Cover not available
Part of
Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics
Edited by Agnieszka Piskorska
[Figurative Thought and Language 8] 2020
► pp. 95–119

Chapter 4
The Greek connective gar

Different genres, different effects?

 | St. Mellitus College, UK | SIL International
Traditional accounts of the Greek connective gar offer an inadequate causal definition, while multiplying descriptive categories. Linguistic accounts have paid little attention to the role of gar in different kinds of communication. This article proposes a relevance-theoretic procedural explanation which provides a unifying cognitive explanation for gar’s communicative role. Gar indicates that the premise it introduces is relevant in relation to a previously communicated claim, which, when combined with implicit assumptions, it strengthens. This strengthening may work itself out differently in diverse kinds of communication: typically, as confirmation in argumentation, and explanation in narrative. Perceived differences in stylistic effects sometimes associated with gar are attributable not to multiple functions, but to recognition of differing communicator goals in narrative and argumentation.
Keywords: cognitive effect of strengthening, persuasion, connectives, gar, Koine Greek, argumentation, narrative, procedural marker, New Testament, epistemic vigilance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Traditional and linguistic accounts of gar
  • 3.Argumentation and narrative
    • 3.1Defining argumentation and narrative
    • 3.2Gar in argumentation and narrative
  • 4.A procedural account of gar
    • 4.1Blass’s proposed account of gar
    • 4.2Examples of gar in argumentation and hortatory material
    • 4.3Gar in narrative texts
  • 5.Different stylistic effects?
  • 6.Epistemic vigilance and stylistic effects?
  • 7.Communicator goals, expectations of relevance and stylistic effects
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.8.04cas
References (22)
References
Bakker, S. (2009). On the curious combination of the particles γάρ and οὖν. In S. Bakker, & G. Wakker (Eds.), Discourse cohesion in ancient Greek (pp. 40–61). Leiden: E. J. Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, W., Danker, F. W., Arndt, W. F., & Wilbur Gingrich, F. (Eds.). (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature, 3rd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, S. (2002). Sentence conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.Google Scholar
Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Blass, R. (1998). Constraints on relevance in Koine Greek in the Pauline letters. Unpublished paper presented at SIL Exegetical Seminar, Nairobi, 29th May to 19th June, 1993.Google Scholar
(2005). Manipulation in the speeches and writings of Hitler and the NSDAP. In L. De Saussure, & P. Schulz (Eds.), Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century (pp. 169–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Jong, I. (1997). Γάρ introducing embedded narratives. In A. Rijksbaron (Ed.), New approaches to Greek particles, ASCP 7 (pp. 175–185). Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. (1934). The Greek particles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinsohn, S. (2000). Discourse features of New Testament Greek. A coursebook on the information structure of New Testament Greek. 2nd ed. Dallas: SIL International.Google Scholar
Runge, S. (2010). A discourse grammar of New Testament Greek. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrikson Publishers.Google Scholar
Slings, S. (1997). Adversative relators between PUSH and POP. In A. Rijksbaron (Ed.), New approaches to Greek particles (pp.101–129). Amsterdam J. C. Gieben. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. (2001). An evolutionary perspective on testimony and argumentation. Philosophical Topics 29:401–413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., Clément, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, O., Mercier, H., Origgi, G. & Wilson, D. (2010). Epistemic Vigilance. Mind & Language, 25, 359–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thrall, M. (1962). Greek particles in the New Testament. New Testament tools and studies III. Leiden: E. J. Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unger, C. (2002). Global coherence, narrative structure and expectations of relevance. Paper presented at the conference Relevance Theory and Literature, University of Huddersfield, 12th-13th September, 2002.Google Scholar
(2012). Epistemic vigilance and the function of procedural indicators in communication and comprehension. In E. Wałaszewska, & A. Piskorska (Eds.), Relevance theory: More than understanding (pp. 45–73). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. (2011). The conceptual-procedural distinction: Past, present and future. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti, & A. Ahern (Eds.), Procedural meaning: Problems and perspectives (pp. 3–26). Emerald Group Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Modality and the conceptual-procedural distinction. In E. Wałaszewska, & A. Piskorska (Eds.), Relevance theory: More than understanding (pp. 23–43). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Wright, N. T. (2013). Paul and the faithfulness of God. Parts I-IV, vol. 2. Christian Origins and the Question of God 4. London: SPCK.Google Scholar
Zakowski, S. (2016). She was twelve years old: on γάρ and Mark 5:42. University of Ghent. [URL].Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Piskorska, Agnieszka
2023. Has madam read Wilson (2016)?. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 33:3 ► pp. 486 ff. DOI logo
Kroeger, Paul
2022. “For She Loved Much”: Reason Clauses in Translation. Journal of Translation 18:1 ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.