When Wikipedia doesn't help...

I felt at a disadvantage when asked to write about the literary language of the first two chapters of Genesis. I had to go look up on Wikipedia what “literary language” even meant… only to discover that I didn’t know what the definition meant.

“A literary language is a register of a language that is used in writing, and which often differs in lexicon and syntax from the language used in speech. In some languages, such as Tamil, the difference is so extreme that the language exhibits diglossia.”

When I read that definition, (after I uncrossed my eyes, and started to think again) I thought of an experience I had while learning Spanish. I spent a year in Spain, so the version of Spanish that I learned was, well, common Spanish. But I have a friend here in the states that is also learning Spanish, and she has chosen to let me correct many of her papers, while consciously opted to use verb forms that are only used in Spain, rather than in Latin America. Because of this, her Spanish professor often jokes that reading her papers is like reading the Bible… her verbs are old fashioned and formal.

And that to me is what the language of the Bible is like. It’s simple, structured, and rather forceful. God is shown to act through short sentences because… well… in my mind it’s hard to argue with a short sentence. And to me it seems like the first chapter of Genesis is designed to specifically discourage argument, and to make a point about the absolute correctness and power of God. In the second chapter, indeed, as has been mentioned a number of times in class, God is almost a bit funny. A little bit slow on the uptake at times. And because the language is a bit lighter, the structure more fluid, it seems a bit more like a story that you could tell to children… they could interrupt and ask questions, and the story could flow around them… I can’t imagine anyone interrupting someone reciting chapter 1. It would throw off the rhythm.

And we’ve talked a lot about the power in the accounts we’ve read so far. I don’t yet know what these two chapters are saying about power, but just on a really simple level… in the first chapter the language is strong, and God has ultimate power. In chapter 2, the language is soft – less formal (though did he not say it was probably written before chapter 1? There’s probably something important in that, but I’m not sure what it means…) and God begins to give away some of his power. He gives it to man as man is given the power to name the animals… and then man (I suppose speaking in plural there) takes power for himself when deciding to eat from the tree.

So I’m still a little confused about what is meant by literary language. I’ve taken my best guess, and this is what I’ve thought. I suppose I’ve never seen the importance of it, but then again, I never noticed that all of chapter one is in simple sentences… I’ve never thought that there could be a hidden purpose in there… very interesting… I shall keep pondering and wait to see what other, more… um… English-majory-types have to say about the matter.