The seventeen essays of this volume, edited by S. E. Porter and A. W. Pitts, both from McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ontario, treat matters pertaining to the Greek language, and to linguistics more generally. The first seven essays are grouped under the heading “Context.” Jonathan M. Watt explores implications of bilingualism for NT exegesis, explaining, for example, the use of the foreign word raka in Matt 5:22. Stanley E. Porter discusses a mosaic found at Antioch-on-the-Orontes that personifies four temporal conceptions, concluding that at least some Greeks thought of time as past, present, future, and enduring, indicated by a variety of forms. Rodney J. Decker investigates the Markan idiolect, emphasizing the need for caution “not to over-draw conclusions based on ostensible idiosyncrasies of Mark’s Greek” (p. 61), the need for “grammars” of each of the NT authors, the relevance of idiolect to textual criticism, the relevance of Mark’s idiolect for discussions of the Synoptic problem, and the nature of Mark’s Greek as non-literary. Frederick W. Danker investigates the alleged Pauline and Lukan christological disparity and concludes the two authors “share common ground in celebrating God as the Supreme Benefactor and Jesus Christ as the Great Benefactor, with Paul as envoy in the service of both with a message of salvation” (p. 90). Sean A. Adams critiques Albert Wifstrand’s application of Atticism to first century texts, suggesting that influences on first century authors should be treated as “classicism”; he builds on the work of Loveday Alexander in developing the concept of register, including the concept of genre as influencing the choice of register which in turn “dictates the selection of dialect within a piece of writing” (p. 111). Fredrick J. Long investigates the reality of Roman imperial rule under the authority of Jupiter/Zeus in an attempt to understand Eph 2:2, concluding that readers would “naturally equate” the phrases “the age of this world” and “the ruler of the authority of the air” to the emperor and Jupiter/Zeus (p. 153). In the longest essay of the volume (67 pp.), Jan Henrik Nylund describes “The Prague School of Linguistics and Its Influence on New Testament Language Studies” (pp. 155–221), which was established in the 1920s by Vilém Mathesius, and exemplified by the work of J. Zubatý, R. Jakobson, N. Trubetzkoy, B. Trnka, S. Kercevskij, and others (more recently J. R. Firth of the London School and M. Halliday). Its main achievements are the vindication of the synthetic approach, the emphasis on the prevailingly systemic character of language, and the emphasis on the function performed by language (as summarized by J. Vachek in 1972; p. 185); the influence of the Prague School is identified in the linguistic work of E. Nida, D. Hill, G. Mussies, D. Hellholm, J. P. Louw, especially S. E. Porter, and others (pp. 208–20), especially regarding the concepts of structural/functional perspectives, focus on actual language use, differentiation of tense and aspect, markedness/prominence, foregrounding, and discourse analysis.

Four essays explore the history of the Greek language. Jonathan M. Watt provides “A Brief History of Ancient Greek with a View to the New Testament,” discussing the classical dialects, the triumph of fourth century Attic, the Koine of the Hellenistic period, the multilingual realities in Jewish Palestine and Egypt (the work of M. Hengel is curiously absent from Watt’s bibliography), and the choice of Greek by the NT authors. Christopher Land’s essay “Varieties of Greek Language” covers ground familiar from other essays. Andrew W. Pitts investigates the Greek case in the Hellenistic and Byzantine grammarians (the Stoics, Dionysius Trax, Apollonius Dyscolus, Georgius Choeroboscus, Maximus Planudes). John A. L. Lee describes the Atticist grammarians, in particular Phrynichus, Moeris, and other sources; he argues that the phenomenon of Atticism was well under way in the first century, with Atticistic features appearing in the NT, notably in Luke.

Six essays discuss various aspects of “Development” (presumably the development of concepts of Greek linguistics in terms of their relevance for the NT). Andrew W. Pitts compares Greek word order and clause structure in the NT, concluding that “there seem to be several standard patterns, but they vary in levels of codification according discourse type, register and authorship variation” (p. 341), with implications for markedness determinations (p. 346). Rodney J. Decker investigates the function of the imperfect tense in Mark, concluding that the functions of the tense-forms should carry greater weight. Paul Danove compares the usages of δίδωμι and δίδωμι compounds in the Septuagint and NT, describing eight distinctive usages: transference to a goal, transference terminating in a locative, delegation to a goal, delegation terminating in a locative (LXX only), benefaction, transformation, disposition, and initial motion from a source for a benefactive. Francis Gignac describes grammatical developments of Greek in Roman Egypt, as represented in the papyri, which are significant for the NT in the areas of phonology, morphology, and syntax. Stanley E. Porter and Andrew W. Pitts discuss the development, form, function, and syntax of the disclosure formula (expression of the author’s desire that the audience know something) in the epistolary papyri, concluding that the implications for understanding the formula “are significant, especially with respect to emphasis, structure, and prepositional modification” (p. 438), which are, however, not spelled out. Finally, Beth M. Stovell writes about “Seeing the Kingdom of God, Seeing Eternal Life: Comparing Cohesion and Prominence in John 3 and the Apocryphal Gospels in Terms of Metaphor Use,” describing similarities and differences as regards cohesion and prominence in metaphor.

The volume informs competently about a host of linguistic theories and facts that pertain to the Greek language. The volume reads like a topic Festschrift (which it is not)—the various essays are loosely connected, with some essays being more pertinent and more technical than others (e.g., the essays of Danker and Long certainly contribute to a better understanding of NT texts and concepts, but are less relevant for understanding the Greek language of the NT). Some essays would have to be taken into consideration by an author writing a new grammar of NT Greek, others not so much. Reading this book does not improve one’s Greek language skills, but it will certainly, and helpfully, call into question any facile reference to “rules” that govern the Greek of the NT.

---