ἵνα clause word order

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

I am looking for examples of constituents of an ἵνα which are placed before ἵνα. I seem to recall a statement made here that this is common but I can't find any reference to this in Smyth or Cooper. It happens in the New Testament.
Last edited by C. S. Bartholomew on Thu Oct 23, 2014 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by mwh »

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:It happens in the New Testament.
Interesting, and something I wasn't aware of. Could you give instances?

It's extremely rare in classical prose, and I didn't know it happened in koine at all.

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

mwh wrote:
C. S. Bartholomew wrote:It happens in the New Testament.
Interesting, and something I wasn't aware of. Could you give instances?

It's extremely rare in classical prose, and I didn't know it happened in koine at all.
Perhaps I am confusing it with constituents of a relative clause in front of the relative pronoun. That is not so unusual?

Here are some ἵνα clause samples:

2 Cor 2:4
ἐκ γὰρ πολλῆς θλίψεως καὶ συνοχῆς καρδίας ἔγραψα ὑμῖν διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, οὐχ ἵνα λυπηθῆτε ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀγάπην ἵνα γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω περισσοτέρως εἰς ὑμᾶς.

(SBLG) Acts 22:5
ὡς καὶ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς μαρτυρεῖ μοι
καὶ πᾶν τὸ πρεσβυτέριον·
παρʼ ὧν καὶ ἐπιστολὰς δεξάμενος πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς
εἰς Δαμασκὸν ἐπορευόμην
ἄξων καὶ τοὺς ἐκεῖσε ὄντας
δεδεμένους εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ
ἵνα τιμωρηθῶσιν.


Bezae D 05 Acts 22:5 (Cambridge Bezae)

ως και ⸆ αρχιερευς μαρτυρησει μοι
και ολον το πρεσβυτεριον
παρ ων επιστολας δεξαμενος παρα των αδελφω(ν)
εις δαμασκον επορευομην
αξων και τους εκει οντας
δεδεμενους εν ϊερουσαλημ
ϊνα τειμωρηθωσιν

In Rius-Camps, Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, Message of Acts in Codex Bezae v.4 p219, the authors consider εν ϊερουσαλημ a constituent of the ϊνα clause.


Gal. 2:9 καὶ γνόντες τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι, Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας, ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήν· 10 μόνον τῶν πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν, ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι.

The Acts example appears to be contingent on Codex Bezae reading εν ϊερουσαλημ.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by mwh »

Thanks a lot. I might have guessed it was Paul, with his forceful grammar-bending Greek. It's a matter of salience, of course, or would you explain otherwise? The Galatians example displays that μονον earlier discussed too. ?Significant that in both cases the ινα is a second ινα, arguably not necessary for the syntax (certainly not in 2Cor.), and is slipped in directly before the verb (as well as behind the noun thereby highlighted, of course).

The Acts sentence surely doesn't count. ινα begins the clause, and in cod.Byz. εν will be just a mistake for εις.

The only classical example I can reciprocate with—though I don't believe it's the only one—I steal from LSJ: Pl.Charm.169d, where we find καγω ημιν ινα ο λογος προιοι, ειπον· (This is the OCT punctuation, which strikes me as odd, since καγω is the subject of ειπον.) LSJ cite this as exemplifying "sometimes preceded by an emphatic word," which is what you'd expect, and the prepositioning would be understandable here as bringing the emphatic pronouns together — but I wonder. I wonder whether this ημιν is rather unemphatic, a virtual enclitic (or even a real one), and so tucks itself into that least prominent of positions, thereby deferring the ινα. Then it would mean "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:", which seems to me a whole lot better in context than "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:" That may even be what the OCT punctuation implies by not putting comma after καγω. (Burnet was a reader of Plato second to none, as I've said in print.) But while LSJ is not perfect, I always hesitate to disagree with it.

Michael

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

mwh wrote: The only classical example I can reciprocate with—though I don't believe it's the only one—I steal from LSJ: Pl.Charm.169d, where we find καγω ημιν ινα ο λογος προιοι, ειπον· (This is the OCT punctuation, which strikes me as odd, since καγω is the subject of ειπον.) LSJ cite this as exemplifying "sometimes preceded by an emphatic word," which is what you'd expect, and the prepositioning would be understandable here as bringing the emphatic pronouns together — but I wonder. I wonder whether this ημιν is rather unemphatic, a virtual enclitic (or even a real one), and so tucks itself into that least prominent of positions, thereby deferring the ινα. Then it would mean "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:", which seems to me a whole lot better in context than "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:" That may even be what the OCT punctuation implies by not putting comma after καγω. (Burnet was a reader of Plato second to none, as I've said in print.) But while LSJ is not perfect, I always hesitate to disagree with it.

Michael
Assuming for the sake of convenience that editors correctly placed the commas I looked through Thucydides and Xenophon without finding any examples. This is kind of circular since the editors would presume that ινα was in front. The thread on b-greek[1] has turned up some more New Testament examples:

John 13.29b ἀγόρασον ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν, ἢ τοῖς πτωχοῖς ἵνα τι δῷ.

Acts 19.4 εἶπεν δὲ Παῦλος· Ἰωάννης ἐβάπτισεν βάπτισμα μετανοίας, τῷ λαῷ λέγων εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτὸν ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν, τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν.

1 Cor. 9.15 (MS C al) καλὸν γάρ μοι μᾶλλον ἀποθανεῖν ἢ τὸ καύχημά μου ἵνα τις κενώσει.

Col. 4.16 καὶ ὅταν ἀναγνωσθῇ παρ’ ὑμῖν ἡ ἐπιστολή, ποιήσατε ἵνα καὶ ἐν τῇ Λαοδικαίων ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀναγνωσθῇ, καὶ τὴν ἐκ Λαοδικείας ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀναγνῶτε.

Rev 13.13 (M-K text) καὶ ποιεῖ σημεῖα μεγάλα, καὶ πῦρ ἵνα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνῃ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀνθρώπων

Posted by Tony Pope (SIL)

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/vie ... 31a#p17517
C. Stirling Bartholomew

cb
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 762
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by cb »

hi, some of these look like variations on prolepsis, the so-called "lilies of the field" construction - see in particular smyth s2182(d), where the object of a subordinate clause can be brought into the main clause, eg Herodotus 3.130 εἰρώτα ὁ Δαρεῖος τὴν τέχνην εἰ ἐπίσταιτο:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 7:id=s2182

a search for prolepsis in other grammars should bring up more e.g.s (there are different types of prolepsis...). i don't know about NT usage... cheers, chad

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

cb wrote:hi, some of these look like variations on prolepsis, the so-called "lilies of the field" construction - see in particular smyth s2182(d), where the object of a subordinate clause can be brought into the main clause, eg Herodotus 3.130 εἰρώτα ὁ Δαρεῖος τὴν τέχνην εἰ ἐπίσταιτο:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 7:id=s2182

a search for prolepsis in other grammars should bring up more e.g.s (there are different types of prolepsis...). i don't know about NT usage... cheers, chad
It took a while to find this in Cooper (no index!). He treats it under "Anticipation of the Subject" (V2 p595ff §61.6.0). He states that this is rare in final sentences §61.6.5 and he gives two examples with ὅπως but no examples with ἵνα.

Thucydides 3,51,2,4

Νικίου τοῦ Νικηράτου στρατηγοῦντος ἐστράτευσαν ἐπὶ Μι-
νῴαν τὴν νῆσον, ἣ κεῖται πρὸ Μεγάρων· ἐχρῶντο δὲ αὐτῇ
πύργον ἐνοικοδομήσαντες οἱ Μεγαρῆς φρουρίῳ. ἐβούλετο
δὲ Νικίας τὴν φυλακὴν αὐτόθεν δι' ἐλάσσονος τοῖς Ἀθη-
ναίοις καὶ μὴ ἀπὸ τοῦ Βουδόρου καὶ τῆς Σαλαμῖνος εἶναι,
τούς τε Πελοποννησίους, ὅπως μὴ ποιῶνται ἔκπλους αὐτόθεν
λανθάνοντες τριήρων τε, οἷον καὶ τὸ πρὶν γενόμενον, καὶ
λῃστῶν ἐκπομπαῖς, τοῖς τε Μεγαρεῦσιν ἅμα μηδὲν ἐσπλεῖν.

Isocrates orat. 4 §78, line 2

Τούτων δ' ἦν
αἴτιον, ὅτι τοὺς νόμους ἐσκόπουν ὅπως ἀκριβῶς καὶ καλῶς
ἕξουσιν, οὐχ οὕτω τοὺς περὶ τῶν ἰδίων συμβολαίων ὡς τοὺς
περὶ τῶν καθ' ἑκάστην τὴν ἡμέραν ἐπιτηδευμάτων· ἠπίς-
ταντο γὰρ ὅτι τοῖς καλοῖς κἀγαθοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲν
δεήσει πολλῶν γραμμάτων, ἀλλ' ἀπ' ὀλίγων συνθημάτων
ῥᾳδίως καὶ περὶ τῶν ἰδίων καὶ περὶ τῶν κοινῶν ὁμονοήσου-
σιν.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

mwh wrote: The only classical example I can reciprocate with—though I don't believe it's the only one—I steal from LSJ: Pl.Charm.169d, where we find καγω ημιν ινα ο λογος προιοι, ειπον· (This is the OCT punctuation, which strikes me as odd, since καγω is the subject of ειπον.) LSJ cite this as exemplifying "sometimes preceded by an emphatic word," which is what you'd expect, and the prepositioning would be understandable here as bringing the emphatic pronouns together — but I wonder. I wonder whether this ημιν is rather unemphatic, a virtual enclitic (or even a real one), and so tucks itself into that least prominent of positions, thereby deferring the ινα. Then it would mean "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:", which seems to me a whole lot better in context than "And I, to move our discussion forward, said:" That may even be what the OCT punctuation implies by not putting comma after καγω. (Burnet was a reader of Plato second to none, as I've said in print.) But while LSJ is not perfect, I always hesitate to disagree with it.

Michael
Here is some context.

Plato Char. page 169, section d,

ἅτε οὖν εὐδοκιμῶν ἑκάστοτε, ᾐσχύνετο τοὺς παρόντας, καὶ οὔτε συγχω-
ρῆσαί μοι ἤθελεν ἀδύνατος εἶναι διελέσθαι ἃ προυκαλούμην
αὐτόν, ἔλεγέν τε οὐδὲν σαφές, ἐπικαλύπτων τὴν ἀπορίαν.
κἀγὼ ἡμῖν ἵνα ὁ λόγος προΐοι, εἶπον· Ἀλλ' εἰ δοκεῖ, ὦ
Κριτία, νῦν μὲν τοῦτο συγχωρήσωμεν, δυνατὸν εἶναι γενέ-
σθαι ἐπιστήμην ἐπιστήμης· αὖθις δὲ ἐπισκεψόμεθα εἴτε
οὕτως ἔχει εἴτε μή. ἴθι δὴ οὖν, εἰ ὅτι μάλιστα δυνατὸν
τοῦτο, τί μᾶλλον οἷόν τέ ἐστιν εἰδέναι ἅ τέ τις οἶδε καὶ ἃ
μή;
C. Stirling Bartholomew

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by mwh »

Thanks for providing Tony Pope’s bunch of NT ινα’s, which are interesting. They all show distinctly post-classical usage (non-final), and show ινα well on the way to becoming the all-purpose να of modern Greek.

As for the the Isoc. and Thuc. examples, in both of them οπως is the first word of its clause. You were looking for constituents of a ινα clause placed before the ινα (now extended to οπως). These are not examples of that, but rather of what chad referred to as prolepsis, ordinary Greek (well, not so ordinary in Thuc's case). All the constituents of the οπως clause follow the οπως. (Plus the Isoc. is not a final clause, nb fut.indic.)

Anyone have any views on the Charmides passage, with its unusual word order? Is ημιν emphatic (so LSJ), or is it functioning as an enclitic, occupying the Wackernagel slot (as I suggest above)?

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

mwh wrote:

As for the the Isoc. and Thuc. examples, in both of them οπως is the first word of its clause. You were looking for constituents of a ινα clause placed before the ινα (now extended to οπως). These are not examples of that, but rather of what chad referred to as prolepsis, ordinary Greek (well, not so ordinary in Thuc's case). All the constituents of the οπως clause follow the οπως.
Agreed, I was reading the section in Cooper dealing with "anticipation" in final clauses which isn't what we are looking for with ινα. Anticipation isn't a matter of fronting but it could be confused as such in some cases.
C. Stirling Bartholomew

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

Josephus AJ 7.237
[237] ἔτι δὲ τῶν μὲν πλειόνων ἵνα μὴ κρατηθῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν σὺν Ἰωάβῳ καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ στρατηγοῖς ὄντων ὀλίγων, αἰσχύνην γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῦτο εἶναι μεγίστην, τῶν δὲ Δαυίδου στρατιωτῶν ἵνα τοσούτων μυριάδων κρατήσωσι φιλοτιμουμένων, ἔρις ἐγένετο καρτερά, καὶ νικῶσιν οἱ Δαυίδου ῥώμῃ τε προύχοντες καὶ τῇ τῶν πολεμικῶν ἐπιστήμῃ.

Those also that were the most numerous were solicitous that they might not be conquered by those few that were with Joab, and with the other commanders, because that would be the greater disgrace to them; while David's soldiers strove greatly to overcome so many ten thousands as the enemy had with them.
— W. Whiston
There is no verb prior to ἵνα. Does that suggest that the ἵνα clause is not subordinate?
C. Stirling Bartholomew

C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1259
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by C. S. Bartholomew »

mwh wrote:Thanks for providing Tony Pope’s bunch of NT ινα’s, which are interesting. They all show distinctly post-classical usage (non-final), and show ινα well on the way to becoming the all-purpose να of modern Greek.
To evaluate that claim I had to haul out M. Sim 2006[1] a dissertation on NT ἵνα, read all the grammars both Attic and NT. Finally discovered the most concise treatment was the last place I would look for questions of syntax, Danker's 3d Edition aka BDAG (2nd BADG 1979 will do). From Danker's 3rd you can follow the references to the standard grammars. This will cut down the research time enormously.

What I haven't been able to discover is in what sense Sim 2006 moves us beyond J.H. Moulton Prolegomena a hundred years earlier.

[1] Sim 2006 http://www.sil.org/resources/archives/9504
C. Stirling Bartholomew

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ἵνα clause word order

Post by mwh »

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:Josephus AJ 7.237
[237] ἔτι δὲ τῶν μὲν πλειόνων ἵνα μὴ κρατηθῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν σὺν Ἰωάβῳ καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ στρατηγοῖς ὄντων ὀλίγων, αἰσχύνην γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῦτο εἶναι μεγίστην, τῶν δὲ Δαυίδου στρατιωτῶν ἵνα τοσούτων μυριάδων κρατήσωσι φιλοτιμουμένων, ἔρις ἐγένετο καρτερά, καὶ νικῶσιν οἱ Δαυίδου ῥώμῃ τε προύχοντες καὶ τῇ τῶν πολεμικῶν ἐπιστήμῃ.

Those also that were the most numerous were solicitous that they might not be conquered by those few that were with Joab, and with the other commanders, because that would be the greater disgrace to them; while David's soldiers strove greatly to overcome so many ten thousands as the enemy had with them.
— W. Whiston
There is no verb prior to ἵνα. Does that suggest that the ἵνα clause is not subordinate?
Both ινα clauses are subordinate to φιλοτιμουμενων (gen.abs.).

What a despicable character Josephus was.

Post Reply