Patrick A. Tiller, «Reflexive Pronouns in the New Testament», Vol. 14 (2001) 43-63
The purpose of this study is to answer two basic
questions concerning reflexive and reciprocal pronouns in the New
Testament: (1) What are the syntactic constraints on reflexives, that
determine when they may be used? (2) What are the semantic constraints
that determine when in fact they are used? In answering the first question
the author considers both reflexives and reciprocals and discuss the whole
NT; for the second, the author attempts to suggest answers for third
person reflexives and based only on the Pauline Epistles commonly
recognized as authentic.
Patrick A. Tiller
48
2 Thess 1:3 pleonazei hJ agavph eJno;~ eJkavstou pavntwn uJmw'n eij~ ajllhvlou~
v
increases the love of-one of-each of-all of-you toward one-another
The love of each and every one of you is increasing toward one
another.
Here the genitive uJmw'n (‘of you’) is semantically the agent of the recip-
rocated action, love, but not of the main verb, (‘increases’). It is thus pos-
sible that the subjective genitive may function as the trigger for the reflex-
ive, even though in surface structure it is not the subject of a VP. In anoth-
er illuminating case, the trigger for the reciprocal is neither agent nor sub-
ject but the object of the action reciprocated.
Matt 25:32 aforisei
j v aujtou;~ ajp’ ajllhvlwn
he-will-separate them from one-another
Possibly the phrase «them from one another» is thought of as seman-
tically an embedded clause.
Since all of the exceptions are with the reciprocal pronoun, it seems that
the rules for triggers of both reflexives and reciprocals are basically syntac-
tic but that the rules for reciprocals are more sensitive to the semantics of
the reciprocating agent or object. That is, the trigger of the reciprocal is
usually the subject of the clause, but it may be any clause-mate NP that
either affects or is affected by the reciprocated action. In the few examples
where the trigger of the reciprocal is not the subject, it precedes the recip-
rocal in surface structure (word order), but there does not seem to be any
other common syntactic relationship. On the other hand, the trigger of the
reflexive is always the subject of the clause. Since in the vast majority of
cases, the trigger of reflexives also seems to be the agent, and if not, at least
the experiencer, of the action, it may be that reflexives are also somewhat
sensitive to the same semantic constraints as reciprocals, but not enough to
violate the syntactic rule that the trigger must be the subject of the clause.
We may now set forth the following rules for the syntactic and seman-
tic constraints on reflexives and reciprocals.
Rule 1 The trigger of a reflexive pronoun must be the subject of
the clause in which the reflexive appears.
Rule 2 The trigger of a reciprocal pronoun is usually the subject
of the clause in which the reciprocal appears.
Rule 3 The trigger of a reflexive pronoun should also be either
the agent or the experiencer of the action of the clause.
This should never violate Rule 1.
Rule 4 The trigger of a reciprocal pronoun must be the agent or
experiencer of the reciprocated action, even if that means
that Rule 2 will be violated.