Hughson T. Ong, «An Evaluation of the Aramaic Greek Language Criteria in Historical Jesus Research: a Sociolinguistic Study of Mark 14,32-65.», Vol. 25 (2012) 37-55
Did Jesus ever speak in Greek? This is the question I have sought to answer in this paper. Using M. Casey’s Aramaic and S.E. Porter’s Greek hypotheses as my starting point, I attempt to show based on sociolinguistic principles that Jesus must have been fluent and would have used Greek and Aramaic in his daily conversation with various audiences in different linguistic situations and contexts. Specifically, I show that the sociolinguistic situation in the three chronological episodes of Mark 14,32-65 necessitates a code-switch on Jesus’ part by virtue of his multilingual environment.
An Evaluation of the Aramaic and Greek Language Criteria... 45
Three fields of disciplines —sociology, social psychology, and anthropol-
ogy— have all shown that the native tongue is typically used in family
or intimate social settings, while the second language is used in a more
public and formal situation41.
3. Language Use in a Multilingual Society
Depending on the social context, individuals can ask for or give in-
formation to their conversation partners by exploiting either similar or
different language styles “for the satisfaction of needs, attainment of goals
or consensual validation of attitudes and values”42. Jesus used the com-
mands “Go, call your husband and come back” (John 4,16) and “Go, wash
in the Pool of Siloam” (John 9,7a) with different goals and intentions,
even though both are similarly imperatival statements that use the verb
ὑπάγω. The former was probably employed to invoke a response from the
Samaritan woman, whereas the latter was a straightforward command—
the command was at once carried out to completion (John 9,7b). As we
will see shortly, an utterance often gives information and conveys feelings
simultaneously43. Following this basic principle, sociolinguists typically
seek to investigate three major areas of interests.
First, sociolinguists investigate different types of linguistic symbols
(e.g. vocabulary, grammar, language choice and styles) that are used to
express and reflect social factors44. Second, the participants, the social
setting, as well as the topic and purpose of interaction are also matters
of extreme importance to sociolinguists. “And the reasons for the choice
of one dialect [or language] rather than another involve the same kind
of considerations”45. Accordingly, in any multilingual society there are
a variety of codes46 that are being used that form a kind of “repertoire”
41
For more details on this, see H. Ong, “Language Choice in Ancient Palestine: A
Sociolinguistics Study Based on Four ‘I Have Come' Sayings”, Biblical and Ancient Greek
Linguistics 1 (2012) 63-101.
42
H. Tajfel, Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (Cambridge 1982) 15.
43
I have used utterance here as “any stretch of talk, by one person, before and after
which there is silence on the part of the person.” Lyons, Introduction, 172.
44
Holmes, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 4.
45
Holmes, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 6.
46
The term “code” is taken from information theory, and it “can be used to refer to any
kind of system that two or more people employ for communication”. Sociolinguists find the
term more neutral in comparison to the terms dialect, language, or style. Wardhaugh, An
Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 88.