A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch

the fact that 'milk' occurs in both, because 'milk' is not an
'important' word. And it is to be remembered that the greater
part of any language is made up of words for rather insignifi­
cant ideas and objects. No language, not even that spoken by
the Jews, consists solely of theologically important terms. The
Jews, too, had occasion to speak of milk, wills, receipts, and
deposits.
On another occasion Turner supports his contention that
'there was a distinguishable dialect of spoken and written Jewish
Greek' with this statement: 'Certainly it was not artificial.
Biblical Greek is so powerful and fluent, it is difficult to be­
lieve that those who used it did not have at hand a language all
4 3
ready for use. It is plainly useless to enter into discussion
about this. One can only express the opinion that a subjective
argument of this sort is of no value whatever for our question.
Finally, a point to which Turner keeps returning: the
hypothesis that the Koine had itself been extensively influenced
by Semitic idiom and that this explains why so many 'Semitisms'
can be paralleled in the papyri.^ Turner clearly favours this
idea, even though he admits the force of Moulton's objections to
it. In Turner's opinion 'the question of Jewish influence on
4 5
the Koine ... has not yet been met . To my mind, however,
Moulton has long since convincingly refuted this extraordinary
theory.^ It is of course not to be denied that some words, and
perhaps uses and expressions, were borrowed into Hellenistic
Greek from one or other of the Semitic languages. But there is
not the slightest evidence that the Koine as a whole had been
subject to extensive Semitic influence. Turner's approval of
this theory seems to be based on the wish that it might be so,
43. Grammatical Insights 183.
44. NTS I (1954-5) 222f., ET LXXVI (1964-5) 47, Grammatical
Insights 184.
45. Grammatical Insights 184.
46. Ρ Γ Ο , ρ σ . xvi ff., Cambridge Biblical Essays, ed. H.B. Swete,
London, 1909, 468ff. See also G. Milligan, The New Testament
Documents, London, 1913, 54f., and the discussion in Moulton-
Howard, Gramm. II 415. Cf. Moule's cautious reference to this
question, Idiom Book 171.