Article

Name: Communicative process in the NT texts: author, addressee and secondary interpretant

Authors: A. V. Vdovichenko

Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Abstract: Strict linguistic criteria applied to the NT texts lead to stating rather strange features of the NT authors’ literary activity: 1) an impulsiveness and spontaneity; 2) a poor acquaintance with the verbal clichés of the language which they wrote in; 3) inadequate relations between the authors and the audience; 4) absence of a literary tradition to which the authors ascribed themselves. Three general reasons for the communicative vacuum described above are: a structural (Saussurian) methodology of linguistic research, the theory of bilingualism uncritically applied, little attention paid to the audience of the NT texts. The Diaspora Greek-speaking tradition is regarded as a territory of language conventions among its participants where Semitisms could not exist as “mistakes.” More correct evaluation of NT linguistic phenomena is possible through research of authentic Diaspora communication factors.

Keywords: communication, New Testament corpus, author, addressee, secondary interpreter, Semitisms, Judaic diaspora, specifics linguistic practices

Bibliography:

Beyer K. Semitische Syntax im Neuen Testament. Goettingen 1962.

Deissmann A. Bible Studies. Trans. by A. Grieve. T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1901.

Gehman H. S. The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek // Vetus Testamentum 1 (1951). P. 81–90.

Horrocks G. Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers. London, 1997.

Horsley G. H. R. Divergent Views on the Nature of the Greek of the Bible // Biblica. 65 (1984). P. 393–403.

Iosif Flaviy. Iudeuskaya voyna [Jewish war] / Per. M. Finkelberg М.; Ieruslem: Mosty, 2008.

Iosif Flaviy. Iudeuskye drevnosty [Jewish antiquities]: 2 v. Per. G. G. Genkelya. Т. 2. М., 2002.

Katz P. Septuagintal studies in the mid-century: Their links with the past and their present tendencies // The Background of the New Testament and Its Eschatology: In Honour of С H. Dodd. Cambridge: Uni. Press, 1956. P. 176–210.

Maloney E. C. Semitic Interference in Marcan Syntax. Michigan, 1981. P. 9–10.

Mussies G. Greek in Palestine and the Diaspora // The Jewish People in the First Century. CRINT I. 2 / Ed. S. Safrai, M. Stern. Assen, 1976. P. 1043.

Porter S. E. The Greek Language of the New Testament // Handbook to Exegesis of the New Testament. Ser. «New Testament Tools and Studies» / Eds. B. M. Metzger & B. D. Ehrman. Leiden; New York; Kohln, 1997. P. 99–130.

Silva M. Bilingualism and the Character of New Testament Greek // Biblica. 61 (1980). P. 198–219.

Turner N. A Grammar of NT Greek. V. 3. Syntax. Edinburgh, 1963.

Vdovichenko A. V. Konceptsiya Saussura v interpretatii spetsifiki novozavetnogo texta [The concept of Saussure in interpretation of New Testament text] // Vestnik PSTGU Ser. 3: Filologia. 2012, № 30. С. 7–25.

Wacholder B. Z. Eupolemus // A Study of Judaeo-Greek Literature. Cincinnati, 1974.