| One of the most commendable aspects of discourse analysis is its ability to approach a text's individual paragraphs (microstructures) mindful of the broader context (macrostructure). Indeed, this interplay between micro and macrostructures is one of the foundational aspects of the discourse analysis. While there have been numerous studies seeking to identify the macrostructures of various biblical texts, there have been surprisingly few that take the next step of applying such findings to actual microstructures. Instead, discourse analysts often conclude their investigations with a delineation of the text's macrostructure, stopping short of applying their findings to the actual interpretation of individual texts. Thus, one could say that in practice the work of discourse analysis is often concluded as soon as it has begun.;This thesis, therefore, will not only attempt to provide a corrective to the problem, but will make important discoveries along the way. Specifically, this study will uncover important aspects regarding the discursive-structure of James that will then be applied to James 5:13–18. Perhaps the most important result of this study will be the conclusion that 5:13–18 does not speak of physical sickness. Thus, it will be shown that the majority of scholars have, quite simply, misinterpreted this text, and largely because of their failure to approach this text mindful of the broader context of the Epistle.;There are various schools and styles of discourse analysis, many of which are quite lengthy and cumbersome. For example, Jeffrey Reed's 525 page discourse analysis of Philippians could just as easily be criticized for its tediousness as it could be commended for its thoroughness.¹ An alternative approach to discourse analysis is that employed by D. Black in his analysis of Philippians²—a model that has proved to be thorough yet concise. Perhaps the greatest benefit of such a model is that it enables researchers to adequately examine a discourse and identify the macrostructure while still leaving ample space to apply their findings to a paragraph of the text. Furthermore, a book like James is ideal for applying discourse analysis to a microstructure, being a relatively short book in which discourse analysis need not be exceedingly lengthy.;This thesis will aim to perform a discourse analysis of James, and then to apply the analysis specifically to James 5:13–18. And this paragraph is by all means a text in need of investigation.³ Those who comment on the passage have sometimes overlooked significant details. Thus, the text-critical issues, the perfect periphrastic in 5:15, and the relation of the passage to the OT and to the context of the letter, are all issues demanding attention but ignored in many studies. This thesis proposes to examine this passage by: (1) performing a discourse analysis of the Epistle; (2) examining 5:13–18 in detail; and (3) integrating the findings of discourse analysis to the passage. The results of this study will, hopefully, be beneficial to discourse analysis as a methodology by showing how it can and should be applied to microstructures, and to our understanding of James by elucidating the meaning of an often misinterpreted and neglected passage of Scripture.;I have made it my goal to keep this thesis as readable as possible. In order to accomplish this, I have opted to translate all quotes in the body of the text from foreign languages into English, as well as many in the footnotes. Thus, all translations of Greek, Hebrew, Latin, German, and French, unless otherwise noted, are my own. I have also attempted to avoid the tedious jargon that often accompanies discourse analysis.;¹A Discourse Analysis of Philippians: Method and Rhetoric in the Debate over Literary Integrity (JSNTS 136; Sheffield: Academic Press, 1997). ²"The Discourse Structure of Philippians: A Study in Textlinguistics," NovT 37 (1995): 16–49. ³The only monograph, as far as I am aware, devoted to the paragraph is that of Sigurd Kaiser, Krankenheilung: Untersuchungen zu Form, Sprache, traditionsgeschichtlichem Hintergrund und Aussage von Jak 5, 13–18 (WMANT 112; Neukirchener Verlag: Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2006). |
