Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 35:4 (Dec 1992)
Article: Motivation And Antithetic Parallelism In Proverbs 10-15
Author: Ted Hildebrandt

---

JETS 35:4 (December 1992) p. 433

Motivation And Antithetic Parallelism
In Proverbs 10-15

Ted Hildebrandt*

Motivation is a critical issue for employers, administrators, teachers and parents. It is also a key topic in the book of Proverbs. This paper will attempt to make contributions to proverbial motivation studies in several areas. A methodology will be developed for digging out the deep semantic motivational structures buried in the sentence literature (Proverbs 10–15). By applying this method of analysis to the sentence literature, a rich diversity of motivational forces will be exposed even though there is a dearth of explicit motive clauses. Eight deep-structure categories will provide an initial framework for categorizing and understanding the underlying thought structure of the proverbial sentences. It will be suggested that “approach/avoidance” motivation theory may provide a psycholinguistic reason for the sages’ frequent selection of antithetic parallelism as a medium to express their instruction. A dialogue will be initiated between proverbial motivation study and the vast literature on the psychology of motivation that lies untapped by Biblical scholars. Such an integration may yield fresh insights into a Biblical theory of motivation that may be of use to educators, employers and parents. Hopefully such a theory will allow us to expose the motivating forces that should and do drive us as we pursue God and others (Prov 16:2).

I. Background: OT Motive Clause Study

Gemser in 1953 first isolated the motive clause as a grammatically subordinate clause usually introduced by a particle (kî; lĕ plus infinitive; lĕmaʿan; pen-) that provides motivation for a command (Law: Exod 20:7; Deut 22:19; Prophets: Amos 5:4–5; Isa 34:5–8; Jer 4:6–8; Writings: Pss 2:11; 3:7; 95:3–7; Prov 3:1–2). After surveying the ancient Near Eastern law codes, Gemser concludes that motive clauses were unique to Israel.1 While the absoluteness of his original conclusion has been tempered by the dissertations of Sonsino and Utti, they confirm a wide frequency gap between the motives of Biblical law (30% are motivated; 375 of 1,238 commands) and the ancient law codes (only 5%-6% are motiva...

visitor : : uid: ()