The previous post on the meaning of the Greek sentence caused some more questions by the same visitor:
Perhaps the translation of τάσις as “tensity” is rather confusing. Do you mean “tendency”?
Tensity and tendency are sisters: you can not have the one without the other. Selecting one of them does not exclude the other, it just recognises the leadership. Tendency is usually connected with an unconscious inclination, which is not the case with protasis.
1) How does this tensity arise?
As anything in spiritual life: by itself. Spiritual life can not be assigned to other functions, it’s a mystery.
2) What/who leads ahead? (is there some sort of momentum in πρότασις?)
The meaning leads ahead.
3) [Quoting from the second lesson in Greek:] “A sentence, a πρότασις, is a tensity that emerges in communication and leads ahead – not just a statement, but the disclosure of something probable, which is placed in front of those who listen, calling them to estimate it carefully and bear the consequences of this estimation.”: this sounds threatening. I’d rather not find myself in a situation where such προτάσεις are “thrown” at me. … It seems to me that the word probable assigns a “True” or “False” value to πρότασις, in which case πρότασις becomes a statement (or premise).
In general (not only in language) we estimate things starting from the most important. E.g. if we want to estimate the American culture, we start from the greatest American poets, artists and philosophers, not from the clerks of a party, nor from the members of the mafia. We estimate language the same way, starting from the highest functions.
Perhaps you’d rather not find yourself in a situation where such protaseis are ‘thrown’ at you, but this has happened already and is still happening – you can ignore the Bible (or pretend you ignore it), but the Bible exists.
In case of protaseis of the highest type, the word probable refers to the listeners. To St. John it is not probable that In the Beginning was the Word, it is certain and known.
4) Is this “tensity” or “tendency” a quality inherent in the sentence by virtue of the sentence’s constituent elements (υποκείμενον, κατηγόρημα)? Is it the intention of the speaker? Does it arise in the understanding of some of the listeners? or does it describe a relationship between the speaker and some of the listeners?
If it was inherent in the form, it would arise in everyone’s mind. It regards speakers and listeners to the degree they can participate in the meaning of a protasis. If you speak about God to Lenin, the only possible tensity you are going to have in his mind is anger or contempt, etc.
I believe that you are putting forward a claim which attaches to πρότασις a metaphysical aspect, one which is beyond the scopes of argument, persuasion, logic and reasoning. In this sense it is apocalyptic. This may explain your choice of Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος. This is not (empirically) testable, hence it is not a πρότασις (not a conclusion either, you’d say); it is more (you’d agree).
I don’t agree. When John says Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, he does not express a capricious position you are obliged to accept or deny without reason. He invites you to test it, he invites you to find out if it is true – which is the reason of your tensity to the degree that you are interested in these matters. Recall the other protasis “taste and see that the Lord is good”. What if I don’t taste and if I don’t see? To the degree that I mysteriously keep paying attention to St John, instead of waving goodbye to him and his Lord, my blindness becomes a cause of tensity.
In short, you seem to claim that πρότασις includes a metaphysical aspect – in which case it is not a statement (or premise) but a revelation (apocalyptical nature of πρότασις).