Assyrian Forums
 Home  |  Ads  |  Partners  |  Sponsors  |  Contact  |  FAQs  |  About  
 
   Holocaust  |  History  |  Library  |  People  |  TV-Radio  |  Forums  |  Community  |  Directory
  
   General  |  Activism  |  Arts  |  Education  |  Family  |  Financial  |  Government  |  Health  |  History  |  News  |  Religion  |  Science  |  Sports
   Greetings · Shläma · Bärev Dzez · Säludos · Grüße · Shälom · Χαιρετισμοί · Приветствия · 问候 · Bonjour · 挨拶 · تبریکات  · Selamlar · अभिवादन · Groete · التّحيّات

Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Archived: Read only    Previous Topic Next Topic
Home Forums Peshitta Topic #353
Help Print Share

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-22-2001 at 04:43 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-2001 AT 04:45 PM (CST)

Shlama Akhi Iakov,

In Luqa 1:66, we read with amazement:

kai; e~qento pavnte oiJ ajkouvsante ejn th'/ kardiva/ aujtw'n

('And all who heard laid it up in their heart....')

This would have sounded as strange to Greek ears as it does it does to us.

It is actually a very common idiom in all Semitic languages, because the Semitic languages attribute the "mind" to the "heart", rather than to the "brain."

To "lay something up in your heart" is a Semitic idiom, meaning "To think about it". The Peshitta preserves the idiom, the Greek does not.

Examples of this idiom in Semitic writings are numerous, but for your reference see the following 2 examples:


  • 2 Sam. 13:33
  • 2 Sam. 19:19


Verse 1:66 is not the only place Luqa has this idiom. Check out 21:14 as well, although this is in Maran Eshoa's dialogue.

Verse 1:66 is important because, again, this is in the commentary portion of Luqa - an indication of what language he wrote in.


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Print Top

 
Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic
Andrew Gabriel Roth
 
Send email to Andrew Gabriel RothSend private message to Andrew Gabriel RothView profile of Andrew Gabriel RothAdd Andrew Gabriel Roth to your contact list
 
Member: Sep-6-2000
Posts: 384
Member Feedback

1. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #3

Mar-22-2001 at 10:45 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-2001 AT 09:37 AM (CST)

Shlama Akhi Paul!

You knew this one was coming, since we have discussed it so many times. There is no way Luqa 1:66 should be dealt with here without me adding the explosive evidence a few lines later: Zakarya's Canticle (1:68-79).

I love this one SO MUCH because Luke-- especially his first 2 chapters-- is frequently regarded as the best Greek in the entire GNT. In other words, if there are Semitic patterns here, nowhere else in the NT is "safe".

First however, an important point. As a master of Greek supposedly writing for a Greek audience, there can be little doubt that Luke shows a propensity for poetry. That being said, both Koine and Classical Greek had strict and disciplined rules for how poetry should be composed and read-- right down to whether a breath should fall on this or that accent. The same can be said for diction, rhyme, etc.

BUT...Luke does NOT write a single Greek poem.

Instead, this "Gentile" from Antioch in Syria follows the time honored SEMITIC system-- a discipline lesss concerned with rhyme and more focused on sentence to paragraph concordance of thought. The stanzas in a semitic poem are STROPHES, and the verses are STICHES. The numbers of these structures are also significant. In this case, there were 3 STROPHES with 7 STICHES each. 7 is the symbol of completenes and perfection (7 days of creation plus Sabbath) and 3 may be a very early allusion to Father-Son-Holy Spirit.

However, owing to the very complex rules in this discipline, I will simplify by focusing in on a small part of strophe 2-- equivalent to 1:72-73.

Let's take a look:

1) "He remembers his covenant".
Question: Who remembers?
Answer: God.
Therefore: remembers (ZAKHAR) + God (YAH-- a very common truncation. Ex: Yehosophat) = ZAKHAR-YAH (Zacharias).

2) "The oath he swore".
Question: Whose oath?
Answer: God (actually from Zakarya's view "my God").
Therefore: God (EL)+ my (I - personal pronoun suffix. Ex: Eli Eli lmana shabakthani-- Matti 27:46) + oath (SHABA)=ELISHABA (Elizabeth).

3) "He has shown mercy".
Question: Who has shown mercy?
Answer: God.
Therefore: God (YAH) + show mercy (KHNAN) = YUKHANAN (John).

Not bad for a goy who supposedly did not know a word of Aramaic, eh?

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

2. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 08:15 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
Akhi Paul,

Dr. Fitzmeyer refers to Luke's use of the Greek phrase "kai ethonto pantes hoi akousantes in te kardia auton legontes..." as a Septuagintism. Since what follows is the Semitic B'rakha, Luke wants to remain true to his Bible.

In other words its nothing he hasn't read and come to understand as a Greek speaking Gentile. I mean if he originally spoke Aramaic as did his audience why quote the LXX instead of Targum (or from the Heb. perspective the MT)? Luke, a Greek speaking Gentile, knows well the LXX version of 2Shmuel 13:33, 1Shmuel 21:12, and Malachi 2:2.

Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as the most prominent Lucan scholars agree. But then the LXX is full of Semitic idiom.

Perhaps also the "investigation" carefully executed by Luqa would have uncovered some Heb-Aram documents since Luqa's birth narrative has no parallel. He did spend considerable time in Cesarea while Paul was a prisoner there. Is it plausible to consider while there with Paul he interviewed Mariam the mother of M'shiaH? And she gave him this Aram. version of the birth narrative?

Since Luqa uses his own Greek terminology in 2:19 concerning Mariam, it seems likely the former words in the birth narrative are not his own but his source's.

In fact, and here is a classical Greek term found in Plato, "sumballo" in 2:19 means to "ponder, consider, think about". The present active participle form in which it appears gives the idea that the events occurring around the birth were always on her mind. Literally translated
"compare with". I don't know if that is good Aramaic but its not good Hebrew.

Now it seems the queston is why, if Luqa was penning the gospel originally in Aram., would he abandon the Semitic; "...put these things in their hearts..." and opt for the classical Greek;
"...pondered these things in her heart..."?

Shlaama
Iakov.


Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

3. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 08:37 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 
>Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as the
>most prominent Lucan scholars agree.
>But then the LXX is full of Semitic idiom.

Yes because the LXX is a Greek translation of Hebrew and Aramaic documents just as Luke is.

Trimm

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

5. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 04:38 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #3
 
Shlaama Akhi Dr Trimm,

>>Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as the
>>most prominent Lucan scholars agree.
>>But then the LXX is full of Semitic idiom.
>
>Yes because the LXX is a
>Greek translation of Hebrew and
>Aramaic documents just as Luke
>is.

I'm afraid you miss my assertion that since Luke knows & quotes the LXX well, he literlizes, as does the LXX, when he uses THAT source. He makes it clear in his prologue that he has taken into account many previous sources.

Again akhi no one has anwered MY question: Why does Luke quote the LXX so regularly if he is writing in Aramaic? Why not refer to the Targums as does Matthay? Why not use the MT as does Matthay?

Shlaama
Iakov.


Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

7. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 05:18 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #5
 
>Shlaama Akhi Dr Trimm,
>
>>>Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as the
>>>most prominent Lucan scholars agree.
>>>But then the LXX is full of Semitic idiom.
>>
>>Yes because the LXX is a
>>Greek translation of Hebrew and
>>Aramaic documents just as Luke
>>is.
>
>I'm afraid you miss my assertion
>that since Luke knows &
>quotes the LXX well, he
>literlizes, as does the LXX,
>when he uses THAT source.
>He makes it clear in
>his prologue that he has
>taken into account many previous
>sources.
>
>Again akhi no one has anwered
>MY question: Why does Luke
>quote the LXX so regularly
>if he is writing in
>Aramaic? Why not refer to
>the Targums as does Matthay?
>Why not use the MT
>as does Matthay?
>
>Shlaama
>Iakov.

This is circular thinking. It is only GREEK LUKE that makes such use of the LXX. ARAMAIC Luke does not.

Also agreements with the LXX do NOT point to the LXX as the source. As you know many Qumran texts have been found in Hebrew which agree with the LXX against the MT. LXX agreements only point to agreements with the underlying Hebrew text behind the LXX.

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

4. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 08:52 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 
Shlama Akhi Iakov,

YOU SAID:

>
>Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as
>the most prominent Lucan scholars
>agree. But then the LXX
>is full of Semitic idiom.
>

THE LXX IS A TRANSLATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Does that not suggest to you, in the slightest bit, that the GNT is a translation too?

This argument which says "The writers of the NT were imitating the LXX" is poppycock! Bull!

They were writing on their own, imitating no one!

How can you find Aramaic idioms in Luke and brush them off as "imitation"?

At the same time, if you happen to find something that looks like a Greek idiom, you would say - 'See! It's a Greek idiom, that means Luke must have written in Greek!'

How can I argue with a position as unreasonable as that?

The objective here was to find Greek/Aramaic idioms in the commentary portion of Luke. So far, we have demonstrated (even from reference to Tanakh) 3 Aramaic idioms present in the narrative of Luke - NO Greek idioms.

YOU SAID:

">Now it seems the queston is
>why, if Luqa was penning
>the gospel originally in Aram.,
>would he abandon the Semitic;
>"...put these things in their
>hearts..." and opt for the
>classical Greek;
>"...pondered these things in her heart..."? "

That's not an unreasonable thing. Look at 9:44, where Luke makes it the 'ear', rather than the 'heart'.

There was varying usage of this idiom -

But it's still not Greek!!!!!

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

6. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 04:38 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
Shlaama Akhi Paul,


>
>>
>>Luqa 1:66 is Semitic idiom as
>>the most prominent Lucan scholars
>>agree. But then the LXX
>>is full of Semitic idiom.
>>
>
>THE LXX IS A TRANSLATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Refer to comments I made to Dr Trimm, please.
>
Does that not suggest to you,
>in the slightest bit, that
>the GNT is a translation
>too?

ibid.


>This argument which says "The writers
>of the NT were imitating
>the LXX" is poppycock!
>Bull!
>
>They were writing on their own,
>imitating no one!

I'm sorry but I have not brated your views but simply discussed the issues. Why the offensive tone Akhi?


>How can you find Aramaic idioms
>in Luke and brush them
>off as "imitation"?

Refer to comments about the same topic to Dr. Trimm.
>
>At the same time, if you
>happen to find something that
>looks like a Greek idiom,
>you would say - 'See!
> It's a Greek idiom,
>that means Luke must have
>written in Greek!'
>
>How can I argue with a
>position as unreasonable as that?
>

>The objective here was to find
>Greek/Aramaic idioms in the commentary
>portion of Luke. So
>far, we have demonstrated (even
>from reference to Tanakh) 3
>Aramaic idioms present in the
>narrative of Luke - NO
>Greek idioms.

When I have I ever disputed that Semitic idioms exist? Repetition is redundant. Remember I think Heb & Aram is essential to the understanding of the GNT.
As I have said Luke 2:19 uses Classical Greek prose from Plato in Lucan narrative. Literally translated back into Heb or Aram does it make sense? To "collect"? She "collected" these things in her heart? I would think she would have "put", or "set" or "placed" them there.


>
>YOU SAID:
>
>">Now it seems the queston is
>>why, if Luqa was penning
>>the gospel originally in Aram.,
>>would he abandon the Semitic;
>>"...put these things in their
>>hearts..." and opt for the
>>classical Greek;
>>"...pondered these things in her heart..."? "
>
>That's not an unreasonable thing.
>Look at 9:44, where Luke
>makes it the 'ear', rather
>than the 'heart'.

But it is still "place" in the ear not "collect".
Grk - "ponder".

>There was varying usage of this
>idiom -

But it's still
>not Greek!!!!!


>
I assure you "to collect" IS Greek thought.

Shlaama,
Iakov.

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

8. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-23-2001 at 05:18 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #6
 
>When I have I ever disputed
>that Semitic idioms exist? Repetition
>is redundant. Remember I think
>Heb & Aram is essential
>to the understanding of the
>GNT.
>As I have said Luke 2:19
>uses Classical Greek prose from
>Plato in Lucan narrative. Literally
>translated back into Heb or
>Aram does it make sense?
>To "collect"? She "collected" these
>things in her heart? I
>would think she would have
>"put", or "set" or "placed"
>them there.

The Aramaic has N'TAR "kept or guarded"

>
>
>>
>>YOU SAID:
>>
>>">Now it seems the queston is
>>>why, if Luqa was penning
>>>the gospel originally in Aram.,
>>>would he abandon the Semitic;
>>>"...put these things in their
>>>hearts..." and opt for the
>>>classical Greek;
>>>"...pondered these things in her heart..."? "
>>
>>That's not an unreasonable thing.
>>Look at 9:44, where Luke
>>makes it the 'ear', rather
>>than the 'heart'.
>
>But it is still "place" in
>the ear not "collect".
>Grk - "ponder".
>
>>There was varying usage of this
>>idiom -

But it's still
>>not Greek!!!!!


>>
>I assure you "to collect" IS
>Greek thought.
>
>Shlaama,
>Iakov.


Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

10. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-24-2001 at 00:21 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #8
 
>>As I have said Luke 2:19
>>uses Classical Greek prose from
>>Plato in Lucan narrative. Literally
>>translated back into Heb or
>>Aram does it make sense?
>>To "collect"? She "collected" these
>>things in her heart? I
>>would think she would have
>>"put", or "set" or "placed"
>>them there.
>
(Trimm said)
>The Aramaic has N'TAR "kept or
>guarded"

Dan 7:28 uses N'tar "w'miltha b'liby NITRET".
"...and he kept the matter in his heart...".
The LXX uses "kai to rhema en te kardia mou diateresa" (diatereo), also translated the same.

Luqa 2:19 however in the GNT uses 'sumballo' which is not the same as 'diatereo' (see above Dan. 7:28, also Luqa 2:51). Both words compound a preposition with a verb (perhaps like the proclitics). Both are in the imperfect tense in Greek which is repetitive past action. "always pondering" for the former and "always keeping" for the latter. The force of the Greek is unmatched in the Sem. languages and goes unnoticed in the Peshita. After the events of the birth narrative 'Mariam PONDERS (collects) but after the childhod events she KEEPS (keep through). Fritz Reinecker explains of the latter 'The preposition compound is perfective and describes the carrying of action through to a definite result' In other words previous events caused her to wonder but later events started to grow legs. The matter then came into fruition in Qana of Galiyl Yokhanan 2.

Yet we find the same Aramaic N'tar in both Luqa 2:19 & 52. The Aramaic translator blew his cover on this one.

Why does the classical Greek philosopher's term prevail over a cumbersom poorly translated idiom as in 1:66?

BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER THERE.

This is why we have bad Greek in places, (due to the Semitic idiom) and wonderful Greek elsewhere. Because if the tranlator can smooth over the idiom in one place he could the next.

THERE ARE TOO MANY HOLES IN YOUR BOAT AKHAY.

Shlama,
Iakov.

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

11. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-24-2001 at 01:08 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #10
 

Well you have succeeded in disarming your own argument.

We showed you a number of Semitic idioms which show up in Greek Luke and argued that they originated in Aramaic Luke.

Paul then challenged you to show us Greek idioms in Luke. You then proceed to show us what you claim is a Greek idiom in 2:19 & 52. However your Greek idiom only shows up in the Greek and does not appear in the Aramaic at all. In fact the Aramaic reads instead with a known Aramaic idiom which also appears in the Aramaic of Dan. 7:28. In order for your Greek idiom to hold any value in this debate it would have to appear in the Aramaic of Luke. Your showing us a Greek idiom which only appears in the Greek of Luke is about as hekpful as if we were to show you an Aramaic idiom that appears in Aramaic Luke but not in Greek Luke. Remember we are showing you Aramaic idioms in the Greek text of Luke. You would need to counter by showing Greek idioms in Aramaic Luke. All you have shown at best isthat the Greek translator substituded a Greek idiom for an Aramaic one.

Trimm

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

12. RE: Luqa Aramaic Idiom #2.

Mar-24-2001 at 06:52 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #11
 
Shlama Kulkhon, Yaqub w'Iakov,

Akhi James, you made an excellent point.

So far, we have shown Aramaic idioms in the

NARRATIVE

of

GREEK LUKE.

To do the same, Akhi Khabiba Iakov, you would have to do the reverse - show us Greek idiom in the narrative of

Aramaic Luke.

Still waiting.........score Aramaic (3) - Greek (0), bottom of the 9th - 2 outs, 2 strikes.

Next topic - poetry. (I can hear you salivating Andrew!)


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Print Top

Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic


Assyria \ã-'sir-é-ä\ n (1998)   1:  an ancient empire of Ashur   2:  a democratic state in Bet-Nahren, Assyria (northern Iraq, northwestern Iran, southeastern Turkey and eastern Syria.)   3:  a democratic state that fosters the social and political rights to all of its inhabitants irrespective of their religion, race, or gender   4:  a democratic state that believes in the freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture in faithfulness to the principles of the United Nations Charter — Atour synonym

Ethnicity, Religion, Language
» Israeli, Jewish, Hebrew
» Assyrian, Christian, Aramaic
» Saudi Arabian, Muslim, Arabic
Assyrian \ã-'sir-é-an\ adj or n (1998)   1:  descendants of the ancient empire of Ashur   2:  the Assyrians, although representing but one single nation as the direct heirs of the ancient Assyrian Empire, are now doctrinally divided, inter sese, into five principle ecclesiastically designated religious sects with their corresponding hierarchies and distinct church governments, namely, Church of the East, Chaldean, Maronite, Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholic.  These formal divisions had their origin in the 5th century of the Christian Era.  No one can coherently understand the Assyrians as a whole until he can distinguish that which is religion or church from that which is nation -- a matter which is particularly difficult for the people from the western world to understand; for in the East, by force of circumstances beyond their control, religion has been made, from time immemorial, virtually into a criterion of nationality.   3:  the Assyrians have been referred to as Aramaean, Aramaye, Ashuraya, Ashureen, Ashuri, Ashuroyo, Assyrio-Chaldean, Aturaya, Chaldean, Chaldo, ChaldoAssyrian, ChaldoAssyrio, Jacobite, Kaldany, Kaldu, Kasdu, Malabar, Maronite, Maronaya, Nestorian, Nestornaye, Oromoye, Suraya, Syriac, Syrian, Syriani, Suryoye, Suryoyo and Telkeffee. — Assyrianism verb

Aramaic \ar-é-'máik\ n (1998)   1:  a Semitic language which became the lingua franca of the Middle East during the ancient Assyrian empire.   2:  has been referred to as Neo-Aramaic, Neo-Syriac, Classical Syriac, Syriac, Suryoyo, Swadaya and Turoyo.

Please consider the environment when disposing of this material — read, reuse, recycle. ♻
AIM | Atour: The State of Assyria | Terms of Service