Chrys C. Caragounis - Jan Van der Watt, «A Grammatical Analysis of John 1,1», Vol. 21 (2008) 91-138
This article is a pilot study on the feasibility of investigating the grammar, both in terms of words and sentences, of the Gospel according to John in a systematic manner. The reason is that in general the commentaries and even specialized articles have different foci, inter alia, focusing on the historical nature or the theological and literary aspects that the Gospel is so well-known for. In surveys of commentaries on the Gospel it becomes apparent that real grammatical studies are far and few between, and that there is a tendency among commentators to copy grammatical material from one another. More often than not, grammatical issues are simply ignored and the unsuspecting and trusting reader will not even realize that there is a dangerous dungeon of grammatical problems lurking beneath the surface of the text. Apart from that, the significance of grammatical decisions are often underestimated in studies of John’s Gospel.
129
A Grammatical Analysis of John 1,1
more and no less than God. The rest of the book will be concerned with a
person whose identity is Θεός†(not ὠΘεός nor Θεός τις!).
4. Considering the possibilities in light of socio-linguistic and theolo-
gical considerations
Jan v.d. Watt: While considering the grammar of words and even of
sentences, it became clear once more that interpretation of sentences is
not just a mathematical procedure in which the sum of the grammar
of words or sentences are added together156. It is an integrated process
in which all the different aspects should be interpreted in relation with
each other so that a balanced conclusion may be reached. The problems
discussed above will now be considered in context of the Gospel of John,
both socio-linguistically and theologically.
a) The use of the phrase á¼Î½ á¼€Ïχῇ
We have seen above that for several reasons the noun in 1a (á¼Î½ á¼€Ïχῇ)
should be read as definite and does not need an article. This seems to be
supported by the context and theology of this Gospel. The expression
points to location in time: at the point of the beginning of time the λόγος
was already there. This implies pre-existence. The idea of pre-existence is
confirmed in the rest of this Gospel (8,57-58; 17,5, 24)157.
Chrys C. Caragounis: We have seen that in Greek usage it is not pos-
sible to distinguish between the anarthrous á¼Î½ á¼€Ïχῇ and the arthrous á¼Î½
τῇ á¼€Ïχῇ and to ascribe an indefinte meaning to the first while ascribing
a definite meaning to the second. In manuscript tradition, too, the two
phrases occur sometimes as varia lectiones and both seems to be saying
the same thing. In Neohellenic, which renders the ancient dative with εἰς
+ acc. (στὴν á¼€Ïχήν) the phrase contains the article, but semantically it
is equivalent to á¼Î½ á¼€Ïχῇ. It thus appears that the phrase has crystallized
into a set phrase, a temporal adverb—if you like—where the question of
definite and indefinite is irrelevant.
Of theological significance is the fact that á¼Î½ á¼€Ïχῇ recalls the story
of creation (Gen 1,1). Yet it is even more important to note that the
beginning that John speaks of goes temporally further back than “the
beginning†of Gen 1,1. For John the Logos was already in existence at
Functionalist grammarians believe that sentences get their meaning from the con-
156
texts within which they are produced. See Riddell, Language, (see n. 1), 430.
Schnackenburg, John, (see n. 10), 232; Bultmann, Johannes, (see n. 13), 15. Barrett,
157
John, (see n. 16), 152.
FOLLOW US