Adelbert Denaux, «Style and Stylistcs, with Special Reference to Luke.», Vol. 19 (2006) 31-51
Taking Saussure’s distinction between language (langue) and speech
(parole) as a starting point, the present article describes a concept of ‘style’
with special reference to the use of a given language system by the author of
Luke-Acts. After discussing several style definitions, the question is raised
whether statistics are helpful for the study of style. Important in the case of
Luke is determining whether his use of Semitisms is a matter of style or of
language, and to what extent he was influenced by ancient rhetoric. Luke’s
stylistics should focus on his preferences (repetitions, omissions, innovations)
from the range of possibilities of his language system (“Hellenistic Greek”),
on different levels (words, clauses, sentences, rhetorical-narrative level and
socio-rhetorical level), within the limits of the given grammar, language
development and literary genre.
31
STYLE AND STYLISTCS, WITH SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO LUKE1
ADELBERT DENAUX
Taking Saussure’s distinction between language (langue) and speech
(parole) as a starting point, the present article describes a concept of ‘style’
with special reference to the use of a given language system by the author of
Luke-Acts. After discussing several style definitions, the question is raised
whether statistics are helpful for the study of style. Important in the case of
Luke is determining whether his use of Semitisms is a matter of style or of
language, and to what extent he was influenced by ancient rhetoric. Luke’s
stylistics should focus on his preferences (repetitions, omissions, innovations)
from the range of possibilities of his language system (“Hellenistic Greekâ€),
on different levels (words, clauses, sentences, rhetorical-narrative level and
socio-rhetorical level), within the limits of the given grammar, language
development and literary genre.
1. Language and Style
Philological studies of Luke-Acts often speak about the “language
and style†of Luke-Acts. Often there is no attempt to distinguish the two
concepts. Both words are understood as a hendiadys2. Since the studies
of the French linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, however, it makes sense
to distinguish the two concepts. De Saussure himself made a distinction
between language in its entirety (langage)3, language as a structured
Paper held in the Seminar “The Greek of the New Testament†of the 58th General
1
Meeting of the SNTS, Bonn 29/07-02/08/2003.
Cf. T. Vogel, Zur Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil. Eine philologische
2
Laienstudie (Leipzig 1897; 21899); A. Plummer, The Gospael According to St. Luke (ICC;
Edinburgh, 1896; 51922 [= 1964]) xli-lxvii: § 6. “Characteristics, style, and languageâ€; J.A.
Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke I-IX. Introduction, Translation and Notes (AB,
28; Garden City, NY 1981) 107-27: “IV Lukan Language and Styleâ€.
F. de Saussure, Cours de linguistique générale (ed. C. Bally & A. Sechehaye, 1916; Paris
3
1972 [Critical edition prepared by Tulli De Mauro]); ET: Course in General Linguistics,
translated and annotated by Roy Harris (London 1983) 10: “Language in its entirety has
many different and disparate aspects. It lies astride the boundaries separating various
domains. It is at the same time physical, physiological and psychological. It belongs both to
the individual and society. No classification of human phenomena provides any single place
for it, because language as such has no discernible unityâ€.
FilologÃa Neotestamentaria - Vol. XIX - 2006, pp. 31-51
Facultad de FilosofÃa y Letras - Universidad de Córdoba (España)
FOLLOW US