Read on Twitter
In beginning Greek, you're told the prepositions προς & εις along with the dative case can all mean 'to'. This is a classic example of how unhelpful English-priority Greek teaching can be.
What do we miss when we focus on translation equivalents in English? A quick thread:
What do we miss when we focus on translation equivalents in English? A quick thread:
Can they all be translated as 'to' in English? Sure. But this doesnt mean they're synonymous! Many students will see this & think it's another confusing example fixed by memorizing 19 diff glosses.
In fact, most students will memorize a bad flashcard & never think twice about it! But is there a reason for the alternation despite the shared gloss 'to'? Let's dig a little bit & see what we find.
One answer has been suggested by Joanne Stolk (2020). She points out that the choice between προς & εις with verbs of motion or transference in post-classical Greek is related to animacy (e.g. people vs things).
When the theme (object undergoing motion) and the recipient are both animate, we normally find either the Dative (normal) or προς.
[αυτόν] ανέπεμψα σοι (Phil 12)
"I sent him to you"
Εδοκιμάσαμεν παραγενέσθαι...προς σε (TM 2029)
"We decided to come to you"
[αυτόν] ανέπεμψα σοι (Phil 12)
"I sent him to you"
Εδοκιμάσαμεν παραγενέσθαι...προς σε (TM 2029)
"We decided to come to you"
Why both? Fuzziness. προς is becoming more frequent (as many prepositions are!), & the boundaries are becoming less discrete as the Dative dies (it's replaced completely by the Byzantine period, cf. Luraghi 2003).
One distinction that does remain in PCG: προς is used only w/ sending verbs for *people while the Dative is still used for both (Danove 2007). As προς evolves, the overlap between it and the dying Dative gets messier and the data reflects it.
So we have at least one reason for alternation between προς & the dative, even though both can be glossed 'to'.
What about προς and εις? Stolk notes that when the goal is inanimate ('I sent Larry to Nashville'), we normally find εις instead of προς.
What about προς and εις? Stolk notes that when the goal is inanimate ('I sent Larry to Nashville'), we normally find εις instead of προς.
For example:
Εδοκιμάσαμεν παραγενέσθαι εις Φιλαδέλφειαν προς σε (TM 2029)
"We decided to come to Philadelphia to you"
ἔρχονται οἱ ἄγγελοι εἰς Γαβαα πρὸς Σαουλ (1 Sam 8:4)
"The messengers came to Gaba to Saul"
Εδοκιμάσαμεν παραγενέσθαι εις Φιλαδέλφειαν προς σε (TM 2029)
"We decided to come to Philadelphia to you"
ἔρχονται οἱ ἄγγελοι εἰς Γαβαα πρὸς Σαουλ (1 Sam 8:4)
"The messengers came to Gaba to Saul"
Notice in both examples how motion toward an inanimate goal (a city) is coded with εις while motion toward an animate goal (a person) is coded by προς.
What does this mean for the choice between προς and εις?
What does this mean for the choice between προς and εις?
It means with certain verbs (e.g. motion, transference), the choice was motivated by semantic features like animacy that correlate with broader changes in the preposition's semantic network. Speakers had an intuitive knowledge of this (including Paul above!) & write accordingly.
Excessive focus on English glosses controlled by an obsession on neat grammatical categorization ('indirect object') can actually obscure this. We need to evaluate the data without relying so heavily on the standard lexicons, choosing instead to do our own 'fieldwork' first.
There's much, much more to say and more data to look at. But this is only a brief sketch of why we need:
(1) A complete overhaul of how we analyze prepositional semantics,
(2) A complete overhaul of the English-priority, gloss-based system we teach them with, and
(1) A complete overhaul of how we analyze prepositional semantics,
(2) A complete overhaul of the English-priority, gloss-based system we teach them with, and
(3) A complete overhaul of how we evaluate synchronic data in NT (languages evolve!).
This isnt even to mention the extra layer of confusion for students for whom English is an L2. Imagine having to sift through English glosses to understand Greek prepositions only to discover..
This isnt even to mention the extra layer of confusion for students for whom English is an L2. Imagine having to sift through English glosses to understand Greek prepositions only to discover..
the glosses actually obscure meaning!
We need to do all we can to create the best, non-English-centric resources possible. We also need to consider how sound methodology helps us do more than understand data: it helps us love our student-neighbor in the world church too.
We need to do all we can to create the best, non-English-centric resources possible. We also need to consider how sound methodology helps us do more than understand data: it helps us love our student-neighbor in the world church too.
