Ben C Smith

Both commas (the one between Los Angeles and CA and the one after CA) in the first example are required by standard English convention. It is the second example that uses incorrect punctuation by omitting the comma(s).

I believe I have. But I can only lead you to the sea; I cannot make you fish in it.

Ben.

spin

:wide:

They are doing different things. Nevertheless, the attempt doesn't start to deal with the grammar you would like to parallel. There is no linking preposition in either of your examples.

"[B]elieve" is the operative word. In reality you've simply ignored it:

In my view, the seeing of a great light is not the move from Nazara to Capernaum; it is the beginning of the preaching ministry, which the author describes for us. Likewise, the fulfillment of Isaiah is not the move from Nazara to Capernaum; it is the location of Capernaum (and therefore of the base for that ministry) in Z and N.

You focus on the great light and poof goes the rest of the text.


spin

Ben C Smith

Are you asking for more? Here is an example with prepositions:

I was born in Saigon in 1971. My family later moved to a city in the northern part of South Vietnam.

Would you assume that Saigon is not in South Vietnam? I would perhaps assume it was not in the northern part of South Vietnam. Compare:

And he left Nazara and came and housed in Capernaum, by the sea, in the borders of Zebulun and of Naphtali.

Would you assume that Nazara is not in Z and N? I would perhaps assume it was not by the sea in Z and N.

If there is an argument in this sentence, I am missing it.

Backing up to a previous point for clarification, do you accept that this statement of yours...:

...was erroneous (it being written English convention that necessitates the comma, not any problem the writer is having)? You have since brought in prepositions, but

Ben.

spin

Separate sentences. Probable non-native speaker. When are you going to start thinking about linguistic issues?

What exactly does en oriois Zaboulwn kai Neftalim attach to?

If you cannot attach it then I don't see how you can really attach ths paraQalassian, but you seem to attach the latter without any qualms.

I merely said you were ignoring most of the cited Isaiah text.

No. What was the purpose of asking?

Returning to your example, the writer, apparently hoping to deal with the fact that they've put a little too much information that could get misapplied, has separated the "CA" from "Los Angeles" so that the phrase won't get confused.

Common usage of language in the modern era, supported by the various public communication channels and media, has tended to institutionalise errors, such as the apostrophe to separate the plural "s", or the confusion regarding the present perfect, leading to overuse of the simple past tense. Because you can find errors and poor sentence construction in English doesn't mean that they are fine and dandy, though familiarity with such manifestations tends to lull one into blithe acceptance.

Commas serve a number of uses. Punctuation is a somewhat complex area such that in natural language processing for example, some punctuation marks are treated as conjunctions (commas can be "inclusive or", "exclusive or", or "and" amongst other uses).

...that's a conjunction that requires a following clause.

Prepositions help you construct thoughts and sentences. They attach to earlier ideas. The text uses prepositions and we need to consider them.


spin

spin

If you lived on the Springfield Road, would cars be racing through your bedroom?

:Cheeky:


spin

ynquirer

The Septuagint Joshua 19:21 mentions Bhrsafhs as one of the cities of the land of Issachar. Josephus De Bello Judaico 3:39 mentions Bhrsabhs (Bersabe, in W. Whiston’s transliteration, War of the Jews 3.3.1), which is obviously the same name, as stretching out across the border between the Upper and the Lower Galilees.

Bersabe is rather north while Chesulloth (Joshua 19:18) or otherwise Chislothtabor (v.12), on the slopes of Mount Tabor, is rather south in Galilee. On the other hand, borderlines between the lands of different tribes must have being far for straight, as Kanah (Hebrew QNH), belonging in the land of Asher (v.28), is in the center of Galilee.

Therefore, one has pretty many places in Galilee that belonged in the land of either Issachar or Asher. The theory that Galilee was another name for the land of Naphtali and Zebulon is overgeneralization.

Accordingly, Matthew 4:12-14 is best understood as if the author had good reason to think that Nazara/Nazareth was located in the land of Asher and Issachar:

• 12 When Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, he returned to [Nazara in] Galilee [in the area of Asher and Issachar]. 13 Leaving Nazara, he went and lived in Capernaum, which was by the lake in the area of Zebulun and Naphtali— 14 to fulfill what was said through the prophet Isaiah:

Ben C Smith

My example #1:

Spin dealing with the commas around CA in my example #1:

Standard English conventions regarding commas around state names or abbreviations:

City, State
Place a comma between the city and the state name, and another comma after the state name, unless ending a sentence.

Right: They moved from Trenton, N.J., to Pittsburgh, Pa.,
Wrong: Kansas City, Mo. is the site of the conference.
Right: Kansas City, Mo., is the site of the conference.
Right: Washington, D.C., was the destination.

No wonder we are at odds over the Greek; we disagree even on standard English punctuation of the kind learned in the fourth grade!

Done. I leave it to the reader of this thread.

Ciao.

Ben.

spin

We haven't reached the stage of being at odds over the Greek.

Now that you're completely off topic you can leave it to the reader. That makes sense. Form versus content is the rule. It's apparently not important what the person is showing that they want to say, it's whether they say it according to some prescriptive rule. I really don't know what you're on about with the examples above containing one or two commas: it has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic. I referred to the conceptual use of a comma which separated a state from a city. Now you're babbling about (prescriptive) uses of commas. I can see you've got a firm grasp of the o.p.

Dear reader, the topic that Ben C wanted to deal with regards the following information from Mt 4:12-16:

1. Jesus withdrew to Galilee
2. He left Nazara
3. He went and dwelt in Capernaum
4. (which is) by the sea in Zebulun and Naphtali
5. in order to fulfill a prophecy by Isaiah
6. that (in) the land of Zebulun and Naphtali
7. on the road by the sea, across the Jordan--
8. Galilee of the gentiles--
9. the people who sit in darkness have seen a great light...

Ben C wants to say that that doesn't indicate that Nazara is outside Zebulun and Naphtali. Hands up anyone who thinks from Mt 4 that the writer thinks that Nazara is in Zebulun and Naphtali? or that the writer is at least non-commital regarding the issue?

For me, if he'd said simply that Capernaum was by the sea then he would have been non-commital, but, by saying that Capernaum was by the sea in Zebulun and Naphtali, he implies that Nazara was not -- an implication which he strengthens by justifying the move, saying it was to fulfill a prophecy regarding a change in Zebulun and Naphtali, ie that the people there would see a great light. This means to me that Jesus arrives in Zebulun and Naphtali. That was straight after saying that Jesus moved from Nazara to Capernaum (by the sea in Zebulun and Naphtali). Ben C is prepared to accept that the writer implies that Jesus is the great light that the people of Zebulun and Naphtali see. He is not prepared to see the implication of relating the prophecy to the move from Nazara to Capernaum. Instead, he wants to talk about commas.

To quote Ben C "I leave it to the reader of this thread."


spin

Ben C Smith

I said nothing about whether there should be one or two commas. I was rebutting your assertion that the writer inserted a(ny) comma so as to make up for having given too much information that could be misapplied. You were simply wrong to assert that, since there is a much clearer reason why the writer would have inserted this comma.

If you do not wish to debate commas, then next time do not bring them up. And, especially, do not pretend that the writer was using a comma in order to clarify his meaning when ordinary English usage actually calls for a comma in that case. You may as well assert that I capitalize the first word of a sentence in order to emphasize the thought that follows.

I agree with this. Exactly what you said. He implies (at most) that Nazara was not by the sea in Zebulun and Naphtali.

Ben.

the_cave

I would ask why Matthew says Z&N are "beyond the Jordan", except my first question has to be, why does the Septuagint call Z&N "beyond the Jordan"?