Paul Danove, «A Comparison Of The Usage Of Akouw And Akouw- Compounds In The Septuagint And New Testament», Vol. 14 (2001) 65-86
This study characterizes all occurrences of
a0kou/w and seven related verbs (a0ntakou/w,
diakou/w, ei0sakou/w,
e0nakou/w, e0pakou/w,
parakou/w, and u9pakou/w)
in the Septuagint and New Testament according to their semantic and
syntactic properties, develops a single set of rules to describe the
distribution of noun phrase objects of these verbs, and then compares the
patterns of usage of these verbs in the Septuagint and New Testament. A
preliminary discussion identifies the semantic and syntactic properties
necessary to describe all biblical occurrences of
a0kou/w and proposes a set of descriptive rules that govern the
syntactic case of its noun phrase objects. Further investigation then
indicates that this same set of rules with only one minor modification
also is adequate to describe the syntactic case of noun phrase objects of
the noted a0kou/w-compounds. The discussion
concludes by comparing the distribution of noun phrase objects in
particular syntactic cases within the Septuagint and New Testament.
Paul Danove
72
1. positive hkousa de; kai; fwnh~ legouvsh~ moi, jAnastav", Pevtre,
[
quson kai; favge
`
And I heard a voice saying to me, «Peter, rising, slaughter and eat.»
(Acts 11:7).
2. negative: kai; ejavn tiv~ mou ajkouvsh/ tw`n rJhmavtwn kai; mh; fulavxh/
and if someone hears my words and does not keep them
(John 12:47).
Third, the response may be to something «not heard» when this con-
notes a refusal to hear:
kaqa; kai; ta; loipa; e[qnh, o{sa kuvrio~ ajpolluvei pro; proswvpou
umwn, ou{tw~ ajpolei`sqe, ajnqæ w|n oujk hjkouvsate th'~ fwnh'~ kurivou
J`
tou` qeou` uJmw`n.
And like the other nations which [the Lord] destroyed before your
face, so too will you be destroyed because you did not listen to the voice of
[the] Lord your God (Deut 8:20).
Fourth, the response may precede ajkouvw when actions appear out of
chronological sequence 16:
kai; uJpevstreyan oiJ poimevne~ doxavzonte~ kai; aijnou`nte~ to;n qeo;n
epi; pa`sin oi|~ h[kousan kai; ei\don kaqw;~ ejlalhvqh pro;~ aujtouv"
j
And the shepherds returned glorifying and praising God for all the things
that they heard and saw, just as it was told to them (Luke 2:20).
Within this analysis, subjects that register a response to hearing are
deemed to be characterized by the semantic feature, «+ response,» with all
other subjects receiving the feature, «– response 17.» The genitive in 181
of 183 transitive occurrences of ajkouvw (direct perception) indicates the
feature [+ response] 18. Of the two remaining examples of the genitive,
16
In 1 Sam 15:22 the response appears in the infinitive in 15:23, whose subject ref-
erent is the same as that of ajkouvw.
17
The appeal to semantic considerations in contexts of extension greater than a clause
or verb phrase is similar to that required for the analysis of anaphora: cf. C. J. Fillmore,
«Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora,» in Papers from the Twelfth Annual Meeting of
the Berkeley Linguistics Society, (1986) 95-107.
18
Object noun phrase [+ response, - speaker] (genitive, direct): Gen 3:8, 10, 17;
4:23; 21:12; 24:52; 27:43; 37:6; Exod 3:7; 15:26; 18:24; 19:5; 23:22a, 22b; 32:17;
Num 12:6; Deut 4:1; 8:20; 13:4, 5, 19; 21:20 [A]; 28:1, 2, 9, 13, 45 [A], 49; Josh 1:18;
6:20; 24:24; Judg 5:16; 11:28; 20:13; 1 Sam 2:25; 4:6; 8:7, 9, 22; 12:1, 14, 15; 15:1,
19, 20, 22, 24; 19:6; 24:10; 25:24 [R], 35; 28:18, 21, 22, 23; 2 Sam 13:14, 16; 1 Kgs
[5:14a, 14b], 21; 8:28; 9:3; 10:24; 12:24, 24z; 13:4; 21:25, 36; 2 Kgs 18:12; 19:6; 20:5;
22:13; 2 Chr 6:20, 21, 35, 39; 7:12; 9:23; 34:21; 35:22; 1 Esdr 5:62; 9:40, 50; 2 Esdr
19:16; 1 Macc 2:22; 6:41; 10:74; 13:7; 14:25; 2 Macc 7:30; 3 Macc 6:23; Ps 6:9 [A, S];
17:7; 80:12; 94:7; 101:21 [R]; 102:20; 118:149; Prov 1:5; Job 21:2; Jonah 2:3; Hag