Another book I've started to work through (though I'll be working through this much less diligently than others) is Richard Young's Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguistic and Exegetical Approach.
At least, I decided to read the introduction to see what his book was all about. And it confirmed my suspicions: Language is difficult.
Young doesn't shy away from the task, his intro brings up issues that need resolution. We know so much intuitively in our native language. Even reading on the page, we can discern things like tone. In acquired language, these things are very difficult. It's not enough to have perfect understanding of vocabulary, morphology and syntax. As I've been seeing in the very short time I've been working through 1John, there are other factors to consider. For instance, consider the following contrived example:
“The stove is hot.”
Analyzing it by itself, it is a simple declarative sentence. However, give the same sentence some context:
“Watch out, Johnny!” he said to his four-year-old son. “The stove is hot.”
Here it is still a declarative sentence, but really it's a prohibition or a command. He means, “Don't touch the stove, Johnny!”, though that's not what is actually said.
Even if we run through each word of the sentence and determine its morphological and syntactic qualities (somewhat naively, as I'm likely to do with an acquired language), we could still be a ways off from understanding what is actually being communicated.
Young breaks this stuff down. He talks about implicit and explicit information that can be garnered from the text and context. He talks about skewing, which is “non-correspondence between form and meaning” and the need to discern and account for it. He offers the following example:
Also, when Jesus said that Lazarus sleeps, He did not mean that Lazarus went to bed, but that he died (John 11.11). The words and grammar of such expressions cannot be interpreted literally, for they involve a skewing between form and meaning. (p. 4)
Young then goes on to talk about “Surface Structure” and “Deep Structure”. But, I digress.
The main point is that learning the intricacies of an acquired language is a difficult thing. It requires one to simply immerse oneself in a language, and just try to slog through it. The more one tries, the easier it gets. With some background, one then can read grammars and say, “oh, yeah, that makes sense!” instead of “what the heck is a dative of instrument?!”. Right now, I tend more toward the latter than the former, but my flashes of insight are becoming more frequent — and that's good.
This means, of course, that I still have a lot of work ahead of me. But that's ok. It wouldn't be as fun any other way.