Reciprocals

GrammarReciprocals

In reciprocal constructions, multiple participants participate in the same event and are affected by it in some way. The prototypical case is when each participant engages in the same event and is affected in the same way, e.g. Leah and Adriana hugged each other. The reciprocal each other specifies that both Leah and Adriana engaged in the hugging event, and they were both affected by it, i.e. both were hugged. In this case, each other is the way that the reciprocal meaning is expressed, but languages normally have multiple means of expressing reciprocal relationships, often with slight differences in meaning, e.g. Leah and Adriana hugged one another where one another expresses a similar relationship as each other. Greek also has multiple “strategies” for expressing reciprocity. The strategies for expressing reciprocity can be grouped into two main buckets: the nominal strategy and the verbal strategy.

fromLesson 47.4

SemanticsReciprocals

The interpretation of reciprocal eventualities is complex because different relationships can hold between the participants. There are two main considerations for how to interpret reciprocals. First, participants may either be engaged in an eventuality in the same way or a different way. A verb of speaking like ὁμιλεῖ falls into this category. Each person takes a turn speaking when people are ‘conversing’ with one another. Other verbs, such as οἰκοδομεῖ ‘build up,’ refer to events where both participants do not engage in the same event in the world. One participant is being built up and another does the building up. If some people in the church at Thessalonica were being built up rather than building up, the church is, as a whole, still engaging in the event of ‘building up one another,’ and they are following Paul’s command. Some may not have the capacity to build up someone else, but they still need to allow someone to build them up.

The second issue with interpreting reciprocal verbs is identifying how many of the participants each participant is engaging with. To illustrate, we can contrast the reciprocal in Luke 24:15 (conversing on the road to Emmaus) with the reciprocal in Luke 2:15 (shepherds speaking to one another). Both disciples who were conversing on the road to Emmaus must each be talking and listening to the other participant, since there are only two participants to begin with. However, there seems to be more than two shepherds in Luke 2:15. For the sake of the discussion, let us assume there are five. The question arises: does each shepherd need to say something to every other one in order for the reciprocal to be true? Probably not. If there were five shepherds, it is enough to have each one talking to one other shepherd and not every other shepherd. If shepherd 1 talks to shepherd 2 and shepherd 3 talks to shepherds 4 and 5, it still counts as a reciprocal.

Though these distinctions are subtle, they are not trivial. When Jesus commands his disciples ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους ‘love one another,’ what counts as loving one another? If Peter loves 7 of the 11 disciples with Jesus at this moment, does this count, or does he need to love every single one? It is best to understand this example as requiring Peter to love every other individual and not just some of the individuals (unlike Luke 2:15).

fromLesson 47.4