Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

110 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM texts, texts destined to be read by the lower classes and written in a language which must have been close to daily speech. Why this idiom does not occur in the later papyri, has been discussed in 2 etc. As to the scarcity of instances in the papyri in general the following may be said. It is not that this construction is suppressed, but the style used in papyri generally is not such that one would expect the use of relat. connection 413. On the other hand, however, it should be noted that among the 17 cases of relat. connection occurring in 47 documents and 81 private letters 414 there are three where a pronomen abundans is used. This is an extremely high percentage, even when it is compared with Polybius! 415. This can only mean that it is highly probable that the pronomen abundans occurred in the spoken language. 7.2.3. The absence ol the pronomen abundans in the texts ol the 5th and lollowing centuries. Exactly in the period during which önov penetrated into the spoken language and even made its way into the texts (a little later), the idiom 413 See 5.1.2.1. A very odd instanee of the pronomen abundans which has been found by Gignac (p. 151) should be mentioned here: P. Oxy. VII 1070,22 ff. (lIl A.D.) neei óè TijÇ aeaVTijç èmp.d.elaç xai rpeOVTióoç àvû navroç neOVÓT}aOV, önee xai neei TOVTOV noÄ.Ädxlç aOI lreatpa, IJTJóevoç wv lxop.ev aVTwv rpetóop.f:vTJ. It is odd for two reasons: 1. the last clause wv lxop.ev aVTwv is an essential clause, the only example occurring outside of the atmosphere of the LXX and the NT. Considering the fact that all the instanees of the pronomen abundans, in whatever period of the Greek language they occur, are found in nonessential clauses, I must agree with Gignac's suggestion that this may have been caused by the influence of the Coptic language (on p . 151 of his article Gignac mentions some more phenomena where Coptic influence may have been interfering. See also notes 47 and 75 of this paper). This, however, does not have to apply to the other instanees which have been found in papyri: they all occur in nonessential clauses (see I 2.2.3.5, but also note 75); 2. the first part of the sentence offers another instanee of the pronomen abundans, this time in arelat. clause that forms a parenthesis (and thus may be considered as arelat. connection) : önee xai neei TOVTOV noÄ.Ädxlç aOI lreatpa. It is difficult to decide how this instanee should be looked upon. Comparing it to Sym. Styl. 48,1 (see 2.1), one might say that the writer changed his mind in the mid of the sentence as to how to denote the object of lreatpa. It mayalso be compared to Lev. 11,32 (see I 2.4.2.1): önee may be as fossilized a form as IJ there. And finally one may even think of instanees found in texts of the 14th century, in the Alch. app. (see 2.4.1) and the Ohron. Mor. (see note 377), but it must be admitted that in the 3d cent. A.D. one cannot expect yet that a man, in using önee as where it a connective, was thinking of the connective önov. I am inclined to regard th is use of önee as being caused by interference of the Coptic indeclinabie relative (just as the translator of Leviticus used IJ under the influence of the Hebrew nota relation'Ï8), but I do it with all reserve. We should not lose sight of the fact that on the whole this letter is rather odd: the editors qualify it as "a verbose and rather pompous epistie" . 414 Published in Hunt-Edgar I. 415 Among th~ 50 cases of relat. connection occurring on pp. 240-320 (ed. W. R . Patton, Loeb, vol. I) there is only one where the relat. pronoun is followed by a pronomen abundans (= 2%). For the papyri the proportion is almost 18%.
PRONOMEN ABUNDAN8 AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM 111 of the pronomen abundans 8eems to have become a sporadically occurring peculiarity, so that one might think that it had become almost extinct. In 2.3 we have already wondered at the fa ct that the pronomen abundans does not occur in works like the Historia Monachorum, the Historia Lausiaca, the Apophthegmata Patrum, in the works of Marcus Diaconus, Malalas, Leontius and Theophanes. This absence is strange for two reasons : 1. the relat. pronoun has been reduced to a connective, and 2. these historical works teem with cases of relat. connection. 7.2.3.1. Causes One might suppose that these people avoided an idiom which impressed them as something vulgar. They certainly knew the LXX and many books of the NT and may have noticed that the frequency of the pronomen abundans was higher in the more vulgar writings 416. This supposition is incorrect, I believe, and should be rejected. Their style and usage do not prove at all that they assumed such an attitude towards the language used in the Holy Scripture. The following causes are more realistic. 7.2.3.1.1. The artificial revival of the traditional relat. pronouns is a fact that needs our attention. A fact indeed! One can maintain even that a man as Malalas, for instance, of ten uses 8ç and oauç, but mainly oar:tç, as were they demonstI'. pronouns 417. The negative attitude these authors assumed towards the new pronoun onov may be viewed as one of the causes of this revival. At the time that önov began replacing oç(rtç), they use it only a few times by accident. Later they manage to avoid it completely, just like the other pronoun, rdv r~v ró. The main cause, however, of this reinforcement is the following. In 5.4.1.2 a principle was mentioned, a principle brought forward by Werner 418, viz. that the extinction of a phenomenon in the spoken language brings with it a revival in the written language. This is exactly what has happened to oç( uç) and öan€(!: because of theit disappearance from the living language they were revived in the texts. 7.2.3.1.2. A new way of thinking. At a certain time people must have begun to use a pronomen coniunctum aftel' önov. We have no idea when this began, but it cannot have been very late: önov by itself was not clear enough. About that time people must have started thinking according to a new pattern, viz. önov noods a pronomen coniunctum, of course, but why should a declinable pronoun as oç(uç)? Needless to say that this has not been the normal way of thinking: it may be supposed that in the spoken language people intermixed önov and öç(uç) (at least in the be- 416 This, ho wever, is only true, because these writings contain more Semitisms! See I 2.4.2.2 and 2.4.5.7. 417 See 5.3.3 and note 371. 418 See note 391.
Page 1 and 2:
VERHANDELINGEN DER KONINKLIJKE NEDE
Page 3 and 4:
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1. Definition
Page 5 and 6:
PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONI
Page 7:
PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONI
Page 10 and 11:
10 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN O
Page 12 and 13:
12 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN C
Page 14 and 15:
14 PRONOMEM ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN C
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
22 PRONOMEN AlIUNDANS AND PRONOMEN
Page 24 and 25:
24 l'RONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
52 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEM C
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61: 60 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN C
Page 64 and 65: 64 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN O
Page 80 and 81: PART III BYZANTINE PERIOD 1. INTROD
Page 92 and 93: 92 PRONOMEM ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN C
Page 94 and 95: 94 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEM C
Page 98 and 99: 98 PRONOMEN ABUNDAN8 AND PRONOMEN C
Page 100 and 101: 100 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN
Page 116 and 117: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS A. TEXTS Achi
Page 120: 120 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN
show all

Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?