Structural synonymy is exhibited by sets of expressions that are capable of conveying the same denotative content but are differently constructed and hence have slightly different meanings. Synonymous structures, due to the general complexity of syntactic phenomena, are not quite coterminous semantically, stylistically, or pragmatically; hence, they are not synonyms in the strict sense. It is exactly such differences that make it possible for them to offer a choice for the language user. Formal variants, in the author's view, are sets of syntactic structures that do not exhibit any semantic diversity despite their formal differences; hence, they are freely interchangeable (or, in the case of historical phenomena, are assumed to be such on the basis of available data). The existence of formal variants is the basis of the subsequent emergence of synonymous constructions. This paper discusses variation and structural synonymy in one type of complex sentences: those involving relative clauses. The data are taken from parallel passages of six different Hungarian translations of the Bible written between 1416 and 1626, supplemented by two contemporary translations of the same passages.
sens étymologique du terme : entre les années 381–384, Égérie s’est rendue en Terre Sainte Bible en main, elle a visité les sites bibliques, puis en Mésopotamie, à Antioche et enfin à Constantinople, où elle a rédigé le récit de sa pérégrination. Ces
, wrote schoolbooks for Bible class, evangelizing successfully. In 1968, during the Tet offensive, he fled with the Bru to Đông Hà and from there to Da Nang. Then he returned to Cam Lộ to help the Bru refugees, even building a new church from leftover
say private payers together with their family members in their homes. In addition, he deemed it necessary for them to discuss informally the chosen sections of the Bible which happened to be the guiding text of the Sunday sermon. He considered it
Hungarian music and its “principals” using the Bible’s words: “[they] have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.” See Ligeti to Veress, dated Christmas 1956, PSS SSV. For the Hungarian original of the quotations in the present article, see my article
argumentation on what is prohibited and what is allowed in magical and superstitious activities. Their sources were also similar: they used the Bible, as well as the writings of Saint Augustine, Saint Isidor of Seville, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Jean Gerson, the
The present paper outlines a historical change in Hungarian syntax by focusing on participial constructions and their clausal equivalents in ten different Hungarian translations of the Bible. The first part investigates the relative frequency of the relevant structures and, relying upon statistical data, it characterises the process of a shift from analytic to synthetic constructions. Then we analyse secondary semantic differences among the various structures (participial constructions, subordinate clauses and coordinate clauses) and propose that in the case of subordination the semantic relationship between the matrix sentence and the dependent clause is expressed in an explicit manner. However, if the meaning of the related participial construction is complex (combining features of temporal, causal, and instrumental relationships), a subordinate clause can express only one of these, and the other features are not represented in it. Coordination, on the other hand, especially asyndetic (conjunctionless) coordination and that involving the conjunctions és, s ‘and’, is more capable of embracing several shades of meaning. Thus, in terms of their semantic properties, coordinate clauses are more similar to participial constructions than subordinate clauses are. Finally, the paper raises some general ideas with respect to the theoretical background of this kind of shift in sentence construction. The framework of the study is what is called “traditional grammar”, but it also introduces some terms of functional grammar.
In 1539, a peculiar Latin-Hungarian (more precisely: Hungarian-Latin) grammar was published by Johannes Sylvester, dedicating the grammar (probably symbolically) to his son. Unfortunately enough, his grammar got lost in the war-stricken times of the first half of the 16th century. At the end of the 18th century, however, it was found again and then republished. Being lost, the grammar in question could not influence the grammarians of Sylvester’s age.The “discovery” of the mother tongues in Europe, the birth of a new spirituality (Reformation) and the compelling drive to translate the Bible into vernaculars were the unmistakable signs of the first linguistic revolution.The grammar actually is a contrastive analysis of Latin, Greek and a lesser degree German, Hebrew and Hungarian. What is more interesting, its deals with structure and not with single word comparisons. Sylvester was the first in Europe to articulate the basic difference between the chief European languages (Latin, [Ancient] Greek, German and the non-European Hebrew) and Hungarian revealing that Hungarian is of postpositional character; so he was the first in Europe to discover agglutination as the basic feature of Hungarian (though he was not familiar with this term). Among other things, he casually mentions the relationship of Hebrew (the “lingua sancta”) to Hungarian, as was the linguistic trend of his age.