What Can I Say? Implications and Communicative Functions of Rhetorical “WH” Questions in Classical Biblical Hebrew Prose

2014 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adina Moshavi

Abstract The rhetorical question is a sentence whose meaning is that of a question, but which is used to indirectly express an assertion. This paper examines content (“WH”) rhetorical questions in classical biblical prose, classifying them according to implications and communicative goals. Rhetorical questions have one of three types of implications: negative, specific, and extreme scalar implications. The content rhetorical question is found to be a versatile conversational device in the Bible, serving a variety of distinct communicative functions which operate on multiple levels. It is directly or indirectly connected to persuasion in most of its uses. The rhetorical question is in essence an intensifier, deriving its force on the higher-level of function from the implication of obviousness. In some cases, however, the choice of a persuasive form of communication rather than a more direct strategy has the effect of mitigation on the superordinate function level.

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-455
Author(s):  
Rebecca S Watson

The interrogative sequence אִם‎ . . . הֲ‎ in Biblical Hebrew can be employed in two forms of disjunctive question. The first offers mutually exclusive questions and the second comprises a rhetorical pair. Close examination of the extant examples reveals no difficulty in distinguishing between these two forms and, further, that, when employed to express a rhetorical question, the double rhetorical sequence אִם‎ . . . הֲ‎ anticipates the answer ‘No’. Careful study of a debated example, Jer. 31.20, confirms that a negative answer is implied here, hence the evidence strongly favours this reading in the other contentious passage, Hab. 3.8. Here, triple rhetorical questions introduced by the interrogative particles אִם‎ . . . אִם‎ . . . הֲ‎ are employed in a motivated interrogative sentence, suggesting that a negative answer is therefore expected.


2019 ◽  
pp. 171-197
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Kuznetsova

The article focuses on the problem of translation of Biblical Hebrew (and some Aramaic) quotes in Sholem Aleichem’s works into Russian.A review of different translations into English and Hebrew is also included to show a broader context. Sholem Aleichem is one of the most frequently translated Yiddish writers and certainly the most translated into Russian, and translators face many peculiar challenges while working on his texts. One of those challenges is the usage of phrases and quotes from various languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Russian, Ukrainian, German, etc.). Each language has its own semantic function, and its presence is vital for comprehensive understanding of the work. Thus, quotes from the sacred texts of Judaism in Tevye the Dairyman have several functions: first of all, they create a comic effect, second, they reveal the protagonist’s relationships with God, and finally, they allow the author to show Tevye’s perception of events in the book without direct naming.The article describes different ways in which linguistic polyphony could be preserved, by analyzing the translations starting from the 1910s, when Sholem Aleichem himself advised the translators regarding the issue, to the Soviet translations that are still in print today. Inseparable from translation matters is the question of interpretation of Tevye as a character: thus,for instance, in the USSR his constant quoting from the Bible was interpreted as anti-clericalism and rebellion against religion.The article explains how different translation strategies influence the characters and the work in general, often simplifying or distorting the original intention.


The three texts of this section deal with translation, a field where Meschonnic is of particular influence and importance. Meschonnic’s own experience of translating the Bible, and a very particular understanding of meaning-making procedures in biblical Hebrew, establishes in fact the basis for his theory. The exposure to the semantic accent system of biblical Hebrew allowed Meschonnic to develop a theory of language which saw meaning as residing not only in linguistic reference but in what he called a ‘serial semantics’: motivated forms of verbal patterning, chains of signifiers, prosodic contours, distributions of and connections between speech sounds and motifs across a longer text. He posits that, more than what a text says, it is what a text does that is to be translated: its force. The third text on translation then offers a demonstration of how Meschonnic applies the continuous of his theory of language to a text.


Author(s):  
Joseph Tse-Hei Lee ◽  
Christie Chui-Shan Chow

This essay investigates the influential role that the Bible played in the sphere of Chinese popular Christianity. It explores the widespread use of the Bible among the lay populace who were traditionally excluded from the concerns and pursuits of Chinese Christian elites in cosmopolitan cities. Beginning with an overview of the cultural influence of the Bible in the mid-nineteenth century, this study argues that the liberating power of the Word was leveraged by peasant converts looking for new cosmologies and norms to change society. The twentieth century witnessed multiple levels of direct engagement with biblical texts, unmediated by foreign missionaries, among Chinese evangelists and congregants. Some drew on new biblical inspirations to found independent churches and sectarian groups, and some relied on the practice of bibliomancy to seek guidance in times of chaos. These examples offer complex view of the symbiosis between Bible reading and conversion in Chinese popular Christianity.


2012 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas H. Snyman

In tradisionele grammatikas en kommentare word gewoonlik net onderskei tussen egte en retoriese vrae. In hierdie artikel word nie-egte vrae geklassifiseer aan die hand van ’n model wat ontwikkel is uit die taalhandelingsteorie. In plaas van alle nie-egte vrae as retoriese vrae te beskou (soos die meeste kommentators doen), maak die model voorsiening vir ses hoof- en verskeie subkategorieë van nie-egte vrae. Die model word kortliks opgesom, gevolg deur ’n sistematiese ondersoek van al die vrae in 1 Korintiërs 5–6. Die slotsom is dat die voorgestelde model nuttig is vir die onderskeiding van verskillende soorte nie-egte vrae binne ’n wetenskaplike raamwerk en vir die bepaling van hulle kommunikatiewe funksies. Op dié wyse word ’n bydrae gelewer tot die vertaling en eksegese van die betrokke gedeeltes. Die model behoort navorsing oor die rol van nie-egte vrae in al Paulus se briewe te stimuleer.Non-real questions in 1 Corinthians 5–6. In this article, questions previously distinguished in traditional grammars and commentaries as mainly real or rhetorical, are classified in terms of a model developed from speech act theory. Instead of classifying all non-real questions as rhetorical questions (as commentators tend to do), the model makes provision for six main and various sub-categories of non-real questions. The model is briefly summarised, followed by a systematic investigation of all the questions in 1 Corinthians 5–6. The conclusion is that the proposed model is useful for distinguishing various types of non-real questions within a scientific framework and for determining their communicative functions, thereby contributing to the translation and exegesis of the passages involved. The model could stimulate research on the role of non-real questions in all Paul’s letters.


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-140
Author(s):  
Zhou Mingqiang

Pragmatic function and cognitive characteristics of discourse markers of complaintsDiscourse markers of complaints, mainly including ‘zhēnshì/yě zhēnshì’ (‘really / is really’), ‘zhēnshìde /yě zhēnshìde’ (‘really / is really’), ‘hébì ne’ (‘why bother’), ‘hékǔ ne’ (‘why bother’), ‘zhìyù mā’ (‘need you …’), ‘nǐ kàn nǐ’ (‘look at you’), ‘bù shì wǒ shuō nǐ’ (‘I want to remind you’), ‘bù shì wǒ V nǐ’ (‘I want to VERB you’), ‘kàn / qiáo nǐ shuōde’ (‘well, listen to you’), ‘nǐ zhè ge / zhè zhǒng rén a’ (‘oh, the likes of you’), ‘zài zěnme shuō’ (‘anyway’), etc., express complaint feelings.The pragmatic frame of discourse markers of complaints includes WHOM, WHY and WHAT, among which WHOM and WHAT are two vital factors. People usually complain in three cases: first is to complain behind the back of an interlocutor, which is graver than the second, to complain face to face; third is to complain about oneself, which is usually in a light way or just to boast with sly humor. The cause of complaints is sometimes identical to the content to be complained about, including complaining interlocutors’ behavior and its consequences, interlocutors’ thought and speech, among which the complaints about interlocutors’ behaviors and its consequences are more common than the complaints about interlocutors’ thought and speech. Different discourse markers of complaints might intensify, weaken or even alleviate the complaining feelings. Depending on different complaining interlocutors and the content to be complained about, the speakers choose corresponding discourse markers of complaints to make the complaining content fit their feelings. The sentiments of complaints can be classified into following categories: the first is a self-compliment, a false complaint concealing actual praise; the second is caring displeasure, a tender complaint with sympathy, friendliness and affection to remind the addresser of inappropriateness; the third is blaming in different degrees, a complaint of criticism with an excuse in a stern tone, or that of disapproval with no excuse in the same tone, or that of mocking in a teasing tone, as well as that of self-reproach, of persuasion, of rejection, of marked ellipsis with no gist and ground of the blame, etc. The sentiments of complaint may be expressed with the marked speech with criticism and blame at the fore, while the marked speech is indispensible from the changeable context of complaints due to a wide variety of complainees.The objects to be complained about can be the interlocutors, the speaker him/herself and the facts. When the object to be complained about is the interlocutor, the speaker may complain to them face to face, or behind their back; when an object to be complained about is facts, the complaints will be with a lighter tone, and only with comments and descriptions on the facts; when the object to be complained about is the speaker him/herself, the complaints will be with lightest tone. The discourse markers of complaints are usually used in the negative contexts, mainly by 4 means: first is to use negative sentences, second is to use contrast expressions, third is to use rhetorical questions, fourth is to use some other special expression, such as Chinese idioms ‘duì niú tán qín’ (‘play the lute to a cow’), ‘diū rén xiàn yǎn’ (‘disgraced’) etc., or commentary adverbs, such as ‘chàdiǎner’ (‘almost’), ‘jiǎnzhí’ (‘simply’), ‘lǎoshì’ (‘always’), ‘hébì’ (similar to ‘why must...’),or sentence constructions with negative connotation, such as ‘lián…dōu’,‘gēnběn bù…’,‘yě tài…’ etc. When discourse markers are used in the negative contexts, the scale of complaining tone is like this (from heavy to light): rhetorical question sentence > negative sentence > contrast sentence > other sentence.To choose the right discourse markers of complaints, the speakers must correctly understand the functions of the corresponding discourse markers. Meanwhile, listeners can catch the speakers’ real implication by seizing the characteristics of the discourse markers of complaints.The discourse markers of complaints can be researched in terms of the following aspects: the impacts of contexts, the common and distinct functions of the complaint markers, and the convergence of cognition on the pragmatic function.


2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-166
Author(s):  
Richard Pleijel

In this paper, the translation of the Biblical Hebrew word nephesh is discussed in light of new research. The starting point for the paper is a 1976 article in The Bible Translator that discusses the translation of nephesh based on the idea that it is a monistic entity referring to human beings as such. It is shown that this view was most representative for the exegetical consensus of the time of the article. However, a fair amount of new research points out new directions for interpreting nephesh as an entity or essence that was perceived as being separable from the body. This is also confirmed by research on cognate ancient Near Eastern concepts. It is argued that this should affect our way of translating the word nephesh.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 713-739
Author(s):  
Hsuan-Hsuan Ku ◽  
Mei-Ju Chen

Purpose As an alternative to straight rhetorical questions, questions using analogies that invite the reader to think about the frame of reference to answer the target have been used in advertising to persuade. This paper aims to investigate consumer responses to the use of analogical questions in ads for incrementally new products and the important variables moderating those responses. Design/methodology/approach Four between-subjects experiments examined how product evaluations in response to analogical questions differ from non-analogical variants as a function of consumers’ persuasion awareness (Studies 1 and 2) and also tested if the effectiveness of an analogical question among potential consumers who are more aware of persuasion attempts might be enhanced only when it is proposed with a strong rather than a weak frame of reference (Study 3), and when the frame of reference and the target share underlying similarities (Study 4). Findings Analogical questions are more persuasive than non-analogical variants for participants who are more aware of persuasion attempts. Inferential fluency mediates the results. Furthermore, the positive impact of analogical questions for participants high in persuasion awareness is diminished when the frame of reference is weak or from a dissimilar domain. The same patterns are not evident for participants who are less aware of persuasion attempts. Research limitations/implications Drawing on the concepts of inferential fluency, this study offers an empirically-based view of how the analogical questions in advertising may bias the responses exhibited by individuals who demonstrate either a high or low level of persuasion awareness. Practical implications The inclusion of an analogy can lower consumers’ tendency to behave in a defensive manner by facilitating inferences about intended claims that are implicitly stated in a rhetorical question and achieve higher levels of persuasion. Originality/value This study contributes to prior study on rhetorical questions within a persuasion communication by adopting inferential fluency as an underlying mechanism for analyzing the impact of analogical questions and individual’s awareness of persuasion.


2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 471-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Juliana Claassens ◽  
Amanda Gouws

This article seeks to reflect on the issue of sexual violence in the context of the twenty year anniversary of democracy in South Africa bringing together views from the authors’ respective disciplines of Gender and the Bible on the one hand and Political Science on the other. We will employ the Old Testament Book of Esther, which offers a remarkable glimpse into the way a patriarchal society is responsible for multiple levels of victimization, in order to take a closer look at our own country’s serious problem of sexual violence. With this collaborative engagement the authors contribute to the conversation on understanding and resisting the scourge of sexual violence in South Africa that has rendered a large proportion of its citizens voiceless.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document