Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Latinisms in mark
#1
I am presently in a discussion here
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1494446#post1494446">http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php? ... ost1494446</a><!-- m -->
regarding the presence of latinisms in Marks gospel.
Before I respond I thought I might throw the topic open here.

Originally the topic was raised here
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=78328&perpage=25&pagenumber=1">http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php? ... genumber=1</a><!-- m -->

where it was pointed out that the latin word for pratorium is transliterated in Mark 15:16.
The word for denarius is transliterated in 6:37 even though the coins at use in Judea were shekels and prutahs.
When Jesus is whipped in Mark 15:15 we find a translation of the latin flagellare but in Matt 27:26 we find a transliteration of the greek flagellow rather than the latin flagellare. (although it seems curious anyone would suggest Matt was written in Latin).

Any thoughts on these latinisms" particularly in Mark?
Reply
#2
Shlama Akhi Michael,

These are not "Latinisms" (whatever that means!) - these are merely Latin loan-words in Aramaic. What do these people expect the Aramaic-speaking communities in the Roman empire to do?

Make up their own names for the official coins used by the empire?

Make up their own names for the soldier ranks used by the empire?

Make up their own names for the Praetorium? That WAS it's name, wasn't it?

If I call you on the phone and tell you that I enjoyed a taco and burrito lunch today, does that mean that I spoke to you in Spanish?

C'MON!!!

These "Internet Infidels" are nothing more than children parading themselves as pseudo-intellectuals. This is just about the most ridiculous argument that they could make.

Did the Greeks make up their own name for the Field of Blood?

Did the Romans make up their own name for Golgotha?

Did the Greeks make up their own name for "Strong Drink" (Shakira) ??? (Luke 1:15)

Did the Romans make up their own name for the Sabbath? (Matthew 12:10)

How about "Pascha" (Luke 2:41), the Greeks couldn't make up a word like the English people did......"Passover"?

How about these following Aramaic words in the Greek texts.......???????????

Lebonthah (frankincense, Matthew 2:11)
Mammona (Luke 16:9)
Wai (Woe! Matthew 23:13)
Rabbi (Matthew 23:7,8)
Beelzebub (Luke 11:15)
Qorban (Mark 7:11)
Satana (Luke 10:18)
cammuna (cummin, Matt 23:23)
raca (a term of contempt Matthew 5:22)
korin (a dry measure, between 10-12 bushels, Luke 16:7)
zezneh (tares, Matthew 13:25)
Boanerges (Mark 3:17)

....and Amen, which appears about 100 times in the Greek text of the Gospels.

Why is it that nobody talks about these Aramaic words in the Greek manuscripts?

Why don't you extend these infidels a kind invitation over here so we could have some fun at their expense? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#3
Thanks Paul,
Of course as this kind of thing has been discussed before I see the sense in what you say. It is kinda obvious, but I thought I would throw it open any way.
Curiously , as I mentioned, the claim is even made that the trajectory of Matti goes from latin(??) to greek to aramaic??!!
What do you think of the suggestion that Matthew transliterates the greek word flagellow (?) rather than the latind word flagelere in Matti 27?
Reply
#4
Shlama Akhi Michael,

I don't know what verse this person is referring to, but in the Peshitta Mattai 27:26 contains the native Aramaic "pragela" - the entry is here from CAL:

Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Wrote:prgl N prgl)
1 CPA,Syr whip
LS2 592
LS2 v: prAgelA)

This word comes from the Aramiac verb:

Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Wrote:prgl V
091 Syr to warn
092 Syr to send a denunciation
093 Syr to stir up
094 Syr to prohibit
095 Syr to hold back
096 Syr to impede
097 Syr to reproach
098 JLATg to whip
121 Syr to be stirred up
122 Syr to be forbidden
123 Syr to be impeded
124 Syr to be reproached
LS2 592

The word also occurs in Yukhanan 2:15, and nobody would argue for a "Latinism" here.

The word is used in several other Aramaic sources, including The Syro-Roman Lawbook (see http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/cgi-bin/showtexts...word=60301)

Akhi, you have to remember that these people do not know enough about the history of Aramaic, and its interaction with and influence on other languages like Greek and Latin. All these languages borrowed heavily from one another.

For instance, the word English word TUNIC, from Latin, entered Latin from Phoenician (through Punic), which in turn had borrowed it from Akkadian, which in turn had borrowed it from Sumerian ("gada", linen), a non-Semitic language of ancient Mesopotamia.

But if you ask any linguist, there is no reason why TUNIC isn't a perfectly Latin word.

Things are not always as simple as they seem when it comes to linguistics. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#5
Shalom Paul!


About what you said in this post, someone told me extamente this:



His argument becomes a bit weak, because although I believe Semitic origin in the New Testament, the terms in Aramaic transliterated Greek letters prove that Mark, for example, was written in Aramaic, the Latin words transliterated into Greek letters also prove that Mark was written in Latin.


And now brother Paul?
Reply
#6
BenEfraym Wrote:Shalom Paul!


About what you said in this post, someone told me extamente this:



His argument becomes a bit weak, because although I believe Semitic origin in the New Testament, the terms in Aramaic transliterated Greek letters prove that Mark, for example, was written in Aramaic, the Latin words transliterated into Greek letters also prove that Mark was written in Latin.


And now brother Paul?

Shalom Ben,

Our proof is not only Aramaic words transliterated into Greek, if that was it we would have a very weak case.

Our proof is mistranslations in Greek based on the Aramaic. Makes sense ?

Ask your friend if there are any mistranslations in the Aramaic that can be explained by a Latin original. Wait for an answer.

+Shamasha
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)