Tomorrow I will be posting an interview I did with Douglas Estes on his new book The Questions of Jesus in John: Logic, Rhetoric, and Persuasive Discourse (QJJ). This is a preview that I wanted to share for all those scrambling to find potential thesis or dissertation topics. I asked Estes if his book on non-declaratives in the Fourth Gospel provided him with any areas of study he’d like to see future students engage. This is his answer:
I would love to see someone tackle the way Paul uses questions (or non-declaratives) in order to build up his arguments. That’s a book waiting to be written. I also think there is much more linguistic work that can be done on the NT text—linguistics is somewhat a new field, and its (meaningful) impact on the study of the NT has been minimal. I also think that there are also many studies that could be written on the various forms of question-asking and argumentation in OT books. When I wrote the QJJ, the OT folks were far ahead of NT folks in the study of argumentation (my opinion), but they don’t appear to make much use of linguistics in this particular area (as far I can see). Someone could easily go back and do research on the way interrogatives were used in Hebrew, from a linguistic perspective. One thing I noticed in writing QJJ is that some languages (such as Latin) have more robust resources for handling non-declaratives than our Greek resources do.
If you are trying to find a thesis or dissertation topic Estes suggests (1) the use of questions by Paul; (2) the function of questions in other NT books; (3) the connection between question-asking and argument in the OT; (4) the use of interrogatives in Hebrew; and (5) the differences between how languages like Greek and Latin use non-declaratives.
I hope this find some student in need of suggestions!
the archives near Emmaus 
As someone who is currently struggling to come up with a thesis topic (Only a little more than a year before I have to submit mine! Yikes!), I really appreciate this post.
I had been leaning toward instances of theo-political performance drama in the Gospel of Mark, but I’m not quite sold on it. The function of questions in one of the Synoptics is an intriguing topic—the possibilities for the study of questions as cultural rhetoric in the Gospels seems endless.
Agreed, there are many, many avenues to travel with this. If you can find a copy of Estes’ book I recommend glancing at it if not reading it. He does a fine job of mixing linguistic studies with biblical studies to present a compelling book that made me pause and think more deeply about the Gospel of John’s message and function. It has been observed that Jesus is depicted as someone who often answered questions with questions. This may be the tip of the iceberg though. What are the Evangelists doing literarily with these questions? What do they want to convey to their audience? Does this help us understand their audiences better (like I think Estes’ book did with John).
I’ve seen it suggested that the returning question-for-question is a method of countering rhetorical challenges that might attempt to shame Jesus publicly. Makes sense within the first century’s honor/shame social structure. But I agree—this really only seems like a jumping-off point to discuss deeper questions of linguistics and especially early Christian rhetoric. My guess is that Matthew especially (being a bit more Jewish and philosophical in nature) would offer insight into early Jewish/Christian cultural rhetoric.
I’ll have to pick up a copy of Estes’ book. I look forward to reading the rest of the interview.
It’s been a very long time since I’ve been in college…not much of a theologian or historian anymore, I guess. Still, I wonder if Paul’s use of questions isn’t an echo of sorts of Socratic questioning?
I have absolutely zero research into that, but it seems plausible considering that Paul was often a minister to Greeks and Romans, rather than Jews. Sorta putting wind in Brian’s sails about the questions giving us insight into Paul’s audiences.
Just my .02….probably only worth .01 😉
Joshua
I’ve heard that point made as well, though I can remember where or by whom! Matthew is likely the best option among the Synoptics.
Chance
Estes discusses Socrates a bit in his book, so you’re not off track at all.
Hi there Brian
When Estes says people should use “linguistics”, do you know what he means by this? Was a specific aspect/subfield/theory/approach in his mind—or was he just saying, in general?
You *can read minds, right? 😉
Just wondering. I would naturally gravitate towards using something that pays attention to the pragmatic effect of of the sentential constituents… like Information Structure.
Lyle
It is a broad statement, so I won’t try to unpack it since I’m not sure what specifics he intends to promote. The interview will post this morning though, so feel free to leave a comment and hopefully he will respond there.
Full interview available: http://nearemmaus.com/2013/03/15/interview-douglas-estes-on-the-question-of-jesus-in-the-gospel-of-john/
Lyle,
Let’s say that I followed a very general approach, as I am a biblical scholar, not a linguist. Most of the linguistic research I did was with linguists in a very narrow subfield, erotetics, that crosses over into logic and other areas. There are probably only a couple dozen linguists who have published in this area in the last 50 years (small group). There is a bit of philosophy there too, as you are really dealing with the way we think and speak in non-propositional situations (questions, exclamations, prayers, etc).