Gustavo Martin, «Procedural Register in the Olivet Discourse: A Functional Linguistic Approach to Mark 13», Vol. 90 (2009) 457-483
I will rely on insights from Halliday’s register theory to explain the Markan Jesus’ use of a functional variety of language I call procedural register. The identification of procedural register in the main section of the Olivet Discourse (vv. 5b-23) will be shown to reveal the rhetorical design of the discourse within a first temporal horizon, of direct relevance for the audience and addressing the disciples’ question (v. 4). The absence of procedural register in vv. 24-27 indicates the opening of a second horizon in the speech, lacking immediate impact for the audience and no longer addressing the disciples’ question.
Procedural Register in the Olivet Discourse 481
(v. 37) are used synonimously and all suggest the adoption of an
attitude of constant vigilance and alertness. By means of these verbs,
Mark effectively connects the Olivet Discourse with the Gethsemane
episode, where Jesus commands his disciples to remain alert
(grhgorei'te 14,34; grhgorei'te kai; proseuvcesqe( 14,38). The disci-
ples, however, are twice caught sleeping (kaqeuvdonta" 14,37, 40).
Geddert and Villota Herrero have argued convincingly that the
blevpete, commands of 5b-23 and the grhgorei'te / ajgrupnei'te
commands of the final section are fundamentally different, not only
lexically, but also from a literary point of view. All of the instances of
blepw outside Mark 13 occur before Mark 13, while all he instances of
v
grhgorew outside of Mark 13 occur after this chapter.
v
III. The Language of Mark 13: From Text to Context
In Mark 13,5b-23, I have argued Mark is deploying a rare
procedural register by which behavior is prescribed for the audience
within specific time frames as indicated by the characteristic o{tan
clauses plus imperatives. I have also discussed how choices from the
transitivity network of Greek contribute to this procedural register by
depicting certain participants as agents, while others, in most cases the
“you†subject, are placed on the receiving end of the violent actions of
others. Unlike more typical instances of procedural register, the
audience in Mark 13 is not in a position to carry out any actions, other
than understand, watch out, not fear, and escape. The course of
“action†prescribed for them amounts to adopting the correct response
and attitude in the face of the violent acts of their enemies. The features
of procedural register are completely absent from the following section
of the speech, vv. 24-27, in which the Markan Jesus opens a new
temporal horizon in his oration, delivering material unrelated to the
disciples’ question, that is, to the temple’s destruction and associated
tribulation. In contrast to the events described in vv. 5b-23, no roadmap
is available to forewarn of the Son of Man’s coming.
Porter has wandered whether we can “extrapolate from the text
back to re-creation of the context of situation, as Halliday seems to
want us to be able to do…†(79). My analysis has shown how
expressions of the ideational function of language (transitivity patters
(79) S.E. PORTER, “Dialect and Register in the Greek of the New Testamentâ€,
Rethinking Contexts, Rereading Texts. Contributions from the Social Sciences to
Biblical Interpretation (ed. M.D. CARROLL R.) (JSOTSS 299; Sheffield 2000) 205.