melding for the Formulation of the Lexicon

Most Greek dictionaries of Septuagint and New Testament vocabularydo not distinguish whether verbs (and other words) permit the omissionof required complements either only when their definite semantic contenthas received previous clarification or even when their definite semanticcontent has not received previous clarification. Incorporation of thisdistinction and a discussion of melding into the lexicon, however,would permit three clarifications in the usage of Greek vocabulary.

First, Greek presents paired verbs that have similar connotations andrequire the same number of complements but are distinguished only bywhether or not they require a complement to have a definite semanticcontent when omitted. Thus, such words may be synonymous in meaningbut not true semantic synonyms. This is the case for two paired sets of

verbs of communication which, in one usage, are distinguished only in thedefinite / indefinite requirement for omitted third complements: / (beg, pray) and / (say, speak). Here the latterverbs of these pairs properly have the connotations, say a prayer andsay something when their third complements are indefinite and null.This distinction also extends to verbs that do not express communica-tion, such as / , which, with the connotation, receive,are distinguished only by whether or not they require their third (source)complement to have a definite semantic content when omitted (null).

Second, notations concerning requirements for definite semantic con-tent for particular null complements would prevent potential ambiguities

Levites were ordering all the people, This day is holy: do not be sad!, 1 Esdr 9:53); ... ... (and Moses...commanded, Keep all these commandments...!, Deut 27:1); and (and you, command the sonsof Israel, Watch and keep my Sabbaths!, Exod 31:13).

Paul Danove

7/23/2019 Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament (Paul Danove)

13/13

31

in translation. For example, five of the thirteen verbs that express directdiscourse have a majority of their occurrences with omitted third com-plements precisely in the context of melding: (301 of332); (6 of 8); (32 of 41); (28 of 34);and (9 of 14).20Such a preponderance of occurrences within thecontext of melding has the potential to obscure their requirementthat third complements be definite when null. Given the previously noteddifferences in English and Greek style, translation of these occurrenceswithout careful attention to the third complement of the final linked verbhas the potential to introduce into the English translation ambiguitiesnot present in the Greek text.

Third, eight of the verbs that participate in melding are restricted

to the expression of indirect discourse outside of this context. Inclusion ofa note about melding into the lexicon entries for these verbs wouldclarify that these verbs in fact are reserved to the expression of indirectdiscourse and that the occurrences with V+finite third complements area function of an intruding grammatical construction and not a functionof the verbs themselves.

These considerations indicate that attention to the phenomenon of melding has implications both for translation and the grammaticaldescription of Greek verbs of communication.

Paul DANOVEDept. of Theology and Religious Studies

Villanova University

800 Lancaster AvenueVillanova, PA 19085-1699 (USA)

20The remaining verbs have half or fewer of their intransitive occurrences in the contextof melding: (11 of 70); (20 of 83); (1 of 3); (62 of 156); (9 of 26); [a second] (119 of +7000); (1 of 2); and (11 of 23).

Melding in the Septuagint and New Testament