Okay, I have now searched more thoroughly, and after finding a few more potential examples remembered that John C. Hawkins might have a list in Horae Synopticae, which he did, on pages 135-136 (only for the gospel of Mark). Not all of the examples I am going to list here are of the same kind as the ones listed in the other post.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:45 pmI have looked for examples of the above kinds of syntactic awkwardness in the gospels, and (really) I have not yet found any which do not point to sources as the above do. I imagine such examples do exist, and I have simply not found them yet, but there are enough of the above, I think, to make the argument that such examples of awkwardness are a pretty decent indicator of sourcing.
I am listing the passages only in Greek (at least for now), since some of the issues are not all that apparent in English. I am hoping that Kunigunde can chime in on these examples, as well:
The instances which seem to be most relevant to the examples I gave in the other thread are: Mark 3.14-19; Mark 5.22-23; Mark 7.18-19. The other examples are not really of the same kind, to my eye; they generally involve a questionable choice in the case of a single word, rather than an entire clause slipped into an unexpected place or wielded in an unexpected way (involving phrases rather than words). If we think that Mark himself is responsible for the infelicities in all three of these passages, then I would have to downgrade my confidence in this sort of syntactic break to "merely plausible," down from "a pretty decent indicator." I also would probably wish to withdraw my tentative example of Matthew 4.14-16. However, I think these residual cases ought to be examined more carefully, and I intend to do so at some point. It is hardly beyond the realm of possibility that Mark 3.14-19 got the apostles' names from a source, for example, and bungled the syntax while inserting the datum that Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter. And the participial phrase at the end of Mark 7.18-19 has always read like an editorial comment slipped in from the margin by a scribe or some such. I have no special insights into the Jairus example in Mark 5.22-23 yet.
At any rate, my list of syntactic anomalies in Mark is now closer to complete.