This thesis demonstrates how new theories concerning language and cognition can be applied to our understanding of specific languages, and to the task of translation. Section one documents the theory of scenarios, how people store, categorize, and access information in the brain, and demonstrates how these mental scenarios are reflected in the grammar and lexicon of texts. It shows how scenarios shared by speaker and audience allow effective communication without enormous verbal detail, and explains how miscommunication occurs, especially across cultural and linguistic divides. Section two applies scenario theory to the Greek New Testament, demonstrating how specific grammatical forms, such as Participles and the Article, are linked to scenarios. This affects discourse analysis and exegesis, by giving textual evidence that certain scenarios are open, and thus certain information is implicit and intended to be communicated. Scenario theory is also applied to lexical choice, providing a theoretical framework for determining the topic of a passage, and clarifying exegetical decisions. Section three applies scenario theory to texts in the Parkari language of Pakistan. This not only helps in textual analysis, explaining the choice and significance of certain grammatical forms, but also demonstrates that although Parkari, like New Testament Greek and English, uses different grammatical forms depending on whether a scenario is currently open or not, the specific forms used differ between languages. Section four shows how the mismatch of mental scenarios, between original speakers of New Testament Greek and modem Parkaris, highlights potential problem areas in translation. It also suggests possible solutions to such problems, by using scenario theory not only to determine the author's intended meaning, but also to provide strategies for communicating that same meaning in translation, specifically addressing the issue of what information is implicit in the source text, and when and how to make it explicit in translation.

By employing a method for comparing and assessing linguistic frameworks, this dissertation will demonstrate that the study of New Testament Greek requires a paradigm change from the limitations of traditional grammar to the more comprehensive approach and methodological clarity of the most recent research into language consistent with modern linguistic theory. This point is argued based on the method developed in chapter 3 that compares, contrasts, and assesses linguistic frameworks. Christopher S. Butler's Structure and Function laid much of the foundation within modern linguistic theory for the kind of work that this dissertation seeks to do. The purpose of this method is to determine which approach is more comprehensive and methodologically clearer on the basis of the questions contained therein. The questions themselves are intended to be exploratory' of both approaches and framed to highlight responses from both approaches as possible. The focus of the method considers each approach as a whole, from specific examples within grammar and exegesis. The overall conclusion that will be made is that traditional grammar is limited in comparison to the more comprehensive approach and methodological clarity consistent with the most recent research into language from modern linguistic theory. Neither of these approaches is perfect—or claims to be—and the analysis presented in the pages that follow in no way intends to communicate that. Nevertheless, this dissertation hopes to encourage traditional scholars to move beyond traditional grammar to utilize modern linguistic theory. Chapter 2 seeks to demonstrate that the limitations of traditional syntax grammars for NT Greek require the adoption of a new approach. Modern linguistic theory provides a way forward in language study that traditional grammar cannot. Thus, this paradigm change will allow for further research within the larger theological enterprise. This dissertation concludes with a chapter considering how one could apply modem linguistic theory to make progress on a number of fronts within biblical and theological studies. These two approaches are so different that they are incommensurable. They are as distinct as differing worldviews. But the widespread adoption of the approach of modern linguistics by more scholars within the larger theological enterprise would supply countless contributions to its scholarship. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

By employing a method for comparing and assessing linguistic frameworks, this dissertation will demonstrate that the study of New Testament Greek requires a paradigm change from the limitations of traditional grammar to the more comprehensive approach and methodological clarity of the most recent research into language consistent with modern linguistic theory. This point is argued based on the method developed in chapter 3 that compares, contrasts, and assesses linguistic frameworks. Christopher S. Butler's Structure and Function laid much of the foundation within modern linguistic theory for the kind of work that this dissertation seeks to do. The purpose of this method is to determine which approach is more comprehensive and methodologically clearer on the basis of the questions contained therein. The questions themselves are intended to be exploratory' of both approaches and framed to highlight responses from both approaches as possible. The focus of the method considers each approach as a whole, from specific examples within grammar and exegesis. The overall conclusion that will be made is that traditional grammar is limited in comparison to the more comprehensive approach and methodological clarity consistent with the most recent research into language from modern linguistic theory. Neither of these approaches is perfect—or claims to be—and the analysis presented in the pages that follow in no way intends to communicate that. Nevertheless, this dissertation hopes to encourage traditional scholars to move beyond traditional grammar to utilize modern linguistic theory. Chapter 2 seeks to demonstrate that the limitations of traditional syntax grammars for NT Greek require the adoption of a new approach. Modern linguistic theory provides a way forward in language study that traditional grammar cannot. Thus, this paradigm change will allow for further research within the larger theological enterprise. This dissertation concludes with a chapter considering how one could apply modem linguistic theory to make progress on a number of fronts within biblical and theological studies. These two approaches are so different that they are incommensurable. They are as distinct as differing worldviews. But the widespread adoption of the approach of modern linguistics by more scholars within the larger theological enterprise would supply countless contributions to its scholarship. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Historically, the study of NT Greek conditional statements has predominantly set its focus on the Mood and Tense of the protasis. More recently, semantic approaches based on the speaker's viewpoint, or attitude, have also been adopted, to classify conditionals either as statements of assertion or projection. As such approaches are based on a limited number of linguistic features and functions, they offer only a partial understanding of conditionals. Most grammarians also largely ignore the wider contexts of the biblical texts and conditionals' rhetorical function. The purpose of this study is twofold: to critically examine current methods of describing and classifying conditionals to propose a new method based on theory of language and the analytical framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL); and to apply the proposed interpretive framework to analyze selected conditionals found in the Gospel of John, exploring how Jesus uses conditionals to persuade his audience and how conditionals serve the persuasive purpose of the Gospel. Instead of following the conventional lines of investigation, this thesis adopts Systemic Functional Linguistics' multi-stratal structure and multi-functional concept of language. Structurally, the interpretive framework expands from the units of words and clauses to those of clause complexes. All three major functions of language (ideational, interpersonal, and textual) are included as part of the total meaning. An analytical interpretive framework is then set up and applied to selected conditionals in John 3-11. Based on the evidence such as the choice of the Mood, thematic structure, logico-semantic relation, grammatical intricacy, clustered and consecutive conditionals, and conditionals as topic and summative statements, it is concluded that the conditionals Jesus uses present a strongly persuasive case for the author's purpose of writing. On one hand, the conditionals that Jesus uses rebut the Jews' charge of blasphemy and make a convincing case for his Christological claim. On the other hand, conditionals by Jesus also provide his audience and the reader of John with a different viewpoint (an alternate world) to understand the deeper meaning of faith and discipleship. Johannine conditionals perform the function of persuading the reader of John toward faith and spiritual growth in Jesus (20:31). / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)