How might we define structural analysis?
David Black offers these defining words: "If syntax is concerned with the meaning of words in their combination with other words, structural analysis is concerned with the ways clauses and larger thought units are placed in relation with each other. Since it is difficult to say what anything means until one has decided in a sense what everything means, the study of structure is an indispensable component of exegesis."
As you can see, structural analysis deals with the relationships between clauses and macrostructures although I've read microstructural studies before. In truth, there's no one way to do structural analysis, but I'll consider what scholars have proposed.
The main idea behind structural analysis is tracking the flow of discourse or understanding how the whole relates to the parts. One way of breaking down structures in order to see how they flow is through diagramming. For an example, see https://gknt.s3.amazonaws.com/42/original/rom_1.16-17.png
Some benefits of diagramming is that it helps one to discern grammatical subjects: you can also determine the grammatical object and other parts of speech when diagramming and track how discourse flows. Another benefit is that diagramming facilitates the separation of salient material (what is prominent) from what the writer views as subordinate. All these efforts are part of tracking discourse flow.
Some famous examples of structures amenable to analysis include Colossians 1:15-20: these verses are thought to constitute a hymn although this interpretation is not as prevalent as the idea that Philippians 2:5-11 contains hymnic material. In any case, both Colossians 1:15-20 and Philippians 2:5-11 are considered to be structural units that one can analyze to determine how they fit into the overall discourse of the respective letters.
James D.G. Dunn examines features that purportedly help one to identify hymnic material: see
his NIGT Commentary on Colossians and Philemon. Similar to other
commentators, Dunn proposes that the "hymn" in Colossians 1:15-20 clearly includes poetic elements and uses exalted language about the
Lord Jesus Christ. Furthermore, he points to hymnic clues like the relative
clause beginning with ὅς along with a sequence of clauses and phrases falling
easily into matching "rhythmic units" and a "clear structure of two
strophes (1:15-18a, 18b-20)" inter alia. See Dunn, Colossians and Philemon, pages 83-85. Compare the thoughts of F.F. Bruce here: https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/bsac-nt/bruce-colossianheresy-pt2-bs.htm
Probably no GNT books have been studied structurally like Colossians, Philippians, Hebrews and Revelation have. The first chapter of Hebrews possibly could be broken down structurally in the following way:
Hebrews 1:1-4 (the exordium of the Epistle)
1:5-2:18 (The Son's name is superior to the angels)
3:1-5:10 (Jesus is faithful and compassionate)
5:11-10:39 (The central exposition)
11:1-12:13 (Faith and Endurance)
12:14-13:19 (The Peaceful fruit of Justice)
13:20-25 (Conclusion of the Epistle)
This is one structure for Hebrews proposed by A. Vanhoye, and other attempts for arranging the structure of Hebrews can be found in George H. Guthrie, The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis.
Guthrie initiates his discussion of Hebrews by reviewing past
scholarly endeavors to discern the letter's structure. He
convincingly demonstrates that scholars have found it rather challenging
to ascertain the precise textual structure of Hebrews: it is no wonder
that Guthrie humbly approaches his task.
Since Patristic times, attempts have been made to ascertain the structure
and recurring motifs of Hebrews. Text-linguists
currently put forth efforts to apply their knowledge of discourse principles to
this Bible book; Guthrie's work demonstrates that these attempts can produce valuable fruitage.
After examining the numerous theories posited vis-à-vis the structure
of Hebrews, Guthrie proceeds to explain his own approach. Accentuating the author's use of inclusio and "hook-words," he supplies an enlightening study on the rhetorical devices
employed in Hebrews and the main point the writer is trying to develop (See Hebrews 1:5-14). Guthrie's study concludes on a somber and grave note, observing that
"the problems caused by the complex structure of Hebrews are not easily
answered; they may never be answered with a consensus of New Testament
scholarship" (146).
Comparing the writer of Hebrews to a highly skilled virtuoso, Guthrie states that while he does not understand or comprehensively fathom every rhetorical device which the writer of Hebrews wields in his discourse to the first-century recipients of his letter, he can still appreciate the hortatory and expository aspects of an epistle written by a "Mozart" of oratory (147). What insightful remarks!
The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis showcases Guthrie's thorough knowledge of discourse analysis, rhetoric, and rabbinic practices. Additionally, his approach to Hebrews models one way to carry out structural analysis.
The only drawback to Guthrie's study is that he primarily writes for specialists who have a working knowledge of Greek and rhetoric as well as some knowledge of Hebrew and the rabbinic writings; the neophyte could quickly find himself or herself lost in the sea of technical terminology used in the book. If you like struggling with difficult subjects, however, The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis will be worth the read.
My next post will discuss rhetorical criticism.
Other Resources:
https://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=jibs
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003463730510200207
I did something like this in my Jesus's Manifesto, for the blessings and woes, a clear rhythmic patter comes out (for the first 3 blessings and first three woes).
ReplyDeleteI've also done some work on Colossians 1:15-20, the structure does seem to fit a hymnic structure to me, and there are pretty clear patterns, at least as far as I've researched it.
I have Jesus' Manifesto and plan to read it soon. I love studying the rhetorical patterns, so now have even more incentive to read your book :-)
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point about Colossians 1:15-20: I'm neutral about the "hymn" issue, but the hymnic structure and poetic elements are certainly there. I can speak more to the poetry than hymn part, so I suspend judgment on the issue. However, many scholars would agree with you.
See also 1 Tim. 3:16 for a similar example.