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.
50 Adelbert Denaux
one or more words†(I, 5,1)77. Individual words will either be native or
imported, simple or compound, literal or metaphorical, in current use or
newly-coined (I, 5,3). Each of these possibilities is discussed.
- The second virtue or quality of style is the “clearness of speechâ€
(perspicuitas) (VII, 2,1-22). “For my own part, I regard clearness as the
first essential of a good style: there must be propriety in our words, their
order must be straightforward, the conclusion of the period must not be
long postponed, there must be nothing lacking and nothing superfluous.
Thus our language will be approved by the learned and clear to the
uneducated. I am speaking solely of clearness of style, as I have already
dealt with clearness in the presentation of facts in the rules that I laid
down for the statement of the case. But the general method is the same in
both. For if what we say is not less not more than is required, and is clear
and systematically arranged, the whole matter will be plain and obvious
even to the not too attentive audience†(VIII, 2, 22)78.
- The third virtue or quality of style is the “ornament of speechâ€
(orationis ornatus) (VIII, 3,1-88). The employment of skilful ornament
not only serves the interests of the case that is defended, but at the same
time, it commends the orator and appeals the approval of the world at
large (VIII, 3,2). Rhetorical ornament resides in individual words or in
groups of words. As to the use of individual words, it is to be noted
that, whereas clearness mainly requires propriety of language, ornament
requires the skilful use of metaphor. We should realise, however, that
without propriety ornament is impossible (VIII, 3,15). The choice of
striking and sublime words will be determined by the matter that is dealt
with (VIII, 3,18). Words are proper, newly-coined or metaphorical (VIII,
3,24). Hence, it is a question of good taste whether and when one uses
archaisms, neologisms, or metaphors (VIII, 3,24-39). When one considers
connected discourse (groups of words): “Its adornment may be effected,
primarily, in two ways; that is to say, we must consider first our ideal of
style, and secondly how we shall express this ideal in actual words. The
first essential is to realise clearly what we wish to enhance or attenuate, to
express with vigour or calm, in luxuriant or austere language, at length or
Cf. Butler, The Institutio Oratoria 1, 78-79, … emendate loquendi regulam, quae
77
grammatices prior pars est, examinet. Haec exigitur verbis aut singulis aut pluribus.
Cf. Butler, The Institutio Oratoria 3, 208-09, Nobis primus virtus sit perspicuitas,
78
propria verba, rectus ordo, non in longum dilata conclusio, nihil neque desit neque
superfluat; ita sermo et doctis probabilis et planus imperitis erit. Haec eloquendi observatio.
Nam rerum perspicuitas quo modo praestanda sit, diximus in praeceptis narrationis.
Similis autem ratio est omnibus. Nam si neque pauciora quam oportet neque plura neque
inordinata aut indistincta dixerimus, erunt dilucida et negligenter quoque audientibus
aperta (VIII, 2, 22).