Book Review/Synopsis: Voice and Mood: A Linguistic Approach, by David L. Mathewson

Essentials of Biblical Greek Grammar, Stanley E. Porter, Series Ed.; Baker Academic, 2021, 191 pages.

Voice and MoodDavid L. Mathewson’s Voice and Mood: A Linguistic Approach inaugurates a new series on Biblical Greek Grammar. Mathewson (with Elodie Ballantine Emig) previously co-authored Intermediate Greek Grammar: Syntax for Students of the New Testament (Baker Academic, 2016), and this new volume both expands on and sharpens the related material from that earlier work. As one would expect by its subtitle, Voice and Mood provides a linguistic framework within which to systematically exegete.

After a brief introduction, Voice and Mood divides into two sections, one per subject. The first is Voice, which begins with a brief survey of recent intermediate-level grammars (S. Porter, K. L. McKay, D. Wallace, D. A. Black, Mathewson/Emig, Köstenberger/Merkle/Plummer) and other recent works discussing voice. The author then reveals his approach using New Testament (NT) examples.

Mathewson grounds his methodologies in adaptations of M. A. K. Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Among other things, SFL posits that when a choice is made between available options—e.g., passive voice over against middle or active—a meaningful distinction is indicated (p 26). For the author, “SFL has proven a powerful descriptive model for interpreting…the New Testament” (p 25).

Voice is conceptualized through the lens of causality and agency/medium. In the active voice the subject functions as agent. In the passive and middle voices the subject functions as medium. Thus, the active indicates direct causality, the passive indirect–external causality, the middle indirect–internal causality (p 36). Similar to the method Stanley Porter applies to aspect (see Porter’s VAGNT, p 90), Mathewson views direct causality—morphologically conveyed in the active voice—as the default in a choice between the three causality types. The author illustratively (fig. 2.2, p 38) pairs direct causality with indirect causality as the first option, signified as +Active (direct causality) or –Active (indirect causality). The latter must then be further subdivided as a choice between +Passive (external causality/external agent) or +Middle (internal causality).

Choosing passive or middle over against the default active voice should be seen as exegetically significant, with the middle the weightiest. Yet one must bear in mind the special case of so-called deponent verbs, which lack active forms (e.g., –ομαι endings). Mathewson believes (as others) these should be better termed “middle-only verbs” (pp 70-72). Extrapolating from this, these middles should not be deemed as possessing the same weight as middles within the typical three-voice trinary.

In some contexts, middle-voiced verbs are transitive; that is, there are accusatives following. These accusatives should not be understood as “direct objects” (the “goal” in active contexts) but as the Range, functioning to further define the verbal action or process (pp 65–66).

Mathewson’s approach provides a more precise and internally consistent explanation for the middle voice compared to other works. In short, when viewed through the lens of causality and agency/medium, the three voices can be individuated by the characteristics each expresses—and, correspondingly, does not express—relative to the others.

As with Voice, the section on Mood (Modality) begins by surveying related material. Also like Voice above, Mathewson adapts Halliday’s SFL English modal system. But the Biblical Greek Modal system is necessarily more complex than Voice, given the larger number of and the myriad pragmatic functions for the moods.

Mood is defined as the speaker’s attitudinal, subjective portrayal of the verbal action or process relative to reality (pp 87, 89, 170–171). This portrayal may or may not reflect objective reality or factuality. This is so even in the indicative (which could be expressing the speaker’s misunderstanding, hyperbole, sarcasm, etc.).

Mathewson conceives the Greek Modal system as comprised of either assertive (indicative) or non-assertive (imperative, subjunctive, optative) moods. Similar to Voice, Mood is illustrated (fig. 5.1, p 96) as a choice between Assertion and Nonassertion, with Assertion (indicative) being the default. Nonassertion must be further delineated as a choice between Direction (imperative) or Projection, the latter even further subdivided between –Contingency (subjunctive) or +Contingency (optative). The author suggests this added feature of contingency in the optative might be seen as a sort of parallel to the two imperfective aspects—found in the present and imperfect tense-forms—in that the imperfect adds +remoteness (p 96, nt 3).

Thus, when the Biblical author has chosen any of the non-assertive moods over against the assertive, this should be understood as exegetically significant. And, for example, when the optative is chosen over the subjunctive, “prominence” is indicated (p 121).

It is not sufficient to merely determine voice and mood in isolation. One must consider these as choices over other available options. If a non-default voice (i.e., passive or middle) and/or a non-default mood (i.e., imperative, subjunctive, or optative) is found, the exegete should view this as significant. Within this schema the reader should search for broader patterns. For example, Mathewson notes the significance of Paul’s use of the indicative mood throughout chapters 1—3 of Ephesians as compared to the many imperatives in chapters 4—6. The imperatives build upon the foundation fashioned by the earlier indicatives (p 130).

The future tense-form, which has traditionally proved difficult to categorize, is understood by Mathewson as a quasi-mood. Following Porter, Mathewson views the future as indicating an expectation of fulfillment (p 132). Its form and semantics similar to the subjunctive, the future is sometimes even found where one might expect the subjunctive (e.g., ἵνα clauses). In such usages, the future should be considered “the more semantically weighty form with its feature of expectation” (p 132).

Mathewson suggests how the future might fit within the Modal system—between the assertive and non-assertive moods (chart p 132). Thus, after the Indicative (Assertion) would be the Future (Expectation of fulfillment), followed by the Subjunctive (Projection: no expectation of fulfillment), Optative (Projection: contingent expectation of fulfillment), and Imperative (Direction).

Participles and infinitives (nonfinite verbal forms) are also considered, in conjunction with the mood expressed by corresponding finite verbs (see fig. 6.1, p 139). Participles presuppose the author’s commitment to the subjective reality (which, again, is not necessarily objectively true) portrayed by the control/main verb (p 138). Infinitives do not; that is, “the infinitive merely states the verbal idea” (p 139; emphasis added). The author provides a number of NT examples of each.

I strongly recommend this book. In fact, my goal is to incorporate Mathewson’s approach. While the work necessarily uses some new jargon and some intermediate-level concepts, the writing is suitably accessible for the motivated student. The author illustrates via NT examples as he goes. One might wish he sometimes provided more, but I’d think interested students would be sufficiently inclined to seek out more examples on their own.

Worth the price of the book is Mathewson’s explanation of what is signified by the middle voice of γλῶσσαι, παύσονται (glōssai, pausontai, “tongues, they will cease”) in 1 Cor. 13:8—and, more importantly in my estimation, is not signified (p 68).

Being Blessed

Who doesn’t want to be blessed, be happy? Obviously that’s rhetorical. I’m sure you would like a blessing bestowed upon you—to be blessed, to be happy. Let’s be blessed!

The Greek word for “blessed” or “happy” is μακάριος, makários. The second syllable receives the accent, so we pronounce it ma-kA-rē-os. It even sounds happy!

Scripture provides direction on how to be blessed. This is predicated upon belief, of course. Blessed are those who believe despite not being direct eyewitnesses to Jesus’ post-resurrection body (John 20:24-29).

The word is first found in the New Testament in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount—the Beatitudes, beginning in Matthew 5:3. Jesus closes the section by pointing to our future heavenly reward (5:12):

5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit . . . 11 Blessed are you when they insult you, persecute you, and speak all kinds of evil against you falsely because of Me. 12 Rejoice! Be overjoyed even, because great is your reward in heaven! For in this same way they persecuted the Prophets who were before you.1

The way up is down.2 The last will be first.

The word also occurs in James 1:12:

1:12 Blessed is the man who endures temptation, for in becoming approved he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love Him.

The first part of this verse summarizes James 1:2-4. By trials we are purified, proven to be true.3 Our relationship with God has contingency: We must persevere. And we will receive trials. Especially the stubborn, like me. In 5:11 James uses the verbal form of this word (makarízō) in a context about the blessedness of Job due to his perseverance in suffering. His example provides hope for the rest of us:

5:11 See how blessed are those who persevere! You have heard of Job’s perseverance and you have seen his ending on account of the Lord—because the Lord is full of compassion and tender mercy.

But are we fit for the test? More pointedly, am I?

This theme of blessedness both opens and closes the book of Revelation. This last book in all Scripture might be better known as God’s revelation given to Jesus Christ, which was subsequently delivered to His servant John through an angel.4 God gave it to Jesus, who then gave it to an angel, who subsequently gave it to John. It is God’s revelation specifically intended for us!  Here are the first 3 verses:

1:1 [This is] the apocalypse/revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants what must come soon. He delivered it through His angel to His servant John, 2 who testified to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ in all he saw. 3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and keep the things written in it, for the time is near.5

So the book opens with a promised blessing to the one reading it. This extends to those heeding the revelation of God and Jesus. You haven’t yet ventured into a full reading of Revelation? Take heed: “the time is near.” Just before the final usage of “blessed”, and just after describing the wondrous Garden with its River of Life (see Looking Past the Future), Jesus reprises and synopsizes the introduction (22:7):

22:7 See, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of this prophecy in this scroll.

The final use of “blessed” comes just a few verses from the very end. Jesus’ words here provide a nice summary of what is expected of our life here to gain the life hereafter—life in the Garden city containing the River of Life:

22:14 Blessed are those who wash their garments, so that they may have the right to the Tree of Life and may enter through the gates to the city.

To be blessed, we must read and keep God’s word. Be blessed!

_____________________

1 My translation, as is all here. I take the καί (kai) in v 12 as ascensive (“even”), given that the second imperatival verb is more intensive lexically than the first (chairō, “rejoice” > agalliaō, “be exceedingly joyful”). Moreover, “be overjoyed” is in the middle voice (agalliasthe), and in this context I interpret this combination as akin to being reflexive in some sense (“be yourselves overjoyed”). That is, the verb’s root meaning lends itself to intransitivity (both verbs do), depending on context, and in the context here it’s surely intransitive. When this intransitivity is coupled with the middle voice I view it as indicating reflexivity (self-inducing an emotional state?).  See Carl W. Conrad, “New Observations on Voice in the Ancient Greek Verb. November 19, 2002”, ([unpublished], accessed 12/31/2020), which seems to support my position here regarding this verb in its middle voice, “It appears the verb is intransitive in every instance [in the NT], though one may readily understand a middle sense: ‘feel joy’” (p 15). Conrad compiled helpful lists of functions for the middle (pp 9-10), of which category 10 “Emotion” (p 10) fits here (this list culled from Suzanne Kemmer), or the more specific “Class 3: Self-Involvement: B. Emotional States” (Neva Miller’s own designation) could work. Maybe it isn’t necessary to put too fine a point on all this, but the categories help to fully consider lexis and voice within the overall syntactical structure, in order to arrive at a better understanding of the text/context, I think. I certainly need to more fully consider Conrad’s work.

   Additionally, Conrad suggests—and I think his points are well-reasoned—that the active voice be understood as the “basic” (p 11) or default voice, and any other (he prefers “subject-focused” for what are variously called middles, passives, or middle/passives) be considered a marked usage comparatively (pp 7-9). Accepting this stance would appear to solidify my contention that καί should be understood as ascensive in this context.

2 I like the way Charles H. Talbert (Reading the Sermon on the Mount: Character Formation and Decision Making in Matthew 5—7 [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004]) summarizes the Beatitudes: “The Content of the Beatitudes is twofold: promises of eschatological blessings and a portrait of the recipients of these blessings. The first four Beatitudes deal with the vertical relationship; the final four plus one focus on horizontal relationships” (p 54). I really need to read this book cover-to-cover instead of merely skimming sections….

3 Or not!

4 The inscription preceding the first verse in the manuscript tradition simply reads Apocalypsis Iōannou, which translates as “Apocalypse of John” or “John’s Apocalypse”. But this merely identifies the author of the written work, as opposed to its actual genesis, which is spelled out in the first verse. In any event, our own tradition that simply truncates this wonderful work to the title Revelation does it a terrible disservice! The work provides its own self-inscription via the contents of what we label verses 1 and 2.

5 The word translated “read” in verse 3 is more accurately “reads aloud”. Understood in this way, one person would be reading the manuscript in front of an audience. The orator would certainly be blessed, and those hearing and obeying it would likewise be blessed.