Chrys C. Caragounis - Jan Van der Watt, «A Grammatical Analysis of John 1,1», Vol. 21 (2008) 91-138
This article is a pilot study on the feasibility of investigating the grammar, both in terms of words and sentences, of the Gospel according to John in a systematic manner. The reason is that in general the commentaries and even specialized articles have different foci, inter alia, focusing on the historical nature or the theological and literary aspects that the Gospel is so well-known for. In surveys of commentaries on the Gospel it becomes apparent that real grammatical studies are far and few between, and that there is a tendency among commentators to copy grammatical material from one another. More often than not, grammatical issues are simply ignored and the unsuspecting and trusting reader will not even realize that there is a dangerous dungeon of grammatical problems lurking beneath the surface of the text. Apart from that, the significance of grammatical decisions are often underestimated in studies of John’s Gospel.
92 Jan van der Watt & Chrys Caragounis
‣ Then the grammar of sentences (syntax) will receive attention. The
aim of this phase is to illustrate the different possibilities of linking dif-
ferent phrases within a particular context. Linking different phrases
in different ways often leads to significant and even divergent exege-
tical conclusions. This material is often not considered properly and
in most commentaries certain syntactical connections are favoured
without any clear reason. This will be illustrated when the use of καί
in John 1,1 is considered.
‣ Since our assumption is that exegetical decisions are combinations of
grammatical arguments, syntactical considerations, contextual and
theological influences (semantics as the relationship of structures of
meaning2), we have chosen to consider the grammatical solutions offer-
ed on any particular problem in the light of the theological feasibility
of that particular solution. The significance of this will be illustrated
in this article. In the case of John 1,1c the majority of grammarians
choose for θεός to be translated as “divine†while there is with one
or two exceptions, a allergy to this solution among theological com-
mentators who feel that “divine†is not acceptable in the Johannine
theological context at all.
1.3 What will be discussed?
Obviously it is not possible to discuss every single grammatical issue.
There must be some criteria for deciding what will come up for conside-
ration. At this stage the following path will be taken.
‣ If any grammatical construction reflects accepted grammatical norms,
it will not be discussed. However, if an issue is made of any such gram-
matical construction on any point in any exegetical discussion we are
aware of, it will be discussed.
‣ Where there is a clear grammatical deviance from what is generally
regarded as acceptable Greek, it will be discussed.
‣ Where there is a variety of opinions on any issue, even if the rea-
son for the difference of opinions lies in the area of, for instance,
theology and not strictly speaking grammar, it will be discussed.
We realize that a measure of subjectivity is present, but we hope that
the coverage of secondary material (discussions in grammars, commen-
taries or journal articles) will be of assistance in making the decisions of
what to discuss and what not to discuss.
R. Buth, “Language, linguistics†in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the
2
Bible, edited by Vanhoozer, K.J. (London: SPCK 2005), 431-435, here 431.
FOLLOW US