127 A Grammatical Analysis of John 1,1 is distinct from θεός in 1c. Apart from that, the whole unit must be considered: ᾿Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. It is clear that the first phrase (1a) is ignored in order for the chiasm to work. This is usually an indication of structural manipulation. Considering the whole of verse 1 the argument for “staircase parallelism” seems stronger.152 In any case, structures do not carry meaning in them- selves. Rather, they are emphasis markers. What exactly the emphasis is should then be determined semantically. Not accepting the chiastic struc- ture, but rather the “staircase parallelism”, does not really influence the interpretation, since the structural emphasis marker catches the reader’s attention in any case. Chrys C. Caragounis: In the above discussion some interesting sugges- tions are offered on how to understand the structure of the whole passage (i.e. vv. 1-5). The presentation of the various possibilities of structure is exemplarily clear. My presentation of the following structure is meant to further enrich the discussion presented above by laying more alternatives before the reader for his/her consideration. Further, it may be that some of my critical remarks may lead to making those positions more cogent. Of the three analyses of the structure of Jn 1,1, the “co-ordinate cons- truction”, the “chiastic construction”, and the “staircase construction parallelism”, the first is rather flat and loose, lacking the ingenuous way in which John arranged the three clauses into a beautiful and sublime sentence153. The second proposal, chiasm, demands for its function that a certain manipulation be applied to the verse, i.e. removing the first clause. It cannot be seriously entertained. The third, alternative, staircase paral- lelism, has at least a semblance of validity. Here we have the important observation that whereas a paratactic construction offers a loose rela- tionship, a hypotactic construction carries a closer semantic relationship. But an important obstacle to regarding the verse structured in a staircase parallelism is the conjuction καί. The staircase parallelism must of neces- sity disregard καί, in the same way as the chiastic structure disregarded the first clause of the verse. A further problem with this understanding is that the position of Θεός in Jn 1,1c is seen as demanded by the staircase parallelism and therefore, “predetermined”. But this would go contrary to the above finding that the word order in Jn 1,1c was determined by the emphasis the author wanted to express. “Staircase parallelism” implies that there are a series of chiasms linked together. The 152 difference is that in the case of the staircase parallelism there is flow from the one to the other, while with chiasms there is a circular interpretative movement. On sublimity, see C. C. Caragounis, “Dionysios Halikarnasseus, the Art of Composi- 153 tion, and the Apostle Paul”, JGRChJ 1 (2000), 25-54.