The Meaning of κοιμάω in the Letter to the Corinthians of St. Clement of Rome and in the Gospels

Idiomatic expressions are widely used as one of figurative languages when people sensed that idiom contained more than its surface meaning. For a long time, researchers have done a lot of work studying the mechanism of processing idioms, and two models were proposed: noncompositional model and compositional model. Those two models, however, can only explain one aspect of processing idioms. Therefore, hybrid model (Cutting Bock, 1997) came into being in explaning how people process idioms: top-down process and bottom-up process co-exist. Compositionality was introduced in psycholinguistics by Gibbs and his colleagues (Gibbs, Nayak, Cutting, 1989), and later developed into the so-called idiom semantic decomposition hypothesis, which made great contribution to generating hybrid model. According to this view, idioms are at least partly decomposable, and speakers have shared intuitions about how the meanings of the parts contribute to the idiomatic meaning. The degree of analyzability determines the access of idioms’ figarative meaning. During recent years, semantic analyzability has become very popular among psycholinguists, and the claims of the idiom semantic decomposition hypothesis are now widely accepted (Libben Titone, 2008). Some questions remain unsettled, however, including: (1) whether semantic decomposability affects understanding idioms independently; (2) if so, how semantic decomposability affects it; (3) whether semantic decomposition hypothesis is suitable in processing Chinese modifier-noun structure; (4) which model can be applied in accessing Chinese three-character idioms.The present study tried to answer those questions by exploring semantic priming task to investigate how Chinese three-character idioms with verb-object structure and with modifier-noun structure were processed. We intended to reveal the role semantic decomposability played in processing idioms in early (SOA=300ms in Experiment 1) and later (SOA=800ms in Experiment 2) period. The results showed that semantic decomposability affected semantic activation independently. In early period, as to high decomposable idioms with verb-object structure and with modifier-noun structure, we found significant activation in their literal meanings; on the other hand, in later period, as to low decomposable idioms with modifier-noun structure, we found significant accuracy in activating literal and figurative meanings. The results also showed that the degree of semantic decomposability resulted in different effects of semantic priming. In early period, as to low decomposable idioms with verb-object structure, we found significant activation in both literal and figurative meanings, and we found activation in literal meanings when idioms with verb-object structure and with modifier-noun structure were high decomposable. In later period, significant activation in both literal and figurative meanings was found in low decomposable idioms with verb-object structure. But significant activation in figurative meanings was only found in high decomposable idioms with modifier-noun structure. These results supported the notion that semantic decomposability plays a role in processing idioms in early period; while in later period, as to high decomposable idioms with verb-object structure, the simultaneous activation of literal and figuratvie meanings weakens the advantage of semantic priming. So we made conclusions that (1) semantic decomposability independently affects understanding idioms; (2) figurative meanings are activated more easily when idioms are low semantic decomposable; whereas literal meanings tend to be easily activated when idioms are high semantic decomposable; (3) the privilege of activation in literal meaning exists in processing idioms. All those results partly support the Graded Salience Hypothesis and hybrid hypothesis.

Students often have difficulty understanding figurative meanings compared to lexical meanings. Figurative meaning refers to the immediate meaning conveyed when a language is spoken in isolation, while the secondary meaning is dependent on the context; this is known as figurative meaning. On the other hand, lexical meaning refers to the literal meaning of language elements as symbols of things. The research aims to assess students’ proficiency in identifying figurative and lexical meanings and to compare this between the experiment and control classes. The study involved 46 students from the eleventh year at SMAN 1 Maja. It was a quantitative research study, indicating that the data collected were presented in numerical form and then interpreted using statistical analysis. The research tools included a questionnaire, observation, pre-test, and post-test. The results of the research showed that students' competence in identifying figurative and lexical meanings was low during the pre-test (5.23) and reached a sufficient level during the post-test (6.07). The post-test scores for figurative and lexical meanings were 6.57 and 6.92, respectively. The difference between pre-test and post-test scores was analyzed using t-tests, which yielded significant results for both the control class (t=4.84) and the experiment class (t=3.94) for figurative meaning, and for lexical meaning in the control class (t=2.712) and the experiment class (t=3.98). These results demonstrate that students' competence in identifying figurative and lexical meanings can improve their English proficiency, particularly in enhancing their speaking ability.

Yūsuf ibn Ḥusayn, a 15th century Ottoman ulama member, is known as al-Kirmāstī in reference to his hometown, Kirmasti, in the Bursa district. He attended Hocazade Muslihuddin’s classes. He taught in a number of madrasas, including Sahn-i Seman, and worked as a judge in Bursa and Istanbul. He penned many works in the fields of jurisprudence, theology, logic, and disputation. He contributed to the literature of rhetoric by writing foundational textbooks, including al-Tabyīn, al-Tibyān (al-Tabyīn’s commentary), al-Muntakhab (al-Tibyān’s abridgement), al-Mukhtār, and a gloss on al-Muṭawwal and al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī’s al-Miṣbāḥ. Following al-Sakkākī, who treated the main disciplines of the science of rhetoric in a semantic unity, the works in this field evolved into the genre of commentaries and glosses, which examined issues in detail. After the 14th century, when the number of works of commentary and gloss increased, works related to rhetoric were viewed as unimportant and belonging to a period of intellectual decline. However, even if one does observe a foundational change in the science of rhetoric after al-Sakkākī, one cannot convincingly argue that commentaries and glosses on works of rhetoric were useless and unimportant. In this context, the tradition of commentaries-glosses was not a regurgitation of the main text but was instead a genre filled with contemporary discussions. The period during which al-Kirmāstī wrote corresponded with a period in which the tradition of rhetoric matured in respect to vocabulary and textualization. Al-Kirmāstī undertook a detailed examination of the science of eloquence (‘ilm al-bayān) with his treatise titled Uṣūl al-iṣṭilāḥāt al-bayāniyya, which I examine here. I will reproduce a critical edition of this treatise and examine its contribution to the science of eloquence. Al-Kirmāstī formulates his treatise by the definitions and classifications of the main concepts of the science of eloquence. In the introduction, he briefly lists the five types of words in respect to philosophy of language as adopted by scholars of rhetoric (namely ḥaqīqa: literal meaning; majāz: figurative meaning; istiʿāra: metaphor; tashbīh: simile; and kināya: metonymy). He then examines al-Sakkākī’s two formulations of literal and figurative meanings in a lengthy and detailed way and defends the position of al-Sakkākī, who was criticized by others on the issues of metonymy, rational figurative meaning, and metaphor by allusion. He explains five issues on which al-Sakkākī disagreed with earlier scholars of rhetoric. He mentions briefly al-Qazwīnī’s three different categories, i.e. literal meaning, figurative meaning, and metonymy and identifies the points of disagreement. In the last chapter, al-Kirmāstī dwells on his own classification. Therefore, he compares the classification of words by al-Sakkāki and al-Qazwīnī and underlines their points of disagreement. In this treatise, Al-Kirmāstī offers a comparative reading of the science of eloquence in respect to its classifications and conceptual framework. While maintaining important concepts and findings of al-Sakkākī’s, he adopts a critical perspective in respect to simile. While al-Sakkāki defined the science of eloquence as an effort to convey a single meaning in various ways, he kept simile provided by literal usage outside of this science and based it on figurative language and metaphor, because he based it on rational signification. However, he re-includes simile, an instrument and introduction to metaphor with a figurative meaning, into the science of eloquence as a third element. Al-Kirmāstī considers it an unreasonable argument that simile is kept outside of the science of eloquence by a logical-philosophical limitation. Despite this critique, al-Kirmāstī never ventures to adopt a rejectionist perspective that would damage al-Sakkākī’s system. Al-Kirmāstī summarizes the issues on which al-Sakkākī disagreed with other scholars of rhetoric in the following way: according to al-Sakkākī, the imaginary metaphor was of lexical figurative meanings but not of rational figurative meanings. The metaphor by allusion was the word of the thing compared but not the word of the thing compared to that which was obtained by an imaginary way. The secondary metaphor was considered as belonging to the thing compared. The rational figurative meaning was not a separate part of the figurative meaning but rather being of the thing compared. The figurative meaning by addition or subtraction was not a separate part of the figurative meaning but belonged to the figurative meaning.

On understanding familiar and less-familiar figurative language

James M. Neumann proposes that there is far more at work in Mark’s portrayal of Jesus as Son of God, and what it means for Mark to depict him as such, than past scholarship has recognized. He argues that Mark presents Jesus’s life from beginning to end as the actualization of Psalm 2: a coronation hymn describing the Davidic king as God’s “son,” which was interpreted messianically in early Judaism and christologically in early Christianity. Rather than a simple title, the designation of Jesus as God’s “Son” in Mark contains and encapsulates an entire story of its own. Beginning with an analysis of why this most important identity of Jesus in the Gospel has been under-studied, Neumann retraces the interpretive traditions surrounding Psalm 2 in early Judaism and Christianity alike. Pointing to Mark’s first introduction of Jesus as God’s Son into the narrative via an allusion to Ps 2:7 and portraying his baptism as a royal anointing, he demonstrates how Jesus begins to realize the implications of his anointment through his disestablishment of Satan’s kingdom. Focusing on the repetition of the allusion to Ps 2:7 at Jesus’s transfiguration and exploring how the Parable of the Vineyard uniquely encapsulates the Gospel as a whole, Neumann traces the use of the psalm throughout the Markan passion narrative, contending that, in Mark’s vision, the hope envisaged by the psalm has been realized: the Son begins to inherit (the worship of) the nations. He concludes that Mark paradoxically portrays the accomplishment of the Messiah’s victory through Jesus’s crucifixion.

Wright's latest book in his multi-volume treatment of 'the New Testament and God' reveals an impressive amount of research and reflection on practically every topic. The size and detail of Wright's book make it difficult to do justice to it, and it requires anyone who engages it in such a limited presentation to select matters for particular attention. This is an attempt to contribute productively by offering critique of certain matters, particularly those of apologetics, Wright's portrayal of Jesus' resurrection in the New Testament, 'metaphorical' use of resurrection language, religious experience and devotion to Jesus, and variety in early Christian resurrection-beliefs. But the critical focus should not be misconstrued and the overall reaction is one of appreciation and gratitude.

The present study examines non-native (L2) and native (L1) listeners' access to figurative idiomatic meaning and literal constituent meaning in two cross-modal priming experiments. Proficient German learners of English (L2) and native speakers of American English (L1) responded to English target words preceded by English idioms embedded in non-biasing prime sentences in a lexical decision task. English idioms differed in levels of translatability: Lexical level idioms had word-for-word translation equivalents in German, while post-lexical level idioms had matching idiomatic concepts in German but could not be translated word for word. Target words either related to the figurative meaning of the idiom or related to the literal meaning of the final constituent word of the idiom (e.g., to pull someone's leg, literal target: walk, figurative target: joke). Both L1 and L2 listeners showed facilitatory priming for literally- and figuratively-related target words compared to unrelated control target words, with only marginal differences between the listener groups. No effect of translatability was found; that is, the existence of word-for-word translation equivalents in German neither facilitated nor hindered meaning activation for German L2 listeners. The results are interpreted in the context of L1 and L2 models of idiom processing as well as further relevant translation studies.

12 What native and non-native speakers' images for idioms tell us about figurative language

The article is devoted to the analysis of ideas about charity in early Christianity, Judaism and in the Greco-Roman pagan tradition. The focus is on the formation of the doctrine of “correct” alms in the New Testament texts, “Didache”, in Clement of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, in the “Shepherd” of Hermas, in the writings of Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria. These authors discussed questions about who and how to help, and what kind of reward awaits benefactors. At this time (1st — 2nd centuries), two discussions were going on in parallel in early Christian literature: about martyrdom “according to Christ” and about “correct” alms, and comparison of these discussions gives interesting results.

Figure of speech changes the use of words from their usual literal meaning to a more creative, figurative or unconventional meaning. The purpose of using figure of speech is to enrich and beautify the language, as well as to create a stronger and more interesting impression in communication. This study aims to analyze the figure of speech contained in the lyrics of the Japanese song "Flower" sung by Maeda Atsuko. The study was conducted using a semantic approach to identify and understand the use of figure of speech in the lyrics. The research method involves a process of recording and direct analysis of the lyrics of the song "Flower". The figure of speech found were analyzed based on their literal and figurative meanings, as well as the context of their use in the lyrics. The results showed that the lyrics of this song contained 18 data or sentences containing various types of figure of speech, including metaphor, personification and hyperbole. The most common figure of speech found are 14 metaphors, 3 personification figure of speech and 1 hyperbole figure of speech. This research provides insight into Maeda Atsuko's creativity and artistic expression in composing the lyrics of the song "Flower". The analysis of figure of speech in these lyrics also provides a deeper understanding of the messages and feelings that singers want to convey to listeners. In addition, this research can be a contribution to literature and language studies, especially in understanding the use of figure of speech in the context of music and songs. Keywords: figure of speech, Japanese songs, semantics

Studies in Matthean Christology often tend to focus merely on the titles given to Jesus in this Gospel. These titles are considered as KEY WORDS to convey the early Christians’ confession of Jesus. Such an approach holds the risk of assuming that Matthew had a worked out “Christology” and that these titles had universal and fixed meanings. In this article I argue that such titles provide helpful pointers to Matthew’s understanding of Jesus, but on condition that their meanings are carefully interpreted within the context of the Matthean narrative. One also has to read beyond the titles and recognize allusions and motifs which Matthew uses to present his compelling narrative of Jesus.

The subject of the study is the examination of figurative meaning in Hungarian and German. In the present study, I present the interpretation of figurative meaning within the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics by analysing idiomatic expressions in Hungarian and German on the example of the concept of ‘time’. In this contrastive research, I primarily look for the answer to how ordinary people use cognitive tools to grasp intangible abstract concepts such as ‘time’ and what connections can be observed between literal and figurative meaning.
 The examined Hungarian and German idioms are the linguistic manifestations of the conceptual metaphor time is money (valuable resource). The study aims to support the assumption that in any language an abstract meaning can only be expressed with a figurative meaning.
 Time is an abstract concept that is present in the everyday language use of all people. The expressions time passes, the time is here, my time has come, it takes a lot of time – to mention just a few, have become so conventionalized in our language that we take their meaning literally. Nonetheless, they are based on conventional conceptual metaphors that we use to make the concept of time more tangible to ourselves. The linguistic manifestations of these conceptual metaphors are created and understood without any mental strain.
 In the first stage of the research, I searched for possible German equivalents of Hungarian expressions, and then I used Internet search engines and idiom and monolingual dictionaries to select the most frequently used equivalent in German. As a next step, I examined 1) the word form, 2) the literal meaning, 3) the figurative meaning, and 4) the conceptual metaphor of idioms in both languages, which were either been identical or different. Because they are different languages, the word forms are inherently different. At the end of the study, I compared the formed patterns from which I drew conclusions, which support that figurative meaning is figurative in another language as well.

The non-Pauline Letters - what do we mean by that description? The negative suggests that we are dealing with somewhat marginalized texts compared with Paul. Many of our texts have indeed become cinderellas, though one comes from a theologian worthy to rank alongside Paul and 'John'; and the rest are increasingly seen as intriguing, for they enable access to the development of diverse traditions within early Christianity. Comparing and contrasting these makes study of these apparent 'oddments' rewarding. For this reason we shall keep them all in play alongside one another. But first to identify them. Associated with the Pauline tradition, but definitely to be distinguished from Paul's work, is the Epistle to the Hebrews. Even if ascribed to Paul in the process of canonization, this work does not bear his name, and the Church of the third century CE knew not whence it came: one suggested Barnabas (Tertullian), one supposed Paul had written it in Hebrew and Luke translated it (Clement of Alexandria), one knew that Clement of Rome had been suggested but concluded that only God knows the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Origen).

Book Review: The Use of the Old and New Testa-ments in Clement of Rome, by Donald A. Hagner. Supplements to Novum Testamentum, 34; E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1973. 393 pp. 88 guilders.; The Setting of Second Clement in Early Christianity, by Karl Paul Donfried. Supplements to Novum Testamentum, 38; E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1974. 240 pp. 58 guilders.

Reviewed by: Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church Jerry L. Sumney Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church. By James W. Aageson. [Library of Pauline Studies.] (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers. 2008. Pp. xvi, 235. $24.95 paperback. ISBN 978-1-598-56041-1.) James Aageson's engaging book examines the ways various groups within the early Church developed and utilized differing images of Paul. Rejecting the notion that only Gnostics and others on the fringe of the developing Church accepted Paul as an authority, he shows how various early Christian writers used both their image of Paul and Paul's letters as sources for their theological positions. Aageson's method is to compare the patterns and structures of the [End Page 761] thought and theology of individual writings, rather than identifying features of the tradition and comparing each text to that synthetic structure. Using this method, Aageson concludes that 2 Timothy was either written by someone other than the author of 1Timothy and Titus or that the situation it addressed was so different that it required a significant reorientation of thought. He also finds diverse patterns of thought in the manners in which Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen develop their images of Paul and use Pauline texts. Aageson's analysis of how the Acts of Paul constructs and uses its image of Paul undermines the notion that this work simply opposes the line of tradition the Pastorals represent by showing that in some ways, it stands close to the image of Paul in 2 Timothy, while in others, it opposes the outlook of 1Timothy and Titus. Aageson demonstrates clearly that the church fathers did not belong to a monolithic tradition of developing orthodoxy that demanded conformity; rather, they drew on a range of developing trends, trends that sometimes stood in tension with one another. Christians such as those who wrote the Acts of Paul drew on some of the same trajectories, even as they interpreted them differently and used their image of Paul to advocate alternative views. Still, most recognized Paul as an authority and by the third century drew on his writings as authoritative. The complexity Aageson uncovers shows that no simple model of conflict or separate trajectories sufficiently accounts for what we find in early Christian writings. Neither can models that assume movement from orthodoxy to heresy, or the reverse, explain the differences and commonalities in the theological structures and thought of these works. Aageson suggests a "multiplex"approach that recognizes commonality and tension within a shared tradition that contains competing elements and makes competing uses of common materials. Readers will disagree with some specifics of Aageson's interpretation of individual texts, but such disagreements do not undermine his comparisons or his method of comparison. One might also ask for a larger and more diverse comparative base, but the series in which the book appears limits its length, as well as its explicit exchange with the scholarly literature on the works it does treat. These quibbles do not, however, significantly weaken Aageson's convincing case for acknowledging the complexity of the development of the Church's theology, ecclesiology, and ethic through the third century and the resultant need to move beyond the oppositional models that many still use to interpret the theological differences present in the early Church. [End Page 762] Jerry L. Sumney Lexington Theological Seminary Copyright © 2008 The Catholic University of America Press