Grammmar Greek New Testament Full.pdf

^aSiammar

of the greek new testament in the light of historical research

BY

__^.>»^'*-.*

Af T.' ROBERTSON,

M.A., D.D., LL.D.

Professor of Interpretation of the New Testament in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville,

Ky.

"'Exofitv Se Tov Orjaavpov tovtov iv dcrrpaKlvois aKelecnv,

iva

rj

virepfioXr] Trjs 8vvafj.ecjs

b tov dead Kai

(jltj

k^

riixCiv.

— 2 Cor. 4:7

521498 HODDER & STOUGHTON NEW YORK GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY

COPYEIGHT, 1914

BY

GEORGE

H.

DORAN COMPANY

PR

^»

Presswork: Composition, Electroiyping and U.S.A. THE UNIVERSITT PRESS, CAMBRIDGE,

TO THE MEMORY OF SCHOLAR

TEACHER

PREACHER

PREFACE with mingled feelings of gratitude and regret that I let I am grateful for God's sustaining this book go to the public. grace through so many years of intense work and am fully conFor a scious of the inevitable imperfections that still remain. It

is

dozen years this Grammar has been the chief task of my life. I have given to it sedulously what time was mine outside of my teaching. But it was twenty-six years ago that my great predecessor in the chair of New Testament Interpretation proposed to his young assistant that they together get out a revised edition

The manifest demand for a new grammar of the New Testament is voiced by Thayer, the translator of the American edition of Winer's Grammar, in his article on "Language of the of Winer.

New Testament"

in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible.

I actually began the work and prepared the sheets for the first hundred pages, but I soon became convinced that it was not possible to revise Winer's Grammar as it ought to be done without making a new grammar on a new plan. So much progress had been made in comparative philology and historical grammar since Winer wrote his great book that it seemed useless to go on with it. Then Dr. Broadus said to me that he was out of it by reason of his age, and that it was my task. He reluctantly gave From that day it was in my it up and pressed me to go on.

thoughts and plans and I was gathering material for the great If Schmiedel had pushed through his work, I undertaking. might have stopped. By the time that Dr. James Hope Moulton announced his new grammar, I was too deep into the enterprise

draw back. And so I have held to the titanic task somehow the end has come. There were many discouragements and I was often tempted to give it up at all costs. No one who has not done similar work can understand the amount of research, the mass of detail and the reflection required in a book of this nature. The mere physical effort of writing was a joy of expres-

to

till

sion in comparison with the rest.

The

title of

Cauer's brilliant

book, Grammatica Militans (now in the third edition), aptly describes the spirit of the grammarian who to-day attacks the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

VIU

problems of the language of the

New

Testament

in the light of

historical research.

point of view a grammar of the Greek New Testaan impossible task, if one has to be a specialist in the whole Greek language, in Latin, in Sanskrit, in Hebrew and the other Semitic tongues, in Church History, in the Talmud, in English, in psychology, in exegesis.^ I certainly lay no claim to omniscience. I am a linguist by profession and by love also, but I am not a specialist in the Semitic tongues, though I have a working knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, but not of Syriac and Arabic. The Coptic and the Sanskrit I can use. The Latin and the Greek, the French and German and Anglo-Saxon complete my modest linguistic equipment. I have, besides, a smattering of Assyrian, Dutch, Gothic and Italian. I have explained how I inherited the task of this Grammar from Broadus. He was a disciple of Gessner Harrison, of the University of Virginia, who was the first scholar in America to make use of Bopp's Vergleichende Grammatik. Broadus' views of grammar were thus for long considered queer by the students who came to him trained in the traditional grammars and unused to the historical method; but he held to his position to the end.

From one

ment

is

This

Grammar aims

to keep in touch at salient points with the

results of comparative philology

true linguistic science.

and

historical

grammar

as the

In theory one should be allowed to as-

all this in a grammar of the Greek N. T., but in fact that cannot be done unless the book is confined in use to a few technical scholars. I have tried not to inject too much of general grammar into the work, but one hardly knows what is best when

sume

the demands are so varied.

So many men now get no Greek

except in the theological seminary that one has to interpret for them the language of modern philology. I have simply sought

modest way to keep the Greek of the N. T. out in the middle In actual it is proper to do so. class use some teachers will skip certain chapters. Alfred Gudemann,^ of Munich, says of American classical scholars: "Not a single contribution marking genuine progress, no work on an extensive scale, opening up a new perspective or in a

of the linguistic stream as far as

breaking entirely new ground, nothing, in scientific

fact, of the slightest

value can be placed to their credit."

charge, to be sure, but then originality 1

Cf. Dr.

2

The

James Moffatt's remarks

CI. Rev., June, 1909, p. 116.

in

The

is

That

is

a serious

a relative matter.

The

Expositor, Oct., 1910, p. 383

f.

PREFACE

IX

only too glad to stand upon the shoulders of his predecessors and give full credit at every turn. Who could make any progress in human knowledge but for the ceaseless toil of true scholar

is

Prof. Paul Shorey,^ of the Unianswer to Prof. Gudemann. He speaks of "the need of rescuing scholarship itself from the German yoke." He does not mean "German pedantry and but ... in all superfluous accuracy in insignificant research seriousness from German inaccuracy." He continues about "the disease of German scholarship" that "insists on 'sweat-boxing'

those 1

who have gone

before?

versity of Chicago, has a sharp

—

the evidence and straining after 'vigorous and rigorous' demon-

There probably

stration of things that do not admit of proof."

are

German

scholars guilty of this grammatical vice (are

my own

conviction that

work, such as

possible but for the painstaking

Germans

at every turn.

The

and

it is,

Amer-

wish to record my would have been im-

But

ican and British scholars wholly free?).

I

scientific investigation of the

republic of letters

is

cosmopolitan.

common with all modern linguists I have leaned upon Brugmann and Delbriick as masters in linguistic learning. In

1 cannot here recite my indebtedness to all the scholars whose books and writings have helped me. But, besides Broadus, I must mention Gildersleeve as the American Hellenist whose wit and wisdom have helped me over many a hard place. Gildersleeve has spent much of his life in puncturing grammatical He exercises a sort of bubbles blown by other grammarians. "At least whole grammars have been grammatical censorship. constructed about one emptiness." ^ It is possible to be " grammar

mad," to use The Independent's phrase.* It is easy to scout all grammar and say: "Grammar to the Wolves."^ Browning sings in A Grammarian's Funeral:

"He

— —

settled Hoti's business

let it be!

—

Properly based Oun Gave us the doctrine of the enchtic De, Dead from the waist down." F. H. Colson, in an article entitled "The Grammatical Chapters in Quin4-8 (The 01. Quarterly, Jan., 1914, p. 33), says: "The five chapters which Quintilian devotes to Grammatica' are in many ways the most valuable ^

tilian," I,

'

discussion of the subject which into

"grammar" and

largely directed to 2

The

3

Gildersleeve,

*

Article

CI.

F.

possess," though he divides

and

(p.

May

"grammatica"

37) "the whole of this chapter

meet the objection that grammar

Weekly,

by

we

"literature,"

is

'tenuis

et

is

jejuna.'"

27, 1911, p. 229.

* Am. Jour, of Philol., July, 1909, p. 229. A. W. Henderson, Blackwood for May, 1906.

1911, p. 717.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

X

Perhaps those who pity the grammarian do not know that he finds joy in his task

and

work

Prof. C. F.

is

necessary.

is

sustained by the conviction that his

Smith {The

Classical Weekly,

1912, p. 150) tells of the joy of the professor of Greek at

when he

received a copy of the

first

volume

Bonn

of Gildersleeve's

Syntax of Classical Greek. The professor brought it to the Seminar and "clasped and hugged it as though it were a most precious darling {Liehling)." Dr. A. M. Fairbairn^ once said: "No man can be a theologian who is not a philologian. He who is no grammarian is no divine." Let Alexander McLaren serve as a good illustration of that dictum. His matchless discourses are the fruit of the most exact scholarship and spiritual enthusiasm. I

venture to quote another defence of the study of Greek which

its true place in modern education. Kalamazoo College, says-: "Greek yet remains the very best means we have for plowing up and wrinkling the human brain and developing its gray matter, and wrinkles and gray matter are still the most valuable assets a student can set down on the credit side of his ledger," Dr. J. H. Moulton has shown that it is possible to make grammar interesting, as Gildersleeve had done before him. Moulton protests^ against the notion that grammar is dull: "And yet there is no subject which can be made more interesting than grammar,

will, I trust,

yet come back to

Prof, G, A, Williams, of

a science which deals not with dead rocks or mindless vegetables, but with the ever changing expression of human thought," I wish to acknowledge here my very great indebtedness to Dr, Moulton for his brilliant use of the Egyptian papyri in proof of the fact that the

New

Deissmann

KoivT],

is

Testament was written

the pioneer in this

field

in the vernacular

and

is

still

the

hard to overestimate the debt of modern New Testament scholarship to his work. Dr, D. S. Margoliouth, it is true, is rather pessimistic as to the value of the papyri: "Not one per cent, of those which are deciphered and edited with so much leader in

it.

care

us anything worth knowing."*

tell

It is

Certainly that

is

too

Address before the Baptist Theological College at Glasgow, reported in British Weekly, April 26, 1906. 2 The CI. Weekly, April 16, 1910. 3 London Quarterly Review, 1908, p. 214. Moulton and Deissmann also disprove the pessimism of Hatch {Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 1): "The language of the New Testament, on the other hand, has not yet attracted the There is no good lexicon. special attention of any considerable scholar. There is no good philological commentary. There is no adequate grammar." 1

The

*

The

Expositor, Jan., 1912, p. 73.

PREFACE

Xi

gloomy a statement. Apart from the linguistic value of the papyri and the ostraca which has been demonstrated, these letters

and

receipts

have interest as human documents.

give us real glimpses of the actual

the

first

life

of the

common

They

people in

Christian centuries, their joys and their sorrows, the

things that go so far to

make

life what it is for us all. But Testament finds a joy all his own in seeing so many words in common use that were hitherto found almost or quite alone in the New Testament or LXX. But the grammar of the N. T. has also had a flood of light thrown on it from the papyri, ostraca and inscriptions as a result of the work of Deissmann, Mayser, Milligan, Moulton, Radermacher, Thumb, Volker, Wilcken and others. I have gratefully availed myself of the work of these scholars and have worked in this rich field for other pertinent illustrations of the New Testament idiom. The material is almost exhaustless and the temptation was constant to use too much of it. I have not thought it best to use so much of it in proportion as Radermacher has done, for the case is now proven and what Moulton and Radermacher did does not have to be repeated. As large as my book is, the space is precious for the New Testament itself. But I have used the new material freely. The book has grown so that in terror I often hold back. It is a long step from Winer, three generations ago, to the present time. We shall never go back again to that standpoint. Winer was himself a great emancipator in the gram-

little

the student of the Greek

matical

field.

But the

New

battles that he fought are

now

ancient

history. It

is

proper to state that the purpose of this

that of the author's Short

Grammar which

is

now

Grammar

is

not

in use in various

modern languages of America and Europe. That book has its own place. The present volume is designed for advanced students in theological schools, for the use of teachers, for scholarly pastors who wish a comprehensive grammar of the Greek New

Testament on the desk

for constant use, for all who make a thorough study of the New Testament or who are interested in the study of language, and for libraries. If new editions come,

as I hope, I shall endeavour to

make improvements and

correc-

Errata are sure to exist in a book of this nature. Occasionally (cf. Accusative with Infinitive) the same subject is tions.

treated

more than once

points.

Some

repetition

for the purpose of fulness at special is

necessary in teaching.

repetition can be eliminated later.

I

may

Some

needless

explain also that the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

XU

works used by me in the Bodleian Library and the British Museum had the citations copied twice with double opportunity for have guarded that point to the best of have been careful to give credit in detail to the

errors of reference, but I

my

I

ability.

many works

consulted.

am reluctant to let my book slip away There is so much yet to learn, I had hoped that Mayser's Syntax der griechischen Papyri could have appeared so that I could have used it, but he sorrowfully writes me that illness has held him back. Neither Helbing nor Thackeray has finished his Syntax of the LXX. The N. T. Lexicon of Moulton and Milligan, though announced, has not yet appeared. Deissmann's Lexicon is still in the future. Thumb's revision of Brugmann's Griechische Grammatik appeared after my book had gone to the press.^ I could use it only here and there. The same thing is true of Debrunner's revision of Blass' Grammatik des New light will continue to be turned on the neutest. Griechisch. Greek of the N. T. Prof. J. Rendel Harris (The Expository Times, Nov., 1913, p. 54 f.) points out, what had not been recently noticed, that Prof. Masson, in his first edition of Winer in 1859, p. vii, had said: "The diction of the New Testament is the plain and unaffected Hellenic of the Apostolic Age, as employed by Greek-speaking Christians when discoursing on religious subthe number of which jects Apart from the Hebraisms the New has, for the most part, been grossly exaggerated genuine only Testament may be considered as exhibiting the unsophisticated facsimile of the colloquial diction employed by Grecian gentlemen of the first century, who spoke without pedantry as IbLOiTai and not as ao(l)L(TTal." The papyri have simply confirmed the insight of Masson in 1859 and of Lightfoot But, after

my

from

.

.

all is said, I

hands.

—

.

—

—

in 1863 (Moulton, ProL, p. 242).

One's mind lingers with fas-

cination over the words of the New Testament as they meet him in unexpected contexts in the papyri, as when aperr] (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9) occurs in the sense of 'Thy Excellency,' exco irapa-

O. P. 1131, 11 f. (v/a.d.), or when vTzepcoov (Ac. used of a pigeon-house, t6v vivepcoov tottou ttjs vTapxovarjs Movxivvp oldas, O. P. 1127, 5-7 (a.d. 183). But the book

(Tx^lu rfi afj aperfj, 1

:

13)

ahrCo

is

h

must now go

forth to do

its

part in the elucidation of the

New

1 Prof. E. H. Sturtevant (CI. Weekly, Jan. 24, 1914, p. 103) criticises Thumb because he retains in his revision of Brugmann's book the distinction between accidence and syntax, and so is "not abreast of the best scholarship of the day." But for the N. T. the distinction is certainly useful.

PREFACE

Xlll

I indulge the hope that Testament, the treasure of the ages.^ Dods {Later Letters, Marcus in vain. the toil has not been all are content to grammarians who the admire p. 248) says: "I knowledge intemple of permanent the add one solid stone to many swallows and only like it so round twittering stead of

attracting attention to themselves."

I

make no complaint

of the

labour of the long years, for I have had my reward in a more intimate knowledge of the words of Jesus and of his reporters

and

interpreters.

^0517

koTLv (Jo. 6

I

:

Td

prjixara

a €70? XeXdXTj/ca v/uv

irvevixb.

kcTiv koI

63).

my

must record

grateful appreciation of the

many

sympathy and

have in the Seminary colleagues My years. the through on plodded Faculty have placed me under many obligations in making it possible for me to devote myself to my task and in rendering In particular Pres. E. Y. Mullins and Prof. substantial help. been active in the endowment of the plates. have Sampey J. R. Prof. Sampey also kindly read the proof of the Aramaic and Hebrew words. Prof. W. O. Carver graciously read the proof of the entire book and made many valuable suggestions. Dr. S. Angus, of Edinburgh, read the manuscript in the first rough draft and was exceedingly helpful in his comments and sympathy. Prof. W. H. P. Hatch, of the General Episcopal Theological Seminary, New York, read the manuscript for the publishers and part of the proof and exhibited sympathetic insight that is greatly help received from

appreciated.

friends all over the world as I

Prof. J. S. Riggs, of the

Auburn Theological Semi-

gave way, and was gracious in his enthusiasm for the enterprise. Prof. Walter Petersen, Ph.D., of Bethany College, Lindsborg, Kansas, read all the proof and freely gave his linguistic attainments to the improvement of the Last, but not least in this list, Mr. H. Scott, of Birkenbook. head, England, read the whole book in proof, and in the Accidence

nary, read the proof

till

his health

with minute care and loving interest, and all through the book contributed freely from his wealth of knowledge of detail concerning the Greek N. T. The references in Syntax were verified by a dozen of my students whose labour

verified all the references

of love

is

greatly appreciated.

Janeiro, Brazil,

and

Prof. G.

W.

Pres. J.

verified the Scripture references in the verified in proof. 1

The Index

Brilliant use of the

Testament (A

New

W.

Shepherd, of Rio

Taylor, of Pineville, La., had

MS., which were again been prepared by

of Quotations has

new knowledge

Translation, 1913).

is

made by Dr. James

Moffatt's

New

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

xiv

Davis, of Richmond College, Va. the Index of Greek S. L. Watson, Tutor of N. T. Greek for this sesRev. Words by All this work has been done for me Seminary. in the sion recital of it humbles me very much. mere The gladly. and freely

Rev.

W. H.

Without

;

this expert aid in so

many

directions the

book could

not have been produced at all. I must add, however, that all errors should be attributed to me. I have done the best that I could with my almost impossible task. I have had to put on an old man's glasses during the reading of the proof. I must add also my sincere appreciation of the kind words of Prof.

Edwin Mayser

of Stuttgart, Oberlehrer

H. Stocks of

Cottbus, Pres. D. G. Whittinghill of Rome, Prof. Caspar Rene Gregory of Leipzig, the late Prof. E. Nestle of Maulbronn, Prof. James Stalker of Aberdeen, Prof. Giovanni Luzzi of Florence, Prof. J. G. Machen of Princeton, Profs. G. A. Johnston Ross and

Union Seminary, and many others who have of toil. For sheer joy in the thing Prof. C. M. Cobern of Allegheny College, Penn., and Mr. Dan Crawford, the author of Thinking Black, have read a large part of the Jas. E.

Frame

cheered

me

in

of

my years

proof. I gladly record

my

gratitude to Mr. G.

W. Norton,

Misses

Lucie and Mattie Norton, Mr. R. A. Peter (who gave in memory of his father and mother, Dr. and Mrs. Arthur Peter), Rev. R. N. Lynch, Rev. R. J. Burdette, Mr. F. H. Goodridge, and others generously contributed to the endowment of the plates I am inso that the book can be sold at a reasonable price. deeply I am co-operation. kindly debted to Mr. K. B. Grahn for making for Seminary the Trustees of grateful also to the Board of

who have

provision for completing the payment for the plates. It is a pleasure to add that Mr. Doran has shown genuine enthusiasm in the enterprise, and that Mr. Linsenbarth of the

University Press, Cambridge, has taken the utmost pains in the final proofreading,

should say that the text of Westcott and Hort is followed Use is made also of the Greek Testaments of in all essentials. Von Soden whose untimely death is so reand Nestle, Souter, chapter on Orthography and Phonetics the In event. cent an I

is made, for obvious reasons, of variations It is now four in the rest of the book. than manuscripts in the hundred years since Cardinal Francisco Ximenes de Cisneros had printed the Greek New Testament under the auspices of the University of Alcala or Complutum, near Madrid, though it

more constant use

PREFACE was not circulated lation in 1516.

of

till

1522.

Erasmus got

"The Complutensian

more than a thousand

XV his edition into circu-

edition of 1514

editions of the

was the first in Greek"

New Testament

(E. J. Goodspeed, The Biblical World, March, 1914, p. 166). It thus comes to pass that the appearance of my Grammar marks the four hundredth anniversary of the first printed Greek New Testament, and the book takes its place in the long line of aids

"Book of Humanity." The Freer Gospels and the Karidethi Gospels show how much we have to expect to the study of the

way of discovery of manuscripts of the New Testament. think with pleasure of the preacher or teacher who under

in the I

Grammar may turn afresh to his Greek Testament and there find things new and old, the vital message all electric with power for the new age. That will be my joy so long as the book shall find use and service at the hands the inspiration of this

New

of the ministers of Jesus Christ.

A. T. ROBEETSON. Louisville, Ky., 1914.

TABLE OF CONTENTS PART Chapter

I.

"

II.

"

III.

«

IV.

New The The

I

— INTRODUCTION PAQB

Historical

"

49

The Place

VII. VIII.

II

"

"

Testament

...

76

— ACCIDENCE

The Declensions The Conjugation

PART

"

New

of the

in the Koivi]

143 177

VI. Orthography and Phonetics

"

"

Method

V. Word-Formation

"

Chapter

31

KoLPv

PART Chapter

3

Material

246 of the

III

303

Verb

— SYNTAX 379

IX. The Meaning of Syntax

390

X. The Sentence

446

XI. The Cases

544

XII. Adverbs

553

XIII. Prepositions

"

XIV. Adjectives

650

"

XV. Pronouns XVI. The Article

676

" "

XVII. Voice

"

XVIII. Tense

"

XIX. Mode

" " "

XX.

754 797 821 •.

.

.

.

911

1050

Verbal Nouns

1142

XXI. Particles XXII. Figures of Speech

1194

Additional Notes

l-'09

Index of Subjects

1223

Index of Greek Words

1-49

1-^5

Index of Quotations xvii

LIST OF I

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

HAD prepared an exhaustive

analytic bibliography of the per-

was so long that, on the advice of several friends, I have substituted an alphabetical list of the main works mentioned in the book. The editions of Greek authors, the papyri and the inscriptions will be found in the Index of Quotations. Look there for them. For full histories of grammatical tinent literature, but

discussion one

may

it

turn to Sandys,

ship, vols. I-III (1906-1908);

A

History of Classical Scholar-

Gudemann, GrundriB

der Geschichte

and Hubner, GrundSyntax (1883). By no

der klassischen Philologie (2. Aufl., 1909); riB

zu Vorlesungen

means

iiber

die griechische

the works consulted and referred to in the Grammar are given below. Only the most important can be mentioned. all

Hundreds that were consulted are not alluded to in the Grammar. But the following list represents fairly well the works that have contributed most to the making of my book. The chief journals quoted are also mentioned here.

Abbott, E. A., Clue. A Guide through Greek to Hebrew (1904). Johannine Grammar (1906). Johannine Vocabulary (1905). A7n. J. Ph., The American Journal of Philology (Baltimore). Alexander, W. J., Participial Periphrases in Attic Orators (Am. ,

,

J.

Ph., IV, pp. 291-309).

Allen, H.

F.,

finitive in

The Infinitive in Polybius compared with the InBibhcal Greek (1907).

Lit., The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature (Chicago). Am. J. of TheoL, The American Journal of Theology (Chicago). Angus, S., Modern Methods in New Testament Philology (Harvard Theol. Rev., Oct., 1909). The KoiPT], the Language of the New Testament (Princ.

Am.. J. of Sem. L. and

,

Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910). Anz, H., Subsidia ad cognoscendum Graecorum

garum

sermonem

e Pentateuchi versione Alexandrina repetita

phil. Hal.,

XII, 1894, pp. 259-387).

vul-

(Diss,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XX

Apostolides, Essai sur rHellenisme figyptien et ses rapports avec I'Hellenisme cla.ssique et THellenisme moderne (1898). ,

Du

grec

grec alexandrin et des rapports avec

moderne

le

grec ancien et.le

(1892).

Archiv fur Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gehiete (Leipzig). Arnaud, Essai sur le caractere de la langue grec du N. T. (1899).

Arnold and Conway, The Restored Pronunciation

of

Greek and

Latin (1885).

AuDOiN,

E.,

De

la declinaison

dans

les

langues indo-europeennes

(1898).

Babbitt, The Use of Mr] in Questions (Harvard Studies in Class. Phil., 1901).

Bacon, Roger, Oxford Greek Grammar.

Edited by Nolan and Hirsch (1902). Bamberg, Hauptregeln der griechischen Syntax (1890).

Baron, Le Pronom Relatif et la Conjonctive en Grec (1892). Barry, W., The Holy Latin Tongue (Dublin Rev., April, 1906); Our Latin Bible (ib., July). Baumlein, Untersuchungen iiber die griech. Modi und die Partikeln Kev und av (1846). ,

Untersuch. iiber griech. Partikeln (1861).

Bekker, Anecdota Graeca. 3 Bde. (1814-1821). Benard, Formes verbales en grec d'apres le texte d'Herodote (1890).

Berdolt, Der Konsekutivsatz

Bernhardy,

G.,

in der altern griech. Lit. (1896).

Wissenschaftliche

Syntax

der

griechischen

Sprache (1829). Bihl. Ec, Bibliotheque de

I'ecole des hautes Etudes (Paris). grecque vulgaire (Paris). The Bibliotheca Sacra (Oberlin).

Bibl. Gr. V., Bibliotheque Bihl. S.,

Bibl. W.,

The

Biblical

World (Chicago).

BiRKE, De Particularum /xi? et ov Usu Polybiano Dionysiaeo Diodoreo Straboniano (1897). BiRKLEiN, F., Entwickelungsgeschichte des substantivierten Infinitivs (1882).

F., Acta Apostolorum (1895). Die griech. Beredsamkeit von Alex, bis auf August. (1865). Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa

Blass, ,

,

(1905). ,

Die rhythm. Kompos. d. Hebr.-Briefes (Theol. Stud, und 420^61). Evangelium sec. Lukam (1897).

Krit., 1902, pp. ,

LIST OF Blass,

F.,

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

Grammatik

d. neut. Griech.

,

Hermeneutik

,

Philology of the Gospels (1898).

,

2. Aufl.

XXI

(1902).

unci Kritik (1892).

Pronunciation of Ancient Greek (translation by Purton in 3. Aufl. of Tiber die Aussprache des Griech. (1888).

1890 of

Blass-Debrunner, Grammatik d. neut. Griech. 4. Aufl. (1913). Blass-Thackeray, Grammar of New Testament Greek. 2d ed. (1905).

Bloomfield, study

BoHMER,

J.,

Das

of

Greek Accent

biblische

(A. J. Ph., 1883).

"im Namen"

(1898).

BoiSACQ, Les dialectes doriens (1891). Dictionnaire etymol. de la langue grecque (1907 ff.). BoLLiNG, The Participle in Hesiod (Cath. Univ. Bulletin, 1897). BoNHOFFER, A., Epiktet und das N. T. (1911). ,

Bopp, Vergleichende Grammatik (1857). Br. W., The British Weekly (London). Broadus, John A., Comm. on Matt. (1886). Brockelmann, C., GrundriB der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen (1907). Brugmann, K., Elements of Comparative Grammar of the IndoGermanic Languages (translation by Wright, 1895). ,

Griechische Grammatik.

Vierte vermehrte Aufl. of A. ,

I,

GrundriB der

3. Aufl.

Thumb

(1900), the ed. quoted. (1913).

vergl. Gr. d. indog. Sprachen.

2. Aufl.,

Bde.

II (1897-1913).

Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen (1904). Buck, C. D., Introduction to the Study of the Greek Dialects ,

(1910).

BuLTMANN,

R.,

Der

Stil

der paulinischen Predigt

und

die kynisch-

stoische Diatribe (1910).

Buresch, Teyovav und anderes Vulgargriechisch (Rhein. Mus. f.

Phil., 1891, pp.

193-232).

BuRKiTT, F. C., Syriac Forms of N. T. Proper Names (1912). Burrows, R. M., Discoveries in Crete (1907). Burton, E. D., Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the N. T. Gk. 3d ed. (1909). BuRTON-ZwAAN, Syntax d. Wijzen etijden in h. Gr. N. T. (1906). Butcher, S. H., Some Aspects of the Greek Genius (1893). Harvard Lectures on Greek Subjects (1904). BuTTMANN, A., Grammatik d. neut. Sprachgebrauchs (1859). Buttmann-Thayer, a Grammar of the N. T. Greek (1880). ,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XXll

Bywater,

J.,

NEW TESTAMENT

The Erasmian Pronunciation

of

Greek and

its

Pre-

cursors (1908).

•

Byz.Z., Byzantinische Zeitschrift (Leipzig). Cambr. Ph. J., Cambridge Philological Journal. Cath. Univ. Bull., Catholic University Bulletin.

Cauer, Grammatica Militans. 3d ed. (1912). Chandler, H., A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation. 2d ed. (1881). Chase, F. H., The Credibihty of the Acts (1902). Christ, W., Geschichte der griech. Literatur bis auf die Zeit Justinians.

4. Aufl. (1905).

Churton, The Influence

5.

Aufl. (1913).

of the Septuagint

upon the Progress

of

Christianity (1861).

Claflin, Edith, Syntax of Boeotian Dialect Inscriptions (1905). Classen, J., De Grammaticae Graecae Primordiis (1829). CI. Ph., Classical CI. Q., Classical

CI. Rev., Classical CI.

Philology (Chicago).

Quarterly (London).

Review (London).

W., Classical Weekly (New York).

Clyde, J., Greek Syntax (1876). CoMPERNASS, De Sermone Gr. Volg. Pisidiae Phrygiaeque meridionalis (1895).

CoNYBEARE and Stock,

Selections from the

LXX.

A Gram-

matical Introduction (1905).

CouRTOZ, Les Prefixes en Grec, en Latin et en Frangais (1894). Cremer, H., Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N. T. Greek (1892). Urwick's translation. ,

Bibl.-theol.

Worterbuch

d. neut. Gracitat.

9. Aufl. (1902).

Cremer-Kligel, neue Aufl. (1912).

Cronert, W., Memoria Graeca Herculanensis

(1903).

Questiones Herculanenses (1898). Crum, W. E., Coptic Ostraca from the Collections of the Egypt Exploration Fund, the Cairo Museum and others (1902). ,

Curtius, G., Greek Etymology. ,

Studien zur griech. und

Dalman,

G.,

Grammatik des

lat.

2 vols. (1886).

Grammatik (1868-1878).

judisch-palastinischen Aramaisch

(1894).

Worte Jesu (1902). The Words of Jesus (1902). Translation by D. M. Kay. Dawes, E. S., Pronunciation of the Gk. Aspirates (1894). ,

,

D. B., Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings, 1898-1904). D. C. G., Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels (Hastings, 1906).

LIST OF

Deissmann,

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO Tr. by A. Grieve; Neue Bibelstudien (1897).

a., Bible Studies (1901).

studien (1895) and

XXIU

cf.

Bibel-

,

Biblische Gracitat etc. (Theol. Rundschau, Okt. 1912).

,

Die Hellenisierung des semitischen Monotheismus

Jahrb.

f.

(N.

d. kl. Alt., 1903).

Die neut. Formel "in Christo" (1892). Die Sprache d. griech. Bibel (Theol. Rundschau, 1906, No. 116). Die Urgeschichte des Christentums im Lichte der Sprachforschung (Intern. Woch., 30. Okt. 1909). Hellenistisches Griechisch (Herzog-Hauck's Realencyc, VII, ,

,

.

,

,

1899). ,

,

,

Licht

vom

Osten (1908).

Light from the Ancient East (1910). Tr. by Strachan. New Light on the N. T. (1907). Tr. by Strachan.

Papyri (Encyc. Bibl., Ill, 1902). Paul in the Light of Social and Religious History (1912). Delbrijck, B., Ablativ LocaHs Instrumentalis (1867). GrundriU der vergl. Gramm. d. indog. Sprachen. Syntax. ,

,

St.

"

,

Bde. III-V (1893, 1897, 1900). Introduction to the Study of Language (1882). Einleitung in das Sprachstudium. 4. Aufl. (1904). 5. Aufl. (1913). Syntaktische Forschungen. 5 Bde. (1871-1888). ,

,

Dick, Der schriftstellerische Plural bei Paulus (1900). Dickey, S., New Points of View for the Study of the Greek of the N. T. (Princeton Theol. Rev., Oct., 1903). Diel, De enuntiatis finalibus apud graecorum rerum scriptores posterioris aetatis (1894).

Dieterich, K., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Sprache von der hellen. Zeit bis

zum

10.

Jahrh. n. Chr. (1898).

Donaldson, J. W., The New Cratylus (1859). Draeger, Hist. Syntax d. lat. Sprache (1878-1881). Dubl. Rev., The Dublin Review (Dublin). DtJRR, Sprachliche Untersuchungen (1899). Dyroff, a., Geschichte des Pronomen Reflexivum (1892, 1893). Earle, M. L., Classical Papers (1912). Ebeling, H., Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zum N. T. (1913). Eckinger, Die Orthographie lateinischer Worter in griech. Inschriften (1893).

E. G. T., Expositor's Greek Testament. Encyc. Bibl., Encyclopaedia Biblica. Encyc.

Brit.,

Encyclopaedia Britannica.

11th ed. (1910).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

XXIV

Engel, E., Die Aussprache des Griechischen (1887). Ernault, Du Parfait en Grec et en Latin (1886). Evans, A. J., Cretan Pictographs and Pre-Phoenician Script (1895).

Further Researches (1898). The Expositor (London). Expos. T., The Expository Times (Edinburgh). ,

Exp.,

Farnell, L. R., Greek Conditional and Relative Sentences (1892). Farrar, F. W., Greek Syntax (1876). Fick-Bechtel, Die griechischen Personennamen. 2. Aufl. (1894). Pars Tertia (1881).

Field, F., Otiura Norvicense.

Flensberg, tJber Ursprung und Bildung des Pron. auros (1893). Fowler, The Negatives of the Indo-European Languages (1896). FoY, K., Lautsystem der griech. Vulgarsprache (1879). ^Frankel, Griechische Denominativa (1906). Frenzel, Die Entwick. des relativen Satzbaues im Griech. (1889). Die Entwick. der Satze mit irpiv (1896). FucHS, A., Die Temporalsatze mit den Konjunktionen "bis" und "solangals" (1902). ,

FiJHRER,

De

Particulae ws

cum

Usu Thucydideo (1889). Galloway, W. F., On the Use

Participiis et Praepos.

punctae

of Mtj with the Participle in Clas-

Greek (1897). Geddes, a Compendious Greek Grammar (1888). Gelbart, The Modern Greek Language in Its Relation to Ancient Greek (1870). Gersdorf, C. G., Beitrage zur Sprachcharakteristik der Schriftsteller des N. T. (1816). Gesenius-Kautzsch, Hebrew Grammar. Geyer, M., Observationes epigraphicae de praepositionum graec. forma et Usu (1880). GiLDERSLEEVE, B. L., Editions of Pindar and Justin Martyr. sical

,

Latin Grammar.

Many

editions since 1867.

Notes on Stahl's Syntax of the Greek Verb (1910). Numerous articles in the American Journal of Philology. GiLDERSLEEVE and Miller, Syntax of Classical Greek. Part ,

,

I

(1900), Part II (1911). Gildersleeve Studies.

Volume

in

honour of Prof. Gildersleeve of

Johns Hopkins (1902). Giles,

P.,

A

Short Manual of Comparative Philology.

(1901). ,

The Greek Language (Encyc.

Britannica, 1910).

2d

ed.

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF

XXV

Giles-Hertel, Vergl. Grammatik (1896). Tr. of Giles' Manual. GoETZELER, L., De Polybii elocutione (1887). Einflufi d. Dion. Hal. auf d. Sprachgebrauch (1891). GooDSPEED, E. J., Did Alexandria Influence the Nautical Language of St. Luke? (The Expositor, VIII, 1903, pp. 130-141). Goodwin, W. W., Greek Grammar. Various editions. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb. Rev. ,

,

ed. (1890).

Granit,

De

Inf. et Part, in Inscr. Dial.

Graec.

Questiones Sjnit.

(1892).

Green,

Mrj for ov before

Lucian (Studies in Honour of B. Gil-

dersleeve, 1902).,

Green, Green,

B.,

Notes on Greek and Latin Syntax (1897). Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek N. T.

S. G.,

Rev. ed. (1904). R., Canon and Text of the N. T. (1907). Die griech. Handschriften d. N. T. (1908). Nov. Test. Graece, ed. Tischendorf. Bd. Ill, Prolegomena

Gregory, C. ,

,

(1884-1894). ,

Textkritik d. N. T.

Grimm-Thayer, GrIjnewald,

a

L.,

3 Bde. (1900-1909).

Greek-English Lexicon of the N. T. (1887). Der freie formelhafte Inf. d. Limitation im

Griech. (1888).

GuDEMANN, 2. Aufl.

A.,

GrundriB der Geschichte

d.

klass.

Philologie.

(1909).

GuiLLEMARD, W. H., Hebraisms in the Greek Testament (1879). GuNTHER, R., Die Prapos. in d. griech. Dialektinschriften (Indog. Forsch., 1906).

Hadley and Allen, Greek Grammar

(1895).

Hadley, James, Essays Philological and Critical (1873). Language of the N. T. (vol. II, Hackett and Abbott's ,

ed. of

Smith's B. D., 1898).

Hahne, Zur sprachlichen Asthetik d. Griechischen (1896). Hale, W. G., The Anticipatory Subj. in Gk. and Lat. (Stud.

CI.

Phil., 1895). ,

The Cum Constructions (Studies in Class. The Origin of Subj. and Opt. Conditions

Phil., 1887).

in Gk. and Lat. (Harvard Studies in Class. PhiloL, 1901). Hamilton, The Negative Conditions in Greek (1899). Hammer, De re Particulae Usu Herodoteo Thucydideo Xenophonteo (1904). ,

Hammerschmidt,

tjber die Grundb.

von Konjunktiv und Optativ.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XXvi

NEW TESTAMENT

Harnack, a., Luke the Physician (1907). The Acts of the Apostles (1909). Harris, J. Rendel, Side-Lights on N. T. Research ,

Harrison, Gessner,

A

(1908).

Treatise on the Philology of Greek Prepo-

sitions (1858).

Harrison, Miss Jane, Prol. to the Study of Greek Religion (1903). Harsing, C., De Optativi in Chartis Aegyptiis Usu. Diss. Bonn (1910).

Hartel, Abrifi der Gr. d. hom. und herod. Dial. (1888). Hartung, J. A., Lehre von den Partikeln der griech. Spr.,

I,

II

(1832-1833).

Hatch, E., Essays in Bibl. Greek (1892). Hatch, W. H. P., Some Illustrations of N. T. Usage from Greek Inscriptions of Asia Minor (Journ. of Bibl. Lit., 1908, pp. 134-146).

Hatzidakis, G. N., Einleitung in die neugriechische Grammatik (1892).

Havers, W., Untersuch. zur Kasussyntax der indog. Sprachen (1911).

Horae Synopticae. 2d ed. (1909). Heine, G., Synonymik des neutest. Griechisch (1898). Heinrici, K. F., Der literarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften

Hawkins,

J. C.,

(1908).

HEiTMiJLLER, W., Im Namcu Jesu (1902). Helbing, R., Die Priipos. bei Herodot und andern Historikern (1904). ,

,

Laut- und Wortlehre (1907). Gebrauch des echten und soziativen Dativs bei

Grammatik der Septuaginta. tJber den

Herodot.

Henry,

Precis de

grammaire du grec

et

du

latin.

5th ed. (1894).

Elliott's tr. of 1st ed. (1890).

Hermes, Zeitschrift fiir klassische Philologie. Hesseling, D. C., De Koine en de oude dialekten van Griechenland (1906).

Hicks, E.

L., St.

Paul and Hellenism (Studia Biblica et EccL,

1896). ,

Traces of Greek Philosophy and

Roman Law

in the

N. T.

(1896).

Use of Political Terms in the N. T. (Class. Rev., March and April, 1887). Hicks, E. L., and Hill, G. F., A Manual of Greek Historical In,

scriptions (1901).

LIST OF

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

XXVll

HiRT, H., Handbuch der griech. Laut- und Formenlehre (1902). Aufl. (1912).

2.

HoBART, W. K., The Medical Language of Luke (1882). Hoffmann, F., Neutestamentliche Bibelstudien, 5 Bde. tjber die Entwick. des Begriffs der Grammatik ,

(1903). bei

den

Alten (1891).

Hoffmann,

O., Das Prasens der indog. Grundsprache (1889). Die griechische Dialekte, I-III (1891-1898). Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und ihr Volkstum (1906). Geschichte d. griech. Sprache (1911). Hogarth, D. G., Philip and Alexander (1897). HoLL, K., Das Fortleben der Volkssprachen in nachchristlicher Zeit (Hermes, 1908, 43, pp. 243 ff.). HooLE, C. H., The Classical Element in the N. T. (1888). HoRT, F. J. A., Notes on Orthography (pp. 141-173, vol. H of the N. T. in the Original Greek, 1882). Howes, The Use of Mrj with the Participle (Harv. St. in CI. Ph., ,

,

,

1901).

Hatch and Redpath, Concordance

to the

LXX

(1897).

HiJBNER, E., GrundriB zu Vorlesungen iiber die griech. Syntax (1883).

HuBSCHMANN, Zur Kasuslchre (1875). Humphreys, M. W., The Problems of Greek (Congress and Sciences, 1904,

vol. Ill, pp. 171

of Arts

ff.).

Indog. Forsch., Indogermanische Forschungen (StraCburg).

Immer,

Hermeneutics of the N. T.

J.,

Tr.

by A. H. Newman

(1877). Intern. Woch., Internationale Wochenschrift.

Jacobsthal, H. K., Der Gebrauch der Tempora und Modi in den kretischen Dialektinschriften (1906). Jacquier, E., Histoire des Livres du N. T. Tomes I-IV. Ch. ii, Tome I, Langue du N. T. J. kl. Ph., Jahrbuch fiir klass. Philologie (Leipzig). Jannaris, a. N., a Historical Greek Grammar (1897). On the True Meaning of the KoLvri (Class. Rev., 1903, pp. ,

93

ff.).

Jebb, R. ,

,

C,

Attic Orators.

to Vincent

Jelf,

2d

ed. (1893).

Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey (1892). On the Relation of Classical to Modern Greek (Appendix

W.

E.,

(1866).

and Dickson's Handbook to Mod. Gk., 1887). of the Greek Language. 2 vols.

a Grammar

XXViii

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

NEW TESTAMENT

JoHANNESsoHN, M., Dgt Gebrauch der Kasus und der Prapositionen in der Septuaginta. Teil I (1910). Jolly, Ein Kapitel d. vergl. Syntax, Der Konjunktiv und Optativ.

Geschichte des Infinitivs im Indog. (1873). the Syntax of Some Prepositions in the Greek Dialects

,

On

Joy,

(1905).

The Journal of Philology (London). The Journal of Bibhcal Literature (Boston). J. H. S., The Journal of Hellenic Studies (London). J. T. S., The Journal of Theological Studies (London). JtJLicHER, A., Introduction to the N. T. Tr. by Ward J. of Phil., J. B. L.,

(1904).

Kaerst, J., Geschichte des hellenistischen Zeitalters (1901). Kaibel, Stil und Text der 'AQtivaiwv IIoXtTeta. Kalker, F., Questiones de elocutione Polybiana (1880). Kallenberg, Stud, iiber den griech. Artikel (1891). Kautzsch, E., Grammatik d. bibl. Aram. (1884). Kennedy, H. A. A., Recent Research in the Language of the N. T. (The Expos. T., xii, 1901). Sources of N. T. Greek (1895). St Paul and the Mystery Rehgions (1913). Kenyon, F. G., Evidence of the Papyri for Textual Criticism of the N. T. (1905). Handbook to the Textual Grit, of the N. T. 2d ed. (1912). Palseography of the Greek Papyri (1899). Papyri (Hastings' D. B., extra vol., 1904). King and Cookson, The Principles of Sound and Inflexion as Illustrated in the Greek and Latin Languages (1888). Krauss, S,, Griechische und lateinische Lehnworter in Talmud, ,

,

,

,

,

Midrasch und Targum. I (1898), II (1899). Krebs, F., Die Prapositionen bei Polybius (1882.

Schanz' Bei-

trage). ,

Die Prapositionsadverbien

in der spateren hist. Gracitat.

Tl. I (1889). ,

Zur Rektion der Kasus

in der spateren hist. Gracit. (1887-

1890).

Krenkel, Josephus und Lukas (1894). Kretschmer, p., Die Einl. in die Geschichte der

griech,

Sprache

(1906). ,

,

Die Entstehung der Kotj'^ (Sitz. ber, d, Wien. Akad., 1900), Die griech, Vaseninschriften ihrer Sprache nach untersucht

(1894).

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF

Krumbacher,

K., Beitrage zu einer Geschichte Sprache (Kuhn's Zeitschr., 1885, pp. 481-545). ,

,

,

XXIX

der

griech.

Das Problem d. neugriech. Schriftsprache (1902). Das Programm des neuen Thesaurus d. griech. Spr.

(1909).

Die griech.

Tl.

I,

Abt.

des Mittelalters (Kultur d. Gegenwart,

Lit.

1905).

viii,

Kuhner-Blass, AusfiihrHche Grammatik 3. Aufl. of

Kuhner.

Kuhner-Gerth, KuHRiNG,

Ausf.

Bde.

Tl. II,

G.,

I,

De

Teil

I,

Gramm.

Bde.

I,

griech.

d.

Sprache.

II (1890, 1892).

d. griech. Spr.

3. Aufl. of

Kiihner.

II (1898, 1904).

praepositionum Graecarum in chartis Aegyp-

tiacis (1906).

KuPFF, Der Gebr. d. Opt. bei Diod. Sic. (1903). K. Z., Kuhn's Zeitschrift flir vergl. Sprachforschung (Berlin). Lafoscade, Infl. du Lat. sur le Grec (Bibl. de TEcole des hautes fit.,

1892, pp. 83-158).

Lagarde, p. de, Septuagintastudien. I (1891). Lake, K., The Text of the N. T. 4th ed. (1908). Lambert, fitude sur le dialecte eolien (1903). Lang, A., Homer and His Age (1906). Laqueur, R., Questiones epigraphicae et papyrologicae

selectae

(1904).

La Roche, Beitrage zur griech. Gr. (1883). Das Augment des griech. Verbums (1882). Laughlin, T. C., The Solecisms of the Apocalypse ,

(1902).

Lautensach, Verbalflexion der attischen Inschriften (1887). Lefevre, Race and Language (1909). Lell, Der Absolut-Akk. im Griech. bis zu Aristoteles (1892). Leutner, W. G., The Article in Theocritus (1907). LiDDELL and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon. 7th ed. (1882). LiETZMANN, H., Die klass. Philologie und das N. T. (N. Jahrb. f. ,

kl. Alt.,

1908, Bd. 21).

Griechische Papyri ausgewahlt und erklart.

2. Aufl.

(1910).

Lightfoot, Trench, Ellicott, The Revision of the N. T. (1873). Lipsius, K. HA-'., Grammatische Untersuchungen iiber die bibl. Gracitat (1863).

Livingston, The Greek Genius and Its Meaning to Us (1912). LoBECK, C. A., Phrynichi ecloga nominum et verborum Atticorum (1820).

Lock, W., The Bible and Christian Life (1905). LoiSY, A., Histoire critique du texte et des versions de (1892).

la

Bible

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XXX

LoTTicH, B.,

De sermone

NEW TESTAMENT

vulgari Atticorum (1881).

LuTZ, Die Kasus-Adverbien bei

att. Rednern (1891). Punkte des Griech. (1848). Syntax of the Greek Language (1880). Mahaffy, J. P., A Survey of Greek Civilization (1897). Greek Life and Thought (1896). Progress of Hellenism in Alexander's Empire (1905). The Greek World under Roman Sway (1890). What Have the Greeks Done for Civilization? (1909). Margoliouth, D. S., Language of the O. T. (Hastings' D. B.). Margolis, The Particle in O. T. Gk. (Am. J. of Sem. Lang, and

Madvig, Bemerk.

iiber einige

,

,

,

,

,

ij

Lit., July, 1909).

Marshall, ii,

iii,

J. T.,

The Aramaic Gospel (The Expositor, The Expos. Times, iv, 260).

ser.

IV,

iv, vi, viii;

Marti, K., Kurzgef. Gr.

d. bibl.

aram. Spr. (1911).

Grammatik der griech. Papyri aus der Ptolemaerzeit. Laut- und Wortlehre (1906).

Mayser,

E.,

Meillet,

a.. Introduction h 1' etude comparative des langues indoeuropeennes (1908). 3d ed. (1912). L'aoriste en lat. (Revue de Phil., 1897, p. 81 f.). ,

Notes d'fitymologie Grecque (1896). Meister, R., Beitrage zur Lautlehre d. LXX (1909). Der syntakt. Gebrauch d. Genitivs in den kret. Dialektinschriften (Indog. Forsch., XVIII, pp. 133-204). Die griech. Dialekte. 2 Bde. (1882-1889). ,

,

,

,

Prol. zu einer

Gramm.

d.

LXX

Meisterhans-Schwyzer, Gramm.

(1907).

d. attischen

Inschriften.

3.

Aufl. (1900) of Meisterhans.

Merriam, a. C, Temporal Coincidence Principal Verb (Proc.

Meyer, Meyer, Meyer, ,

A., Jesu

Am.

Phil.

of the Aor. Part, with the

Assoc, 1877).

Muttersprache (1896).

G., Griech.

Grammatik.

3. Aufl.

(1896).

L., Griech. Aoriste (1879).

Vergl. Gr. d. griech.

1884).

und

lat.

Spr.

2 Bde.

2. Aufl.

(1882-

h..

MEYER-LtJBKE, Gramm. d. roman. Spr. 3 Bde. (1890-1899). MiDDLETON, Analogy in Sjmtax (1892). The Doctrine of the Greek Article (1855). MiLDEN, The Limitations of the Predicate Position in Greek. Miller, C. W. E., The Limitation of the Imperative in the Attic Orators (Am. J. Ph., 1892, pp. 399-436). MiLLiGAN, G., Selections from the Greek Papyri (1910). ,

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF

XXXI

MiLLiGAN, G., The Greek Papyri with Special Reference to their Value for N. T. Study (1912). The N. T. Documents (1913). MiTSOTAKis, Praktische Gr. d. neugriech. Schrift- und Umgangs,

sprache (1891).

MiTTEis und WiLCKEN, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde.

MoFFATT,

J.,

MoMMSEN,

2 Bde. (1912).

The New Testament.

T.,

Beitrage

A New

Translation (1913). Prapositionen

zur Lehre der griech.

(1886-1895).

Die Prap.

,

Monro, D.

B.,

crvp und nera bei den nachhom. Epikern (1879). Homeric Grammar (1882). 2d ed. (1891). First

ed. used.

Moulton; J. H., A Grammar of N. T. Greek. mena (1906). 3d ed. (1908).

Vol.

N. T. Greek (The Expositor,

,

Characteristics of

,

Einleitung in die Sprache des N. T. (1911).

I,

Prolego-

1904).

Grammatical Notes from the Papyri (The Expositor, 1901, The Classical Re-

,

pp. 271-282; 1903, pp. 104-121, 423-439.

view, 1901, pp. 31-37, 434-441; 1904, pp. 106-112, 151-155).

Introduction to N. T. Greek (1895).

,

2d

ed. (1904).

Language of Christ (Hastings' One-vol. D. B., 1909). N. T. Greek in the Light of Modern Discovery (Cambr.

,

,

Bibl. Essays, 1909, pp. 461-505).

The Science of Language (1903). Moulton, W. F., and Geden, A. S., A Concordance ,

to the Greek Testament (1897). Moulton and Milligan, Lexical Notes from the Papyri (The Expos., 1908—). A Lexicon of N. T. Greek based on these "Notes" is ,

announced. MozLEY, F. W., Notes on the Bibl. Use of the Present and Aorist Imperative (Journ. of Theol. Stud., 1903, iv, pp. 279-282). MuLLACH, F., Grammatik d. griech. Vulgarsprache (1856). MtJLLER, H. C, Hist. Gramm. d. hellen. Sprache (1891). MtJLLER, I., Handbuch d. klass. Altertumswissenschaft (1885 ). MtJLLER, Max, Three Lectures on the Science of Language (1891). Murray, G., A History of Ancient Greek Lit. (1897). MuTZBAUER, C, Die Grundbedeutung des Konjunktivs und Optativs und ihre Entwick. im Griech. (1908). Die Grundlagen der griech. Tempuslehre und des hom. Tempusgebrauchs. I (1893), II (1909).

—

,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XXXii

Nachmanson,

E., Beitrage zur

NEW TESTAMENT

Kenntnis der

sprache (1910). Epigraphisch-grammatische ,

altgriech. Volks-

Bemerkungen

(Eranos

11,

1912).

Laute und Formen der magnetischen Inschriften (1903). e (1905). Nageli, T., Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus. a ,

—

Navarre, Etude

sur les particules grecques (R. E. A.,

vii,

pp.

116-130).

Nestle,

E., Einfiihrung in das griech.

N. T.

2.

Aufl.

(1899).

Introd. to the Textual Crit. of the N. T. (Tr. 1901).

Novum Testamentum

,

Graece.

8th ed. (1910).

,

Septuagint (Hastings' D. B., 1902). Septuaginta-Studien. I-V (1886-1907).

,

Zum

,

neutest. Griechisch (Z. N. W.,

vii,

1906).

Neubauer, Studia Bibhca (1885). N. k. Z., Neue kirchhche Zeitschrift (Leipzig). N. Jahrb. U. Alt, Neue Jahrbiieher fiir das

'

klass.

Altertum

(Leipzig).

NiLssoN, Kausalsatze im Griech. bis Aristoteles. I., Die Poesie. NoRDEN, E., Die antike Kunstprosa. 2. Aufl. (1909). Oertel, H., Lectures on tlie Study of Language (1902).

Ogden, De

infinitivi finalis vel consecutivi constr.

apud

priscos

poetas Graecos (1913). Paley, Greek Particles and their Combinations (1881). Pallis, A., A Few Notes on the Gospel (1903). The N. T. (Gospels) in modern 'H Nea ^la^r]Kr) (1902). Greek vernacular. Pater, W., The Renaissance (1904). Paul, H., Principles of the History of Language (1888). Tr. Petersen, W., Greek Diminutives in -lov (1910). Pfeifauf, Der Artikel vor Personen- und Gotternamen bei Thuk. ,

und Herod. (1908). Pfister, Die parataktische Darstellungsform in der volkstiimhchen Erzahlung (Woch. f. klass. Phil, 1911, pp. 809-813). Ph. W., Philologische Wochenschrift. Ph. Z., Philologus: Zeitschrift f. d. kl. Alt. (Gottingen). Postgate, J. p.. Contrasts of Oh and M?? (Cambr. Phil. Jour., 1886). Prellwitz, Etym. Worterbuch d. griech. Sprache (1893). 2d ed. (1905).

Preuschen, E., Vollstandiges griechisch-deutsches Handworterbuch zu den Schriften d. N. T. und d. ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur (1908).

LIST OF Pr. Rev.,

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

The Princeton Review

PsiCHARi,

Essai sur

J.,

le

XXxiii

(Princeton).

grec de la Septante (Rev. des etudes

juives, April, 1908).

Essais de grammaire historique neo-grecque (1886-1889).

,

Radermacher, L., Neut. Grammatik. Das Griechisch des N. T. im Zusammenhang mit der Volkssprache (1911). Ramsay, W. M., Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia. 2 vols. (1895, 1897). St.

,

Paul the Traveller (1896).

R. E., Herzog-Hauck's Realencyclopadie. R. E. Gr., Revue des etudes grecques (Paris).

Reffel, tJber den Sprachgebr. d. Agathias. Reik, Der Opt. bei Polyb. und Philo (1907). Reinach, S., Pap. grecs et demotiques (1905).

Reinhold, H., De graecitate Patrum (1898). Reisart, Zur Attraktion der Relativsatze in der griech. Prosa. Reitzenstein, Geschichte d. griech. Etym. (1897). Renaud, The Distributed Emphasis of the Pers. Pronoun (1884). Rev. and Exp., The Review and Expositor (Louisville). Rev. d. Ling., Revue de Linguistique de la Phil, comparee (Paris). Rev.

d.

Rev. of

Revue de Philologie (Paris). Th. & Ph., Review of Theology and Philosophy (Edin-

Ph.,

burgh)

.

Rh. M., Rheinisches

Museum

(Bonn).

Ridgeway, W., The Early Age of Greece. Vol. I (1901). RiEMANN and Goelzer, Grammaire Comparee du Grec Latin.

RiES,

Was

Roberts,

et

du

I (1897), II (1901). ist

A

Syntax? (1894).

Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Jesus

(1893).

Roberts-Gardner, Introduction to Greek Epigraphy (1883). Robertson, A. T. A Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (1908). 3d ,

ed. (1912).

Syllabus on N. T. Greek Syntax (1900).

Robertson-Bonaccorsi, Breve grammatica del Nuovo Testamento greco (1910). Robertson-Grosheide, Beknopte Grammatica op het Grieksche Nieuwe Testament (1912). Robertson-Montet, Grammaire du grec du N. T. (1911). Robertson-Stocks, KurzgefaBte Grammatik des neut. Griechisch (1911).

Rose,

A., Christian

Greece and Living Greek (1898).

XXxiv

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

RossBERG, C,

De

prapos.

graecamm

NEW TESTAMENT

in chartis aegyptiis ptolem.

aetatis usu (1909).

RouFFiAC,

J.,

Recherches sur

les caracteres

du grec dans

le

N. T.

d'apres les inscriptions de Priene (1911). Rutherford, W. G., A Chapter in the History of Annotation (1905).

The New Phrynichus

,

(1881).

RiJGER, Prap. bei Joh. Antiochenus (1896). Priip. bei Pausanias (1889). Sand AY, W., The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel (1905). Sandys, J. E., A History of Classical Scholarship. I-III (1906,

1908).

Sayce, a. H., Introduction to the Science of Language (1880).

Language (Encyc. Brit., Uth ed., 1910). Principles of Comparative Philology (1875). ScHAEFER, Das Partizip des Aor. bei d. Tragikern (1894). ScHAFF, p., A Companion to the Greek N. T. and Engl. Vers. ,

,

3d ed. (1889). ScHANZ, M., Beitrage zur histor. Syntax d. griech. Sprache (1882—). Schilling, D., Comm. exeg.-philol. im Hebraism, d. N. T. (1886). ScHiRLiTZ, S. C, Anleitung zur Kenntnis d. neut. Grundsprache (1863).

ScHLACHTER,

Modi

Statist.

Unters. iiber den Gebr. der

Temp, und

bei einzelnen griech. Schriftst. (1908).

ScHLAGETER, J., Der Wortschatz d. auCerhalb Attikas gefundenen Inschriften (1912). Zur Laut- und Formenlehre d. aufi. Att. gef attischen Inschr. .

,

(1908).

Schleicher, A., Compendium

d. vergl.

Gr. d. indog. Sprachen.

4. Aufl. (1876).

ScHMiD, J., tJber den gnomischen Aor. des Griech. (1894). ScHMiD, W., Der Atticismus in seinen Hauptvertretern. 4 Bde. (1887-1897).

Schmidt,

De

Articulo in nominibus propiis

apud

Att. scriptores

(1890).

Schmidt, W., De Flavii Josephi elocutione (1894). ScHMiTT, P., tJber den Ursprung des Substantivsatzes mit Relativpartikeln im Griech. (1889). Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten (1862). Schroeder, tlber die form. Untersch. d. Redet. im Griech. und

Lat. (1874).

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF

ScHUERER,

A

A.,

XXXV

History of the Jew. P. in the Time of Jesus

Tr. by Macpherson. ScHULZE, Der schriftsteller. Charakter unci Wert des Petrus, Judas und Jakobus (1802). ScHULZE, W., Graeca Latina (1901). Schwab, O., Hist. Syntax der griech. Komparative in d. klass. Lit. Heft I (1893), II (1894), III (1895). ScHWEiZER, E., Bericht iiber die Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der griech, Sprachw. mit Ausschlufi der Koine und der Dialekte in den Jahren 1890-1903 (Bursian's Jahresbericht, cxx, 1904, Christ.

5 vols. (1898).

pp. 1-152). ,

Die griech. Sprache in Zeit

1901,

d. Hellen. (N. Jahrb.

f.

kl. Alt.,

vii, viii).

,

Grammatik der pergamen.

,

Neugriech. Sjmtax und altgriech. (N. Jahrb.

Inschriften (1898). f.

kl. Alt.,

1908,

pp. 498-507).

ScHWYZER (Schweizer),

E.,

Die Weltsprachen des Altertums

(1902).

ScoMP, H. A., The Case Absolute in the N. T.

(Bibl. Sacra, April,

1902).

Seymour, T. D., Homeric Language and Verse Life in the Homeric Age (1907). The Use of the Gk. Aor. Part. (Trans. Am.

(1902).

,

,

1881, pp. 88

Phil.

Assoc, XII,

ff.).

Sanday and Headlam on Romans. Sharp, G., Remarks on the Definitive Article in the Greek of the N. T. (1803). Sheffield, A. D., Grammar and Thinking (1912). SiMCOX, W. H., The Language of the N. T. (1890).

S. H.,

The Writers

of the N. T. Greek Grammar. 2 vols. (1903, 1908). Smith, R. H., The Theory of Conditional Sentences in Greek and ,

SiMONSON,

A.,

A

Latin (1894).

Smyth, H. W., The Sounds and Inflexions of Greek Dialects.

I,

Ionic (1894).

SoDEN, H. VON, Die Schriften des N. T. in ihrer altesten erreichbaren Textgestalt. Teil I, Untersuch. (1902-1910) Teil II, Text und Apparat (1913). Griechisches N. T. Text mit kurzem Apparat (1913). SoLMSEN, F., Beitrage zur griech. Wortforschung (1909). ;

,

,

Inscriptiones graecae selectae (1905).

,

Untersuch. zur griech. Laut- und Verslehre (1901).

XXXvi

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Sophocles, E.

A.,

Greek Lexicon

of the

Roman and

Byzantine

Period (1888).

SouTER, A., Novum Testamentum Graece (1910). The Revisers' Text with a New Apparatus Criticus. Spieker, The Gen. Abs. in the Attic Orators (Am. J. of Ph., VI, pp. 310-343).

SL

B.,

Stahl,

Standard Bible Dictionary (Ed. by M. W. Jacobus, 1909). J. M., Kritisch-historische Syntax des griech. Verbums

der klass. Zeit. (1907).

Staurac, tjber den Gebr. d. Gen. bei Herodot. Steinthal, H., Geschichte der Sprachwiss. bei den Griech. und Romern. 2. Aufl. (1890-1891). Introduction to the Psychology and Science of Language ,

(1900).

Sterenbourg, The Use

of the

Cond. Sentence in the Alex. Ver-

sion of the Pentateuch (1908). Sterrett, J. R. S., Homer's Ihad with Grammar (1907). Stocks, H., Das neutestamentliche Griechisch im Lichte der modernen Sprachforschung (Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, XXIV.

Jahrgang, 633-700).

Strack, H. L., Grammatik des bibl. Aram. 4. Aufl. (1905). Strong, Logeman and Wheeler, Introduction to the Study of the History of Lang. (1891). Sturm, J., Geschichtl. Entwick. der Konstrukt. mit Upiu (1882). Sturtevant, Studies in Greek Noun Formation (01. Philol., VII, 4, 1912).

SusEMiHL, Gesch. der griech.

Lit. in der Alexandrinerzeit. I (1891),

II (1892).

SiJTTERLiN, Gesch. der Verba denom. in Altgriech. (1891).

Sweet, History of Language (1900). SwETE, H. B., Introduction to the O. T. in Greek (1900). The Apocalypse of St. John (1906). The 0. T. in Greek according to the Septuagint ,

,

(1887).

3 vols.

SzuczuRAT, De Inf. Hom. Usu (1902). Telfy, Chron. und Topogr. der griech. Ausspr. nach

d.

Zeugnisse

der Inschr. (1893).

Thackeray, H.

St.,

A Grammar

of the O. T. in Greek.

Vol.

Introduction, Orthography and Accidence (1909).

Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Thought (1900). Thayer, J. H., Greek-Enghsh Lexicon of the N. T. (1887). Language of the N. T. (Hastings' D. B., 1900). ,

,

I,

WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF

Theimer,

a., Beitrage zur

XXXVli

Kenntnis des Sprachgebr. im N. T.

(1896).

Th. L.-Z., Theologische Literaturzeitung (Leipzig).

Rundschau (Tubingen). und Kritiken (Gotha). Die Inschr. von Magnesia am Maander und das

Th. R., Theologische

Th. St. u. Kr., Theol. Studicn

Thieme, G., N. T. (1906). Tholuck, Beitrage zur Spracherklarung des N. T. Thompson, E. M., Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography (1893).

New

ed. (1913).

Thompson, F. E., A Syntax of Attic Greek. New ed. (1907). Thomson, J. E. H., The Language of Palestine during the Time of Our Lord (Temple Bible Diet.). Thomson, P., The Greek Tenses in the N. T. (1895). Thouvenin, p., Les Negations dans le N. T. (Revue de Philologie, 1894).

Thumb,

A., Die Forsch. liber die hellen. Spr. in den Jahren 1902-1904 (Arch. f. Pap. 3, pp. 443-473). Die griech. Sprache im Zeitalter des Hellenismus (1901). Die sprachgesch. Stell. des bibl. Griech. (Theol. Rund., 1902).

,

,

,

Handbuch Handbuch Handbuch

,

Unters. iiber d. Sp. Asper

,

,

der griech. Dial. (1909).

Volkssprache.

d. neugriech.

des Sanskrits.

Thumb-Angus, Handbook

of

I,

2.

Grammatik

im Griech. the

Aufl. (1910).

(1905).

(1889).

Modern Greek Vernacular

(1912).

TiscH., tio

Novum Testamentum

Graece,

octava critica major.

2 vols. (1869-1872).

by C. Tischendorf.

Edi-

Trench, R. C., Synonyms of the N. T. 11th ed. (1890). Deutsche Ausgabe von Werner (1907). TsouNTAS and Manatt, The Mycenaean Age (1897). Tucker, T. G., Litroduction to the Natural History of Language (1908).

Vandacle, L'Optatif Grec (1897). Veitch, W., Greek Verbs, Irregular and Defective. 2d ed. (1871). Viereck, p.. Die griech. Papyruskunde (1899-1905). 34. Jahrgang 1906. UL Abt. (1907). Die Papyrusliteratur in den 70 Jahren bis 1898 (1900). 27. Jahrgang 1899. IIL Abt. Sermo Graecus quo senatus populusque Romanus (1888). ViERKE, De A£T7 Particulae cum Indicative Conjunctae Usu An,

,

tiquiore (1876).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

XXXVlll

A Handbook

Vincent and Dickson, ViTEAU,

to

NEW TESTAMENT Modern Greek

Essai sur la syntaxe des voix dans

J.,

le

grec

(1887).

du N. T.

(Rev. de Phil., 1894).

Etude sur

,

le

du N. T.

grec

I,

Le Verbe (1893)

;

II,

Le Sujet

(1896).

VoGEL, H., Zur Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und

Stil

(1899).

Vogrinz, Grammatik

d. hom. Dial. (1889). VoLKER, F., Papyrorum graecorum syntaxis specimen (1900). Syntax d. griech. Papyri. I, Der Artikel (1903). VoTAW, C. W., The Use of the Infinitive in Bibl. Greek (1896). Wackernagel, J., Das Dehnungsgesetz der griech. Komposita ,

(1889).

Die hellenistische Gemeinsprache. (Die Kult.

,

Tl.

Abt.

I,

d.

Gegenwart,

1905, pp. 98-305).

viii,

Die Sprache des Plut. etc. Teile I, II (1895-1896). R., Questiones de epigrammatis graecis ex lapidibus collectis grammaticae (1883). Walch, Observationes in Matt, ex graecis inscriptionibus (1779). Walker, D., Elementary Greek Syntax (1897). Warfield, B. B., An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of ,

Wagner,

New

the N. T.

Warren, Winifred,

ed. (1914).

A

Study

of Conjunctional

Temporal Clauses

Thucyd. (1897).

in

Weber,

P.,

Heft

Entwick. der Absichtssatze.

I (1884),

Heft II

(1885).

Wecklein, Curae epigraphicae ad grammaticam graecam

et

ad

poetas scenicos pertinentes (1869).

Weiss,

B.,

Der Gebr. des

Artikels bei den

Gottesnamen (Th.

Stu. u. Krit., 1911, pp. 319-392). ,

Textkritik (1894

Weiss,

J.,

ff.).

Beitrage zur paulinischen Rhetorik (1897).

Wellhausen,

J.,

Einl. in

die

drei

ersten Evangelien

(1905).

Ausg. (1911). Wendland, p., Christentum und Hellenismus (1907). 2.

,

Hellen.-rom. Kultur.

Wesseley, C, Die

lat.

3. Aufl. (1912).

Elemente in

d.

Gracitat d. agypt. Pap.

(Wien. Stud., xxiv, 1902). ,

Lit. der

Papyruskunde (Stud, zur Palaogr. und Pap.

I,

1901, pp. 17-20; II, 1902, pp. 43-52). ,

Proleg.

dam

ad papyrorum graecorum novam collectionem eden-

(1883).

MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

LIST OF "WORKS

XXXIX

Language of the N. T. (Smith's B. D.). W. H., Westcott and Hort's Edition of the N. T. in the Original

Westcott, B.

Numerous

Greek.

The N.

,

F.,

eds.

T. in the Original Greek.

Introduction and Appen-

dix (1882).

Weymouth, On and

the Rendering into English of the Greek Aorist

Perfect (1894).

Wheeler, B.

The Whence and the Whither

I.,

Science of

Language

of the

Modern

(1905).

Whibley, L., Companion to Greek Studies (1905). 2d ed. (1906). Whitney, S. W., The Revisers' Greek Text. 2 vols. (1892). Whitney, W. D., A Sanskrit Grammar (1891). 4th ed. (1913). Language and the Study of Language (1867). Life and Growth of Language (1875). WiLAMOWiTZ-MoLLENDORFF, U. VON, Die griech. Literatur des ,

,

Altertums (Die Kult. 3-238.

3. Aufl.

d.

Gegenw., 1907, Tl.

I,

Abt.

viii,

pp.

1912).

tjber die Entstehung der griech. Schriftsprachen (Verf.

,

deutscher Phil, und Schulm., 1879, pp. 36^1). in den U., Die Forschungen tiber die hellen. Spr. Jahren 1902-1904 (Archiv f. Pap., 1906, pp. 443-473).

WiLCKEN,

Wilhelm, a., Beitrage zur griech. Inschriftenkunde (1909). WiLHELMUs, De Modo Irreali qui Vocatur (1881). WiLKE, Neutestamentliche Rhetorik (1843). Williams, C. B., The Participle in the Book of Acts (1908). Wilson, A. J., Emphasis in the N. T. (Jour, of Th. Stud., VIII, pp. 75ff.).

Winer, G.

B.,

De verborum cum

praep. compos, in N. T.

Usu

(1834-1843).

Gramm. d. neut. Sprachidioms (1822). 7. Aufl. von Liinemann (1867). Winer-Masson, a Grammar of the N. T. Gk. (1859). WiNER-MouLTON, A Treatise of the Grammar of N. T. Gk. 3d ,

Various eds.

ed. (1882).

WiNER-ScHMiEDEL, Winer's Grammatik des neutest. Sprachidioms.

8.

Aufl.

(1894—).

a Grammar

Winer-Thayer,

of the

Idiom

of the

N. T. (1869).

Various eds.

WiTKOWSKi,

St.,

Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren

CXX, 1904, pp. 153-256). Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren 1903-1906

1898-1902 (Bursian's Jahrb. ,

(Jahresber.

f.

Alt., 1912, III. Bd., 159).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Xl

WiTKOWSKi, St., Epistulae privatae graecae (1906). Prodromus grammaticae papyrorum graecarum Lagidarum (1897). ,

Woch.

/.

M. Ph., Wochenschrift

Wright,

J.,

A

fiir

aetatis

klassische Philologie.

Comparative Grammar

Greek Language

of the

(1912).

WuNDT,

Volkerpsychologie.

Young, Language Zahn, Th., ,

On

2.

Aufl. (1904).

of Christ (Hastings'

N. T.

Einl. in das

Bd.

Zarncke,

E.,

Tr.

Aufl. (1911

f.).

I (1906), II (1907).

the Language of Palestine.

tion to the N. T.

3.

D. C. G.).

Vol.

by Jacobus

Die Entstehung der

I,

pp. 1-72.

Introduc-

(1909). griech.

Literatursprachen

(1890).

Zeitlin,

The Ace. with

Inf.

and Some Kindred Constrs.

lish (1908).

Zezschwitz, Profangrac. und bibl. Sprachg. (1859). ZiEMER, Vergl. Syntax der indog. Kompar. (1884). Z. N.-T. W., Zeitschrift fiir neut. Wissenschaft (GieBen).

in

Eng-

PART

I

INTEODUCTION

CHAPTER

I

NEW MATERIAL Perhaps the ideal grammar of the New It is a supremely difficult task to interpret accurately the forms of human speech, for they have life and change with the years. But few themes have

The

Ideal

Grammar?

Testament Greek

may

never be written.

possessed greater charm for the best furnished scholars of the

world than the study of language.^ The language of the N. T. has a special interest by reason of the message that it bears. Every word and phrase calls for minute investigation where so much is at stake. It is the task and the duty of the N. T. student to apply the results of linguistic research to the Greek of the N. T.

But, strange to say, this has

not been adequately done.^

New

Testament study has made remarkable progress

in the

sphere of criticism, history and interpretation, but has lagged

behind in this department.

A

brief survey of the literary history

shows it. It was Winer who in 1822 made a I. The Pre-Winer Period. new epoch in N. T. grammatical study by his Neutestamentliches of the subject

Sprachidiom.

It

is

hardly possible for the student of the present

day to enter into sympathy with the

inanities

and

sinuosities

that characterized the previous treatises on the N. T. idiom.

Not

alone in the controversy between the Purists and Hebraists

was

this true,

but writers

like Storr,

by a

secret

system of quid

pro quo, cut the Gordian knot of grammatical difficulty by explaining one term as used for another, one preposition for another, one case for another, etc. 1

See

humani

J.

Classen,

De

ingenii inventa,

As a

university tutor

Winer

Gr. Graecae Primordiis, 1S29, p. 1, who says: "Inter quae diuturna consuetudine quasi naturae iura adepta

sunt, nullum fere magis invaluit et pervulgatuni est, quani grannnaticae ratio ct usus."

"And

despite the enormous advance since the days of Winer toward a and unitary conception of the N. T. language, we still labour to-day under the remains of the old conceptions." Samuel Dickey, Prince. Thcol. 2

rational

Rev., Oct., 1903,

"New

Points of View." 3

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

4

combated "this absurd system of interpretation," and not without success in spite of receiving some sneers. He had the temerity to insist on this order of interpretation: grammatical, historical, theological.

He

adhered to his task and lived to see

"an enlightened philology, as deduced and taught by Herrmann and his school," triumph over the previous "unbridled license."^ II. The Service of Winer. It must be said, however, that (a) Winer's Inconsistencies. great as was the service of Winer to this science, he did not at all points carry out consistently his own principles, for he often explained one tense as used for another. He was not able to rise entirely

above the point

of

view of

his

time nor to

make

persist-

ent application of the philosophical grammar. It is to be borne in mind also that the great science of comparative philology had

not revolutionized linguistic study when Winer first wrote. In a true sense he was a pathfinder. (6) Winer Epoch-Making.— Winer IN English. But none the less his work has been the epoch-making one for N. T. study. After his death Dr. Gottlieb Liinemann revised and improved the NeutestamentUcJies Sprachidwm. Translations of Winer's Grammatik into English were first made by Prof. Masson of Edinburgh, then by Prof. Thayer of Harvard (revision of Masson), and finally by Prof. W. F. Moulton of Cambridge, who added excellent footnotes, especially concerning points in

modern Greek.

various editions of Winer-Thayer and Winer-Moulton have served nearly two generations of English and American scholars.

The

But uow at last Prof. Schmiedel of Ziirich is (c) ScHMiEDEL. thoroughly revising Winer's Grammatik, but it is proceeding slowly and does not radically change Winer's method, though Deissmann,^ use is made of much of the modern knowledge.^ indeed, expresses disappointment in this regard concerning Schmiedel's work as being far "too much Winer and too little Schmiedel." But Deissmann concedes that Schmiedel's work "marks a characteristic and decisive turning-point in N. T. philology." 1

J.

See Pref to the sixth and last ed. by Winer himself as translated by Dr. in the seventh and enlarged ed. of 1869. Winer's Gr. des neutest. Sprachid. 8. Aufl. neu bearbeitet von Dr. Paul .

H. Thayer 2

Wilhelm Schmiedel, 1894—. He adds, "Der 3 Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 20. alte Winer war seiner Zeit ein Protest des philologischen Gewissens gegen die Willktir eines p. 63.

anmaCenden Empiricismus."

Cf. also Exp., Jan., 1908,

^

NEW MATERIAL

5

BuTTMANN.

Buttmann's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen had appeared in 1859 and was translated by Thayer as Buttmann's Grammar ofN.T. Greek (1873), an able work. (d)

Sprachgebrauchs

(e)

Blass.

Griechisch

mar appears tional

It is

by

not

till

the Grammatik des neutedamentlichen any other adequate gram-

Prof. Blass in 1896 that in this field.

methods and points

And

Blass departs a

He

of view.

little

from tradi-

represents a transition

towards a new era. The translation by H. St. John Thackeray has been of good service in the Enghsh-speaking world.

^m. The Modern

Period. It is just in the last decade that has become possible to make a real advance in New Testament grammatical study. The discovery and investigation that ^

it.

have characterized every department of knowledge have borne rich fruit here also. (a) Deissmann. Deissmann^ sees rightly the immensity of the task imposed upon the N. T. grammarian by the very richness of the new discoveries. He likewise properly condemns the too fre-

quent isolation of the N. T. Greek from the so-called "profane Greek." 3 Deissmann has justly pointed out that the terms "profane" and "bibhcal" do not stand in linguistic contrast, but rather "classical" and "biblical."

Even

practical identity of biblical with the of the popular style.*

was Neue

It

his

fairly

in 1895 that

here he insists on the contemporary later Greek

Deissmann published

Bibelstudien followed in 1897.

begun.

his Bibelstudien,

The new

era has

and

now

In 1901 the English translation of both volumes as Bible Studies. In 1907 came the Philol-

by Grieve appeared

First ed. 1898, second ed. 1905, as Blass' Gr. of N. T. Gk. revision work of Blass (the 4th German edition) by Dr. A. Debrunner has appeared as these pages are going through the press.

A

1

of the

2 Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 5: "Durch neue Erkenntnisse befruchtet steht die griechische Philologie gegenwiirtig im Zeichen eincr

vielverheiCenden Renaissance, die fordert von der sprachlichen Erforschung der griechischen Bibel, daO sie in engste Fiihlung trete mit der historischen Erforschung der griechischen Sprache." »

lb., p. 7.

Like, for instance, Zezschwitz, Profangrac.

und

bibl.

Sprachg

,

1859. * Die Spr. der griech. Bibel, Theol. Rnnds., 1898, pp. 4G3-472. He aptly says: "Nicht die Profangriicitat ist dor sprachgeschichtliche Gegensatz zur

'biblischen,' sondern das classische Griechisch. Die neueren Funde zur GeBchichte der griechischen Si)rache zeigen, dafi die Eigontiinilichkeitcn des

'biblischen'

Formen- und Wortschatzos (bei don original-griechischon Schrifim groBen und ganzon Eigentiinilichkeiton des spiiteren

ten auch der Syntax)

und zwar zumeist des

unliterarischen Griechisch iiberhaupt sind."

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

6

His Licht vom Osten (1908) was his next most important work (Light from the Ancient East, 1910, translated by Strachan). See Bibliography for full list of his books. The ogy of the Bible.

contribution of Deissmann

Thumb.

(b)

It

was

is

largely in the field of lexicography.

Thumb

in 1901 that A.

published his great

Die griechische Sprache im Zeitalter des Helbook on the which has done so much to give the true picture of the lenismus, already in 1895 produced his Handbuch der neuhad KOLvrj. He In 1912 the second enlarged edition Volkssprache. griechischen issued in English dress, by S. Angus, as Handbook of Modern Greek Vernacular. This book at once took front place for the kolvt],

study of the modern Greek by English students. It is the only book in English that confines itself to the vernacular. In 1895, J. H. Moulton, son of W. F, Moulton, (c) MouLTON. the translator of Winer, produced his Introduction to N. T. Greek, in a noble linguistic succession. In 1901 he began to publish in The Classical Review and in The Expositor, "Grammatical Notes from the Papyri," which attracted instant attention by their freshness and pertinency. In 1906 appeared his now famous Prolegomena, vol. I, of A Grammar of N. T. Greek, which

reached the third edition by 1908. With great ability Moulton took the cue from Deissmann and used the papyri for grammatical He demonstrated that the Greek of the N. T. is in purposes. the main just the vernacular kolvt] of the papyri. In 1911 the Prolegomena appeared in German as Einleitung in die Sprache des

Neuen (d)

Testaments.

Other Contributions.

not possible to mention here

It is

N. T. grammar (see found in the books of Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (1889); Hoole, The Classical Element in the N. T. (1888); Simcox, The Language of the N. T. (1890) Schaff A Companion to the Greek Testament and English

all

the names of the workers in the

Bibliography).

;

The

old standpoint

,

Versio7i (1889); Viteau,

Etude sur

Le Sujet

The same

(1893);

field of

is still

(1896).

le

grec

thing

is

du N. T.

— Le

Verbe

true of Abbott's Jo-

hannine Vocabidary (1905) and Johannine Grammar (1906); Burton's Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the N. T. Greek (1888, In Kennedy's third ed. 1909) is yet a genuine contribution. transition toward distinct Sources of N. T. Greek (1895) we see a

N. T. grammar. In 1911 Radermacher's Neutestamentliche Grammatik is in fact more a grammar of the kocvti than of the N. T., as it is designed to be an Einleitung. The author's Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (1908) gives the new the

new

era of

NEW MATERIAL

7

knowledge in a succinct form. The Italian translation (1910) by Bonaccorsi has additional notes by the translator. Stocks (1911) made numerous additions to the Laut- und Formenlehre of the

German made a

Grosheide in the Dutch translation (1912) has The French edition (1911) by Montet is mainly just a translation. The third enlarged edition in English appeared in 1912. Many special treatises of great value have appeared (see Bibliography), by men like Angus, edition.

revision of the whole book.

Buttmann, Heinrici, Tliieme, Vogel, Votaw, J. Weiss, Wellhausen. (e) Richness of Material. Now indeed it is the extent of the material demanding examination that causes embarrassment. But only twenty years ago K. Krumbacher^ lamented that it was not possible to give "a comprehensive presentation of the Greek language" because of the many points on which work must be done beforehand. But we have come far in the meantime. The task is now possible, though gigantic and well-nigh insurmountable. But it is not for us moderns to boast because of the material that has come to our hand. We need first to use it. Dieterich^ has well said that the general truth that progress is from error to its confirmation also in the history of the development that the Greek language has received in the last two thoutruth "finds

By

sand years."

we can

the induction of a wider range of facts

eliminate errors arising from false generalizations.

But

a Dionysius Thrax,^ one of the Alexandrian fathers of the old Greek grammar (circa 100 B.C.), slow process that

calls for patience.

said: Tpa/xfiariK-f] kaTLV efiireLpia twv irapa TrotTjraTs 4>ev(nv ws

this is

re

/cat

Andrew Lang^ indeed

to ttoXv Xeyopikvwv.

avyypa-

a disDionysius Thrax in one respect, for he contends that students are taught too much grammar and too little language. krcl

is

ciple of

They know the grammars and not the tongue. can be given of the sources of the new material

A

bare outline

for such

gram-

matical study. Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr.,

Kuhn's Zeits. fur vergl. Sprach"Eine zusammenhiingende Darstellung des Entwicklungsganges der griechischen Sprache ist gegenwiirtig nicht moglich. Auf allzu vielen Pimkten eines langen und viel verschlungenen Weges gcbricht es an den Vorarbeiten, welche fiir ein solches Untcrnchmen unerlilBlich sintl." 2 Unters. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr. von der hell. Zeit bis zuni 10. Jahrh. '

forsch.,

1882, p. 484:

n. Chr., 1898, p. x. '

also

As quoted mentions

in

Bekker, Anec. Graeca (1816), vol.

six ixkpn in

grammar:

piuv irpSxei-pos inroSoais, ervnoXoylas tjhAtwv.

a generous allowance truly!

dLvayviisaiz, evpr](Ti.s, *

629.

Dionysius

yXwaawv

re nai urro-

II, p.

i^Tiyncns,

ifaXoylas iK\oyi(rn6s,

Morning

Post, Lond.,

Kplffis

iroi-

May 5, 1905.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

8

The New Grammatical Equipment for N. T. Study. Comparative Philology. We must consider the great advance in comparative philology. The next chapter will deal somewhat at length with various phases of the historical method IV. (a)

of linguistic study.

A revolution has been wrought must be confessed that grammatical

The Linguistic Revolution.

1.

in the study of language.

It

investigation has not always been conducted on the inductive principle nor according to the historical method. Too often the rule has

been drawn from a limited range of

facts.

What

is

afterwards found to conflict with a rule is called an ''exception." Soon the exceptions equal or surpass the rule. Unfortunately the ancients did not have the benefit of our distinctions of "regular"

Metaphysical speculation with lofty superiis sometimes charged upon grammarians.^ "Grammar and logic do not coincide." ^ Comparative grammar is merely the historical method applied to several languages to-

and "irregular." ority

to

the facts

gether instead of only one.^ 2.

A

had

its

The Greek has Sketch of Greek Grammatical History. of kindred history the own history, but it is related to

the the days of Plato's Kratylus do^vnward convention originated by language Greek disputed as to whether Indeed formal Greek grammar (vofxco) or by nature {(t)vaeL)."*

tongues.

"From

.

.

.

was the comparison with the Latin and began "with Dionysius Thrax, who utilized the philological lucubrations of Aristotle and the Alexandrian critics for the sake of teaching Greek to the sons of the aristocratic contemporaries of

Greek grammar the cause of

is still

much

Pompey

at Ilome."^

in existence in Bekker's Anecdota,^

His

and

is

grotesque etymology since.'

This period of grammatical activity came after the great creative period of Greek literature was over, and in Alexandria, not 1

So Dr. John H. Kerr, sometime Prof,

3

lb.,

pp.

1

"Comparative historical 4

of

N. T.

in the Pac. Theol. Sem.,

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. 18. ff. So Oertel, Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1901, p. 42, grammar in Schleicher's sense is in its essence nothing but

in conversation with me.

^

grammar by the comparative method." Comp. Philol., 1875, p. 259 f.

Sayce, Prin. of

« Op. dt., pp. 629-643. See Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., 1880, vol. I, p. 19 f.; Dionysius Thrax's rkx^v ypa/xfiarLKr) was developed into a system by ApoUonius Dyscolus (ii/A.D.) and his son Herodian. Dionysius Thrax was born b.c. 166. Dyscolus WTote a systematic Gk. Syntax of accentuation in 20 books (known to

6

lb., p. 261.

7

us only in epitome) about 200 a.d.

NEW MATERIAL

9

Rhetoric was scientifically developed by Aristotle

in Athens.^

long before there was a scientific syntax. Aristotle perfected logical analysis of style before there was historical grammar.^ With Aristotle 6 ypan/j-aTLKos ters (ypaufxaTo).

was one that busied himself with the

He was

not ay pa nnaros;

fi

ypaufxaTui] then

let-

had

and was exegetical.^ Plato does not treat grammar, though the substantive and the adjective are distinguished, but only dialectics, metaphysics, logic* The Stoic grammarians, who succeeded Plato and Aristotle, treated language from the logical standpoint and accented its psychological side.^ So the Alexandrian grammarians made ypaufxaTiKr] more like KptTuiJ. They got hold of the right idea, though they did not attain the to do with the letters

true historical method.*'

Comparative grammar was not wholly unknown indeed to the Roman grammarians since Varro made a comparison between Greek and Latin words.^ The Roman writers

ancients, for the

on grammar defined it as the "scientia recte loquendi et scribendi,"^ and hence came nearer to the truth than did the Alexandrian writers with their Stoic philosophy and exegesis. It has indeed been a hard struggle to reach the light in grammar.^ But Roger Bacon in this ''blooming time" saw that it was necessary for the knowledge of both Greek and Latin to compare them.^^ And Bernhardy in 1829 saw that there was needed a grammaticosyntax because of the "distrust of the union of philosophy with grammar." ^^ We needed "the view-

historical discussion of

1

2

See Jebb in Whibley's Comp. to Gk. Stud., 1905, p. 147 f. See Steinthal, Gesch. der Sprachw. bei den Griech. und Rom.,

2.

Tl.,

1891, p. 179.

F. Hoffmann, tjber die Entwickelung des Begriffs der Or. bei den Alien,

3

1891, p.

1.

grammarians were "ohne richtiges historisches Sprachw. etc., 1. Tl., 1863, p. 39). Even in Plato's Kxatylus we do not see "das Ganze in seiner Ganzheit" (p. 40). 6 lb., p. 277 f. For a good discussion of Dion. Thr. see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 34 f. *

lb., p. 144.

BewuBtsein"

« ^

8 9

The

early Gk.

(Steinthal, Gesch. der

See Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 1. See Ivretschmer, op. cit., p. 4. F. Blass, Hermen. und Krit., 1892, p. 157 f. Steinthal, Gesch. etc., 2. TL, 1891, p. 1, calls this time of struggle "ihre

Blutezeit."

Roger Bacon, Oxford Gk. Gr., edited by Nolan and Hirsch, 1902, p. 27: in hac comparatione Grammaticae Graecae ad Latinum non solum est necessitas propter intelligendam Grammaticam Graecam, sed omnino neceaBarium est ad inteUigentiam Latinae Grammaticae." " Wissensch. Synt. der griech. Spr., 1829, pp. 7, 12. 10

"Et

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

10

NEW TESTAMENT

point of the historical Syntax." Humboldt is quoted by OerteU as saying: "Linguistic science, as I understand it, must be based upon facts alone, and this collection must be neither one-sided

So Bopp conceived also: "A grammar in the higher scientific sense of the word must be both history and natural science." This is not an unreasonable demand, for it is nor incomplete."

of every other department of science.^ The Discovery of Sanskrit. It is a transcendent fact which has revolutionized grammatical research. The discovery of Sanskrit by Sir William Jones is what did it. In 1786 he wrote thus^: "The Sanskrit language, whatever may be its antiquity, is of wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either; yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could have been produced by accident; so strong that no philologer could examine all the three without believing them to have sprung from some common source which no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though blended with a different idiom, had the same origin with

made 3.

the Sanskrit."

then the significance of his own discovery, for the Teutonic tongues, the Lithuanian

He saw

though not all of it, and Slav group of languages, the Iranian, Italic, Armenian and Albanian belong to the same Aryan, Indo-Germanic or IndoEuropean family as it is variously called. 4. From Bopp to Brugmann. But Bopp^ is the real founder of comparative philology. Before Bopp's day "in all grammars the mass of 'irregular' words was at least as great as that of the 'regular' ones, and a rule without exception actually excited suspicion."^ phonetics.^ 1

work names Other great Pott's great

laid the

in this

foundation of

new

science are

scientific

W. von

Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1901, p. 47.

See C. Herrmann, Philos. Gr., 1858, p. 422: "Die Natur der philosophischen Grammatik war von Anfang an bestimmt worden als die eine Grenzwissenschaft zwischen Philosophie und Philologie." But it is a more objective task now. 8 Cf. Benfey, Gesch. der Sprachw., p. 348. "This brilliant discovery, deJ. H. clared in 1786, practically Ues at the root of all linguistic science." 2

Moulton, Sci. of Lang., 1903, p. « See his Vergl. Gr., 1857.

4.

He began

pubhcation on the subject in

1816. 6 6

Study of Lang., 1882, p. 25. Etym. Forsch. auf dem Gebiet der indoger. Spr., 1833-1836. Delbriick, Intr. to the

NEW MATERIAL

11

Humboldt,^ Jacob Grimm,^ Schlegel,^ Schleicher,*

Max

Muller,^

Curtius/ Verner/ Whitney,^ L. Meyer.^ But in recent years two men, K. Brugmann and B. Delbruck, have organized the previous knowledge into a great monumental

work,

GrundriB

der

nischen Syrachen}^

mark

vergleichenden

Grammatik der indogerma-

This achievement

is

as yet the high-water-

comparative grammar. Brugmann has issued a briefer and cheaper edition giving the main results." Delbruck has also a brief treatise on Greek syntax in the light of comparative grammar, ^^ while Brugmann has applied comparative philology to the Laut- und Formenlehre of Greek grammar.^^ In the GrundriB Brugmann has Bd. I, II, while Delbruck treats syntax in Bd. III-V. In the new edition Brugmann has also that part of the syntax which is treated in Vol. Ill and IV of the first edition.

ners

in

The

best discussion of comparative

grammar

ManuaU*

the second edition of P. Giles's

is

for begin-

Hatzidakis

successfully undertakes to apply comparative

modern

grammar to the Riemann and Goelzer have made an exhaustive

Greek.^^

comparison of the Greek and Latin languages.!^ deed,

many

growing out of

all this

^

ters.

and

are, in-

principles

hnguistic development, such as the works

Always mentioned by Bopp with reverence. Deutsche Gr., 1S22. Author of Grimm's law Next to Bopp in influence.

*

There

interesting discussions of the history

of the interchange of let-

Indische Bibl.

2

<

Vergl. Gr. der indoger. Spr., 1876,

^

Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1866.

8

His most enduring work

is

marks the next great advance.

He

did

his Prin. of

much to

popularize this study.

Gk. Etym.,

vols.

I, II, fifth ed.,

1886.

The discovery

of Verner's law, a variation

from Grimm's law, according d and g, instead of /, th and h when not immediately followed by the word-accent. 8 Life and Growth of Lang., 1875; Sans. Gr., 1892, etc. ^

to which p,

»

t

and

pass into

k,

h,

Vergl. Gr., 1865.

" Bd.

I-V, 1st ed. 1886-1900; 2d ed. 1897—;

cf.

also Giles-Hertel, Vergl.

Or., 1896.

" Kurze vergl. Gr., 1902-1904. " Die Grundl. der griech. Synt., 1879.

"

Griech. Gr., 1900,

Griech. Gr.,

3.

verm.

" A Short Man. 16

3. Aufl.; 4. Aufl.,

1913,

by Thumb.

See also G. Meyer,

Aufl., 1896.

of

Comp.

Philol., 1901.

Einl. in die neugr. Gr., 1892.

" Gr. compar6e du Grec et du Lat.: Syntaxc, 1897; Phon6tiquo ct fttudo de Formes, 1901. Cf. also King and Cookson's Prin. of Sound and Inflexion as illustrated in the Gk. and Lat. Lang., 1SS8.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

12

Jolly ,^

of

Max

ney,'

Delbruck,2 Sweet,^ Paul," Oertel/ Moulton/ WhitMiiller,^ Sayce.^ It is impossible to write a grammar

Greek N. T. without taking into consideration this new conception of language. No language lives to itself, and least of

of the

all is

It the Greek of the N. T. in the heart of the world-empire. had this science recently use of until that not necessary to say i*'

not been made by N. T. grammars.^^

Advance

(6)

great advance

in

General Greek Grammar.

There has been Greek grammar. The

in the study of general

foundations laid by Crosby and Kiihner, Kruger, Curtius, Butt-

mann, Madvig, Jelf and others have been well built upon by Hadley, Goodwin, Gildersleeve, Gerth, Blass, Brugmann, G. Meyer, Schanz, Hirt, Jannaris, etc. To the classical student this catalogue of names ^^ jg f^n of significance. The work of Kiihner has been thoroughly revised and improved in four massive volumes by Blass" and Gerth,i" furnishing a magnificent apparatus Hirt's handbook ^^ gives the modern for the advanced student. knowledge in briefer form. These make use of comparative grammar, while G. Meyer ^^ and Brugmann ^^ are professedly on the Schulgr.

*

und Sprachw.,

1874.

Lang., 1882; .5th Germ. ed. 1908. tjber die Resultate der vergl. Synt., 1872. Cf. Wheeler, The Whence and Whither of the Mod. Sci. of Lang., 1905; Henry, Precis de gr. du grec et du latin, .5th ' The Hist, of Lang., 1899. ed., 1894. *

Intr.

to the

Study

of

*

Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888; 4th

Germ.

»

Lect. on the

Study of Lang., 1901. Lang, and the Study of Lang., 1867. Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891.

«

The

»

Prin. of

^ 8

ed. 1909. Sci. of

Lang., 1903.

Comp.

Philol., 1875.

"die historische Sprachforschung " the Gk. tongue is shown to be a of the Indo-Germanic family; thus is gained "der sprachgeschichtliche Gesichtspunkt," and then is gained "ein wesentUch richtiges VerstandBrugmann, Griech. Gr., fiir den Entwicklungsgang der Sprache." nis

By member 10

.

.

.

1885, p. 4.

Cf. p. 3 in third ed., 1901.

H. Moulton's Prol. to the N. T. Gk. Gr., 1906, and A. T. Robertson's N. T. Syll., 1900, and Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., 1908. 12 The late G. N. Hatzidakis contemplated a thesaurus of the Gk. language, 11

See

J.

but his death cut it short. " Ausfiihrl. Gr. der griech. Spr. von Dr. Raphael Kiihner, 1. Tl.: Elementar- und Formenlehre, Bd. I, IL Besorgt von Dr. Friedrich Blass, 1890, 1892. " lb., 2. TL: Satzlehre, Bd. I, IL Besorgt von Dr. Bernhard Gerth, 1898, 1904.

Laut- und Formenlehre, 1902,

18

Handb. der

16

Griech. Gr., 3. Aufl., 1896. lb., 1900; 4. Aufl., 1913, by

" now

(1912)

griech.

Wright has given

in

Thumb; 3d

ed.

1.

Aufl.; 2. Aufl., 1912.

quoted

Enghsh a Comp. Gr.

in this book.

of the

Gk. Lang.

And

NEW MATERIAL basis of comparative philology.

attempt to present ress of the language as a ambitious undertaking and graphs to furnish material

Jannaris^

13 is

the

first fairly

suc-

one volume the survey of the progwhole. Schanz^ makes a much more endeavours in a large number of monofor a future historical grammar. Gildersleeve^ has issued only two volumes of his work, while the grammars of Hadley-Allen and Goodwin are too well known to call for remark. New grammars, like F. E. Thompson's (1907, new ed.) and Simonson's (2 vols., 1903, 1908), continue to appear. (c) Critical Editions of Greek Authors. The Greek authors in general have received minute and exhaustive investigation. The modern editions of Greek writers are well-nigh ideal. Careful cessful

in

and

critical historical notes give the student all needed, sometimes too much, aid for the illumination of the text. The thing most lacking is the reading of the authors and, one may add, the study of the modern Greek. Butcher^ well says "Greek literature is

the one entirely original Uterature of Europe."

Homer,

Aris-

not to say ^Eschylus, Sophocles and Euripides are the modern masters of the intellect. Translations are better

totle, Plato, still

than nothing, but can never equal the original. The Greek language remains the most perfect organ of human speech and largely because "they were talkers, whereas we are readers."^

They

studied diligently

how

to talk.^

Works on

Individual Writers. In nothing has the tendency to specialize been carried further than in Greek grammatical research. The language of Homer, Thucydides, Herodotus, the tragic poets, the comic writers, have all called for minute investi(d)

1

Die

An

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

chiefly of the Att. Dial., 1897.

griech. Spr. (pp. 291-318), Tl.

I,

Of. also Wackernagel, Abt. VIII, Kultur der Gegenw.

2 Beitr. zur histor. Synt. der griech. Spr., Tl. I. Cf. also Hubner, Grundr. zur Vorlesung fiber die griech. Synt., 1883. A good bibliography. Ivrumbacher, Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., Kuhn's Zeitschr. etc., 1885, pp. 481-545.

3

Synt. of Class. Gk., 1900, 1911.

Harv. Lect. on Gk. Subj., 1904, p. 129. See also Butcher, Some Aspects Gk. Genius, 1893, p. 2: "Greece, first smitten with the passion for truth, had the courage to put faith in reason, and, in following its guidance, to take no account of consequences." So p. 1 "To see things as they really are, to discern their meanings and adjust their relations was with them an 6 instinct and a passion." j^^ p 203. » See Bernhardy, Griech. Lit., Tl. I, II, 1856; Christ, Gesch. der griech. *

of the

:

Lit. bis auf die Zeit Justinians, 4. revid. Aufl., 1905; 5. Aufl.,

Gk. Lyric Poetry, 1891, etc. A. Croiset and M. Croiset, of Gk. Lit., transl. by Heffelbower, 1904. nell,

1908

An

fif. FarAbr. Hist,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

14

gation/ and those of interest to N. T. students are the monographs on Polybius, Josephus, Plutarch, etc. The concordances The Apostolic Fathers, of Plato, Aristotle, etc., are valuable.

Greek Christian Apologists and the Apocryphal writings illusCf. Reinhold, De Graec. trate the tendencies of N. T. speech. America and Europe of universities The Apost. (1898). Pair. produced a great number of have degree Ph.D. the give which monographs on minute points hke the use of the preposition in Herodotus, etc. These all supply data of value and many of them have been used in this grammar. Dr. Mahaffy,^ indeed, is impatient of too much specialism, and sometimes in linguistic study the speciaHst has missed the larger and true conception of the whole.

The Greek inscriptions speak (e) The Greek Inscriptions. with the voice of authority concerning various epochs of the language. Once we had to depend entirely on books for our knowledge of the Greek tongue. There is still much obscurity, but it is

no longer possible to think

of

Homer

as the father of Greek

beginning of Greek culture. The two chief names in epigraphical studies are those of August Boeckh {Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum) and Theodor Mommsen {Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum). For a careful review of "the Nature of the New Texts" now at our service in the ui-

nor to consider 1000

B.C. as the

Deissmann, Light, etc., pp. 10-20. See W. H. P. Hatch's article {Jour, of Bibl Lit., 1908, pp. 134-146, Part 2) on "Some Illustrations of N. T. Usage from Greek Inscriptions Cf. also Thieme, Die Inschriften von Magnesia of Asia Minor."

scriptions see

am M&ander und

das Neue Test. (1906), and Rouffiac, Recherckes

du Grec dans le N. T. d'apres les Inscriptions de Prime (1911). Deissmann, op. cit., p. 18, thinks that aya[Trr]]v of the imperial is rightly restored in a pagan inscription in Pisidia op. cit., Deissmann, see For the Christian inscriptions period. to Troy of story the restored Schliemann^ has not only p. 19. sur

les

Caracteres

the reader of the historic past, but he has revealed a great civi1 Cf., for instance, Die Spr. des Plut. etc., Tl. I, II, 1895, 1896; &ebs. Die Prapositionen bei Polybius, 1881; Goetzeler, Einfl. des Dion. Hal. auf die Sprachgesch. etc., 1891; Schmidt, De Flavii Josephi eloc. observ. crit., 1894;

Kaelker, Quest, de Eloc. Polyb. etc. 2 "A herd of specialists is rising up, each master of his own subject, but absolutely ignorant and careless of all that is going on around him in kindred

Survey of Gk. Civilization, 1897, Mycenae and Tiryns, 1878.

studies." 3

p. 3.

NEW MATERIAL

15

Homer stands at the close of a long antecedent history of linguistic progress, and once again scholars are admitting the date 850 or even 1000 b.c. for his poems as well as lization at Mycense.^

abandoning Wolff's hypothesis.^ They have been driven to this by the abundant linguistic testimony from the inscriptions from many parts of Greece. So vast is this material that numerous grammatical discussions have been made their essential unity, thus

concerning the inscriptions, as those by Roehl,^ Kretschmer,* Lautensach,^ Rang, ^ Meisterhans,^ Schweizer,^ Viteau,^ Wagner,^"

Nachmanson,"

etc.

These inscriptions are not sporadic nor local, but are found in Egypt, in Crete, in Asia Minor, the various isles of the sea,^^ jn Italy, in Greece, in Macedonia, etc. Indeed Apostolides" seems to show that the Greeks were in Egypt long before Alexander the Great founded Alexandria. The discoveries of Dr. A. J. See also Tsountas and Manatt, The Mycensean Age, 1897. Ridgeway (Early Age of Greece, vol. I, 1901, p. 635) says that the methods apphed to dissection of the lUad and the Odyssey would pick to pieces the ^

2

The Antiquary. "The hnguistic attack upon their age have at last definitely failed." (T. W. Allen, CI. Rev., May, Lang, Homer and His Age (1906), advocates strongly the 193.) ^ Inscr. Graecae Antiq., 1882. the Homeric poems.

Paradise Lost and

may be 1906, p.

unity of

said to

*

Die griech. Vaseninschr. und ihre

6

Verbalfl. der att. Inschr., 1887.

">

Or. der att. Inschr.,

3. Aufl.

8

Gr. der perg. Inschr., 1898.

'

La

^o

decl.

dans

les inscr. att.

Spr., 1894. ^

Antiquites hellen., 1842.

von E. Schwyzer, 1900. de I'Empire, 1895.

Quest, de epigram. Graecis, 1883.

" Laute und Formen der magn. Inschr., 1903; cf. also Sohnsen, Inscr. Graecae ad illustr. Dial, sel.; Audollent, Defix. Tabellae, 1904; Michel, Rec. d'inscr. Graec, 1883; Dittenberger, Or. Graeci Inscr. Sel., 1903-1905; RobertsGardner, Intr. to Gk. Epigr., 1888. See Bibhography. Cf. especially the various volumes of the Corpus Inscr. Graecarum. 12 As, for example, Paton and Hicks, The Inscr. of Cos, 1891; Kern, Die Inschr. von Magn., 1900; Gartingen, Inschr. von Priene, 1906; Giirtingen and Paton, Inscr. Maris Aegaei, 1903; Letronne, Rec. des inscr. lat. et grec. de I'Egypte, 1842. As early as 1779 Walch made use of the inscriptions for the N. T. Gk. in his Observationes in Matt, ex graecis inscriptionibus. Cf. also the works of E. L. Hicks, Lightfoot, Ramsay. 1' Essai sur I'Hellenisme Egypt., 1908, p. vi. He says: "Les d(?couverte3 Des ruines de Naucratis, de Daphn6, de Gurob, et de I'lllahoun (pour ne citer que les locaUtt^s dans lesquoUes les recherches ont donn6 le plus de r^sultats) est sortie toute une nouvelle Grdce; une Gr^ce ant<5rieure aux Ramsds .; et, si les recherches se continuent, on ne tardera pas, nous en sommes convaincus, k acqui^rir la certitude que les Grecs sont aussi ancicns en Egypto qu'en Gr^ce mfiine."

rdcentes des arch6ologucs ont dissip6 ces illusions.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

16

NEW TESTAMENT

Evans in Crete have pushed back the known examples of Greek a thousand years or more. The Hnear script of Knossos, Crete, may be some primitive form of Greek 500 years before the first dated example of Phoenician writing. The civilization of the how old no Hellenic race was very old when Homer wrote, one dares say.^ For specimens of the use of the inscriptions see Buck's Introduction to the Study of the Greek Dialects (Gram-

—

mar, Selected Inscriptions, Glossary), 1910. (/) Fuller Knowledge of the Dialects. The new knowledge of the other dialects makes it possible to form a juster judgment of the relative position of the Attic. There has been much confusion on this subject and concerning the relation of the various races. It now seems clear that the Pelasgians, Achseans, Dorians were successively dominant in Greece.^ Pelasgian appears to be the name for the various pre-Achsean tribes, and it

Greek

was the Pelasgian

tribe that

made Mycenae glorious.^ Homer who displaced the Pelasgians,

sings the glories of the Achseans

while "the people

lonians

Ji]olians,

who

play a great part in later times

— are

to

Homer

little

— Dorians,

more than names."*

The Pelasgian belonged to the bronze age, the Achaean to the The Pelasgians may have been Slavs and kin to the Etruscans of Italy. The Achaeans were possibly Celts from northern Europe.^ The old Ionic was the base of the old Attic.'' iron age.^

This old Ionic-Attic was the archaic Greek tongue, and the choruses in the Attic poets partly represent

artificial

literary

There was not a sharp division^ between the early dialects owing to the successive waves of population sweeping over the country. There were numerous minor subdivisions in the Doric.

dialects (as the Arcadian, Boeotian, Northwest, Thessalian, etc.)

due to the mountain ranges, the peninsulas, the islands, etc., and other causes into which we cannot enter. For a skilful attempt at grouping and relating the dialects to each other see Thumb's Handbuch, p. 54 f. The matter cannot be elaborated here (see ch. III). But the point needs to be emphasized that ^ 2

'

A. J. Evans, Ann. Rep. of the Smiths. Inst., p. 436. See Ridgeway, The Early Age of Greece, vol. I, p. 84. For the contribution of the dialects to the lb., p. 293.

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., 1901, p. 526.

<

Giles,

*

Ridgeway, op. cit., vol. I, p. 337. Hoffmann, Die griech. Dial., Bd. I,

8

dialects

is

Thumb's Handb. der

p. 7.

griech. Dial.

the recent discoveries from the inscriptions. see

Thumb,

p. 61

f.

A

kolvt)

see ch. III.

*

lb., p. 406.

'

lb., pp.

666-670.

more recent treatment (1909), which makes use

On

of the

of all

the mixing of the dialects

NEW MATERIAL the literary dialects of Greece Itself

Buck

and

17

by no means represent the linguistic history that of the islands and other colonies

still less

Greek Dialects, p. 1). The blending of these dialects was not complete as we shall see.i "Of dialects the purest Hellenic is Dorian, preserved in religious odes, pure because they kept aloof from their subjects. The next is the ^olic preserved in lyric odes of the Lesbian school. The earliest to be embodied hterature was Ionic, preserved in epic (cf.

into the

s

KOLvi,

-

m

most perfect

poems

The

Attic,

the language of drama, philosophy and oratory. This arose out of the Ionic by introducing some of the strength of Doric-^olic forms without sacrificing the sweet smoothness of Ionic." ^ In general concerning the Greek dialects one may consult the works of Meister,^ Ridgeway,^ Hoffmann,^ Thumb,6 Buck,7 Boisacq,^ Pezzi,^ etc. is

{g) The Papyri and Ostraca. Thiersch in 1841 had pointed out the value of the papyri for the study of the in his De Fentateuch versione Alexandrina, but nobody thought it worth while to study the masses of papyri in London, Paris and Ber-

LXX

lin for

the N. T. language.

Farrar {Messages of the Books, 1884 noted the similarity of phrase between Paul's correspondence and the papyri in the Brit. Mus. "N. T. philology is at present undergoing thorough reconstruction; and probably all the workers concerned, both on the continent p. lol)

and in English-speaking time agreed that the starting-point for the philological investigations must be the language of the non-literary countries, are

by

papyri, ostraca,

this

and inscriptions" (Deissmann,

Light, etc., p. 55) rich in material for the study of the vernacular or popular speech as opposed to the book language, this distinction belongs to all languages which have a literature and to all periods of the language. It is particularly true of the

Ihe

KOLvrj IS

now

modern

SeeDieterich DieKo..^unddieheut.kIeinasiat. ^ Mundarten-Untors. zur Gesch. etc., pp. 271-310. Cf. Chabert, Hist, sommaire des ct. d'cpigr. grecque, ^''^'' °'' Collc^e^"

^^' ^'' ^^ ^- ^- ^^''^''

^^^" P""^- °^

^^- ^* Ri^hniond

'

'

* «

Op

cit.

and Bd^II, 1S93, Bd.

III. 1898.

Samml. der griech. Dial.-Inschr. • Handb. der griech. Dial., 1909. ''*''

onlyUSgf «

^°"'"'' ^^^^'

Lingua Greca Antica, 1888.

'^- ''''^

Op

cit

See also various volumes of the 7

^- ^-

Cf. Lambert,

^'"y*'^'

fit.

sur

'^^^"^

Qk

Dialects

^''^•" ^'''^1-

le dial, eolicn,

(I^'^ic

1903.

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

18

NEW TESTAMENT

Greek to-day as it was true in the early period. Witness the Athenian riot over the Pallis vernacular translation. Occasionally a writer like Aristophanes would purposely write in the language of the street. It is not therefore a peculiarity of the kolvt] It always prevails. that the vernacular Greek prevailed then. But the Kadapevovcra has secured a more disastrous supremacy over the Stjixotlkt] than in any other language. And we are now able to estimate the vernacular

kolvt],

since the

great

papyri

and Hunt and others. We had already the excellent discussions of Mullach/ Niebuhr,^ Blass,^ Foy^ and Lottich.^ But in the last fifteen years or so a decided impetus has been given to this phase of Greek grammatical discoveries of Flinders-Petrie,

research.

It is in truth

a

new

Grenfell

study, the attention

now

paid to

the vernacular, as Moulton points out in his Prolegomena (p. 22). "I will go further and say that if we could only recover letters that ordinary people wrote to each other without being literary,

we should have

the greatest possible help for the understanding

of the language of the

N. T. generally" (Bishop Lightfoot, 1863,

as quoted in Moulton's Prol, 2d and 3d ed., p. 242).

If

Lightfoot

Masson's Preface to Winer (1859). The most abundant source of new light for the vernacular kolvt} is found in the papyri collections, many volumes of which have already been published (see Bibliography for fuller list), while more are yet to be issued. Indeed, Prof. W. N. Stearns'' complains: "There would seem to be a plethora of such material already as evidenced by such collections as the Berlinische Urkunde and the Rainier Papyri." But the earnest student of the Greek tongue can only rejoice at the "extraordinary and in part unexpected wealth of material from the contemporary and the later languages."^ See the publications of Drs. Grenfell and Hunt, only lived now!

Cf.

^

Gr. der griech. Vulgarspr., 1856.

«

tJber das Agyp.-Griech., Kl. Schr., II, p. 197

'

Die

* » « ^

griech.

f.

Beredsamkeit von Alex, bis auf Aug., 1865.

Lauts. der griech. Vulgarspr., 1879.

De Serm. vulg. Att., 1881. Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 134. Samuel Dickey, New Points of View for

the Study of the Gk. of the N. T.

(Prince. Theol. Rev., Oct., 1903). 8

Oxyrhyn. Pap.,

vols. I-VIII,

1898-1911; Fayfim Pap., 1900; Tebtunis

I, II, 1907; Hibeh Pap., pt. I, 1906; vol. IV, Oxyrhyn. Pap., pp. 265-271, 1904; Grenfell and Hunt, The Hibeh Pap., 1906, pt. I. In general, for the bibliography of the papyri see Hohlwein,

Pap., 1902 (Univ. of Cal. Publ., pts.

La

papjTol. grec, bibliog. raisonn6e, 1905.

NEW MATERIAL

19

Mahaffy/ Goodspeed,^ the Berlinische Urkunde,^ Papyri in the British Museum/ the Turin Papyri,^ the Leyden Papyri,^ the Geneva Papyri,^ Lord Amherst's collection (Paris, 1865), etc. For general discussions of the papyri see the writings of Wilcken,^

HartcV

Kenyon,^ Wessely.^^

A

Haberlin," Viereck,^^ Deissmann,^^ de Ricci,^^

great and increasing hterature

existence on this subject.

is

thus coming into

Excellent handbooks of convenient

those by H. Lietzmann, Greek Papyri (1905), and by G. Milligan, Greek Papyri (1910). For a good discussion of the papyri and the literature on the subject see Deissmann, Light, The grammatical material in the papyri has not etc., pp. 20-41. exhausted. There are a number of excellent workers in the been field such as Mayser,^^ St. Witkowski,^^ Deissmann,^^ Moulton,^^ H. A. A. Kennedy,2° Jannaris,^^ Kenyon,^^ Voelker,^^ Thumb.^'* size are

1

Flinders-Petrie Pap., 1891, 1892, 1893.

2

Gk. Pap. from the Cairo Mus., 1902, 1903.

3

Griech. Urk., 1895, 1898, 1903, 1907, etc.

F. G. Kenyon, Cat. of Gk. Pap. in the B. M., 1893; Evid. of the Pap. for Text. Crit. of the N. T., 1905; B. M. Pap., vol. I, 1893, vol. II, 1898. *

6

Peyron, 1826, 1827.

Zauber Pap., 1885; Leeman's Pap. Graeci, 1843. 1900; cf. Wessely's Corpus Pap., 1895. 8 Griech. Papyrusurk., 1897; Archiv fiir Papyrusforsch. und verw. Gebiete, 1900—. 9 Palajog. of Gk. Pap., 1899; art. Papyri in Hast. D. B. (ext. vol.). 8

»

1"

J. Nicole, 1896,

tjber die griech. Pap.

" Griech. Pap., Centralbl.

fiir

Bibhothekswesen,

14. 1

f.

12

Ber. liber die altere Pap.-Lit., Jahresb. iiber d. Fortschr. etc., 1898, 1899.

1^

Art. Papyri in Encyc. Bibl.

1*

Bui. papyrologique in Rev. des

fit.

grecques since 1901.

Papyrus-Samml. since 1883. Cf. also Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., 1903; Reinach, Pap. grecs et demot. etc., 1905. i« Gr. der griech. Pap., Tl. I, Laut- und Worth, 1906. " Prodromus Gr. Pap. Graec. aetatis Lagidarum, 26. Bd. der Abhandl. der Phil, class, der Acad, zu Krakau, 1897, pp. 196-260. 18 B. S., 1901; Light, etc.; art. Hell. Griech. in Hauck's Realencyc; art. Papyrus in Encyc. Bibl., etc. " Gr. Notes from the Pap., CI. Rev., 1901; Notes on the Pap., Exp., April, 1901, Feb., 1903; Characteristics of N. T. Gk., Exp., March to Dec, 1904; Prol. to Gr. of N. T. Gk., 1908, 3d ed., etc. 2" Sources of N. T. Gk., 1895; Recent Res. in the Lang, of the N. T., Exp. 15

Times, May, July, Sept., 1901.

Gk. Gr., 1897; The Term Koiv^,

21

Hist.

22

Art. Papyri in Hast. D. B.

CI. Rev.,

March, 1903.

Syntax der griech. Pap., Tl. I, 1903. Die Forsch. iiber die hell. Spr. in d. Jahr. 1896-1901, Archiv fiir Papyrusforsch., 1903, pp. 396-426; Die Forsch. liber die hell. Spr. in d. Jahr. 1902-4, 2»

2<

A GRAM^L\R OF THE GREEK

20

NEW TESTAMENT

These are all helpful, but Cronert^ is right in urging that we need a comprehensive discussion of the syntax of the Ptolemaic papjT-i in order to set forth properly the relation of the papyri

both to the N. T. Greek and to the older Attic. This wall require time, for the mass of material is very great and is constantly

But enough already is clear for us to see the general growing.^ bearing of the whole on the problem of the N. T. It is just here that the papyri have special interest and value. They give the language of business and life. The N. T. writers were partly aypaiJL^iaTOL, but what they wrote has become the chief Book of Mankind.^ Hear Deissmann^ again, for he it is who has done most to blaze the way here: "The papyrus-leaf is aUve; one sees in a word, autographs, indi^^dual peculiarities of penmanship men; manifold ghmpses are given into inmost nooks and crannies of personal life in which history has no eyes and historians no glasses ... It may seem a paradox, but it can safely be affirmed that the unliterary pap^'ri are more important in these respects

—

than the hterary." fragments of Greek

Some

of the papjTi contain hterary works,

portions of the LXX or of the N. T., though the great mass of them are non-literary documents, letCf. also Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 29. ters and business papers. Unusual interest attaches to the fragments containing the Logia of Jesus, some of which are new, dating from the second or third centuries a.d. and sho\\ing a Gnostic tinge.^ It is no longer possible to say, what even Friedrich Blass^ did in 1894, that the N. T. Greek "is to be regarded something by itself and following laws classics,

own." That view is doomed in the presence of the papyri. Hatch^ in particular laboured under this error. The N. T. Greek

of its

Archiv fiir Pap., 111. 4; also Jahresb. iiber die Fortschr. des Class., 1906; Die griech. Pap>-rusurk., 1899-1905, pp. 36-40; Die griech. Spr. etc., 1901. 1 Archiv fiir Pap.-Forsch., 1900, p. 215. 2 " Zum ersten Mai gewinnen wir reale VorsteUungen von dem Zustand und der Entwickelung der handschriftlichen Lebenslieferung im Altertum Neue wichtige Probleme sind damit der Philologie gestellt." N. selbst. Wilcken, Die griech. Papyrusurk., 1897, p. 7. Mayser's Tl. II will supply need when it appears. See Deissmann, Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 27. * Art. PapjTi in Encyc. Bibl. New 6 See AoYia 'Iriffov, Sayings of Jesus, by Grenfell and Hunt, 1897. Sayings of Jesus, by Grenfell and Hunt, 1904. See also two books by Dr. C. Taylor, The Ox^Thyn. Logia, 1899; The Ox>Thyn. Sayings of Jesus, 1905;

this 3

Lock and Sanday,

Two

Lect.

on the Sayings

«

Theol. Literaturzeit., 1894, p.

^

Essays in Bibl. Gk., 1892,

of Jesus, 1897.

.3.38.

p. 11

f.

The

earhest dated papyrus

is

now

NEW MATERIAL will

no longer be despised as

21

inferior or unclassical.

It will

be

seen to be a vital part of the great current of the Greek language. For the formal discussion of the bearing of the papyri on the N. T.

Greek

see chapter IV.

reason

why

A

word should be

the papyri are nearly

said concerning the

found in Egypt.' It is due to the dryness of the climate there. Elsewhere the brittle material soon perished, though it has on the whole a natural toughness. The earliest known use of the papyri in Egypt is about 3400 B.C. More exactly, the reign of Assa in the fifth dynasty is put at 3360 B.C. This piece of writing is an account-sheet belonging to this reign (Deissmaim, Light from A. E., p. 22). The oldest specimen of the Greek papyri goes back to "the regnal year of Alexander .'Egus, the son of Alexander the Great. That would make it the oldest Greek papyrus document yet discovered" (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 29). The discoveries go on as far as the seventh century a.d., well into the Byzantine period. The plant still grows in Egypt and it was once the well-nigh universal writing material. As waste paper it was used to wrap the mummies. Thus it has come to be preserved. The rubbish-heaps at Faylam and Oxyrhynchus are full of these papyri scraps. Mention should be made also of the ostraca, or pieces of pottery, which contain numerous examples of the vernacular Kot-v-q. For a very interesting sketch of the ostraca see Deissmann, Light, etc. (pp. 41-53). Crum and Wilcken have done the chief work on the ostraca. They are all non-literary and occur in old Egyptian, Arabic, Aramaic, Coptic, Greek and Latin. "Prof. Wilcken, in his Griechische Ostraka,^ has printed the texts of over sixteen hundred of the inscribed potsherds on which the commonest receipts and orders of Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt were written."^ It was the material used by the poorer classes. all

(h) The Byzantine and the Modern Greek. The Byzantine and modern Greek has at last received adequate recognition.

Thackeray has it in his Gr. of the O. T. Moulton, CI. Rev., March, 1910, p. 53. 1 The practical limitation of the papyri to Egypt (and Herculaneum) has its disadvantages; cf. Angus, The Koivq, The Lang, of the N. T. (Prince. P. Eleph. 1 (311 B.C.), not P. Hibeh, as

in Gk., p. 56.

This was true

in 1907; cf.

Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910, p. 80). * Griech. Ostraka aus Xgypten

und Nubien, Bd. I, II, 1899; cf. also Crum, Coptic Ostraca, 2 vols. (1899); cf. Hilprecht, S. S. Times, 1902, p. 560. " In many Coptic letters that are written on potsherds the writers beg their correspondents to excuse their having to use an ostrakon for want of papyrus" (Deissmann, Exp. Times, 1906, Oct., p. 15). » E. J. Goodspeed, Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 102.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

22

NEW TESTAMENT

N. T. idiom has much to learn from the new The scorn bestowed on the kolvt] by the intense classicists was intensified by the modern Greek, which was long regarded as a nondescript jumble of Greek, Albanian, Indeed the modern Greeks themselves Turkish, Italian, etc. have not always shown proper appreciation of the dignity of the modern vernacular, as is shown, for instance, in the recent upheaval at Athens by the University students over the translation of the Gospels into the Greek vernacular {b-qnoTiKri) of to-day, though the N. T. was manifestly written in the vernacular of its "While the later Greeks, however, could no longer write day.

The student

of the

books on this subject.

classically,

classical

they retained a keen sense for the beauties of the Just as the "popular Latin finally sup-

language."^

pressed the Latin of elegant literature, "^ so the vernacular Koivrj lived on through the Roman and Byzantine periods and survives

to-day as the modern Greek. There is unity in the present-day Greek and historical continuity with the past. Dr. Rose is possibly correct in saying: "There is more difference between the

Greek of Herodotus and the Greek of Xenophon than there is between the Greek of the latter and the Greek of to-day." ^ And certainly Prof. Dickey* is right in affirming "that the Greek of N. T. stands in the centre of the :development of which classical and modern Greek may be called extremes, and that of the two The interit is nearer to the second in character than the first. been in the sole fight pretation of the N. T. has almost entirely of the ancient,

i.

e.

the Attic Greek, and, therefore, to that ex-

and often inaccurate." Hatzidakis^ indeed complained that the whole subject had been treated with tent has been unscientific

Dr. Achilles Rose, Chris. Greece and Living Gk., 1898, p. 7. R. C. Jebb, On the Rela. of Mod. to Class. Gk., in V. and D.'s Handb. to Mod. Gk., 1887, p. 287. "In other words, the Bible was cast into spoken Latin, famihar to every rank of society though not countenanced in the schoolroom; and thus it foreshadowed the revolution of ages whereby the Roman tongue expanded into what we may label as Romance." W. Barry, ^

2

"Our Latin Bible," in DubUn Rev., July, 1906, p. 4; cf. also art. on The Holy Latin Tongue, in April number. ' Chris. Greece and Living Greek, p. 253. < New Points of View for the Study of N. T. Gk. (Prince. Theol. Rev., Oct., 1903). See also S. Angus, Mod. Methods in N. T. Philol. (Harv. Theol. Rev., Oct., 1911, p. 499): "That the progress of philology has thus broken down the wall of partition of the N. T. and removed its erstwhile isolation is a great service to the right understanding of the book's contents." 5

Einl. in die neugr. Gr., 1892, p. ix; cf. also

heU. Spr., 1891.

H. C. Muller,

Hist. Gr. der

NEW MATEKIAL unworthy

23

" dilettanteism "

and not without ground for the comhis great work to put the study of basis/ but he has not worked alone in this important field. Another native Greek, Prof. Sophocles, has produced a Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods in which there is an excellent discussion for that time^ of the KOLvi], the Byzantine and the modern Greek. Other scholars have developed special phases of the problem, as Krumbacher,^ who has enriched our knowledge of the Byzantine* or Middle Ages Greek. Dieterich ^ also has done fine work in this period of Greek, as has Thumb.^ Worthy of mention also is the work of G. Meyer,^ Geldart^ and Prestel,^ though the latter have not produced books of great value. See also Meyer-Liibke's grammar,^" Jannaris' Historical Greek Grammar and the writings of Psichari." In general great progress has been made and it is now possible to view the development of the N. T. idiom in the

He himself did much by modem Greek on a scientific

plaint.

light of the

^

modern Greek.

"Und wenn

berechtigten Mittel-

es

mir

The apparent

drift in the

gelingt, die wissenschaftliche

Zuriickhaltung

und Neugriechische

abzubringen

und

Welt von

vernacular ihrer wohl-

ihr nachzuweisen,

daC das

ein vielversprechendes unkultivirtes Gebiet der

Wissenschaft ist, woraus man viel, sehr viel beziiglich der Sprachwissenschaft iiberhaupt wie des Altgriechischen speciell lernen kann, so ist mein Zweck

vollkommen

erreicht."

One

lb., p. x.

of the pressing

needs is a lexicon of the papyri also. See Contopoulos, Lex. of Mod. Gk., 1868, and others. 3 Das Problem der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903. "Heute bedarf das Studiengebiet der byzantinischen und neugriechischen Philologie keine Apologie," p. 3. In his hands the middle Gk. (Byzantine) is shown to be a rich field for the '^

1870.

student both of philology and hteratm-e;

cf.

also Gesch. der byzant. Lit.,

p. 20. * Gesch. der byzant. Lit. etc.; cf. also his Byz. Zeitschr. and his Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., Kuhn's Zeitschr., 1885. ^ Unters. zur Gesch. d. griech. Spr. etc., 1898; Gesch. der byz. und neugr.

Lit., 1902. « Handb. d. neugr. Volkspr., 1895; Thumb-Angus, Handb. of Mod. Gk. Vernac, 1912; Die neugr. Sprachforsch. in d. Jahr. 1890 u. 1891 (Anz. fur indoger. Spr., I, 1892; VI, 1896, and IX, 1898); Die griech. Spr. im Zeitalter dea Hellen., 1901; Die sprachgesch. Stellung des bibl. Griechisch, Theol. Runds., March, 1902. ^ Neugr. Stud., 1894. 8 The Mod. Gk. Lang, in its Rcla. to Anc. Gk., 1870. On the Orig. and Devel. of the Mod. Gk. Lang., .lour, of Philol., 1869. ' Zur Entwickolungsgcsch. der griech. Spr. '" Gr. der romanischen Spr. " Essais de Gr. hist. Ncogrecque, 1886; cf. also Boltz, Die hell. Si)r. dor Gegenw., 1882.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

24

of the N. T., like ha in the non-final clause, is too common remark in the modern Greek. Indeed the N. T. had a predominant influence on the later Greek as the chief literature of the period, and especially as Christianity won the victory over heathenism. The Byzantine Greek is in subject-matter largely The sermons and treatises of the Greek Christian ecclesiastical. Fathers constitute a large and valuable literature and amply illustrate the language of the time.^ The modern Greek is in all essential points the same as the Byzantine Greek of 1000 a.d. In forty years ^ we have seen a revolution in the study of the modern Greek. But as late as 1887 Vincent and Dickson^ could say: "By many it is believed that a corrupt patois of Turkish and Italian is now spoken in Greece; and few even among professed scholars are aware how small the difference is between the Greek of the N. T. and the Greek of a contemporary Athenian newspaper." The new Greek speech was developed not out of the Byzantine literary language, but out of the Hellenistic popular KOLVT]

for

speech.'*

Less that is new has come (0 The Hebrew and Aramaic. from the Hebrew and Aramaic field of research. Still real advance has been made here also. The most startling result is the In decrease of emphasis upon Hebraisms in the N. T. style. chapter IV, iii the Semitic influence on the N. T. language is discussed. Here the literary history is sketched. It was only in 1879 that Guillemard'^ issued 1. The Old View. his Hebraisms in the Greek Testament, in which he said in the Preface: "I earnestly disavow any claim to an exhaustive exhibition of all the Hebraisms, or all the deviations from classical phraseology contained in the Greek Testament; of which I have gathered together and put forward only a few specimens, in the hope of stimulating others to fuller and more exact research." Even in 1889, Dr. Edwin Hatch ^ says: "Biblical Greek is thus a 1

See the Migne Lib. and the

*

Dieterich, op.

cit.,

new

Ber. Royal Lib. ed;

p. 10.

See also Horae Hellenicae, by Stuart Blaekie, classical Gk. from beginning to end, with only such insignificant changes as the altered circumstances, combined with the law of its original genius, naturally produced." Cf. Rangabe, Gr. Abre'

Handb.

to

Mod. Gk.,

p. 3.

1874, p. 115: "Byzantine Gk.

was

g6e du grec actuel; TewdStos, Tpa/xnaTiK'^

ttjs

'EWeviKrjs

VKwffffijs.

*

Dieterich, op,

^

See also A. Miiller, Semit. Lehnw. in alteren Griech., Bezzenb. Beitr., I, pp. 273 ff.; S. Ivrauss, Griech. und lat. Lehnw. im Tal., 1898, 1899.

cit.,

p. 5.

1878, 6

Essays

in Bibl. Gk., p. 11.

NEW MATERIAL

25

itself. What we have to find out in studying it is what meaning certain Greek words conveyed to a Semitic mind." Again he says^: "The great majority of N. T. words are words which, though for the most part common to biblical and to con-

language by

temporary secular Greek, express in their biblical use the concepand which must consequently be examined by the light of the cognate documents which form the LXX." And W. H. Simcox^ says: "Thus it is that there came to exist a Hellenistic dialect, having real though variable differences from tions of a Semitic race,

Common

the 2.

A

or Hellenic."

But a turn comes when H. A. A. "But while the writer began with a complete,

Change with Kennedy.

Kennedy 3

says:

though provisional, acceptance of Hatch's conclusions, the

far-

was pushed, the more decidedly was he compelled to doubt those conclusions, and finally to seek to establish the connection between the language of the LXX and that of the N. T. on a totally different basis." He finds that common bond in "the colloquial Greek of the time."^ ther the inquiry

3.

Deissmann's

The

Revolt.

full revolt against the theory of a seen in the writings of Deissmann,^ theory indicated is a great power in exegesis,

Semitic or biblical Greek

who

says'':

and that

it

"The

is

possesses a certain plausibility

It is edifying,

and what

is

more,

is

is

convenient.

not to be denied.

But

it is

absurd.

mechanizes the marvellous variety of the hnguistic elements of the Greek Bible and cannot be established either by the psychology of language or by history." There is here some of the It

new discovery, but it is true. The old view of Hatch is dead and gone. The "clamant need of a lexicon to the LXX" is emphasized by Deissmann^ himself. Prof. H. B. Swete of Cambridge has laid all biblical students under lasting obligation zeal of

See also

Gk. belongs not only to a later period than classical Gk., but also to a different country." On page 14 we read: "It is a true paradox that while, historically as well as philologically, the Gk. (LXX) is a translation of the Hebrew, philologically, though not historically, the Hebrew may be regarded as a trans^

lb., p. 34.

p. 9: "Biblical

of the history of the language

Gk." The Lang, of the N.

lation of the

T., 1890, p. 15. Note the date, as late as 1890. Sources of N. T. Gk., 1895, p. v. 4 ib., p. hg. 6 Die sprachl. Erforsoh. dcr griech. Ribel, 1898; B. S., 1901; Hell. Griech., Hauck's Ilcalencyc, New Light (1907), etc. 6 g. s_^ p_ p5_ 2

»

^ lb., p. 73. Schlcusncr, 1821, is hopelessly inadequate and out of date. Hatch and Redi)ath have issued in six parts (two volumes) a splendid concordance to the LXX and other Gk. versions of tlie O. T., 1892-189G, 1900.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

26

him by

to

his contribution to the

an edition

sisting of

LXX^

of the

NEW TESTAMENT

study of the Septuagint, conwith brief critical apparatus

and a general discussion ^ of the Septuagint. Brooke and McLean are publishing an edition of the Septuagint with exhaustive crit-

LXX

now rejoice in Helbing's Gr. Students of the Laut- u. Formenlehre (1907) and Thackeray's

ical apparatus.^

der Septuaginta:

Gr. of the 0. T. in Greek, vol. I (1909).

Conybeare and Stock's

Septuagint (1905) has the old standpoint. Other modern workers in this department are Nestle/ Lagarde,^

from

Selections

the

Hartung,^ Ralfs/ Susemihl,^ Apostolides.^ Another point of special interest in 4. The Language of Jesus. this connection,

the

new

may

which

be as well discussed now as later, is Aramaic as the language habitually

light concerning the

This matter has been in

spoken by Jesus.

the scholars are not at one even now.

much

confusion and

Roberts^'' maintains that

Greek, not Hebrew, was "the language of the common public intercourse in Palestine in the days of Christ and His apostles." By Hebrew he means Aramaic. In The Expositor (1st series, vols. VI, VII) Roberts argued also that Christ usually spoke Greek. He was replied to (vol. VII) by Sanday. Lightfoot (on Gal. 4 6) :

holds that Jesus said lated

it.

'AiS/Sd 6 Trariyp

thus,

Thompson, "The Language

the Bible),

Mark

not having trans-

of Palestine" {Temple

D.

of

argues strongly that Christ spoke Greek, not Aramaic.

Neubauer" contends that there was spoken besides at Jerusalem and in Judea a modernized Hebrew, and comments ^^ on "how 1 The O.T. in Gk. according to the LXX, vols. I-III, 1887-1894. He does not give an edited text, but follows one MS. at a time with critical apparatus

in footnotes. 2

An

8

The Larger Camb. LXX, 1906—.

*

Ed. of the

Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., 1900.

1896; Urtext

LXX

with Grit. Apparatus, 1880-1887; Sept.-Stud., 1886-

und Ubersetz. der

Bibel, 1897. e

Nestle died in 1913.

6

Sept.-Stud., 1891-1892.

8

Gesch. der griech. Lit. in der Alexandrinzeit, Bd. I, II, 1891, 1892. Du grec Alexandrin et de ses rapports avec le grec ancien et le grec mo-

9

derne, 1892.

Gf.

among

lb., 1886.

'

the older discussions, Sturz,

De

lb.,

dial.

1904.

Maced.

Alexan., 1808; Lipsius, Gr. Unters. iiber die bibl. Grac, 1853; Churton, Infl. of

the

LXX

upon the Prog,

of Ghris., 1861.

et

The

See also Anz, Subs, ad

cognos. Graec. serm. vulg. e Pent. vers. Alexan., 1894. 1"

I, On the Lang. Employed by Our Lord and His Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Jesus

Disc, on the Gosp., pt.

Apost., 1864, p. 316;

A

(1893).

" On the Dial, of Palestine " Stud. Bibl., p. 54.

in the

Time

of Ch., Stud. Bibl., 1885.

NEW MATERIAL little

knew Greek." A. Meyer urges that the vernacular was Aramaic and shows what })earing this fact has on

the Jews

of Jesus

27

^

A. Jiilicher^ indeed says: "To G. B. Winer supposes, because of

the interpretation of the Gospels. suppose, however

Mk. 7:24; is

(as,

e.g.

Jo. 7:25; 12:20) that Jesus used the

Greek language

But Young, vol. II, Dictionary of Gospels (Hastings), article "Language of Christ,"

quite out of the question."

and

Christ

the

admits that Christ used both, though usually he spoke Aramaic. So Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 8. But Dalman^ has done more than any one in showing the great importance of the Aramaic for the interpretation of the words of Jesus. He denies the use of a modernized Hebrew in Jerusalem and urges that proper names hke ^rjdeaba, ^"rm n^S, are Aramaic (but see J. Rendel Harris, Side Lights on the N. T., p. 71 f.). Dalman further urges that "Aramaic was the mother tongue of the Galileans."* J. T. Marshall^ makes out a plausible case for the idea of a primitive Aramaic Gospel before our Mark, and this would make it more probable that Jesus spoke Aramaic. E. A. Abbott^ also attempts to reproduce the original Aramaic of the words of Jesus from the Greek. But Prof. Mahaffy^ can still say: "And so from the very beginning, though we may believe that in Galilee and among His intimates our Lord spoke Aramaic, and though we know that some of His last words upon the cross were in that language, yet His pubhc teaching. His discussions with the Pharisees, His talk

1 Jesu Mutterspr. das gaUlaische Aram, in seiner Bedeut. fur die Erkl. der Reden Jesu und der Evang. uberhaupt, 1896. So Deissmann (Light, etc., p. 57) says that Jesus "did not speak Gk. when He went about His public :

work," and, p. 1, "Jesus preaches in his Aramaic mother-tongue." * Art. Hellenism in Encyc. Bibl. Canon Foakes-Jackson(Interp., July, 1907, p. 392) says: "The Jews of high birth or with a reputation for sanctity are said to have refused to learn any language but their own, and thus we have the strange circumstance in Roman Palestine of the lower orders speaking two languages and their leaders only one." ' The Words of Jesus considered in the Light of the post-Bibl. Jewish Writings and the Aram. Lang., 1902. Cf. also Pfannkuche (Clark's Bibl.

Cab.). *

lb., p. 10.

Exp., ser. IV, VI, VIII. See also Brockelmann, S>Tische Gr., 1904; Schwally, Idioticon des christl.-palestinischen Aramiiisch, 1893; Riggs, Man. 5

of the

Chaldean Lang., 18G6; Wilson,

Intr. S>Tiac

Meth. and Man., 1891;

Strack, Gr. des bibl. Arainiiischen.

A Guide through Gk. to Hob., 1904. Prog, of Hcllen. in Aloxan. Emp., 1905, p. 130 f. Hadley (Ess. Pliil. and Crit., p. 413) reaches the conclusion that Jesus spoke both Gk. and Aram. 6

Clue,

^

The

28

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

with Pontius Pilate, were certainly carried on mainly in the

Zahn {Intr. to the N. T.) labours needlessly to show that Hebrew was no longer the language of Palestine, but he does not prove that Aramaic was everywhere spoken, nor that Jesus Greek."

always spoke Aramaic. Wellhausen {Einl. in die drei erst. Evang.) It may be admitted is prejudiced in favour of the Aramaic theory. known the majority of the Jews in Aramaic was to that once at Palestine, particularly in Judea. Cf. Ac. 1 19: rfj StaXeKrw avTcbv :

22:2, aKovaavres otl rrj 'E/3pat5t 6i.aXe/crco irpoaeThere is no doubt which (j)coveL avTOLS (xaWov irapeaxov rjavxiav. language is the vernacular in Jerusalem. Cf. also 26 14. Jo'AKeXdafiax',

:

sephus confirms Luke on this point {War, V, 6. 3), for the people of Jerusalem cried out ttj TaTpio: yXdoaari, and Joscphus also acted intermediary for Titus,

rfj

Trarptoj yXdcaari

(War, VI,

2.

1).

See

Josephus wrote his War first in Aramaic and then in Greek. The testimony of Papias that Matthew wrote his Xoyta in Aramaic bears on the question because of the The brogue tradition that Mark was the interpreter of Peter. also 2

Mace. 7:8,

21.

that Peter revealed (Mt. 26 73) was probably due to his Gali:

lean accent of Aramaic.

Aramaic was one

the inscription on the cross (Jo. 19:20).

It

of the languages for is

clear therefore that

and Antiochus Epiphanes received a set-back in Palestine. The reaction kept Greek from becoming the one language of the country. Even in Lycaonia the people kept their vernacular though they understood Greek (Ac. 14 11). On the other hand Peter clearly spoke in Greek on the Day of Pentecost, and no mention is made of Greek as one of the peculiar "tongues," on that occasion. It is clear that Paul was understood in Jerusalem when he spoke Greek (Ac. 22:2). Jesus Himself laboured chiefly in Galilee where were many gentiles and much commerce and travel. He taught in Decapolis, a Greek region. He preached also in the regions of Tyre and Sidon (Phoenicia), where Greek was necessary, and he held converse with a Greek (Syro-Phoenician) woman. Near Csesarea-Philippi (a Greek region), after the Transfiguration, Jesus spoke to the people at the foot of the mountain. At the time of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus addressed people from Decapolis and Perea (largely Hellenized), besides the mixed multitudes from Galilee, Jerusalem and Judea (Mt. 4 25). Luke (6 17) adds that crowds came also from Tyre and Sidon, and Mark (3 8) gives "from Idumaea." It is hardly possible that these crowds understood Aramaic. The fact that Mark the Hellenizing work of Jason and Menelaus

:

:

:

:

NEW MATERIAL

29

twice (5:41; 7:34) uses Aramaic quotations from the words of

Jesus does not prove that

He

always spoke in that tongue nor In Mk. 14 36, *A/3/3a 6 waTYip, it is possible that Jesus may have used both words as Paul did (Ro. 8: 15). In the quotation from Ps. 22: 1, spoken on the cross, Mt. 27:46 gives the Hebrew, while Mk. 15:34 has an Aramaic adaptation. There is no reason to doubt that that

Jesus

He

did so only on these occasions.

knew Hebrew

:

But Thomson (Temple Bible, Lang, of Matthew gives the quotations made by words of the LXX, while his own quotations are also.

Palestine) proves that

Christ in the

usually from the Hebrew.

It is clear, therefore, that Jesus spoke both Aramaic and Greek according to the demands of the occasion and read the Hebrew as well as the Septuagint, if we may argue from the O. T. quotations in the Gospels which are partly like the

Hebrew

and partly like the LXX.^ In Lu. 4: 17 it was the Hebrew text or the LXX that was the synagogue at Nazareth.^ One surely needs no argutext

not clear whether

is

read in

it

to see the possibility that a people may be bilingual when he remembers the Welsh, Scotch, Irish, Bretons of the present day.3 The people in Jerusalem understood either Greek or Ara-

ment

maic (Ac. 22:2). (j)

Grammatical Commentaries. A word must be said connew type of commentaries which accent the gram-

cerning the

matical side of exegesis.

This is, to be sure, the result of the emphasis upon scientific grammar. The commentary must have other elements besides the grammatical. Even the historical element when added does not exhaust what is required. There remains the apprehension of the soul of the author to which grammar is only an introduction. But distinct credit to be given to those commentators who have lifted this kind

still

historical is

of exegesis out of the merely homiletic vein.

Among

the older

writers are to be mentioned Meyer, Ellicott, Godet, Broadus,

Hackett, Lightfoot and Westcott, while

commentators stand out most

among

the more recent

of the writers in the International

See C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law, 1869; Boehl, Alttestamcntl. Cit. T., 1878; Toy, Quota, in the N. T., 1884; Huhn, Die alttestamcntl. Cit. etc., 1900; Gregory, Canon and Text of the N. T., 1907, p. 394. ^ On the Gk. in the Tal. sec art. Greek in Jew. Encyc; Ivrauss, Gricch. und lat. Lehnw. im Tal.; Schiircr, Jew. Hist., div. II, vol. I, p. 29 f. ' See Zahn, Einl. in das N. T., ch. 11. On the bilingual character of many of the Palestinian Jews see Schiircr, Jew. Peo. in the Time of Ch., div. II, »

im N.

vol.

I,

p.

48

f .;

Moulton,

Prol., p. 7

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

30 Critical

Commentary, Holtzmann's

Hand Comm., The

Expositor's

Greek Test, Swete, Mayor, G. Milligan, Lietzmann's Handhuch, Zahn's Kommentar, The Camb. Gk. Test., etc. In works like these, grammatical remarks of great value are found. There has been great advance in the N. T. commentaries since Winer's day, these

comments "were rendered

useless

by that

when

uncritical empi-

ricism which controlled Greek philology."^

The New Point

View. It will hardly be denied, in view condensed presentation of the new material now at hand that new light has been turned upon the problems of the N. T. Greek. The first effect upon many minds Some will not know how to is to dazzle and to cause confusion. assimilate the new facts and to co-ordinate them with old theories V.

of

of the preceding necessarily

nor be willing to form or adopt new theories as a result of the fresh phenomena. But it is the inevitable duty of the student in this

department to welcome the new discoveries and to attack

the problems arising therefrom.

The new horizon and wider

out-

be possible to avoid some mistakes at first. A truer conception of the language is now offered to us and one that will be found to be richer and more inspiring.2 Every line of biblical study must respond to the new

look

make

possible real progress.

discovery in language.

a

new Winer

It will not

"A new

will give the

Cremer, a new Thayer-Grimm, twentieth century plenty of editing to

keep its scholars busy. New Meyers and Alfords will have fresh matter from which to interpret the text, and new Spurgeons and Moodys will, we may hope, be ready to pass the new teaching on to the people." ^ The N. T. Greek is now seen to be not an

abnormal excrescence, but a natural development in the Greek language; to be, in fact, a not unworthy part of the great stream of the

mighty tongue.

but in the very heart of of the

was not outside of the world-language, it and influenced considerably the future

It

Greek tongue.

Winer, Gr. of the N. T. Idiom, Thayer's transl., p. 7. "Nun hat man aber die Sprache der heiUgen Biicher mit den Papyrusdenkmalern iind den Inschriften der alexandrinischen und romischen Zeit 1

2

genau verghchen, und da hat sich die gar manchen Anhanger der alten Doktrin verbUiffende, in Wahrheit ganz natiirhche Tatsache ergeben, da(5 die Sprache des N. T. nichts anderes ist als eine fiir den hterarischen Zweck Krumbacher, Das leicht temperierte Form des volkstumhch Griechisch." Prob. der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903, p. 27. 3 J. H. Moulton, New Lights on Bibl. Gk., Bibl. World, March, 1902.

CHAPTER

II

THE HISTORICAL METHOD Language as History. The

I.

scientific

grammar

is

at

bottom

a grammatical history, and not a linguistic law-book. The seat of authority in language is therefore not the books about language, but the people who use the language. The majority of well-educated people determine correct usage (the mos loquendi as Horace Even modern dictionaries merely record from time to says). Wolff was right time the changing phenomena of language. when he conceived of philology as the "biography of a nation." The life of a people is expressed in the speech which they use.^ We can well agree with Benfey^ that "speech is the truest picture of the soul of a people, the content of all that which has brought a people to self-consciousness." However, we must not think that we can necessarily argue race from language.^ The historical conception of grammar has had to win its way against the purely theoretical and speculative notion. Etymology was the work The study of the forms, the syntax, the of the philosophers. dialects came later. The work of the Alexandrians was originally philology, not scientific grammar.^ (a) Combining the Various Elements. It is not indeed easy to combine properly the various elements in the study of language. Sayce considers Steinthal too psychological and Schleicher too physical.^ The historical element must be added to both. PauF objects to the phrase "philosophy of language" as suggesting "metaphysical speculations of which the historical investigation 1

2 3 *

See Oertel, Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1902, Kleinere Schr., 1892, 2. Bd., 4. Abt., p. 51.

p.

9

f.

See Sayce, Prin. of Comp. Philol., 1875, p. 175 f. See Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp.

Comp.

^

Prin. of

«

Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. xxi.

ology

is

we

"The truth is that the science way as physics or i)h3'si-

philosophy in the same philosophy, neither more, nor less."

of which

2, 3.

Philol., p. xvi.

are thinking

is

31

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

32

of language needs to take

ence of principles."

He

no count."

The study

prefers the

of language

is

term

"sci-

a true science, a

with a psychical as well as a physical basis. It properly related to the historical natural sciences which have been subject "to the misdirected attempt at excluding them from the circle of the sciences of culture." ^ Language is capable real philosophy, is

almost perfect scientific treatment. Kretschmer- outlines as modern advances over ancient grammar the psychological treatment of language, the physiology of sound, the use of the comparative method, the historical development of the language, the of

recognition of speech as a product of human culture, and not to be separated from the history of culture, world-history and life

thinks that no language has yet received such treatment as this, for present-day handbooks are only "speechpictures," not "speech-histories."

He

of the peoples.

Practical Grammar a Compromise. Historical practical grammars have to make a compromise. They can give the whole view only in outline and show development and interrelation in part. It is not possible then to write the final grammar of Greek The modern is constantly changing either ancient or modern. What was true of more of the old. learning and we are ever (b)

Mistriotes^

But

and Jannaris^

none the less the

will

way

be true of the attempts of

to study Greek

is

to look at

it

all.

as a

history of the speech-development of one of the greatest of peoBut it is at least possible now to have the right attitude, ples.

thanks to the books already mentioned and others by Bernhardy,^ 1 Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. Gesch. der Philol., 1892, p. 22: "Zu der Sie sich die historische Betrachtung. Satze von deren loser Verkniipfung, die

xxvii.

See

Von

Ulrich's Grundl.

wissenschaftlichen

Grammatik

und

gesellt

unterscheidet die Periodisierung der

wechselnde Bedeutung der Partikeln, den Gebrauch der Modi und Tempora, die erfahrungsmaCig festgestellten Regeln der Syntax, den Sprachgebrauch der Schriftsteller." On the scientific study of the Gk. language sketched historically see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl.

I,

Abt.

8,

pp. 314-316.

Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., pp. 3-5.

2

He himseK

here merely

cutUnes the historical background of the Gk. language. " Kara ravra

*

7^s

\oLir6v

aia0r]TiKri eiri(TTriixr]

ij

dXXd

ypanfJ-aroXoyia dkv

elvat.

fxerkxtt- aix4>0Tkpuiv."

ovre aniyris laropiKr], ovre d/xt-

'^W-qvLK-q TpapnaToXoyia, 1894,

p. 6. *

"As a matter

of course, I

do not presume to have said the

last

word on

or most of these points, seeing that, even in the -case of modern Gk., I cannot be expected to master, in all its details, the entire vocabulary and grammar of every single Neohellenic dialect." Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. x. all

B

Wissensch. Synt. der griech. Spr., 1829.

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

33

Christ/ Wun(lt,2 Johannsen,'' Krumbacher,'' Schanz,* G. Meyer/ Miiller/ Hirt/ Thumb/ Dieterich/" Steinthal." The Latin

I.

syntax received historical treatment by Landgraf/^ not to men-

EngUsh and other modern languages. Language as a Living Organism. (a) The Origin of Language. Speech is indeed a characteristic of man and may be considered a divine gift, however slowly the gift was won and developed by him.'-^ Sayce is undoubtedly tion

II.

correct in saying that language

is a social creation and the effort communicate is the only true solution of the riddle of speech, whether there was ever a speechless man or not. "Grammar has grown out of gesture and gesticulation."!* But speech has not created the capacities which mark the civilized man as higher than the savage. ^^ Max Miiller remarks that "language forms an impassable barrier between man and beast." Growls and signs do not constitute "intellectual symbolism." i« Paul indeed, in opposition to Lazarus and Steinthal, urges that "every linguistic creation is always the work of a single individual only."i^ The

to

psychological organisms are in fact the true media of linguistic

Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1893. Volkerpsychol., 1900, 3. Aufl., 1911 Beitr. zur griech. Sprachk., 1890.

^

2 '

f.

<

Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1885.

»

Beitr. zur hist. Synt. der griech. Spr.,

«

Ess.

Bd. I-XVII.

und Stud, zur Sprachgesch. und Volksk., Bd. I, II, 1885, 1893. Handb. der Altertumswiss. He edits the series (1890—). Handb. der griech. Laut- und Formenl. Eine Einfuhr. in das sprach-

7 8

wiss. Stud, des Griech., 1902, 2. Aufl., 1912.

Die griech. Spr. im Zeitalter des Hellen., 1901,

9

Untersuch. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1898.

1"

" Gesch. der Sprachwiss. bei den Griech. und Rom., Hist. Gr. der lat. Spr., 1903.

12

Cf. Stolz

TI. I, II, 1891.

und Schmalz,

Lat. Gr., 4. Aufl., 1910; Draeger, Hist. Synt. der lat. Spr., Bd. I, II, 1878, 1881; Lindsay, The Lat. Lang., 1894. In Bd. Ill of Landgraf's Gr., GoUing says (p. 2) that Latin Grammar as a study is due to the Stoics who did it "in der cngsten Vcrbindung mit der Logik." Cf. Origin of Gk. Gr.

" See Whitney, Lang, and the Study

of Lang., 18G8, p. 399.

1^

Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., vol.

15

Whitney, Darwinism and Lang., Reprint from North Am. Rev., July,

II, p.

301.

1874. 16 Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 9. See also The Silesian Horseherd: "Language and thought go hand in hand; where there is as yet no word, there is as yet no idea." Many of the writers on animals do not accept this doctrine.

"

Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. xHii.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

34

development.

and analogy help one

Self-observation

general average and so

make grammar

to strike a

practical as well as scien-

tific.

Evolution in Language. Growth, then, is to be expected Change is inseparable from life. No language dead so long as it is undergoing change, and this must be true spoken and written usage. It is not the function of the gram-

(6)

in a living tongue. is

in

marian to stop change in language, a thing impossible in itself. Such change is not usually cataclysmic, but gradual and varied. " A written language, to serve any practical purpose, must change with the times, just like a living dialect."^ In general, change in usage may be compared to change in organic structure in The changes by analogy in the "greater or lesser fitness." ^ speech of children are very suggestive on this point. The vocabulary of the Greek tongue must therefore continually develop, for new ideas demand new words and new meanings come to old words. Likewise inflections vary in response to new movements. This change brings great wealth and variety. The idea of progress has seized the modern mind and has been applied to the study of language as to everything

Change Chiefly

(c)

in

else.

the Vernacular.

occurs chiefly in the vernacular.

From

Linguistic change

the spoken language

new

words and new inflections work their way gradually into the written style, which is essentially conservative, sometimes even Much slang is finally acanachronistic and purposely archaic. cepted in the literary style. The study of grammar was originally confined to the artificial book-style. Dionysius Thrax expressly

grammar

defined ewl

cos

TO

TToXv

as

ejUTretpta roiv

\eyofjL€P(jop.

It

irapa TrotijraTs re Kal crvyypa4>evaLU

was with him a concern

poets and writers, not "die Sprache des Lebens."^ (ypafxnaTLK-fi, 7pd0aj),

then,

what was wTitten; then the

was

first

to write

and to understand

scientific interpretation of this litera-

ture; later the study of hterary linguistic usage.

moderns who

own

its

for the

Grammar

It is

only the

have learned to investigate the living speech for

Before the discovery of the Greek inbetween the vernacular and the literary could not be so sharply drawn for the Greek of the classical historical value.

scriptions the distinction style

^

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 481.

Kiihner speaks of "das organische Leben der Sprache" and und lebensvoUes Bild des groBen und kraftig bliihenden Sprachbaums." Ausfiihrl. Gr. der griech. Spr., 1. Bd., 1890, p. iii. 3 Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 3-5. 2

lb., p. 13.

of "ein klares, anschauliches

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

35

though Aristophanes should have taught us much. We have moved away from the position of Mure^ who said: "The distinction between the language of letters and the vulgar tongue, so characteristic of modern civilization, is imperceptible or but period,

little

defined in the flourishing age of Greece.

Numerous

peculi-

tended to constitute cla'ssical expression in speaking or writing, not, as with us, the privilege of a few, but a public property in which every Hellene had an equal interest." The people as a whole were wonderfully well educated, but the educated classes themselves then, as now with us, used a arities in her social condition

spoken as well as a literary style. Jannaris^ is clear on this point: "But, speaking of Attic Greek, we must not infer that all Athenians and Atticized Greeks wrote and spoke the classical Attic portrayed in the aforesaid literature, for this Attic is essentially it still remains in modern Greek composition: a merely historical abstraction; that is, an artistic language which nobody

what

spoke but

still

everybody understood."

We

must note

therefore

both the vernacular and the literary style and expect constant change in each, though not in the same degree. Zarncke indeed still sounds a note of warning against too much attention to the vernacular, though a needless one.^ In the first century a.d. the vernacular Greek was in common use all over the world, the character of which we can now accurately set forth. But this nonUterary language was not necessarily the speech of the

Mahaffy*

is

very positive on this point,

"I said just

illiterate.

now

that

the Hellenistic world was more cultivated in argument than we are nowadays. And if you think this is a strange assertion, ex-

pray you, the intellectual aspects of the epistles of St. first Christian writer whom we know to have been thoroughly educated in this training. Remember that he was a practical teacher, not likely to commit the fault of speaking over the heads of his audience, as the phrase is," Hatzidakis^ laments that the monuments of the Greek since the Alexandrian period are no longer in the pure actual living speech of the time, but in the ar-

amine,

I

Paul, the

'

A

2

Op.

Crit. Hist, of the cit.,

1897, p. 3

Lang, and

Lit. of

Anc. Greece, 1850,

vol.

I,

p. 117,

f.

3 Die Entst. der griech. Literaturspr., 1890, p. 2: "Denn man liefe Gefahr, den Charakter der Literaturdeiikinaler giinzlich zu zenslorcn, indcni man, ihre eigenartigc Gestaltung vcrkcnnend, sie nach den Normen eincr gesprochenen Mundart corrigirt." But see Lottich, De Serm, vulg. Att., 1881; and

Apostolides, op.

cit.

*

Prog, of Hcllen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 137.

^

Einleitung, p. 3.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

36

Attic of a bygone age. The modern Greek vernacular is a living tongue, but the modern literary language so proudly

tificial

and unreal.'^ This new conception no longer possible to set up the Greek

called Kadapevovaa

is artificial

of language as life

makes

it

any one period as the standard for all time. The English who would use Hooker's style would be affected and anachronistic. Good English to-day is not what it was two hundred years ago, even with the help of printing and (part of the time) dictionaries. What we wish to know is not what was good Greek at Athens in the days of Pericles, but what was good Greek in Syria and Palestine in the first century a.d. The direct evidence for this must be sought among contemporaries, not from ancestors in a distant land. It is the living Greek that

of

writer to-day

we

desire,

not the dead.

Greek not an Isolated Language. (a) The Importance of Comparative Grammar. Julius Csesar, who wrote a work on grammar, had in mind Latin and Greek, for both were in constant use in the Roman world.^ Formal Sanskrit grammar itself may have resulted from the comparison of Sanskrit with the native dialects of India. ^ Hence comparative grammar seems to lie at the very heart of the science. It cannot be said, however, that Panini, the great Sanskrit scholar and grammarian of the fourth century e.g., received any impulse from the Greek civilization of Alexander the Great.^ The work of Panini is one of the most remarkable in history for subtle originality, "une histoire naturelle de la langue sanscrite." The Roman and Greek grammarians attended to the use of words in III.

sentences, while the Sanskrit writers analyzed words into syl-

and studied the relation of sounds to each other. It is not possible to state the period when linguistic comparison was first made. Max Miiller in The Science of Language even says: lables^

"From an the

first

historical point of

Day

of Pentecost

One must not think

of language."

"more

is ^

view

it is

marks the

much to say that beginning of the Science

not too

real

that the comparative

method

characteristic of the study of language than of other

"Eine Literatursprache

Weltspr. des Altert., 1902,

ist

iiie

eine Art Normalsprache. "

Schwyzer,

p. 12.

Comp. Gr., p. 2. Comp. Philol., p. 261. « Goblet d'Alviella, Ce que I'lnde doit a la Grece, 1897, p. 129. ^ King, op. cit., p. 2 f "The method of comparative grammar is merely auxiliary to historical grammar," Wheeler, Whence and Whither of the Mod. Sci. of Lang., p. 96. ^ ffing, Intr. '

to

Sayce, Prin. of

.

-

THE HISTORICAL METHOD branches of modern inquiry." i

mar

The

the kinship of languages.

is

37

root idea of the

Chinese grammar

new gram-

said to be one of the curiosities of the world, and some other grammatical works can be regarded in that light. But our fundamental obli-

gation (6)

is

to the

Hindu and Greek grammarians. in Language. Prof. Alfredo Trom-

The Common Bond of

betti,

Rome, has sought the connecting a gigantic task, but it of ultimate common origin.

speech.3

speech

It is

is

are very difficult to trace. tive

is

grammarians speak

link in all

human

doubtless true that

is

The remote

all

relationships

As a working hypothesis the comparaand inflectional

of isolating, agglutinative

In the isolating tongues like the Chinese, Burmese, the words have no inflection and the position in the sen-

languages. etc.,

tence and the tone in pronunciation are relied on for clearness Giles* points out that modern English and Persian

of meaning.

have nearly returned to the position

Hence

guages.

it is

of Chinese as isolating lan-

inferred that the Chinese has already gone

through a history similar to the English and is starting again on inflectional career. Agglutinative tongues like the Turkish express the various grammatical relations by numerous separable

an

prefixes, infixes still

and

suffixes.

have made made between

Inflectional languages

further development, for while a distinction

is

the stem and the inflexional endings, the stems and the endings do not exist apart from each other. There are two great families in the inflexional group, the Semitic (the Assyrian, the

Hebrew, and the Indo-Germanic or Indo-European (the Indo-Iranian or Aryan, the Armenian, the Greek, the Albanian, the Italic, the Celtic, the Germanic and the BaltoSlavic).^ Indo-European also are Illyrian, Macedonian, Phrygian, Thracian and the newly-discovered Tocharian. Some of these the Syriac, the Arabic,

etc.)

groups, like the Italic, the Germanic, the Balto-Slavic, the IndoIranian, embrace a number of separate tongues which show an inner affinity, but »

all

the groups have a general family likeness."

Whitney, Life and Growth of Lang., 1S75— p. 315. F. Hoffmann, Ubcr die Entwickel. des Begriffs dcr Gr. bei den Alten, ,

^

1891, p.

1.

See his book, The Unity of Origin of Lang. Dr. AUison Drake, Di^c. in Heb., Gaehc, Gothic, Anglo-Sax., Lat., Basque and other Caucasic Lang., 1908, undertakes to show "fundamental kinship of the iVryan tongues and of Basque with the Semitic tongues." *

* ^

^

Man. of Comp. Philol., 1901, p. 36. Brugmann, Kurze vergl. Gr. dcr indogcr.

Sjjr.,

1.

Lief., 1902, p. 4.

See Misteli, Characteristik der hauptsachliohsten Typen des Sprach-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

38

NEW TESTAMENT

The Original Indo-Germanic Speech,

(c)

It is

not claimed

Indo-Germanic speech has been discovered, though Kretschmer does speak of "die indogermanische Ursprache," but he considers it only a necessary hypothesis and a the

that

original

useful definition for the early speech-unity before the Indo-Germanic stock separated. 1 Brugmann speaks also of the original

and ground-speech ( Ur- und Grundsprache) in the prehistoric background of every member of the Indo-Germanic family .2 The science of language has as a historic discipline the task of investigating the collective speech-development of the Indo-Germanic peoples.^ Since Bopp's day this task is no longer impossible. The

existence of an original Indo-Germanic speech This hypothesis of all modern linguistic study.

is

the working

demands indeed

a study of the Indo-Germanic people. Horatio Hale* insists that language is the only proper basis for the classification of manBut this test breaks down when Jews and Egyptians speak kind. Greek after Alexander's conquests or when the Irish and the American Negro use English. The probable home and wanderings of the original Indo-Germanic peoples are well discussed by Kretschmer.^ It is undeniable that many of the same roots exist in slightly different

They

tongues.

forms in

all

or

most

of the

Indo-Germanic

are usually words that refer to the

common

do-

mestic relations, elementary agriculture, the ordinary articles of food, the elemental forces, the pronouns and the numerals. Inflexional languages have two kinds of roots, predicative (nouns

and verbs) and pronominal. Panini found 1706 such roots in Sanskrit, but Edgren has reduced the number of necessary Sanskrit roots to 587.^ But one must not suppose that these hypothetical roots ever constituted a real language, though there was an

original

Indo-Germanic tongue.^

For further literature on comparative gi-ammar see ch. I, 2 (j) There is an Enghsh translation of Brugmann's Bde. I and II called Elements of the Comp. Gr. of the Indo-Ger. Lang., 5 vols., 1886-97. But his Kurze vergl. Gr. (1902-4) is the handiest edition. Meillet (Intr. k 1 'Etude Comp. etc., pp. 441-455) has a discriminating discussion of the Mtera-

baues, 1893.

of this book.

ture. 1

Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 7-9.

2

Kurze

3

lb., p. 27.

4

Pop.

6

Einl. in die Gesch. etc., pp. 7-92.

8 »

vergl. Gr., 1. Lief., 1902, p. 3.

Sci.

Rev., Jan., 1888.

See Max Muller, Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 29. Sayce, Prin. of Comp. Philol., 1875, p. vi.

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

39

(d) Greek as a "Dialect" of the Indo-Germanic Speech. Greek then can be regarded as one of the branches of this original Indo-Germanic speech, just as French is one of the descendants of the Latin/ Hke Spanish, Portuguese, Itahan. Compare also the re-

lation of English to the other Teutonic tongues.^

To go

further,

the separation of this original Indo-Germanic speech into various tongues was much like the breaking-up of the original Greek into dialects

and was due to natural

causes.

Dialectic variety itself

implies previous speech-unity.'

Greek has vital relations with all the branches of the Indo-Germanic tongues, though in varying degrees. The Greek shows decided affinity with the Sanskrit, the Latin and the Celtic" languages. Part of the early Greek stock was probably Celtic. The Greek and the Latin flourished side by side for centuries and had much common history. All the comparative grammars and the Greek grammars from this point of view constantly compare the Greek with the Latin. See especially the great work of Riemann and Goelzer, Grammaire comparee du Grec et du Latin.^ On the whole subject of the relation of the Greek with the various Indo-Germanic languages see the excellent brief discussion of Kretschmer.^

But the hypothesis of an cannot be considered as shown, though there are many points of contact between Greek and Latin. ^ But Greek, as the next oldest branch known to us, shows marked affinity with the Sanskrit. Constant use of the Sanskrit must be made by one who wishes to understand the original

Graeco-Italic tongue

historical development of the Greek tongue. Such a work as Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar is very useful for this purpose. See also J. Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik. I, Lautlehre

(1896).

II,

1,

Einleitung zur Wortlehre (1905).

So Thumb's

See Meyer-Liibke, Gr. der rom. Spr., 3 Bde., 1890, 1894, 1899. See Hirt, Handb. der gricch. Laut- und Fornienl., 2d ed., 1912, p. 13. Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 112 (Ethn. Affin. of the Anc. Greeks). 3 Whitney, Lang, and the Study of Lang., 1868, p. 185. See Brugmann, 1

2

Griech. Gr., p. 5: "Die griechische, lateinische, indische u.s.w. Grammatik sind die konstitutiven Teile der indogermanischen Grammatik in gleicher Weise, wie z. B. die dorische, die ionische u.s.w. Grammatik die griechische

Grammatik ausmachen." See Holder, Altcelt. Sprachsch., 1891 flf. Phon6t. ct Et. dcs Formes Grq. et Lat., 1901. 8 Einl. in die Gesch. der gricch. Spr., pp. 153-170. ' Prof. B. L. Gildersleeve, Johns Hopkins Univ., has always taught Greek, but his Latin Grammar shows his fondness for Latin. See also Henry, A Short Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., 1890, and A Short Comp. Gr. of Eng. and ^

*

Synt., 1897.

Ger., 1893.

40

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Handbuch

des

Sanskrit.

I,

Grammatik

(1905).

Max

Mliller^

playfully remarks: "It has often been said that no one can

know

anything of the science of language who does not know Sanskrit, and that is enough to frighten anybody away from its study." It is not quite so bad, however. Sanskrit is not the parent stock The age of of the Greek, but the oldest member of the group. the Sanskrit makes it invaluable for the study of the later speechdevelopments.

The Greek

therefore

is

not an isolated tongue, but sustains vital

So important does he devotes his notable Einleitimg in die Geschichte der griechischen Sprache to the setting forth of "the prehistoric beginnings of the Greek speech-development." 2 This effort is, of necessity, fragmentary and partly inferential, but most valuable for a scientific treatment of the Greek language. He has a luminous discussion of the effect of the Thracian and Phrygian stocks upon the Greek when the language spread over Asia Minor.^ IV. Looking at the Greek Language as a Whole. We cannot indeed make an exhaustive study of the entire Greek language in a book that is professedly concerned only with one epoch of that Jannaris^ inhistory. As a matter of fact no such work exists. deed said that "an 'historical' grammar, tracing in a connected manner the life of the Greek language from classical antiquity to the present time, has not been written nor even seriously attempted as yet." Jannaris himself felt his limitations when he faced so gigantic a task and found it necessary to rest his work

relations with a great family of languages.

Kretschmer consider

upon the

this aspect of the subject that

classical Attic as the

only practical basis.^

But

so far

Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 72. P. 5. Prof. Burrows (Disc, in Crete, 1907, pp. 145 fT.) raises the question whether the Greek race (a blend of northern and southern elements) made the Gk. language out of a pre-existing Indo-European tongue. Or did the northerners bring the Gk. with them? Or did they find it already in the .^gean? It is easier to ask than to answer these questions. * Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. v. 3 See pp. 171-243. ^ lb., p. xi. Thumb says: "Wir sind noch sehr weit von einer Geschichte oder historischen Grammatik der griechischen Sprache entfernt; der Versuch von Jannaris, so dankenswert er ist, kann doch nur provisorische Geltung beanspruchen, wobei man mehr die gute Absicht und den FleiB als das Die griech. sprachgeschichtliche Verstiindnis des Verfassers loben muB." Spr., etc., 1901, p. 1. Cf. also Krumbacher, Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr. (1884, p. 4): "Eine zusammenhangende Darstellung des Entwickelungsganges der griechischen Sprache ist gegenwartig nicht mogUch." But it is more possible now than in 1884. 1

2

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

41

he departed from the pure historical method. But such a gramwill come some day. (a) Descriptivp: Historical Grammar. Meanwhile descriptive

mar

grammar

and necessary. " Descriptive gramand grammatical conditions in use at a given date within a certain community speaking a common language." There is this justification for taking historical

mar has

is

possible

to register the grammatical forms i

Attic as the standard for classical study; only the true historical perspective should be given and Attic should not be taught as

the only real Greek.

and essential then to correlate other Greek and to use all Greek to throw light on the stage of the language under review. If the Greek itself is not an isolated tongue, no one stage of the language can be so regarded. ''Wolffs deprecates the restriction of It is possible

the N. T. Greek with

all

grammar to a set of rules abstracted from the writings of a 'golden' period, while in reality it should comprise the whole history of a language and trace its development." H. C. Miiller' indeed thought that the time had not arrived for a grammar of Greek on the historical plan, because it must rest on a greater amount of material than is now at hand. But since then a vast

amount

new

material has come to light in the form of papyri, and research in the modern Greek. Muller's owti book has added no little to our knowledge of the subject. Meanof

inscriptions

while

we can

use the historical material for the study of N. T.

Greek. (b)

Unity of the Greek Language. At the

risk of slight repe-

worth while to emphasize this point. Muller^ is apologetic and eager to show that "the Greek language and hterature is one organic, coherent whole." The dialectical variations, while tition

it is

confusing to a certain extent, do not show that the Greek did not and continuous unity. As early as 1000 b.c. these

possess original

dialectical distinctions is

probably existed and the speech of Homer a literary dialect, not the folk-speech.^ The original sources of

'

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 18SS, p. 2.

2

Oertel, Lect.

on the Study

of Lang., 1902, p. 27.

Thumb

(Thtol. Litera-

turzeit., 1903, p. 424) expresses

the hope that in a future edition of his Gr. des N. T., Blass may do this for his book: "Die Sprache des N. T. auf dem grofien Hintergrund dcr hellenistischen Sprachontwickhmg boschreibcn zu

konnen."

s

m^^ q^

*

lb., p. 16.

On

*

Brugmann,

Vergl. Gr., 1902, p. 8.

fi,>,.

i,(.ii

j^^j.^

jj,f)|^

^^

j^

f

"die griechische Spraehe als Einlioit" see Thumb's able discussion in Handb. d. gricch. Dial. (pp. 1-12). With all the diversity of dialects there was essential unity in comparison with other tongues.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

42

the Greek speech go back to a far distant time

when

as one single

language an Asiatic idiom had taken Europe in its circle of- inThe translator of Buttmann's Greek Grammar speaks fluence.^ This was of Homer "almost as the work of another language." once a common opinion for all Greek that was not classic Attic. But Thiersch entitled his great work Griechische Grammatik vorziiglich des homerischen Dialekts, not simply because of the worth

Homer, "but because, on the contrary, a thorough knowledge of the Homeric dialect is indispensably necessary for those who desire to comprehend, in their whole depth and compass, the Grecian tongue and literature." ^ But Homer is not the gauge by which to test Greek; his poems are invaluable testimony to the

of

early history of one stage of the language. It is a pity that we know so little of the pre-Homeric history of Greek. " Homer pre-

sents not a starting-point, but a culmination, a complete achievement, an almost mechanical accomplishment, with scarcely a it has persisted as a whether we read the language one linguistic unit till now. the Attic Herodotus, Ionic the Pindar, Doric Epic Homer, the Paul the Plutarch, Atticistic the Sappho, ^Eolic Xenophon, the

hint of origins."^

But whenever Greek began It is

exponent of Christ, an inscription in Pergamus, a papyrus letter None of in Egypt, Tricoupis or Vlachos in the modern time. impertior excrescences as regarded can be representatives these persons, but the uneducated been always have There nences. all history checkered, though continuous, had a has tongue Greek of appreciation keen has a Greek educated modern The the way. complained MuUer^ Sprache."" klassischen der Schonheiten "die that "almost no grammarians have treated the Greek language as a whole," but the works of Krumbacher, Thumb, Dieterich, Hatzidakis, Psichari, Jannaris, etc., have made it possible to obtain a general survey of the Greek language up to the present

Like English,^ Greek has emerged into a unity and consistent growth. time.

new sphere

of

Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 6. On the unof the Gk. tongue see Wackernagel, Die griech. Spr., p. 294, Tl. I, Abt. 8 (Die Kult. der Gegenw.). On the antiquity of Gk. see p. 292 f. 2 Sandford, Pref. to Thiersch's Gk. Gr., 1830, p. viii. 3 Miss Harrison, Prol. to the Study of Gk. Rel., 1903, p. vii. 1

mixed character

*

Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr. Gr., 1892, p.

6

Hist. Gr. der hell. Spr., 1891, p. 2.

4.

See John Koch, Eng. Gr., for an admirable bibhography of works on Eng. Ergeb. und Fortschr. der germanist. Wiss. im letzten Vierteljahrh., 1902, The Germans have taught us how to study Enghsh! pp. 89-138, 325-437). 6

(in

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

43

Periods

of the Greek Language. It will be of service to present a brief outline of the history of the Greek tongue. And yet it is not easy to give. See the discussion by Sophocles in his Greek Lexicon (p. 11 f.), inadequate in view of recent discoveries (c)

by Schliemann and Evans. The following is a tentative outhne: The Mycenaan Age, 2000 b.c. to 1000 b.c; the Age of the Dialects,

1000

B.C. to 300 B.C.; the Age of the Koivij, 300 b.c. to 330 Byzantine Greek, 330 a.d. to 1453 a.d.; the modern Greek, 1453 a.d. to the present time. The early stage of the Byzantine Greek (up to 600 a.d.) is really KOiv-q and the rest is modern Greek. See a different outline by Jannaris^ and Hadley

A.D.; the

and the

Allen.2 As a matter of fact any division is arbitrary, for language has had an unbroken history, though there' are

these general epochs in that history. We can no longer call the pre-Homeric time mythical as Sophocles does.^ In naming this

the Mycenaean age we do not wish to state positively that the Mycenseans were Greeks and spoke Greek. "Of their speech we have yet to read the first syllable." ^ Tsountas^ and Manatt, however, venture to believe that they were either Greeks or of the same stock. They use the term "to designate all Greek peoples who shared in the Mycenaean civilization, irrespective of their

habitat." ^

p. 862) claims

Ohnefalsch-Richter {Cont.

Cyprus as the purveyor

Rev., Dec, 1912, of culture to the Creto-

age. He claims that Hellenes lived in Cyprus 1200 to 1000 B.C. The Mycenaean influence was wide-spread and comes "do^vn to the very dawn of historical Greece." ^ That Greek was known and used widely during the Mycenaean age the researches

Mycenaean

Evans at Knossos,

of

Hist.

^

make

clear.^

The

early linear

Cf. also Schuckburgh, Greece, 1906, p. 24 f. counts 32 centuries of the Gk. language from 1275 the date of the mention of the Acha;ans on an Egyptian monument.

Moulton B.C.,

Gk. Gr.,

in Crete,

p.

xxii.

(Prol., p. 184)

2 Gk. Gr., 1885, p. 1 f. Deissmann indeed would have only three divisions, the Dialects up to 300 b.c, Middle Period up to 600 a.d., and Mod. Gk. up to the present time. Hauck's Realencyc, 1889, p. 030. Cf. Miillc-, Hist Gr. der hell. Spr., 1891, pp. 42-62, for another outline. ' * ^

«

Gk. Lex., etc., p. 11. Tsountas and Manatt, The Mycenaean Age, 1897 p 316 lb., p. 335 fT. lb., p. 235.

lb., p. 325. See also Beloch, Grieoh. Gesch., I., 85: "Auch sonst kann kern Zweifel sem, dafi die mykeniiischo Kultur in Griechonland bis in das VIII. Jahrhundcrt gehorrscht." Flinders-Petrie ^

(Jour, of Hell. Stud.,

204) speaks of 1100 to 800 b.c. as the "age of »

Mycemran

xii

decaxlcnce."

Cretan Pictographs and Pre-Phoenician Script, 1895,

j).

362;

cf.

also

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

44

came from a still earlier pictograph. The emerge into light from about 1000 b.c. onward and culminate in the Attic which flourished till the work of Alexander is done. The Homeric poems prove that Greek was an old language by 1000 to 800 b.c. The dialects certainly have their roots deep Roughly, 300 b.c. is the time when the in the Mycensean age. Greek has become the universal language of the world, a Weltsprache. 330 a.d. is the date when the seat of government was removed from Rome to Constantinople, while a.d. 1453 is the date when Constantinople was captured by the Turks. With all the changes in this long history the standards of classicity have not varied greatly from Homer till now in the written style, while the Greek vernacular to-day is remarkably like the earliest known We know something inscriptions of the folk-speech in Greece.^ of this history for about 3000 years, and it is at least a thousand years longer. Mahaffy has too poor an idea of modern Greek, but even he can say: "Even in our miserable modern pigeonGreek, which represents no real pronunciation, either ancient or modern, the lyrics of Sophocles or Aristophanes are unmistakably writing of the Cretans

Greek

dialects

lovely." (d)

2

Modern Greek in Particular.

It

is

important to single out

the modern Greek vernacular^ from the rest of the language for the obvious reason that of the vernacular

also that

it is

the abiding witness to the perpetuity

Greek as a

living organism.

at our service always.

is

It

is

a witness

The modern Greek popular

differ materially from the vernacular Byzantine, and thus connects directly with the vernacular kolvI]. Alexandria was "the great culture-reservoir of the Greek-Oriental world the repository of the ancient literary treasures.""* With this

speech does not

.

Jour, of Hell. Stud., xiv, 270-372.

See Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr.,

.

.

p. 22, for fur-

Mosso (Palaces of argues that the Mycenaian Unear script was used 1900

ther proofs of the antiquity of Gk. as a written tongue. Crete, 1907, p. 73 B.C. ^

f.)

Cf. Evans, Further Researches, 1898.

Brugmann, Griech.

Gr., p. 13.

See also Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr.

Gr., 1892, p. 3. 2

Survey

of

Gk. Civihz., 1896, p. 209. Cf. further Mosso, Dawn of Civiliz. Kings of Crete, 1910; Firmen, Zeit und Dauer der

in Crete, 1910; Baike,

kretisch-

myken.

Kult., 1909.

The modern hterary language (Kadapevovaa) is really more identical with the ancient classical Gk. But it is identity secured by mummifying the dead. It is identity of imitation, not identity of life. Cf. Thumb-Angus, Handb. of Mod. Gk. Vern., Foreword (p. xi f.). * Dieterich, Gesch. der byz. und neugr. Lit., 1902, p. 2. *

THE HISTORICAL METHOD general position

Thumb

heartily agrees.^

45

Hatzidakis^ even says:

generally spoken to-day in the towns differs less

"The language

from the common language of Polybius than

from

this last diifers

the language of Homer." Since this is true it at first seems odd that the students at the University of Athens should object so much to the translation of the N. T. into the modern vernacular.

They

forget that the

KOLPT].

But that was

N. T.

written in the vernacular

itself

is

so long ago that

it is

Certainly in the Gospels, as Wellhausen^

now

classic to

insists,

them.

the spoken

of the modern Greek* helps Procrustean bed of the old "the the student to escape from thing.^ dead It is probfixed and Greek" which he learned as a besides the Byzantine manual had some able that Roger Bacon in the of less than rest England, no "In old Greek grammars.^ had died away, and of Greek knowledge the Western Europe, here also, it was only after the conquest of Constantinople that a

Greek became

Knowledge

literature.

change was possible."^ Western Christians had been afraid of the corruptions of paganism if they knew Greek, and of Moham-

But at if they knew Hebrew (being kin to Arabic!). inBoltz modern Greek. the favour of in come has change last a for language common the Greek as modern advocated has deed the scholars of the world since Latin is so httle spoken.^ There is indeed need of a new world-speech, as Greek was in the N. T. times, but there is no language that can now justly make such a English comes nearer to it than any other. This need claim. has given rise to the artificial tongues Uke Volaptik and Espe-

medanism

1

"Die heutige

griechische Volkssprache ist die natiirliche Fortsetzung der

Die neugr.

alten Kolvt]."

maic Gk. (1834), who the vern. kolvt). 2 Transl. by

Rev. des

fit.

J.

Spr., 1892, p. 8.

fii-st

saw

H. Moulton

Grq.,

1903,

220.

6

between the mod. vcrn. and

N. T. Gk., 1906 and 1908,

Of. Ivrumbachcr,

p. 30,

Das Prob. der

from

ncugr.

Einl. in die drei erstcn Evang., 1905, p. 9.

'

Schriftspr., 1902. *

in Gr. of

p.

See Heilmeier's book on the Ro-

this connection

See Riiger, Prap. bei Joh. Antiochenus, 1896, p. 7. Thumb, Handb. der neugr. Volkspr., 1895, p. x.

by Nohxn and Hirsch,

6

Roger Bacon's Gk.

^

lb., p. xlii.

8

Hell, die internat. Gelehrtenspr. der Zukunft, 18SS.

"Die

Gr., edited

griechische Sprache

.

.

.

hat

.

.

.

1902, p. ]x

f.

Likewise A. Rose:

cine gliinzcnde Zukunft vor sich."

Die Griechen und ihre Spr., 1890, p. 4. He pleads for it as a "Weltsprache," But Schwyzer pointedly says: "Die Rollc einer Weltsprache wird

p. 271.

das Griofihische nicht wieder spiclen." Weltspr. des Altcrt., 1902, p. 38. Of. also A. Boltz, Die hell. Spr. der Gegcnw., 1882, and Gk. the Gen. Lang, of the Future for Scholars.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

46

ranto/ the latter having some promise in it. But the modern Greek vernacular has more merit than was once conceded to it. The idioms and pronunciation of the present-day vernacular are often seen in the manuscripts of the N. T. and other Greek docu-

ments and much

earlier in inscriptions representing

other of the early dialects. is

The persistence

easily observed in the vernacular in parts of

land.

In the same

way

one or anforms

of early English

the late Latin vernacular

America or Engto be compared

is

with the early Latin vernacular, not with the Latin of elegant "Speaking generally, we may say that the Greek of a literature. well-written newspaper [the literary language] is now, as a rule, far more classical than the Hellenistic of the N. T., but decidedly

What

than the Greek of Plutarch." 2

classical

less

the rela-

Greek and the modern Greek is will be shown in the next chapter. It should be noted here that the N. T. Greek had a strong moulding influence on the Byzantine, and so on the modern Greek because of the use of the Greek New Testament all over the world, due to the spread of Christianity tion between the N. T.

throughout the Roman Empire.^ The great Christian preachers did not indeed use a peculiar ecclesiastical Greek, but the N. T. did tend to emphasize the type of kolvt] in which it was written. "The diction of the N. T. had a direct influence in moulding the Greek ordinarily used by Christians in the succeeding cenCompare the effect of the King James Version on the turies."^

English language and of Luther's translation of the Bible on

German.

The Greek Point

of View. It sounds like a truism to Greek idiom must be explained from the Greek point of view. But none the less the caution is not superfluous. Trained Unguists may forget it and so commit a grammatical vice. Even Winer ^ will be found saying, for instance: "Appel-

V.

insist that the

latives which,

as expressing definite objects,

*

Cf. J. C. O'Connor, Esperanto Text-book,

^

Jebb,

On

the Rela. of

Mod.

should naturally

and Eng.-Esper. Diet.

to Class. Gk., in Vincent and Dickson's

Blass actually says: "Der SprachgeHandb. to Mod. Gk., 1887, p. 294. brauch des Neuen Testaments, der vielfaltig vom Neugriechischen her eine viel bessere Beleuchtung empfangt als aus der alten klassischen Literatur." Kiihner's Ausf. Gr.

etc.,

1890, p. 25.

wissenschaftliche neugriechische

Blass also says

Grammatik

fehlt."

(ib., p.

others have written since.

De

Graecitate Patrum, 1898.

3

See Reinhold,

*

Jebb,

'

Gr. of the N. T. Gk., Moulton's transl., 1877, p. 147.

ib., p.

26) that "eine

But Hatzidakis and

290.

.

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

47

That have the article, arc in certain cases used without it." appelThe Greek. toward attitude wrong the "should" has to be lative in Greek does not need to have the article in order is used tense one that admits often Winer when So definite. "for" another, he is really thinking of German and how it would be expressed in German. Each tongue has its own history and of langenius. Parallel idioms may or may not exist in a group is guages. Sanskrit and Latin, for instance, have no article. It the not possible to parallel the Hebrew tenses, for example, with Greek, nor, indeed, can it be done as between Greek and English. The English translation of a Greek aorist may have to be in the but past perfect or the present perfect to suit the English usage, that proves nothing as to

how a Greek regarded

the aorist tense.

must assume in a language that a good writer knew how to Greek use his own tongue and said what he meant to say. Good tovs Haayaytlv tQ h uses may be very poor English, as when Luke this of translation literal A -yoveZs TO TraiBlov 'Irjaovv (Lu. 2:27).

We

simply neat Greek idiom makes barbarous English. The Greeks and commonest the of "One did not look at this clause as we do. is languages foreign of grammar gravest errors in studying the back reason then and translation, to make a half-conjectural exfrom our own language to the meaning of the original; or to idiom different formally the by original plain some idiom of the which is our substantial equivalent." ^ Broadus was the greatest said nothing teacher of language that I have known and he has what he knew Greek educated an all, After truer than this. task difficult and great a indeed is It do. meant better than we underto-day who grammarian Greek the of that is demanded development of takes to present a living picture of the orderly Ganzen" and groBen und schonen einem "zu the Greek tongue of the Greek flower the light beautiful most the show "in also

spirit

and

life."^

Deissmann^ feels strongly on the subject of the development of Primitive Christianity, "a

neglect of the literary

als Mt., 1886, p. 316. See also Gerber, Die Spr. Sprache jener odcr dieser Charakter ganzc Kunst 1. Bd., 1871, p. 321: "Der des Landcs, wo sic gcsprochen wird. Die gricchiist der Abdruck dor Natiir selbst mit seiner tiefdunklen Bliiue, schc Sprache ist der gricchische Himniel Meere spiegelt." agaischen wogcnden sanft dem in die sich How much more so ^ Kuhner, Ausf. Gr. der griech. Spr., 1834, p. iv. 1

Broadus,

Comm. on

now' 3 Expos. Times, Dec, 1906, neue Folge, 1882, p. 429 ff

p. 103.

Cf. also F. Overbeck, Hist. Zeitschr.,

48

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

subject which has not yet been recognized by many pBrsoTis in its Huge as is the library of books that have been full importance.

written on the origin of the N. T. and of its separate parts, the N. T. has not often been studied by historians of literature; that is

to say, as a branch of the history of ancient literature."

CHAPTER THE

III

KOINII

The Greek of the N. T. has many streams that flow into it. But this fact is not a pecuharity of this phase of the language. The KOLvrj itself has this characteristic in a marked degree. If one needs further examples, he can recall how composite English is, not only combining various branches of the Teutonic group, but also incorporating much of the old Celtic of Britain and receiving a tremendous impress from the

Norman-French (and so

mention the indirect literary influence of Latin and Greek. The early Greek itself was subject to non-Greek influence as other Indo-Germanic tongues were, and in particular from the side of the Thracians and Phrygians in the East,^ and in the West and North the Italic, Celtic and Germanic pressure was Latin), not to

strong.^ I.

The Term Koivn.

simply

common

The word

language or dialect

speech (Weltsprache).

kolvt],

sc.

common

Unfortunately there

is

StdXe/cros,

to

all,

means

a world-

not yet uniformity

term to describe the Greek that prevailed over Alexander's empire and became the world-tongue. KiihnerBlass^ speak of " kolvt] oder eXXrjVLKri SiaXeKTos." So also Schmiein the use of a

rj

Winer

exactly. But Hellenic language is properly only Greek language, as Hellenic culture'' is Greek culture. Jannaris" suggests Panhellenic or new Attic for the universal Greek, del* follows

* Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 171-243. But the true Phrygians were kin to the Greeks. See Percy Gardner, New Ch.

Gk. Hist., p. 84. Kretschmer, op. cit., pp. 153-170, 244-282, 3 Griech. Gr., Bd. I, i p. 22. W.-Sch., N. T. Gr., p. 17. 8 Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p. 3. Mahaffy does use Hellenism like Droysen in his Hist, of Ilollenism, as corresponding to Hellonistic, but he does so under protest (p. 3 f.). He wishes indeed that he had coined the word "Hellcnicism." But Hogarth (Philip and Alexander, p. 277) had ah-eady used "Hellenisticism," saying: " Hellcnisticism grew out of Helof

'^

lenism." «

Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 6.

49

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

50

the Greek

'par excellence

as to

common

usage.

Hellenistic

Greek

would answer in so far as it is Greek spoken also by Hellenists Krumbacher applies Heldiffering from Hellenes or pure Greeks. lenistic to

the vernacular and

mivi] to

the " conventional Uterary

language" of the time,i but this is wholly arbitrary. Krumbacher Hatzidaterms the Hellenistic "ein verschwommenes Idiom." kis and Schwyzer include in the Koivi] both the literary and the spoken language of the Hellenistic time. This is the view adopted Deissmann dislikes the term Hellenistic Greek in this grammar. because it was so long used for the supposedly peculiar biblical Greek, though the term itself has a wide significance.^ He also strongly disapproves the terms "vulgar Greek," "bad Greek," "graecitas fatiscens," in contrast with the "classic Greek." Deissmann moreover objects to the word koivt] because it is used either for the vernacular, the literary style or for all the Greek So he proposes of the time including the Atticistic revival.

cumbersome. It is indeed the world-speech of the Alexandrian and Roman period that is meant by the term Koivi]. There is on the other hand the "Hellenistic world-speech."

^

But

this is too

literary speech of the orators, historians, philosophers, poets, the public documents preserved in the inscriptions (some even Atti-

on the other hand we have the popular writings in the LXX, the N. T., the Apostolic Fathers, the papyri (as a rule) and the ostraca. The term is thus sufficient by itself to express the Greek in common use over the world, both oral and literary,

cistic);

as Schweizer^ uses

it

following Hatzidakis.

Thumb ^

identifies

to both vernacular and KOLvi] and Hellenistic Greek and applies written style, though he would not regard the Atticists as proper producers of the Koivij. Moulton^ uses the term KOLvi] for both it

spoken and literary kolvt]. The doctors thus disagree very widely. On the whole it seems best to use the term KOLvq (or Hellenistic Greek) both for the vernacular and literary Koivi], excluding the Atticistic revival, which was a conscious effort to write not Koivii 1 2 s

Miinchener Sitzungsber., 1886, p. 435. Art. Hell. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 629. lb., p. 630.

^ Die griech. Spr. etc., p. 9. Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 19 f. "Hellenistic" Prol., p. 23. It is not necessary to discuss here the use of Gk. as "Jewish-Gk." (see "Semitic Influence" in ch. IV), for it is absurd. The notion that the kolv^ is Macedonian Gk. is quite beside the mark, for

4

"

The theory of an Alexandrian dialect is obsolete. is too barbarous. " corruptissima lingua," and Ganges, in his Glossarium called Hell. Gk. caUs it "jargon." Schr., 197) Kl. p. Xgyp.-Griech., Niebuhr (Uber das

Mac. Gk.

Du

THE Komn

51

but old Attic.i At last then the Greek world has speech-unity, whatever was true of the beginning of the Greek language.^ n. The Origin of the Kotvii. (a) Triumph of the Attic. This is what happened. Even Asiatic

Ionia the Attic influence was felt. The Attic verto the Ionic vernacular, was greatly influenced by the speech of soldiers and merchants from all the Greek in

nacular, sister

world. in

the

Attic fifth

infer that all

became the standard language of the Greek world and the fourth centuries b.c. "We must not Athenians and Atticized Greeks wrote and spoke

the classical Attic portrayed in the aforesaid literature, for this Attic is essentially what it still remains in modern Greek compo-

a merely historical abstraction, that is, an artistic language which nobody spoke, but still everybody understood." ^ This is rather an overstatement, but there is much truth in it. This

sition:

more and more lose touch with the verone of our misfortunes, whatever be its practical convenience, that we are taught Attic as the standard Greek, and all other forms and dialects as deviations from it when many grammarians come to characterize the later Greek of the Middle Ages or of to-day, or even that of the Alexandrian or N. T. classic literary Attic did

" It

nacular.

is

.

.

.

periods, no adjective is strong enough to condemn this 'verdorbenes, veruneinigtes Attisch'" (S. Dickey, Princeton Rev., Oct., 1903).

The

even in

this

fast lines

literary Attic was allied to the literary Ionic; but crowning development of Greek speech no hard and are drawn, for the artificial Doric choruses are used in

tragedy and the vernacular in comedy.^ as gain as the Attic 1

There was

was more extensively

loss as well

used, just as

is

true

Blass indeed contrasts the literature of the Alex, and Rom. periods on but wrongly, for it is type, not time, that marks the difference.

this principle,

" If then the hterature of the Alexandrian period must be called Hellenistic, that of the Roman period must be termed Atticistic. But the popular lan-

guage had gone its own way." Gr. of the N. T. Gk., 1898 and 1905, p. 2. On the Gk. of Alexandria and its spread over the world see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 304 f. 2 See Kretschmer, Einl., Dieterich: "Das Sprachgebiet der Koi«^ p. 410. bildet eben ein Ganzcs und kann nur im Zusammenhang betrachtet werden." Unters., p. xvi. » Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. 3 f. On the superiority of the Attic see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., TI. I, Abt. 8, p. 299. * Rutherford, Zur Gesch. des Atticismus, Jahrb. fiir class. Phil., suppl.

xiii,

1884, pp. 360, 399.

les dcrivains grecs

So Audoin says: "Ce n'est point arbitrairement que tel ou tel dialecte." fit. sommaire des Dial.

ont employ6

Grecs. Litt., 1891, p.

4.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

52

NEW TESTAMENT

"The orators Demosthenes and ^schines the new Attic, where other leading representa-

modern English.

of

may

be counted in

tives in literature are

Menander, Philemon and the other writers As the literary Attic lived on in the literary

of the

New

KOLvr],

so the vernacular Attic survived with

Comedy."

vernacular

kolvt].

We

old Attic inscriptions

make

this clear.

steadily forward

ent day .2

^

and the

kolut}

The march on

and the papyri to Greek language has been

this Attic vernacular base

(^olic, Doric, Ionic, Attic, Koivij,

changes in the

inscriptions

of the

In a sense, therefore, the

stehung der

many

are at last in possession of enough of the

pp. 1-37.

kolvt]

even to this pres-

became another

dialect

Die Entwas far more than a

Cf. Kretschmer,

kolvt]).

But the

kolvt]

Kretschmer holds, it is fair to say, that the kolutj is merkwiirdige Mischung verschiedenster Dialecte" {op. cit., dialect.

He

" eine

p. 6).

the dialects into the melting-pot in almost equal proWilamowitz-Mollendorff considers the Ionic as the chief influence in the kolvt], while W. Schmidt denies all Doric

puts

all

portions.

Schwyzer rightly sees that the dialectical though the vernacular Attic

and Ionic elements.

influences varied in different places,

was the common base. (6) Fate of the Other Dialects. The triumph

of the Attic

was

not complete, though in Ionia, at the end of the third century b.c, inscriptions in Attic are found, showing that in Asia Minor pure In the first century b.c. the Attic Ionic had about vanished. appears in inscriptions in Boeotia, but as late as the second century A.D. Ji]olic inscriptions are found in Asia Minor. ^Eohc first went down, followed by the Ionic. The Doric made a very stub-

born resistance.

It

was only natural that the

munities should hold out longest.

Even to-day the Zaconian »

patois of

Simonson, Gk. Gr., Accidence, 1903,

the dialects, pp. 221-265. 2 Riemann and Goelzer well say:

com-

agricultural

Thumb, Hellen., p. 28 f. modern Greek vernacular

See

He

p. 6.

"Quant au

has a good discussion of

dialecte attique, grace

aux

grace a la preponderence politique et commerciale d'Athenes, grace aussi a son caractere de dialecte interinediaire entre I'ionien et les dialectes en a, il se repandit de bonne heure, hors de son domaine

grands ccrivains qui

I'illustrerent,

continua a s'etendre meme apres la chute de I'empire politique d'Athenes et finit par embrasser tout le monde sur le nom de langue comprimitif,

mune

{Koiv-n

SLoXeKTos)"

Homer

understood

(Phonetique, p. 16).

also as late as

Kal vvi' hvvaljxriv av 'IXtd5a

De Serm.

oXrjj'

New

yet the

Cf.

common

people

Xenophon, Com.

koI 'Obvaatiav airo crxoyuaros elweii'.

3, 5,

Cf. Lottich,

On the "Growth of the Attic Dialect" see Phrynichus, pp. 1-31.

vulg. Attic, 1881.

Rutherford,

And

Xenophon.

THE KOINH

53

has preserved the old Laconic Doric "whose broad a holds its ground still in the speech of a race impervious to literature and proudly conservative of a language that was always abnormal to It is not surprising that the Northwest Greek, because of the city leagues, became a kind of Achaean-Dorian KOLVT]^ and held on till almost the l^cginning of the Christian era

an extreme."^

was merged into the kolvt] of the whole Grajco-Roman There are undoubtedly instances of the remains of the Northwest Greek and of the other dialects in the Koivri and so in the N. T. The Ionic, so near to the Attic and having flourished over the coast of Asia Minor, would naturally have considerable influence on the Greek world-speech. The proof of this will appear in the discussion of the kolvt] where remains of all the main before

it

world.^

dialects are naturally found, especially in the vernacular.^

Partial Koines. The standardizing of the Attic is the The kolpt] was not a sudden creation. There were These were Strabo's aUiquasi-koines before Alexander's day. ance of Ionic- Attic, Doric-JiloHc (Thumb, Handh., p. 49). It is therefore to be remembered that there were "various forms of KOLvi]'^ before the Koivi] which commenced with the conquests of (c)

basis.

real

Alexander (Buck, Gk. Dialects, pp. 154-161), as Doric Koi.vq, Ionic Hybrid forms are not unKOLvi], Attic KOLVT], Nortliwcst KOLvi).

common, such Buck,

(cf.

as the Doric future with Attic ov as in

ttolt](tovvti

There was besides a revival here and there of

p. 160).

local dialects during the

Roman

times.

{d) Effects of Alexander's Campaigns. But for the conquests of Alexander there might have been no kolvt] in the sense of a world-speech. The other Greek koines were partial, this alone was a world-speech because Alexander united Greek and Persian,

east

.

and west,

into one

1

Moulton,

2

Radermacher(N. T.

Koivii

starksten

common

world-empire.

^

Pro!., p. 32.

Gr., p. 1) puts

it

Zusammenhang mit dem

clearly:

He

respected the

lb., p. 37.

"Es geniigt zu sagcn,

dafJ die

Attischen, in zweitcr Linie mit

dem

In der altesten Pcriode des Hellcnismus zeigt sich daneben geringcr EinfluO anderer Dialektc, dcs Dorischen und Aolischcn." * " II est k peine besoin de r6p6ter que ces caracteires s'effaccnt, k mcsure lonischen, verriit.

Sous I'influencc sans cesse grandisune sorte d'uniformite." Boisacq, Los Dial. Dor., 1891, p. 204. "The Gk. of the N. T. is not, however, mere Koivi). In vocabulary it is fundamentally Ionic" (John Burnet, Rev. of Tlieol. and "Fundamentally" is rather strong, but dTroaroXos, Phil., Aug., 190G, p. 95).

que Ton descend vers

I'ere chrctienne.

sante de I'atticisme,

s'etablit

mere expedition, evXoyia, vqarela, give some colour But what does Prof. Burnet mean by "mere koivi?"?

as ambassador, not

statement.

il

to the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

54

NEW TESTAMENT

customs and language of all the conquered nations, but it was inevitable that the Greek should become the lingua franca of the world of Alexander and his successors. In a true sense Alexander made possible this new epoch in the history of the Greek tongue. The time of Alexander divides the Greek language into two peri-

"The

ods.

and

first

period

is

that of the separate

the second that of the speech- unity, the

KOLVT]" (e)

(Kretschmer, Die

Entst. d. Kolvt], p.

life

of the dialects

common

speech or

1).

The

The March toward Universalism.

successors

of

Alexander could not stop the march toward universalism that had begun. The success of the Roman Empire was but another proof of this trend of history.

The days

of ancient nationalism

were

over and the KOLvq was but one expression of the glacial move-

ment.

The time

for the world-speech

had come and

it

was ready

for use.

m. The Spread of the KoivTJ. What (a) A World-Speech.

called

is

17

speech, not merely a general Greek tongue

kolutj

was a worldthe Greek

among

Achaean-Dorian and the Attic. It is not kolpt] as a world-speech, for the inscriptions in the kolvt] testify to its spread over Asia, Egypt, Greece, Italy, Sicily and the isles of the sea, not to mention the papyri. Marseilles was a great centre of Greek civilization, and even Gy-

tribes as

was true

of the

speculation to speak of the

though not Carthage, was Grecized.^ The kolvt) was in such general use that the Roman Senate and imperial governors had the decrees translated into the world-language and scattered over the empire.^ It is significant that the Greek speech becomes rene,

one instead of many dialects at the very time that the Roman rule sweeps over the world.^ The language spread by Alexander's army over the Eastern world persisted after the division of the kingdom and penetrated all parts of the Roman world, even Rome itself. Paul wrote to the church at Rome in Greek, and Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Emperor, wrote his Meditations It was the language not only of letters, (tojv eis 'EavTov) in Greek.

but of commerce and every-day 1

See Churton,

Infl. of

the

life.

LXX Vers.,

A common

lan?,uage for all

1861, p. 14.

Sermo Graecus quo Senatus Popul. Rom. etc., 1888, p. xi. 3 See Wilamowitz-MoUendorff: "In demselben Momente, wo die casarische Weltmonarchie alle Strome hellenischer und italischer Kultur in einem Bette leitet, kommt die griechische Kunst auf alien Gebieten zu der Erkenntnis, daI5 ihre &eise erfiillt sind, das einzige das ihr bleibt, Nachahmung ist." 2

Viereck,

tJber die Entst. der griech. Schriftspr., Abhandl. deuts. Phil., 1878, p. 40.

THE KOINH

55

men may indeed be only an ideal norm, but " the whole character of a common language may be strengthened by the fact of its transference to an unquestionably foreign linguistic area, as

may

observe in the case of the Greek

became a

Kotvf]

for the

West

the East, this latter the

first

kolvt]."^

The

as the old Babylonian

world-tongue

known

late

we

Latin

had been for Xeno-

to us.^

phon with the retreat of the Ten Thousand'' was a forerunner of KOLvrj. Both Xenophon and Aristotle show the wider outlook

the

of the literary Attic

There

is

elwa

—roiaav, G(j,

now

vaos.

which uses Ionic words very extensively.

the "GroB-Attisch,"

and

rjve'yKa,

e8coKaiJ.€P

Aheady Thucydides and

It already has yipofiaL, eueKev,

and

eSco/caj',

^aaiXtaaa,

btLKVvoi,

others had borrowed aa from

an easy transition from the vernacular Attic to after Alexander's time. (Cf. Thumb's Handhuch, pp. 373-380, "Entstehung der Koivrj.") On the development of the KOLVT) see further Wackernagel, Die Kultur der Gegenwart, Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 301 ff.; Moulton, Prol, ch. I, II; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., Kap. I. But it was Alexander who made the later Attic the common language of the world, though certainly he had no such purpose in view. Fortunately he had been taught by Aristotle, who himself studied in Athens and knew the Attic of the time. " He rapidly established Greek as the lingua franca of the empire, and this it was which gave the chief bond of union to the many countries of old civilizations, which had hitherto the Ionic.

It

is

the vernacular

been

isolated.

kolvyj

This unity of culture

the history of the world." ^ history

when

It

was

is

the remarkable thing in

really

an epoch

in the world's

the babel of tongues was hushed in the wonderful

language of Greece.

The vernaculars

of

the eastern

provinces remained, though the Greek was universal;

Paul came to Lystra, the people ^

still

Roman

so,

when

spoke the Lycaonian speech

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 496.

See also Kaerst, Gesch.

d. Hel-

"Die Weiterentwicklung der Gcschiehte des Altertums, so weit sie fiir unsere eigene Kultur entschcidende Bedeutung erlangt hat, beruht auf einer fortschreitenden Occidentalisierung; auch das im Oriente emporgekorninene Christentum entfaltet sich nach dem Westen zu und gelangt hier zu seiner eigentlich weltgeschichtlichen Wirksamkeit." lenist.

Zeitalt.,

1901, p. 420:

Schwyzer, Die Weltspr. etc., p. 7. See Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p. 7; cf. also Rutherford New Phrynichus, 1881, p. 160 f.; Schweizer, Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 16. Moulton (Prol., p. 31) points out that the vase-inscriptions prove the statement of the Const, of Athens, 11. .3, that the Athenians spoke a language compounded of all Greek and barbarian tongues besides. * Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen., etc., p. 40. 2 *

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

56

The papyri and the inscriptions prove beyond controversy that the Greek tongue was practically the same

of their fathers.^

whether in Egypt, Herculaneum, Pergamum or Magnesia. The Greek was Greeks were the school-teachers of the empire. but West, Latin was not taught in the grammar schools in the taught in the East. (6) Vernacular and Literary. L Vernacular. The spoken language is never identical with the literary style, though in the social intercourse of the best educated people there is less difference than with the uncultured.^ We now know that the old Attic of Athens had a vernacular and a literary style that differed considerably from each other.^ This distinction exists from the very start with the kolvti, as is apparent in Pergamum and elsewhere.* This vernacular kolvt] grows right out of the vernacular Attic normally and naturally.^ The colonists, merchants and soldiers who mingled all over Alexander's world did not carry literary Attic, but the language of social and This vernacular

business intercourse.^

kolut]

at first differed little

300 B.C. and always retained the bulk of the oral Attic idioms. "Vulgar dialects both of the ancient and modern times should be expected to contain far more archaisms than innovations."^ The vernacular is not a variation from the literary style, but the literary language is a development from the vernacular.* See Schmid^ for the relation between

from the vernacular Attic

of

the literary and the vernacular

and the papyri

The pure

for the living

Attic as

it

Hence

kolvt].

the normal speech of the people,

we must

if

the vernacular

is

look to the inscriptions

idiom of the common Greek or kolvt]. in Athens is preserved only in

was spoken

^ Schweizer, Gr. der perg. etc., p. 22. Schwyzer, Weltspr., p. 29. See Ivretschmer, Die griech. Vaseninschr. und ihre Spr., 1894; and Meisterhans, Gr. der att. Inschr., 1900. Cf. Lottich, De Serm. vulg. Attic, 1881. 1

3

*

5

Schweizer, Gr., p. 27. Thumb, Griech. Spr. im Zeitalter

etc., p.

208

f.

vulg. Attic, shows from the writings of Aristophanes

varied in a

number

of points

from the Uterary

Lottich in his

how

De

Serm.

the Attic vernacular

style, as in the frequent

use of

diminutives, desiderative verbs, metaphors, etc. 8

Schweizer, Gr., p. 23.

7

Geldart,

Thumb,

Mod. Gk. Lang,

Griech. Spr.

See also weniger ein AbschluC

in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 73.

etc., p. 10,

who

calls

"die

kolvt)

Anfang einer neuen Entwicklung." On the okler Gk. kolvt] see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 300 f. 8 Deissmann, HeU. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 633. 9 Atticismus, Bd. IV, pp. 577-734. A very important treatment of the als der

whole question

is

here given.

THE KOINH

57

In the Roman Empire the vernacular kolvt) would be understood almost everywhere from Spain to Pontus. See IV for further remarks on the vernacular kolvti. If the vernacular kolvt] was the natural develop2. Literary. ment of the vernacular Attic, the literary kolvt] was the normal the inscriptions.^

Thumb

evolution of the literary Attic.

well says,

"Where

there

and syntax the is widely more from the collodiverges Greek literary common with the in harmony previous renatural and This is quial."* The the language of the people.^ from Attic literary of the moval growth of the literary kolvt] was parallel with that of the popular The first prose monuKOLVT] and was, of course, influenced by it. no development, there

ment

is

no

known

of literary Attic

life."^

"In

style

to us, according to Schwyzer,

is

the

Constitution of Athens^ (before 413), falsely ascribed to Xenophon. The forms of the literary kolvt] are much like the Attic, as in Polybius, for instance,

but the chief difference is in the vocabPolybius followed the

ulary and meaning of the same words.^

general literary spirit of his time, and hence

words, abstract nouns, denominative verbs,

rich in

new

adverbs.^

He

was

new

and Josephus therefore used Ionic words found in Herodotus and Hippocrates, hke 'ivSeais, irapacfyvXaKi], not because they consciously imitated these writers, but because the Koivi), as shown by papyri and inscriptions, employed them.^ For the same reason Luke and Josephus^ have similar words, not because of use of one by the other, but because of common knowledge of literary terms, Luke

many common

medical terms natural to a physician Writers like Polybius aimed to write without pedantry and without vulgarism. In a true sense then the literary KOi.vj] was a "compromise between the vernacular kolvt] and the literary also using

of culture.

and school." ^^

Attic," between "life

There

is

indeed no Chinese

Laut- und Formonl., 1902, p. 41. Moulton, Prol., p. 26. ^ Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 5. Deissmann (New Light on the N. T., 1907, p. 3 f.) shows that part of Norden's criticism of Paul's Gk. is nothing but the contrast between hterary Koivq and vernacular koivt)] cf. Die ant. Kunstjir. 5 Schwyzer, Die Wcltspr. der Alt., p. 15. See also Christ, Gesch. der

Handb. der

griech.

1

Hirt,

2

Griech. Spr., p. 251.

griech. Lit., p. 305.

=•

See Die pseudoxenophontische

'Adrjvalo:v

IloXireia,

von

E. Kalinka, 1913. «

Schweizer, Gr., p. 21.

8

Thumb,

Griech. Spr.

''

etc., p.

213.

Christ, op.

See also Goetzeler,

De

cil.,

p. 5SS.

Polyb. EIoc,

1887, p. 15. 9

Thumb,

pp. 283

ff.

ib.,

p.

225

f.

See also Krenkel, Josephus und Lukas, 1894,

" Thumb,

ib., ji. 8.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

58

and the vernacular kolvyj, but a constant from the vernacular to the written style as between prose and poetry, though Zarncke ^ insists on a thorough-going distinction between them. The literary KOLvrj would not, of course, use such dialectical forms as tovs iravTes, toIs TpayfiaroLs, etc., common in the vernacular Koivi]} But, as Krumbacher^ well shows, no literary speech worthy of the name can have an independent development apart from the vernacular. Besides Polybius and Josephus, other writers in the literary kolvt) were Diodorus, Philo, Plutarch, though Plutarch indeed is almost an "Anhanger des Atticismus"^ and Josephus was rather self-conscious in his use of the literary style.^ The literary kolvt) was still affected by the fact that many of the writers were of "un-Greek or half Greek descent," Greek being an acquired tongue.^ But the point must not be overdone, for the literary Koivi] "was written by cosmopolitan scholars for readers of the same sort," and it did not make much difference "whether a book was written at Alexandria or Pergamum."^ Radermacher^ notes that, while in the oldest Greek there was no artificiality even in the written prose, yet in the period of the KOLvi] all the literary prose shows "eine Kunstsprache." He applies this rule to Polybius, to Philo, to the N. T., to Epictetus. But certainly it does not hold in the same manner wall between the literary inflow

for each of these. (c)

The Atticistic Reaction. Athens was no

longer the centre

That glory passed to Alexandria, to Pergamum, to Antioch, to Ephesus, to Tarsus. But the great creative epoch of Greek culture was past. Alexandria, the chief seat of Greek learning, was the home, not of poets, but of critics of style who found fault with Xenophon and Aristotle, but could not produce an Anabasis nor a Rhetoric. The Atticists wrote, to be sure, in the kolvt] period, but their gaze was always backward The grammarians (Dionysius, Phrynito the pre-Kot^i7 period. Greek

of

civilization.

1 Zarncke in Griech. Stud., Hermann Lipsius, 1894, p. 121. He considers the Homeric poetry a reflection of the still older historical prose and the epic the oldest hterary form. See his Die Entst. der griech. Literaturspr., 1896. Cf. Wilamowitz-MoUendorff, Die Entst. der griech. Schriftspr., Verhandl. d.

Phil., 1878, p. 3

Das Prob.

^ Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr. Spr., p. 6. 36 f. der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903, p. 6. A valuable treatment of

this point. *

Weissenberger, Die Spr. Plut. von Charonea, 1895, pp.

6

Jos., Ant.,

8

Susemihl, Gesch. der griech. Lit. in der Alexandrienzeit, 1. Bd., 1891, p. ^ n. T. Gr., p. 2. Croiset, An Abr. Hist, of Gk. Lit., 1904, p. 425.

»

XIV,

I,

3, 11.

1.

2.

THE KOINH

59

chus, Moeris) set up Thucydides and Plato as the standards for pure Greek style, while Aratus and Callimachus sought to revive the style of Homer, and Lucian and Arrian ^ even imitated Herodotus. When they wished to imitate the past, the problem still remained which master to follow. The Ionic revival had no great vogue, but the Attic revival did. Lucian himself took to Attic. Others of the Atticists were Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dio

Chrysostom, Aristides, Herodes Atticus, ^Elian, etc. "They assumed that the limits of the Greek language had been forever

Some

fixed during the Attic period."^

of the pedantic declaimers

Demosthenes to These purists were opposed to change in language and sought to check the departure from the Attic idiom. "The

of the time, like Polemon, were thought to put

the blush.

The

purists of to-day are like the old Atticists to a hair."^

Atti-

were then archaic and anachronistic. The movement was rhetorical therefore and not confined either to Alexandria or Pergamum. The conflict between the kolvt] (vernacular and literary) and this Atticistic reaction affected both to some extent.* This struggle between "archaism and life" is old and survives to-day.* The Atticists were in fact out of harmony with their time,^ and not like Dante, who chose the language of his people for his imThey made the mistake of thinking that by mortal poems. cists

imitation they could restore the old Attic style.

example

of these purists, too,

though

"The

effort

and

criticized at first, gradually

became a sort of moral dictatorship, and so has been tacitly if not zealously obeyed by all subsequent scribes down to the present time."^ As a result when one compares N. T. Greek,^ he 1

A

sharp distinction as a rule must be made between the language of The Gk. of Epict. as reported by Arrian, his pupil, is a

Arrian and Epict.

good representative duction

of the vern.

koivt]

of

an educated man.

Arrian 's intro-

quite Atticistic, but he aims to reproduce Epictetus'

is

own words

as

ov5h av

fjv

far as possible. ^ Sophocles, Lex., p. 6. rdv ypaufxaTecop ixijiportpov. 3

Thumb,

Griech. Spr.

Athena;us etc., p. 180.

nagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl.

I,

15.

2 said: Et

On

Abt.

/ni)

iarpol ^aav,

Atticism in the

8, p.

Koivii

see

Wacker-

309.

*

Norden, Die griech. Kunstpr. bis Aug., Bd.

6

Thumb,

I,

1898, p. 150.

ib., p. 8.

7 Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 7. 252 f. Moulton, Prol., p. 26. The diction of Aristophanes is interesting ii8 a specimen of varieties of speech of the time. Cf. Hope, The Lang, of Parody; a Study in the Diction of Aristophanes (190G). Radermacher (N. T. Gk., p. 3) holds that we must even note the " barbarischcs Griechisch" of writers like John Philoponos and Proclos. 6

'

lb., p.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

60

must be

careful to note

dapevovaa)

whether

it is

NEW TESTAMENT with the book Greek (KaThis artificial reac-

or the vernacular (ojuiXou^ei'Tj).

tionary movement, however, had

little effect

upon the vernacular

witnessed by the spoken Greek of to-day.

Consequently a negligible quantity in direct influence upon the writers of the N. T.^ But the Atticists did have a real influence upon the With literary kolvt] both as to word-formation ^ and syntax.^ Dionysius of Halicarnassus beauty was the chief element of style, and he hoped that the Attic revival would drive out the Asiatic The whole movement was a strong reaction against influence.'* what was termed "Asianism" in the language.^ It is not surprising therefore that the later ecclesiastical literary Greek was largely under the influence of the Atticists. "Now there was but one grammar: Attic. It was Attic grammar that every freeman, whether highly or poorly educated, had learned."^ "This purist conspiracy" Jannaris calls it. The main thing with the Atticists was to have something as old as Athens. Strabo said the style as

KOLvrf

is

it is

of

Diodorus was properly "antique."' The Characteristics of the Vernacular Koivii. One must not (a) Vernacular Attic the Base.

IV.

vernacular Greek

is

unworthy

of study.

"

The

fact

is

feel

that the

that, during

the beBt days of Greece, the great teacher of Greek was the com-

mon

There was no violent break between the vernacuand the vernacular KOLvrj, but the one flowed into the other as a living stream.^ If the reign of the separated dialects was over, the power of the one general Greek speech had just begun people."^

lar Attic

on the

heels of Alexander's victories.

broke the

The

battle of Chseronea

spirit of the old Attic culture indeed,

but the Athenians 606

1

Schmid, Der Atticismus

^

Troger, Der Sprachgeb. in der pseudolong. Schr., 1899, Tl. I, p. 61. Schmid, ib., Bd. I, pp. 17, 25. See Bd. IV, pp. 577-734, for very valu-

*

etc.,

Bd. IV,

p. 578.

^

jb., p.

f.

summary of this whole subject. Norden, Die griech. Kunstpr., 1898. 1. Bd., p. 149. So Blass calls it " gleichzeitige atticistische Reaction gegen die asianische Beredsamkeit." Die griech. Beredsamkeit etc. von Alex, bis Aug., 1865, p. 77. 6 Jannaris, op. cit., p. 11. See also Fritz, Die Brief e des Bischofs Synesius von Kyrene. Ein Beitr. zur Gesch. des Att. im 4. und 5. Jahrh., 1898.

able 6

7

Strabo, 13.

4, 9.

Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 11. Deissmann, Die sprachl. Erforsch. etc., p. 11. Rutherford (New Phryn., p. 2) says that "the debased forms and mixed vocabulary of the common dialect would have struck the contemporaries of Aristophanes and Plato as On the form of the kolvti little better than jargon of the Scythian policemen." see Wackernagel, Kult. etc., Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 305, 8

9

Sophocles, Lex. of

THE KOINH

61

gathered up the treasures of the past, while Alexander opened the flood-gates for the change in the language and for its spread over the world.^ "What, however, was loss to standard Attic was

The language m which Hellenism was eminently practical, better fitted for life than for the schools. Only a cosmopolitan speech could comport with Hellenistic cosmopolitanism. Grammar was simplified, exceptions decreased or generalized, flexions dropped or harmonized, gain to the ecumenical tongue.

expressed

itself

made easier" (Angus, Prince. Rev., The beginning of the development of the vernot perfectly clear, for we see rather the comBut it is in the later Attic that lies behind the

construction of sentences Jan., 1910, p. 53).

nacular

KOLvi]

is

pleted product.2

The

optative was never common in the vernacular Attic a vanishing quantity in the kolvt]. The disappearance of the dual was already coming on and so was the limited use of the KOLvi].

and

is

superlative, -Twaav instead of -vrwv, yivofiaL,

aa,

dira,

tLs

and -adwaav instead of -aduiv, instead of Torepos, eKaaros and not eKarepos.^

But while the Attic forms the ground-form* of the kolptj it must not be forgotten that the kolvt] was resultant of the various forces and must be judged by its own standards.^ There is not complete unanimity of opinion concernmg the character of the vernacular Steinthal^ indeed called it merely a levelled and debased Attic, while Wilamowitz ^ described it as more properly an Ionic popular idiom. Kretschmer « now (wrongly, I think) contends that the Northwest Greek, Ionic and Boeotian had more influence on the KOLvi] than the Attic. The truth seems to be the position of KOLPT).

Thumb,^ that the vernacular kolvy] is the result of the mingling with all dialects upon the late Attic vernacular as the base. As between the Doric d and the Ionic the vernacular kolpy] follows the Attic rj

»

Christ, Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1905, p. 509

character of the 2

Kaibel, Stil

'

Blass, Gr. of

gone, as in

Emor. *

p.

*

und Text der

f.;

Gel.-Anz.,

1895,

Krumbacher, Byz.

"Die Erforschung der

^

8 »

p.

30

Ilatzidakis,

f.;

Einl.

in

die

neugr. Gr.,

Lit., p. 789.

kolvti

'Klas-sicismus' gestanden." *

'Adr)valu}v UoXiTeia, p. 37.

N. T. Gk., p. 3. Even in the htorary koivt] the dual is nearly Polybius and Diodorus Siculus; cf. Schmidt, De Duali Grace, et

et Reviv., 1893, pp. 22, 25.

Gott.

168

f. For "the Attic groundMayscr, Gr. dcr griech. Pap. (1906, p. 1).

KOLvri" see

hat lange gcnug unter

Thumb,

Griech. Spr.

Gesch. der Sprachw., H, p. 37 f. Verhandl. der 32. jihil. Versamml.,

dem

Gesichtswinkel des

etc., p. 10.

p. 40.

Wochenschr. fiir klass. Philol., 1899, Op. cit., pp. 53-101, 202 f.

p. 3;

Die Entst. der Koivv, 1900.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

62

and

usage,

Dieterieh^ indeed

this fact alone is decisive.^

sums

several points as belonging to the "Attic kolvtj" such as verbs

up

in -voo instead of -vfii, in fects, disuse of

-uaav instead of

-cov in

contract imper-

the temporal and the syllabic augment in com-

position, disuse of reduplication, -rjv instead of -tj in ace. of adjs. in

-17s, -01;

sing,

instead of -ovs in gen. sing, of third declen-

-a instead of -ov in proper names, disuse of the Attic de-

sion,

clension, -es for -as in accusative plural, t6v as relative pronoun, tStos

as possessive pronoun.

But

by "Attic

clearly

kolvt]"

he means

the resultant Attic, not the Attic as distinct from the other dialects. Besides the orthography is Attic (cf. I'Xecos, not tXaos) and the

bulk of the inflections and conjugations likewise, as can be seen by comparison with the Attic inscriptions.^ Schlageter* sums the matter up " The Attic foundation of the kolvt] is to-day generally admitted." But Kretschmer ^ is (h) The Other Dialects in the Koivq. :

wrong

in saying that the KOivq mixture of the dialects. Attic, but a

clearly

neither Attic nor decayed

is

He compares

the mixture

and low Ger^Eolic and Doric. is made plain by

of dialects in the kolut] to that of the high, middle

The The mixed

man.

Attic

itself is

a

kolvt]

out of Ionic,

character of the vernacular

Schweizer^ and Dieterich.^ presence of forms like

idlr],

kolvt)

The Ionic shows awelprjs,

influence in the

its

eiSvZa, —vlrjs,

Ko.d'

eros (cf.

—aSos; absence of the or de-aspiration, ^olic also); dropping

vetus), oarea, x^tXecoi', /3Xa|3ecof, xP^^'^ov, -as,

rough breathing of

ixi

(psilo&is

in verbs like StSco; KiQiiv (xtTwi'), reaaepa, irpaaaoo for xpdrrco

(Attic also), etc.

Ionic words like

(Herod.) instead

iJLov-6(j)da\fios

Conybeare and Stock {Sel. from LXX, p. 48) suggest that Homer was used as a text-book in Alexandria and so caused lonisms like
1

Moulton,

2

Unters. zur Gesch. d. griech. Spr., 1898, p. 258

' *

Meisterhans, Gr. der Att. Inschr. Der Wortsch. der auBerhalb Attikas gefundenen att. Inschr., 1912.

*

Wochenschr.

« 7

Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 201 f. Unters. zur Gesch. etc., p. 259 f.

9

Myer, Das Heerwesen der Ptolemaer und Romer

Prol., p.

fiir

33

f.

f.

klass. Phil., 1899, p. xvii.

^

in

Arrian, II, 20. 5.

Agypten, 1900.

THE KOINH

63

Besides, even after the triumph of the Attic in Greece

andria.*

the Ionic had continued to be spoken in large parts of Asia Minor.

Pergamum also.

The mixing of the with Ionic, elements, has laid the foundation for the kolvt]} The Molic makes a poor showing, but can be traced especially in Pergamum, where Schweizer considers it one of the elements of the language with a large injection

The

Ionic influence appears in

Attic with foreign, before

all

Jilolic has the a for r/ in proper names and forms Bceotian-^olic uses the ending -oaav, as etxoaap, so common in the LXX. Moulton'* points out that this ending is very rare in the papyri and is found chiefly in the LXX. He calls Boeotian-

of the Ionic. ^ in as.

.^olic also "the

monophthongizing

of the diphthongs."

Attic and the Ionic the open sound of

Boeotian the closed. together

till

In the

forms

Psilosis is also Ionic.

Xaos (Xews), vaos

like

In the

prevailed, while in the

the two pronunciations existed

kolvt]

the closed triumphed.

Doric appears in

rj

The

(vecos), Trtafco (tu^cS),

and in had the Doric softer sound as /3, But, Moulton^ modern Greek vernacular. as argues, the the in vernacular kolpt] comes to us now only in the written form, and that was undoubtedly chiefly Attic. The Arcadian dialed possibly contributes a(t>ecopTaL, since it has d^ecbo-^r?, but this form occurs Xt)u6s in Doric and Ionic also.^ Cf. also the change of gender The Northivest Greek contrib(Luke) and to ttXoCtos (Paul). kcrirovda^a,

17

Xi/x6s,

to ttXoOtos, oKeKTCop, K\l^avos (KpilSapos)

the pronunciation perhaps

;

7, 8

17

uted forms

like

nian and Lesbian

The

\e\vKap.

tovs

apxoPTois,

"Kejopres,

rJTaL

{riiJ.T)p

cf.

Messe-

also), tjpcotovp (like Ionic), etxoaav (cf. Bosotian),

accusative plural in -es

is

very

common

in

the

some N. T. MSS. give rkaaapes for reaaapas.'' The Achsean-Dorian kolpt] had resisted in Northwest Greece the inroads of the common Greek for a century or so. The Macepapyri, and

1 H. Anz, Subsidia ad cognoscendum Graec. Serm. vulg. etc., 1894, p. 386. Mayser, Gr., pp. 9-24, finds numerous Ionic peculiarities in the Ptolemaic pap. far more than ^Eolic and Doric. He cites —rcoo-a/', iiaxa.Lpr]s, ecrco, (ftKiv, On the Ionic and other nonopkoiv, yoyyv^cj, wapaOijKTi, rkaaipts, €K7rTco/ja, etc. Attic elements in th(! Koivrj see Wackernugel, Kult., p. 3()G f. 2 Kaibel, Stil und Text etc., p. 37. ^ Gr. d. pej-g. Inschr., p. 202. < Prol., The caution of Tsichari (Essais de Gr. Hist. Neo-grq., 2*"^° p. 33.

cxhx) is to be noted, that the vernacular is not necessarily diabut "destin6e au peuple et ven;iit du j)euple." Cf. on .iEolic elements, Mayser, Gr., p. 9. He cites Xi/u6s in the pap.; cf. N. T.

6d., 1889, p. lectical,

17

»

Prol., p. 34.

«

Moulton,

Gr., p. 5

f.

ib.,

p. 38, n. 3. ^

For

W.

l)ori(!

H.,

Iiitr.

clcincnts in the paj). see Mayser, to the

Gk. N.

T., App., p. 150.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

64

donian Greek, spoken by many of Alexander's soldiers, naturally had very slight influence on the kolvt]. We know nothing of the old Macedonian Greek. Polybius ^ says that the Illyrians needed an interpreter for Macedonian, Sturz^ indeed gives a list of Macedonian words found in the kolvt], as ao-xtXos, Kopacnov, TapenBut he also includes d77€XXw! The Macedonians /3oXi7, pu/iTj. apparently used |3 instead of ^ as j3l\LTnros, 6 = 9 as davaros, a = ^ Plutarch^ speaks of Alexander and his soldiers as akpedpov. Ma/ceSoj/to-rt. For full discussion of the Macedonian dialect see O. Hoffmann, Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und Volkstum, 1906, pp. 232-255. It is uot always possible to (c) NoN-DiALECTiCAL CHANGES.

speaking to each other

separate the various peculiarities of the

"Where Macedonian, Spartan,

fluences.

kolpt]

into dialectical in-

Boeotian, Athenian

and

Thessalian were messmates a kolvt] was inevitable. Pronounced dialecticisms which would render unintelligible or ludicrous to others were dropped" (see Angus, Prince. Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910,

The common blood

p. 67).

itself

went on changing.

It

was a

whole and not a mere artificial mingling of various elements. There is less difference in the syntax of the KOLvi} and that of the earlier Greek than in the forms, though the gradual disappearance of the optative use of 'iva and finite verb in the non-final sense rather than the infinitive or even 6tl, the gradual disuse of the future part, may be mentioned. It was in the finer shades of thought that a common vernacular would fail to hold its "Any language which aspires to be a Weltsprache (worldown. living

language), as the cacy,

its

particles

Germans

say,

must

and

tenses,

much of its delimany synonjins and

sacrifice

shades of meaning, expressed by

which the foreigner in

his

hurry and without

contact with natives cannot be expected to master."^

1

Polybius, 28.

2

De

8, 9.

Dial. Alexan. etc., 1786, p. 56

f.;

see also

De

Dial.

Macedonica

et

Alexan., 1808, pp. 37, 42; Maittaire, Graecae Ling. Dial. Sturzii, 1807, p. 184; Sophocles, Lex. of Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 3. Schweizer, Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 27, sees very little in the

Macedonian

influence.

(Sources of N. T. Gk., p. 17) says: "In any case, the Macedonian type of Greek, whether or not it is admissible to call it »

I,

Kennedy

592 B, 694 C.

a special

dialect,

was

removed from ordinary Attic as to make it cerMacedonian hps must soon and inevitably suffer thor-

so far

tain that the latter on

ough-going modification." 4 Mahaffy, Survey of Gk. Civilization, p. 220. Cf. Geldart, Mod. Gk. Lang, in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., p. 73, for discussion of "the levelling tendency common to all languages."

— THE KOI Nil

65

.

(d) New Words, New Forms or New Meanings to Old Words. Naturally most change is found either in new words or in new meanings in old words, just as our English dictionaries must have new and enlarged editions every ten years or so. This growth

in the vocabulary

is

inevitable unless the

life

of a people stops.

third-century inscription in Thera, for instance,

used of a religious meeting,

ivapoiKos

A

shows avvayuyrj

(not the Attic

fxtToiKos)

for

and Karrixw-'^ in their old senses like those Americanisms which preserve Elizabethan English ("fall" for "autumn," for instance).^ Here are some further examples. It is hard to be sure that all of these are words that arose in the kolvt], for we cannot inark off a definite line of cleavage. We mention stranger, aToaroXos

ayairt],

\vTOS,

ayioTrjs,

ayvorrjs,

aKpoaTTjpLOV,

verbs in

aderrjaLs,

adeafxos,

oXKoTpioeTrlaKOTros , d/card-

ai'dpuTrapeaKos, avT'CkvTpov, avaKaivow

avay ^wabi, ^awTtaixa

-ooj, -a^oi, -tfw),

(and

(many words

many

in -^o),

^aTTiafj.6s, ^aTTTLffT-qs, yprjyopew (cf. also arrjKw), deLaidaifxovla, SrjvapLOV,

SLKaLOKpLala, e\er](jLoavv7], Karrix^iji,

OeoTri/evaTOS, \oyia,

e/c/caKeco, eKfJLVKTrjpi^o^, decoT-qs,

KpajSaTTOs, p.a6y]Ttvw, OLKobeairbTTqs, bpdpl^oi, 6\pa.pL0v,

irpoaKaipos,

poiJ.(f)aia,

b\p6}vi.ov,

avp.^ovKLOV, reKiiviov, vlodeaia, viroTrodiov, <^tXa5eX-

For others from the Ancient East, Moulton and Millegan's "Lexical Notes on the Papyri" {Expositor, 1908 ), Winer-Schmiedel (p. 22), Thayer's Lexicon, (p. 691 f.), Rutherford's New Phrynichus, and the indices to the ({)ia,

Let these serve merely as examples.

CotIov, etc.

see the lists in Deissmann's Bible Studies, Light

papyri collections.

One

papyri and then of the

of the pressing needs

a lexicon of the

is

Many

of these words though they probably came from Some old words received slightly new forms,

were already in the literary the vernacular.^

as a whole.

kolvy]

Koivrj,

like auadefxa 'curse' {avadr]p.a 'offering'), aTrapri](TLS (airavTrjixa), airo(TTaaia

(airdaTaaLs),

(yeveOXLo), 8oaLa),

1

Se/caroco

iJL0p6(t}da\(JL0S

dporptdo; {deKarevo:),

(SaaiXiaaa

(dpoco), XvxJ^lo.

(erep6(/)^aXjuos),

(Xux^^oi'),

Hicks, St. Paul and Hellen., in Stud. Bibl. et Eccl., 1896, p.

chiefly "poetical" in the classic literature,

ffKOj,

poets often use the vernacular. btay.ios,

duina,

iKTivaaaw,

Koindofxai, Koiros, \aol

=

people,

Some

evrpiiroiiai, iJ.kpLfj.va,

New

,

761'eo'ta

vovdeala {vovderrjaLs), oiKobopii] {pl-

(Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 24-35) gives an interesting

The

(/3acrtXeia)

paadaivoboaia {fnado-

list

of

5.

Mayser

words that were

but are common in the papjTi. words are dXtKTwp, /3i;Spw-

of these

kiraiTea),

eiriaelu),

daXiru:,

vqirios, oIktjttipmu, irepf/cei/iot,

KaraaTtWo), Trpo<7<{)(jJviu),

forms arc given to old words as XL/jiravo} from XetTTco, etc. Ramsay (see The Independent, 1913, p. 37G) finds ififiartvo) (cf. Col. 2 18) used in the technical sense of entering in on the part of initiates in the sanctuary of Apollos at Clai'os in an inscription there. ffKvWo}, urkyri, avvavraco, verSs.

:

2

See W.-Sch.,

p. 19, n. 8.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

66

KoSofxriaLs),

bveibicxubs

lose their force), Tai.8apLov

4>vaiaofj.aL {(^vaaojiai)

Words cline

,

pai^rifco {palvw, cf. /SaTTTifco, jSaTrrco), arrjKO}

Tafxetov (TafiLelop), (popTiov

(effTrjKo),

which

oirraaia (oi^ts), iravSox^vs (TavSoKevs),

(oveLSos),

jrapa4)povia {irapaippoavvr])

(old

,

NEW TESTAMENT

many diminutives in -iov many diminutives in -apiop),

(and

(and

etc.

and new) receive new meanings, as

at table').

Cf. also

avaTrlTTTCo,

avaK\iv(a ('re-

avTiXkyoi ('speak

dvaKeiixaL,

against'), aTOKpidrjvaL (passive not middle, 'to answer'), baiixovLov ('evil spirit,'

('thank'),

'demon'),

eTrto-reXXco

('house-top'), epccraco ('beg'), evxapLareco

buiixa

a

('write

letter'),

6\papLov

('fish'),

o^/oovlov

('wages'), TTapa/caXeco ('entreat'), Tapprjaia ('confidence'), TrepLairao('distract'),

nat.

iraidevo}

('chastise'),

('compare'), axoXr] {'schooV), Xpr]f^o.Ti-^(^

are to

('be called').^

remember that the

This

('corpse'),

TVTwp.a

avyKpivcx)

('come'), xoprafco ('nourish'),

4>da.voj

is all

difference

Only we

perfectly natural.

between the

kolvtj

vocabulary

and the Attic literature is not the true standard. The vernacular must be compared with the Attic vernacular as seen in the inscriptions and to a large extent in a writer like Aristophanes and the comic poets. Many words common in Aristophanes, taboo to the great Attic writers, reappear in the kolvt]. They were in the vernacular all the time.^ Moulton^ remarks that the verKOLvri

nacular changed very

from the

little

first

century a.d. to the

"The papyri show throughout the marks of a real language of daily life, unspoilt by the blundering bookishness which makes the later documents so irritating." It is just in the first third.

century a.d. that the language.

"

The

kolvt]

comes to

to Christianity there

glory as a world-

which gave birth was an international language" (Deissmaim,

Light from the Ancient East, p. 59). points as to the origin of the

De

its full

fact remains that in the period

Koivi]

It

are

is

not claimed that

now

clear.

koine en de oude dialekten van Griechenland (1906).

enough

is

known

to give

an

intelligible

all

the

See Hesseling,

But

idea of this language

that has played so great a part in the history of man.

Provincial Influences. For all practical purposes the dialects were fused into one common tongue largely as a result of Alexander's conquests. The Germanic dialects have gone farther and farther apart (German, Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, English), for no great conqueror has arisen to (e)

Greek

' Schlageter (Wortsch. etc., pp. 59-62) gives a good another meaning in the kolvt). 2 Cf. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 70 f., 147.

3

CI. Quar., April, 1908, p. 137.

list

of

words with

I

67

THE KOINH bind them into one. ple.

But the

The language

Greek was finally so radical that merged into the general mass, the to-day are

unification of the

"the old dialects

modern folk-language lenistic,

follows the history of the peo-

common

is

only a continuation of the united, Hel-

speech."

So completely did Alexander do

^

his

work that the balance of culture definitely shifted from Athens to the East, to Pergamum, to Tarsus, to Antioch, to Alexandria.^ This "union of oriental and occidental was attempted in every city of Western Asia. That is the most remarkable and interesting feature of Hellenistic history in the Graeco-Asiatic kingdoms and cities." 3 Prof. Ramsay adds: "In Tarsus the Greek qualities

and powers were used and guided by a society which was, on the whole, more Asiatic in character." There were thus non-Greek influences which also entered into the common Greek life and language in various parts of the empire. Cf. K. Holl, "Das Fortleben der Volkssprachen in nachchristlicher Zeit" {Hermes, 1908, These non-Greek influences were especially noticeable

43, p. 240).

Pergamum, Tarsus and Alexandria, though perceptible at other But in the case of Phrygia long before Alexander's conquest there had been direct contact with the Arcadian and the ^olic dialects through immigration.^ The Greek inscriptions

in

points also.

in the Hellenistic time

were

the old dialect of Phrygia,

first in

then gliding into the Koivij, then finally the pure kolvt].^ Hence the KOLvi] won an easy victory in Pergamum, but the door for Phrygian influence was also wide open. Thus, though the kolvt] rests on the foundation of the Greek dialects, some non-Greek elements

were intermingled.''

Dieterich^ indeed gives a special

peculiarities that belong to the

KOivi]

of Asia Minor,

stance, -av instead of -a in the accus. sing, of in as, ris for oaris, SoTts for

future tense. 1

2

for

dfj.[,

of

3d deck, proper names use of ^tXco rather than

In the case of Tarsus "a few traces of the Doric

Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. etc., p. 417. The multitudinous mod. Gk. patois Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 6.

trate the 3

6s, dixai.

list

as, for in-

illus-

KOLvi).

W. M. Ramsay,

Tarsus, Exp., Mar., 1906, p. 261.

* lb., p. 25. Schweizer, Gr. der pcrg. Inschr., pp. 15 IT. « Bnms, Die att. Bestrebungcn in dor gricch. Lit., 1896, p. 12, says: "Statt ihrcr (classische attische Sprache) rogicrt ein gemcines Kcbswoih, das aus •

—

das ist der hellenistische Stil" irgend ciner phrygischen SjK'lunkc stanmit A slight exaggeration. Cf. Brugmann, Vergl. Gr., p. 9. ^ Untersuch. zur Gesch. etc., pp. 258 ff. The speech of Asia Minor has in-

deed close

affinity

!

with that of Paul and Luke and with all the N. T. writers. von Magn. am Maandcr ur.d das N. T., 1906.

Cf. Thierae, Die Inschr.

68

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

dialect

may

perhaps have Hngered" in the

who

gests {Expositor, 1906, p. 31), vecoKopos in

Ac. 19 35 in :

But no hard and

D

may

Egypt

as

Ramsay

sug-

thus be explained.

fast distinction can

as accusative appears in

kolvt],

also thinks that vaoKopos for

be drawn, as -av for -v Is it proper

also, e.g. in dvyarepav.

an Alexandrian dialect? Blass^ says so, agreeing with Winer-SchmiedeP (77 'A\e^av8pecov StdXe/cros). This is the old view, but we can hardly give the name dialect to the Egyptian Greek. Kennedy^ says: "In all probability the language of the Egyptian capital had no more right to be called a dialect than the vernacular of any other great centre of population." Schweizer^ likewise refuses to consider the Alexandrian kolvt] as a dialect. Dieterich^ again gives a list of Eg>T)tian peculiarities such as ol instead of at, -a instead of -as in nominatives of third declension, adjectives in -77 instead of -a, kaov for aov, Kadeh for e/caaros, imto speak of

augment in simple Mayser {Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 35-40) gives a list of "Egyptian words" found in the Ptolemaic papyri. They are words of the soil, like toltvpos But Thumb shows that the majority of the so-called itself. perfect

and

verbs,

indicative instead

aorist in -a,

iifirju

of

for

rjv,

disuse of

the subjunctive.

"^

Alexandrian peculiarities were general in the Kotvr) like riXdoaav, "There was indeed a certain undxo.v, yeyovav, ecbpa/ces, etc.

wieldmess and capriciousness about their language, which displays As itself especially in harsh and fantastic word-composition." examples of their words may be mentioned Karapc^TL^o/jLevos, irapaIt is to be observed also that the avyypactieLv, (jyCkavOpo^Tretv, etc. KOLvi]

was not the vernacular

as a secondary language. 1

2

of all the peoples

when

it

was spoken

In Palestine, for instance, Aramaic was

Gr. of N. T. Gk., 1905, p. 3 note. Gr. des neut. Sprachid., § 3. 1, n. 4.

3 Sour, of N. T. Gk., 1895, p. 23. Irenseus (Minucius Pacatus) and Demetrius Ixion wTote treatises on "the dialect of Alexandria" (Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 289). But they probably did not understand that the vernacular kolvti, which differed from the hterary Koivi), was international

(Thackeray, Gr. of the O. T. in Gk., vol. I, p. 19). "It is certain that many forms of this later language were specially characteristic of Alexandria" (ib.). ^ Unters. zur Gesch. etc., * Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 27. pp. 258 ff. * Die griech. Spr. etc., p. 168 ff. See also Anz, Subs, ad cognos. Graec. Serm. vulg. etc., 1891, p. 262. "Nee quae ApostoUdes homo doctus AlexanCerte nemo drinus nuperrime protulit omnes caHgines propulsaverunt. existet qui cum Sturzio Macedonicam dialectum ibi quaerat, sed altera e parte neminem puto judicare illam quae vulgo appellatur dialectum Alexandrinam soUs vindicandam esse Alexandrinis." Cf. Susemihl, Lit. der Alexan-

jam

drinerzeit.

THE KOINH

69

the usual language of the people who could also, most of them, speak Greek. Moulton's parallel of the variations in modem English is not therefore true, unless you include also peoples Uke the Welsh, Scotch, Irish, etc. But as a whole the vernacular koivt] was a single language with only natural variations like that in the English of various parts of the United States or England.^ Thumb perhaps makes too

much Minor where

of a point out of the use of in its bearing

kfxos

on the authorship

rather than nov in Asia of the

Gospel of John

occurs 41 times, once only in 3 Jo. and Rev. (34 times elsewhere in the N. T.), though it is interesting to note, as he does, that the infinitive is still used in Pontus. But there were it

non-Greek influences here and there over the empire as Thumb ^ well shows. Thumb ^ indeed holds that "the Alexandrian popular speech is only one member of a great speech-development." In the vernacular Koivrj, as in the (/) The Personal Equation. literary language, many variations are due to differences in education

and personal

turn went

its

idiosyncrasies.

off into

"The

colloquial language in

various shades of distinction according to

the refinement of the speaker" (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient

The

East, p. 59).

inscriptions

mal speech, sometimes

on the whole give us a more

official decrees,

for-

while the papyri furnish a

much wider variety. "The papyri show us the dialect of Greek Egypt in many forms, — the language of the Government official,

of the educated private person, of the dwellers in the temples,

We have numerous examples through both the Ptolemaic and the Roman rule in Egypt. All sorts of men from the farm to the palace are here found writing all sorts of documents, a will or a receipt, a loveof the peasantry in the villages."^ of the papyri

Jonathan Williams, an Eng. savant, is quoted in the Louisville Cou(May 9, 1906) as saying: "I have found in the city of Louisville a pronunciation and a use of terms which is nearer, to my mind, to Addison and the Enghsh classicists than anything which the counties of England, the provinces of Australia, or the marshes of Scotland can offer." He added that the purest English known to him is spoken in Edinburgh and Louisville. These two cities, for geographical reasons, are not provincial. ^

Sir

rier-Journal

2

Grioch. Spr.

etc.,

pp. 102-lGl; Theol. Literaturzeit., 1903, p. 421;

cf.

Moulton, Prol. p. 40. Moulton sets over against i/xos the fact that John's Gospel uses IVa rather than the iiifinitivc so often. Much of the force of su(!h an argument vanishes also under the personal equation. ' Gricch. Spr. etc., \i. 171. Cf. also Zahn, Einleitung in tlas N. T., also

I,

38. *

Kenyon,

ext. vol. of Hast.

Pala^og. of the

Gk. Pap., 1899.

D.

B., art. Papyri, p. 355''.

See also

iil.,

'

NEW TESTAMENT

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

70

letter or

a dun, a

memorandum

sources;

or a census report, a private letter

"Private letters

or a public epistle.

and they are

all

are

our most valuable

the better for the immense differences

that betray themselves in the education of the writers. The wellworn epistolary formulae show variety mostly in their spelling; and their value for the student lies primarily in their remarkable

resemblances to the conventional phraseology which even the N. T. were content to use."^ Deissmann^ has insisted on

letter-writers

a sharp distinction between letters and epistles, the letter being private and instinct with life, the epistles being written for the

pubhc

eye,

tinction.

from an

an open

A

letter,

a literary

real letter that has

epistle written as literature.

This

letter.

become

is

literature

a just disis

different

In the papyri therefore

we

would to-day if he rummaged in the rubbish-heaps of our great cities. One need not be surprised at seeing t6v fir}Tpo:s, t6v deaiv, and even worse blunders. As a sample Jannaris^ gives a^eLccdels viraipaTUiv ypa-

find all grades of culture

Hara

and

of illiteracy, as one

nei eidcoTOOv, for a^LCodels ur' avTcov ypaiJ.iJ.aTa

/jr}

Part

tlboTOiv.

of these are crass errors, part are due to identity of sounds in

pronunciation, as o and w, insists that

we

ei

and

take note of the

-q,

ei

and

t.

man and

Witkowski^ properly the character of

work

in each case.

by the papyri and the inscriptions we gain a As a specimen of the vernacular letter of the school-boy Theon to his father has

It is obvious that

truer picture of the situation. KOLvi}

of

Egypt

keen interest A.D.

ing

is

Moulton, B. the

second century

spirit.

The

writ-

uncial.

1

Prol., p.

27

f.

"The distinction way with Deissmann in pronouncing S.,

1901, pp. 3-59.

"Hist. Gk. Gr., p.

holds good, even all

G. Milligan, Gk. Pap.,

rather than 'Epistles.'" 3

It belongs to the

and has a boy's mistakes as well as a boy's

*

all

this

(see O. P. 119).

7.

if

we cannot go

the Pauline writings letters '

p. xxxi.

Quoted from Griech. Urk.,

Berlin, 13^, belonging

to year 289 a.d.

The papyri contain "exempla ex vita deprompta, cum sermo scriptout solutae ita poeticae orationis nuUo modo veram nobis imaginem sermonis illius aetatis praebeat. Etenim sermo, quem apud auctores hellinisticos deprehendimus, arti, non vitae, debetur." Witkowski Prodr. gr. pap. Graec, *

rum

etc.,

1898, p. 197.

He

urges that in case of variations in forms or syntax one

must inquire "utrum ab alia qua dialecto petita sit an in Aegypto nata, utrum ab homine Graeco an barbaro formata." lb., p. 198. He thinks it is necessary that we have "Ubrum de sermone pap>Torum, librum de sermone titulorum, librum de sermone auctorum poeticae et pedestris orationis iUius aetatis, librum de dialecto Macedonica tractantem." lb.

I

:

THE KOINH

71

Qkciov QeoJVL ra3 Trarpt xatpfti'.

ovk cnreprjxts ne ner' e-

/caXcos kirolrjaes.

crov eis irokiv.

i]

ov 9e\ts a-KevtKKHV

'AXe^ai/Spiav ou

T* effoO eis

/xe-

^n) 7pdi/'co (tc I-

KicFToKriv ovTe \a\Ci ae, ovre viyevco ae,

av 8e eXdus

elra. fxrj

a/x ni] OeKjis cnreveKai

at \vTrbv.

ravTa

7e[t]j'ere.

XeXdw

OTL

koKSjs 81

fxeyaXa TTJ

'A\e^ap8piap, ov

els

XdjSco x^^P^'^ Tvapa \a\ov ovTe ttoKl

fxe,

eTTOtTjcres.

apaua

qp.kpa

ixi]

iJ.r]Tr]p

17

p.e

'

5copd

ere.

d/x

/xtj

dire 'Ap-

jiov

ixppou avrbv. jjlol

eTeiJ.\j/e[s

ireirXavTjKav ly/xws

OTL eir'Kevaes.

1.(3'

TrapaKaXoj

7W, ov

Kal

avaaraTot

X'^'^P^j^

fJi[e],

e/ceft],

\vt6v TreiJLx{/r]s

-Keixypov

ov

fxr]

ireivw raDra. kpusade

T0/3t

On

d[s

(pa-

ere

ei;x(o/xat).

17?'.

the other side dTToSos QeoiVL [d]7r6 Qeoovaros

vlQi.

Milligan (Greek Papyri, p. xxxii) admits that there may be now significance of the papyri." But

a temptation "to exaggerate the surely his book has a wonderful Take this extract from terest. Alis (P. Oxy. 744 B.C. 1) 'Edi' :

a(f)es,

(g) is

eav

rjv

human, not

to say linguistic, in-

a letter of Hilarion to his wife iroWaTroWQip

TtKijs,

eav

rjv

apaevov,

drjXea, eK^aXe.

Resume.

To

all

intents

and purposes the vernacular

kolvt]

the later vernacular Attic with normal development under

environment created by Alexander's conquests. On this base then were deposited varied influences from the other dialects, but not enough to change the essential Attic character of the language. There is one kolptj everywhere (cf Thumb, Griech. The literary KOLvi] was homogeneous, while the Spr., p. 200).

historical

.

vernacular

kolptj

was

practically so in spite of local variations

(cf. Angus, The Koine: "The Language of the N. T.," Prince. In remote districts the language Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910, p. 78 f.).

would be Doric-coloured or Ionic-coloured. It is in pronunciation that the Phonetics and Orthography. most serious differences appear in the KOLvrj (Moulton, Prol., p. 5). We do not know certainly how the ancient Attic was pronounced, though we can approximate it. The modern Greek vernacular The koivt) stands along the path of pronunciation is known. progress, precisely where it is hard to tell. But we know enough

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

72

NEW TESTAMENT

not to insist too strongly on "hair-splitting differences hinging on forms which for the scribe of our uncials had identical value phonetically, e.g. p. 79).

ol,

tj,

-q,

v,

i=ee

in feet, or at = e" (Angus, op.

Besides itacisms the i-monophthongizing

and the equalizing

and

of o

w.

The

Attic tt

is

is

cit.,

to be noticed

aa except in a few

The tendency

is toward dewhere the reverse is true as a aspiration except in a few cases ec^' digamma). Cf. eXTlBc. Elision is not result of analogy (or a lost assimilation is carried still further in the Attic, but so common as care for rhythm in general, There is less and the (cf. kfjL/jLeao:) v and appear constantly before confinal consonants variable s for -tetin forms like relu and ra/jLelou The use of -etsonants. probably comes by analogy. OWels and /jL-qdeis are the common forms till 100 B.C. when ov8eis and ixrjSeis begin to regain their

instances (like eXaTTcov,

KpelTTcov).

.

ascendency.

The words from the town-life (the stage, the marto the front. The vocabulary of Aristophanes is There was an increase in the number of diminutive in point. forms. The kolpt] was not averse to foreign elements if they were Xenophon is a good illustration of the preparation for useful. Vocabulary.

ket-place)

come

Radermacher, A^. T. Gr., p. 8. There is the natural dropping of some old suffixes and the coining of new suffixes, some of which appear in the modern Greek vernacular. The number of compound words the

Koivr].

Cf.

Word-Formation.

by juxtaposition is greatly

increased, like xXTjpo-c^opeoj,

x^'-po-ypa-ov.

In particular two prepositions in compounds are frequent, like New meanings are given to old words. avv-avTL-\ayi^avoiiai. Accidence. In substantives the Ionic -prjs, not -pas, is common, bringing nouns in -pa into harmony with other nouns of the first declension (Thackeray, Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., p. 22). The Attic second declension disappears. Some feminine nouns in -os be-

come masculine.

The

third declension

is

occasionally assimilated

forms like vvKrav, Ovyarepav. Contraction is absent sometimes in forms like bpkwv. Both x^Pf-v and xapira occur. Adjectives have forms like aacfjoXyjp, irX-qp-qs indeclinable, irav for iravra (cf. p'e'yav), bval for bvoiv. The dual, in fact, has disappeared Pronouns show the disapin all inflections and conjugations. to the

first in

like tKarepos and uroTepos. Tis is used sometimes like oo-rts, and os eav is more frequent than 6s av about A.D. 1. Analogy plays a big part in the language, and this is proof In the verb there is a general tendency toward simpliof life. fication, the two conjugations blending into one {pi, verbs going).

pearance of the dual forms

THE KOINH

New

presents like

airoKT'twoi,

fusion in the use of -dco

The

and

increase of the use of

There

are formed.

oirTavo},

We

verbs.

-eco

first

73

aorist forms

hke

diva in the older Greek).

This

first aorist

even in the imperfect as in

etxa.

The use

ecrxa (cf tlirov .

of -oaav {dxocrav, taxo-

There

is

The

may

be due to analogy of this same frequent absence of the syllabic augment

{bkbwKav) for -dcri

first aorist.

and

termination appears

aav) for -ov in the third plural is occasionally noticeable.

form -av

con-

is

find ylvoixaL, yivdoaKd}.

compound verbs it is sometimes The temporal augment is often ab-

in the past perfect, while in

doubled

like aireKaTeaT-qaav.

sent, especially

We

with diphthongs.

have -rcoaav rather than

-vrwv, -adwaav rather than -aOoiv.

Syntax.

ments.

There

is

Simplicity

shorter sentences

in general

is

an absence

much more

of

in evidence.

many This

Attic refineis

seen in the

and the paratactic constructions rather than

The

the more complex hypotactic idioms.

sparing use of parti-

There is no effort at rhetorical embellishment. What is called "Asianism" is the bombastic rhetoric of the artificial orators. Atticism aims to reproduce the classic idiom. The vernacular kolvt] is utterly free from this vice of Asianism and Atticism. Thackeray (op. cit., p. 23) notes that "in the breach of the rules of concord is seen the widest deviation from classical orthodoxy." This varies a great deal in different writers as the cles is noticeable.

papyri amply

The

dence.

testify.

tives, adjectives

plural

The nominaiivus

variations in case, gender

and verbs are frequent

-pendens

is

The neuter The comadjective. The

KaTo. avveaiv.

parative does duty often for the superlative

(as

in evi-

of substan-

used with either a singular or plural verb.

is

superlative form usually has the elative sense.

mon

much

and number

Ilpcoros is

com-

sometimes in older Greek) when only two are compared.

'EavTwv occurs for

all

three persons.

The

accusative

is

regaining

There is an increase in the use of the accusatives with verbs and much freedom in the use of transitive and intransitive verbs. The growth in the use of prepositions is very marked both with nouns and in composition, though some its

old ascendency.

of the old prepositions are disappearing.

with more than two cases.

Phrases

parture from the old idiom.

New

Few

like

prepositions occur

^Xkirui airo

show a de-

adverbial and prepositional

coming into use. The cases with prepositions are The instrumental use of h is common. The optative disappearing. The future participle is less frequent. The in-

phrases, are

changing. is

finitive (outside of rod, kv

Tc3, ets

TO

and the

inf.) is

receding before

,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

74

NEW TESTAMENT

which is extending its use very greatly. There is a wider use Everywhere it is the language of life and not of the books. of T. use of expressions like els to ovoixa, 8vo 8vo, once cited N. The as Hebraisms, is finding illustration in the papyri (cf. Deissmann, M17 begins to encroach on ov, especially Light, etc., p. 123 f.). with infinitives and participles. The periphrastic conjugation is frequently employed. The non-final use of tva is quite marked. Clearness is Direct discourse is more frequent than indirect. more desired than elegance. It is the language of nature, not of tva,

oTL.

the schools.

V.

The

Adaptability of the Kotvii to the

Roman

World.

It is

worth while to make this point for the benefit of those who may wonder why the literary Attic could not have retained its supremacy in the Grseco-Roman world. That was impossible. The very victory of the Greek spirit made necessary a modern common dialect. Colonial and foreign influences were inevitable and the old classical culture could not be assimilated by the Jews and Persians, Syrians, Romans, Ethiopians. " In this way a Panhellenic Greek sprang up, which, while always preserving all its main features of Attic grammar and vocabulary, adopted many colonial and foreign elements and moreover began to proceed in a more analytical spirit and on a simplified grammar."^ The old literary Attic could not have held its own against the Latin, for the Romans lamented that they were Hellenized by the Greeks Spenserian English would be an afafter conquering them.^ fectation to-day. The tremendous vitality of the Greek is seen precisely in its power to adjust itself to new conditions even to the present time. The failure of the Latin to do this not only

made

it

give

way

before the Greek, but, after Latin

became the

speech of the Western world during the Byzantine period, the vernacular Latin broke up into various separate tongues, the modern

Romance the

KOLVT]

languages.

The

conclusion

is irresistible

therefore that

possessed wonderful adaptabihty to the manifold needs

Roman world. ^ It was the international language. Nor must one think that it was an ignorant age. What we call the "Dark Ages" came long afterwards. "Let me further insist that this civilization was so perfect that, as far as it reached, men were of the

*

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 6.

Gk. was the language of culture in Rome. Gk. tutors, often slaves, taught in the schools, cf. Epictetus. Paul wrote to Rome in Gk. 5 Lafoscade, Infl. du Lat. sur le Grec, pp. 83-158, in BibHot. de I'Ecole des *

hautes

6t.,

1892.

75

THE KOINH

than they ever have been We have discovered new forces in nature; we have made since. new inventions; but we have changed in no way the methods of The Hellenistic world was thinking laid down by the Greeks nowadays." ^ Moulton^ are more cultivated in argument than we the remarkable fact that to attention cannot refrain from calling began its career the world master was to the new religion that world had one ruler Mediterranean the when at the very time possible language the best it was whole the and one language. On a.d. century first of the world for the Grseco-Roman

more cultivated

in the strict sense

.

.

.

Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 137. He adds (p. Ill): of Alexandria was a permanent education to the whole Greekspeaking world; and we know that in due time Pergamum began to do similar 1

"The work

work." See also Breed, Prep, of the World for Chr., 1904, ch. IX, Hellenizing of the Nations, and ch. XI, The Unification of the World. Jannaris (op. cit., p. 8) indeed puts the LXX, N. T. and many pap. into "the 2

Prol., p. 6.

The

Levantine group" of the Uterary language, but this both the LXX and the N. T.

for

is

a wrong assignment

CHAPTER

IV

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH I.

The New Testament

Chiefly in the Vernacular Koivrj.

serve "chiefly/' for not quite

nacular

as will be shown. ^

KOLVT]

to every one,

the period.

come

all

is

the N. T.

is

But the new

Ob-

wholly in the verpoint,

now obvious

N. T. is in the normal kolvt) of what one would have looked for, when you

just this, that the

That

to think of

is it.

And

Purists held that the N. T.

yet that

was

is

a recent discovery, for the

in pure Attic, while the Hebraists

explained every peculiarity as a Hebraism.

come

The

Purists felt that

and hence it had to be in the Attic. This, as we now know, could only have been true if the N. T. writers had been Atticistic and artificial stylists. So the Hebraists got the better of the argument and then overdid The most popular language in the N. T. is found in the it. Synoptic Gospels. Even Luke preserves the words of Jesus in colloquial form. The Epistle of James and the Johannine writings revelation could only

reflect

in the "best" Greek,

the vernacular style very distinctly.

the Epistles of Peter (Second Peter

is

We

see this also in

very colloquial) and Jude.

The

colloquial tone is less manifest in Acts, some of Paul's Epistles and Hebrews. Cf. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 63 f. Wellhausen (Einl., p. 9) stresses the fact that in the Gospels the Greek spoken by the people makes its entry into literature.^ (a) Not a Biblical Greek. As late as 1893 Viteau^ says: "Le grec du N. T. est une variete du grec hebraisant." Again: "C'est

par

le

grec des

LXX qu'il

faudrait expliquer,

le

plus souvent,

le

du N. T."^ Viteau is aware of the inscriptions and the papyri and even says: "The Greek of the N. T. must be compared continually wdth the post-classical Greek in its various branches: with the Greek of the profane writers, the Greek of the inscripgrec

Deissmann, Light, pp. 55, 69. Ok. (Camb. Bibl. Ess., pp. 488 ff.) who notes a special deficiency in Gk. culture in Mark's Gospel and the Apocalypse. 3 Etude sur le Grec du N. T., Le Verbe, p. Uv. * lb., p. Iv. 76 ^

Cf.

2

Cf. Moulton, N. T.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH tions of the Alexandrian

and GriECO-Roman

braizing Greek, finally the Christian Greek,"

under Hatch's

N. T.

false idea of

77

HeBut he labours

periods, the ^

a distinct biblical Greek of which the

a variety; both of these ideas are erroneous. There distinct biblical Greek, and the N. T. is not a variety of the is

is

no

LXX

Jowett^ over forty years ago said: "There seem to be

Greek.

reasons for doubting whether any

considerable

light

can be

thrown on the N. T. from inquiry into language." That prophecy is now almost amusing in the light of modern research. Simcox^ admitted that "the half-Hebraized Greek of the N. T. is neither a very elegant nor a very expressive language," but he found consolation in the idea that "it is a many-sided language, an eminently translatable language." Dr. Hatch* felt a reaction against the modern Atticistic attitude toward the N. T. language: "In almost every lexicon, grammar and commentary the words and idioms of the N. T. are explained, not indeed exclusively, but chiefly, by a reference to the words and idioms of Attic historians and philosophers." In this protest he was partly right, but he went too far when he insisted that^ "biblical Greek is thus a language which stands by itself. What we have to find in studying it is what meaning certain Greek words conveyed to a Semitic mind." Dr. Hatch's error arose from his failure to apply the Greek influence in Palestine to the language of Christianity as he had done to Christian study. Judea was not an oasis in the desert, but was merged into the Grseco-Roman world. Rothe^ had spoken "of a language of the Holy Ghost. For in the Bible it is evident that the Holy Spirit has been at work, moulding for itself a distinc-

mode of expression out of the language of the Cremer,^ in quoting the above, says: "We have a very clear and striking proof of this in N. T. Greek." Winer ^ had indeed seen that "the grammatical character of the N. T. language has a very slight Hebrew colouring," but exactly how slight he tively religious

country."

tell. Winer felt that N. T. Greek Avas "a species of a "a variety of later Greek," in a word, a sort of dialect. he was wrong, but his notion (op. cit., p. 3) that a gramthe N. T. should thus presuppose a grammar of the later

could not species,"

In this

mar

of

Ess. in Bibl. Glc, ISSO, p. 2.

1

lb., p.

^

» lb., ]). 11. and Rev., p. 477. « Dogniatik, 1S03, Lang, of the N. T., 1890, p. 20. Biblico-Theol. Lex. of N. T. Gk., 1802, p. iv. W.-M., 1877, p. 38. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 28.

3 7

8

lii.

4

Ess.

p. 23S.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

78

Greek or kolvt] is quite right, only we have no such grammar even Winer made Httle use of the papyri and inscriptions (p. 21 We still sigh for a grammar of the kolvt], though Thumb ft. n.). has related the kolvt] to the Greek language as a whole. Kennedy contended that there was "some general characteristic" about the LXX and N. T. books, which distinctly marked them off from the other Greek books; but "they are both children of the same parent, namely, the colloquial Greek of the time. This is the secret yet.

^

Even

of their striking resemblance."

in the Hastings' Dictionary

Thayer^ contends for the name "Hellenistic Greek" as the proper term for N. T. Greek. That is better than "biblical" or "Jewish" Greek, etc. But in simple truth we had better just call it N. T. Greek, or the Greek of the N. T., and let it go at that. It is the Greek of a group of books on a common theme, as we would speak of the Greek of the Attic orators, the Platonic Greek, etc. It is not a peculiar type of Greek except so far as that is due to the historical conditions, the message of Christianity, and the Deissmann,^ however, is the man pecuharities of the writers. who has proven from the papyri and inscriptions that the N. T. Greek is not a separate variety of the Greek language. He denies that the N. T. is like the LXX Greek, which was "a written Semitic-Greek which no one ever spoke, far less used for literary purposes, either before or after. "^

Blass^ at

first

stood out against

—

view and held that "the N. T. books form a special group one to be primarily explained by study," but in his Grammar of N. T. Greek he changed his mind and admitted that " a grammar of the popular language of that period written on the basis of all these various authorities and remains" was better than limiting oneself "to the language of the N. T."^ So Moulton^ concludes: "The disappearance of that word 'Hebraic' from its prominent place in our dehneation of N. T. language marks a change in our conceptions of the subject nothing less than revolutionary." The new knowledge of the kolvt] has buried forever the old controversy between Purists and Hebraists.^ The men who wrote the N. T. this

1

Sour, of N. T. Gk., 1895, p. 146.

2

Art. Lang, of the N. T., Hast.

'

B.

S.,

*

B.

S., p. 67.

6

^ Prol., p. 1. Thcol. Literaturzeit., 1895, p. 487. Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 120. It lasted "solange die bibhsche Gra-

8

D.

citat als etwas isoliertes betrachtet

N. T.

B., 1900.

1901; Hell. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc. etc. «

wurde."

Thumb

dialect or a pecuhar bibhcal variety of the

tory of the Purist controversy see W.-Th.

§ 1,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

Koivrj,

W.-Sch.

2.

attacks the idea of a pp. 162-201. § 2.

For

his-

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH were not aloof from the

life

of their time.

79

"It embodied the

Hebrew and Christian faith in a language which brought them home to men's business and bosoms."* Wackernagel understates the matter: "As little as the LXX does lofty conceptions of the

the N. T. need to be isolated linguistically." ^ (b) Proof that N. T. Greek is in the Vernacular Koivq.

now

We

The

numerous contemporary Greek inscriptions already published and in the ever-increasing volumes of papyri, many of which are also contemporary. As early as 1887 a start had already been made in using the inscriptions to explain the N. T. by E. L. Hicks.^ He was followed by W. M. Ramsay/ but it is Deissmann who has given us most of the proof that we now possess, and he has been ably seconded l)y Deissmann^ indeed insists: "If we are ever in J. Hope Moulton. proof

is

at hand.

have

it

matter to reach certainty at

this

in the

all,

then

it

is

the inscriptions

and the papyri which will give us the nearest approximation to the truth." Hear Deissmann^ more at length: "Until the papyri were discovered there were practically no other contemporary documents to illustrate that phase of the Greek language which comes before us in the LXX and N. T. In those writings, broadly, what we have, both as regards vocabulary and morphology, and not seldom as regards syntax as well, is the Greek of ordinary intercourse as spoken in the countries bordering on the Mediter-

ranean, not the

bound

strictly

dinary

life,

Greek of the rhetoricians and litterateurs, was by technical rules. This language of or-

artificial

as

it

shows unmistakable traces going on, and in many from the older dialects as from the classical

this cosmopolitan Greek,

of a process of development that

respects

differs

was

still

2

Thayer, Hast. D. B., art. Lang, of the N. T., Die griech. Spr. (Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl.

3

CI. Rev., 1887.

1

Ill, p. 366. I,

Abt.

8), p.

309.

X, pp. 9 ff. Deissmann calls attention also to a booklet by Walch, Observ. in Mattha3um ex graecis inscr., 1779. So in 1850, Robinson in the Pref. to his N. T. Lex. says: "It was, therefore, the spoken language of common life, and not that of books, with which they became acquainted"; cf. also the works of Schweizer, Nachmanson, Dittcnbcrger, etc. 6 Encyc. Bibl., art. Papyri. "At the time when the ancient Greek culture was in conflict with Christianity, the assailants pointed sarcastically at the boatman's idiom of the N. T., while the d(>fenders, glorying in the taunt, *

Exp. Times,

^

B.

made make

S.,

vol.

p. 81.

Latin apologists were the first to this very homeliness their boast. the hopeless attempt to prove that the literary form of the Bible as a

Deissmann, whole, and of the N. T. in particular, was artistically perfect." Exp. Times, Nov., 1906, p. 59; cf. also Norden, Kunstpr., II, pp. 512 f., 526 f.

— NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

80

As Moultoni puts

Attic."

"the Holy Ghost spoke absolutely

it,

in the language of the people." The evidence that the N. T. Greek

in the vernacular

is

and partly grammatical, though

partly lexical

The evidence

the case chiefly lexical.

kolvt] is

in the nature of

See

constantly growing.

is

Deissmann, Bible Studies, Light from the Ancient East; Moulton and Milligan's "Lexical Notes on the Papyri" {The Expositor, 1908

We

).

give

first

some examples of words, previously supnow shown to be merely popular

posed to be purely "bibUcal,"

of their presence in the papyri or inscriptions:

Greek because

apaaraTOOJ,

ava'^ao^,

aKarayvciocrTOs,

ayaTTT],

avTL\r]iJ.TTO}p,

aWoyevijs,

a(j)L\dpyvpos, aWevreo), jSpoxv, ivavri, evbibhaKOJ, hdoircov, eTriKardparos, einavvaycjoyr],

evapearos,

ieparevo},

evTrpo(XO)ireo3,

t/xarti'co,

KaTaireTaap-a,

KarayyeXevs, Karrjyo^p, Kadapl^u, kokklvos, KvpLaKos, XetrovpyLKOs, Xoyela, ve6(f)VT0S, 6(/>etXi7, -Kapa^oKtvojiai, Treptaaela, TXrjpocjiopew, irpodKapTepriffLS,

t pcoToroKos aiTop-erpiov, avvavTiKaix^avonaL, For a lively discussion of these etc. words see Deissmann {Bible Studies, pp. 198-247; Light, etc., pp. 69-107). The recovery of the inscription on the marble slab that irpoaevxV}

TrpoaKvi^rjTTjs,


warned the

,

(f)pepaTraTr]s,

from the Updv

gentiles

aWoyovrj daTTopeveadaL kvTOS tov OS

5'

av

eavTccL

\r]drj,

earai

a'cTLOS

is

M-qdha

very impressive,

to lepov Tpv4>aKT0V Kal -Ktpi^oKov.

irepl

olcl

The

to h^aKoXovOetv davaTOV.

words above are no longer biblical avra^ \ey6fxeva. But this is not all. Many words which were thought to have a peculiar meaning in the LXX or the N. T. have been found in that very sense in the inscriptions or papyri, such as d5eX06s in the sense of

'common brotherhood,' CTpe4>onaL,

apKeTos,

a.vacj)epoo,

adeTrjaLs, d/xerai'OJjTos, aiJL4>6TepoL

avTiKrjixxJ/LS,

anoKpLixa,

aai: agonal,

aarnios,

'AcTLapxv^,

avrexco,

cltottos,

=

iravTes,

airoTaacTOfiaL,

jSaaTa^w,

dm-

apeTr],-

/3e/3atco(rts,

^La^ofxai, jSouXo/xat, ykvqiia, yoyyv^oo, ypa/JLfxaTevs, ypacjjco, SeLirvku}, bkov effTL, IJLOS,

evebpehoi, eTTLOvaios, 'idios,

biaadw, bUaios, 8l6tl

StajSdXXco, dojfia,

eau

=

epoxos,

av,

el

el8os,

=

otl,

els,

bixorojikw,

eKTeveia,

8ok'lhlos,

ecos,

I'Xecos,

riyovfxaL,

riXiKla,

56/ct-

Utos, eKTivdacroi,

evTvyx^vw, kin^akiov, eTlaKOiros, epcordw,

tiixaptcrreco,

IXaaT-qpiov,

lurjv,

riavxia,

ev,

evaxVfJ-^Vj

dep-ekiov,

decxipeo),

laTopeo), KadapV^oi, Kadapos, Kaivos, KaKoirddeLa,

Kard, KaTO-Kpiixa, KaTavrdu!,

kXIvt},

KoXdfopat, KoWdco, KoXa^tfw, kotos,

KopaaLOV, KTOLOixaL, KvpLOS, XtK/xdco, Xti^, Xouojuai, fxevovvye, iJ.apTvpovp.aL, Ixei^oTepos,

\oyeu, a<j>'epw,

piKpbs,

opo/ia,

poyCKoKos,

6\poji>LOV,

Kapeirib-qpos,

xepto-TrdoJ, irepLTtfjiVb),

povi],

mDs,

veKpol,

vt],

vofxos,

oU'ia,

6p.o~

irapd, Tvapabeiaos, TvapaO-qKr], Trapa/cuTrrw, irapei-

Trdpecrts,

irdpoLKOs,

Tvapo^vvofiai,

-rraTpoirapaboTOS,

Ttrixvs, irXeoveKTeoj, ttXtjOos, 'ir\r]po(})opeu, irpdyna, 1

Prol., p. 5.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH TrpcLKTWp,

wpodeaLS,

Trpe
ivpocfkxoi,

TrpoffKaprepeoj,

(TTpaTevofxai,

a(j>pa'y'i^w,


avyyevris, (tvh^ovXlov, cvveidrjcns, avp-

€xo}, (TvvevdoKeo}, crvvevcjoxeoidai, avvlaTriixL, aujia,

vios deov,

c})6avo},

Trpo(f>T)Tr]s,

(TKvWa), okoKox}/, anapaySLPos, crovoaptov, aireKovXaTo^p, araaLS,

(Tawp6s,

vios,

81

vlodeala, vwo^vyLOv, VTroirbhov,

4>L\oaTopyLa,

(f)i\os,

(fiCKoTitxkoixaL,

awTrjp, r-qpricns, tottos,

VToaraaLS, (pacns,

xapayfxa, xo-pis

tui

Gew,

€p(t3,

XP^'i-O-,

ypoiixlov, xl/vxhv aojaai. This seems like a very long list, but do more than pages of argument to convince the reader that the vocabulary of the N. T. is practically the same as that of the vernacular KOLvrj in the Roman Empire in the first century A.D.i This is not a complete list, for new words will be added from time to time, and all that are known are not here included. Besides neither Deissmann nor Moulton has put together such a single list of words, and Kenyon's in Hastings' D. B. (Papyri)

xpovos, will

it

very incomplete.

After compiling this

words I turned to by Thayer (art. "Language of the N. T.") where are found some thirty new words common to the N. T. and the vernacular kolvtj, words not comis

the

list

mon

list

of

in the Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible

in the classic Greek.

a half-dozen.

In his

list

Thayer's hst

aX\r]yop€0}; aPTo4)da\{jLeo), airoKapadoKia,

kmxoprjyeui,

evBoKea:,

is

entirely different save

are comprised such interesting words as

eu/catpeco,

5eLaL5aLp.ovia,

dpLa{jLJ3evo),

etc.

eyxplo:, kyyl^co,

This

list

can

be

by the comparison between words that are the N. T. and the comic poets (Aristophanes, Menan-

largely increased also

common

to

who used the language of the people. See Kennedy's Sources of N. T. Greek (ch. VI). Many of these, as Kennedy shows, are theological terms, like aladrjTrjpLov, appa^wv, ^a-wder, etc.)

lists in

TL^Q}, €vxo.pL(7Tia, Kvpia, fxvaT-qpLov,

common

in

eiTLcfiavrjs,

use in the

Kvpcos,

^tXaSeX^ia.

Roman Empire

terms

The

Christians found

like dSeX^os, cTrt^dj^eta,

XeLTOvpyla, rapovala, Tpea(3vTepos, Tpoypa(f>o), aojrrjp,

acoTTjpla, vios Qeov.

connotation and

They took these words with the new popular gave them "the deeper and more spiritual

not meant, of course, that the bullc of the N. T. words are new as Far from it. Of the 4829 words in the N. T. (not including proper names) 3933 belong to older classic language (litenxry and vernac.) while 99G arc late or foreign words. See Jacquier, Hist, des Livres du N. T., tome 1", 1906, p. 25. Thayer's Lex. claimed 707 N. T. words, but Thayer considered 89 as doubtful and 76 as late. Kennedy (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 02) found about 550 "biblical" words. But now Deissmann admits only about 50, or one per cent, of the 5000 words in the N. T. (Light, 1

It

is

compared with the old Gk.

etc.,

p.

words

72

gives 5420.

Findlay (Exp. Gk. T., 1 Cor., p. 748) gives 5594 Greek N. T. (whole number), while Viteau (Syntaxe des Prop., p. xxx)

f.).

in the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

82

sense with which the N. T. writings have made us famihar" They could even find tov (Milhgan, Greek Papyri, p. xxx).

neyaXov Qeov evepykrov Kal awTrjpos (GH 15, ii/B.c). Cf. Tit. 2 13; 2 Pet. 1:1.^ The papyri often show us how we have misunderstood a word. So airoypa^yi] (Lu. 2 2) is not "taxing," but "en:

:

rolHng" for the census (very common in the papyri). But this is not all, for the modern Greek vernacular will also augment the When list of N. T. words known to belong to the oral speech. character vernacular the admit this much is done, we are ready to like the Koivi] also in using

words

The N. T. Greek

words not known to be otherwise.

of all the

many compounded

like avtKbii]'yr]TOS, ave^epavvr]Tos,

is

("sesquipedalian")

dXXoTpto€7rt(TK07ros,

virepevTvy-

some There is etc. dirapiov, lotIov, irXoLapLov, as significance, of which have lost that fist in the illustrated well are words old The new meanings to hrpoTr], fwoxoteco, avakvui, added be which may from the papyri, to also the

xavoo, etc.

same frequency

of diminutives,

o'Xo^^j XopTo.^^, etc.

As

we need say less, but the evidence is to the same show examples of 'AKuXa (and -ov) for genipapyri The

to the forms

effect.

tive,

dvojv

ripirayriv,

and

ri^a,

Svai,

6e5co/f6S,

tyevap.riv,

ekeyas, 'ekev^a, ^\da,

eXa/3a,

oUes, eypa\pes,

tl6oj,

airelpr]s;

r]V0Lyr]v,

the imperative

has only the long forms -rcoaav, -adcoaav, etc. The various dialects are represented in the forms retained in the N. T., as the Attic in ^ovXei, 5t56a(7t, rifxeXKe, etc.; the Ionic in ixaxalp-ns, yivop.aL, yLPo^aKu, rirco, etc.; the ^Eolic in airoKTewi^, 3d Northwest Greek in accusative plural in -€s, perfect in -av (3d plural), confusion of -aco and -eco verbs, etc.; the Arcadian-Cyprian group in accusative singular in -av, d(/)ecovIt is curious that Thayer in Hastings' D. B., follows rat (also). in giving eblhoaav as an example of a form like e'ixoaav, error Winer's stem is 5t5o-, and aau is merely the usual p.L ending. present the for

etc.;

the Doric in

a.(j)eo)UTaL,

plural in -aav, etc.; the

d. griech. Pap., pp. 4-20. the syntactical peculiarities of N. T. Greek which are less numerous, as in the kolvt], the following are worthy of note and are found in the KOLvrj: the non-final use of IW; the frequent

See Mayser, Gr.

Among

use of the personal pronoun; the decreased use of the possessive pronouns; disuse of the optative; increased use of 6tl; disuse of the future participle; use of participle with elfxl; article with the infinitive (especially

with

h

and

els);

cities

and

/SXcxe

with sub-

junctive without conjunction; the absence of the dual; use of 6^e>iOv as conjunction; frequency of kav; orav, etc., with indicative; 1

Moulton,

Prol., p. 84;

Wendland,

Hell.-rora. Kult., p. 100.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

83

KOINII

upon ov; decreased use of interrogative particles; some indirect discourse; Wep with comparaTrapd and pronoun; use of tdm as possessive

interchange of eav and ap;

increasing

jui?

els = TLs;

disuse of

disappearance of the superlative; frequency of prepositions; vivid use of present tense (and perfect); laxer use of particles; growth of the passive over the middle, etc. Various phrases are common both to the N. T. and to the tives;

papyri, like Se^tav 8tr]veKes, Kad
Wos, ovx o

StSw/it; ku rots

yeypawraL,

Tvx<j^v,

e/c

=

-irapexofiaL

house

'in

avix^wvov,

kiri

of,' avro

to avTO, KaT

kjxavTov, to avTO

tov vvv,

els

to

ovap, KaTO. to

(fypoveXv.

"There

is

placed before us in the N. T. neither a specific speech-form nor a barbaric Jewish-Greek, but a natural phase of the Hellenistic

Deissmann {Exp. Times, 1906, p. 63) speech-development." 1 properly holds the N. T. to be the Book of Humanity because and not from the it "came from the unexhausted forces below, Swete (0. T. feeble, resigned culture of a worn-out upper class." is influenced by the in Gk., pp. 295 ff.) shows how the

LXX

vernacular

As

Koivrj.

p. 14) explained the

Hase (Wellhausen, Einl, Thackeray {Gram-

early as 1843 B.

LXX as "Volkssprache."

LXX

mar, pp. 22 ff.) gives a good summary of "the kolvt] basis of Greek." is true II. Literary Elements in the New Testament Greek. It then, as Blass^ sums it up, that "the language employed in the N. T. is, on the whole, such as was spoken in the lower circles of society, not such as

N. T. writers were

was written

in

works

of literature."

The

not Atticists with the artificial straining after

the antique Attic idiom.

were mere purveyors of

But one must not imagine that they FreudenthaP slang and vulgarisms.

speaks of the Hellenistic Jews as "one of those societies without a mother-tongue which have never attained to any true excelAnd even Mahaffy^ speaks of the Greek lence in literature." learned by the Jews as "the new and artificial idiom of the trading classes" which had neither "traditions nor literature nor precious associations which give depth and poetry to words." That is a curious mistake, for it was the Atticistic re-

those

vival that 1

was

Thumb, Die

p. 93.

1899.

The

artificial.

sprachgesch.

Stell.

kolpt]

had

all

the memories of a

des bibl. Grioch., Tliool. Runds., 1002,

N. T., Cf. also Arnaud, Essai sur le caractcre dc la languo ^rccquc du disViteau (Et. sur le Grec du N. T., 2 vols., 1893, 1896) insists on the

tinction

between the

lit.

and the vernac. elements

2

Gr. of the N. T. Gk., p.

4

Gk. Life and Thought, 1896,

in the ''

1.

p. 530.

N. T. Hell. Stud., 1875.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

84

Instance Robert Burns in Scotland. It is to be life. ^ Mahaffy, however, that he changed his mind, for he later wrote " They write a dialect simple and rude in comparison with Attic Greek; they use forms which shock the purists who examine But did any men ever tell a great for Cambridge scholarships. story with more simplicity, with more directness, with more

people's said for :

power?

.

.

.

Believe

me

against

all

the pedants of the world, the

no poor language, but the outcome of a great and a fruitful education." The N. T. uses the language of the people, but with a dignity, restraint and pathos

dialect that tells such a story

is

beyond the trivial nonentities in much of the papyri remains. N. T. Greek is not so vernacular as parts of the LXX.^ The papyri often show the literary kolvt] and all grades of variation, while the lengthy and official inscriptions^ "often approxLong before many imate in style to the Hterary language."

far

All the

words are used in

literature they belong to the diction of polite

In a word, the N. T. Greek "occupies apparently an intermediate position between the vulgarisms of the populace and the studied style of the litterateurs of the period. It affords a

speech."

honour on strange been It would indeed have what man no shown if men like Paul, Luke and the author of Hebrews had Classical Prof. J. C. Robertson {The literary affinities at all. striking illustration of the divine policy

of putting

"^ calls 'common.'

Weekly, for

March

9,

1912, p. 139) in

an

article entitled

Teaching the Greek N. T. in Colleges" says:

"Reasons

"Take the

par-

In literary excellence this

able of the Prodigal Son, for instance. Nothing piece of narrative is unsurpassed.

more simple, more the famous among from direct, more forceful can be adduced tragedy of moving It is a passages of classical Greek literature. Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 114 f. Cf. Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Time of Jes. Ch., div. II, vol. I, pp. 11 ff., Hellen. in the Non-Jew. Regions, Hellen. in the Jew. Regions. He shows how Gk. and Lat. words were common 1

in the

Aram, and how thoroughly Gk. the Jews

of the Dispersion were.

On

this point see Schiirer, Diaspora, in ext. vol. of Hast. D. B. "Greek was the mother-tongue of the Jews" all over the gentile world. Susemihl holds that

in Alexandria the

Jews gave "quite a considerable Hebraic tinge" to the

Gesch. der griech. Lit., Bd. II, 1892, p. 602. An excellent discussion of the hterary elements in the Gk. N. T. is to be found in Heinrici's Der ht. Charakter der neutest. Schr. (1908). He shows also the differences between Palestinian and Alexandrian Judaism. Cf. also 2 Cf. Geldart, Mod. Gk. in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 180.

KOLPr,,

Kennedy, Som*. of N. T. Gk., p. 65; Frankel, Altert. von Perg., 1890, p. xvii. " Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 77. 3 Deissmann, B. S., p. 180. 5 Thayer, art. Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B., Ill, 36*'.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

KOI Nil

85

The is not accidental. unof In an age analyzed." be elements of that excellence can culture. touch with that some for usual culture one would look "I contend, therefore, that the peculiar modernness, the high inreconciliation.

Yet

its literary

excellence

tellectual standard of Christianity as

we

find

it

in the

N.

T., is

caused by its contact with Greek culture." ^ In his helpful article on N. T. Times Buhl^ underrates, as Schlirer^ does, the amount of Greek known in Palestine. It is to be remembered also that great diversity of culture existed among the writers of the N. T.

men used much the same vernacular all and a grade of speech that approached world over the in English to-day .^ One is not to stress as standard literary the Paul's language in 1 Cor. 2 1-4 into a denial that he could use the literary style. It is rather a rejection of the bombastic rhetBesides, the educated

Roman

:

oric that the Corinthians liked

common from Thucydides parison in

mind that Origen

literary inferiority.

and

(c.

rhetorical art that It is

Celsus, vii, 59

It is largely

mann^ has done a good letters

and the

to Chrysostom.^

f.)

was so

with this com-

speaks of Paul's

a matter of standpoint.

service in accenting the difference

Deiss-

between

Personal letters not for the public eye are, Cicero's Letters are epistles written

epistles.

of course, in the vernacular.

with an eye on posterity.

"

In letters one does not look for treauniformity and proportion of

tises, still less for treatises in rigid

parts."

There

^

may

be several kinds of

pastoral or congregational, etc.).

letters (private, family,

But when a

letter is published

consciously as literature, like Horace's Ars Poetica, for instance, Epistles may be either it becomes a literary letter or epistle.

genuine or unauthentic.

Tire unauthentic

may

be either merely

^ Ext. vol. of Hast. D. B. Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen., p. 139. Jew. Peo. in Time of Jes. Ch., div. II, vol. I, p. 47 f. He admits a wide diffusion of a little knowledge of and easy use of Gk. among the educated 1

3

classes in Palestine. « Cf. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, pp. 482 ff ., for discussion of literary elements in N. T. Gk. Deissmann makes "a protest against overestimating the literary evidence" (Theol. Runds., 1902, pp. 66 ff.; Exp. Times, 1906, p. 9) and points out how Norden has missed it in contrasting Paul and that ancient world, merely the contrast between non-Hterary prose and artistic lit. prose. 5 Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 15. « B. S., pp. 16 ff. However, one must not think that the N. T. Epistles al-

ways

fall

wholly in one or the other category.

"new category" (Let. to the >

in the

new

Ramsay

calls attention to the

conditions, viz., a general letter to a congregation

Seven Chur., p. 24). See also Walter Lock, The Epistles, pp. 114

lb., p. 11.

and Chr. Life, 1905.

ff.,

in

The

Bible

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

86

pseudonymous or

real forgeries.

If

NEW TESTAMENT

we examine the N. T. Letters we shall see that Phile-

or Epistles in the hght of this distinction,

mon is a personal but Ephesians

The

is

The same

letter.

more

like

an

Thessalonian, Corinthian,

writings are

all

is

true of the Pastoral Epistles;

epistle

from

Galatian,

its

general nature.

Colossian,

congregational and doctrinal letters.

Philippian

Romans

howtome V, p. 66), remarks that "The Pauline Epistles are often more discourse than It will thus be seen that I do not agree with Deissmann letter." (Bible Studies, p. 3 f.) in calling all the PauHne writings "letters"

partakes of the nature of a letter and an epistle. ever {Histoire des Livres

as opposed to "epistles."

wise protests against

du N.

T.,

Jacquier,

1906,

Milligan (Greek Papyri, p. xxxi) like-

the sweeping statement of Deissmann.

Deissmann gives a great variety of interesting letters from the papyri in his Light from the Ancient East, and argues here (pp. 224-234) with passion that even Romans is just "a long let"I have no hesitation in maintaining the thesis that all ter." Hebrews is the letters of Paul are real, non-literary letters." more like an epistle, as are James, 1 John, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, while 2 and 3 John are again letters. The Letters to the Seven Churches again are epistles. This is a useful distinction and shows that the N. T. writers knew how to use one of the favourite literary methods of the Alexandrian period. Dr. Lock concludes: "Letters have more of historic and literary interest, epistles more That Paul could of central teaching and practical guidance."^ use the more literary style is apparent from the address on Mars Hill, the speech before Agrippa,^ and Ephesians and Romans. Paul quotes Aratus, Menander and Epimenides and may have been acquainted with other Greek authors. He seems also to have understood Stoic philosophy. We cannot tell how extensive his literary training was. But he had a real Hellenic feeling and outlook. The introduction to Luke's Gospel and the Acts show real literary skill. The Epistle to the Hebrews has oratorical flow and power with traces of Alexandrian culture. Viteau^ reminds For the history and literature of ancient Deissmann, B. S.; Susemihl, Gesch. der griech. Lit.; Overbeck, tJber die Anf. der patrist. Lit. The oldest known Gk. letter was written on a lead tablet and belongs to the Iv/b.c. and comes from near Athens. It was discovered by Prof. Wiinsch of Giessen. See art. by Dr. Wilhelm of Athens in Jahresh. des osterreich. archilol. Inst. (1904, vii, pp. 94 ff.). ' Le Verbe: Synt. des Prop., p. xxx. 2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 5. *

Bible and Chr. Life, p. 117.

letters

and

epistles see

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

THE KOINE

IN

87

US that about 3000 of the 5420 words in the Greek N. T. are found in ancient Attic writers, while the syntax in general " obeys the ordinary laws of Greek grammar."^ These and other N. T. writers, as James, occasionally use classic forms like IV/xej', tcrre, laaaL, e^fjeaap, etc. Konig^ in his discussion of the Style of Scripture finds ample illustration in the N. T. of the various Uterary linguistic devices, though in varying degree. See "Figures of Speech" (ch. XXI). But the literary element in the N. T. is subordinate to the practical and

is

never

artificial

nor strained.

We

have the language of spirit and life. The difference between the old point of view and the new is well illustrated by Hort's remark {Notes on Orthography, p. 152 f.) when he speaks of "the popular Greek in which the N. T. is to a certain extent written." He conceives of

new and

it

as literary

the true view

with some popular elements.

KOLv-q

is

that the N. T.

is

The

written in the popular

with some literary elements, especially in Luke, Paul, Hebrews and James. Josephus is interesting as a background to the N. T. He wrote his War in Aramaic and secured the help of Greek writers to translate it, but the Antiquities was composed in Greek, probably with the aid of similar collaborateurs, for parts of Books XVIIXIX copy the style of Thucydides and are really Atticistic' It KOLvri

1 Maccabees as we have it and compare it with the corThe Greek of 1 Mace, is, like

interesting to take a portion of

is

translated from the

Hebrew

original

responding portion of Josephus. the IjXX, translation Greek and intensely Hebraistic, while Josephus smooths out all the Hebraistic wrinkles and shifts it into the rolling periods of Thucydides.

The N. T. has

slight affinities

in vocabulary, besides Josephus, with Philo, Plutarch, Polybius,

Strabo, Diodorus and a few other writers in the literary

kolvt}.^

Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 64) holds that Paul's "Greek never becomes literary." "It is never disciplined, say, by the canon of the Atticists, never tuned to the Asian rhythm: 1 W.-M., p. 37. Kennedy indeed (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 134) says that 80 per cent, of the N. T. words date from before 322 B.C. ^ Hast. D. B., ext. vol. 3 See Thackeray, art. Josephus in ext. vol. of Hast. D. B.; of. also Schmidt, De Flavii Jos. Eloc, 1893. Thumb (Die griech. Spr., p. 125) and Moulton

accent the fact that Josephus has only one Hebraism, wpoffHwith infinitive = ^ '^Qh. Cf. also Raab, De Fl. Jos. Eloc. Quest., 1890. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 50 ff. Hoolo, The Class. I'^lem. in the

(Prol., p. 233)

dtadai <

N.

T., 1888, gives

occur in the N. T.

an interesting

list

of

Gk. and Rom.

i)r()por

names that

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

88

remains non-literary." But has not Deissmann given a too special sense to "literary"? If 1 Cor. 13 and 15, Ro. 8 and Eph. 3 do not rise to literary flavour and nobility of thought and it

my

expression, I confess

ignorance of what literature

is.

Har-

nack (Da's hohe Lied des Apostels Paulus von der Liehe und seine religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung, 1911) speaks of the rhythm, the poetic form, the real oratory, the literary grace of 1 Cor. 13. The best literature is not artificial nor pedantic hke the work of the Atticists

We

and Asian

That

stylists.

man

Deissmann

of the people.

literary quality of

a caricature of

is

man

must not forget that Paul was a

(Light, p.

This epistle

Hebrews.

literature.

of culture as well as a

is

f.) does admit the more ornate as Origen

64

(Eus., Eccl. Hist., VI, xxv, 11).

saw

III.

The Semitic

Influence.

This

is still

the subject of keen

same way that the Purists and the Hebraists debated it. Now the point is whether the N. T. Greek is wholly in the kolvt] or whether there is an appreciable Semitic colouring in addition. There is something to be said on both controversy, though not in the

sides of the question. (a)

tion.

The Tradition.

See

i,

(a) for ,

proof of the error of this posiHebraic Greek for the

It is certain that the idea of a special

N. T. is gone. Schaff said that the Greek spoken by the Grecian Jews "assumed a strongly Hebraizing character," and the N. T. Greek shared in this "sacred and Hebraizing character." According to Hatch2 "the great majority of N. T. words ... ex^

press in their biblical use the conceptions of a

Semitic race."

"Hebraizing Greek," while Simcox^ speaks of "the half-Hebraized Greek of the N. T." Reuss^ calls it "the JewishHadley^ considered the "Hellenistic dialect, Greek idiom." Westcott^ spoke of largely intermixed with Semitic idioms."

Viteau^

calls it

"the Hebraic style more or less pervading the whole N. T." But Westcott^ admitted that "a philosophical view of the N. T. language as a whole is yet to be desired," as Hatch ^ lamented that the N. T. Greek "has not yet attracted the attention of any considerable scholar." That cannot now be said after the work of Blass, Deissmann, Moulton,

overstatement then.

And

Comp.

2

Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p. 34. Synt. des Prop., p. xxxvi.

«

6

yet the old view

others,

and was an Greek"

of "biblical

to the Gk. Test., 1885, pp. 22, 25.

1

3

Radermacher and

Lang, of the N. T., p. 20. Hist, of the N. T., 1SS5, p. 36.

« ^

Lang, of the N. T., Smith's B. D. Art. N. T., Smith's B. D.

«

lb.

»

Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p.

1.

'

THE PLACE OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT

IN

THE KOINH

89

both N. T. and LXX is still championed by Conybeare and Stock in their grammar of the Septuagint {Selections from the Sept., 1905, p. 22 f.). They insist, against Deissmann, on the "hnguistic unity" of the LXX and of the N. T. as opposed to the

for

vernacular

kolpt].

They admit,

of course, that the

LXX is far more

This sturdy contention for the old view Wellhausen {Einl. in die drei ersten least. Evangelien) is rather disposed to accent the "Semiticisms" (Aramaisms) in the Synoptic Gospels in contrast \vith the Attic Greek.

Hebraic than the N. T. is interesting, to say the

claims the N. T. Greek to be Attic in purity. " No one denies the existence of Seraiticisms; opinions are only divided with reference to the relative proportion of these Semiticisms"

Nobody now

(Deissmann, Light from is

dead beyond (6)

the

Ancient East,

The

p. 65).

old view

recall.

The View of Deissmann and Moulton. Over against

old conception stands out in sharp outline the view of

the

Deissmann^

Greek Bible appears only contemporary 'proagainst the background more^: "The few Once "only." word the Note fane' Greek." T. which were in the N. of parts in those expressions Hebraizing not essentially which does accidens an are but first Greek from the

who

"The

says:

linguistic unity of the

of classical, not of

alter the

fundamental character of

its

language."

The

portions

of the Synoptic Gospels which were either in Aramaic or made use of Aramaic originals he considers on a par with the LXX. They use translation Greek. No one "ever really spoke as he

may have

translated the Logia-collection, blessed

— and

cramped

— as

he was by the timid consciousness of being permitted to convey the sacred words of the Son of God to the Greeks." Thumb* accepts the view of Deissmann and admits "Hebraisms in a few cases" only and then principally the meaning of words. In 1879 Guillemard^ disclaimed any idea of being able to give "an exhaustive exhibition of all the Hebraisms," but he "put forMoulton admits practically no ward only a few specimens'' =^

'^

\

Hebraisms nor Aramaisms outside of "translation Greek." "Between these two extremes the N. T. writers lie; and of them all B.

3

lb., p. 76.

S.,

'

1901, p. 66.

1

"What would wc

give

if

we

book with a few leaves containing genuine Aramaic sayings those few leaves

we would,

I

Griech. Spr.

6

Hebraisms

of Jesus!

For

think, part willingly with the theological out-

put of a whole century" (Deissmann, Light, *

lb., p. 177.

could recover but one papjTus

p. 57).

etc., p. 121.

in the

Gk.

Test., Pref.

«

Prol., p. 10.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

90

we may

assert with

some confidence

that,

where translation

is

not involved, we shall find hardly any Greek expression used which would sound strangely to speakers of the kolvt] in Gentile lands." Once more^: "What we can assert with assurance is that the papyri have finally destroyed the figment of a N. T. Greek which in any material respect differed from that spoken by ordinary people in daily life." Moulton^ realizes "the danger of going too far" in

summing up thus the issue According to Moulton

over N. T. Hebraisms.

of the long strife (p. 18)

the matter

complicated only in Luke, who, though a gentile, used Aramaic sources in the opening chapters of the Gospel and Acts. This new is

and revolutionary view as to Semitisms is still challenged by Dalman^ who finds many more Aramaisms in the Synoptic Gospels than Moulton is willing to admit. Dcissmann indeed is not disposed in his later writings to be dogmatic on the subject. "The word has not yet been said about the proportion of Semiticisms" {Expositor, Jan., 1908, p. 67). He is undoubtedly right in the idea that many so-called Semiticisms are really "interna-

last

tional

vulgarisms."

Schtirer,

Deissmann

Theol.

Literaturzeiiung,

1908,

p.

vom Osten, 1908, p. 35) for running the parallel too close between the N. T. and the unliterary papyri. It is truer of the LXX than of the N. T. The old view cannot stand in the light of the pap3Ti and inscriptions. Both the Purists and the Hebraists were wrong. Many words and idioms heretofore claimed as Hebraisms are shown to be current in the vernacular kolvt]. As specimens^ one can mention huinou ("^.^c^ according to Winer-Liinemann, p. 201, and "biblical" according to Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, 555, criticizes

p. 90) is

(Licht

found in the papyri;

Trpecr/Surepos

in the official sense

occurs in the papyri of Egypt in combinations like irpea^vTepoi tepets; epcordco

»

=

'

to beg'

is

in the papyri;

els

in sense of irpooTos also;

Prol., p. 18.

lb., p. 18. He quotes approvingly Deissmann's remark that "Semitisms which are in common use belong mostly to the technical language of religion" and they do not alter the scientific description of the language. Moulton 2

(Interp., July, 1906, p. 380) says: "Suffice

it

to say that, except so far as the

N. T. writers are quoting baldly Hteral translations from the LXX, or making equally hteral translations from the Aramaic in which the Lord and His disciples usually spoke, we have no reason whatever to say that the N. T. was composed in a Greek distinguishable from that spoken all over the Roman Empire." 3 Wds. of Jes., 1902. * See Deissmann (B. S. and Light) and Moulton (Prol.).

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINE

91

Tpoaevxv can no longer be regarded as a word of Jewish formation it appears in that sense in a

for a Jewish place of prayer, since

Ptolemaic inscription in Lower Egypt in the III cent. B.C.;

ovofxa

occurs also in the sense of "person"; expressions like vlos dauarov are found in the papyri; jSXexeij' airo occurs in a papyrus letter; ets ovofxa is

in inscriptions, ostraca, papyri; 8vo 8vo is

matched

in

the papyri by rpla rpla (this idiom has been traced in Greek for

h

2500 years); the instrumental use of the use of

h

tcS

and the

infinitive so

as

common; Luke appears in

iu fiaxalpji is

common

in

ets a-rravrriaLv meets us in the papyri (Tebt. Pap. 43, II cent. b.c). Certainly a full list of the words and phrases that can no longer be called Hebraisms would be very Besides, the list grows continually under the reformidable. searches of Deissmann, Moulton, Mayser, Thumb, Kalker, Wit-

the papyri; and even

kowski, Milligan and other scholars. clearly against a

Hebraism.

The presumption

The balance

is

now

of evidence has

gone

over to the other side. But after all one has the conviction that new discovery has to some extent blurred the vision of

the joy of

Deissmann and Moulton to the remaining Hebraisms which do not indeed make Hebraic Greek or a peculiar dialect. But enough remain to be noticeable and appreciable. Some of these may vanish, like the rest, before the

new knowledge.

The LXX,

though "translation Greek," was translated into the vernacular of Alexandria, and one can but wonder if the LXX did not have some slight resultant influence

upon the Alexandrian

KOLvi) itself.

The

Jews were very numerous in Alexandria. "Moreover, it remains to be considered how far the quasi-Semitic colloquialisms of the papyri are themselves due to the influence of the large Greekspeaking Jewish population of the Delta" (Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 1906, p. cxx). Thackeray (Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., vol. I, p. 20) uses the small number of Coptic words in the Greek papyri against the notion of Hebrew influence on the kolvt] in Eg5T)t. However, Thackeray (p. 27) notes that the papyri so far discovered tell us little of the private life of the Jews of Egypt and of the Greek used by them specifically. The marshes of the Delta were not favourable for the preservation of the papyri. The KOLVT] received other foreign influences we know. The Jews of the Dispersion spoke the vernacular kolvti everywhere, but they read the LXX, " a written Semitic Greek which no one ever spoke, far less 1

used for literary purposes, either before or after." ^ Deissmann, B.

S.,

p. 67.

Rev., July, 1909, p. 453.

See also Angus, N. T.

The I.XX, though

Philol.,

translation

Greek

And

yet

Harv. Theol. (see above),

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

92

the Hellenistic Jews the

LXX

all

NEW TESTAMENT

over the world could not read continually

and not to some extent

feel

the influence of

its

peculiar

No

one to-day speaks the English of the King James Version, or ever did for that matter, for, though like Shakespeare, it is the pure Anglo-Saxon, yet, unlike Shakespeare, it reproduces to a remarkable extent the spirit and language of the Bible. As style.

Luther's

German Bible

largely

made

the

German

language, so the

King James Version has greatly affected modern English (both vernacular and literary). The situation is not the same, but there There are fewer is enough of truth to justify the comparison. details that preserve the Semitic character, but what does not disappear is the Hebrew cast of thought in a writer like John, for

No

papyrus

much

a parallel to John's Gospel as Westcott^ has true insight when he says of N. T. Greek: "It combines the simple directness of Hebrew thought with the precision of Greek expression. In this way instance.

the

Book

is

as

of Job, for instance.

the subtle delicacy of Greek expression in some sense interprets

Hebrew thought." What is true of John's Gospel is true also of James. The numerous quotations both from the LXX and the Hebrew in the N. T. put beyond controversy the constant use of the O. T. in Greek on the part of the N. T. writers. Besides, with the possible exception of Luke and the author of Hebrews,

they

knew and used Aramaic

all

as well as Greek.

The point

is

that the N. T. writers were open to Semitic influence. How great that was must be settled by the facts in the case, not by pre-

sumptions for or against. Dr. George Milligan {Greek Papyri, p. xxix f .) says " In the matter of language, we have now abundant proof that the so-called 'peculiarities' of biblical Greek are due simply to the fact that the writers of the N. T. for the most :

part

made

day.

This

use of the ordinary colloquial Greek, the is

not to say that

we

influence of 'translation Greek,'

KOLvi]

of their

are to disregard altogether the

and the consequent presence

of

undoubted Hebraisms, both in language and grammar. An overtendency to minimize these last is probably the most pertinent is

in the vern.

with the

KOLvi}.

KOLvij,

and thus the N. T. writers had a double point

of contact

Cf. Wackernagel, Theol. Lit., 1908, p. 38; Milligan, Epis. to

the Th., p. Iv. 1 Exp., 1887, p. 241. Thumb (Griech. Spr. etc., p. 132) denies any influence on the development of the Gk. But Thayer (Hast. D. B., Lang, of the N. T., Ill, 40^) is not surprised to find "idioms having a distinctly Hebraistic

flavour even in native Greek circles."

1884, vol.

I,

p. 33.

Cf. also Reuss, Hist, of the

N. T.,

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH

93

criticism that can be directed against Dr. J. H. Moulton's ProSo Dr. Swete legomena to his Grammar of N. T. Greek."

"deprecates the induction which, as it seems to him, is being somewhat hastily based upon them (the papyri), that the Greek of the N. T. has been but shghtly influenced by the famiharity of the writers with Hebrew and Aramaic" {Apocalypse of St. John, p. cxx).

Von Soden^ sums up the whole matter as follows: "It was unavoidable but that the primitive Christian writers often used compulsion with the Greek tongue and offended against its genius. They wished to bring to expression things which, up to that time, were foreign to the Greek spirit and only found expression in Semitic languages.

And

besides,

it

is

only natural

that the phraseology of the Greek translation of the O. T., to which they were habituated from their youth, should unconsciously flow from their pens, and still more, that when their sub-

them

ject-matter brought

when they

into close contact with the O. T. or

translated from the Aramaic dialect of Palestine, their

Greek should receive a foreign tinge." This by no means makes a special N. T. dialect nor even Jewish-Greek, but it admits a " transreal, though slight, Semitic influence even where it is not with all This position is more nearly in accord lation Greek." Deissmann find the facts as we now know them. It is pleasing to {Expositor, Oct., 1907, "Philology of the Greek Bible," p. 292) extreme position. He accents here strongly the influence of the LXX on the N. T. "It is one of the most painful deficiencies of biblical study at the present day that the reading of the LXX has been pushed into the background, while its exegesis has been scarcely even begun." {lb., p. 293): "A single hour lovingly devoted to the text of the Seprather reacting a bit from the

first

exegetical knowledge of the Pauline whole day spent over a commentary." {lb., Epistles more than a " This restoration of the Greek Bible to its own epoch is p. 294)

tuagint will further our

:

really the distinctive feature of the

We

work

of

modern

scholarship."

remark {ExposiThat the Greek Bible Semiticisms of the that 435) tor, Nov., 1907, p. philology, of Greek scope the outside of T. the N. place not do but are merely its birth-marks. In the Dec. (1907) Expositor (p. 520) Deissmann comments feelingly on the fact that the LXX "has served the Christian Church of Anatolia in unbroken conhits the point.

tinuity

down

cordially agree with his

to the present day." 1

Early Chr.

Lit., 1906, p. 11 f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

94

Little Direct Hebrew Influence. The Hebrew was not any longer. Less than half of the O. T. quotations^ in the N. T. are from the Hebrew text. It was still read in most of the synagogues of Palestine and it is possible that a modernized Hebrew was in use to some extent for literary purPerhaps the Hebrew text was consulted by the N. T. poses.2 writers who used it much as a modern minister refers to his Greek Testament. The reading of the Hebrew 0. T. would give one dignity of style and simplicity of expression. The co-ordination of clauses so common in the Hebrew is not confined to the Hebrew, but is certainly in marked contrast with the highly developed sys(c)

a living language

tem

But

of subordinate sentences of the Greek.

construction

partly Hebraic

is

and partly

this paratactic

The

colloquial.

total

absence of extended indirect discourse is a case in point also. Compare the historical books of the N. T. with Xenophon and

Thucydides.

Likewise the frequent use of

may

use of particles

nouns

like

Tjv

by the

an occa-

8) finds

less its

is

participle, as ^Xkirovres ^Xkipere

instrumental, as

:

but none the

in the papyri,

due to the Hebrew. The same remark to express in Greek the Hebrew infinitive ab-

frequency in the N. T. applies to the effort

and the sparing

/cat

pleonastic use of pro-

(Rev. 3

ovdels Svvarai KXeiaai avTrjv

sional parallel (Moulton)

solute

The

be mentioned.

x^tpet (Jo. 3

xo-pq.

:

(Mt. 13

Both

29).

:

14), or

The

tions are found in the Greek, but with far less frequency.

use of

TpoaridrjiJLL

TefxxJ/ai

(Lu. 20

Et=ti5i!

does not

is

:

with an 12)

is

mean

infinitive for repetition, as Tpoaedero rplrov

in evident imitation of the ov as in

ei SoOrjaerai.

a-qixdov

aposiopesis, the apodosis not being expressed.

the papyri.

oivev

i3"!*ii, though Moulton and x^P^s so used with ttSs.

The

(p.

Hebrew

(Mk. 8

:

cjo;;'.

12),

This use

but

is

in

due to the LXX trans246) has found in the papyri

Ou-xas in the sense of ovhds

lation of

the

of these construc-

is

thing is a Hebraism after Greek already has X670S in this sense. IIpoYlpoawTroKruxivTko) aoi-Kov \ap.^a.veiv ^^^^ Si'iJp is a clear Hebraism. So also is apkaKeiv kvwiriov tlvos rather than first appears in the N. T. Cf. the circumlocutions irpo Trpoaunrov tt]s ap€(TKHv TLvl CI Hcbraism. The elabbov avrov (Acts 13 24) rather than the simple 7rp6 avrov. frequent use of the article in address, though occasional in Greek, the

use of

py)p.a,

LXX. The

in the sense of "i^l

'

'

classic

:

1

Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., 1900, pp. 381-405.

Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Times of Ch., div. II, vol. I, p. 10. "Hebrew also continued to be the language of the learned, in which even the legal discussions of the scribes were carried on." 2

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH is like rjv

or

the

ecrrt

Hebrew and Aramaic

and

the participle suits

The common

vocative.

95

use of

both the Hebrew and the analy-

tendency of the kolvt]. Cf. the more frequent use of the instrumental h. So the frequent construction ehat els is due to h in Hebrew, though in itself not out of harmony with the Greek tic

It occurs in the papyri.

genius.

are both Hebraisms.

sense of TLdkvai

is

due to

inp

The use

tiii^'.

of hbovai.

in

the

having both senses (Thackeray, Gr.

of the 0. T. in Gk., p. 39); cf. Deut. 28 rinkpat takes the flavour of the Hebrew

salutation like

and rpd

'Atto irpocruirov='''2'B'^

7rpoo-cb7rou=''35^

:

1,

Scoo-et

and The superfluous pronoun Q"^??-;

So

ae vwepavoj. is

eiprjpr]

calls

used in

for notice

due to 2i. So also vlos occurs in some Hebraistic senses like 1?, but the papyri have some examples of vlSs for 'quahty,' 'characteristic' Thackeray (p. 42) notes the Hebrew fondness for "physiognomical

The frequency

also.

of kv rw with the infinitive is

expressions" like 600aX/x6s, irpoacoTov, creased use of

avrjp

and avdpwTos

like

aro/jLa, x^'i-P, ttous, etc.

Tii''i<

rather than

The

in-

eKaaros

tIs, ttSs,

must be observed. The very extensive use of prepositions is accented by the Hebrew. Kal kyevero translates ^ri'^l. The use of a question to express wish is Uke the Hebrew idiom (cf. 2 Kgs. 18:33). But these constructions are doubtless due to the LXX rather than to Hebrew itself. It is not possible to give in clear outline the influence of the Hebrew Bible on the N. T. apart from the LXX and the Aramaic, though there was httle of just that kind. Kennedy^ gives thirteen words common to the LXX and the N. T. (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 31 ff., gives a hst of "Hebraisms in Vocabulary") and counts "twenty Hebrew and Aramaic words which do not occur in the LXX, e.g. ^t^dviov, na/xoipas, paKa, The words in the N. T. known to be Hebrew and not cbo-ai'ra." Aramaic are as follows: d/3a56wj'=ii"^35*; dXXrjXoi;id=n^"ib):n; afxrjv

= '\?2N; = ^inT

dp)ua7€5cbj'=li^a>? "^n; dppa/3cbj'=

b?5;

(3oai/77P7es

(cf.

49); |8u(7o-os=Y'^2

= ^'^'l also

Ills'!?;

j8dTOS=ria; /SeeXfejSoujS

Dalman, Words of ^maLvos); l^paiaTl from ^3?; "^5?

(cf.

Jesus, p. ^Xet ="'';»

(MSS. Mt. 27:46); Kd)Lt?7Xos = ^p3; lovbat^co, iovdaia/jLos, iovdaUos, Ki'/xtwf=li?23; Xt/^aras = reia^ fxawa 101)5010$ = nnin"!; Kop^ap = = = 'no*^ (LXX, but same for Aramaic s^v^s); iJ.wpe=T^y2; -7raaxa o-arams = l^i? crdTrpai3^i{€l)='^^^; (xa^a6)d=t^-\ii:^'2; ad/SiSaro;/ = nsp = = riblip; n'Ol5ffi; crcoTTOS = niTx; ^'''SO au;:d/xtt'os from StXcod/x 4>€tpos '\:^')'p/,

;

^'>?;

;

;

i;cr

]

xepoi;j3tM=^^^^'^?; p. 222). 1

Some

wo-aj'vd

of these

=

ycin (Dalman, Words of Jesus, !*3 were already in classical Greek (fimaos,

Sour, of the N. T. Gk., p. 110

foreign words in the N. T.

f.

Cf. Gregory, Pro!., etc., p. 102

f.,

for

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

96

Of doubtful Origin are vapdos, vlrpov (Jer. 2 22), a fairly complete list of the Hebrew words in the N. T. The Aramaic words will be given later. There are to be added, however, the very numerous Hebrew proper names, only a few samples of which can be given, as Mapid/x= U'^^??;

"Kl^auos, (j-aTTe^etpos)

This

avKaiJLLvos.

:

.

is

M€Xxto-€5k = p'ir-'i3^>a; 2aouX=

mann

b^s^i^i;

2a/iou7;X

= ^5i!^?ar2;

kt\.

Deiss-

in saying ("Papyri," Encyc. Bihl.) that lexical

correct

is

Hebraisms "must be subjected to careful revision," but these remain.

Certain

it is

that the bulk of the examples of Hebraisms given

by Guillemard vanish

He

methods."

It

and

in the light of the papyri

feared indeed that his book

was "a return

inscriptions.

to old exploded

indeed "exploded" now, for the N. T.

is

is

not

"unlike any other Greek, with one single exception, and abso-

There are three ways of giv-

lutely unique in its peculiarities."^

ing these Semitic words: mere transliteration and indeclinable, transliteration (d)

and declinable, Greek endings to Aramaic words. Impress by the LXX. It is true that the

A Deeper

N. T. at many points has

affinities

with the

LXX,

the "single

LXX

is not ''the basis of the exception" of Guillemard, but the Christian Greek." ^ In his second volume Viteau began to see

that he had been too extreme in his notion that the N. T. was Hebraized Greek: "The language of the N. T. is not derived from that of the

LXX;

it is its sister.

It is the

same

familiar

Greek

language which one finds employed in the one or the other. But has exercised a considerable influence upon the Greek of the that of the N. T."^ But even in this volume Viteau overestimates

LXX

the influence of the

LXX

on the N. T.

Westcott''

idea that the N. T. language, "both as to

its

had the old

lexicography and

grammar, is based on the language of the LXX." It is undoubtedly true^ that a very large proportion of the N. T.

as to

its

2 Schaff, Comp. to the Gk. Test., p. 23. N. T., 1879, p. ix f. Compl. et Attr., 1896, p. ii. * Art. N. T., Smith's B. D. Helbing in his Gr. der LXX (1907) promises to investigate the Hebraisms in the second volume (p. iv). But he ah-eady sees that irpoaTLdkvai occurs in the papyri as well as constructions Uke k^Siv €$ avTuv. In general (p. vii) the LXX shows the same tendency as the rest of the Koivri towards uniformity (the disappearance of the opt., the superl., the 2d aorist, the middle, etc.). Cf. also Sel. from the LXX by C. S. (1905) with a brief Gr. of the LXX; Deissmann, Die Anf. der Sept.-Gr., Intern. 1

Hebr.

'

Sujet,

in the

.

Wochenschr., Sept. 26, 1908. « Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., vergl. Gr. der semit. Spr. (1907).

p.

142

f.

.

.

Cf. Brockehnann, Grundr. der

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU

LXX,

words are found in the

97

but there are very few words that

LXX

and nowhere else.^ Both are found in the N. T. and the and the N. T. use the current vocabulary. There are the

LXX

indeed numerous theological terms that have a new meaning in the LXX, and so in the N. T., Hke ayLa^etv, ac^eais, ykevva, eKKk-qala, Kvptos,

\6yos, \vTp6w,

longer

list

many N.

also 6eov, i]

auTrjpla, xpiaTos, ktK.

fjLOVoyeurjs, Truevfia,

in Swetc, Introduction to 0. T. in Greek, p. 454.)

T.

evwdlas,

oajjiri

phrases are found Tpos

Tvpoao^irov

The

kt\. {ib.).

haffTTopa,

LXX,

the

in

Trpbauiirov,

like

(See

So dKwv

irpoauirou,

'Ka/j.^aveLV

0. T. apocryphal books also are of

on this point. We have a splendid treatment of the Greek by Thackeray. He shows "the kolvt] basis of LXX Greek," as to vocabulary, orthography, accidence and syntax He notes a<x, reaaepaKovTa, finds v movable before (pp. 16-25).

interest

LXX

consonants,

vaos,

vmrav,

irXrjp-qs

indechnable,

disappearance

do-e/Srjj',

of /xt-verbs, rikdoaav, rjXOa, ave^aivav, ecopaKav, 6s eau, oWeLs, tivus pendens, even in apposition with genitive

ad sensum,

constructio

\eycov

ax-qyyeXr] Xeyovres, recitative

and ort,

(cf.

nomina-

Apocalypse),

Xeyopres with construction like

neuter plurals with plural verb,

partial disappearance of the superlative

and usually

in elative sense,

TpuiTos instead of wporepos, eavrovs, -wv, -oTs for all three persons,

disappearance of the optative, great increase of tov and the infinitive, co-ordination of sentences with /cat, genitive absolute

when noun

in another case

crease of adverbial phrases

between

kv

and

els

is

and

(increase

present,

blending of cases, in-

prepositions, elpX of

els),

etc.

els,

See

interchange

also Psichari

(Revue des etudes juives, 1908, pp. 173-208) for a discussion of the Semitic influence on the N. T, Greek. The use of el/j-l els the

occurs occasionally in the papyri, writers,

but

it is

extremely

and

inscriptions

kolvt]

LXX because of the the LXX is far more Hebra-

common

in the

Li the realm of syntax ^. than the N. T., for it is a translation by Jews who at many points slavishly follow the Hebrew either from ignorance of the Hebrew or the Greek, perhaps sometimes a little of both. B in Judges, Ruth, 2-4 Kings, has eyu elpa with indicative, as eydo elfXL Kadiaonat (Judges 6 18) .^ BA in Tobit 5 15 have 'iaoixai

Hebrew istic

:

:

5t56mt.

B

in Eccl. 2

:

17 has enlarjaa avv

ttju

^oorju

=

ts'^'^tiri-n^t.

J The 150 words out of over (?) 4800 (not counting proper names) in the N. T. which Kennedy (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 8S) gives as "strictly peculiar to the LXX and N. T." cut a much smaller figure now. New pap. may remove many from the list that are still left.

2

Cf. Swetc, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

98

Swete^ finds this misunderstanding of

and

clesiastes

Aquila.2

No

six

times in 3 Kings.

NEW TESTAMENT nis!

It

common

in

A

in

Ec-

the characteristic of

is

such barbarisms as these occur in the N. T,, though

the "wearisome iteration of the obhque cases of personal pro-

nouns answering to the Hebrew suffixes" finds illustration to some extent in the N. T. books, and the pleonastic use of the pronoun after the Greek relative is due to the fact that the Hebrew The N. T. does not have such a conrelative is indeclinable.^ struction as rip^aTo Tov oLKohoixelv (2 Chron. 3 1), though tov kaekdeiv with kyevero (Ac. 10 25) is as awkward an imitation of the Hebrew infinitive construct. The LXX translators had great difficulty in rendering the Hebrew tenses into Greek and were often whimsical about it. It was indeed a difficult matter to put the two simple Hebrew timeless tenses into the complicated and highly developed Greek system, and ''Vav conversive" added to the complexity of the problem. Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX, p. 23, doubt if the LXX Greek always had a meaning to the translators, as in Num. 9:10; Deut. 33:10. The LXX Greek is indeed "abnormal Greek," ^ but it can be un:

:

derstood.

Schiirer^

wrong when he

is

calls it

"quite a

new

lan-

guage, swarming with such strong Hebraisms that a Greek could

not understand

it."

It

who spoke

is

indeed in places ''barbarous Greek," but

kolvy] could and did make it Jews knew no Hebrew nor Aramaic but only the kolvt]. The Greek proselyte, like the Ethiopian eunuch, could read it, if he did need a spiritual interpreter. Schlirer,® who credits the Palestinian Jews with very little knowledge of the current Greek, considers "the ancient anon\Tnous Greek

the people

Many

out.

the vernacular

of the Hellenistic

translation of the Scriptures" to be "the foundation of dseo-Hellenistic culture."

He

is

all

Ju-

indeed right in contrasting the

hardness of Palestinian Pharisaism with the pliable Hellenistic

Judaism on the

soil of Hellenism.''

But the Jews

felt

the Greek

they could not handle easily oratio indireda) not only in the Diaspora, but to a large extent in the cities of Palestine, especially along the coast, in Galilee and in the Decapolis.

spirit

1

(even

if

Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

Use should be made of the transl. of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus, though they are of much less importance. Cf. Swete, p. 457 f 3 Swete, ib., p. 307. * Moulton, Prol., p. 13. 2

6

Hist, of Jew. Peo. in

6

lb., vol. I, p.

7

lb., p. 157.

47

f.,

Time

and

of Ch., div. II, vol. Ill, p. 163.

div. II, vol. Ill, p. 159.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH

On the spread of Greek

in Palestine see Milligan, iV. T.

pp. 39 ff. The lem, against a Jew teaching his son Greek, shows that

99

Documents,

prohibition/ about the time of the siege of Jerusait

had previ-

ously been done. The quotations in the N. T. from the O. T. show the use of the LXX more frequently than the Hebrew, sometimes the text quoted in the Synoptics is more like that of A than B, sometimes more like Theodotion than the LXX.^ In the Synoptic Gospels the quotations, with the exception of five in Matthew which are more like the Hebrew, closely follow the LXX. In John the LXX is either quoted or a free rendering of the Hebrew The Acts quotes from the LXX exclusively. The is made. Catholic Epistles use the LXX. The Epistle to the Hebrews "is in great part

Epistles

a catena of quotations from the LXX."^ In Paul's half of the direct quotations follow the LXX.

more than

Here also the text of A is followed more often than the text of B. Swete^ even thinks that the Hterary form of the N. T. would have been very different but for the LXX. The Apocalypse indeed does not formally quote the O. T., but it is a mass of alluIt is not certain^ that the LXX was sions to the LXX text. used in the synagogues of Galilee and Judea, but it is clear that Peter, James, Matthew and Mark, Jewish writers, quote it, and that they represent Jesus as using it. In the Hellenistic synagogues of Jerusalem it would certainly be read. It would greatly facihtate a just conclusion on the general relation of the N. T. Greek to the LXX Greek if we had a complete grammar and a dictionary of the LXX, though we are grateful for the luminous chapter of Swete on the Greek of the Septuagint in his IntroducKennedy for his Sources of N. T.

tion to the 0. T. in Greek; to

Greek; to

Hatch

for his Essays in Biblical Greek; to

his Bible Studies

and

Deissmann

for

his Philologij of the Greek Bible (1908); to

Helbing for his very useful Grammatik, and especially to Thack»

Megilla,

Cf.

I, 8.

Hamburger, Realencyc,

art.

Griechentum; R. Meister,

Prol. zu einer Gr. der Sept., (Wiener Stud., xxix, 27). ^ Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 395. Cf. Deissmann in

Exp. Times, Deissmann, Die Sept. Pap., 1905) "assimilates such passages as are cited in the N.T., or are capable of a Christian meaning, as far as possible, to their form in the N. T. Ileinrici shows the same thing text, or to the sphere of Christian thought." to be true of Die Leip. Pap. frag, der Psalmcn, 1903. 3 Swete, Intr., etc., p. 402. All these facts about LXX quotations come Mar., 1906,

p. 254,

who

points out that Pap. Heid.

(cf.

from Swete. *

lb., p. 404.

s

lb., pp.

29

See ff.

ib., p.

404

f.,

for bibliography

on N. T. quotations.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

100

NEW TESTAMENT

eray for vol. I of his Grammar. It is now possible to make inin the study telligent and, to a degree, adequate use of the The completion of Helbing's Syntax and of of N. T. Greek.

LXX

Thackeray's Syntax will further enrich N. T. students. The Oxford Concordance of Hatch and Redpath and the larger Cambridge Swete^ laments that the N. T. Se-ptuagint are of great value.

grammars have only "incidental

The

references to the linguistic char-

Alexandrian version."

acteristics of the

translation

and not by men of who knew "the patois of and markets." ^ One doubts, however,

was not done

all

at once,

Jerusalem, but by Jews of Alexandria

the Alexandrian streets

KOLvi] and from most scholars and insists that "the translators write Greek largely as they doubtless spoke it." They could not shake off the Hebrew spell in translation. In free Greek like most of the N. T. the Semitic influence Mahaffy was quick to see the likeness between the is far less. papyri and the LXX.'* But one must not assume that a N. T. if

these translators spoke this mixture of Egyptian

On

Hebrew.

word

this point

necessarily has the

or the

KOLvi].

sidered later.

Swete^

differs

same sense that

it

has either in the

LXX

The N. T. has ideas of its own, a point to be conis "indispenWe agree with Swete^ that the

LXX

sable to the study of the N. T."

remarks that the

Nestle'' justly

Greek of the LXX from philologists than some twenty years ago. Conybeare and Stock {Set. from the LXX, p. 22) observe that, while the vocabuenjoys

LXX

lary of the

syntax

The

is

is

now a much more

that of the market-place of Alexandria, the

much more under

LXX

favourable judgment

the influence of the

Hebrew

original.

does, of course, contain a few books like 4 Maccabees,

written in Greek originally and in the Greek

spirit, like Philo's

Philo represents the Atticistic revival in Alexandria that

works.

But the "genitivus hebraicus," like papyri and the inscriptions, though not so often as in the LXX. Cf. Radermacher, N. T. Greek, p. 19. So also (p. 21) roh e^ kpideias (Ro. 2:8) is like k Thumb ^ irXrjpovs in the papyri and already in the tragic poets. properly takes the side of Deissmann against Viteau's exaggerated

was a

real factor

with a few.

6 KPIT17S T^s dSiKtas, is paralleled in the

1

Intr., p. 289.

^

ib., p. 299.

2

lb., p. 9.

*

Exp. Times,

iii,

p. 291.

open his on O. T. by asking: "Gentlemen, have you a LXX? If not, seU whatever you have and buy a LXX." Nestle, LXX, in Hast. D. B., p. 438. ^ Griech. Spr. etc., 6 LXX, Hast. D. B., p. 451. pp. 128-132. ^

Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 4.50

lectures

f.

Hitzig, of Heidelberg, used to

.

IN THE KOINH 101 THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT idea of

influence (following Hatch). what is due to the use of the

LXX

It

is

not always easy

LXX

and what to the to decide have an open must One development of the ko.^ vernacular. clearly right is Deissmann^ mind to light from cither direction. o the Hebrais-s the of scientific investigation in calling for a

i and N. T. use of aperrj (Is. 42 8 12, Caria. 9- 2 Pet 1:3) is paralleled by an inscription m Pet 2as ever Christians the or Jews the We" are not then to think of Greek used m thetransor Uterature the peculiar

LXX. Even

the

LXX

:

using in speech which in lation of the Hebrew O. T., respect in different parts.

The

m

varied much same intense Hebraistic itself

this

cast

m

books which were originally appears in the O. T. apocryphal Ecclesias icus, 1 MaccaTobit, as Hebrew and then translated, the Greek of the Wisdom of Solobees etc. Contrast with these to the Greek translation of mon, 2 Maccabees and the Prologue The Wisis at once manifest. 3 Ecclesiasticus, and the difference wrote who for the author, is of special interest,

of Solomon Greek culture, art, science Greek and revealed knowledge of with the LXX -d imjtated and philosophy, was yet familiar himself. Cf Siegfried, Book some of its Hebraisms, being a Jew that B. It must never be forgotten of Wisdom," Hastings' D.

dom in

"by great

the of Alexandrian Pro^^ to far the greatest contribution 1. O. the of translation very literature of the world is this

LXX

"and so the very Christ (Xp.ar6s) is found in the language emthe of arose out terms Christian and Christianity Bible known only The interpreters."^ ployed by the Alexandrian century was Christian world in the first to most of the Jews in the ihe Bible Greek the The first complete Bible was the used freely was and was the "first Apostle to the Gentiles" (^eL Christians. Conybeare and Stock for many centuries by the itsel T N. the that say as to from the LXX, p. 24) go so far Certainly it would not not have been but for the LXX.

The name

LXX LXX would

638.

•. n^ ^ Hell -Gricch., Hauck's Realencyc, p. G-tzschius, Spec. Exer^^^^^^^^^^^ DelLann, B. S., pp. 95 f ., 360 ff. Cf 38o points cognos. Grace. Scrm. etc., 1894, p. 1778 p 23. H. Anz, Subs, ad the common speech. Cf through also the in are out that poetic words 1

.

.

LXX

vu. Gr Unters. tiber die bibl. Griic,. 1863, p. T.insius Lipsius, ur.

ume

,

jl

.

, ,, attention to the fact that

,

w

Deissmann, a. b., p. /di. xit. n^ii^'J' t o,i,l bn.tU, hri^tle eontemporary with the LXX and many of the Ptolemaic pap. are Li^jptof ko.., vernac. whole is in the with proof that the LXX on the itself in the act of translating. The Hebraisms came from the Hebrew 80. « Mah;iffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p. 3

_

6

Churton,

Infl. of

the

LXX

Vers., 1861, p.

1.

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

102

have been what

it is.

"The

Bible whose

Bible of one people, the Bible whose

God

God is

is

Kupios

Yahweh is

is

the

the Bible of

the world" (Deissmann, Die Hellen. des Semit. Mon., p. 174). Thackeray {Grammar of the 0. T. in Greek, pp. 25-55) gives a careful survey of the "Semitic Element in the Greek." He

LXX

admits that the papyri have greatly reduced the number of the Hebraisms heretofore noted in the LXX. He denies, however

LXX

gives "a true picture of the that the Greek of the language of ordinary intercourse between Jewish residents in (p. 27),

the country." He denies also any influence of the Hebrew on the vernacular Greek of the Jew^s in Alexandria outside of the vocabulary of special Jewish words like aKpo^varia.

the

Book

s^'ii'^3

irdpoLKos

thinks

(p.

28)

Greek

There are more transliterations like yetupas for Ara13) in the later books where the early books had

of the Jews.

maic

He

of Tobit the best representative of the vernacular

(Heb.

The fact of a translation argues for a Hebrew from the thought of the people. In the

or TpoarjXvros.

fading of the

early books the translation

is

better

done and "the Hebraic

character of these books consists in the accumulation of a of just tolerable

number

Greek phrases, which nearly correspond to what

normal and idiomatic in Hebrew" (p. 29). But in the later books the Hebraisms are more numerous and more marked, due to "a growing reverence for the letter of the Hebrew" (p. 30). We cannot follow in detail Thackeray's helpful sketch of the transliterations from the Hebrew, the Hellenized Semitic words, the use of words of like sound, Hebrew senses in Greek words is

like 8l8u!fj.L= X^'i-P,

Tidi]fj.L

after

^£].,

vids dSi/ctas, 600aX/i6s,

TpoaoiTov, arona,

the pleonastic pronoun, extensive use of prepositions,

/cat

accompaniment or instrument, etc. (e) Aramaisms. N. T. grammars have usualty blended the Aramaic with the Hebrew influence. Schmieden complains that the Aramaisms have received too little attention. But Dalman^ retorts that Schmiedel himself did not do the matter justice, and still less did Blass. Moulton^ recognizes the distinction as just and shows that Aramaisms are found chiefly in Mark and Matthew, but does not point out the exact character of the Aramaisms in question. We take it as proved that Jesus and the Apostles, like most of their Jewish contemporaries in Palestine who moved in pubhc life, spoke both Aramaic and Greek and read Hebrew kykvero, ev for

*

W.-Sch., Gr.,

§ 2, 1 c.

And Dalman (Words

of Jesus, p. 18

f.)

criticizes

Schmiedel for not distinguishing Aramaisms from Hebraisms. 2

Words

of Jesus, p. 18.

»

Prol., p. 8.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE Lu. 4

(cf.

:

17).

Even

103

KOINII

Schiirer^ admits that the educated classes

There is no doubt about the Arahis time knew the Hemaic. Jerome says that all the Jews of Hebrew was used in but that, disproves brew O. T. The LXX was clearly read by and Palestine of the schools and synagogues the impression that give not do Jesus many. The discourses of used the undoubtedly he though seclusion, he grew up in absolute occasions many on address public and Aramaic in conversation The Aramaic tongue is very old and its use as a if not as a rule.^ previous Aradiplomatic tongue (Is. 36 U) implies perhaps a a vernacular well as as hterary .3 a was There maic leadership Targum of the Ezra, Daniel, of portions Aramaic Aramaic. The

used Greek without

difficulty.

:

Dalman^ suggests that Onl^elos are in the literary Aramaic." Judean literary Arathe in originally Gospel his Matthew wrote reason is not maic rather than the Galilean vernacular, but the distinction Dalman's of validity the doubts Zahn<^ very apparent. Peter was recogbut Aramaic, Galilean a and Judean between a

pronunciation (Mt. 26 73). nized in Jerusalem by the Galilean This gutturals and '^. the with difficulty had Gahleans^ :

The

Christian AraAramaic is not to be confounded with the later translated. The Aramaic or Syriac into which the N. T. was Aramaic,^ not the East maic spoken in Palestine was the West feel the differAramaic (Babylonia). So keenly does Dahnan^ that "the avers that he ence between Hebraisms and Aramaisms freer considerably was Jewish Aramaic current among the people Synoptists the which from Hebrew influence than the Greek in that statement. But he write." Not many can go with him

on a real difference, though, as a matter of about it at the time. With Jofact, no great point was made pr. § 1; v. 6, § 3; TCLTpLos 'y\w(i(Ta was the Aramaic (B. J. sephus is

right in insisting

7j

1

Gk 2 3 4

6 7 8

Ch., div. II, vol. I., p. 48. On the Hist, of the Jew. Peo. in Time of fiir neutest. Wiss., 1908, 4. Heft. Zeitschr. Fiebig, see of the Mishna for full discussion. of Jesus, pp. 9, 11; Ch. I, § IV, (i) 4,

Dalman, Words Hast. D. B. D. S. Margoliouth, Lang, of the O. T., Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 80. Einl. in das N. T., I, 1897, p. 19. See Neubauer, Stud. Bibl., 1885, p. 51.

Meyer Jesu Muttcrspr.,

1896, p. 58

f

.

Some

of the Lat.

^

lb., p. 81.

monks

actually

T. was written in that tongue! thought that Jesus spoke Lat. and that the N. that Jesus knew Cd<. Chase, on the allow not will 63 f.) (ib., p. Meyer But spoke Gk. on the Day of Pentecost other hand, shows that Peter necessarily (Credibility of the Acts, 1902, p. 114). » Words of Jesus, p. 42.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

104

He

V. 9, § 2).

John

'E/Spato-Ti

:

:

:

11; 16

:

16)

Luke has

17

The people underGreek, but they gave the more heed when he dropped 21

'EjSpats dLoXeKTos (Ac.

stood Paul's

originally in the native tongue for

13, 17, 20; Rev. 9 (5 2; 19 in the sense of the Aramaic. So

Tois avco ^apl3apoLs.

uses

War

wrote his

NEW TESTAMENT

:

40; 22

:

26

2;

:

14).

4 Mace. (12 7; 16 15) likewise employs 'E/3pais of Jewish Christians are even called (Ac.

into Aramaic.

:

:

The two kinds

4>0!}vr].

6 1) 'EX\r]VLaTal and 'E/3patot, though 'EWrjVLaTai and Supto-rat would have been a more exact distinction.^ It is beyond controversy that the gospel message was told largely in Aramaic, which to some extent withstood the influx of Greek as the vernacular :

did in Lycaonia^ (Ac. 14 the Synoptic problem. gentile,

knew

:

It

11). is

One cannot

at this point discuss

not certain that Luke, probably a

Aramaic or Hebrew, though there

either

is

a real

Dalman^ Aramaic or Hebrew

Semitic influence on part of the Gospel and Acts, due, holds, to the

LXX

example and a possible

original for the opening chapters of the Gospel, already

put inprobably written in Rome, not Palestine. Hence the Aramaic original of Mark, Bousset argues, cannot be considered as proved.* He rightly insists, as against Wellhausen,* that the question is not between the classic Greek and Aramaic, but between the vernacular kolvt] and Aramaic. But whatever is

Mark was

to Greek.

or

is

not true as to the original language of

thew, the gospel story was

first

Mark and

of

told largely in Aramaic.

MatThe

translation of the Aramaic expressions in Mark proves this beyond all doubt, as ToKeida, kovix by to Kopaaiov, eyeipe (Mk. 5 41). Dalman^ indeed claims that every Semitism in the N. T. should first be looked upon as an Aramaism unless it is clear that the Aramaic cannot explain it. The Mishna (Neo-Hebraic) was not itself unaffected by the Greek, for the Mishna has numerous :

*

Dalman, Words

^

Words

Schwyzer, Weltspr. etc., p. 27. the Heb. document, but admits a "wealth of Hebraisms" in Lu. Vogel (ZurCharac. des Lu., p. 32 f.) argues for a "special source" for these opening chapters. Blass, Philol. of theGosp., p. 195, denies that 4 ^

of Jesus, p. 7.

of Jesus, p. 38.

^

Dabnan doubts

Luke knew Hebrew.

Theol. Runds., Jan., 1906, pp. 2-4, 35 Einl. in die drei Evang., §§ 2-4.

f.

6 Words of Jesus, p. 19; cf. also Schaf?, Comp. to the Gk. N. T., p. 28. In 1877 Dr. John A. Broadus said in lecture (Sum. of the Leading Peculiarities of N. T. Gk. Gr., Immer's Hermen., p. 378) that the N. T. Gk. had a "Hebrew and Aramaic tinge which arises partly from reading Hebrew and chiefly (so his own correction) from speaking Aramaic." If instead of Hebrew he had

said

LXX,

or

had added

LXX

to

Hebrew, he would not have missed

it far.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 105 Greek words and phrases that were current in the Aramaic.^ The Aramaisms of vocabulary that one can certainly admit in the N. T. are the following words: d(3i3a=sas; 'AKeX5a/idx='<'?1 ip-"; all words beginning with /3ap="i5 hke Bapra/Sas; BeeXi'e/3oL'X = i''?2, B7?^e(76d=»iDD

i^nT;

yeepua =

Brjd^ada,

rr^?;

B77fa0d=!!
=

rr^?;

Ta^^aBa =

Kri53; FoXTO^d KIJ^3^3; aa^ax^^^ davd (or probably Heb. "^^Js^^Xet, and the rest Aramaic, DalS*?.;

eXcot,

eXwt,

Xa/zd

f = ^^^P?".?' s^^i^ ^^)^ ^'^i^; t4>oJda.= = »J?'^^p; /xaAtcoms=!*;'i?2!S:'9; fxapava, 0d = sn S^J'^^^; /cop/3aj/as = S^nittiTp 0apt(raTot=i*'\'45 '")?; pa^l3o{ov)vL{el) = Trdo-xa^'*'??^; Meo-crtas o-drof =«^S9; ''pia'l; j5aKd=Spil; o-d|3/3aTa = 5^ri:3'0; aaraj'as = 5<3pO

man, Wcrrds

of Jesus, p. 53

.)

nnsri^;

;

;

(7kepa=!s'i^t:";

K7j0ds =

ToKada,

5*p'^5; Ta;Set0d=Kri-^nt?,

Aramaisms

'^fi'^^P;

Kouii=^'!2'^p

names

persons like

etc.

of syntax are seen in the following.

yeveadaL davarov

of

The

expression

seems to be in imitation of the Aramaic.

Well-

hausen {Einl. in die drei Evang., pp. 31 ff.) suggests that els Kad' els (Mk. 14 19) is a hybrid between the Aramaic els els (but this is an old Greek idiom) and the vernacular (kolvt)) Kad' eh. He suggests also that Aramaic meanings are found in such words as aco^eLu, :

Kapirov, avfj-^ovXiov Trotelv (5t56i'at), elpi]vq, eiprjvrjv SidopaL, 686s

TvoieXv

As already explained, apart from the question Aramaic Mark and an original Aramaic Matthew and Aramaic sources for the early chapters of Luke and

6eov, TrXTjpoofxa, etc.

of a possible original

the

first

twelve chapters of Acts,^

many

of the discourses of Christ

were undoubtedly in Aramaic. There was translation then from this Aramaic spoken (or written) gospel story into the vernacular KOLvr] as we now have it in large portions of the Synoptic Gospels

and possibly part Aramaic original

of Acts.

The

conjectural efforts to restore this

words of Jesus are suggestive, but not always convincing. On the whole subject of Semitic words in The the. Ptolemaic papyri see Mayser, Grammatik, pp. 40-42. list is

of the

includes ap{p)a^6)P, ^vaaos,

not a very long

some

little

list

influence

Kvp-ivov, Vi^avos, cvKap-LVOs, x^t-wv.

It

indeed, but shows that the Orient did have

on the Greek vocabulary.

These words oc-

cur in older Greek writers.

*

Schiirer, Hist, of the Jew. Peo., etc., div. II, vol. I, pp. 29-50.

Cf.

mod.

Yiddish. 2 Cf. Bickel, Zcitschr. fiir Cath. Thool., viii, 43. This would then mean, W. 11. give it fiapav iiOa. "Lord, come." Cf. Rev. 22 20. ' Sec Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., ch. XI; Dahiian, Words of Jesus, pp. 1778; Wellhausen, Einl. m die drei Evang. (Die aram. Grundl. der Evang., pp. :

14-43).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

106 (/)

in

Varying Results.

It

natural that different writers

is

amount of Semitic influThey all used the vernacular

the N. T. should diverge in the

ence manifest in their writings. KOLvr]

which in

influence.

But

itself

may have had

a very faint trace of Semitic

of the nine authors of the

ably Palestinian Jews.^

Now

N. T.

six

were prob-

these six writers (Mark,

thew, James, Peter, Jude, John)

are just the very ones

Matwho

mould of thought. It is often merely the Hebrew and Aramaic spirit and background. In Mark the Aramaic influence appears; in Matthew ^ the LXX is quoted along with the Hebrew, and Aramaisms occur also; in James reveal the Semitic

there

is

the stately dignity of an O. T. prophet with Aramaic

his address and letter in Ac. 15) but with many neat turns of Greek phrase and idiom; Peter's two letters pre-

touches

(cf.

sent quite a problem and suggest at least an amanuensis in one case or a different one for each letter (cf. Biggs, Int. and Crit. Comm.); Jude is very brief, but is not distinctly Hebraic or Grecian; John in his Gospel is free from minor Semitisms beyond the frequent use of /cat like but the tone of the book is distinctly that of a noble Jew and the sum total of the impression from the book is Semitic, while the Apocalypse has minor Hebraisms and many grammatical idiosyncrasies to be discussed later, many of which remind one of the LXX. If the absence of the optative be taken as a test, even when compared with the vernacular kolvyi, Matthew, James and John do not use it at all, while Mark has it only once and Jude twice. Peter indeed has it four times and Hebrews only once, but Luke uses the optative 28 times and Paul 31. The remaining three writers (Paul, Luke, author of Hebrews) were not Palestinian Jews. Paul was a Hellenistic Jew who knew his vernacular kolvt] well and spoke Aramaic and read Hebrew. His Epistles are addressed chiefly to gentile Christians and naturally show little Semitic flavour, for he did not have to translate his ideas from Aramaic into Greek. In some of his speeches, especially the one delivered in Aramaic, as reported by Luke in Ac. 22, a trace of the Semitic point of view is retained. In contrast with Ac. 22 note Paul's address on the Areopagus in 17. The author of Hebrews makes abundant use of the LXX but exhibits possible Alexandrian origin or training, and it is not clear that he knew either "i,

1 2

the

Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 381. Dalman (Wds. of Jes., p. 42) thinks that the Heb. of Mt. are due to

LXX.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU 107 Hebrew

Luke presents something of a problem, for to have had Aramaic sources in Lu. 1 and 2 (possibly 1-12), while it is uncertain whether he was famiUar There seems little evidence that he knew Aramaic. that he may have read his Aramaic thinks Blass^

or Aramaic.^

he seems also Ac.

with the

Hebrew.

them translated for him. Curiously enough, and capable of writing almost classic Attic though a uses Semitisms not common elsewhere Luke yet (Lu. 1 1-4), shows that the few real Hebraisms in Dalman^ T. in the N. of things (9 28 but classical authority sense in \6yovs like Luke

sources or had

gentile

:

:

for this exists),

bia.

aTonaros (1:70) are due to the

LXX,

not the

with the infinitive and followed by the subject of the clause occurs 25 times in Luke, once in Mark, thrice in Matthew and in John not at all.^ See kv tc3 vTvo(jTpt
Hebrew.

The use

of ev

tc3

:

common^ 8:5), and in Lu. 10:35; 19:15. Hence the idiom is " clasin Luke from some other cause. The construction occurs in common sical historians, in Polybius and in papyri," ^ but is most in the

LXX, and

the parallel

is

wanting in the spoken Aramaic.

Luke also freely uses /cat kyhero (almost peculiar to him in the N. T.), which at once suggests ^^':l. He doubtless got this from the

LXX.s

He

has three constructions,

viz. Kal

kyhero koL

rfKde,

common

eyhtTo riWe and koX eykuero ehdeZv. The first i" LXX, while kyepero ekSeiv is due to the Greek vernacular Araas the papyri testify. The superfluous d<^ets, rip^aro, etc., are Hebrew, the Uke Aramaic, maisms, while ei/xt and the participle is

two^ are

Kal

in the

and

also in

analytic vernacular

harmony with the

Koivi].

Nestle"

even Biesenthal (Das Trostschreiben des Ap. Paulus an d. Heb., 1878) Heb. or Ai'am. in written was Ep. the that thinks 1

2

Philol. of the Gosp., p. 205.

3

Wds.

of Jes., p. 38

f.

Cf. also Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., pp. 113 f., 118; ^ Dalman, Wds. of Jes., p. 33.

Vogel, Zur Charac. des Lukas, p. 27.

6 Evang. sec. Lucam, p. xxii. But kv tw with the inf. occurs with great freInf. quency in the LXX, 555 times in the O. T., Apoc. and N. T. (Votaw, in the N. T.). It in Bib. Gk., p. 20), chiefly in the LXX (455 times, only 72

occurs nearly as often in the

LXX as all other prepositions with ^

together. '

Moulton, Prol., p. 14 (1st ed.).

9

Cf. Thackeray, Gr.,-pp. 50

and iykvero Kal 11:43 B). " Zeitschr.

v\Oe 209 times

f iir

ff.

»

We

in the

Dalman, Wds. W.-M., p. 760

the infinitive

of Jes., p.

3-4.

note.

have the type iykvtro f,\Oe 145 times, but kyhiro kUetv only once (1 Kgs. ^° Moulton, Prol., p. 17.

LXX,

ncutest. Wiss., 190G, p. 279

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

108

agrees with Blass (p. 131) in taking buoKoydv kv in Mt. 10 32 and Lu. 12 8 as a Syrism. n with nnin is not in the Hebrew, nor :

:

the LXX, but "^nist is used with n in the Jewish-Aramaic and Christian-Syriac. Nestle refers to o/xoXoyovvrcov tQ bvb15) as a Hebraism, for in such a case the Hebrew fxaTL (Heb. 13 used ^. The LXX and the Aramaic explain all the Semitisms in Luke. Dalman^ ventures to call the LXX Hebraisms in Luke

bixok.

ev in

:

"Septuagint-Grsecisms" and thinks that the same thing is true Certainly it is proper to investigate ^ the words of Jesus from the point of view of the peculiarities of style of the other Synoptists.

But, after all is said, the Semitisms in the N. T. Greek, while real and fairly numerous in bulk, cut a very small figure in comparison with the entire text. One can

in each reporter of them.

read whole pages in places with little suggestion of Semitic inbeyond the general impress of the Jewish genius and point

fluence

of view.

and Other Foreign Words. Moulton^ considers "hardly worth while" to discuss Latin influence on the kolvt] of the N. T. Blass ^ describes the Latin element as "clearly traceable." Swete^ indeed alleges that the vulgar Greek of the Empire "freely adopted Latin words and some Latin phraseology." Thumb'' thinks that they are "not noteworthy." In spite of the conservative character of the Greek language, it yet incorInasporated Latin civil and military terms with freedom. IV. Latinisms

it

as Judea was a Roman province, some allusion to Roman customs and some use of Latin military and official terms was to be expected,^ though certainly not to the extent of Romanizing

much

or Latinizing the language.

Cicero^ himself described Latin as

provincial in comparison ^vith the Greek.

Latin words are fairly

Latin names were early naturaUzed into the Greek vernacular and in the N. T. we find such Roman names as Aquila, Cornelius, Claudia, Clemens, Crescens, Crispus, Fortunatus, Julia, Junia, Justus, Linus, Lucius, Luke, Mark,

common

in

the Mishna.^

1

Wds.

"

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

2

lb., p. 72.

^

Comm.

3

Prol., p. 20.

^

Griech. Spr.

'

Hoole, Class. Element in the N. T., p. 4. Pro Archia 10. Cato lamented: airoXoCo-t

8

'EWtjvikwu

of Jes., p. 41.

a.vaTr\T)ue'evTe% (Plut.,

Cato Maj.

(Griech.

guage

und

of the

lat.

Lehnw. im

Romans with

Tal., Tl.

I,

p. xliv.

etc., p. 152.

'PwAtaiot ra -Kpayixara ypafj.naTo:v

23. 3).

de 200 h 146 avant Jesus-Christ (1905). 9 Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Time of Ch., div.

4.

on Mk., 189S,

Cf. Colin,

II, vol. I,

p. xxi) says:

"One

Rome

pp. 43

et la

ff.

Grece

Krausa

speaks of the lan-

the greatest respect as the speech of the soldiers."

KOINU 109 THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE Rufus, Sergius, Silvanus Niger, Paul, Priscilla, Publius, Pudens, themselves (Jewish Christians the among Titus (Silas), Tertius, ^e^aaros), while Agrippa, Augustus (translated

and

gentile),

Julius, Caesar, Claudius, Gallio, Felix, Festus, names. Roman typical are TertuUus Pilate,

Nero (Text. Rec.), Note the Roman

Palestine. mentioned in Ac. 28, Ca^sarca and Tiberias in occur places More than forty Latin names of persons and are milithirty-one), (or the N. T. The other Latin words, thirty into the come They terms. tary, judicial, monetary or domestic in appearing them of N. T. through the vernacular kolvt], none words Latin uses "Plutarch but two in Polybius. cities

m

LXX and part not those more frequently than Polybius, but for the most "the Roman that employed in the N. T.''^ Jannaris^ observes culture Greek to surrendering administration, notwithstanding its language." Greek the and education, did not fail to influence aaadpLov (as), But in the N. T. only these Latin words are found: Lu. 14 18), irapvrw^vov, dvvapLov (denarius), ?x^=aestimo (exe fie

the

:

(centurio), K^uaos (census), KoSpavevpaKv\o^v, 6 piap.^eheiv Kevrvplc^v \eyi6:v Ko\oivia (colonia), Kovarwhla (custodia), ,

(quadrans),

T-qs

(libertinus), Virpa (libra), txa(legio), \kvTi.ov (linteum), Xt/SeprTvos (mille), MoStos ii'CKiov (membrana), KeWov (macellum), ixep-^pava (xuaptos (si(praetorium) Trpan6,pLov , (modius), ^earrjs (sextarius), aizeKov(sudarium), covhaptov carius), aLpuKivdLov (semicinctium), cj^eKouris (titlus), rlrXos (taberna), Urcop (speculator), a^ ra^eppat ct>payk\\Lov (fiagellum), cj^payeWdo: (flagello),

(paenula), ^opo^forum),

This is at most (31) not a foroccur like epyaaiav SovpaL (opephrases midable list. A few Latin accipere), rb kapop Tvoietp (satis (satis \ap.^apeip ram dare), to Ikupop capere). But Deissmann (consilium facere), cvix^ov\iov \aix^kpeiv the use of kpyo-aiap notes f.) 117 East, p. the Ancient xaprrjs (? charta), x^ipos (corus).

from the vulgar type in in an Oxyrhynchus papyrus letter of with a decree of Caria in inscription an in 2d cent. b.c. and also Kplfco to bkaiop (cf. shows Amorgus at tablet lead the Senate. A So aumipco Uyop (Mt. 18 23 f.) occurs in two pa{Light blbo^ixi

Lu. 12

:

57).

pyri letters of 2d

274

p.

1

f.).

:

cent. a.d. (Moulton,

Thayer

='

The Expositor,

calls attention also to ai)

Burton, Notes on N. T. Gr., 1904,

oypxi

April, 1901,

(Mt. 27

:

4)

as

p. 15.

Gk. Gr., p. 7. . ^. -ni Cf. also C. Wessely, Die lat. Elem. in 3 Lang of the N. T., Hast. D. B. subwhole 24 (1902). On the der Griic der ilgyp. Papyrusurk., Wien. Stud., Trotetv is lKav6^> T6 83-158. Grec, le sur pp. ject see L. Laforcade, Infl. du Lat. 2

Hist.

115). as old as Polybius (Moulton, Exp., Feb., 1903, p.

,

,

•

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

110

being like videris.

So also

6\peade

NEW TESTAMENT

avroi (Ac.

considers \ayL^avtLv in Jo. 5 The majority of these instances occur in :

18

15).

:

Griimn^

34, 41 equal to capto ('to catch at').

Mark and Matthew,

Mark using more Latinisms than any other N. T. writer. Too much, however, cannot be argued from this point. ^ There are besides such adjectives as 'HpwStawt, XpiaTiavol, ^LKnnrrjaLoi, which made

are

after the Latin model.

Blass^ thinks that the syntax shows a greater Latin influence, but admits that it is difficult to tell the difference between native

development in the Greek and a possible Latin bent. It is indeed difficult to speak with decision on this point. Ultimately Greek and Latin had great influence on each other, but at this stage the matter is at least too doubtful to appeal to with conPaul indeed may have spoken in Latin at Lystra, acfidence." cording to Prof. Ramsay .5 Thayer'' indeed gives a longer list of Latin syntactical influences on N. T. Greek, but not all of them are certain. The anticipatory position of airo and irpo in expres-

and place, as wpd U w^poiv (Jo. 12: 1), is a possible Latinism, though only of the secondary sort, since the Doric and the Ionic use this construction occasionally and the kolvt] frequently

sions of time

Moulton, Prolegomena,

(cf.

p. 101).

Cf. also Merd xoXXas ravras

increased use of the subjunctive rather rinkpas (Ac. past tense of the indicative is a necessary after a optative than the of the optative rather than a Latindisappearance the result of 1:5).'^

ism.

1

2

The

The

alleged blending of present perfect

Gk.-Eng. Lex. of the N. T. Swete, Comm. on Mk., p. xliii.

and

aorist

might

Cf. Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., p. 211

f.

Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 4. Thumb (Griech. Spr., p. 152) 4 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1888, pp. 60, 66. considers the matter .inconclusive, as does Moulton (Prol., p. 21). For the Schulze, Graeca later Latinisms see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 13 f. See also W. 3

Lat., 1891; Schwyzer, Weltspr. des Altert., p. 20.

25-30 for Latinisms in Gk. 6 Exp., Sept., 1905, and March, 1906.

"As

Cf. Sophocles, Lex., pp.

his father,

and possibly

also

use of Latin speech his grandfather, had possessed the Roman citizenship, the and names was an inheritance in the family" (Ramsay, Ex-p., Aug., 1906, Cf. also Ramsay, Pauhne and Other Studies (1906, p. 65), where p. 160). Alex. he says it is "certain" that he spoke the Latin language. So holds certain "a Iconium At April, 1911). Exp., Latin?, Speak Paul Souter (Did Moulton also thinks that affectation of speaking Latin was fashionable."

Lat. Paul preached in Lat. at Lystra, since the earhest inscriptions there are (Prol., p. 233). 6 1

Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B. On this matter of time see Schulze, Graeca Lat., pp. 13

ff.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOIMI be a Latinism, but

it is

at least doubtful

if

that

is

found

111

in the

rather than the infinitive follows N. T. The use of 6ri and but it is parallel to the growvanishes, naturally as the infinitive the ablative after 4)v\a.(x
be due to cavere ab or to the general analytic tendency to also). express the preposition with the case (cf. the Hebrew avv vocative, with the o: of absence the are Other smaller details =nwwith dative 7aMeco hie), {qui=et outos = /cat as equal to Kal, 6s

may

bere alicui, infinitive alone

There

with KeKehw.

is

no evidence that

verthe absence of the article in Latin had any influence on the irregular in the it sees he thinks Schmidi though nacular Koivi], connection use of the article in iElian. It is interesting in this represented as Latin vernacular the in development the to note the Old Latin and the Vulgate versions. Unusual cases are in

used with

many

verbs; prepositions are

indicative with final ut

and

much more frequent; the common use of

in indirect questions;

quia and quoniam like quod with verb rather than the accusative and infinitive; ille, ipse, hie, is, more like the article, as the later

Itahan

il,

Spanish

el,

French

le."^

Other foreign words had, of course, entered the

kolvt]

or

the

Greek, like /Souros (Cyrenaic and Sicilian); peSrj (Gallic or aavdoKLov (PerCeltic); ayyapevoo (even J^^schylus), ya^a, Trapadetaos, irapefx^oXi,, sian); xiTcbv (Oriental); Kpa^arros (cf. Latin grabatus),

earlier

(Macedonian);

pvixr]

appa(3uu, Kivvaixwuov, kvixlvov, nva (Phoenician);

(Egyptian or Semitic?); ftfaOn the Egyptian words in the Ptolemaic papyri vLov (Arabic?). words, 26., see Mayser, Grammatik, pp. 35-40; on the Persian origin. uncertain StmTrt is of p. 42 f., including ya^a and 7rapa5eio-os.

Pa'Cov,

iStjSXos,

iSucraos,

alvaTi,
But Greek was known

in all parts of the

Roman Empire

except

There were

parts of North Africa and the extreme west of Europe. Schools great hbraries in Alexandria, Pergamum and elsewhere. of the mass the less were numerous and excellent. But none the

people were ^ap^apoi to the real Greeks and inevitably brought Cf. Eadermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. laxities into the vernacular. 9 ff., who gives a good discussion of the Latinisms in kolvt] writers. 1

Atticismus

etc., p. 64.

Cf. Gcorgi,

Dc

Latinismis N. T.,

iii,

Vita, 1733.

whole subject sec Ronsch, Itala unci Vulgata. Das Sprachid. der und der Kath. Vulg. unter Beriicks. der rom. Volksspr., 1875, Itala urchristl. Cf also The Holy Lat. Tongue, W. Barry, in Dublin Rev., April, p. 480 f and Our Lat. Bible, ib., July, 1906. "The common dialect, spoken 2

On

this

.

.

1906,

Africa, saw with local differences in every part of Italy, in Gaul, Spain and (Dubshores" those over spread Christianity when arrive moment happy its lin

Rev., April, 1906, p. 293).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

112

But was there a Christian adbibhcal no separate Greek, not to say a special was dition if Christian Greek? Winer ^ admitted "religious technical terms" in the Christian sense, but thought that "the subject scarcely V.

The

Christian Addition.

there

within the limits of philological inquiry." Blass has nothing on the subject. But even Deissmann^ insisted that "the say to language of the early Christians contained a series of religious terms peculiar to itself, -some of which it formed for the first lies

time," but he added that this enrichment did not extend to the

Once more hear Deissmann^: "Christianity, like any affecting civilization, must have produced an effect upon language by the formation of new ideas and the modification of old ones." Moulton^ sounds a note of warning when he says that "it does not follow that we must promptly obliterate every grammatical distinction that proves to have "syntax."

other

new movement

been unfamiliar to the daily conversation of the first century The N. T. must still be studied largely by Egyptian farmer Westcott^ indeed thinks the subject light drawn from itself." calls for "the most careful handling" in order to avoid Jewish usage on the one hand and the later ecclesiastical ideas on the other. This is obviously true. Connect the discussion of the Semitic influence on the N. T. wdth this point and recall the revolutionary effect that Christianity had upon the Greek language in the ecclesiastical Greek of the Byzantine period, and the difficulty will be appreciated. Mahaffy^ does not hesitate to say that the main cause of the persistence of Greek studies to-day .

.

.

due to the fact that the Gospels are written in Greek. "Greek conquered Jew and Jew conquered Greek and the world inherited Under the the legacy of their struggle through Roman hands." influence of Christianity some of the old heathen vocabulary is

vanished and the remaining stock "was now considerably reduced and modified in a Christian and modern spirit."^ The 1

W.-M.,

p. 36.

65 (note). Encyc. Bib., art. Papyri, p. 3562. 4 Prol., p. 20. Cf Thumb, Griech. Spr., p. 182 f. B Smith's D. B., art. N. T. 6 The Gk. World under Rom. Sway, 1890, p. 389 f. Butcher, Harv. Lect. on Gk. Subj., 1894, p. 2 f., calls the power of Jew and Gk. on modern Hfe one of "the mysterious forces of the spirit." "Each entered on a career of world-wide empire, till at length the principles of Hellenism became those of civilization itself, and the religion of Judea that of civiUzed humanity." 2

B.

S., p.

3

.

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 10

f.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 113 N. T. Greek became the standard for ecclesiastical Greek as the Attic had been for the ancient world. Winer ^ indeed curtly says: "To attempt to explain such expressions of the apostolical terminology by quotations from Greek authors is highly absurd." Rutherford ^ almost despairs of understanding N. T. Greek as well as "classical Greek," since it contains so many alien elements, "but it has at least begun to be studied from the proper point of view," though he overestimates the difficulty and the difference when he speaks of "the singular speech in which the oracles of God are enshrined." On the other hand 3 we must not let the papyri make us swing so far away

from the old "biblical" Greek idea as to imagine that we can find in the vernacular kolvv all that Christianity has to offer. Christian spirit put a new flavour into this vernacular kolpt}

The and

thought and dignity of style that lifted it to a new unify and glorify the language. This new and victorious spirit, which seized the best in Jew and Greek, knew how to use the Greek language with freedom and power.^ If the beauty of the elevation of

N. T. writings is different from the ancient standard, there is none the less undoubted charm. Matthew Arnold put the Gospels at the acme of simplicity and winsomeness, and Renan spoke of Luke's Gospel as the most beautiful book in the world. Norden^ admits that the N. T. style is less exclusive and more universal. There was indeed a compromise between the old and the new. The victory of the new brought rhythm (not the technical sort)

and unity as the chief characteristics.^ In Christianity Hellenism becomes really cosmopolitan.^ If Christianity had merely used the Greek language and had been entirely alien to Hellenism, the Epis. to the

^

1

W.-M.,

3

Cf. Zezschwitz, Profangrac.

p. 36, n. 3.

und

bibl. Sprachg.,

Rom.,

p.

x

f.

1859, p. 4, where he

speaks of "dieses neue geistige Princip an der Sprachc." Deissmann (Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, p. 8) accents the dilTcrence between the Christian ideas and the Gra!CO-Rom. heathen words that express them. * lb., Norden (Die griech. Kunstpr., Bd. II, pp. 453 ff.) indeed p. 12. thinks that the N. T. wants the "freedom" (Freiheit) and "serenity" {Hei-

This is true in part of Paul's wTiting, of the ancient hterature. where passion rages fiercely, and in Rev. and other apocalyptic passages. But what can excel Lu. and Jo. in lucidity and beauty? " Ileiterkeit ft,cnera\ity or breadth, are the blitheness or repose, and Allgemeinhcit Walter Pater, The Renaisideal." Hellenic of the characteristics supreme

terkeit)

—

—

sance, 1904, p. 225. 6

Die

griech. Kunstpr.,

6

lb.,

Bd.

I,

p. 290.

Bd.

II, p. 456. ^

lb.,

Bd.

II, p.

463.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

114

N. T. would not have belonged to Greek literature, but this sympathy with the best in the world must not be overworked.^ The N. T. language is real Greek, though with the Christian supreme in it because Christianity seized the Hellenic and transformed it. W. Christ ^ rightly calls attention to the fact that Christianity brought "a renewal of the human race," "the moral worth of man and a purer view of God." So "this ethical new birth of mankind" found expression in the N. T. The touch of life is what distinguishes the N. T. writings from the philosophical, historical, religious and ethical writings of spirit

spirit

In the Synoptic Gospels this quality reaches its height. details is the spirit, the literary conception of a life to be written without ornament, without reflection, without the writer's personality."* This fact constitutes a literary phenomenon amounting almost to a miracle. This vital spirit disthe time.^

"Far above these

on every page and baffles analysis. It is the essence N. T. language, but "is as pervasive as the atmosphere," "as intangible as a perfume."^ If some concentration and strength are lost, there is great adaptability.^ Thayer^ does not hesitate to speak of the fitness of N. T. Greek for its providential It is It is the language of men's business and bosoms. office. closes itself

of the

It is not the life, not of the study nor the cloister. language of a bygone age, but the speech of the men of the time. " The Book of the people has become, in the course of centuries,

the language of

the

Book

of all

mankind" (Deissmaim,

Light, p. 142).

Chris-

"began without any written book at all" except the Old the gospel, but Testament. "There was only the living word no Gospels. Instead of the letter was the spirit. The beginning, in fact, was Jesus HimseK" {ih., p. 245). The N. T. is in close sympathy with both Jew and Greek, in a sense has both languages to draw on, can reach both the Semitic and the gentile mind, becomes a bond of union, in a word (as Broadus used to say) it is better suited to be the vehicle of truth conveyed by Jewish minds than classical Greek would have been. And a grammarian must admit that, however necessary and fundamental grammattianity

—

1

2 3

«

6 6 7

Cf. Hatch, Infl. of Hellen. on Christ. Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1905, p. 912. Hicks, Gk. Phil, and Rom. Law in the N. T., 1896, p. 12.

Mahaffy, Su^\^ of Gk. CiviUz., 1897, p. 309. Thayer, Hast. D. B., art. Lang, of the N. T., p. 40^. Rodwell, N. T. Gk., 1899, p. 2. Hast. D. B., ib. Cf. Schaff, Comp. to the Gk. N. T., p. 26.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 115 ical exegesis

is, it

forms only the basis for the spiritual exposition

which should follow. When one comes to Christianity

is

he notes that the influence of not grammatical.^ But a few points

details,

chiefly lexical,

be observed, as in expressions like kv Xpto-rcS^; h the Kupicp; TTio-reuco^ h with locative, els with accusative, kirl with accuthe with dative, the with Trtareuco locative or the accusative, sative or absolutely. As to the lexical element the lists of aira^

in syntax are to

€vpy]ixkva

It is too

require severe sifting.*

but in the nature of the case the

words

soon to pass a final verdict,

number would be

small.

Such

as clvtIxpi-'^tos, erepoStSao-KaXeco, evayyeXLCTTjs , avvaravpow, \pev-

5d5eX0os, xf/ev8aTr6aTo\os, etc., naturally spring out of the Christian The vocabulary of the N. T. Greek is not very exenterprise.

somewhere near 5600 words, including proper names.^ But the main point to note is the distinctive ideas given to words tensive,

already in use, like

01701x77,

ayM^cc,

0,7105,

dSeX^os, avrlTviros, avrifiL-

^acrtXeta, fiairadla, dTToXurpcocris, (ZTrcoXeta, airoaToXos, airoaToXi] , apTOS, Tifco,

/SaTTTto-juct

(-M05),

yXcccrcra,

Slclkovos,

SiKatoco,

CK'XeKTOs, eX-TTtfco, eXTrts, eTlaKoiros, tTnaTp'tc^ojiaL,

yeXitco,

k^ovala,

^cor],

davaros,

lepevs,

KTipvaaw, Kk-qTOS,. K6(jp.o<;, Koivwvia, paKKrjTOS,

tt'l<jtls,

ttlotos,

irpoaKonida, aap^, cravpos,

yj/vxr],

xpvxi-Kos.

irKXTevw,

irpevna,

(Xvvel8r](XLS,

When

eKKKrjala,

KaToWayri, KaToWaaac^,

\vTpov, \vrpbw, neravoia, 656s, Tra-

TaTreLVOcppoavpt], 6 vios tov deov, 6 vlos o-t6s,

/caXeco,

eiprjvr],

epya, evayyeXiov, evay-

ado^o:,

irvevp-aTLKOs, (rcoTi7p,

irpea^VTepos,

cruTr]pla,

raireLVOs,

rod avOpoiwov, viodeala, X^P^s, Xpt-

one considers the new connotations

that that these words bear in the N. T., it is not too much "to say lies the history of words like such and these of history the in used Christianity.'"^ The fact that these and other terms were 1

Cf.

Thumb,

griech. Spr., pp. 1G2-201.

Formel "in Christo Jesu" untersucht, 1892. On the whole question see Vocab., 1905, pp. 19-80. Job. Cf. Abb., Buttmann, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 173 ff.; Moulton, Prol., p. 67 f. Not 550 (as Ken4 Cf. Deiss., Hell.-Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 636. 2

Cf. Deiss., Die neutest.

3

T. formations nedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 93) bibl. words, but only 50 N. (Deissmann, Exp., Jan., 1908; Light, p. 73). 6 Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 88. The Eng. of the King James Vers. and N. T.) contains only about 6000 words (Adey, The Eng. of the T. (O. use only King James Vers.). Max Miillor (Sci. of Lang., p. 16) says that we

about 4000 words in ordinary Eng. Cf. also Hatch, Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p. 11. 6 Weatcott, Smith's B. D., N. T. "Though Greek words were used they were the symbols of quite other than

That is, when the distinctively Christian ideas are given. ideas." Gegenw., the influence of Gk. on other languages see Wack., Die Kult. der ff. 311 Tl. I, Abt. 8, pp.

Greek

On

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

116

in the popular language of the

day gives a sharper point to the of the emperor

new turn in the gospel message. The deification made Christians sensitive about the words dtos, KvpLos, KvpLaKos,

(7(iOTr]p,

xttpttT/xa,

^aatXevs, ^aaCKda.

vlbs deov,

detos,

See the lumi-

nous discussion of Deissmann {Light, pp. 343-384). The papyri and the inscriptions throw almost a lurid light on these words. Cf. Ki)ptos Katcrap

with

1

Cor. 12

:

and

1-3.

Kuptos

The

'Iriaovs

{Martijrium Polycarpi,

viii, 2)

Christians did not shrink from using

these words in spite of the debased ideas due to the emperor-

Mithraism, or other popular superstitions. Indeed, Paul (cf. Col. 2 1 f .) often took the very words of Gnostic or Mithra cult and filled them with the riches of Christ. Cf. The Expositor for April, 1912, "Paul and the Mystery Religions," by H. A. A. cult,

:

For the stimuli that Christianity derived from popular notions of law, religion and morality see Deissmann, Light, The mass of the N. T. vocabulary has been transpp. 283-290. of a Csesar would indeed call him worshippers The figured. deov, but the words were empty flattery. vlbs or (TUT-qp Tov Kocrixov that well shows a LXX word, for instance, in the Deissmann^ did not mean what it did in the Ephesus, of citizen mouth of a

Kennedy.

Much more is N. T. The new message glorified the current kolvt], took the words from the street and made them bear a new content, linked heaven with earth in a new sense. In particular the N. T. wi'iters took and greatly enriched the religious vocabulary

LXX,

as

dpxtepei'S, dLadijKr], deos, ttpo^tjttjs, acorripia.

this true of the

of the

LXX.

VI. Individual Peculiarities.

The language

of

Christianity

and there was more play for individualism. If the style is not all of the man, certainly each writer has his own style. But style varies with the same man also at different stages of his own development, with varying moods and when discussing different themes. Style is thus a function All these points of view must be kept in mind of the subject. with several of the N. T. writers, as Paul, Luke, Peter and John, whose writings show marked variations. Simcox^ notes that in the Thessalonian and Corinthian letters Paul uses kv Tavrl twelve

was not stereotyped at

first

1 B. S., p. S3. Cf. Schleierm., Hermen., pp. 66 ff., 138 ff., who early called attention to the Christian element in the N. T. Cf. also Viteau, Le Verbe;

Synt. des Prep., p. xl f 2 Writers of the N. T., p. 37.

on the Study

grammar by

of the

itself."

Gk. N. T.,

A. Souter (The Exp., 1904, Some Thoughts "We must take each writer's

p. 145) says:

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 117 times, in the Pastoral Epistles

h

iraai five (or six) times,

while in

In thus accenting the individuahty of the Ph. 4 forget that each writer had access to not must one writers N. T. of early Christianity. There was terminology religious common the expressions that reappear in and ideas of substratum common a them all, though in certain cases there may have been actual use :

12 he has both.

documents. But one can never be sure whether Peter had James, or the author of Hebrews Luke's writings. Peter probably had some of Paul's letters when he wrote 1 Peter, and 2 Peter The grammarian cannot be 3 15 f. expressly refers to them. of

:

expected to settle questions of authorship and genuineness, but he has a right to call attention to the common facts of linguistic

Immer^ indeed complains that the

usage.

linguistic peculiarities

N. T. writers have been worked more in the interest of The modern method of biblical criticism than of exegesis. theology is designed to correct this fault, but there is a work here for the grammarian also. Winer ^ declines to discuss this of the

question and of the

N. T.3

is

horrified at the idea of

Language

is

grammars

rightly viewed

of each writer

from the point

of

view

rapid and continued changes in the individual mind during the mental process of expressing thought find a parallel in the syntactical relations in the sentence.* One cannot protest too strongly against the levelling process of of the speaker or writer.

The

an unsympathetic and unimaginative linguistic method that puts all the books of the N. T. through the same syntactical mill and tags this tense as "regular" and that one as "irregular." It is not too much to say that the characteristic of the Greek literature of this time

was

precisely that of individuality (cf Plutarch's .

Viteau^ has a brief discussion of "The Psychological Character of the Syntax of the N. T.," for, added to all other

Lives). ^

things, there 1

"the influence of the moment."

Differences in

N. T., 1877, p. 132. Thayer (Lex. of N. T. Gk., p. 689) misjudgments committed by some who have monumental "the

Hermen.

speaks of

is

of the

questions of authorship .turn on vocabulary alone." rhetoric p. 1 f., remands \''^ TL^ »Jiole matter to the realm of N. T. Wilke, 1843, N. T. Rhet.; Schleicrm., Ilermcn.; Gersdorf, Beitr. zur

made 2

(cf.

W.-M.,

Sprachchar.

d.

N.

T.),

but some discussion

is

demanded

here.

Schmiedel

abbreviates Winer's comments. 3 W.-M., p. 4. He did not live to see Dr. Abbott's two stout volumes, Joh. Vocab. (1905) and Joh. Gr. (190()). * Cf. Steinthal, Intr. to the Psych, and Sci. of Lang. Cf. also Blass, Ilermcn. 6 Cf. Norden, Die griech. Ku^iiitpr., Bd. I, p. 243.

und

Krit., p. 206.

*

Le Vcrbe; Synt. dcs

Prep., pp. xUff.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

118

culture, in environment, in gifts, in

but

fect style,

this fact

is

temperament inevitably

not to be stressed so as to

make a

af-

new-

In the following discussions some lexical comments are given besides the grammatical to give a better idea of the writer's style as a whole. Certainly Blass' theory ^ of an original Aramaic (a) Mark. Mark is not proven, but Peter often spoke in Aramaic, and Mark dialect for each writer.^

was

see previous discussion (Semitic Influence). The idea that Matfirst wrote in Latin need not be seriously discussed.

Mark Mark

thew and Luke have It

For the Aramaisms and Hebraisms of

bilingual like Peter.

not

is

in his

many Latinisms as Mark. Mark is most distinctive, for of

also nearly as

vocabulary that

the 1270 words in

Mark

(besides 60 proper names) only 80 are

pecuhar to him among the N. T. writers.^ He has 150 in common with Matthew and Luke alone, while only 15 belong to Mark and John and nowhere else in the N. T. About 40 words belong only to Mark and the LXX in the Greek Bible, while Mark has 38 (besides proper names) occurring nowhere else in the N. T. or

LXX;

but these are not all real awa^ 'Xeyofxeva, for there are the papyri! Mark seems fond of diminutives like the vernacular the

in general (dvyarpLov, KopaaLov, Kwapiov, etc.);

KOLPT}

and

et/xt

epxofxai

kwith the participle are common, as in Luke (cf. 1 6, ^j' pictorial multiplies he in fact Krjpvaawv); 1 ri\dev :39, 8e8vtxhos; av occurs with efx(3\€\paaa Xe7et) participles (cf 14 67, ibovaa .

:

.

.

:

.

.

past tenses of the indicative (3

(9

:

(cf

.

.

;

11, orav ainbv kQedopow);

he loves

is com(1 N. T. generally) with the infinitive and sentences d dvprf) broken and parenthetic clauses are frequent

the double negative

mon

:

.

:

44,

ixribevl ii-qUv e'lirris)

;

the article

(as in

23, TO

7

:

;

19,

at times he is pleonastic (2 20, Tore kv he uses eWvs or eWews al)out 40 times; he is emo-

Kadapi^o)v)

iKelvji TT) rjfxepa);

:

;

and vivid, as showTi by descriptive adjectives, questions and exclamations (cf. 1 :24; 2:7); the intermingling of tenses tional

(9

:

33

ff.,

eTTTjpajra

Greek* or to

.

.

.

XeTet

artificiality, as

^

As Simcox does

2

Philol. of the Gosp., pp. 196

Allen,

ib., ser. 6, vi,

elTrev) is not due to ignorance of Swete well says, but to "a keen sense .

.

in Writers of the ff.

.

N. 1 ., y.'A Cf. MarshaU, Exp.,

ser. 4, vi,

pp. 81

ff.;

pp. 436-443.

1898, p. xl. Thayer (Lex. of N. T. Gk., App., but the text of some 32 is in dispute. Hawkins, Hor. Syn. 2, p. 200, gives 71. Swete gives interesting Hsts of Mark's vocabulary from various points of view. Cf. also Salmond, Mark (Gosp. of), in Hast. D. B. * Swete, Comm. on Mk., p. xhii. Thi'erie (Die Inschr. von Magn. am Maander und das N. T., 1906, p. 4) says: "Die Gruppe der sogenannten Ha3

Swete,

Comm. on Mk.,

p. 699) gives 102,

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH and

of the reality

119

living interest of the facts; there are 151 his-

W. H.

toric presents in the

text against 78 in

Matthew and 4

of prepositions in Luke; there is frequent and discriminating use than 8k, selrather Kal the connective is usually (2 1, 2, 10, 13) and great simplicity much but there is little artistic effect, ;

:

dom

ovv;

little vividness of detail; the vernacular kolvt] is dominant with by held so b\}/ia are and raihbdev literary influence, though elreu,

Norden.i

n€7rXi7pcoTat

Fayum papyrus and

(Mk.

1

:

15) is paralleled

by

a

in

eTrXrypco^rj

xpaatat xpaatai

'avynvbcna avy.TrbaLa,

by Taynara

World, raTMara in the "Shepherd of Hermas" (Goodspeed, Bihl. illiterate, considered be not to is Mark 1906, p. 311 f.). In general though more Semitic in his culture than Greek. Wellhausen has has more Aramaisms in Mark's text than B. But noted that Mark's Semitisms are not really barbarous Greek, "though extremely vernacular language often makes us think so,

D

Mark's

the less educated papyri" (Moulton, Camb. Bihl. (even double Essays, p. 492). Even his fondness for compound influence of the If kolvJ]. vernacular the like compound) verbs is until

we read

Peter

is

seen in the Gospel of Mark,

as to language and temperament.^ of Jesus

and a

it

He

was thoroughly congenial an objective picture

gives

realistic one.

writer quotes both the Hebrew and the as doing the same. He has 65 allusions Jesus and represents verbal quotations. And yet the being them of to the 0. T., 43 He has the instinct for Hebrew Hebraistic. book is not intensely and his thought and genelaboration, Hebrew the and (6)

Matthew.

The

LXX

parallelism

eral outlook are Hebraistic,

though

his

language

is

"colourless Hel-

Essays, p. 484). lenistic of the average type" (Moulton, Camh. Bihl. of peculiarities linguistic Q as distinct the into enter We need not In Mt. 9 6 correct. be hypothesis that if Matthew Greek from our rather than the vulgar Kpa^arTos of Mark. In 12 14 :

we see Matthew has

:

kKIvt]

op.

cit.,

Uaei avTovs

and 14

avix^ovKiov 'eXa^op for a. e8idovv of

He can use paronomasia as (21:41). He uses rbre 91 times

p. 485).

in

Luke; he has

17

Mark (Moulton,

in KaKovs

Ka/cojs

against 6 in

dTro-

Mark

^aacXeia rihv ovpavdv 32 times, while

he

im Ncucn paxlegomena ist bedenklich zusammensoschrumpft; cs handclt sich aira^ dp-nfxiva. nicht tvp-qukva, aTra? um meistens Testament 1 Die Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, p. 488. Cf. on Mark, Schulze, Dor schrift2 Schaff, Comp. to Gk. N. T., p. 51. (Keil and Tzschirncr's Analecta, II, Marcus Btcllcr. Charakter und Wert des Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 114-153. Syn.2, Hor. pp. Hawkins, Sec .3). 2, style of Mark. narrative the on comments 302) has 203, 2G1, 270, 278,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

120 has

ri

^aacXeia rod Oeov 14 times (Mt. 4; Lu. 32); he uses 6

ovpavLos 7

times and

Trarrip 6

13 times; he 12 times

6 Trariip 6 kv toIs ovpavols

quotes the O. T. with the formula h>a (ottws) ifK-qpo^dfi to p-qdh or Tore hifK-qpiidi] to prjdh, whereas Luke does not have it at all, Mark only once and John 7 times;

where

and

N. T.;

else in

like

6vap occurs 6 times

/car'

Luke he

and no-

uses Kal l8ov often (27 times)

the genitive absolute 11 times; he alone speaks of

idov after

like Mark he uses whereas Luke usually has 'lepovaaXrjiJL] 6p.vvw kv or els, common in Matthew, does not occur in the other Gospels; rd
ayia

and

ttoKls

'lepoaoKviia

TroXts

tov ixejaXou jSao-tXews;

always save once (23

:

37),

N. T. (Heb.); note the pleonastic use of avdpwTos as avdpwhe twice uses ds to ovofxa, but the other Gospels h re?

in the

TTos jSao-iXeiis;

ovofxaTL

or

eirl

;

the oriental particularity

51 times while is

Mark

has

it

is

seen in using Trpoaepxoixai

only 5 and Luke 10 times; awayeLv

used by Matthew 24 times; the vernacular

many ways Thayer

as in the use of

kolvt] is

manifest in

Mark), KoXXu/Stcrrat. gives 137 words occurring

/xovocpdaKixos (like

in his list {Lexicon, p.

698

f.)

Matthew alone in the N. T., but 21 are doubtful readings. Matthew has fewer compound verbs than Mark. Matthew does in

not use adverbial where Mark has

ttoXXol,

Kal

while

Mark

verbs of saying 38 times, while the 151 historic presents in

though Matthew has 93 Horae Syriopt., p. 144 f.

Mark

has

Mark

Mark

it

9 times.

Matthew has

about 60 times.

has

has

ort

50 times.

8e

after

Of

only 21 appear in Matthew,

historic presents in

Matthew

it

He

all.

See Hawkins,

frequently has aorist

when

xx f.). The periphrastic tenses are less common in Matthew than in Mark and Luke Matthew is less fond than Mark of redundant (op. cit., p. xxii). phrases {o-p. cit., p. xxvi). The Gospel is largely in the form of discourses with less narrative element than Mark. The style is more uniform and less graphic than either Mark or Luke and so has imperfect (see Allen, Matthew,

p.

less individual.^ (c)

Luke.

Whether Luke knew Hebrew

or

Aramaic or both,

cannot be stated with certainty. He did make use of Aramaic documents or sayings in Lu. 1 and 2, and in the earl}^ part of the Acts. He was also quite familiar with the LXX, as his quo1 Cf. Dalman, Wds. of Jes., 1902; Gla, Die Originalspr. des Mt., 1887; See Hawkins, Hor. Syn.-, pp. 154-173; Allen, Mt., pp. xix-xxxi; Plummer, Mt., Zahn, Einl. in d. N. T., Bd. II, 1898. On Matthew's style see p. xiiif.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ok., pp. 203, 276, 278, 300, 302, 305.

.

IN THE KOINH 121 THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT in his writings has

from it show. The Semitic influence "He consciously imitates the Greek already been discussed. narrative which have their scene Bible and in the parts of his rough diction of he feels it congruous to retain the tations

in Palestine

Camh. Bihl. Essays, p. 479). One thing He had a good command of the vernacular is certain about him. the literary KOLvii in Lu. 1 1-4 and Ac. KOLvi, and even attains often been 1-516-34. The preface to his Gospel has

his sources" (Moulton,

:

1

17

•

:

Herodotus, and it does not compared to those of Thucydides and is an offset to their vainmodesty his for suffer by the comparison, Roman citizen, and he a was Luke glory 1 Selwyn^ thinks that the spirit of Paul in exhibits He was a fit companion for Paul. doctrinal position. general his in and his comprehensive sympathy the Gospels. He of literary most the Renan^ calls Luke's Gospel use of his mateskilful makes and writes more like an historian the Gospel have in .« pictures His accuracy rials^ and with minute thinks that indeed Norden painter." given him the title of "the influence Atticistic received writers Luke alone among the N. T. asiamschen der Rhythmen Die Blass, Cf (Kunstprosa, II, pp. 485 ff But we need not go that ar. und ramischen Kunstprosa, p. 42). makes apparent in many ways, but withal he .

.

His versatility

is

His vocabulary illustrates his a faithful use of his materials.^ counting doubtful readings) breadth of culture, for he uses 750 (851 N. T.« Some of them are the in elsewhere words not occurring One special item in his vocabulary is the large still avra^ \ey6fxem. as is natural, since he number of medical terms in his writings, nautical phraseology is abunwas a physician.^ His command of 1

SchniT, intr. of

the

Comp.

St.

N.

T.. p. 55.

Herodotus and Luke

of the Gosp., pp. 7 2

to Gk.

He

are about the

calls

attentbn to the fact that length. Cf Blass, Philol.

same

Luke the Prophet,

1901, p. 81.

ii, p. 17. Davidson, Les Evang., pp. 232, 283. Plummer, Comm. on Luke, 1896, p. xlvn.

Intr. to

3

* B e

Ramsay,

rVii'^o

St.

.

ff

N.

T.,

Paul the Traveller, 1895;

Was

Christ

Born

Credibility of Acts, 1902.

, ^ , u at Bethlehem?,

•?

,,

differences

calls attention to fvogel (Zur Charak. d;s Lukas, 1899, p. 19) Peter and Paul m the Acts. in the sDccches of Stephen, 699 ff.), Plummer (Comm., pp. lu ff.) 8 See the lists of Thayer (Lex., pp. Of the 851 some 312 occur m the Gospel Hawkins (Ilor. Syn.S pp. 201-207). and 478 in the Acts. , occur n. the„ ,

«

•

i^i

1882. Many o those Hobart, Medical Lang, of St. Luke, phrahis knowledge of the medical show to remain plenty also, but

LXX

ecology of the time.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

122

The

dantly shown in Ac. 27 and 28.^ tion of the Gospel is

that of a

how

man

question of a double edi-

and Acts does not belong

His language

here.^

of culture with a cosmopolite tone,

who

to be popular also (Deissmann, Light, p. 241

only has a rich vocabulary, but also fine

In particular his stjde

diction.

the writer to the Hebrews.

is

Among

will note his use of the infinitives

yet knows

He

f.).

command

more Hke that

not

of the

KOLvrj

of Paul

and

matters of detail in Luke one

with

kv tc3

(37 times)

ToO with the infinitive (25 instances); avv (25 times)

and

of

frequent,

is

though seldom in the other Gospels; Kai avros {avrr]) he has 28 times, and often constructions like avros 6 xpovos; Kal kykvero or eyevero 8e he uses 43 times; he has 8e Kal 29 times; he loves iropevofxai (88 examples); he uses el like an interrogative 18 times; to occurs often before a clause, especially an indirect question; he makes frequent use of Kal l8ov; Uavos is common with him; rjv with present participle occurs 47 times; the descriptive genitive is common; irpds with the accusative occurs 151 times with him and only 25 in the rest of the N. T.; he is fond of hoiinov; re (and re Kal) is almost confined to him in the N. T.; the optative is alone used by Luke in indirect questions and more often otherwise than by any other N. T. writer save Paul. This is a literary touch but not Atticistic. He alone makes any special use of the future participle; he is fond of xas and awas; cbs in temporal sense is common in Luke, once in Mark, not in Matthew; a good many anacolutha occur in Acts, and the change from direct to indirect discourse

is

frequent; the relative

is

often attracted to the case of

the antecedent and often begins a sentence (Ac. 2

used 7 times (peculiar to Luke) rather than syntax is throughout in general that of the is

/cupte

kolvt]

:

24)

;

cTrio-rdra

or ^a^^el; the of the time.^

Smith, Voy. and Shipw. of St. Paul, 1882. Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., and Acta Apostol. Bacon (Story of St. Paul, 1905, p. 156, note) actually urges Kai kytvtTo in the "we" sections of Acts as a 1

2

for a Greek"! Cf. Moulton, Prol., Luke's style see Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 3, 5, 203, 250 f.,

"pronounced Septuagintism improbable p. 16

f.

On

261, 276, 278, 280, 300, 305. 3 Cf. Vogel, Zur Charak. des Lukas, pp. 21-37, for criticism of the Syntax of Luke; Plummer, Comm. on Luke, has many sensible remarks; Wright, Gosp. ace. to Luke, 1900, p. xi, on Luke's literary habits, and see also Hawkins, Hor. On relation of Luke to Josephus, cf. Bebb, Luke's Syii.^, pp. 174-193. Gosp. in Hast. D. B. On Luke's Hebraisms cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 13 f. Cf. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr., II, pp. 486 ff., for differences between Luke and Mark and Matthew. See also Harnack, Lukas der Arzt der Verfasser des dritten Evang. und der Apostelgesch. (1906). On p. 15 he gives a hst of 84 words

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 123 Luke is also fond of 6 fxev ovv (Acts). The historic present is rare Luke (4 or 6 times). Luke uses the conjunctions and subordinate clauses with more literary skill than the other N. T. writers. He makes choice use of words .and idioms. Cf his report He accumulates participles, espeof Paul's speech on Mars Hill. in

.

cially in the Acts,

Acts he

is

but not without

fond of eh when

kv

In the

stylistic refinement.

would ordinarily be used.

{(J) James. It is at first surprising that one recognized as such a thorough Jew as James, the brother of our Lord, and who used Aramaic, should have written in such idiomatic Greek. "In the skilful use of the Greek language its [Epistle of James] author

There are very few Hebraisms distinctly Jewish, perhaps the earliest Christian document in the N. T. But one cannot think that James wrote the book in Aramaic, for the ear-marks of translation are not present, as Bishop John Wordsworth once argued." There is not, however, in James studied rhetoric nor keen dialectics. The author of Hebrews, Luke and Paul far surpass him in formal rhetoric. "The Epistle of James is from the beginning a little work of literature," "a product of popular literature" (Deissmann, Light, p. 235). The writer uses asyndeton very often and many crisp aphorisms. Just as the inferior to

is

no N. T. writer."^ though the tone

in the Epistle,

is

Synoptic Gospels preserve the local side, so the Epistle of

of the harvest-field

smooth piece

James

{ih.,

p.

is

colour

of

the

country-

best understood in the open air

The incongruity

241).

of such

a

Greek as this Epistle being written by a Palestinian Jew like James vanishes when we consider the bilingual character of the people of Palestine (cf. Moulton, Camh. Bibl. of

Essays, p. 487).

mould is

But,

all

Hebrew The atmosphere

the same, the author has a

of thought reminiscent of 0. T. phrases.

Jewish and "international vulgarisms" do not explain

The pleonasms

are just those seen in the

the fondness for assonance so ley,

Exp. Gk.

Test., p.

394.

LXX, and

it

all.

the book has

common in the 0. T. Cf. OesterHe uses many examples that re-

Luke and Paul. On p. 15 of Luke the Physician Harnack considers the Gk. of Luke's Gospel "excellent." "It occupies a middle position between the kolvt] and Attic Gk. (the language of Mterature)." This is not a very exact description, for Harnack here uses Koivri for vernac. Koivri and Attic was not the language of literature in Luke's peculiar in the N. T. to (trans., 1907)

time (save the Atticists), but the literary 1 Thayer, Lang, of N. T., Hast. D. B. "^

First series of Stud. Bibl., pp. 144

pp. ccv

ff.

KOLvrj.

ff.

Cf.

Mayor, Comm. on James,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

124

NEW TESTAMENT

mind one vividly of the parables of Jesus and many of the ideas and phrases of the Sermon on the Mount are here. There is also a marked similarity between this Epistle and the speech of James in Ac. 15 and the letter there given, which was probably written by him.^ He is fond of repeating the same word or root, as OprjaKos, 9p7]aKeia (1 :2QL)^; his sentences,

rhythmical^; he

is

crisp, vivid, energetic;

forms or the syntax to mark the N. T. representatives of

is

little

in the

from the current kolvt] or though his idiomatic use of the off

it

it,

though short, are

there

worth mentioning, as is also that of a7€ as an interjection, the gnomic aorist, the possible nominative Aieori? in apposition with yXuaaav (3 8). But it is in the vocabulary that James shows his individuality, for in this short epistle there are 73 (9 doubtful) words not appearing elsewhere in the N. T., some of which are found in the LXX,^ like TapaXXayr]. The use of avvaycoyr] (2 2) of a Christian assembly is noteworthy (cf. eKKXrjaia in 5 14 and eTnawaycoyr] in Heb. 10 :25). He has many compound words like Mlcikpltos, bookish words like efxcjiVTos, philosophical terms like vXrj, picturesque words like oXoXv^co, some of a technical nature like inqhaXiov, some strictly classical like pronouns

is

:

:

:

assumed against Spitta^ and Bigg^ that which is so much like Jude. There is not in Jude the epigram of James, but he has a rugged rotundity of style that is impressive and vigorous, if a bit harsh. His style is marked by metaphor and the use of trip(c)

Jude

JuDE.

is

It is here

prior to 2 Peter, the second chapter of

He

cannot be said to be "steeped in the language of the with Chase, ^ but there is a more Hebraistic flavour than is observed in James, his brother. He has literary affinities with some of the apocryphal books and with some of Paul's writings. lets.

LXX"

he shows a better

If

^

command

of

Greek than 2 Peter, yet

See this point well worked out by Mayor, James (Epis. N. T. Gk., p. 279.

of),

his

Hast. D. B.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

Mayor, Comm., pp. cxcvff., for exx. f. Mayor, ch. viii, has also a luminous discussion of the "GramSt. James," which shows conclusively that he has httle that is distinchis grammar. Cf. Thayer (Lex., p. 708) for Ust of words pecuhar

2

Cf.

'

lb., p. cci

mar

of

tive in

to James. *

Cf.

Mayor, Comm.,

p. cxci

f.

On

awaycoyfj

cf.

Hort, Judaistic Christian-

ity, p. 150. *

Der Zweite

6

Comm. on

»

Jude

Brief des Petrus St.

und der

Brief des Judas, 1885.

Peter and St. Jude, 1901.

(Epis. of), Hast.

D. B.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

KOINII

125

"Greek is a strong and weighty weapon over which, however, he has not a ready command." ^ Per contra, there is httle that is peculiar in his grammar, for he shows a normal use of the Greek

The optative occurs twice {w\7]6vvddr], verse

idiom.

2,

and

kinTLixriaai

used skilfully with the participle. Cases, pronouns, tenses, free use of participles, indicate a real mastery The true superlative occurs in rfj dTtwrdrj? of current Greek. The idiomatic use of e^Sofxos without article is seen in xto-ret.

and the

in 9)

article is

.

accusative is seen in to Sevrepov 5 and tov For further details see Mayor on "Grammar of Jude and of Peter" {Cofrmi., pp. xxvi-lv). He has 20 words (one doubtful) not found elsewhere in the N. T.^ A few of them Some of them have a stately like Tr\apr]Tr]s occur in the LXX. ring like Kvixara 6.ypi.a, and a number occur which are found in

Jude

14.

The adverbial

oiioLov TpoTvov 7.

writers of the literary

He

kolptj.

uses

of the state") in a Christian sense,

proscribed").

terms

But he has

also

17

kolvyi

and so

command

like 017101, kXtitoI, irlaTLs, irvevfxa,

awTr]pia ("the safety

ol

Tpoye-Ypamjihoi ("the

of technical Christian

if/vxi-Kos

as Paul used them.

vividness of his style hardly justifies the term "poetic."^

The

Deissmann

(Light, p.

235)

considers Jude a literary epistle in

popular style and "cosmopolite" in tone

with a certain

(p. 242),

Greek is degree of artistic expression. The correctness since Jesus, brother of quite consonant with the authorship of the Essays, Bibl. Catnh. Palestine was a bihngual country (Moulton, of the

p. 488). (/)

Besides, the Epistle has only 25 verses.

Peter. As Peter was

full of

impulses and emotions and ap-

Epistles. parent inconsistencies, the same Peter is Peter and 2 between 1 The most outstanding difference in Peter, found not 2 words 361 1 Peter has in the vocabulary. are in each case Many Peter." while 2 Peter has 231 not in 1

heritage falls to his

common words

like ayia^oj, eXiri^o:, evayyeki^o:, etc., in 1 Peter,

/Sao-tXela, €7ra77eXta, eTnyLvo^aKw, etc., in 2 Peter.

1

and

Peter has 63

words not in the rest of the N. T., while 2 Peter has 57 (5 doubtful); but of these 120 words only one (aTrodeais) occurs in both.^ This is surely a remarkable situation. But both of them have a Chase, Jude (Epis. of), Hast. D. B. See Thayer's list (Lex., p. 709). For fresh discussion of the gram, aspects of Jude and 2 Pet. see Mayor's Comm. (1908). He accepts the genuinenefs of Jude, but rejects 2 Peter. 1

2

3

*

5

Maier, Der Judasbrief, 1906, p. 1G9. Comm. on St. Peter and St. Judo, p. 225. Thayer, Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B., p. 42*. Bigg,

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

126

number N.

of

T., like

words in common that occur elsewhere also a.vacrTpo(}>i],

Both use the

ypvxh, etc.^

in the

plural of abstract

nouns; both have the habit, like James, of repeating words, while Jude avoids repetitions; both make idiomatic use of the article; both make scant use of particles, and there are very few Hebraisms; both use words only known from the vernacular Koivi];

both use a number of

classical

words

like avayKaards

(1

both use picture-words^; both seem to know the Apocrypha; both refer to events in the life of Christ; both show acquaintance with Paul's But, on the Epistles, and use many technical Christian terms.

Peter, Plato), TrXatrTos (Her., Eur., Xen., 2 Peter)

other hand,

1

Peter

is

3;

deeply influenced by the

LXX,

while 2

and elePeter shows little use of it; 1 Peter is more it though vated without affectation, while 2 Peter has grandeur, number is, perhaps, somewhat "grandiose" (Bigg) and uses a of rare words hke Taprapooj; 1 Peter makes clear distinctions between the tenses, prepositions, and uses smooth Greek generally, while 2 Peter has a certain roughness of style and even apparent solecisms like jSXkfxiJia (2:8), though it is not "baboo Greek" (Abbott) 5 nor hke modern "pigeon Enghsh"; 1 Peter shows little originality and rhetorical power, while 2 Peter, though not so original as Jude, yet has more individuality than 1 Peter. Deissmann {Light, p. 235) says: "The Epistles of Peter and Jude have also quite unreal addresses; the letter-like touches are purely decorative. Here we have the beginnings of a Christian literature; the Epistles of Jude and Peter, though still possessing as a whole many popular features, already endeavour here and stately

there after a certain degree of artistic expression."

It is

not for

a grammarian to settle,' if anybody can, the controversy about those two Epistles, but Simcox" is not far wTong when he says of 2 Peter that " a superficial student

student to be certain that 1

N.

Cf. Zahn, Einl. in d.

is

it

T.,

Bd.

is likelier

spurious."

II, p.

than a thorough Bigg^ and

Spitta,^

108; B. Weiss, Einl. in d. N. T.,

p. 445. 2 Bigg, Comm., p. 225 f. Cf also Schulze, Der schriftstellcr. Charakter und Wert des Petrus, Judas und Jacobus, 1802. ' Cf. excellent lists by Chase, Hast. D. B., 1 Peter and 2 Peter. Many of these words are cleared up by the pap., Uke Bodiiiov and dperr]. .

*

Vincent, Word-Studies, vol.

6

Exp., ser.

with « '

2, v. III.

irap€L(T4)epeit>

I,

p. 621.

Chase, Hast. D. B.,

(2 Pet. 1

:

5), for irapa is

Writers of the N. T., p. 64. Der Zweite Brief des Petrus.

p. SOS**, finds needless difficulty

'alongside,' 'in addition.'

^

Comm. on

St. Peter

and Jude.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 127 Zahn^ among recent writers suggest that in 2 Peter we have Peter's own composition, while in 1 Peter we have the Greek of an amanuensis

who

either wrote out Peter's ideas, revised

Peter's

lated

Aramaic

We know

Greek.

into

them

or trans-

that Peter had

and Josephus used such literary (Hasthelp and Paul had amanuenses. On the other hand Chase menis worth It entirely. ings' D. B.) and others reject 2 Peter books the two are which tioning that 2 Peter and the Apocalypse, both that furnish most of the linguistic anomaUes in the N. T,,

interpreters (Mark, for instance),

have abundant writers, and it

among

parallels

the

well-educated papyri

less

is of Peter and John that the terms aypannaroi and tStljTat are used (Ac. 4 13). As we have a problem concerning 1 Peter and 2 Peter on the linguistic side, so we have one concerning John's Gospel and Epistles on the one hand and :

The use

Revelation on the other.

of the article in 1 Peter

is

and eight times he uses the quite Thucydidean in 3 xpovov (1 17) and once that vixSiv TapoLKias idiom like top ttjs The in the N. T. rule the Wpwv (4:3), seen in to ^ov\r]na roiv with and genitive attributive the with absent article is generally There is a refined prepositions as eis pavriayLov alfxaros (1 2). 3 (Bigg),

:

:

:

accuracy in 1 Peter's use of


(Bigg),

cf.

1

:

19; 2

:

A

16, etc.

with the participle in 1 8. distinction is indicative (3:1). The absence future the with Once 'iva occurs

drawn between

of

iiv

and the 1

able.

have

it.

jui?

particles apa, ye,

and

ov

:

notice-

kirei, eireidr], re, dr], ttov, ttcos is

Peter makes idiomatic use of fj.ev, while 2 Peter does not 2 Peter uses the "compact" structure of article, attribu-

and noun, Uke 1 Peter (cf. 2 Pet. 2 1, 10, 13, 16), but the "uncompact" occurs also (cf. 2 Pet. 1 3, 9, 11, 14). In Jude and 2 Peter the commonest order is the uncompact (Mayor, Jude and Second Peter, p. xxii). The single article in 2 Pet. 1 1, 11 is The used of two names for the same object. Cf. also Jude 4.

tive

:

:

:

with the infinitive does not occur in 2 Peter (nor Jude). 2 Peter has some unusual uses of the infinitive after exw (2 Pet. 1 Peter has the article and 1 f.). 1 15) and as result (2 Pet. 3

article

:

:

and future participle once (3 13) 6 KaKcoao:v. Both 1 Pet. (1 2) Peter 1 2 Pet. (1 :2) have the optative TrXvdvudeiv (Uke Jude). on twice (3 14, 17) has ei and the optative. See further Mayor :

:

:

of Jude and 2 Peter" (Comm., pp. xxvi-lv). There was a Christian terminology apart from Paul. (g) their Paul, but many of the terms most familiar to us received

"Grammar

1

Einl. in d.

N. T. Mayor in his Comm. on Jude and 2 Pctor (1007) on linguistic grounds.

jects 2 Peter partly

re-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

128

NEW TESTAMENT

He was a

interpretation from him.

pathfinder, but had inexResch^ has done good service in putting together the words of Paul and the words of Jesus. Paul's rabbinical training and Jewish cast of mind led Farrar^ to call him a Hagadist. Simcox^ says that "there is hardly a line in his writings that a non-Jewish author of his day would have written." Harnack'* points out that Paul was wholly unintelligible to such a Hellenist as Porphyry, but Ramsay^ replies that Porphyry resented Paul's use of Hellenism in favour of Christianity. But Hicks ^ is certainly right in seeing a Hellenistic side to Paul, though Pfleiderer'' goes too far in finding in Paul merely "a Christianized Pharisaism" and a "Christianized Hellenism." Paul and Seneca have often been compared as to style and ideas, but a more pertinent linguistic parallel is Arrian's report of the lectures of Epictetus. Here we have the vernacular kolvt] of an educated man in the second century a.d. The style of Paul, like his theology, has challenged the attention of the greatest minds. ^ Farrar^ calls his language "the style of genius, if not the genius of style." There is no doubt about its individuality. While in the four groups of his letters each group has a style and to some extent a vocabulary of its own, yet, as in

haustible resources for such a task.

is the stamp of the same tremendous mind. These differences of language lead some to doubt the genuineness of certain of the Pauline Epistles, especially the Pastoral Group, but criticism is coming more to the acceptance of

Shakespeare's plays, there

them

all of

as genuine.

dogmatic style

Longinus ranks Paul as master of the

(IlaCXos 6 Tapo-eus ovTiva koL ivpCirbv

*

Der Paulinismus und

2

Life

3

Writers of the N. T., p. 27. Miss, und Ausbr. des Christent., p. 354.

*

and Work

4)7] jxi.

wpoLCTTdnevop

die Logia Jesu, 1904.

of St. Paul, vol.

I,

p. 63S.

Cf. Moffatt's transl., vol. II,

p. 137. 6

Exp., 1906, p. 263.

Paul and Hellen., Stud. Bib., IV, i. Urchristentum, pp. 174-178. 8 See Excursus I to vol. I of Farrar's Life of Paul. 9 lb., p. 623. On Paul's style cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 5, 251, 276, 279, 281 f., 284 f., 289, 300-305. As to the Pastoral Epistles it has been pointed out that there is nothing in Paul's vocabulary inconsistent with the time (James, Genuin. and Author, of the Past. Epis., 1906). It is natural 6

St.

'

be enriched with age. The Church Quart. Rev. (Jan., the new words in the Past. Epis. come from the LXX, writers before or during Paul's time. Cf. Exp. Times, 1907,

for one's style to

1907) shows that Aristotle, p.

245

f.

kolvt]

all

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 129 Baur^ says that he has "the true ring of Col. 4 16) says: "Tonat, fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus." Hausrath^ correctly says that "it is hard to characterize this individuality in whom Christian

SojiJLaTos avvTrode'iKTov) .

Thucydides."

Erasmus (ad

:

and ancient willpower so wonderfully mingle." It is indeed the most personal^ and the most powerful writing of antiquity. He disclaims classic elegance and calls himself IBlcottis t(2 \6ycp (2 Cor. 11 6), yet this was in contrast with the false taste of the Corinthians. But Deissmann (St. Paul, p. 6) goes too far in making Paul a mere

fulness of love, rabbinic keenness of perception

:

tentmaker, devoid of culture.

He

is

abrupt, paradoxical, bold,

a torrent, now like a summer brook. But He was indeed no it is passion, not ignorance nor carelessness. He used the vernacular kolvt] of the time with some Atticist. antithetical,

now

like

touch of the literary flavour, though his quotation of three heathen poets does not show an extended acquaintance with Greek literature.* The difference between the vernacular and the literary Koivi] is often a vanishing point. Paul's style is unhellenic in arrangement, but in Ro. 8 and 1 Cor. 13 he reaches the elevaCertainly his ethical teaching has tion and dignity of Plato.^ a Hellenic ring, being both philosophical and logical.^ Hatch ^ considers Paul to be the foremost representative of the Hellenic influence on early Christianity. He shows some knowl-

quite

Roman

terms ^ and uses arguments calling for educated minds of a high order.^ The grammar shows Uttle Semitic influence. He uses many rhetorical figures such as paronomasia, paradox, etc., which will be discussed in the chapter on that sub-

edge of

1

legal

Paul, vol. II, p. 281.

sonder,

De

ling. paul. idiom.,

2

Der Apost. Paulus,

'

Renan,

tome

Cf.

Philol. Thucyd.-Paul., 1773; also

1866.

p. 502.

St. Paul, p. 232.

l", 1906, p. 37:

K. L. Bauer,

Cf. Tzschirner, Observ. Pauli ap. epist., 1800; La-

his Rhet. Paul., 1782.

"Son

Cf. also Jacquier, Hist, des Livres

grec,

nous

le

verrons, n'est pas le grec

du N.

T.,

litt(5raire,

mais celui de la conversation." Cf. also pp. 61-70 for discussion of "Langue de Saint Paul." Cf. also Adams, St. Paul's Vocab. St. Paul as a Former of Words, 1895. 4

Cf. Farrar, Exc. Ill, vol. I of Life of St. Paul.

Norden, Die Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, 1898, pp. 499, 509. Hicks, St. Paul and HoUcn., 1896, p. 9. 7 Hibbert Lect. (Infl. of Ilellen. on Cln-is., p. 12). 8 Ball, St. Paul and the Rom. Law (1901). Cf. Thack., Rola. of St. Paul to Contemp. Thought (1900). Paul's use of vo/xos shows knowledge of the Roman lex as well the Jewish Torah. 8 Mahaffy, Surv. of Gk. Civihz., p. 310. 6

«

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

130

some

ject,

Farrar^ sug-

thirty kinds occurring in his writings.

gests that Paul

had a teacher

He

of rhetoric in Tarsus.

and

for his varied use of the particles

is

noted

writes with freedom

and

accuracy, though his anacolutha are numerous, as in Gal. 2 6-9. He uses prepositions with great frequency and discrimination. The genitive is employed by Paul with every variety of applicaThe participle appears with great luxuriance and in all tion. :

sorts of ways, as imperative or indicative or genitive absolute, articular, anarthrous, etc.

He

is 'E/3patos e^ 'E^palcov,

of a Hellenist.

He

but he handles

thinks in Greek

Greek with all the freedom and it is the vernacular kolvt] of a brilliant and well-educated man in touch with the Greek culture of his time, though remaining his

thoroughly Jewish in his mental fibre. The peculiar turns in Paul's language are not due to Hebraisms, but to the passion of

which occasionally (cf. 2 Cor.) bursts all bounds and piles parenthesis and anacoluthon on each other in a heap. But even in a riot of language his thought is clear, and Paul often draws a fine point on the turn of a word or a tense or a case. To go into detail with Paul's writings would be largely to give the tls grammar of the N. T. In Phil. 2 1 we have a solecism in Thayer expressive. and rich is very vocabulary His oirXayxva.. {Lexicon, pp. 704 ff.) gives 895 (44 doubtful) words that are found his nature

e'i

:

nowhere

else in

the N. T., 168 of

them being

in the Pastoral

part of a Pauline lexicon Epistles. use of the papyri makes helpful and very which is (from a to e) this study is the in thing strildng The most inscriptions. and

Nageli^ has pubhshed the

first

cosmopolitan character of Paul's vocabulary. There are very few words which are found only in the Attic writers, like alaxpoTTjs, and no cases of Atticism, though even in the letters a to

he finds some 85 that belong to the literary kolvt] as shown by books, papyri and inscriptions, words hke adavaala, aderko}, etc. In some 50 more the meaning corresponds to that of the literary To these he adds words which 23). KOLvrj, as in dvaXuco (Ph. 1

€

:

appear in the literary kolvt], papyri and inscriptions after Paul's time, words like apirayixos, ava^rjv, etc. Then there are words that,

so

far

as

known,

Christian sense, like

occur

kKKk-qaia.

first

in

1

Life of St. Paul, vol.

2

Der Wortsch. des Apost. Paulus, 1905. He says

I,

the

N.

But the vernacular

T. kolvt]

in

the

as set

p. 6.30. (p. 86):

"Es

iiberrascht

uns nicht mehr, dafi jeder paulinische Brief cine Reihe von Wortern enthalt, die den iibrigen unbekannt sind." This is well said. Each letter oxight to have words not in the others.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU 131 forth in the papyri his vocabulary,

of

and

when

inscriptions furnishes the

to this

(including the Apocrypha) as

is

added the use

ground-work of the

LXX

Especially noteworthy are some nice Greek points that are wanting in Paul (as well as in the rest of the N. T.) and in the papyri and inscriptions, as olos re el/iL, aiadavonat, tclvv, fiaXa, eTrojuat (seldom in in avTi\an^avofj.aL, ayia^oi}.

Niigeli sums up by saying that no one the inscriptions), etc. would think that Paul made direct use of Plato or Demosthenes and that his dihgent use of the LXX explains all his Hebraisms besides a few Hebrew words like afirjv or when he translated Hebrew. His Aramaisms (like a^^d) are few, as are his Latinisms "The Apostle writes in the style natural to a (like TpaLTupLov). Greek of Asia Minor adopting the current Greek of the time, borrowing more or less consciously from the ethical writers of the time, framing new words or giving a new meaning to old words .

.

.

His choice of vocabulary

is

therefore

much

tetus save that his intimate knowledge of the

like that of

LXX

Epic-

has modified

Paul's Greek, in a word, "has to do with no school, with no

it."^

model, but streams unhindered with overflowing bubbling right out of the heart, but it is real Greek" (Wilamowitz-MoUendorff,

Die

griechische Literatur des Altertunis, pp. 1-126.

der Gegenwart, Tl.

I,

Abt.

8,

1905).

Deissmann

Cf. Die Kultur (Light, p. 234)

Paul wholly as "a non-literary man of the non-literary class in the Imperial Age, but prophet-like rising above his class and surveying the contemporary educated world with the conseesi

sciousness of superior strength."

1 Walter Lock, Jour, of Theol. Stud., 1906, p. 298. Athletic figures are almost confined to Paul (and Heb.), and Ramsay (Exp., 1906, pp. 2S3ff.) thinks Tarsus left this impress on him. A further discussion of Paul's rhetoric will be found in the chapter on Figures of Speech. Cf. J. Weiss, Beitr. zur pauUn. Rhetorik, 1897; Blass, Die Rhyth. der asian. und rom. Kunstpr., 1905. Deiss. (Theol. Literaturzeit., 1906, pp. 231 ff.) strongly controverts Blass' idea that Paul used conscious rhythm. Cf. Howson, Metaph. of St. Paul. On Paul's Hellen. see Hicks, St. Paul and Hellen. (Stud. Bibl. et Eccl., 1896); Curtius, Paulus in Athens (Gesamm. Abhandl., 1894, pp. 527 ff.); Ramsay, Cities of St. Paul (pp. 9, 30-41); Heinrici, Zum Hellen. des Paulus (2 Cor. in Meyer);

Wilamowitz-Moll., Die griech. Lit. des Altcrt. (p. 157); G. Milligan, Epis. to the Th. (1908, p. Iv). Paul had a full and free Gk. vocab., thought in Gk., wrote in Gk. as easily as in Aramaic. But his chief indebtedness seems to

bo to the

LXX,

the vernac.

koivt]

and the

ethical Stoical writers.

Milhgan

(see

above, pp. lii-lv) has a very discriminating discussion of Paul's vocab. and style. Garvie (Stud, of Paul and His Gospel, p. 6 f.) opposes the notion that

Paul had a decided Gk. influence.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

132 (h)

Writer OF Hebrews.

Bruce is certain that the author Simcox^ is willing to admit that have belonged once to the school of Philo, as Paul did to

was not a

may

he

^

disciple of Paul, while

that of Gamaliel.

Harnack suggests

Priscilla as the author.

If

Paul had "imperial disregard for niceties of construction," Hebrews shows "a studied rhetorical periodicity." ^ Von Soden* considers that in the N. T. different in

Hebrews is "the best Greek, scarcely any point from that of contemporary writers." This

the more surprising

is

of the

LXX. The

quent use of

when one observes his constant quotation grammatical peculiarities are few, like the fre-

Trapd in

comparison,

kwei

with apodosis (protasis sup-

pressed), the perfect tense to emphasize the

permanence of the Scripture record which sometimes verges close to the aorist (4 3), the frequent participles, the varied use of particles, periphrases, :

the absence of the harsher kinds of hiatus, the presence of rhythm in any of the N. T. books, and in general the quality

more than

of literary style

more than

in

any other N. T.

notes "the parenthetical involutions." the periods

is

of St. Paul."

"The

writing.

Westcott

calculated force of

sharply distinguished from the impetuous eloquence The writer does not use Paul's rhetorical expres-

sions tI ovv; t'l yap; Moulton {Camb. Bihl. Essays, p. 483) notes the paradox that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by one who apparently knew no Hebrew and read only the LXX. The

use of subordinate sentences is

carefully chosen.

and

There

is

is

common and

frequent use of

the position of words fxeu

and

re as well as

The optative occurs only once and shows that it is true KOLvrj. The studied style appears particularly in ch. 11 in the use of TTto-ret. The style is hortatory, noble and eloquent, and has points of contact with Paul, Luke and Peter. The vocabulary, odev

8l6.

like the style, is less like the

vernacular kolvt] than any book in Of 87 words which are found in the LXX and in this book alone in the N. T., 74 belong to the ancient literary works and only 13 to the vernacular. 18 other words pecuhar, to this Epistle are found in the literary kolvt]. There are 168 (10 doubtful) words in Hebrews that appear nowhere else in the N. T. (cf. Thayer, Lexicon, p. 708). These 168 words are quite characteristic also, like a4)opav, aiadrjT-qpLOV, iravrjyvpLS, irpooTOTOKLa. Westthe N. T.

2 Writers of the N. T., p. 42. Hast. D. B., Hebrews. Thayer, Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B. * Early Chris. Lit., 1906, p. 12. On the lang. of Heb. see the careful remarks of Jacquier (Hist, des Livres du N. T., tome V, 1906, pp. 457 ff.). Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 5, 279, 280 f ., 288 f., 296 ff., 303 f. »

»

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE cott^ considers irXrjpoo}

the absence of words like evayykXLou,

The

remarkable.

chief

Hebrews with the

ulary of

words

bond

of contact

133

ixvar-qpLov,

in the vocab-

use of "sonorous" but the author is by no though he does approach the literary kolptj.

like

aPTiKaOiaTrjixL,

is

kolvti

other sphere: as in subject-matter

work, so in form

in the

euTrepto-raros,

means an Atticist, Deissmann^ indeed considers Hebrews logical

KOINII

it is

more

as alone belonging "to an-

it is

more

artistic

of a learned theothan the other books

N. T." He even feels that it "seems to hang in the background like an intruder among the N. T. company of popular books" {Light, p. 243). The Johannine question at once confronts the mod(i) John. ern grammarian who approaches the books in the N. T. that are accredited to John. It is indeed a difficult problem.^ There is a triple difficulty the Gospel presents a problem of its own (with the Epistles), the Apocalypse also has its burden, and there is the serious matter of the relation of the Gospel and Apocalypse on the linguistic side. Assuming that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel, Epistles and Apocalypse, we have the following situation. The Gospel of John has a well-defined character. There are few Hebraisms in detail beyond the use of vloi cfx^Tos (12 36), /cat in the sense of "and yet" or "but" (cf. Hebrew 1 and Kal in LXX) as in 20 14, the absence of the particles save ovp, and the conof the

:

:

:

stant co-ordination of the sentences with rhythmical parallelism.

In the formal grammar the Greek is much like the vernacular literary) kolvt], but the cast of thought is wholly Hebrew. Ewald"* rightly calls its spirit "genuinely Hebrew," while Renan^ even says that the Gospel "has nothing Hebrew" in its style. (and

Godet^

calls

the Gospel a

Hebrew body with a Greek dress and it "has a Hebrew soul in the

quotes Luthardt as saying that

Greek language." Schaff compares Paul to an Alpine torrent and John to an Alpine lake. There is indeed in this Gospel great simplicity and profundity. John's vocabulary is somewhat limited, some 114 words (12 doubtful, Thayer, Lexicon, p. 704) beJ

Comm. on

'

Cf.

gxp. Times, Nov., 1906, p. 59. Fourth Gosp., 1904; Sanday, Crit. of the Fourth Gosp., 1905; Bacon, The Fourth Gosp. in Res. and DeHeb., p.

^

xlvi.

Drummond, Charac. and Author,

of the

bate, 1910. *

Quoted

in Schaff,

On

Comp.

to

Gk. N.

T., p. 67.

73 Sch;iff puts Jo. 1 18 side by side in Gk. and Heb. Heb. tone of the Gk. is clear. 8 Comm. sur I'Evang. de S. Jean, vol. I, pp. 226, 232. 5

lb.

»

Comp.

p.

to

:

Gk. N.

T., p. 66.

The

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

134

NEW TESTAMENT

longing to the Gospel alone in the N. T. But the characteristic words are repeated many times, such as oKriQaa, anapria, ytuuaKoo, KplaLS, X670S, fxaprvpeco,

86^a,

fco57,

"He

rings the changes

k6(j/xos,

-maTevco, ckotos,

etc.

4>uis,

on a small number of elementary words and their synonyms."^ But words like eKKXrjaia, evayyeXiov, puravoLa, irapa^oXi], irlaTLs, crocjiLa do not occur at all. However, too much must not be inferred from this fact, for TncrTevoo and thayytOther characteristics of the Gospel Xtfco do appear very often.^

common

are the

use of tva in the non-final sense, the distinctive

force of the pronouns (especially

eKtlvos, kfxos, I'Sios),

the vivid use

Mark), the unusual use of ovv,^ fw?) atcb^tos is frequent (21 times, and more than all the rest of the N. T.), frequent repetition, favourite synonyms.^ The Johannine use of of the tenses (like

dXXd, yap,

/cat, 5e,

The

el,

otl,

/jlt],

oh, etc., is all

interesting (see Abbott).

modes all yield good John possess the same

prepositions, the cases, the voices, the

results in Abbott's hands.

The

Epistles of

general traits of the Gospel save that ovv does not occur at

save in 3 Jo. 8 while on nective.

is

very common.

Kat

is

all

the usual con-

Only eight words are common alone to the Gospel and

the Epistles in the N. T., while eleven are found in the Epistles

and not in the Gospel. Westcott,^ however, gives parallel sentences which show how common phrases and idioms recur in the The Apocalypse has much in Gospel and the First Epistle. common with the Gospel, as, for instance, no optative is found in either;

oiroos is

not in either save in Jo. 11

:

57; Iva

is

very

common

John and Apocalypse, more so than in any other book of the N. T. save Mark, and 'iva is very common in Gospel and Apocalypse; ovv is almost absent from the Apocalypse in Gospel,

1

/jlt]

Abb., Job. Vocab., p. 348. lb., p. 158. Abbott has luminous remarks on such words as k^ovaia, and all phases of John's vocabulary. 1

2

^

Occurs 195 times in the Gospel and only 8 of the instances Nearly aU of these are in the transitional sense.

courses of Jesus.

Trto-reuw,

in the dis-

Cf. Abb.,

Joh. Gr., 1906, p. 165.

On

Joh. Synon. In John 6pdw

Abbott's Joh. Vocab., not used in present (though often ewpa/ca), but /SXcttw and Oewpew. Luke uses it also in present only 3 times, Heb. 2, Jas. 2, Ac. 8, Apoc. 18. On the whole subject of Joh. gr. see the same author's able work on Joh. Gr. (1906), which has a careful and exhaustive discussion of the most *

1905.

(like deoipkw, opaco) see ch. Ill of is

interesting points in the Gospel. *

Comm. on

istic of

Epis. of Jo., pp. xh

the Gospel, shows

how

ff.

The absence

of ovv,

when

so character-

precarious mere verbal argument

is.

Die Evang., p. 380, calls the Gospel the Apocalypse "transfigured." Blass on John's style, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 261, 276, 278 f., 291, 302.

Baur, Cf.

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 135 as in Epistles

and the discourses

of Jesus, being

common

as tran-

GospeP; apa, common in other Evangelists and Paul, is not found in Gospel, Epistles or Apocalypse; fxev, so common in Matthew, Luke (Gospel and Acts), Paul and Hebrews, is not found at all in Apocalypse and John's Epistles and only eight times in his Gospel; coo-re, which appears 75 times elsewhere in the N. T., is not found in Gospel, Epistles or Apocalypse save once in Jo. 3 16; /xiy Tore, fairly common in Matthew, Luke and Hebrews, does not occur in John's writings save in Jo. 7 26 (Paul uses it also once only, 2 Tim. 2 25, preferring ^117 ttcos, which John does not have) napTvpkw is more frequent in Gospel than in 1 John and Apocalypse, but fxaprvpla is as common in Apocalypse as Gospel; ovoixa is frequent in Gospel and Apocalypse as applied to God; oUa is found less often in Apocalypse than in Gospel; a\r]divbs is common in Gospel, Epistle and Apocalypse, though a\r]dr]s and oXrjOeLa do not appear in the Apocasitional particle in narrative portion of

:

:

:

;

lypse;

occurs only once in Gospel (16:33), but

plkckjo

is

common

John and Apocalypse; diScofjiL is more frequent in Gospel and Apocalypse than in any other N. T. book (even Matt.); 5etKvvfXL appears about the same number of times in Gospel and Apocalypse; X670S is applied to Christ in Jo. 1 1 and Rev. 19 13; the pecuHar expression Kal vvv eariv which occurs in John 5 25 is similar to the Kal ka/xev of 1 Jo. 3:1, and the Kal ouk eial of Rev. 2:2, 3 9; all are fond of antithesis and parenthesis and repeat the article often. Over against these is to be placed the fact that the Apocalypse has 156 (33 doubtful) words not in the Gospel or Epistles, and only nine common alone to them. Certainly the subject-matter and spirit are different, for the Son of Thunder speaks in the Apocalypse. Dionysius^ of Alexandria called the language of the Apocalypse barbaric and ungrammatical because of the numerous departures from usual Greek in 1

:

:

:

:

The

assonance.

solecisms in the Apocalypse are not in the realm

of accidence, for forms like

mon

in

the vernacular

d^rj/ces,

kolvt).

The

irkirrooKav, 8l8co, etc.,

are com-

syntactical peculiarities are

due partly to construdio ad sensum and

variatio structurae.

Some

("idiotisms" according to Dionysius) are designed, as the expres-

God by awo Homer may be

sion of the unchangeableness of

the relative use of 6 in

6

rjv

77

oval in 11

:

14, o/xolou viov in 14

:

14, oval tovs

' Similarly re, which occurs 160 times in the Acts, Luke's Gospel. Cf. Leo, Speaker's Comm., p. 457. 2 Apud Eus. H. E., VII, xxv.

6

uv

(1 :4).

recalled. k.

is

in 8

:

13.

As

to

See also

Benson

found only 8 times in

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

136

"a grammar of Ungrammar," which is a But the "solecisms" in the Apocalypse anacolutha. Concord is treated lightly in the

(Apocalypse) speaks of

bold

way

of putting

are chiefly cases of free use of the

nominative

and

participles Xe7wj'

pronoun as

in 3

:

8;

of parenthesis as in

The

it.

(1

:

5; 2

:

20; 3 :

:

5

f.

Cf. Swete, Apocalypse, p. cxviii

has encroached upon other cases participle is used freely 26)

:

.

12), in particular

the

;

:

1

Most

f.

modern Greek) as with Kar-qyopdv (12 10). The

accusative, as in the vernacular

6 vLKwv (2

:

(4:1; 14 14) in the addition of a in gender and number as in 7 9; in the use exo^v

kolvt]

(cf.

:

and often absolutely

in the nominative as

of the variations in case are

with the parti-

ciple or in apposition, as 6 ixaprvs after XpiaTov (1:5).

Moulton^

has called attention to the numerous examples of nominative apposition in the papyri, especially of the less educated kind. The old explanation of these grammatical variations was that they were Hebraisms, but Winer ^ long ago showed the absurdity of that idea. It is the frequency of these phenomena that calls for remark, not any isolated solecism in the Apocalypse. Moulton* denies that the Apocalypse has any Hebraisms. That is possibly going too far the other way, for the book is saturated with the apocalyptic images and phrases of Ezeldel and Daniel and is very much hke the other Jewish apocalypses. It is not so much particular Hebraisms that meet us in the Apocalypse as the flavour of the LXX whose words are interwoven in the text at every turn. It is possible that in the Apocalypse we have the early style of John before he had lived in Ephesus, if the Apocalypse was written early. On the other hand the Apocalypse, as Bigg holds true "

1

Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 151; Reinhold, 57 f.; Schlatter, Die Spr. und Heimat dea vierten Schl. overemphasizes the Aramaic colour of the Gospel.

Exp., 1904, p. 71.

Graec. Patr.

Evang. 2 W.-M., '

etc.,

p.

p. 671.

Prol., p. 9.

Cf. also Jiilicher, Intr. to

1896; Lee, Speaker's

N. T.; Bousset, Die Offenb. Joh.,

Comm. on Rev. Swete

(Apoc. of St. John, 1906, p.

cxx) thinks that John's "eccentricities of syntax belong to

cause:

some

to the habit which he

may have

thinking in a Semitic language; some to the desire of giving vivid reality to his visions, which leads of shorthand notes, jotted

him

more than one

retained from early years of

to report

them

movement and maimer

after the

down at the time; some to the circumstances in The Apoc. "stands alone among Gk. hterary

which the book was wTitten."

its disregard of the ordinary rules of syntax, and the success with which syntax is set aside without loss of perspicuity or even of literary power." Swete welcomes gladly the researches of Deissmann, Thumb and Moulton, but considers it precarious to compare a literary document Uke the Apoc. with slips in business letters, etc.

writings in

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

KOI Nil

137

may represent John's real style, while the Gospel and may have been revised as to Greek idioms by a friend or

of 2 Peter,

Epistles

John in Ephesus (of. Jo. 21 24). With tliis theory compare Josephus' War and Antiquities. One is slow (despite Moffatt's positiveness in the Exp. Gk. Test.), in the light of Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, to say that John could not have written

friends of

:

Besides what composed was has been said one must recall that the Apocalypse without possibly on the Isle of Patmos, in some excitement, and had probably Epistle careful revision, while the Gospel and First the verrate any care and the assistance of cultured friends. At

the Apocalypse, though

nacular

far

is

KOLvr]

it

more

be the

last of his books.

in evidence in the Apocalypse

than in

had the choice between the

the Gospel and Epistles. "As Dante accepted language of education, Latin, and the vulgar tongue, so artificial kind of Greek, St. John had to choose between a more the common vulgar and as perpetuated from past teaching, rules, but gramm.atical strict speech, often emancipated from speech."^ nervous and vigorous, a true living Vn. N. T. Greek Illustrated by the Modem Greek VernacuConstant use will be made of the modern Greek in the lar. course of the

Grammar.

Here a

brief survey

is

given merely to

show how the colloquial kolvtj survives in present-day Greek vernacular. Caution is necessary in such a comparison. The hterary modern Greek has its affinities with the hterary Koiv-q or even with the

Atticists, while the vernacular of

to-day often shows

the N. T. affinities with the less educated writers of papyri of the later upon effect great a have indeed time. The N. T. did KOLvr]

when

theological questions were

and Constantinople.^ The vernacular became wider terms there

is

uppermost at Alexandria

cleavage between the literary and the also.

But apart from

a striking likeness at

many

ecclesiastical

points between the ver-

and modern Greek vernacular, though modern Greek ^ has, of course, Germanic and other elements not in the Koivn. Greek than in modern the in common more The diminutive'* is

nacular

KOLpi]

In general see to the Seven Churches, 1905, p. 209. Zeitschr., 1905, Kirch. Neuc pp. 51-64. Joh., Apost. des Charak. Seeberg, Zur 2 Cf. Gregory Naz., II, 13, A; Gregory Nyssa, III, 557 B; Reinhold, De 1

Ramsay, Letters

1898. Indoger. Forsch., 1903, p. 359 f. Boltz (Die hell. Spr., 1881, Gk. is as far removed from p. 10) quotes Rangab6 as saying that the mod. as from that of Xenophon. that of the

Graec. Patr.

etc.,

»

Thumb,

*

Cf. Hatz., Einl. in d. ncugr. Gr., p. 37

LXX

f.,

for Ust.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

138

NEW TESTAMENT

and usually in i, as t6 apvl. The optative is rare in the modern Greek it has disappeared. The infinitive is vanishing before I'ra in the N. T. in the modern Greek va has disthe

KOLVT]

N. T.;

in the

placed

it

;

completely save with auxiliary verbs.^

accusative ^

The

modern Greek has made still further headway and is used even The fxi verb has entirely vanished ttTTo and all prepositions. The forms in -oaav, in modern Greek vernacular except dvai. -ovaav are very common, as are the a forms in aorist and imperfect. The forms in -es (-as) for perfect and first aorist are also frequent. The middle voice has almost vanished as a separate in

with

voice

(cf.

Latin).

Prepositions in the vernacular (chiefly

The

displaced the dative.

superlative

the article and the comparative.

is

eis)

have

by

usually expressed

Kennedy^

gives an interesting

words that appear either for the first time or with a new sense in the LXX or the N. T. (or the papyri) that preserve that meaning in the modern Greek, as 8a}fj.a{' rooi') fdvcnaarrjpLov ('altar'), Kadr]yriTr]s ('professor,' in N. T. 'master'), ^evodoxelov ('hotel,' in N. T. ^ti'oSoxeco =' entertain strangers'), iraLbehw ('chastise,' from TraTs) ^^dj/co (' arrive ') xoprdf co (' feed ') etc. The Ust could be greatly extended, but let these suffice.'* A specimen of modern Greek vernacular is given from Pallis' translation of Jo. 1 6-8: By^/ce of

list

,

,

,

:

avdpwTOS (TTaXixhos

ej^as

Kripvy/Jia,

HTav

Greek text,

7id

J^d

eKelvos to

clto to Geo' r' bvofxa tov 'Iccavqs.

Krjpv^ei to c/xis,

4>cos,

Tapa 7td va

in

rjpde

oKol va TncFTeif/ovv.

The

literary

7td Aev

modern

from the original N. T.

vTijp^ev, 6vop,a^6iJ.evos, 5td va, dev, rJTo.

Moul-

an interesting note gives some early illustrations of

modern Greek vernacular. It still persists in

1

kl

Kripv^ei to 0cDs.

in these verses differs very httle

only in the use of

ton*

irov va Kavei

Autos

In the second century a.d. kaov

is

Pontic-Cappadocian Gk. according to Thumb, Theol.

Literaturzeit., 1903, p. 421.

There

a riot of indifference as to case in the vernacular Byz. Gk., as Cf. Mullach, Gr. der griech. Vulgarspr., p. 27. Jean Psichari, 'P65a KoX M^Xa (1906), has written a defence of the mod. Gk. vemac. and has shown its connection with the ancient vernac. The mod. Gk. has like free^

avv

rrjs

dom

is

yvvaiKos.

Thumb, Handb., pp. 32 ff.). Prephave displaced the partitive gen., the genitive of material and of comparison (abl.), in mod. Gk. The mod. Gk. shows the ace. displacing the gen. and dat. of the older Gk. {op. cit., p. 35 f.) after aKoXovdu, &kovo}, airavTu, The double ace. goes beyond anc. Gk. usages {op. cit., p. 36) as oKa p65iva etc. in the use of the genitive case (cf.

ositions

TO. /SXtTTw, » *

Mod. Gk. 6

*I see

everything rosy.'

Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 153 ff. Cf. Thumb's Handb. der neugr. Volksspr. (1895); V. and D., (1887);

ProL, p. 234.

Thumb-Angus, Handb.

of

Mod. Gk. Vernac.

Handb. to

(1912).

THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

IN

(BZ

found in OP 528. He quotes Thumb from an inscription of the first century a.d.

and accusative

plural.

know.'

18).

234)

who

cites

nommative

{Cities and Bish., II, p. 537) form on a Phrygian inscription

As one illustration note Paul's use In modern Greek dialects KaTexw = 5?^eupw,

of the third century a.d. :

ix,

exouaes as

And Ramsay

gives kmrvdemovu as third plural Karkxoi (Ro. 1

THE KOINH 139

of 'I

PART

II

ACCIDENCE

CHAPTER V WORD-FORMATION Grammar was

Etymology.

I.

among

at

first

a branch of philosophy

the Greeks, and with the foundation of the Alexandrian

library a

new

era began with the study of the text of Homer.^

After Photius etymology

The

literature." 2

"rules the whole later grammatical

Stoic granmiarians were far better in ety-

in anything else and we owe them a real debt in though their extended struggle as to whether analogy or anomaly ruled in language has left its legacy in the long lists of "exceptions" in the grammars.^ In some granmiars the term etymology is still applied to the whole discussion of Forms

mology than this respect,

But to-day it is generally applied and meaning of words.* The word krvfioXoyia is, of course, from eru/zos and \6yos, and er-viios, meaning 'real' or 'true,' is itself from the same root er- from which er-eos, 'true,' comes. So also tr-dfco, 'to test.' Compare also Sanskrit sat-yas, 'true,' and sat-yam, 'truth,' as well as the Anglo-Saxon

or Accidence, Formenlehre.

to the study of the original form

soS, 'sooth.'

To

No more

tTVjjLov

is

the true literal sense of a word, the

remark can be made at

this point than to on the importance of the student's seeing the original form and import of each word and suffix or prefix. This is not all that is needed by any means, but it is a beginning, and the right beginning.^ " It was the comparative study of languages that first

root.

helpful

insist

1 "^

'

Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet.

et fit. des

Formes Grq.

ct Lat., 1901, p. 245.

Reitzenstein, Gesch. der griech. Etym., 1897, p. vi. Stcinthal, Gesch. der Sprachw. etc., 2. Tl., pp. 347

"6

ff.

wahre Bedeutung'; daI3 man hior Itx>fios sagte und nicht d.\-n6i]s, liegt daran, daO ionische Sophisten, namentlich Prodikos, die Etymologic und Synonymik aufbrachten." F. Blass, Herman, und Krit., Bd. I, Muller's Handb. d. klass. Alt., 1892, p. 183. 6 See Pott, Etym. Forsch., 1801; Curtius, Gk. Etym., vols. I, II, 1SS6; Prellwitz, Etym. Worterb. der griech. Spr., 1893; Brug. und Delb., Grundr. der vergl. Gr., 1897-1901; Skeat, Etym. Diet, of the Eng. Lang., etc. ^

tru/uos

X670S heiBt ja auch 'die

143

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

144

NEW TESTAMENT

gave etymology a surer holcl."^ Curtius means etymology in the modern sense, to be sure. II. Roots.2 It is not to be supposed that what are called roots necessarily existed in this form.

They

represent the original

stock from which other words as a rule come.

What

the original

words actually were we have no means of telling. They were not necessarily interjections, as some have supposed. Mere articulate sounds, unintelligible roots, did not constitute speech. Some interjections are not roots, but express ideas and can often be analyzed, as "]emme"= Jesu Domine.^ Others, hke most nursery words, are onomatopoetic. There is, besides, no evidence that primitive man could produce speech at will.^ But a few root-words appear like the Latin i ('go') and probably the Greek 77 (though i]k is found in Epic Greek) The number of Greek roots is comparatively few, not more than 400, probably less. Harris^ observes that of the 90,000 words in a Greek lexicon only 40,000 are what are termed classic words. The new words, which are constantly made from slang or necessity, are usually made from one of the .

by various combinations, or at any rate after the analogy of the old words.^ Words are "the small coin of language,"' though some of them are sesquipedalian enough. There seem to be two ultimate kinds of words or roots, verbs and pronouns, and they were at last united into a single word as 077-/X1, 'say I.' old roots

Curtius, Gk. Etym., vol.

1

I,

p. 16.

The whole subject of N. T. lexicography calls for reworking. Deissmann is known to be at work on a N. T. Lex. in the hght of the pap. and the inscr. Meanwhile reference can be made to his Bible Studies, Light, and 2

New

Light on the N. T.; to

J. H. Moulton's articles in the Ex-p. Kennedy's Sour, of N. T. Gk. (for LXX and N. T.); to Thayer's N. T. Gk. Lex. and his art. on Lang., of N. T. in Hast. D. B.; to Cremer's Theol. Lex. of N. T.; to Mayser's Gr. d. griech. Pap. For

his

(1901, 1903, 1904, 1908); to

the

LXX

phenomena

see careful discussion of Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 112-

Nothing hke an exhaustive discussion of N. T. word-formation can yet be attempted. But what is here given aims to follow the hnes of historical and comparative grammar. We must wait in patience for Deissmann's Lex. George MiUigan is at work with Moulton on his Lexical Notes from the Pap. (Exp., 1908 ). Cf. also NageH, Der Wortsch. des Apost. Paulus, a portion of which has appeared. Especially valuable is Abb. Joh. Vocab. (1905). For the LXX cf. also Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., pp. 302-304. The indices to the hsts of inscr. and pap. can also be consulted with profit. 136.

—

3

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 181. notes on Gk. Gr.

6

MS.

«

Cf.

on

slang,

Wedgwood,

Intr. to the Diet, of the

Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 175. »

GUes, Comp.

Philol., p. 235.

*

lb., p. 187.

Eng. Lang.; Paul,

^^^

WORD-FORMATION

verbal and nomiseem possible to distinguish between indifferently verb is word same the nal roots, as in English to-day is that verbs are view modern The or noun "walk," for instance. roots pronominal The 280). nominal in origin (Hirt, Handb., p. nouns and {pwara) verbs both for may furnish most of the suffixes {aura^voixiaL) thereVerbs, substantives and pronouns (opouiaTa). all the others are and speech, of parts the earliest It does not

,

fore, constitute

developed from these three.^

Adjectives {opdfxara

or pronouns. merely variations from substantives

pwara)

kindera)

Adverbs

are

(e^^p-

or adjectives or proare fixed case-forms of substantives used with nouns or Prepositions {Tpodkcas) are adverbs Conjunctions {Mea,.o.) are adverbs

nouns. with verbs (in composition). Intenin various ways. used to connect words and sentences pronominal adverbs from nominal or sive (^TTtrdaecos) particles are Speech has made a very smal bekind. stems of a special the sentence is probably as ginning with isolated words; in fact words.^ The number speech, though we first discuss old as

human

ending is not very great, but some of root-words with the mere where the case-ending is added few survive even in the N. T.,

with which compare InSo mCs (Ac. 27:41), Latin nav-is.

directly to the root, as aX-s

Latin

sal,

English

stead of aXs

sal-t.

{6:Ka,

Mk.

9

:

50),

the N. T. elsewhere follows the

kolvv in

using to

is only .ohs {.68-s) r6 xXoTov instead of vavs. In ihe 68ovs). or ovs of 5 (analogy of slightly changed after the loss numerals and Pronouns pronoun els (e.-s) is similarly explained.

aXas,

and

the root

we have many more such roots use the root directly. In verbs endings without the thematic used directly with the personal any tense-suffix for the presvowel o/e and sometimes without The whole subject of verbs is much more

Uke 4>vy^ (<^a-MO. non-thematic forms are rapidly compUcated, but in general the

ent,

the vernacular modern Greek disappearing in the N. T., while in no longer used (save in the case the non-thematic or m^ verbs are instance. A number of these roots of et^aO, as 515a. for dldc-nc for stock. Take 8ck, the root go back to the common Indo-Germanic in-dic-o, dig-a-rm.; the Latin dic-o, of 8elKPv-nc. The Sanskrit has thematic the Take zeigm. ju-dex; the Gothic teiho; the German is spa? ('look), spaf =spy. verb aKk-.-To-m- The Sanskrit root spec-ulum, spec-to, etc. in The Zend has fpaf, the Latin ^yec-io, and areK has become place taken the Greek root metathesis has

Mt

oder der andercn W^^^^lasse "t)ber das relative Alter der einen 164). (Vogrinz, Gr. dc8 hom. Dud., ISbO, p. sich nichts Sicheres ausmac-hcn" 281. Gr., 2 Brug., Kurze vergl. p. X

NEW TESTAMENT

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

146 cKtT in

(TKkir-To-fMaL

('to

spy

out'),

('a watching'),

o-kott-tj

('a watch-tower'), oKoir-bs ('a spy,' 'a goal'),

Ph. 3

:

14 Kara

The

(xkottov.

old

ctkco;/'

(jkott-io.

('owr).^

Greek writers ^ made

Cf.

iJ,vaTr]pLov

=

/xOs T-qpeivl

The Indo-Germanic in. Words with Formative Suffixes. languages have a highly developed system of affixes,^ prefixes, The suffixes are used for various purposes, as infixes, suffijfes. case-endings of nouns, as personal endings of verbs, as aids in the creation of words (formative suffixes). The Greek is rich in these sufl&xes, which are more or less popular at various peri-

formative

The

ods of the language.

suffixes in the

Greek are quite similar to

those in the older Sanskrit. When the formative suffixes are used directly with the root, the words are called primitives; when the

stem of the word

not a root,

is

it is

called a derivative.

Hence

there are primitive and derivative verbs, primitive and derivaThere tive substantives, primitive and derivative adjectives.

N. T. Greek no "special" formative suffixes, does vary naturally in the relative use of these terminations from the earher language. In the modern Greek a number of new suffixes appear like the diminutives —ttouXos (ttcoXos,

are, of course, in the

though the

kolvt]

'foal'), ktX.

"In

all

essentials the old patterns are

adhered to"

N. T. word-formation.'' See also Hadley-Allen (pp. 188 ff .) for the meaning of the Greek formative suffixes. On the stem-building of the verb one can consult (a) Verbs. Hirt or Brugmann for the new point of view.^ Without attempting a complete list of the new words in the kolvt], I give what in the

I trust, a just interpretation of the facts

is,

the time of Aristotle

concerning the

on that we

new

find in the

words appearing from N. T. Hence some classes of words are not treated. No new roots are used to 1. Primary or Primitive Verbs.

make 1

verbs with old or

new

terminations^ in the

Cf. Rachel White, CI. Rev., 1906, pp. 203

ff.,

kolvt].

for interesting

The

ten-

study of

iTnaKfjTTTCi}. 2

Blass,

Hermen. und

Krit.,

Bd. I, p. 191

.

Heine, Synon. des neutest. Griech.,

1898, has a very helpful discussion of N. T. word-building (pp. 28-65), but does not distinguish the kolpti words. Cf. Jann., 8 Next to Sans. Gk. uses more inflections and so more affixes. Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 45.

N. T. Gk., p. 61. On the whole subject of word-building see Brug., Griech. Gr., 1900, pp. 160-362; K.-BL, Bd. II, Ausf. Gr., pp. 254-340. 6 Brug. op. cit. Hirt, Handb. der griech. Laut- und Formenl., 1902, pp. *

Blass, Gr. of

360-391. 6 Schmid, Der Atticis.

etc., 4.

Bd., p. 702.

WORD-FORMATION

147

dency is all towards the dropping of the non-thematic or /zt forms both with the simple root and with the suffix. The remnants of the fXL forms, which are not quite obsolete in the N. T., will be given in the chapter on the Conjugation of the Verb. Here may be mentioned dTroXXu/zt, which uses the suffix -I'l;.^ Thematic verbs made from the root by the addition of o/e are very common, like \ey-w, XeiTc-w (Xt-rr). The N. T., as the kolvt], has new presents like These kept increasing and are vouched KpvjSo:, viTTTw, x^vvw, etc. Cf Thumb, Handbook, pp. 129 ff. for by modern Greek. .

2.

Secondary or Derivative Verbs.

Not

all

of these verbs are

formed from nouns; many come also from verbs. Denominatives are made from nouns, like rt/xd-oj from rt/xiy, while verbals (postThe simple denomiverbals, Jannaris^) are made from verbs. natives,^ ending in -dco, -eco, -euco, -dfco, -tfw, are not always distinguished from the intensive verbals or the causative denominatives, though -6co, -alvw, -vpco more commonly represent the 'Ottclvoo

latter.

(from

otttco)

Hermes, Tebt. Papyri.

new verbs

rich in

as in the

kolvt],

Verbs

in -vco.

like

tl/jlclo:,

besides Ac.

1

:

3 appears in the

Cf. also the rare 'Ktuwdpoj. in -dco are

bal/aw, fdco, etc.

common

LXX,

The

kolvt)

in the

N.

is

T.,

'Aw-fdco occurs in Artem.,

In the modern Greek verbs in -dco have

Sotion, inscriptions, etc.

gained at the expense of verbs in -ew.'* They belong to the oldest Greek speech and come from feminine stems in -a.^ Verbs in -a^ij)

show great

increase in the

like ayia^cji (ajLOs, ayi^w, vriTTLCi^oo

16

:

2

f.)

in the

kolvt]

and modern Greek,^

evTa(f)La^oj {ePTacf)ia,

Anthol., Plut.),

in Hippocrates, arvypa^o) (from aTvypds) in Schol.

(vrj-n-Los)

on ^sch. and

N. T. as

LXX),

in

occurs in

The majority

LXX aiPLa^co {aLpiop, eccl., Byz.). Iluppdfco (Mt. LXX and Philo, but W. H. reject this passage.

of the

new verbs

in -eco are

compound, as aaxvi^opew,

LXX,

pap.), but Sumreoj (only in N. T.) !r\r]po(f)op€o) (ir\T]po-(f)6pos, 'Aratpeco (from d/catpos) is found is to be noticed on the other side.^

m verbs see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 234. In the pap. keep the non-thematic form in the middle, while in the active both appear. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 38. 2 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 300. » Harris, MS. Notes on Gk. Gr. * Thumb, Handb., p. 175; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 21S, 300. 1

On

verbs in

^

history of the -vjj.l

Siittcrlin,

Gesch. der Verba Denom. in Altgriech., 1S91, p.

Pfordten, Zur Gesch. der griech. Denom., 1886.

has an interesting 8

list

Thumb, Handb.

Mayser

7.

(Gr., pp.

Cf. also

459-466)

of derivative verbs in the Ptol. pap.

of

Mod. Gk.,

V., p. 135

change between forms in -afw, -ifco and -w. 7 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,'p. 61.

f.

There

is

frequent inter-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

148

found in Gal. 6

in Diodorus; evrpoaoiTrkco {evTrpoacairos)

is

papyri, 114 B.C.;

Tebt. P. No.

evTpocroiTrciixeu,

ottojs

:

12 (in Cf.

19i2f.).

Moulton, Expositor, 1903, p. 114. These verbs have always been very numerous, though -eco gradually retreats before -aco. Tp-qyo(Arist., LXX, Jos.) is formed from the perfect kyprjyopa, pk(ji which is not in the N. T., but Winer long ago found a similar

form in pap.)

kinKexeLpeoo

is

from

7).^

'EXarroj'eco (Arist.,

'EXXoyeoi (and -dco)

is in

as Thayer called

it.

AWevrecc {aWevrrjs, avros

according to Moeris, for the Attic

papyri see Deissmann, Light, p. 85.) sense exists between -dco and

Verbs in

-eucu

great

the

evTea) is in

(In the late distinction

in

-eco.

are also very

great variety of stems.

and

and

not "biblical"

avTohiKkui.

No

LXX,

inscriptions

'E^o.Kokovdeco (Polyb., Plut., inscriptions) is

papyri.

KOLVT],

(Papyri Taurin.

eXarTov.

conmion and are formed from a

Aixi^aXo^Tevca

(from

aixp.a\ooTLs) is

read in

2 Tim. 3: 6 only by D" EKL al. pi. Or., the form in -^w being genuine. It is, however, common in the LXX, as is eyKparevofxaL Tvp.vLTevo3 (not yvp.PT](1 Cor. 9 25), from kyKparrjs (in Aristotle). Tevo), Dio Chrys., Plut., Dio Cass., etc.) is found in 1 Cor. 4: 11 and is from yvjjLvrjT-qs. ZrjKeve (Simplic, Democr.), not ^77X^0-01', is the correct text in Rev, 3 19 (so W. H. with ABC against KP). Both are from f^Xos. QpLan^evoi (from dpiafx^os) is in the literary 'leparevcjo (Lu. 1:8) is from lepevs and is found in the K01V17.2 :

:

LXX,

KOLVT} writers and the inscriptions. Meo-trtuo) (Heb. from fxealrris and is found in Arist., Polyb. and papyri. oKoBpevoi (Heb. 11:28, MadrjTevco is from /jLadrjTrjs (Plut., Jambl.) LXX) is from bXedpos (ADE read dXedpevuv in Heb. 11:28). In Ac. 3 23 k^oXedpevoi is the form accepted by W. H. after the Uaytdevo: (Mt. 22 15) is from wayls best MSS. of the LXX.^

6

:

the

17) is

;

:

:

and occurs

in the

LXX.

Uapa-^oXevofiai. is

the correct word in

CKLP which read Tapa-^ovXevonai. The word from xapa-jSoXos, which has not been found in other writers, but an inscription (Ii/a.d.) at Olbia on the Black Sea has the very form Trapa^oXevacifjLevos used by Paul (cf. Deissmann, Light, p. 84). UepirepevofxaL (1 Cor. 13 4) is made from irepwepos and is found in Ph. 2 30 against :

is

:

»

W.-M.,

*

Cf. dplan^ov daayeiv, triumphuin agere.

p. 115.

Goetzeler, Einfl. d. Dion,

von

auf d. Sprachgeb. d. Plut., 1891, p. 203: Deiss. (Light, p. 368) gives this word (with aperri, k^ovcrLa, 86^a, icrxvs, Kparos, ixeyakeioT-qs) as proof of a parallel between the language of the imperial cult and of Christianity. Ital.

3 Cf. W.-M., note, p. 114. Mayser (Gr., pp. 415-509) gives a very plete discussion of " Stammbildung " in the Ptol. pap.

com-

WORD-FORMATION

149

Three verbs in -6oi Xprjareuo/iai is from xpv^^tos. appear which are made from verbs in -dco and -koo, viz. dXijSoj (dXew), KPTjdoj (/cmoj), urjOa: (veoS), one (vriOw) being found also in Plato Antoninus.

289 c). Cf. modern Greek dkro) (TidrjijLi). The causative ending -ow is usually formed on noun-stems and very common, sometimes supplanting verbs in -evoo or -ifco, as

Polit. (p.

is

ava-Katuoco (Isocrates,

/xe,

(LXX, from

56Xtos);

bwanii); k^ovbevboi (often

Mk. 9:12, BefxeKiov;

/ avacTTarboi (from dwcrra tos,

LXX,

'he upsets me,' Deissmann, Light, p. 81);

{AnthoL, classical d^DTrfif oj)

a4>-VKvb(j: 80X1.600

dj^a/cati'tf co)

Cf. avaaTarot

papyri.

bwanboi

LXX,

in

;

beKarboi (classical beKaTtvoi)]

(LXX, but

Plutarch even k^ovbtvl^w);

eccl.

W. H.

and Byz., from read k^ovbevkw in

(LXX)

deixeXibco

Kavabu (from Kavaos, Disc, Galen);

from

is

(Lob., ad

K€
though not in any known Greek author) 4 with KBL as against /ce^aXatoco and it means 'beat on the head' (cf. /coXa^tfco). So koXojSow (from k6Xo/3os,

Phryn., p. 95,

W. H.

read in

/c€(/)aXtfco,

Mk.

12

:

M.

;

i/e/cpoco

(from

veKpbs, Plut., Epict.,

inscriptions); Kparaiboo

(LXX,

eccl.),

from Kparvvw; aapow (Artem.,

Arist., Polyb., Diod.)

Dysc), from

Apoll.,

LXX,

Polyb.,

catpco (
(from

arjiietov,

Theoph.,

from from xap^?- Verbs in-6co causative idea,^ d^t6w='deem worthy'

Philo, Dion. Hal., etc.); adevboi (Rhet. Gr.),

adtvk(jo (adevos); xo-pi-rboi

(LXX,

do not always have the

and

o-ij/^etoco

Aur.,

full

Jos., eccl.),

5tKat6c<;='deem righteous.'

do not necessarily represent repetition or intencausative idea and then again lose even that distinctive note and supplant the older form of the word. Forms in -If co are very common in modern Greek. Tai^Tlf oj (LXX, Athen.), for instance, in the N. T. has displaced patfco, and These verbs /SaTTTtfcj (since Plato) has nearly supplanted iSdrrco. come from many sorts of roots and are very frequent in the N. T., The new formations in the Koivi] as the KOLVI] is lavish with them. appearing in the N. T. are as follows: aiperifco (from alperbs, LXX, inscriptions); aixMaXcorifco (literary Koivrj and LXX), from alxy^b.XcoTOs; avadenaTi^w (LXX and inscriptions), from ava.dep.a; ave^xl^io (Jas. 1 6) is found in schol. on Hom. Od. 12, 336, the old form Verbs in

-ifco

sity.

They sometimes have a

being

aveixboj; drej/tfco

:

(from

SoyixaTL^o}

from Polyb. and Diod. on);

€77i's,

Plut.);

writers, 1

(from arevrjs, Arist., Polyb., Jos.); detynaTl^u appears in apocryphal Acts of Peter and Paul; (from 667/xa) is in Diodorus and the LXX; eyyi^cj: (from

delyfjLo)

dearpi^cj

eKdeaTpi^oj

Cf. Siitterlin,

e^-virvLi;co

(from vtvos,

(from OkaTpov) in ecclesiastical and being in Poly bins;

ijjLaTi^co

Zur Gcsch. der Verba Denom.,

(from

p. 95.

LXX,

Byzantine iixaTLov) ^

lb.

is

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

150

found in Serapeum papyrus 163 e.g.; lovdat^o) (from 'lovSatos) is found in the LXX and Josephus and is formed like eXkr]vi^a3 and similar ethnic terms; Kadapi^o: (classic Kadalpw, from Kadapos, LXX, Jos., inscriptions); /cpuo-raXXtfco (from /cpuo-raXXos, Rev. 21:11) is still

"not found elsewhere" (Thayer);

LXX;

in the

nose')

is

(from

TreXcKus) is

ttIos,

common

root skerp)

oKehavvvixi,

(TTrXaYx^euco

Heb.

tj'^^qin'i)

(jvp.p.op(i)i^o3

;

10 against

:

in literary

LXX

in

occurs

(from

avp.p.op^bu>

elsewhere, perhaps coined

LXX

and

kolvt],

and Byzantine

LXX,

avfjiiiop(pos)

writers.

(akin to aKop-

(from

(nr\ayxv''-^ojjLai

Attic

had an active

the correct text in

is

ct)v\aKl^oo

Of verbs

TreXe/cifco

Attic form being

(EKL), though neither word

by Paul;

'the

hvkttjp,

LXX;

kolpt]; aKopirL^to

in literary

in

(from

in the

is

old Ionic according to Phrynichus;

o-TrXdyxra,

Ph. 3

is

ixvkttipI^co

dpdpl^u (from opdpos)

(from

known is

in

yoyyv^w (ono-

in -v^u,

matopoetic, like TovSpv^oi of the cooing of doves)

is

(l>v\aKri)

is

LXX

in the

and the papyri. Verbs in -hvio are fairly common, like irapo^vvo}. Only one word mention, aKk-qphvco (from aKK-qpos), which takes the place of the rare cK'Xrjpow and is found in LXX and Hippocrates. No new verbs in -aipo) (like ev(t)palvcS) appear in the N. T. Verbs in calls for

-o-Kco are, like

or causative.

the Latin verbs in -sco, generally either inchoative It is not a very common termination in the N. T.,

StSao-Kco occur very often, but these In the N. T. the inchoative sense is greatly weakened. The suffix belongs to the present and the imIn modern Greek it has nearly disappeared save perfect only. TafilaKO) (accepted by W. H. in Lu. 20 34) in the dialects.^

though

Tivcoo-Kco

evplffKui,

and

are not derivative verbs.

:

rather than yani^o}

is

causative (Arist. pol.)

both come from the earher Greek.^

LXX,

Jos., inscriptions.

made from in

T., so in

modem

The verbs

in -toco

N.

out.

'Ep-8l8v-(tkcj)

The new present

the perfect stem

and

eaTrjKa (areKco in

fxtdvaKO}

occurs in the

(Mk. 11 25) is modern Greek). As

o-r^/cco

Greek desideratives still

yTjpaaKco

;

:

in -aeioo, -ataw

retained {iiyaWLdo}, aporp-ido},

drop

dv/x-Ldo:,

Of these d7aXXtdco, for the old dydWofxai, is late kolvt]; dporptdco is from Theophr. on, No new redupUcated verbs /coTTidco is late in the sense of 'toil.'

Koir-idi^

have no desiderative meaning.

appear in the N. T. (6) Substantives. 1.

Primary

or

(stem-suffix) suffix 1

2

Primitive is

Substantives.

added to the

root.

It is

Here the formative important to seek the

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 302; Thumb, Handb., p. 133. Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 615, for discussion of -aKw verbs.

WOED-FORMATION meaning not only

when

151

of the root, but of this formative suffix also

The

root has in most cases the strong form, as These substantives are thus from the same root as the verb. With -ju^-s, -ixt], expressing action, are formed in the old Greek words like 6v-/j,6s, tl-iit). With -/xa, denoting result, we find aPT-air6-8o-na (LXX, old Greek avT-aTr6-8o-aLs, from possible.

in X67(X€7)-o-s.

aPT-airo-8i8oj^ii.)

Arist.

^eXco,

(from

Sid-CTTj-jua

;

8L-iaTr]iJ.L,

;

and with idea

of place); KaTa-aTrj-iia

(from

KTla-jjia

;

LXX

Tpoa-KOT-Tco, in

ktI^(j3,

and

kolvt]

;

Trp6a-KoiJ.-ixa

LXX)

(from

meaning action

suffix -cn-s,

Diod., Strabo, Sirach);

Hal.,

and the

Plut.

{Kad-laT-q-iiL,

The

Plut.).

(from

for old Kar-ajcoyeiov,

Strabo, Dion. Hal.)

(abstract), appears in kvb.-^\el/-Lt (Arist., ava-8dK-vv-ixi, Plut.,

(from

Philo);

ep-8vo},

pap.) Kara-Xv-fxa (from Kara-Kv-co, literary

LXX)

Arist., Polyb.,

LXX, Strabo, Jos., Plut.); dk\r]-na and LXX); Kara-Kpi-na (from Kara-Kpivo}, Dion.

(from

tv-8v-fj.a

d^d-Sei^-ts

;

dkXrj-aLs

(from

Heb. 2 :4

in

a "vulgarism," according to Pollux); KaT6.-pv^-Ls (from LXX) KariL-KpLcns (from Kara-Kplvw, Vettius Valens, ire-TToW-rf-ats (from -Kk-iroLd-a, Treldoo, Josephus and Philo,

deXco,

Kara-vvaa-co, eccl.);

;

condemned by the Atticists) tp6(x-kKl-(tls (from Trpoa-K\lv-w, Polyb. and Diod.); xp6(j-xi'-<ns (from Trpoa-xe-co, Justin Martyr and later). The suffix -ixovq is used with Teia-novr] (from x€t0aj, Ignatius and later) and hirc-\7]a-fxovr} {eTt-\apd-avco, kTn-\r]<j-p.uiv Sirach). llay-rjvr] ;

,

(LXX,

Plut., Lucian)

(TTTop-d

{8La-cnreip(ji,

LXX,

has suffix

LXX,

-rivrj (cf.

Plut.)

~opo, -ovq,

and Tpoa-evx-V

inscriptions) use the suffix -a

(-77).

etc.).

Aia-

{n-poa-evx-op-o.i,

Cf. aTro-^pa(p-r] (N. T.,

papyri), olto-Soxv (inscriptions), ^poxi (papyri), kixwXoKr] {kfiTXeKO}, inscriptions),

-T7/P as in 8i-8oi-iJLL,

LXX,

5tcb/cT7js

classic

become

.

I

-rijs (Blass, Gr., p.

Slwkui, earliest

But

(kt'l^co,

cf.

See further

-Trjpas.

aco-rrjp).

yvcharrjs

-ttjs is

(yL-vwaKOJ,

preserved, but -rcop

Jannaris, op. ciL, p. 288;

pass by words in

common

See

not -rojp or (from

86-Trjs

LXX), ewL-aTa-Tris (only under compound words for more

-evs,

-mv,

Secondary or Derivative Substantives.

not in

62),

example) and

Arist., Plut.,

In modern Greek

-Topr]s,

hook, p. 49. 2.

(from

8oT-qp.

e^tcrrrjAti)

examples.

usually

is

Plut.), KTicr-T-qs

in Luke,

(Sia-Taaaw, papyri, inscriptions, later writ-

5ta-Ta7T7

The agent

ings).

and

ttjp

Thumb, Hand-

-rpov, etc.

Only important words

use in the older Greek can be mentioned.

verbs. Words in -p.6s expressing action. From verbs in -dfco come ayiaa-iios (ancient Greek ayi^o}, but later form (a)

Those from

common in LXX and N. T.); ayvia-ixds (from ayvl^co, Dion. Hal., LXX, Plut.); airapTLa-ixbs (Dion. Hal., Apoll. Dysc, papjTJ); apiray-fios (apTrdfco is

from root

dp7r, like

Latin rapio. 'Apiray-pos once

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

152

common from

in Plutarch, apirayri yoyyv^io, Antonin.) Arist., errac^td^co)

lixaTia-ixos

;

iEschylus)^; yoyyva-nos (from

and

evTa^naa-^bs (Plutarch

;

(from

t/xartfco,

scholia to Eur,

LXX,

common

Diod., Plut., Athen.); ireLpaa-nos (from xetpdfco and

LXX)

and

Theophr.,Polyb., in

verbs in -tf co we have ^airTicr-iJLos (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62) used by Josephus of John's baptism,^ but not in the N. T. of the ordinance of baptism, save in Col. 2 12, in J-i" BD*FG 47, 67**, 71, a Western reading rejected by W. H.; the

From

.

:

(Plutarch and Dion. Hal.); irapopyia-ixos (not found

ovtihiff-ixos

ixos

LXX nor in kolvt] writers,

than

earlier

and

(Plut.

aa^^aTLCT-fMos

etc.); xf/LdvpL(7-p.6s

;

writers);

eccl.

(from

Dion, uses Tvapopyl^w) Topia-

XII

(Sap., Polyb., Jos., Plut., Test.

LXX,

xpidvpi^o},

Patr.); pauna-ixos

(LXX);

(Jos.,

aa:
Clem. Rom.,

Plut.,

Plut., ono-

matopoetic word for the hissing of the snake). The ending -p.6s survives in literary modern Greek. Cf. Jannaris, op. cit., p. 288. The tendency to make new words in -fios decreased. The modern Greek vernacular dropped it (Thumb, Handbook, p. 62). Abstract nouns in -ais are Kaiv(j}-(JLS

M.

Etym.

(ava-Kaivo-a),

/Stw-crts

Her7n.);

LXX,

Polyb., Diod., papyri);

o-Ta-crts

(Potyb., Diod., papyri, etc.)

{kK-^r]Teco,

(from

true text in 1 Tim. Jos.,

evSofiew,

Todeoo); vTr-dvTr]-ais

'Ayairrj

airo-Ka\v\l/Ls ;

Jos., App.).

and papyrus

in

Words

(LXX,

Herculaneum)

-ia) are chiefly from verbs in

.

in

;

awo-KaTaeK^i]T7]-cn% kv-bbii-q-aLs

(LXX, from in

the

ava-

{aT-avTa-w,

;

Didym.)

kirLirodrj-cns

few new formations

begins to displace ayaTrjats

(3t6co);

(LXX, Plut.); (LXX)

4, Basil Cses.,

:

from

airavTri-aLS

dTro-o-ra-o-ta

hddojjLTjaLs)',

(LXX,

Hebrews, make

in

also

1

(in Sirach,

evrt.-

common

-o-is,

later

Greek.

inscription in Pisidia,

Abstract nouns in -eia (W. H. -evoo

Polyb., Diod., papyri,

and usually

W.

in

as apeaKela in

(from apeaKivw,

bad sense); kin-TrSdeLa (so from einTodeo:, probably

Ro. 15 23, Not found elsewhere). 'Epidela (from The verb from eptdos, 'working for hire'); epLdevoo, Arist. pol. lepareia (from leparevco, Arist. pol., Dion. Hal., LXX, inscriptions); Xoyela {-ia) is from \oyevco ('collect') and is found in inscriptions, ostraca, papyri (see Deissmann, Light, p. 105); fiedoSeia (from fxedodevo}, which occurs in the kolvt], from (xWodos, but not H.,

not

by analogy

ein-irodla,

like

:

tTnOvixla.

the abstract noun). 1

foot 2

vii,

Rutherford,

New

Phryn., p. 407; Donaldson,

New

Crat., p. 451; Light-

on Ph. 2:6. Ant. 18. 4,

1912).

5, 2.

Cf. Sturtevant, Stud, in

For long

list

Mayser, Gr., pp. 416-447.

Gk. Noun-Formation

(CI. Philol.,

of derivative substantives in the Ptol. pap. see

WORD-FORMATION From

153

we have b(l)€L\r} (common in LXX). Words in -jua (result)

the papyri),

64)el\w

(Plato, Arist.,

are

b4>d\7]tia

more common

in

the later Greek and gradually take an abstract idea of -ats in modern Greek. ^ The new formations appearing in the N. T. are (O.

a-yp6r]-ij.a

25

Ac.

7,

:

T. Apoc, from ayuoew); alTLw-fia and not alTiana), from alTLa.oiJ.aL.

(correct text

Cf.

aiTio^a-Ls

in in

This form as yet not found elsewhere); Plut., what is drawn, and then strangely a

Eustathius, p. 1422, 21. avrXtjua (from auT^eoo,

thing

draw with,

to

or avT\r]T7}pLov); air-avyaa-na

like ai^rX-qTrjp

Wisdom and

(from awavyd^o:, and this from diro and 01)717, in Philo); d-Ko-aKLaa-jia (from axoo-Kidfo), and this from

Only

d-Ko

and

oklo..

in Jas. 1:17); dadkvq-iia (from dadevkoi, in physical sense in

Arist. hist., papyri) |Sd7rrto--Ata (from j8a7rrtfco, "pecuHar to N. T. and ecclesiastical writers," Thayer). In ^divTLa-txa, as distinct from ^aiTTLa-nos, the result of the act is included (cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62); k^epa-na (from e^epdco, in Dioscor., example of the verb, cf. Lob., ad Phryn., p. 64); ^rrrj-pLa (from r]TTdo-ixaL, ;

LXX,

in ecclesiastical writers); tepdreu-^ua (from Uparevu,

Kar-opdw-fjia

Jos., tiph.,

Plut.,

(from

Kar-opdoo:, literary kolvt], as Polyb.,

Lucian and 3 Mace);

Anthol., Lucian);

aTtpkoo-jxa

pdirLa-ixa

(from

LXX);

Diod., Strabo,

(from

pairl^w,

arepioo:, Arist.,

An-

LXX).

Blass 2 calls attention to the fact that in the later Greek words in

those in

-/xa, like

vowel, as

-o-ts, -ttjs,

-tos, often prefer

86{xa (86(tls), d'efxa (deaLs),

the older Doric,

though

KKt-p-a, Kpt-fxa, Trbp-a

(Attic

this

stems with a short

form is already in Hence dvdde-fxa

xco/xa).

inN. T., though duddvpa in Lu. 21: 5 (W. H. ace. to BLQr, etc.), and in the papyri "nouns in -fxa are constantly showing short penult."^ But dvadejia, like Qkua and bbp.a, belongs to the list primary substantives.

of

Words

in -rrys (agent) are fairly

numerous,

like ^airTLa-rrfs

(from

and others use /Stards); yoyyv(j-rri
Jos.)

opKLa-Tr\s

(from

^

;

^Laa-TT)s

(from

e^-op/ctfo), Jos.,

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 289.

/Stdfco.

Lucian,

Thumb,

Pind., Pyth.

eccl. writers); evayyeXLa-TTjs

Ilandb., p. G5.

On

frequency in

LXX see C. and S., Sel.

from LXX, p. 28. Cf. Frankel, Griech. Denom., 1906. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62 f. For same thing in LXX {kvhOttxa, -n-pSaOeiJia, S6na, etc.) see C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 28. ^ Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 108. lie instances besides d^vaOttxa in tlie

sense of 'curse,'

Okixa, k-KiOttxa, irpbaOtna, irpobona.

inscr., see Glaser,

De

On

ivaOf/jLa,

for exx. in iii/B.C.

Rat., quae intorc. inter serm. Poljb. etc., 1894, p. 82.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

154

(from evayyeXi^w,

Max.

eccl. writers)

;

NEW TESTAMENT (from

KepfiarLa-Trjs

Tyr.); koXKv^kt-ttjs (found in

Men. and

Nicet.,

KepfxaTi^o),

no verb

Lys.) has

KoWv^i^co, but only koWvjSos, a small coin; Xvrpu-Trjs (from Xvrpbo),

LXX

and

(from

-irpoaKvveo),

Philo);

only in Heb. 12

few

-TTjpiov

tions,

late

:

Tpoa-Kwrj-rris

araaLaa-rris

in -rrjp-tov (from -rrjp

cLKpodoixai,

means

(from

reXeidco,

2).

words

(from

TT)pi.ov

Pollux);

jxepl^w,

and Byz.);

Diod., Dion. Hal., Jos., Ptol.); Ttkuw-T-qs (from

o-rao-iafoj,

A

(from

p-tpia-T-q^

inscriptions, eccl.

and

Plut.

and

other

occur as aKpoa-

-lov)

'place'; iXaa-rripLov (from IXdaKo/jLaL,

papyri, Dio Chrys.)

LXX,

inscrip-

a substantive in the N. T.,

is

probably from the adjective

where

writers)

kolut}

IXaarrjpLos (cf.

made

and means

auTrjpLos)

and does not allude mercy seat^ or covering. However, in Heb. 9 5 ikaarrjpLov does have the meaning of 'place of propitiation' or 'mercy seat' (cf. dvjjLta-TrjpLov). Deissmann passed this passage by, though he is 'propitiatory gift' or 'means of propitiation'

to the

:

correct in Ro. 3

:

25.

Cf. 4>v\aKTy]pLov.

Those from substantives.

(0)

Several words expressing place

are formed after the fashion of the older Greek as

ably from the Macedonian

which

may

ing to

DHM

acpeSpos,

and that from

d(f>e8p6:v

edpa

(prob-

and

dTro)

be compared with Koirpuv; (3paj3eLov (from ^pa^evs, Menand. Mon., 0pp., Lycoph., Clem. Rom.); eXacuv (from eXaLov, like diJLTreX-6:p from a/jLireXos, in the LXX, Jos., inscriptions and papyri),- with which compare fjLvXoiv {-wvos) in Mt. 24 41 accord:

and most cursives instead

Expositor, 1903, p. Ill) has found


W.

of fivXas. {-ojuos),

Moulton {The 'palm-grove,' in

first in 1 Mace, formed after the analogy of povae-lo-v. "YiXwvLov (from reXiovrjs) is found in Strabo. Herpahov (Philo) is from rerpas, the usual guard in the prisons. Several new words in -ttjs (quality) appear, as dSeX^o-TTjs (from a.8eX(t)6s, 1 Mace, 4 Mace, Dio

A. P. 31 (112

and

1

Esd.,

B.C.).

EldcjcXelou (-LOV

H.),

found

is

Chrys., eccl. writers);

ded-rrjs

(from

deos,

Lucian, Plut.);

KvpLo-Trjs

* See Deiss., B. S., p. 131 f., where a lucid and conclusive discussion of the controversy over this word is given. See also Zeitschr. fiir neutest. Wiss., 4

(1903), p. 193. 2

Blass

is

examples of

unduly sceptical eXatwi'

=

'

(Gr., p. 64).

Deiss. (B. S., p. 208

f.)

finds nine

place of olives' or 'oUve orchard' in vol. I of the Ber.

Pap., and Moulton (Exp., 1903, p. Ill; Prol., p. 49) has discovered over thirty in the first three centuries a.d. In Ac. 1 12 it is read by all MSS. :

29 (ag. W. H.) and 21 37 (ag. W. H.). 'EXaiuv is right in Lu. 19 37, etc. In Lu. 19 29; 21 37, question of accent. Cf. also afxireXcoi' (from d/xTeXos, LXX, Diod., Plut.) which is now found in the pap.

and

is

correct in Lu. :

19

:

:

:

:

WORD-FORMATION (from is

Kvpios, originally adj., eccl.

J
the text of

BEFG,

in

In

etc.

Rec.) which

is

etc., in

either

case

feminine

7

:

From

1^vpo4 rel="nofollow">oiv'LK-q.

Cf. the use of

^aaiXLaaa,

writers).

(fjoivlKLaaa,

not

(Text.

KiXto-o-a

is

of

and Justin Martyr a

I,vpo4>oivL^

this last (jjoivlKLcaa

the

^oLv'iKLaaa.

(polpLcraa

as

0otj't|,

155

l^ivpo-^oLvlKLaaa.

26 as against 26pa

the usual feminine of

Lucian has a masculine

KtXt^.

and Byz.

Mk.

'

probably comes.

preferring

Atticists

/SacnXts

or

(SaatXeta.

(from

'Ilpw8-Lav6s

'HpobSrys)

and

Xpiar-Lavos (from XptcxTos) first

appear in the N. T., and are modelled after Latin patronymics Caesariamis {Kaiaap-iapos, Arrjan-Epictetus)

like

.

Blass^ goes un-

N. T. form was

necessarily far in saying that the

Xprjar-Lavos

(from Xprjaros), though, of course, t and ij at this time had little, MeyLardv is from fxeytaTos if any, distinction in pronunciation.

from veos)^ Cf. Latin megistanes. MeyLardv is found in Maneth. UXT^/jLixvpa (LXX, Dion. Hal., Jos., Philo) is from 7r\r]fxixr]. There was, of course, no "Christian" or "biblical" way of forming words. Diminutives are not so common in the N. T. as in the Byzantine and modern Greek ^ where diminutives are very numerous, (as peav

LXX,

Jos.,

often their original force.

losing

compare

Xt^aptStoj/)

jSt/3Xt5dptoi^

is

10

:

(a

2 by

(fragment of Aristoph.) according to

the cursives and ^l^XIov (by B) of verses 8, 9, 10.

2 Tim. 3

in

Bt/3Xapt5toj'

read in Rev.

:

ixdvs), K^Lvidiov

.

TwaiKapLOP (from ywrj)

kKlvolplov

(from

form, but

NACP

against

C* and most

of

Variations occur also in the text is

used contemptuously

6 (also in Antonin. and Epict.).

and

new

kKIvt])

'Ixdvdiov

(from

occur from Aristoph. on.

Kop-q, called Maced. by Blass) is used disparagingly and Lucian, but in LXX and Epict. as in the N. T. not true, though it hardly has the endearing sense (some-

Kopaaiov (from in Diog. Laert.

that

is

times found in the diminutive) in Kwapiov (k6v€s=' street-dogs'),

but that sense appears often in (from

ovos)

oypov)

is

o\}/ov)

is

is

found

in

TTaibiov

Machon and

as in Jo. 21

Epictetus.

:

5.

'Ovapiov

'Oypapiov

(from

found in Alexis and Lucian, and b^puvLov (likewise from used by Dion., Polyb., Jos., Apocrypha and papyri. Hre-

' Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 63. Cf. Lipsius, Ursp. dos Christcnnamons, 1873. W.-Sch. (p. 135) suggests that these two words are not after the Lat. model, but after the type of 'Kai.avb%, which was foreign to the European Greeks. But 'kaiavbs (from Kaia) is in Thucyd. and besides is not parallel to Xpiaris, XpiffT-iaws. Cf. Eckinger, Die Orthog. lat. Worter in griech. luschr., 1893,. '

p. 27. 2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 292;

Thumb,

Ilandb., p. 62.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMEISTT

156

comes from Arist. down, but \1/lxIop (from Both cbrdptoi' {Anthol., Anax.) and iOTLov (LXX) are from o5s, but have lost the diminutive idea, just as Atdrt in modern Greek means merely 'eye' {omiaTLov) Blass^ pvyLov (from vrrepu^)

does not appear elsewhere.

i^t^)

.

indeed accuses Luke of atticising when he uses ovs in Lu. 22 50. The new substantives derived from (7) Those from adjectives. adjectives in the later Greek found in the N. T. all have suffixes :

With

expressing quality.

-ia

we

find airo-To^i-la (from airo-TOfios,

Diod., Dion., pap.); eXa^pta (from

e\a(j)p6s,

Lob., ad Phryn.,

cf.

Cf alaxp-la- from alaxpos, Eust.) Trapa4>pop-ia (from irapaGreek writers use rapacfipo-avvr], but cf. evdai/jLov-ia from eu
;

.

with the lengthening of the preceding vowel, as ayadu-avvr] (from ayados, eccl.); ajLco-avvrj (from ajLos, not in earlier Greek writers); IxeyoKoi-avvr] (from stem fxeyaXo of fieyas, LXX and eccl.). These forms are like kpoi-avvri from upbs (also in N. T.) which is as old as

Herod, and Plato.

Still ixeyaKo-avvr]

Most

in inscriptions or in Glycas.^

to the later language.^

Diog. Laert.,

LXX),

'EXerjuo-avvrj

and upo-avvq are both found words in -avvri belong

of the

(from

words

like other

Callim. in Del.,

k\er]ij.uu,

in -avvt], loses the

v.

So

TairHvo-4>po-avv7] (Jos., Epict.).

Rather more numerous are the new words (from

(from

T7JS

a(l)eKr]s,

Mace);

2

0,7105,

adrjXos,

ayv6-Tr]s

Polyb.,

d7J'6s,

in -ttjs,* as 01716-77/5

inscriptions);

Dion. Hal., Philo);

ancient Greek d^eXeia);

eccl. writers,

Deut., Antonin.);

vbs,

(from

(from

/xarato-rjjs

yviivb-ryis

(xaTaios,

LXX). AKadap-TTjs supported by any Greek MSS. The neuter (and often the mascuhne and Arist.,

Thcophr.,

'

(from

(from

yvix-

and

eccl.

LXX

writers); peyaXeLd-rris (from neyaXelos, Athen., Jer.); TTLOJv,

dStj'Ko-

a(j)e\6-Tr]s

ttio-tt/s

(Rev. 17:4) feminine) of

(from is

not

any ad-

jective can be used as a substantive with or without the article, as TO

SoKL/jLLov

(from

Hal., Long., opia in

1

2

Mk.

SokLulos,

LXX, 7

:

24)

Dcissmann, Bible Studies,

papyri). is

Like

Kpoa
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 63. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 124, n. 14.

On

ixedopiov

p.

259

f.,

Dion.

(the Syrian reading for

{TpoayLos,

the termination

—ov

from

-crwrj see

Tpoa-tpa-

Aufrecht, Ber.

Zeitschr. fur verp;!. Sprachf., 6. Heft. 3

*

W.-M., p. On words

darsuffix

ttjs,

118, n.

1.

Lob. ad Phryn., p. 350; Biihler, Das griech. Secun1858; Frankel, Gesch. d. Gr. Norn. Ag. (1910). in -ttjs see

,

157

WORD-FORMATION

from
yelv, inscriptions) (T(f)ayLOP (o-
from

utto \7]p6v,

As already

Cf. vTTo-^vyLov).

seen,

of the adjective iKaa-r-qpLos, -a, TrjpLov

is

.

the neuter of the adjective


-a,

-ov (from

^wTr]pLov and 4>v\aKTi]p, vKa(jc(ji, Dem., Diosc, Plut., LXX).i Greek as old in the common both are auTrjpLos) auTTjpia (from

the case with virep-uov (from vTepwos, -cotos). ZevK-Trjpla (from feuK-Tijpios, only in Ac. 27 40) reverts to the abstract form in -ia. is

:

(c)

Adjectives.

Primary

1.

from verbal

or

These, of course, come

Primitive Adjectives.

(from root

'A/xdpr-ojXos

roots.

afxapr-dvco,

Arist.,

Mace. 2:9), from Plut., from 4>e'L8ofiat) ^et5-6s ireido}, as from tlB-os H. UtLd-6s (W. <^et5-o/xat. regards Blass^ but 2 in 1 Cor. than elsewhere found 4, yet is not is evidence The Tret^oT. for Tret^oTs corruption," patent "a it as versions). and cursives uncials, most the (all Treidots of favour in ^ayos (from root (f)ay-) is a substantive in the N. T. with paroxy-

LXX,

inscriptions)

is

like

(4

(/)et5-wXo5

:

tone accent as in the grammarians, the adjective being 4>ay-bs. The other new adjectives from roots in the N. T. are verbals in

There is only one verbal (gerundive) in -reos (Lu. 5 38, elsewhere only in Basil), and that is neuter (jSXTjreoj'), "a survival The sense of capability or of the literary language in Luke."'' possibility is only presented by the verbal iraQ-q-Tos (from root

-Tos.

:

But the weakened sense of the verbal an ordinary adjective, is very common in the But they are rare in the modern Greek (Thumb,

7ra0-, xdo-xo), eccl. writers).

in -Tos,

more

like

later Greek.^

These verbals correspond to the Latin participle

Handb., p. 151).

They

in -tus,^ like yvucrros, or to adjectives in -hilis, like dpards.

are

common

appear.

They

Georg.

apol.,

-qkvB-,

LXX,

*

in

in

the N. T., though not

are

usually passive

LXX), though Philo)

is

btriT-qpiov,

common

Oavar-qpiov,

formations

ypaT-Tos (from

irpoa-rjXv-TOs

active in sense.

This termination became rather

(ij'a/caXi;7rT:7ptOJ',

like

many new

ypacfio:,

{irpoa-'epx-oixai,

The

root

ancient form was

in the later Gk., as, for instance,

'i.a)iari)pi.ov.

See also btratton, Lnap-

Gk. Noun-Formation, 1889. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. G4. So W.-Sch., p. 135. ' Viteau, Ess. sur hi Synt. des Voix, Rev. de Thilol., p. 38. < Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 297. 'V.k<^v also is wholly adjective and ixk\\<^v sometimes so. Cf. Brugmann, Grundr. d. vergl. Gr., p. 429. ^ W.-M., Cf. Viteau, Ess. sur le Synt. de Voix, Rev. de Philol., p. 120. p. 41. For deriv. adj. in the Ptol. pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 447-455.

ters in the Hist, of

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

158

A number

eTTiyXus.

words which

new

of

compound

verbals were formed on

For the syntactical aspects of the verbal adjectives see discussion of the participle (cf. Moulbe discussed

will

later.

ton, Prolegomena, p. 221). 2. (a)

Secondary or Derivative Adjectives. Those from verbs. Strtcr-ros (from

to be mentioned.

Athen.)

Jos.,

o-irtfc;,

is

Latin saginatus and

It is equivalent to the

is

passive in meaning.

Some new words

Those from substantives.

(0)

(from

Kad'

opOpos,

Athen., Plut,, Jos.)

rj/xepav,

from

KOKK-ivos is

LXX,

kokkos

(LXX,

for

is

(so

Athen., raxt-vos

W.

H., from

etc.);

irvp-Lvos

(from

irvp,

There are several words (from

Kepafx-LKos

supplanted the earlier

LXX,

Trpcotos,

LXX, Polyb., (LXX also).

Arist.,

:

38);

Plut.,

Plut.);

in -lkos, like Wvlkos (from Wvos, Polyb.,

Hipp., Plat,

Kepafxos, KepajXLos,

Kepa/jieods;

pol.,

LXX)

which

(from

Kvptos,

Kvpi-aKos

found in papyri of inscriptions of Phrygia and Lydia.^ So XecTovpyt-

-aKos instead of -ikos after

Fayum and

(from

ea-rrep-ivos

118, 209 (Lu. 12

1,

for the older

xpcot,

(from rdxa) from Theocritus on

Diod.);

Kad-qixkpLos]

opOp-ivos

;

older form opdpLos), with which compare

(from iawepa, from Xen. on) in the minusc. irpoiLvos

Kadrjidep-Lvos

ancient

Plut., Epict., papyri)

occur

in -lvos

as anapavTLVos (from afxdpavTos, Philost., inscriptions);

in

eccl. writers) is

t,

LXX, papyri) and ovlkos (from ovos, in a conFaytim Papyri dated Feb. 8, a.d. 33). interest are several words in -tj^os and -lkos. 'OarpaKoarpaKov, Hipp., Anthol., LXX), 'made of clay,'

(from \eiTovpyia,

Kos

tract in the

Of

special

(from

ivos

'earthen'; aapK-ivos (from aap^, Aristoph., Plato, Arist.) is thus not a new word, but is used in Heb. 7 16 and by Paul in 1 Cor. 3:1; Ro. 7 14 (correct text in each instance), where many :

:

MSS. have aapK-iKos. Indeed aapuvos in these two mean more than made of flesh or consisting in "rooted in the flesh" (Thayer) .^ Still

6ks.

and

ivos

a

real distinction

LXX)

and

is

from

But >

^

down, but not

6 rpvx-Liids

(from

Deiss., B. S., See comm. in

on

:

p.

-iTOs,

\j/vxv,

217

loco. :

f.;

in

who

3.

clXtj-

(p. 123)

Sap/c-i/cos

(from adp^,

according to the flesh

are irvevnar-LKol (from

xi'eO^ua,

pertaining to the wind).

Arist., Polyb.,

but Schmiedel

New

:

lives

LXX,

Liget, p. 361;

W.-M.

16,

Donaldson,

and 3

1

man who

a

here opposed to those

Arist.

tolerated" in Heb. 7 Cf.

is

perhaps

flesh,

Cf. relation of a\r]d-iv6s to

seems to be observed between adpK-

aapK-LKos in 1 Cor. 3

Arist., Plut.,

passages must

down)

is

the

Thieme, Die Inschr.

man

v.

pos-

M., p.

15.

held that aapKivos was "hardly to be (p.

Crat., p. 458.

139) has modified that statement.

159

WORD-FORMATION mere natural

sessed of

{irvevfjiaT-iKos) life (1

life (1

Cor. 2

:

Cor. 2

:

14) as

opposed to regenerate

ZapK-LKos can-be applied to either

15).

3 en yap aapKiKol names also have Proper eo-re Paul reproaches the Corinthians. (from Tcojua-V/cos in Tux-ikos. Note accent -tKos, as 'E|3pa-u-6s. of these

two

read in Lu. 23

TcoMi?) is

common

in the literary

Aicoi/tos,

But

distinct classes.^

:

(Polyb., Diod., etc.).

Cf.

(Dion.

from So/ci/ii? from uLaOos (LXX,

is

is

common

not a

O. T. Apoc, Philo, inscriptions, papyri.

But cf. Moulton and Milligan,

adjective.

and Diod.,

in Plato

LXX,

:

38 by the Western and Syrian MSS.,

kolvt]

though found

in 1 Cor. 3

Expositor,

Long.,

Hal.,

Plut.),

while

1908,

LXX,

'Fa^fiaios

is

p.

174.

AokIulos

papyri).

MladLos

common

in the

is lit-

(from ixtKiaca, like da\aa<XLOS from OaXaaaa) The class of documents in Lu. 24 42. Syrian is read by the and /zcXiao-aTos has Nic. though else, nowhere word occurs erary

K0LV7].

MeXttrcnos

:

Eustath. neKlaaeios.

Those fro7n

(7)

adjectives.

There are only a few new adjectives

About of this character, but they present special difficulties. with used and and Lu. 11: 3 6:11 in Mt. only (found kmovaios has raged a long controversy. It has been derived eiri and ovala, 'bread for sustenance,' though of inrap^is in philosophical language (ansense the has only omia other theory, bread of substance' in the spiritual sense) from €7rt and ojv {e-irovTLos, kirovaLos, like eKOiv, eKovaLos, etc.), 'bread for the apros) there

successively from

'

present,'

save

;

though the

'approach'), like last

t

in

when a digamma a

common

17

ctti is

not allowed to remain with a vowel

existed as in

tTneLKrjs;

from

eTr-icoj'

einovaa {wepa), 'the next day' (Ac. 16

idiom.

of the last position.

:

(eT-eiixi,

11), this

Lightfoot^ has settled the matter in favour

adv. vpkua,

ripefxos

(from

rjpeixrjs,

vecoreptKos

(from

vecorepos,

See also

Lucian, Eustath., Hesych);

3

Mace,

In irepLomLos (from Trept-cov, Treptetjut, LXX) no serious problem in etymology arises, for Trept retains the t in composition with vowels. It is used with Xaos, to express the idea that Xltar-uos (from Trtaros, Israel belongs to God as his very own.^

Polyb., Jos.).

See Trench, N. T. Synon., 1890, pp. 268 ff. See Rev. of the N. T., pp. 194-234. Deiss., B. S., p. 214, calls attention to Grimm's comment on 2 Mace. 1:8 about tovs kwiovfflovs being added to tov% &PTOVS by "three codices Scrgii." Cf. W.-Sch., p. 13G f., n. 23, for full details. Cf. Bischoff, 'ETnoljffLos, p. 2G6, Neutest. Wiss., 1906. Debrunner (Clotta, IV. Bd., 3. Heft, 1912) argues for iirl rijv ovaav r\titpav, 'for the day in question.' 1

*

»

Cf. Lightfoot, Rev. of the

jrepfouaos.

N.

T.,

pp. 234-242, for

full

discussion of

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

160

Plato, Diog., Dion. Hal., in sense of persuading, but Artem.,

Cedrenus and othqf late writers in sense of 'genuine') is hardly be derived from TrtxtcrKo; or ttico and hence =' drinkable.' 'Genuine nard' is a much more probable meaning. For curious

to

details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 138, n. 24.

UoTairos is from the and occurs in Dion. Hal., Philo, Jos., papyri. From avw come di/cbrepos (Polyb., LXX, (5) Those from adverbs. Arist.) and avoo-repLKos (Hippoc, Galen); e^do-repos (LXX, Strabo, etc.). See also eaw-repos (only N. T.); Karco-repos (Theoc, Hippoc, Athen.). Cf. Hagen, Bildung d. griech. Adverbien. (d) The Adverb. The adverb (peLooiJLevoos (from the participle (j)abbp.ivos, Plut., Mosch., Alex.) is a new word of this nature. Cf. dfjLoXoyoviJihcos in the older Greek. So tvxov, ovtoos and vTrep^aWovTcos. The neuter accusative singular and plural of adjectives con-

older

TTobaTTos

tinue to be used adverbially. iElian.

'Akixtju

as well as ev

Badews occurs also in Theoc.

(Theoc, Polyb., Strabo)

d/c/iat (cf.

properly formed

(cf.

is

Ditt., Syll. 326, 12).

'E/Jpatart (Sirach) is

"EWrjmarL) from Expats.

'lovdaUCos is in Jos.

See also WvuCbs (Apoll. Dysc, Diog. Laert.).

Mk. 4 is

:

28)

used from Arist. on.

Anihol. and Aquila.

the

for

HvKLKws

is

Philo, etc.

Tr?rcos

common

Epictetus.

Kei^ws

:

is

found in Polyb., Strabo, Plut.

kolvj) (Plut., App., etc.) and comes from Aristotle and Plutarch.

in the ecclesiastical writers. (GV.,

^vcnKchs is

in Aristotle,

pp. 455-459) has a good hst of deriva-

See ch. VII for

tive adverbs.

.

in the literary

SojyuartKws

Mayser

also)

out of the N. T. only in (correct text Ac. 11 26) occurs here

'OXtycos occurs

Ilpcbrcos

time.

first

'PwjuatVrt is

in

Elrtv (correct text

a rare Ionic form for eUa (papyri

is

and

in the inscriptions also

full

discussion of the formation

of the adverb.

rV.

Words Formed by Composition

in the Ptolemaic papyri

is

(Composita). The Greek not equal to modern German in the

with which agglutinative compound words (5t7rXa Aristermed them) are formed, but it is a good second. The N. T. writers make use of many of the new compounds (some new kinds also), but not more than the literary kolpti, though more than the Atticists or Purists.^ The following lists will show how fond the N. T. is of double prepositional compounds hke a.vT-ava-ir\r]pbo3, dTTO-zcaT-aXXdcro-co, hiri.-avv-a'yoi, avv-avTL-\ap^avoixaL, etc. So also compound prepositional adverbs like kvLoiTLov, KaTevchinov, KarkvavTi, etc. On the whole subject of compound words in the Ptolemaic papyri see Mayser, Gr., pp. 466-506. Compound words played an infacility

totle

^

Schmid, Der Atticismus, Bd. IV,

p. 730.

WORD-FORMATION creasing role in the particular

Cf. Jannaris, op.

Koivrj.

F. Schubert,

(a)

(crvvdecns),

in

Greek

copulative composition {irapadeais)

In the

tion (irapaavudeaLs).

first

by the second part

pressed

qualifying part

is

p. 310.

cit.,

class

proper composition

:

derivative composi-

,

the principal idea

the word, while the

of

is

first

ex-

and

not inflected, but coalesces with the second,

As an example

using merely the stem with connective vowel. take oiKo-vbuos, 'manager of the house.' The

composition, paratactic or copulative,

independent words hke wapa-KXrjTos.

is

second kind of

the mere union of two

common

not

It is

old Greek save in the case of prepositions with verbs, this

See in

Zur mehrfachen prdfixalen ZusammenXenia Austriaca, 1893, pp. 191 ff.

im Griechischen, Kinds of Compound Words

setzung

161

in the

and even

It is seen in is far more frequent in the later Greek. compound adverbs as in vTep-avco. The third or derivcomposition is a new word made on a compound, whether

usage

many ative

late

proper or copulative, as etScoXo-Xarpta (or -ela) from etSwXo-Xarpeuw. The above classification is a true grammatical distinction, but it will be more serviceable to follow a more practical division of the

compound words

into

two

Modern

classes.

the term "proper composition."

linguists

In principle

is

it

do not

like

the same as

copulative.

These make a

Inseparable Prefixes.

(6)

They

study of compound words.

verbs, substantives, adjectives

cross-line in the

enter into the formation of

and adverbs.

By

prefixes here

is

not meant the adverbs and prepositions so commonly used in composition, but the inseparable particles d- (av-) privative, dcoUective or intensive, dpxi-, 8va-, r\p.L-, vr]-. As examples of such in the N. T. may be taken the foUomng substanand adjectives (chiefly verbals) with d- privative: d-/3api7s (from Arist. down, papyri, in metaphysical sense) a-j€vea-\6yT]Tos (LXX); a-yva(t)os (Thom. Mag.); a-yporjixa (0. T. Apoc, papyri); d7pt-eXaios (Arist., papyri); a-yvokoj (Apoc, papyri); d-STjXorrjs

new formations tives

;

(Polyb., Dion. Hal., Philo); d-Std-Kptros (from Hippocrates dowai); a.-8La-\eLirTos

(Tim.

Locr., Attic inscriptions, i/B.c);

(not in ancient Greek); 'to

be weak');

(2

(Diog.

Mace,

eccl.

XuTos

Mace, Dion.

Philo);

d-^eptaros)

(LXX,

a.-8ia-(t>6opla

ancient Greek ;

a-deayios

means (LXX,

Polyb.); d-Katpeo; (Died.);

writers,

papyri);

a-KaTa-yua^aTos

inscriptions,

papyri);

d-Kara-zcdXi'Trros

eccl.

writers,

LXX,

earlier

d-^er^o;

;

Lacrt.,

(Polyb., (4

(for

a-dkp.LTO'i

Diod., Philo, Jos., Plut.) a-deT-qais

a-SwaTeo:

(LXX,

d-K-ard-Kptros

Hal.);

(earliest

d-Kard-Tracrros

example);

d-zcard-

(found only here.

;

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

162

AB

14 rather than ct-KaTafound in Polyb., Diod., Jos., Plut., cf. W. H., App., p. 170; Moulton, Prol., p. 47); a-KaTa-araaia (Polyb., Dion. Hal., papyri); a-Kara-cxTaTos (Hippoc, Polyb.,

This

the reading of

is

verbal of

iravaTos,

LXX);

in 2 Pet. 2

(LXX,

d-Kard-(Txeros

Diod.); a-Kvpbw (Diod., Dion. Hal.,

Hal., Plut.); a-idera-deTos (Polyb.,

LXX,

inscriptions); av-aTro-KoyrjTos

(LXX, Symm., Dio

epevvTjTos

av-ew-alaxwTos

writers);

(reading in Jas. 2 av-r]\er]s)

;

:

Philo); d-Trapd-jSaros

Greek

old

Hal.,

Plut.);

di'-k-Xetxros (Diod., Plut.,

Laert.,

Byz.); av-e^-

eccl.,

(LXX,

Cass.); av-e^-LxviaaTos av-ev-deros

(Jos.);

(Moschion);

eccl.

di^-tXecos

MSS. have di'-eXeos, old Greek from Thuc); av-viro-TaKTOS (Artem.,

a-vo/Jiia

(Jos.,

d-7retparos)

a-Trp6a-LTos (lit. KOLvij);

(LXX,

;

13 of L, other

(LXX,

d-vo/xos

Diog.

(Artem.,

av-ev-5eKTos

Dion.

(Polyb.,

(Clem. Rom., Athen.)

av-eK-dL-rj-Y-qTos

papyri);

Diod., Plut., inscriptions);

(Lucian, Philo, papyri); av-avrl-priTos (from Polyb.

a-nera-vo-qTos

eccl.,

(LXX, Dion.

Esdr.); d-XdXrjTos (Anth. Pal.); a-nedvaros

Plut., 1

down,

:

Karairavoi,

Plut., papyri, etc.); a-TeipaaTos (Jos., ;

a-Tepi-Tn-qTos

(LXX,

Philo,

Plut.);

a-rrpoa-KOTos (Sir., Sext., inscriptions); a-pa^os

Jos.); a-aiTLkos (Anthol., eccl.); a-aTaTkco{Anthol.); d-o-roxeoj

(Polyb.,

Lucian, papyri); a-arripLKTos (Anthol.);

Plut.,

(eccl. writers)

;

a-4>e\6Tr]s

Wisd., Plut., inscriptions);

a.-4>dapTo$ (Arist.,

d-
ayados (papyri and 2 Tim. 3:3); a-cj)L\-apyvpos (Diod., Hippoc, inscriptions, papyri) .^

With dpxt- (from apx^) we have dpx-d77€Xos (eccl); apx-i-epariKos (inscr., Jos.); apx-i-^p^vs (LXX, inscr.); apxi.-Trot.ixi]v (Test, of 12 Patr., wooden tablet from Egypt, Deissmann, Exp. Times, 1906, p. 61); apxi-crvv-aywyo^ (inscr., eccl.); dpxi-reXdjvrjs (only in Lu. 19:2); apxi--rpl-K\ivos (Heliod., cf. avp.Troai-apxy]s in Sirach). Cf. apxi.-4>v\aKlTr]s, P.Tb.

40

(b.C. 117), apxi--^ea p.o-^v\a^

With d- connective or intensive are formed Tios,

LXX,

Lucian)

cf.

(LXX). (for a-veir-

Lat. con-nepot-ius), a-revl^co (Polyb., Diod., Jos.,

.^

With dva- we have evrepLov (late

1

a-veyj/ibs

8v
(LXX,

form, correct text in Ac. 28

Cf. Hamilton,

The Neg. Comp.

:

8,

in Gk., 1899.

Philo,

Plut.);

8v(t-

older form bm-tvTepla)

"The

true sphere of the

combination with nouns, adjectives and verbal stems Cf. also Margarete Heine, Subst. to form adjective compounds" (p. 17). mit a privativum. Wack. (Verm. Beitr. zur griech. Sprachk., 1897, p. 4) suggests that ^Stjs is from ael and -de, not from d- and Idetv. Ingenious! Cf. Wack. again, Das Dehnungsgesetz der griech. Composita, 1889. 2 Cf. on a- connective or intensive, Don., New Crat., p. 397. Also Doder-

negative prefix

lein,

De

aX
is its

intense, 1830.

;

WORD-FORMATION

Laert.);

Cf.

—WpiOv).

(c)

(cf.

rifj.L-

LXX,

For

(LXX, Dion.

8v(r-(j)r]nla

With Died.,

vrj--

Artcm.);

Philo,

(Diod.,

8v(x-eptJi^v€VTos

163

Lat. semi) are found only

Strabo),

rjfxi-ojpov

(Arist.

8v(T-v6r]Tos

Diog.

Hal., Plut.).

(so

W.

fifiL-dap-qs

(Dion. Hal.,

have

H., Strabo, Geop., ^{P

V/JLLCVS.

note

vrjina^oi

(Hippoc,

eccl.).

Agglutinative Compounds {Juxtaposition

or Parathesis).

This sort of composition includes the prepositions and the copThis last is much more comulative composition {dvaiidvd). mon in the kolvt] than in the older Greek. Cf. Jannaris, op. cit.,

and Mayser,

p. 310, 1.

Gr., p. 469.

The new compound verbs

Verbs.

compound substantives

made

are

or adjectives or

from

either

by combining adverbs

with a verb-stem or noun-stem or by adding a preposition to the older verb. This last method is very frequent in the later Greek due to "a love for what is vivid and expressive."^ This embellishment of the speech by compounds is not absent from the simplest speech, as Blass- shows in the case of Titus, where over thirty

compound words are found, omitting verbals and other ones. Moulton {CI. Quarterly, April, 1908, p. 140) shows from the papyri that the compound verb is no mark of the literary style, but is common in the vernacular also. The preposition fills striking

common

out the picture as in

Dio

(Diod.,

Cass.,

(Lucian),

avTi-fxeTpeco

LXX). So

and so

avrL-Xafx^avo)

also observe the realistic

form of

(LXX, Tryphiod.) in Lu. 9 29; The modern Greek 6. Kara-Xt^dfco (eccl. writings) in Lu. 20 even combines two verbs to make a compound, as irai^w-yeXo). As examples of new compound verbs may be given ayadovpyeo:, ayadoepyeo), in 1 Tim. 6 18 (eccl.) ayado-Troikco (LXX, later writers) the preposition in e^-aarpaTTco

:

:

;

:

dXX-777opeco (Philo,

scriptions, later writers)

(LXX,

araTo-o) 1

W.-M.,

Plut.,

Jos.,

p. 127.

ava-dew-pko: (Diod.,

;

papyri);

grammatical writers); dm-faw

df-erdfoj

(LXX,

De

cum

Cf. Winer,

Verb,

Plut

,

papyri);

Lucian)

;

(in-

dm-

avTL-ha-TLdTi]iii

Praep. compos, in N. T. usu,

1834-43. ^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70. Mostly adj., but ireid-apxtlv occurs in the list. ib., p. 65, even thinks that it is not the province of granunar to discuss

Blass,

the numerous

compounds with

prepositions.

It

belongs to the lexicon.

The

that I give are not complete for prepositional compounds because of lack of space. See Helbing (Gr. d. Sept., pp. 128-130) for good list of compound verbs in the LXX. Mayser (Gr., pp. 48G-506) gives list of compountl verbs

lists

in the Ptol. pap.

verb.

Cf.

(text of

d

The

Koi.vri

iT€KVOTp64>ri
W. H.

in 6: 17).

is el

fond of compound verbs £^€co56x'70^ti' (1

Tim. 5

:

made

10).

So

of

noun and

v\prj\opoi'eii'

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

164

(Philo, eccl. writers); avTL-Tvap-kpxo-jJLai {Anthol., Sap., eccl. writers,

(LXX,

Byz.); avT-o(l)da\neo: (Sap., Polyb., eccl. writers); dTr-eXTrt^w

Polyb., Diod., inscriptions); airo-ypaepofxaL (papyri); airoSrjaavpi^c^

(LXX,

Diod., Jos., Epict.); dTro-Ke^aXtfco

(Sir.,

(Polyb., papyri);

ePT€0}

(LXX,

schol. in Bekk.); Sta-yoyyv^o:

Sia-yvopl^co (Philo,

aW-

Epict., etc.);

yovv-Tereoo (Polyb., Heliod., eccl. writers);

Byz.); ha-yp7]yopeoi (Herod., Niceph.); h-avya^w

Heliod.,

(Polyb., Plut.);

Dion. Hal.); dL-epixrjvevo} (2 Mace, Polyb., (LXX, Polj^b., Plut.); 5oi;X-a7co7eco (Diod. Sic. and on); dp-qvo-iroLkw (LXX, Hermes); kK-dairavaoi (Polyb.); eK-biKkw (LXX, Apoll., Diod.); €M-/3aTeuco (inscr.); kv-KaivL^oi (LXX); kv(Aratus,

8La-4>T]iJ.i^w

Philo);

5t-o5ei;co

gymm.

(Polyb.,

Ka/ceco

e^-iaxvco

Strabo,

(Sir.,

(LXX, Acta Thom.);

Plut.);

(LXX,

ev-apeareoo

and

LXX,

as there

SoKeco,

Kapa-Soaew ev-Kaipeco

writers);

Dion.

Diod.,

eTn-(l>avaKoi

(LXX);

lTepo-l;vy'ew

(probably simply from

ev-doKeco

no such form as

is

Polyb.,

in

(Polyb.);

Rom.); Hipp.);

(Jos.,

(Dion. Hal., Phal., Diog. Laert.,

(eccl.

Diod.);

Philo,

Philo, Clem.

e^-aprtfco

ein-aKr]v6oi

kiri-xop-qykoi

Aphr.); erepo-bLhaaKciKko:

Alex.

ev

translation of

(Tob., Strabo, AnthoL, Epict.);

kv-xploo

and

86kos or evdoKos,

Hal.);

cf.

(Philo);

evdv-bpoiikoi

(from Polybius on, papyri); ev-Tpoa-coweco (P. Tb., Chrys.); (Diod., Artem., Ign.); ^wo-yopeca (Theophr., Diod.,

dripLo-naxeco

Lucian, Plut.)

i.e.

KaKov,

Magn.,

(Et>Tn.

KaXo-TToteco

LXX) mK-oi^xew (from LXX, Diod., Dio Cass., Plut.); exw, LXX, Philo); Kara-^apeoo (Polyb.,

fcoo-Troieoj (Arist.,

;

obsolete KaK-ovxos,

Theophr.,

;

Diod., App., Lucian papyri); KaT-ayuvl^oiJLaL (Polyb., Jos., Lucian, Plut.,

iElian); Kar-avTaoo

(LXX);

KaTa-Kk-qpo-boTew

(Athen., Diog. Laert., Philo);

be correct (as is has to be presupposed;

^aTTf]s

:

Strabo); in 2

Tim. 2

Diod., Jos.)

;

(LXX,

:

14)

;

noaxo-Tvoikco

ixaKpo-dvu'ew,

(LXX

(Lucian, Plut.)

and

writers,

papyri);

and ;

if

the conjectural

now no Xa-rofxeco

longer

(LXX,

Kev-efx-^aTevo)

probable),

in

Kev-ep.-

Diod., Dion. Hal.,

Diod., Plut.); Xoyo-piaxeoo (only instance

Sir., Plut.); fxera-ixopcjido}

Seo-TToreco

from

18

Xido-jSokkoo

eccl.

and 3 Macc, Hipp., Polyb., /car-e^-ouo-tdfoj (only N. T.); Kar-oTTpl^co

Diod., Jos., ^EL, etc.);

Col. 2

Diod.,

(Polyb.,

Kara-TTovkw (2

(LXX,

Plut.)

;

iied-tpp.r]vehcji

(Diod., Philo);

eccl. writers)

bpLeipojiai is

(Polyb.,

ixeTpLo-iraQeo}

(Philo,

p.v-wTra^w (Arist.)

;

;

oUo-

a puzzle (Fritzsche derives

it

but other compounds with 6/xoO have instrumental-associative, not genitive case, as 6jut-Xeco, from ojutXos {bpLov, '[Xr]); Photius and Theophr. get it from ofiov rjpfxdadaL; but, as Nicander uses fxelpo/xaL Ifxelpopai, modern editors print 6/xeLpbjxevoi in 1 Th. 2 8 (6-, W. H., elsewhere only in Job and 6/xoO

el'pco,

:

Synom., Ps. 62)

;

bpdo-irobkw (only instance)

;

opdo-rofieco

(LXX,

eccl.

;

WORD-FORMATION writers)

Jos.,

;

(LXX,

7rX?7po-0op€a}

Tpo(T-K\r]p6oo (Philo, Plut.,

(LXX,

scriptions);

(LXX,

TpoTro-
(LXX

etc., in

Ac. 13

:

18);

and some cursives rond., Herm.);

Dion.

TeKvo-rpo4)ew

and

Ac.

(LXX,

Hal.,

(Arist.)

13

:

(LXX and 18)

;

Terpa-apxkio

;

(Jos.)

NBDHLP,

with

eccl. writers, so

vTep-irXeovd^w (Ps.

ACE He-

Sal,

(Themist., Dion. Hal., eccl. and Byz.);

viro-XLijnravoo

(t)L\o-TpcoT€va)

(Artem., Plut.);

Xpovo-TpL^kb}

(Arist.,

4>pev-airaTaoi (eccl.

and Byz.

Heliod., Byz. writers).

Plut.,

writers);

Thus,

be noticed, verbs compounded with nouns are very the

papyri, inPlut., etc.);

Jos.,

W. H.

writers, so

eccl.

Tpoo-(i>opk(j:

in

Trpo-eXTrifco (Posid.,

and many other verbs with aw;

avv-viro-Kplvop.ai (Polyb., Plut.) ;

;

(inscr.

(Diod.,

Polyb., Diod., Lucian);

cruv-aTroo-reXXoj

;

(Diod.,

(XTparo-Xoyea)

(Anthol.)

Trept-Xd/xTraj

;

Lucian); TrpoacoTo-XTjuTTeco (N. T. word);

inscriptions)

TeKTO-yovecx)

Trapa-^okevonaL

eccl. writers)

Dexipp., Greg. N.); irpoa-eyyi^oi

0vp-av^ap(jo

17:5);

(Polyb., Philo, Plut.)

Trap-eia-epxofJLaL

Plut.)

Ac.

(only in

6xXo-7roieco

;

ii/A.D.);

165

will

it

common

in

KOLvr}.

Often two prepositions are used in composition with the same meaning must be given to each. The use of double prepositional compounds grew rapidly in the kolvt); cf. verb, where the proper

Schmid, Att. IV, pp. 708 papyri

(Gr., pp.

Mayser

ff.

gives a long hst in the Ptol.

497-504), some of which are old and some new.

Of 162 examples 96 are new. The N. T. is in perfect accord with KOLvrj here. So it is with avTL-Trap-'epxop.aL {Anthol., Wisdom, eccl. and Byz. writers) in Lu. 10 31; avr-ava-wX-qpooi in Col. 1 24 (Dem., Dio Cass., Apoll. Dysc); avTL-BLa-TidrjpL (Philo, Diod.); the

:

airo-KaT-aXKacrcrw

(not

N. N.

T.); ewL-avv-ayoj

in

N.

old

in

(LXX,

Greek),

cTrt-Sta-rdo-ffo/xat

yEsop, Polyb.);

(only

/car-e^-ouo-tdi'co

in

(only in

T.); Kap-aa-'epxop.ai. (Polyb., Philo, Plut.); Tpo-ev-apxcfxaL (only T.)

;

aw-ava-plyvvjiL

Dion. Hal., Plut.);

(LXX,

Plut.)

(jvv-avTL-\aix^avo}xo.L

tions, papyri); virep-eK-xvvoj is

:

in the papyri (P.

Tb.

(LXX);

I,

;

avu-ava-iravopai

(LXX,

(LXX,

Diod., Jos., inscrip-

There compound,

u7r€p-ej'-TU7xdj'aj (eccl.).

66) a triple prepositional

irpo-avT-av-aLpeco. 2. Substantives. Here again the new compound substantive draws on verbs, substantives, adjectives, adverbs and pri^positions for part or all of the word. There are also double compound substantives from compound substantives, adjectives, adverbs and

prepositions like

Trpoawiro\rifji\l/La,

dXXorpteTriaKOTros, SiairapaTpL^r].

The

great majority have substantive or adjective for the second half of the word. '

These nouns are more often abstract than concrete, and verb-stem, eccl. writers); ayado-

Ayado-TToua (from adjective

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

166

and verb-stem, Sirach, Plut. and later papyri); iiypLOS and eXaios, Arist.); alixaT-eK-xvala (from substantive, preposition and verb x^'i'co, eccl. writers) aKpo-^vaHa (adjective

TTotos

(from

aypL-kXaLos

;

(LXX)

aXeKTopo-4>o:vLa (iEsop, Strabo, ecel. writers)

;

(from dXXorptos and

cKOTTos

Deissmann

Papyri.

Aristoph., Hyper., papyri); dm-5et^ts in

(TTpo(j)r]

eccl. writers.

synon3rm for the word in aXXoTploov kindviiriSee Bible Studies, p. 224); afxcji-odop (LXX,

finds a

Fayum

TTjs,

Dion. Areop.,

eiri-aKoiros,

aXXoTpL-eiri-

;

Pergamum and Magnesia)

Polyb., Plut.);

(Sir.,

(LXX, Polybius

the ethical sense

dm-xuats (Strabo, Philo, Plut.)

;

dra-

on, inscriptions in av9-

;

vTaros (Polyb., Dion. Hal., Lucian, Plut., inscriptions); avTi-\vTpov

(one

translation

of

formed by John,

Ps.

48

:

Orph.)

9,

(Anthol., eccl.); diro-Kapa-SoKla

Kolrris

(probably

clvtI-xplcttos

;

LXX, papyri); (verb -ceo in LXX, Jos.,

eccl.); apyvpo-Kowos (Plut.,

acTL-apxvs (inscriptions,

Polyc); ya^o-4)v\aKLov

LXX,

yXoiaao-Kofxov (earlier yXo^aaoKOfxetov,

(LXX,

apaevoPlut.);

Jos., Strabo);

Jos., Plut., Longin., in-

scriptions, papyri); 8eLaL-8aLiJLovia (Polyb., Diod., Jos., Plut.); deaixo(Jos.,

(j)v\a^

(only in

14

:

AD

Cor. 12

{
28,

LXX);

Lucian, Artem., dpx'-Seo-juo-^uXa^, 1

:

against

10;

by BDFG)

Ipix-qvtvT-qs

h-epixri-via

probably correct

bi-tpix-qvevTq'i

Cor.

1

ha-Tvapa-Tpi^i] (not

;

found elsewhere) is the correct text for 1 Tim. 6 5, not irapadia-TpL^ri, which may be compared with Trapa-KaTa-dr]-Krj in 2 Tim. 1 12, but Trapa-drj-KT] (Herod., LXX, inscriptions, papyri) is the :

:

true reading; ScoSe/cd-^uXov (Clem, of (Test, xii Pat., eccl., papyri);

KpL
BDFG e^eXco

Rome, N. T. Apoc); 5t/catois read by MSS.

8(jopo-(f)opia

against diaKovia in Ro. 15:31; kdeXo-dprjada (from verb

and

OprjaKia, eccl., cf. kdcXo-dovXeia)

two substantives,

and

eccl.)

;

etSwXo-Xarpeta

ei5coXo-Adrpr;s (eccl.)

;

(W. H.

d\i-KplveLa

-la,

(LXX,

Theophr. Sext., Stob.);

k-TrXTjpcoo-ts (2 Mace, Dion. Hal., Philo, Mace, Judith, inscriptions); ev-e8pov (late form of kvk8pa, LXX); el-ara-ara-o-ts (double compound, Polyb.); eTTL-avv-ayojyr} (double compound, 2 Mace, inscriptions, Artem.,

Strabo); eK-Teveia

(2

Ptol.); eTL-av-aracns xop-rjyia

from '

(eccl.)

evpos

;

(double compound,

(LXX,

ev-8oKia

and Lat.

(Arist.);

writers)

KaXo-StSdo-zcaXos

KaTa-Kpifia

in

:

14,

which

(Sir.,

is

Philo, Sext.);

(only in Tit. ;

2:3);

W. H.

utto-X,

LXX,

alone)

/caXXt-eXatos

KapSLo-yvo^aTrjs

/card-^epa (onty in

(eccl.

Rev. 22

:

3)

(N^'DEFGKLP

Gal.); Kar-ijyojp (papyri;

Radermacher,

for Text.

Magn.

(Jos.);

Dion. Hal., papyri); Kara-XeLfxpa

Light, p. 90;

eTrt-

evp-aKvXuv (a hybrid

Etjin.

'lepo-o-oXu/ietrrjs

Kar-ayyeXevs (inscriptions)

Ro. 9:27 for

mann,

27

(Strabo, Theophr.);

;

;

aquilo, like auto-mobile; so

Rec. €vpo-K\v8o:v in Ac. ri8v-ocrnos

LXX,

inscriptions)

cf.

Gr., p. 15); /card-Xu^a

Deiss-

(LXX,

;

167

WORD-FORMATION (LXX,

Polyb., Diod.); KaTa-ireTacrna tions); Kepo-8o^la

(4

Jos., Aristeas, Philo, inscrip-

Polyb., Philo, Plut., Lucian);

Macc,

koct/xo-

Kparcop (Orph., eccl. writers, inscriptions); kojuo-toXls (Strabo,

and

Tim. 6:4);

Theod., eccl.); Xoyo-fxaxla (only in 1

(Plut., Porph.);

(Erat.);

TOLXov

Anthol); Plut.);

(Alexis,

OLKoSeaTOT'ns

Jos.,

(eccl.)

LXX,

(Polyb.,

olvo-iroT-qs

Jos.,

rd

N.

in

is

Attic);

in

6pK-coiJ.6aia

instance

(only

Anthol.,

(LXX, Diog.

6\o-KKr]pla

Lucian, Plut.); iravTo-KpaTOip

T.);

(LXX,

Anthol); Tapa-K\r]Tos (Aq. Theod., Diog. Laert., Dio Cass.,

(LXX);

Tepi-deaLs (Arr., Gal.,

Curt.);

trepL-oxv

Jos., papyri)

wepl-rj/'qi^a

;

exw, literary

-n

pcoro-TOKLa

(Jos., Plut., Ptol.); (jLTo-pLiTpLov aKT]vo-Tr]yia (Arist.,

eccl.);

LXX,

aKkripo-Kapdia

28

(Dion. Hal., Jos., Lucian)

(

Plut.);

:

;

cfvu-kolvcovos,

avv-Trpea-^vTtpos,

Tpo-

81 A.D.);

Tcpoa-4 rel="nofollow">ayi.ov (inscriptions,

Moeris);

Trpo(TO}iro-\r]ixirTr]s

irpwT0-Kade8pLa (eccl.; xpcoro-KXiaia

Philo, Byz.); pa^8-ovxos (pd/35os, (literary

Koivq,

eccl.);

aapb-bw^

Polyb., Diod., Jos., inscriptions);

-apxv^ (reading of

(XTpaTo-ired-apxos,

though

16),

critical

(Geop.)

o-uKo-yuopea

text rejects both

various

;

new words

avv, like (Tvv-aLxlJia.\coTOS, avv-KaTa-dea-is, <jvv-K\it]povbp.os

inscriptions);

;

(lit. KOLvr]);

ir po
;

Philo, inscriptions); cK-qvo-iroLbs (^Elian,

(LXX);

Syrian class in Ac.

eccl.)

Byz.);

(LXX,

pabi-ovpynp-a

kolvt});

(LXX,

Tpav-waOla (Philo, Ign.)

;

'EWrjVLKoJs,

Trpoo-coTro-Xr^M'/'ta (eccl.);

(eccl. writers);

Epict.,

Trept-ro/xi?

irpoa-KapTep-qaLS (inscriptions, eccl.,

irpoa-ipayLOV

'Attikws,

(Chrys.);

Plut.);

(inscriptions,

Trpo(r-KVPT]Tr]s

etc.);

TaTpL-dpxv^

(LXX,

ivepi-Kad-apixa

(LXX,

Trpo-aa^^arov

(LXX,

irpoa-Kop-na

(Tob., Ign.)

Diod.);

(Polyb.,

Scxt.);

(Theophr., Diod., Plut.,

avXiOP (Pollux);

with

oko-doixi)

etc.);

and Byz.);

papyri, inscriptions); irapa-x^Liiaala

01^01'

(possibly

Diod., Philo, Jos., Plut., con-

TToKiv-yeveaia (Philo, Longin., eccl.,

Geop.);

Ign.,

dcpdaXfxo-dovUa

;

(Arist.,

App.,

LXX,

(LXX,

opK-wixoaia

Laert., Plut.); opo-deala

(eccl.

ncopo-'Koyla

Plut.,

demned by Phrynichus); Anacr); oKiyo-TnaTla

titab-

(LXX,

utT-oLKtala

vvxQ-w^pov (Alex.,

(eccl);

Theophr., certainly

Arist.,

(eccl.);

-boTiqs

writers);

Koivi)

(Manetho, Plut.);

and

ixiad-aTvo-boola

vono-didaaKaXos

LXX,

(Arist.,

ixtao-vvK-Tiov

nea-ovpavqiJLa

Ag.

fiaTaio-'Xoyla

avv-o8ia

(XVV-Tpo(t>os

(LXX,

Strabo, Jos.,

(LXX),

etc.;

(Philo,

Epict.,

TaTTiLVO-^poavvT]

(Jos., Epict.); TeKvo-yovia (Arist.); rtrpa-dpx'js (Strabo, Jos.); vlo-

Beaia (Diod., Diog. Laert., inscriptions); uTrep-ketm (Byz.

and eccl.);

VTb-Xeifxpa (from

i)7ro-Xel7rw,

VTTO-y panixb^

(2

LXX, Arist., viro-TrbbiOP

Macc,

Philo,

Thcoph., Plut., Galen)

(LXX, Lucian,

(Dion. Hal.);

eccl.);

viro-Tvirooais

(papyri, eccl. writers)

;

;

vtvo-X^plop

(LXX, Demioph.)

Att.); viro-aToXi) (Jos., Plut.); viro-Tayi] (Sext.

Emp., Diog. Laert.);

xaXKo-Xt/3aj^oi^

(LXX)

;

ptp-aTra.Tj]s

x^i-po-ypo.(l>ov

(Polyb.,

168

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Dion.

Hal.,

xpeos or

Tob.,

xpe<^s

Artem., papyri);

Plut.,

and

dcpeLKerrjs,

LXX,

LXX,

XprjcrTo-Xoyia (Eust., eccl. writers); xp^'o'o-Xt^os (Diod.,

(only in Rev. 21:20);

Xpvo-o-irpaaos

(from

xp€-o€tX€r7js

^Esop, Plut., Dion. Hal.); Jos.);

\pev8-aT6crTo\os,

\pev8-a8eX(j>6s,

compounds of \pev8r]s and are Greek 4^ev8bixavTLs) is found Jos.; \}/ev86-ijLapTvs (LXX) and \l/ev8o-txapTvpla Plato and Aristotle. The papyri show many

xpevdo-didaaKaXos, \pev86-xpi-o-Tos are all

N. T. words;

LXX,

in

^ev8o-irpo4>r]Ty]s

Philo,

(ancient

both go back to examples of such compounds.

Cf.

P.Tb. 40

Kwixo-ypaix^iaTevs,

(B.C. 117).

It will not be necessary to repeat the adjecformed with inseparable prefixes d-, etc. The method of

3. Adjectives.

tives

many grammars element in the is

compounds according

in dividing the

first

to the

or second part has not been followed here.

believed that the plan adopted

It

a simpler and more rational

is

These adjectives are compounded of an adjective and substantive like aKpo-ycjouLalos or vice versa avOpcorr-apeaKos; a substantive and a verbal like x^tpo-TrotTjros; a preposition and a verb like (xv/ji-iradr]s, with two prepositions and verbal like Tap-eia-aKTos; an adverb and a preposition and a verbal like ev-Trp6a-8eKTos, etc. The adjective compounds used in the N. T. characteristic of the kolvt] Ayado-iroLos (Sirach, Plut.); aypt-tXaLos are somewhat numerous. exposition of the facts.

two adjectives

like 6\Ly6->pvxos,

'

(Anthol.)

dKpo-ycjvLOLos

;

inscriptions

and

exo/uat

meant

(eccl.)

Lucian, Justin M.,

KaKos,

(LXX,

eccl.); dwo-SeKros (Scxt.

d7co7os

(2

Esdi'.)

writers)

(eccl.

Strabo, Galen)

8e^Lo-\di3os

;

writers); Seurepo-Trpcoros

(Polyb.,

eccl.);

eK-Tevrjs

(cf. 8evTep-e(Txo.Tos,

Plut.) <jos

;

Xen. has

Strabo, Philo);

euapeurcos)

;

Philo);

ev-rpo/xos,

(Dion. Hal.)

eTTL-dapcLTLOS

(LXX,

only

;

LXX,

23, late eccl.

MSS.

in Lu. 6: 1);

ev-KOwos (Polyb.,

(eccl.);

'h-dap-^os

(only in

eK-rpofios

KD

Plut.); e/c-0o(3os (Arist.,

e-m-Tr6dr]TOS

ev-dpecrros

el8os,

:

eccl.); 8i-\pvxos

(Polyb.,

Heb. 12:21, other MSS.,

avTo-Kard-KpLTos

(true reading in Ac. 23

Dio Chrys.,

8L-dd\aaaos (Strabo,

;

(from 7paDs,

ypa-6i8ris

;

dj/d,

Plut., inscriptions); diro-aw-

(Lucian, Long.)

(Strabo)

^apv-Tiixos

;

(from

Poll., papyri); avdpooTr-dpeaKos

Emp.,

dpn-yepi'riTos

;

(LXX and Temple

aXXo-yevqs

;

for gentiles to read); av-e^l-KaKos

(eccl.)

;

(Wisd., eccl.,

LXX^)

hepo-yXwainscr.,

ev-XoyriTOS

;

but

(LXX,

Philo); ev-fxeT6.-8oTos (Anton.); ev-Tdp-e8pos (for Text. Rec. ev-irp6aeSpos,

Hesych.)

;

ev-wepi-aTaTos (only in

(Plut., eccl.); €vpv-xo}pos (Arist.,

(Hippoc, (Plut.,

LXX,

Phoc,

eccl.

writers);

eccl. writers,

LXX,

Heb. 12

:

1)

;

ev-Tr p6(7-8eKTos

Diod., Jos.); ev-awXayxvos

deo-8l8aKTos

inscriptions);

(eccl.);

deo-irvevaros

to--d77eXos (cf. lao-deos,

WORD-FORMATION Philo,

^lia,

eccl.); etc.)

(cf.

loo-TLfxos

Kadrjueptvos

;

Philo, Jos., Plut., Lucian,

ia6-\l/vxos,

(from

169

Kad' r]fxepau,

Judith, Theophr., Athen.,

Plut., Alciph., Jos.); Kar-eiScoXos (only in Ac.

17

16); Kev6-8o^os

:

(LXX); (LXX, Hipp., (LXX, schol. to

Diod., Philo, Anton., eccl. writers); Xa-^ewros

(Polyb.,

(LXX,

XeLT-ovpyLKos

Agath.);

(Telest.)

/xarato-XoYos

Lucian);

writers);

eccl.

(LXX,

veb-cjiVTos

fxaKpo-xpovLos

fxoyL-XaXos

;

Aristophanes?);

papyri,

oKra-rnjiepos

(eccl. writers); oXLyo-Tnaros

(only in N. T.); okLyo-xl/vxos

Artem.);

Hexapla,

(Arist.,

(Plut.,

oXo-reXiys

LXX)

KOLvi],

(Strabo);

Trapa-XuTtKos

;

(Diod., Dion. Hal.,

LXX,

TTpb-^arov,

12

:

Jo. 5:2);

(LXX,

/SpcoTOS

(LXX,

(Theophr.)

avfji-fiopcfyos

;

\j/vxos (eccl.

writers)

(eccl. writers) iriLvbs,

Sibyll. Or.)

15 and Hesych.);

4>p'nv,

4>6Lv-oTO)pLvbs

;

(Lucian, Nicand.)

Polyb.,

Sext.); 4)l\-7]8ovos (Polyb.,

Lucian,

(Artem.,

Plut.,

Strabo,
(fypev-airaTrjs

etc.);

x^'^po-TroirjTos

papyri); xpv<^o-daKTv\Los (Jas. 2 It

will

(LXX) Pet. 5

1 ;

:

(LXX) 13)

;

jaiT€Lvb-4)poiv

be apparent from this first

Plut.);

:

2,

o-tjto-

aKooXrjKb-^pooros

;

avix-irad-qs

;

;

abv-

avv-aufxos

(from ra-

Symm.);

4>L\-ayadbs

(Arist.,

(Arist., Philo, Plut., Jos.,

Lucian,

Plut.,

etc.);

the N. T. appear

Cass.,

(Philo, Lucian,

Kpo-(f)r]TLKbs

aKkripo-rpaxv^os

Polyb., Wisd., Plut., Philo);

Philo,

(from

Dio

Jos.,

Plut.); Tpi-areyos (Dion. Hal., Jos.,

(Arist.,

(LXX, TrorapLo-

Philo, Anthol., inscriptions, eccl.);

av-ararLKbs (Diog. Laert.)

;

LXX,

(Diod., Plut.,

7rpo-/3art/c6s

Macc,

irpba-Kaipos (4

ow-eK-XeKrbs (onlj^ in

;

Trap-etcr-aKros

;

Tarpo-Tapa-SoTos

Anthol);

Herodian,

Dion. Hal., Strabo, Plut., Herodian); eccl.); TrpwTb-TOKos

(LXX,

irav-ovpyos

Plut., etc.); TroXv-airXayxi^os

(Plut.,

woXv-TLiJios

(only in Rev.

(f)6pr}Tos

LXX);

eccl. writers); irevTe-KaL-8eKaTos

etc.); iroXXa-TXaaio^v (Polyb.,

Theod. Stud.);

writers);

writers)

(eccl.

Athen.,

(Polyb.,

Tvap-eirl-b-qixos

eccl.

etc.);

(eccl.

(LXX,

0tX6-0eos

writers);

(Arist.,

x^i-P-o-y^yos

Polyb., Dion.

Hal.,

elsewhere only in Hesych.).

list

how many words used

in Aristotle or the literary

kolvt].

in

Aris-

and broke away from the narrow vocabMany of these late words are found But we in the papyri and inscriptions also, as is pointed out. must remember that we have not learned all that the papyri and inscriptions have to teach us. Cf. also the numeral adjective totle

was no

Atticist

ulary of his contemporaries.

SeKa-Tcaaapes

(LXX,

Polyb., papyri).^

Sec further chapter VII,

Declensions. 4. Adverbs.

The

late

Greek uses many new adverbs and new

kinds of adverbs (especially compounds and prepositional adverbs).

For

list

of the 1

new

prepositional adverbs see chapter

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70.

on

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

170

These are usually formed either from adjectives

prepositions.

by composition of preposition and adverb as in virep-avoo, or preposition and adjective as in eK-wePLcr-aov, or two or more prepositions (prepositional adverbs as in aT-kv-avTi), or a preposition and a noun-root as in airo-Toiiws, or a substantive and a verl3 as in vow-exois, or an adjective and a substantive as in Trav-Tr\r]6ei, or an adjective and an adverb as in irav-roTe, or a preposition and a pronoun as in k^-avrrjs. In a word, the compound adverb is made from compound adjectives, substantives, verbs with all sorts of combinations. The kolvt} shows a distinct turn for new adverbial combinations and the N. T. illustrates like kv-6}inov (neuter of h-doTLoi) or

very clearly.

Paul, especially, doubles his adverbs as in vrepThese adverbs are generally formed by parathetic composition and are used as prepositions in the later Greek, incorrectly so according to Blass.^ But it must be remembered that the KOLVT] developed according to its own genius and that even the Atticists could not check it. In Luke Trav-wk-qdd (Lu. 23 18) and irav-oLKei (Ac. 16 34) are not derived from adjectives or previous adverbs, but from substantives (perhaps assoc. instr.). As to the use of adverbs as prepositions, all prepositions were originally adverbs (cf. h-avTlov). In the later language we simply can see the process of development in a better state of preservation. No magical change has come over an adverb used with a case. It is merelj^a helper of the case-idea and is part of the analj'tic linguistic development. The chief compound adverbs used in the N. T. characteristic of the KOLVT] are here given. As the list of adverbs is much smaller than those of verbs, substantives and adjectives, compounds it

eK-wepLaaov.

:

:

with d- privative are included here. Strabo,

1

Rev. 7

in

Mace, :

17

papyri)

and

;

Cor. 14

1

ing, rather ava p-kaov,

etc.;

(Xen. avTL-wepav, Polyb.,

and

inscriptions)

Diod.,

(Polyb.,

8

:

25 for

print 5td (Polyb.,

(Theoc,

etc.);

1

Gr.

aiv-kvavTL

bLa-iravrbs is

e/c-7raXai

(Philo

is

not the modern edit-

(Polyb., etc.); avTL-irkpa (Polyb.,

(Polyb.,

and

LXX,

Plut.)

87]\-avyw (so

the

of

N. T. Gk.,

p.

65.

Cf.

Diod.,

the Text. Rec.

papyri

airo-ToiJLOJs

;

KCLA

in

way Griesbach and on, inscriptions);

LXX, inscriptions); ev-avTL (LXX, inscriptions); LXX, papyri); e^-a-n-Lva (LXX, Jamb., Byz.);

(Theogn., Arat., Polyb., Jos.,

§ 1490.

but this

27,

Wisd., Longin.); ;

ava-fiepos is

av-avTL-pT]To)s

d-Trept-o-.Trdo-rws

;

TT]\-avyC}s)

wavros;

:

'A-Sta-XetTrrcos (Polyb.,

and

ava-fxeaov

etc.); k^-aira^

Mk.

Tisch. eK-revoos

h-ooiTLov h^-avTTjs

(Lucian, Dio Cass.,

Mayser's Gr., pp.

485

ff.

Jannaris,

;

171

WORD-FORMATION etc.);

(iElian,

Kae-e^7]s

ev-wTTLov

(LXX)

Trav-oLKei

(rejected

Philo,

vovv-ex^os (Arist.,

;

by the

Jos.); Tvav-TOTe

and

;

[LXX], Plato Eryx.,

(Sap., Menancl., Dion. Hal., condemned by ;

irap-eKTOS

Polyb., Alciph.); virep-avoo (Arist.,

(Byz.

Polyb.)

Kar-

(Dio Cass.)

irap-Tr\r]d€l

Atticists for iravoLKia

the Atticists for eKaaTOTe)

virep-eKeiva

(LXX, Hermas);

Plut.); KaT-h-avTL

eccl.);

Compl.); vTrep-eK-7repL(T(Tus (T,

(LXX);

LXX,

7rpocr-<j!)drcos

(LXX,

Polyb., Jos., Plut., etc.);

vTep-eK-irepL(xaov

W. H. marg.

1

(Dan. 2:22, Aid., Th. 5:13, Clem.

Rom.); virep-Xiav (Eust.); virep-wepLaaais (only Mk. 7 37). There are two ways of writing some of these compound adverbs, either The editors differ as as single words or as two or more words. :

to 5td TavTOS,

€(/)'

dTra^, e/c-TrdXat,

Kad'

r]ixkpav, Kad'

6\ov, vwep ketra,

These compound etc. The For writers. Byzantine in the numerous more still were adverbs "Language see prepositions with compounded verbs of further list The kolvt] was fond of the N. T." by Thayer, in Hastings' D. B. the term sesquipedeserve which of some words, compound of editors do as they wish about

it.

^

We must not formodern words from Aristotle onwards only a small portion of the whole. Kennedy {Sources of N. T.

dalian, like KaraSwacTTevo}, (rvvavTikan^kvonai, etc.

get that after

all

these

are Greek, p. 62) claims that only about 20 per cent, of the words in the N. T. are post-Aristotelian. Many of this 20 per cent, reach

back into the past, though we have no record as yet to observe. of the words in the N. T. are the old words of the ancients, some of which have a distinct classic flavour, literary

The bulk and even

poetic, like ala6r]Tr]pLou, TroXuroktXos.

D. B., Ill, p. 37. seem long, but will repay study.

list

in Thayer's

They

are reason-

See

article in Hastings'

These

lists

ably complete save in the case of verbs compounded with preposiAs a rule only words tions and substantives so compounded. used by Aristotle and later writers are given, while Demosthenes

not usually considered, since he was more purely Attic. Names Abbreviated or Hypocoristic. The chapter on Orthography will discuss the peculiarities of N. T. proper

is

V. Personal

names in general. Here we are concerned only with the short names formed either from longer names that are preserved or from names not preserved. This custom of giving short petnames is not a peculiarity of Greek alone. It belonged, moreover, to the early stages of the language and survives still.- It was used not merely with Greek names, ])ut also with foreign names brought into the Greek. It is proof of the vernacular kolvt] in the N. T. 1

W.-M.,

p. 127.

^

Junn., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 293.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

172

NEW TESTAMENT

"Tom" and "Will." Many of these abbreviated compound also, as Zrjvds for Z7]v6-8upos (Tit. 3 13). Of the various forms used in these abbreviated names onlythree occur in the N. T., -as, -^s, -cos. The great majority English

Cf.

names

are

:

belong to -as or

-as.^

Western and Syrian

'A/xTrXtas

(or -iSs)

the reading of the

is

Ro. 16:8 for

classes in

AfxirXiaTos (Latin according to Blass,^ "a genuine old Greek form," while Schmieden thinks it can come from 'AvdpofjLeSrjs;

Ampliatus); 'AvSpeas 'AvTlwas

a contraction of 'AvTlTarpos (Rev. 2

is

inscription

iii/A.D.

Pergamum^);

at

traction for 'AtoWloplos,

N

'

is,

is

'AttoXXcos

the reading of

D

:

13)

may

in Ac. 18

(found in

be^ :

24,

a con-

though

180 read 'AvreXXT^s here, while 'AireXXrjs is read by all MSS. Ro. 16 10 (cf. Doric 'AreXXas in inscriptions, PAS, ii, 397); 'Apre/iSs (Tit. 3 12) is an abbreviation of 'ApTefj.l8copos; Ar?/ias (Col. 4 14; Phil. 24; 2 Tim. 4 10) is probably an abbreviation of ArjperpLos, though Ar]peas and Arjpapxos are both possible, not to mention ArjfxapaTos, ArjpoBoKos; 'E7ra0pas (Col. 1:7; 4:12; 15,

in

:

:

:

:

Phil. 23)

may (Ramsay

so

takes

it,

Expositor, Aug., 1906, p.

may not be a conbut it does not follow that, if true, the same man is indicated in Ph. and Col.; 'Eppas (Ro. 16 14) is from the old Doric form contracted from 'Ep)u65wpos; 'EppTjs (Ro. 16 14) may be merely the name of the god given to a man, though Blass doubts it^; Z-quds (Tit. 3 13) is from Zr]p68upos; Qev8ds (Ac. 5 36) is possibly a contraction of GeoScopos; 'lowias (sometimes taken as feminine 'lovvia, Ro. 16: 7) may be 'lowtds as contraction of 'lowiavos; KXeowas (Lu. 24 18) is apparently a contraction of KXeoTrarpos; AoukSs (Col. 4 14; Phil. 24; 2 Tim. 4 11) is a contraction of AovKavos and of Aovklos'^; 153.

Cf. genitive

'ETra({>pa8os,

traction of 'ETa(f>p68LTos (Ph. 2

PAS, :

iii,

25; 4

:

375) or

18),

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Ni;/i0as (Col.

4

:

15)

is

probably derived from

Nu/x065copos; 'OXu/xTras

1 See Fick-Bechtel, Die griech. Personennamen, 1894; Pape, Worterbuch dergriech. Eigennamen, 1842, ed. Benseler, 1870; Keil, Beitr. zur Onomatologie; W. Schulze, Graeca Lat., 1901; Hoole, the Class. Elem. in the N. T., 1888; Kretsch., Gesch. der griech. Spr., Die kleinasiat. Personennamen, pp. 311-370.

3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. W.-Sch., p. 143.

5

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 143

2

pap. (Deiss., B.

S.,

p.

4

Deiss., B. S., p. 187.

for objections to this derivation.

f.,

149)

'AiroXXcbwos occurs os Kal crvpLarl

In a Fajolm 'Iwcdeas.

Cf.

Drug., Griech. Gr., 1900, p. 175. «

it

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. 'Ep/xoKpdrrjs, as also

from

Cf. also Fick-Bechtel, p. 304.

Fick

(xxxviii) takes

'EpjuSs.

7 Ramsay (Exp., Dec, 1912, pp. 504 ff.) quotes inscription of Antioch where Aowas and Aovkios are used for the same person.

Pisid.

.

173

WORD-FORMATION (Ro. 16

15) is apparently contracted

:

from

'0\vnTn68o)pos,

though

probably a con•0\vfnnav6s Uarpo^as Uapixha:v; suggests Blass^ though UapfJLivi8r}S, of traction etc.) is (Ac. 15:22, 2tXas narpo/Stos; from derived is 16 14) (Ro. same man as StXouaws (MSS. often StX/Sai'os) as Paul always is

possible; llapfxevas (Ac. 6

:

5)

is

:

the

1 Pet. 5 12); Sre^avas be either a modification of Sre
calls ^l

him

Cor.

1

(1

:

Th.

16; 16

1 :

:

1, etc.

15, 17)

So Peter in

:

may

not certain that they represent the same man, for SajTrarpos Corinth, though it is posis from Beroea and Scoo-irarpos from 'ApxeXaos, NiKoXaos appear in the N. T. in the uncontracted sible. forms, though in the Doric the abbreviated forms in -as were used. On the subject of the N. T. proper names one can consult also

it is

Thieme, Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Mdander und das N. T., in the Mag1906, p. 39 f. He finds twenty of the N. T. names nesia inscriptions, such as

'Aircpia,

'

kpnixasi' kpTep.'ihwpoi) etc. ,

Kupta

Journal of Bibl. Lit., 1908, is a common proper name (cf. Hatch, see Mayser, Gr. der griech. illustrations For the papyri p. 145). Papyri {Laid- und Wortlehre, 1906), p. 253 f. Cf. also Traube,

Nomina Sacra as

D

(1907),

who s hows

that in both

the abbreviation IHC XPC

usual TC XC.

Cf. Nestle,

ton {CI. Quarterly, April,

is

B

Exp. Times, Jan., 1908, 1908, p.

and

J<

as well

found as well as the more p.

189.

Moul-

140) finds 'AKovalUos in the

papyrus and 'Akovtl, the abbreviated adalso Burkitt, Syriac Forms of N. T. Proper See dress, on the back. Die griech. Sklavennajnen (1907) Lambertz, and Names (1912), This subject concerns not merely Words. of VI. The History N. T. but all words there used. the in appearing the new words on it. It is not enough remarks few for a place best This is the

body

of a letter in a

know

to

a given

know

the etymology, the proper formation and the usage in Before one has really learned a word, he must history up to the present time, certainly up to the period

writ'er.

its

The resultant meaning of a word in any is studying. given instance will be d(^tormined by the etymology, the history and the immediate context.^ The etymology and the history belong to the lexicon, but the insistence on these principles is within

which he

114Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. Cf. Meistcrh., Gr. dcr att. Inschr. (pp. formation of proper names. Goodcll, The Gk. in Eng., 2 Cf. Heine, Synon. dcs neutest. Griech., p. 29. of Gk. on Eng. 1886, gives a popular exhibition of the inlhience »

118), for

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

174

the purview of grammar. calls for

NEW TESTAMENT

The N. T. Greek on

the same treatment granted

this point only-

all literature in all

languages

and ages. Take (TKavSaXov, for instance. It is a shorter form of the old Greek word aKavdaXrjdpov, trap-stick.' The root aKav8 is seen in the '

The Latin has

Sanskrit skdnddmi, 'to dart/ 'to leap.' de-scendo. {-dpov) for

The termination instrument and

in Alciphro, of

which

aKav8-a\a{ri).

(7Kav8-aXo-v is

XkclvS-oXo-v occurs first in the iiiu:p)a,

it

in scando,

-ak-qdpov is possibly the suffix —rpov

LXX

The form

(TKavdaXrj

occurs

simply the neuter variation. as a translation for

'a noose,' 'a snare,' as in Ps. 69 (68)

:

23.

It

TiJpi^a

was the

or

trap-

impediment; then a stumbling-block or any So 13, Peter became a stumbling-block to Jesus, arnvhakov el efxod (Mt. 16 23). Christ crucified became a aKavdoKov to the Jews (1 Cor.

stick, the trap, the

person

who was an

occasion of stumbling, as in Josh. 23

:

:

1:23).

Take again

eK-KXrjaia

(from

e/c-zcXjjros,

k/caXeco).

The

root

KaX appears in the Latin cal-endae, con-cil-ium, nomen-dd-tor; in

Ho call.' Originally kK-KXrjala was a from their homes, but that usage soon calling-out of the people assembly of Athens constitutional became the passed away. It minds all remembrance of its etyfrom our must banish and "we the of is used as equivalent LXX the word In the mology."^ In the N. T. iinp,, the assembly of the Israelites as a whole. the word takes a further advance. It still appears in the sense of 'assembly' at times, as in 1 Cor. 11 18, but usually, as Thayer shows (Lexicon), the idea of the word is that of body or company of believers whether assembled or not, the body of Christ. This is true at times where the idea of assembly is impossible, as in Ac. 8:3. The word in this sense of body of Christians is used the Old High

German

hal-on,

:

either in the local (Ac. 8:3) or the general sense (Mt. 16

:

18).

In the general sense the word does not differ greatly from one aspect of the word /SacnXeta. These examples must suffice. VII. The Kinship of Greek Words. The study of the family tree of a word is very suggestive. AeiK-vv-ixi is a good illustration in point. It has the root 8lk which appears in the Sanskrit dig-dmi, 'to show,' Latin dic-o, Gothic teiho, German zeigen, etc. On the root 8lk a number of Greek words are built, as SU-r}, 'the

way

or 'like';

man who

'a 1

N.

pointed out,' 'right' or 'justice'; SeT^-is,

dUrjv, 'after

'a showing'; Sety-pa, 'something

the way'

shown';

5t/c-atos,

seeks to go the right way,' 'righteous'; 5iK-at6w, 'to

Hicks, CI. Rev., 1887, p. 43. T., pp. 57-60.

,

See also Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk.

175

WORD-FORMATION

declaror declare one to be righteous'; 5tK-atw-(ns, 'the act of right'; be to declared ing one righteous'; diK-a'^-ixa, 'the thing Su-aiojs, righteousness '; 8tK-aLo-avpr], 'the quality of being right,' decides 'righteously' or 'justly'; 5tK-atco-Ti7s or dLK-aa-T-qs, 'one who righteously.' judging for place righteously'; SiK-aff-TVPLov, 'the

make

'

words occurs in the N. T. save three, S'lktjv, bu-aioiWith these twelve words the difference in meanTi]z, dLKaa-Trjpiou. (like k/cXTjaia) as ing is not so much due to historical development

Each

of these

true that the to the idea of the various suffixes. It is, of course, gift of God the as righteousness N. T. has a special doctrine of all these that is point The words. colours most of these

which

word. Anvarious points of view must be observed with each (Mt. Xv-rpov is up followed be not other illustration that will agent, action, of ideas The :24). 3 20 :28), dTTo-Xu-rpco-ots (Ro. instrument, quality, plan, person, etc., as shown by the result,

words from each other. Green in his Handbook to Grammar of N. T. Greek^ illustrates only the examples this point well with the root kpl {kplv), giving first, the interesting: found be will They that occur in the N. T. suffixes, differentiate

verb,

ky-Kplv-o}, Kplv-cc;

ava-Kplv-w,

Kplv-o),

kTL-Kplv-c^,

avT-aTro-Kplv-ofxaL,

KaTa-Kpiv-oi,

second, the substantive,

aro-Kplv-Ofxai,,

avy-Kplv-u, Kpl-cns,

dLa-Kpiv-u),


Kpl-fxa,

kpl-ttiplov,

viro-

kp^-t^s,

elXL-Kplv-aa, Kara-KpL-fxa, &pa-KpL-(TLS, airo-Kpi-ixa, dvro-Kpi-ats, Std-zcpt-cns,

Kara-KpL-cns,

Tpo-Kpi-fia,

viro-KpL-aLS,

VTro-KpL-Trjs;

third,

adjectives,

av-viro-KpL-TOS, avTO-Kara-KpL-Tos, KpL-TLKOS, a-dia-KpL-TOS, a-Kara-KpL-TOS, elXi-KpL-v-qs.

The development

of this fine of study will

amply repay the

N. T. student. VIII. Contrasts in

Greek Words or Synonyms.

The Greek

is

choice between the rich in synonyms. In English one often has a as "to ask" equivalent, Norman-French its or word Anglo-Saxon in words. distinctions careful 2 made Greeks The or "to inquire." words as of meaning exact the on Sophists the tripped

Socrates

We are fortunate in N. T. study in the postreatises on this subject. Trench, Synoexcellent two session of But nyms of the N. T., 1890, is valuable, though not exhaustive. investihe gives enough to teach one how to use this method of comHeine, Synon. des neutest. Griech., 1898, is more gation. mentioned prehensive and equally able. The matter can only be

often as anywhere.

new

ed., 1904.

1

§ 149,

2

Cf. Skeat, Prin. of

(Foreign Words, 1891).

Eng. Etym., Ist

Bcr.

(Native Words, 1892); 2d

ser.

176

A GRAMMAE OF THE GREEK

here and illustrated.

pare d7a06s,

With

Kadapos,

a7ios,

NEW TESTAMENT

dkaios, for instance,

one should com-

before he can obtain a complete idea of N. T. goodness or righteousness. see Jesus himself insisting on the use of ayaOos for the idea of absolute koXos,

oaLos,

We

goodness in

and

Mk.

10

:

18, ovSels ayaOds

SUaLos occur in Lu. 23

:

50.

el yu?)

els 6 deos.

In Lu. 8

:

Both

ayados

15 the phrase KapSla

approaches Socrates' common use of koKos k ayados "the beautiful and the good." It is also the Greek way of saying "gentleman" which no other language can translate. To go no further, repas, dhva/xis and arjfxeXov are all three used to deayaOrj Kal koXt]

for

scribe the complete picture of a

and 'not yet

old,'

mtws

is

N. T. miracle. Neos and 'not ancient.'

'recent'

is

'young'

CHAPTER

VI

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS The term orthography

is

used to include

all

that pertains to the

Greek words. Phonetics deals with the sounds of the The orthography was constantly changing, but not so letters. Each had an independent developrapidly as did the sounds. ment as is seen very strikingly in the modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handbook of the Mod. Gk. Vernac, p. 6). There has never been a fixed orthography for the Greek tongue at any stage There has always been an effort to have new of its history. spelling of

phonetic spelling to correspond to the sound-change, Gr. of

N.

The confusion

T. Gk., p. 6.

centuries as in English.

Many

in spelling

Cf. Blass,

grew with the

delicate questions confront us at

seemed possible to give the explanation of all the varied phonetic (true or merely analogical) and orthographic changes in the use of the vowels and consonants. An orderly It has not

once.

collection of the

facts with

historical side-lights

is

that

all

is

attempted. I.

The Uncertainty

what

is

though somewhat (a)

of

the

Evidence.

It

is

less so since

The Ancient Literary

increased

by the comparison

to

difficult

the vernacular usage in N. T. times on

many

tell

points,

the discovery of the papyri.

Spelling.

The

difficulty is

of the phonetic spelling of the

much

modern

vernacular with the historical orthography of the ancient literary Greek.^ error.

This method applied to any language may lead one into Modern conversational English differs widely in orthog-

raphy from Spenser's Faerie Queene. For most of the history of the Greek language no lexicons nor grammars were in use. There were the schools and the books on the one hand and popular usage on the other. The movement of the Atticists was just the opposite of the modern phonetic spelling movement in English. The Atticists sought to check change rather than hasten it. It is to be remembered also that the Atticists were the cloister *

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 19

177

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

178

and of the N. T. some more conservative, some

copyists of the ancient Greek writings copyists reflect local types,

The law of restraint.

Later less so.

life is best here, as always, without artificial impulse or In seeking to restore the orthography of the kolvt] ver-

nacular of the

first

century a.d. one must not be handicapped by

the literary Attic nor the modern Greek vernacular, though each

be of service.

In simple truth one has to be less dogmatic what could or could not have been in the past. Breasted^ calmly assures us that over 3000 b.c. "the alphabetic signs, each of which stood for one consonant," were in use in Egypt. He adds: "Had the Egyptian been less a creature of habit, he might have discarded his syllabic signs 3500 years before Christ, and have written with an alphabet of 24 letters." The Greek language was a growth and did not at first have 24 will

these days concerning

even in early Attic,^ not to mention Cretan, had the and sometimes et. Indeed Jannaris^ asserts that "the symbols r] and w, in numerous cases also i, originated at school as mere compensatory marks, to represent positional or 'thetic' e or o." It is not surprising with this origin of vowels (and consonants do not differ) that variations always exist in the sound and use of the Greek letters. Blass* is clearly right when he points out that in changes in the sounds of words "it is usual for the spelling not to imitate the new sound off-hand," and in the case of the N. T. writers there was "no one fixed orthography in existence, but writers fluctuated between the old historical spelling and a new phonetic manner of writing." Moulton^ adds that the N. T. writers had to choose "between the literary and illiterate Greek of their time," and "an artificial orthography left the door open for not a few uncertainties." Here is a "letter of a prodigal son" (B.G.U. ^6 ii/A.D. See MiUigan, Gk. Papijn, p. 93 f.) in which we have "phonetic" spelling in abundance: Kai 8la iravTwlv] evxonai (Tat xryeiaiveLV. To TrpoaKvvrjixa aov [ttoiJco /car' alKaaTrjv rjiJ,aipap irapa tQ Kvpiijo [2ep]a7r€i5€t. VeivdoaKtiv aai deko: kt\. There is here interchange of e and at, of t and et. letters.

E,

force of

€,

7]

(b) The Dialect-Coloured Vernacular. The dialects explain some variations in orthography. One copyist would be a better

representative of the pure vernacular

kolvt},

while another might

'

A

2

Meisterh., Gr. etc., p. 3; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 26

Hist, of Egypt, 1906, p. 45.

Graecae 3 Op. *

etc., cit.,

pp. 52

f.;

Solmsen, Inscr.

ff.

p. 27.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

6.

^

Prol., p. 42.

179

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

Northwest Greek had still positive influence. Often what looks Hke a breaking-down of the language is but the survival or revival of old dialectical forms or pronunciation. But these variations are mainly due to the perlive

where

Attic, Ionic, Doric or

was not till the time of Marcus Aurelius that the learned grammarians succeeded in formulating the artificial rules which afterwards prevailed for writing the old classical Greek. The first century a.d. was still an age of freedom in or-

sonal equation.

thography. fers is

t

It

in the fourth century a.d. the scribe of ^{ pre-

Even

rather than

ei,

while in the case of

the rule elsewhere.

vidual preference.^

This

"The

is

B

et

often occurs where

not mere itacism, but

oldest scribes

is

i

also indi-

whose work we possess

(centuries 4 to 6) always kept themselves much freer from the But, even if Luke and Paul did not schools than the later." ^

the old historical spelling in the case of t mute (subscript) and €t, it is merely cutting the Gordian knot to "follow the Byzantine school, and consistently employ the historical spelling in

know

the N. T." and that "without any regard to the MS. evidence." It is not the spelling of the Byzantine school nor of the Attic dialect that we are after, but the vernacular Greek of the first cen-

tury A.D., and this is not quite "the most unprofitable of tasks," as Blass would have us beheve.^ They do complicate the situation. On some (c) The Uncials. points, as noted above, the great uncials X and B differ, but usuThere is a general agreement between the ally that is not true. older uncials in orthography as against the later uncials and the cursives which fell under the spell of the Byzantine reformers,

who sought class of

1

to restore the classical Uterary spelling.

documents therefore

Hort,

The N.

fails

The Syrian

to represent the orthography of

T. in Orig. Gk., App., Notes on Sel. Read., p. 152. But Hort is not willing to admit 'peculiarities of a local or

in the Intr. (p. 304)

nature" in the N. T. Still Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 151) allows the Doric oSaykco (oSrjTtoj) in "single MS." like B and D, trpoaaxtiv in B, k^aau in D, etc. Hirt (Handb. d. Griech., p. 53) attributes much of the vocal change to dialect-mixing and analogy. On K and B see Hort, op. cit.,

strictly dialectic

N. T. Gk., p. 6 f. N. T. in Orig. Gk.) makes a strong defence of his effort to give as nearly as possible "the spelling of the autographs by means of documentary evidence." There must not be "slovenly neglect of philological truth." But Moulton (Prol., p. 47) docs not "set much store by some of the minutiae which W. H. so conscientiously gather from the great uncials." Certainly "finality is impossible, notwithstanding the assistance now afforded by the papyri" (Thack., Gr., p. 71).

p.

30G 3

''

f.

lb., p. 7.

Hort

(p.

302

f.

Blass, Gr. of

of the Intr. to the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

180

the vernacular

kolvt]

of the first century a.d.

instance, reads Kairepvaovn, not Ka4)apvaoviJ..

The Syrian class, for But do the MSS.

which give us the pre-Syrian types of text preserve the autographic orthography? The fourth century is a long time from the first and the presumption might seem to be to some extent against the Neutral, Alexandrian and Western classes also. The temptation

culty

is is

constant to spell as people of one's time do. felt

by every

editor of classical

purely arbitrary rules are used, rules

This

diffi-

Greek texts and often

made by modern

critics.

Hort^ is willing to admit that in some instances the spellings found in the great uncials which are at variance with the Textus Receptus are due to the "literary spellings of the time" when the MSS. were written, "but for the most part they belong to the 'vulgar' or popular form of the language." Hort could see that before we had the new knowledge from the papyri and inscriptions. He adds 2: "A large proportion of the peculiar spellings of the N. T. are simply spellings of common life. In most cases either identical or analogous spellings occur frequently in inscrip-

by no means always of the This fact showed that the unclassical spellings in the uncials were current in the Apostolic age and were the tions written in different countries,

more

illiterate sort."

most trustworthy even formity belongs only to it is

sometimes doubtful. "Absolute unitimes," Hort^ argues, and hence

if

artificial

not strange to find this confusion in the

MSS. The

confusion

century a.d. and probably the autographs did not follow uniform rules in spelling. Certain it is that existed in fact in the

first

the N. T. writings as preserved in the

apphes to to

all

the

MSS.

know what vowel

MSS.

to a certain extent

or diphthong

In general the N. T., Hke the

LXX,

was

vary. But itacism and makes it difficult

really before the scribe.

grounded in matters of orthography on the rules of the grammarians of the time of the Caesars (Appollonius and Herodian) rather than upon those of the time of Hadrian, when they had an archaistic or Atticistic tendency (Helbing, Grammatik d. LXX, p. 1). Moulton (ProL, p. 42)

is

thinks that "there are some suggestive signs that the great

uncials, in this respect as in others, are

autographs."

But Thackeray

not far away from the

(op. cit, p.

56) denies that

this

1 Op. cit., p. 303 f. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 35) calls attention to the fact that the professional copyists not only had to copy accurately, but "in the received uniform spelling." Cf also Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, p. 2. For further .

remarks on the phenomena in the 2 Op. cit., p. 304.

LXX

MSS.

see Swete, O. T. in Gk. p. 300 *

Op.

cit.,

p. 308.

f.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS conclusion can be

drawn

ipso facto of the

was

The

(d)

since

some three centuries

lated (the Pentateuch certainly)

the N. T.

LXX,

181 it

was trans-

earlier

than

written.

They strengthen the

Papyri.

case for the uncials.

Deissmann^ and Moulton^ show that the great uncials correspond in orthography not only with the contemporaneous inscriptions as Hort had seen, but also with the papyri of the better-educated writers. Among the strictly illiterate papyri writers one can

The

find almost anything.

case of eav = dv in relative clauses

worked out well by Moulton to prove dated

b.c. the

proportion of eav to

in the first century a.d.

it is

iiv

76 to

this point.

in such cases 9.

But

is

is

In the papyri 13 to 29, while

in the fourth century

it is 4 to 8 and the usage disappears in the sixth century a.d. Thackeray (Grammar, vol. I, pp. 65 ff.) shows (after Deissmann^)

A.D.

LXX

confirms this conclusion for eav=av. The usage how the appears in b.c. 133; copyists are divided in different parts of the

same book as in Exodus or Leviticus; it is predominant in the and second centuries a.d., and then disappears. Thackeray (p. 58) traces oWels (jurj^els) "from its cradle to its grave" (from 378 B.C. to end of ii/A.D.) and shows how in ii/A.D. ovdeis is supreme

first

This point very strikingly confirms the faithfulness of the harmony with the time when the MSS. were written. We may conclude then that Hort

again.

uncials in orthography in a matter out of

is

right

and the

and papyri give us the verwith reasonable correctness.

uncials, inscriptions

nacular orthography of the

kolvt]

n. Vowel-Changes (crToiX€ia vowels underwent

many

4)a)VT|€VTa).

In the old times the

changes, for orthography was not fixed.

Indeed is it ever fixed? If the Atticists had let the kolvt] have a normal development, Dr. Rutherford would not have complained that Greek was ruined by their persistence "in an obsolete orthography instead of spelling as they speak." ^ But as early as 403 B.C. the orator Archinos^ had a law passed in Attica prescribing the use of the Ionic alphabet in the schools.

used only

a,

e,

i,

o,

v,

and no

distinction

The

was made

early

Greek

in writing be-

2 prol., pp. 202 ff. pp. 42 ff. pp. 202 ff. On the whole subject of the difficulty of N. T. orthog. see W.-Sch., pp. 31 ff. Deiss. (B. S., p. 180) is clearly right in denying a 1

B.

S.,

3

B.

S.,

"N. T. orthography" save ities.

as individual writers, as now,

For general remarks about vowel changes

O. T. in Gk.,

p. .301

f.;

Thack., Gr., vol.

I,

in

have

LXX

their peculiar-

MSS.

see Swete,

pp. 71-100; Ilelbing, Gr., Laut- u.

Wortl., pp. 3-14. ••

Nicklin, CI. Rev., 1900, p. 115, in review of Rutherford's

the Hist, of Annotation, 1905.

^

A Chap,

Cf. Bekker, Anec. Gr., vol. II, p. 783.

in

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

182

tween long and short vowels, as indeed was never done in the The Ionic invented^ 12 for long o. Before the t and v. introduction of the Ionic alphabet, o and e were both represented by z. H was at first the aspirate like Hebrew n and then now aspirate and now long e or a as the inscriptions amply show. It case of

common

e thus used as long Indeed e sometimes represented did ov. The kinship of these vowels with the Phcenician ct as alphabet is plain, as a is from ^{, e from H, t from », o from p, u from the doubling of (and so a Greek invention). It is interesting to note that the Sanskrit has three pure vowels, a, i, u, while e and o are diphthongs in origin. In Sanskrit a far surpasses all other vowel-sounds, more than twice as many as all other vowelsounds put together. 2 Schleicher^ speaks of the weakening of a into i and m, and thus he goes back to an original a sound for all the vowels. In Latin also a breaks into e, i and u^ Even in Attica in the first century e.g., in spite of Archinos' law, the inand scriptions use sometimes at and ae, et and t, 77 and i, v and t, VL, t and et interchangeably.^ Uniformity did not exist in one dialect, not to mention the persistent differences between the various Greek These changes were going on constantly all over the dialects. Greek world in the first century a.d. For the alphabetical changes in the dialects see Buck's Greek Dialects, pp. 15 ff. These inter-

very

is

and

in the early inscriptions to see

o likewise, as in

hat and

ros.

•)

i;

changes between vowels are interesting.

The first sound (a) The Changes (Interchanges) with a. made by a baby is a. These changes became dialectical peculiarities in many words like the Lesbian Kperos (kpcltos, "ablaut" variaBoeotian drepos

tions), the

vernacular Attic €

we

find

(vowel assimilation), as in

to

€

1

after

t

and vJ

lapos (lepos).^ So in the where a breaks to e before the Ionic- Attic a sometimes changes

(erepos),

Doric

kperrf {apery])

See Kiihner-Blass^ for

Riem. and Goelzer, Gr. Comp. du Grec

The New Earle, Names

et

many du

Lat., Phonet., p. 38.

Cf. also Donaldson,

Crat., pp. 207

Bd.

of the Orig. Letters of the

I,

pp. 39

ff.;

£f.;

examples.

K.-Bl., Griech. Gr., Tl.

I,

Gk. Alph. (Class-

Flin.-Pet., Form, of the Gk. Alph. (1912). ff.); Arthur Evans gets the Gk. Alph. from Crete. 2 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 10. 3 Vergl. Gr., p. 55. His opinion is now considered antiquated.

Papers, 1912, pp. 257

But

Sir

Comp.

*

Giles,

*

Telfy, Chron.

Philol., p.

149

und Topog.

f.

d. griech.

Larsfeld, Griech. Epig., 1892, pp. 494 Inflex. in ^

Hirt,

Gk. and Lat., 1888. Handb. der griech. Laut-

Ausspr.

ff.;

etc.,

1893, p. 39.

See also

King and Cookson, Sounds and «

K.-Bl., Tl.

I,

Bd. I, p. 115 f. Vk is the form

u. Formenl., pp. 115, 119.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

183

Ji{ (Mt. 5 41) and {
a and (Mk. 15

€.

:

'Ayyapevco appears as kyyap. in

The New

21).^

Ionic

:

e'ipeKev

:

:

a in

many

of the best

MSS. both

in

LXX

and N. T.

(cf.

Mk.

Gregory, Prolegomena, p. 82, gives the Blass"* points out that Xldrepa (Ildrapa) occurs in AC in facts. Ac. 21 1. TeaaepoLKovTa is the form given always by W. H. This is an Ionic form (vowel assimilation) which is not so common in 1:42; Mt. 8

:

3

W.

H.).

:

the papyri as in the N. T. MSS.^ In modern Greek both aapavra and aepavTa survive. Likewise W. H. always give the preference to reaaepa, though the papyri do not use it till the fourth century a.d.^ But in the inscriptions reaaepa is found several times, ^ one case in

the

first

century a.d.^

Teaaepas, however, does not occur in the

N. T. MSS., though the papyri have it in the Byzantine age.^ The Ionic and the modern Greek have recraepes and recrcrepa. The N. T. thus differs from the kolpt] papjrri, but is in harmony with the Ionic In some MSS. in both LXX and N. T. literature and inscriptions. in Doric

and BcEotian, while ye

is

in the Ionic, Attic

found

and Cypriote

(Meister, Griech. Dial., Bd. II, p. 29). *

Deiss., B. S., p. 182, gives ivyapias in

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20.

Cf.

Note

a pap. (iv/A.D.).

in W.-Sch., p. 50; Thack., pp. 82, 135;

Mays., p. 14. 3 According to Phrynichus (Rutherford, words are eo-xaTcos /3dp/3apa.

New

Phryn., p. 204) both of these

^ Moulton, Prol., p. 46. For assimilation between a and e in modern Gk. dialects see Dictcrich, Unters. etc., pp. 272, 274. In mod. Gk. vernacular a frequently displaces Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 14. initial e or o. *

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20.

6

lb.

'

Dieterich, Unters. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr., p. 4; also Schweizer, Gr.

d. perg. Inschr., p. 163.

Nachm., Laute und Formcn d. magn. Inschr., p. 146. Moulton, Prol., p. 46. For further evidence see Cronert, Mem. Graeca Hercul., 1903, p. 199. In the Apostolic Fathers^ and the N. T. Apoc. rkaatpa 8

9

and

TtaaepcLKovTa are

common as well as 'eKad
Patr. Apostol. etc., p. 38

careful discussion of Mayser, Gr., pp. 54-60, (wtXevcraffOaL (for similar

9

:

22 V).

Tkaffipa.

where he mentions

confusion of aorist and fut.

inf.

and TeaaepaKovra are very common

LXX,

see

Graicitate

papjTi see

tKoLo},

kyyapiUii,

eK(t>ev^acrOai,

also in the

2 Mace.

LXX

MSS.

Thack., Gr., p. 62 f. This spelling occurs as early as iv/B.c. in Pcrgamum (Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 163 f.). In Egypt it hardly appears before i/A.D. and is not conunon till ii/A.D. (Thack., Gr., p. 62). The uncials give the later spelling. See "Additional Notes."

Cf. Helbing, Gr. d.

p. 5;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

184 Ttaaapes lect,

is

accusative as well as nominative, like the Achaean dia-

but this

common

NEW TESTAMENT

is

another story.

(Ionic

J^

in

Rev. 3

and Northwest Greek) use

with verbs as in

:

16 has

The

x^i-^pos.

of -eco instead of -aco

be discussed in the chapter on Verbs. sometimes changed to a. 'A^c^tafet is accepted by W. H, in Lu. 12 28 rather than either the late afx^Lk^u or the early ajx^Levvvai. The form epavvao> instead of epewdu) W. H, have everywhere received into the text, and so with k^epawaw and ave^epavvqTos. {
epwreco will

e is

:

p. 7, for similar Initial

phenomena

in the

4)pbs {e\a4)p6s),

So the Doric

LXX.

modern Greek vernacular,

often becomes a in

e

avrepa (evTepa), etc.

Cf.

as dXa-

Thumb, Handbook,

p. 14.

used in the N. T. everywhere save in Lu. 6 38, where, however, TeinecriJLevos has the original idea ('pressed down,' not 'seized'). Both occur in the LXX. The Attic forms irLa^co is

:

^tdXTj, vaXos

Ionic

are retained in the N. T. (as in

and vernacular

the literary^

Some

kolvt]

forms in

e,

a

LXX)

mark

rather than the

of the influence of

kolvt].

verbs in

-eco also

use -dco forms, like eXedw, eXXo7dco,

^vpao:.

See the chapter on Verbs.

Changes

in a take place in a

few Hebrew proper names.

Kairep-

(W. H.). So W. H. read MaXeXeTyX in Lu. 3 37, not MeX. (Tisch.) and Na^awTjX. SeXa^tiyX (instead of SaX.) appears in B. Thumb ^ remarks that these changes between a and e occur to-day in the Kappadocian dialect. a and t|. The Doric forms dSayos, oSdyco are found in the Koivfi, though Schweizer^ calls it hardly a Dorism. So in N. T. MSS. we have Tpoaaxeco in B (Ac. 27 27) and pdaaco in D (Mk. 9 18). The Ptolemaic papyri regularly have avriKiaKeiv till ii/A.D. (Mayser, Gr., p. 345). For a and a see and rj under (c). a and o. The changes* between these two vowels are seen in the Lesbian vira. (vtvo), Arcadian TpiaKaaLoi, Doric etKan {eiKoat), etc. W. H. give ^aTToKoykoi in Mt. 6 7 (cf. ^aTTapl^oo) instead of ^arToXoyew. ABK and twice 'J»{ and many cursives have vrpos KoXao-o-aeTs vaovjjL is

the Syrian reading for

Kacfjappaov/j,

:

,

:

:

??

:

etc., p. 70. Cf. Thack., Gr., vol. I, p. 75 f. So AaXfxarla though C has AeXi^. as Lat. has both. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. Both forms are in the pap., Deiss., B. S., p. 182. 2 Hellen. (Griech. Spr.), p. 76. See also Radermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. 34 ff. 3 Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 49. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 62, xpaadai. for xpw^ai. So A in 2 Mace. 6 :21. * K.-Bl., Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 117 f. Cf. Meisterh., Gr. etc., p. 117, where Attic inscr. are shown to have N£07roXtrr?s. 1

in 2

Dieterich Unters.

Tim. 4

:

10,

185

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS as the

while in Col.

title,

1

:

2 nearly

MSS.

all

read

h

KoXoaaals.

Blass finds the title in o also in accordance with the coins and the profane writers; Xen., Anab. I, 2. 6, has a variant reading in KoXao--

Mk.

In

o-ai.

13

of neaovvKTLov}

35

:

In

B

(instead of -aXoiats)

Xciats

D

has ixeaavvKnov and

Tim.

1

1

W. H.

9

:

11:5

in Lu.

instead

give ^tTjrpoXwats and irarpo-

on the authority

of

}
Blass^

compares irar po-kt6vos. a and
:

Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 103.

the vowels.

The N.

T., like the

LXX,

B

has Kalw and

has aid in /cXatco,

1

Esd.

1

:

30.

though the Ptole-

maic papyri rarely have Kdco and k\6.w. d and av. In Lu. 2 1 J
:

Moulton^ is it as early as 74 b.c. in the Attic inscriptions. probably correct in saying that we need not assume the existence of this spelling in the N. T. autographs, though it is not imposHe indorses Mayor's suggestion {Exp., VI, x, 289) "that sible.

of

d/caraTrdcrrous in

2 Pet. 2

:

14

AB may

be thus explained: he com-

This dropping of u between vowels expares axiJiVPQ 1 19 A." before consonants. In the modern tended to the dropping of '

i;

Greek we have

TO (not the article).^

Hort (Notes on Orth., Mero^v

necraffTvXiov.

p. 152)

{fxera^v)

LXX.

in

compares ixkaa^ov, and Blass (Gr., p. 21) Clem, and Barn. (Reinhold, De Graec,

1

o,

Cf. Meistcrh., Gr., p. 17.

«

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

6

Gr.

etc., p. 61.

xxxiii,

pp. 2

p. 31, 1904, p. 107.

p. 3G3.

So

Gr.

^

Cf. also Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 78.

Moulton, Exp., 1904,

also in the

Rom.

etc., p.

91

f.

ProL, p. 47. period occasionally

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35; Wack.,

e/uaroO, taTov.

»

is

,

.

.

Karoi-^ayai as parallel.

*

of 'Ayovaros

Cf Mayser, Gr., p. GO f ., oXXot for aXXot. Illiterate scribes confused a and e in the LXX (as ixiTo^v) and in the pap. (Thack., Gr., p. 77). Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 151. W.-Sch., p. 51, compare KaTa-4 rel="nofollow">ayas and

p. 40;

a and

'

The examples

no instances in the

p. 79) finds

2

whence comes and dros {aroyevThackeray (Gr.,

dros (in Pontus)

once) in the papyri are very common.-'

vrjTou

1

and

avros (aftos)

^

Kuhn's

Zeitschr.,

\^.

Moulton,

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33; 1904, p. 107.

1903, p. 356) us saying that this half of i/u.c.

He

quotes Laurent (B.C.IL,

phenomenon was very common

in the latter

•

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

186

ai and

€.

at

was written

ae in early

NEW TESTAMENT Boeotian and Attic inscrip-

Latin transliteration) and so naturally was pronounced as e (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 28). By 100 a.d. in the KOLvrj at was the mere equivalent of e. The Egyptian papyri show abuntions

(cf.

dant illustrations of it. Especially do the LXX MSS. exhibit it (Thackeray, Gr., p. 78). The modern Greek pronounces both these vowel-sounds alike, as indeed did the Boeotian dialect long before the KOLPT]. Numerous examples of this interchange of spelling exist

Pompeian

wall-inscriptions and in the vernacular kolvt] from Indeed in the N. T. MSS. it is very common to find -adai and -ade used indiscriminately, probably representing the common later pronunciation which was already developing in the Hort^ compares this "shortening of an identical first century a.d.

in the

100 A.D. on.^

sound" to the

mon

late (ttvKos for arvXos

and

So com-

Kplixa for Kplfxa.

did this blending become that Blass^ places

little

confidence

N. T. MSS. on this point. Such readings occur as kretade and yweKats for yvvoLKes. Sometimes only the context^ can decide between e and at where different forms result, as

in the

for aLTelade

in avaTeae or -at (Lu.

14

:

10), eyetpe or -at

(Ac. 15:28),^ epxeade or -a^at in

^
(Mt. 9

:

5), kirduayKes

(Lu. 14:17), ertpots or

(Mt. 11 16 Syrian reading), TapheyKe or -at (Mk. 14 36), In Gal. 4 18 both K and B read ^riXovade for ^r]\ovadaL. B reads AtXa/xtrat in Ac. 2 9, from fi^"!?, the rest 'EX. The authority according to Hort^ is "usually preponderant" for e^e(l)vr]s and k4 rel="nofollow">vldLos instead of at0. So Kepka for Kepaia is accepted^ in Mt. 5 18; Lu. 16 17, and KpeiraKy] for KpanraKy] in Lu. 21 34. Likewise eratpois

:

etc.

:

:

:

:

:

W. H.

:

receive Aacrea for Aacrata

read XeXaxos, but

The

Luke.

XalXaxp

is

uncials all have

all the early uncials but

Hort^ accepts also

A

pe8r],

have

<j)e\6vr]s

Moulton ^ doubts, because

m

Ac. 27

8.

:

NAG

in 2 Pet. 2

17

:

the undoubted reading in Matthew,

for

not

palSr],

'^vKop.opka (fyaiXourjs

in

Rev. 18

:

(2

Tim. 4

:

13),

So

13.

(not -ata) in Lu. 19

:

4.

though

of the Latin paenula.

1

W.-Sch., p. 47.

2

Notes on Orth., p. 150. Cf. on at and e, Mayser, Gr., p. 107. » W.-Sch., p. 47. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 9. 'Ett' d;'d7Kais "Alexandrian only" according to Hort, Notes on Orth.,

3 5

p. 151. «

lb.

Cf the Western Kaivo4>o:vlas for Kevfxjxj^via^ in 1 Tim. 6 20. In 1 3 instead of aalveadai FG read cuveadai. Nestle (Neut.-Zeit., 1906, p. 361) finds parallels in the forms ffLawoixevcov and aiavdeis. ^

lb.

Th. 3

:

.

:

8

Notes on Orth.,

9

CI. Rev., 1904, p. 107.

p. 151.

The pap.

give

(paip6Xi.ov.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS (6)

The Changes with

The interchanges

€.

187

of

and a have

c

already been discussed under (a), but others took place with rj, t, o. In the Boeotian these were freely interchanged^ and € and €1.

same interchange occurs

the as

The

or TrXelwv.

TrXecoi'

in the Doric,

New

Attic inscriptions ^

Ionic

show

and Attic

this

common

phenomenon. The i before a vowel easily and early loses its force and drops out. Before the adoption of the scholastic orthography at Athens (b.c. 403) e stood for e, rj, et. Sooner or later et became everywhere a monophthong (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 28), But the Koivri usually wrote et before vowels rather than e (Thackeray,

LXX

MSS. reveal the same traits as the N. T. Acts 17 34, but "Apeios occurs (Ac. 17 19, 22). 'Axpetos is uniform in the N. T., but in Ro. 3 12 we have -qxpeudwav (iXABDG). In Lu. 3:13; Jo. 21:15; Ac. 15:28, W. H. print TrXeoj' (Attic has even irXkouos),^ but elsewhere the N. T. has forms in et. The derivatives all have e like wXeoveKTeo}. But the N. T. has only reXeLos, TeKubw, though Herodotus always and the Gr., p. 81).

The

'Ap€07ra7tTJ7s is in

:

:

:

Attic usually used

words with

and

e

reXeooi}.

et

D" has

before consonants one

1.^

Of

note that

dTro-

Heb. 10

TeXeaxraL in

may

:

34 is aorist subjunctive. (Cf. Ex. 3 10.) Both occur in the N. T. (both Ionic and Attic). The N. T. never has es, but always els. However, eaw is the uniform reading in the N. T. Homer used either eiVco or eo-co. Numerous examples of long e occur in the inscriptions € and T|. like Here (fjLTjTe).^ These changes are probably all analogical and not phonetic. But in the N. T. we have only the shortening of 7], back to short e in some words like avade/xa, though this particular word ('curse') came to be distinct from avadrj/jia ('votive offering'). Ac. 7

oretXco in eveKep

and

'Avadrjua occurs

NADX, 6r]fji.a

1

:

:

e'lveKeu

etc.,

only once in the N. T. (Lu. 21

have

avadefxa.

aTTLKus, avadefxa eXXrjVLKois.

BruR., Griech. Gr., p. 28, as

:

5),

and even here

Tisch. quotes Moeris as saying ava-

But the use

0et6s

of avadefxa as 'curse'

= 0e6s; Thumb, Handb.,

p. 220.

The change and ei was very common in vi/iii u.c. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 37. ' But even the Arcadian dial, has nXkoua, irXfovwv (Sohnsen, Inscr. Graec, p. UXkov is common in the N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, De Graec. Patr. Apost. etc., 4). Cf. Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 40 f. On the whole subject of e p. 40). and 6t in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 67-73. They are very numerous indeed, * Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22. these changes in the pap., both ways. ^ Solmscn, Inscr. Graecae etc., p. 1. Arcadian dial. Cf. also Meisterh., Gr., p. 3. In the Pontic dial, to-day there is a wide-spread use of e instead of t], as in akiroixai (Thumb, HeUcn. [Griech. Spr., referred to hereafter usually as '

in

Meisterh., Gr., p. 20

e

HeUen.], p. 149).

f.

Cf. Schweizer, Gr. etc., p. 44

f.

.

188

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

"is not

an innovation of

Greek" (Moulton, Prolegomena,

biblical

NABDcr

Perhaps this rjfxeu, not wv^exchange between e and ij bears on the use of (TTr}KeTe with Iva in Mk. 11 25; 1 Th. 3 8, and of MS. evidence for davixa^ere in Cf. also oxl/rjad^ and Jo. 5 20 and k^oixoXoyqaeraL in Ph. 2:11. In Ac. 11

p. 46).

:

11

:

read

:

:

6\l/e(rd€

in Lu. 13

that sometimes

So in 13

28.

:

e

:

Mayser

25.

represents an original open

{Gr., p. 64)

thinks

as in irapeaTeKOTes.

rj

shows quite a preference for words in -e^a rather than Gr., p. 65 f.), and the LXX has new words in -ejua, though some words have both forms (Thackeray, Gr., p. 80). In the papyri this shortening (as in the LXX) appears in words and et, tjl like eirieeixa, Trpoadeixa, etc.^ The interchanges between

The

KOLVT]

-77jua

(Mayser,

77

and

€t

will

be discussed under

rj

Mayser

(c).

63

(Gr., p.

f.)

thus

e) explains xXijprjs as an indeclinable neuter form. and t. Dieterich^ mentions as one of the marks of the Attic and Egyptian kolvt] the fact that t and e interchange when used with X and v. Cf. the modern Greek, and the Lesbian Greek used It is a Doric rkpros for tp'ltos, and the Thessalian Olos for Beds. inscriptions in the ^ and in This variation appears characteristic. Xeyedov and which is also the papyri,^ especially in the case of XeTtajv, having and co \eyLOPo:s (o genitive even X€7etcb;', not to mention a AeyLOiv is the reading of the best N. T. MSS. the same sound).

(tj

for

€

(NBDL;

Latin

cf.

of the Latin short

legio), i

as in the papyri.

does the

kolvt]

have

e.

Especially in the case

not

'AXeeTs,

aXteZs, is

the

reading in the N. T. according to the best MSS. (Mk. 1 16, etc.).^ This is a natural assimilation after a liquid. The frequency of e for I in the Egyptian papyri may be due in part to the Coptic, which has no short i (Steindorff, Kopt. Gr., p. 13). Note a :

soldier's use of x^pc^v

13

(Jo.

Latin 1

i

:

4,

to

B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). Ahnov a change in the other direction, Blass^ says that \evTeov would have looked for xetpa(v),

Latin lenteum)

Greek

c.

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904,

is

p. 108.

Cf. also Moulton, Prol., p. 46,

and

has good discussion of this shortand 7; interchange times without number from v/b.c. down to ix/A.D." (Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 36). Reinhold (De Graec. Patr. etc., p. 101 f.) shows how the confusion between ij and e led to

Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., pp. ening of 77 to e and also w to o. " E

forms

p.

like

mv ay ay ere.

Unters.

4

Moulton,

80 5

Cf. the

etc., p. 136.

2

ff.,

mod. Gk. orkw ^

(aTT]Kco)

and Oeru

Schweizer, Perg.

CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 33, 434; 1904, p. 107.

{drjTw).

43 f. Mayser, Gr.,

Insclir., p.

Cf.

f

"AXuTs occurs in pap. also.

p. 84. 6

47

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 307;

Thackeray,

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS unnatural to a Greek. vri4>b.\eos (1

Tim. 3

:

Latin Puteoli, using (not -eou)

So

N770dXtos also

2, etc.).

alone well-attested/ not Ac. 28 13 represents the Dittenberger, p. 145). ZcfjuKlvdLou

the N. T. reading (Ac. 19

is

Ti^epLos (not Te^eptos)

though the

is

is

IioTlo\oL in

for e (cf.

i

189

:

12) for Latin semidnctium. the N. T. rendition of Tiberius in Lu. :

Greek writers used TejSepios, AofierpLos, etc.^ more examples of this exchange of e and I do not appear. The interchanges between et and t are discussed under (d), those between eu and v under (/). The Lesbian ^olic had aTp6<j)u: for the Doric arpdcfxc. € ando. 3

1,

:

later

It is really surprising that

The Ionic-Attic made it o-rpe^co. Meisterhans^ gives numerous examples of this change in e and o: djSoXos for 6/3eX6s as early as the middle of the fourth century b.c. Dieterich^ mentions the assimilation of e and o as one of the marks of the Egyptian kolpt,. In Ac. 18 24 }<{ 15. 180. Cop. arm. and in 19 1 N* 180. read 'ATreXXT^s for 'AxoXXws, though D has AiroWcovm in 18 24. The Doric and the :

:

'

:

Attic inscriptions^ had 'Att^XXo^v, 'ATreXXconos, 'ATreXXtos, etc. In 1 Cor. and Titus we have only 'AttoXXojs. Indeed Blass^ suggests that 'ATreXXTjs is the reading of the a text in Acts and that 'AttoXXcos is an interpolation from 1 Cor. It is more likely to think that the two old forms of the name were still in use, though 'AttoXXws is the correct text in Acts also. The MSS. of the

N.

good

uncials,

usual

have

oXedpehc^,

etc.

dXodpeOco, k^oKodpeboi, (cf.

6/3oX6s

T.,

even

oXodpevT-qs as well as

for 6(3eX6s

by

assimilation),

the

and

Hort7 accepts the e form only in Ac. 3 23. The Syrian class has the o form. Blass,^ who usually cares httle for such points, properly insists on the documentary evidence. In :

only ^

ADE

Heb. 11:28

have the

e

form, while in

Notes on Orth., p. 151. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

1

Cor. 10

:

10

DFG

read

e.

But always Tiro,. Cf. Nachm., Magn. i. Both Xe7twj' and XkfTcop are road in Magn. inscr. (Thieme, Die Inschr. von Magn. etc., p. 8). Cf. also Schwcizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 46. For assimilation between e and in mod. Gk. see '

Inschr., p. 22, in discussion of

p. 21.

for Lat.

e

t

Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 272 » *

"

Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 22. Cf. also K.-Bl., Tl. I, Bd. I, p. US. Unters. etc., p. 135 f. Cf. Ilirt, Ilandb. d. Griech. etc.', p. 115 K.-Bl., Tl.

I,

Bd.

I,

p. 118,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. the pap. situation. «

f.

and Ilirt, Mayser

Cf.

op. ciL, p. 115. (Gr., pp. 94-97) for

a discussion of

Notes on Orth., p. 152. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. He quotes Buresch, Rhein. Mus., 210 f as m favour of e in the N. T. as well as the LXX. '()\,o. ajipears inp the Apost. Fathers (Goodspeed, Index) and 6\o0. in N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, p. 40). For assimilation between e and o in mod. Gk. see Dieterich, Unters. etc., 274. ^

«

p.

The

LXX is

NAB

according to

has ^oXoOpevw.

and

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

190

But

oKedpos

the rule in the

In Mk. 8 (Thackeray,

:

14

B

LXX has

e,

though the modern Greek

the uniform spelhng in the N. T.

(Thackeray, Gr., p. 88).

kireKadevro as is

Cf.

Gr., p. 89).

(Mk. 12

reads

is

common

LXX

in the

also kirkbtTo (Heb. 12:16,

LXX),

(Ac. 4 35), irapedldeTo (1 Cor. 11 23), 48 NB). Hort {Appendix, p. 167 f.) explains these changes as "euphonic," but it is a change of the rootvowel of 8o, a confusion of thematic and athematic conjugations. €dv and dv. See also i (d) under Papyri. This is as good a place as any to say a word further on the interchange of these two forms, not strictly vowel-changes, however. We have also See also aldv for kav, elav (really el-\-av) as in P Eleph. 1 (b.c. 311). k^ebtro

:

1), 5te5t5ero

and k^eKpeneTo (Lu. 19

B.G.U. 530

common

The

(i/A.D.).

:

:

:

use of

LXX, N.

eai/

= modal

av in relative sentences,

T. and papyri of

i/ii a.d., is not an exchange of vowels, but possibly a slurring over of the e before a. "Ap=eap survives from the ancient Greek in a few instances, as Jo. 12 32 (B and accepted by W. H.) 13 20 DEFG, 5 19 (NB) 16 23 (BACD, etc., have eav, but NBC iiv and accepted by W. H.) accepted by W. H.) 20 23 (twice and accepted by W. H., though AD have first eav and NAD second). In Ac. 9 2 only NE have iiu and W. H. read eav. Blass^ thinks that as kdv made encroachment into the province of ap " a kind of interchange of meaning between the two words " grew up. The modern Greek vernacular uses ap for Hort^ considers the whole subject of the interchange between 'if.'

so

in the

;

:

;

:

:

;

;

:

:

:

and iiv after relatives Predominantly iiv is found

eav

" peculiarly

and perplexing. and edv after vowels, in Mt. 20 4 and Hv in

irregular

after consonants,

but there are many exceptions." Cf. edv Mt. 20 26 f. Moulton^ has shown that edv = iiv is scarce in the papyri save from 100 b.c. to 200 a.d. In the Magnesian inscriptions^ only edv appears, not Hv nor riv, as riv = edv is not in the N. T. But in the Herculaneum papyri these particles interchange freely. ^ The Attic inscriptions uniformly have av with relatives.^ :

:

Omitted by Debrunner in ed. 4. Notes on Orth., p. 173. Hort has a curious error here, for the references under av and eav should be exactly reversed. "Av = ka.v ('if') is rarely found 1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 60.

2

in the pap. also. ii/B.c).

Moulton

(CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434) gives av

fxi)

Cf. also CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32; Mayser, Gr., p. 152

f.

(AP 43, Mayser gives

airobun.

^ Prol., p. 43; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32, etc. = av and of av = tav. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 68. See Gregory, Prol. (Nov. Test. Gr.), p. 96, for the facts about the N. T. MSS. and kav. ^ Cronert, Mem. Graeca Here, p. 130.

exx. of edv *

^

Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 326.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

191

Indeed Attic does not contract ea with exception of kav= ^v.^ But = modal av is found in Xen. Mem., w eau apuoTTy, in Lysias, This oOs kav ^ovK-qQdaLv, etc. (see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 421).

cdi'

Examples occur in kav. Cf Rein-

use of kav occurs over sixty times in the N. T.

Greek of

late

De

el

— eav as well as — ei

av,

instead of

.

Patrum Apost. etc., p. 35; Moulton, Classical Review, 1901, p. 32. Thackeray {Gr., pp. 65 ff.) finds that in the ii/B.c. the papyri nearly always have 6s av, while in the i/A.D. they nearly always have 6s kav. In the books of Exodus and Leviticus he notes that in the first half of each book both forms occur while in the second part ds eav almost vanishes. Each book may have been written on two rolls. The changes between and a, and (c) The Changes with t). have already been discussed. and I. As already stated, originally H was merely the rough breathing, but the Ionic psilosis left a symbol useless, and heta was called eta.^ Thus the new letter took the old long e value in Ionic and Attic and also largely supplanted the long a where a became e. The Sanskrit used long a, the Greek and the Latin either e or i. This new (in spelling) (v/b.c.) gradually turned more to the i sound in harmony with the growing itacism of the language, though there was some etacism on the other hand.^ As early as 150 B.C. the Egyptian papyri show evidence of the use of t for rj.^ By the and i, middle of the second century a.d. the confusion between and et, rj^and et is very general. By the Byzantine times it is complete and the itacism is triumphant in the modern Greek.^ and t was natural Reinhold^ thinks that the exchange between and e and the interchange bein view of the relation between tween € and I. As early as the fifth century b.c. the change between and t is seen on vases and inscriptions. But the Ptolemaic papyri^show little of it and it is rare in the LXX MSS. NAB (Thackeray, Gr., p. 85). In the N. T. times the interchanges between and i, and et, til and et are not many. In 1 Cor. 4:11 W. H. read yvuvLTevo:, though L and most of the cursives have 77. hold,

Graecitate

t]

rj

(.

'x\

tj

??

t]

r/

r;

tj

tj

17

77

1

Thumb,

*

Hirt,

»

Thumb,

*

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 29.

also

d.

Griech.

Ilellen., p.

and i interchange from a Horn. pap.

77

cites ^

Hellon., p. 92.

Handb.

98

etc., p. G3.

f.

Cf. also

of i/B.c.

Thumb,

Ilellon., p. 138.

Cf. W.-Sch., p.

in ii/B.c.

^^iice

for WrjKe,

Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 47.

He

41).

and per contra gives

iwii

In Bcrotia

Maj'ser (Gr., for

p. 82)

(p. 84) a<j)r)KeTo.

iirl

from a Byz.

inscr. '

De Grace.

Patr. etc., p. 41.

C"f.

also Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inselir., p.

34

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

192

NEW TESTAMENT

b-qvapiov, though btvapLov appears very early.^ Mt. 19 24 and Lu. 18 25 a few late cursive MSS. substitute K-d/xtXos ('rope'), a word found only in Suidas and a schoUum on Arist. But "it is certainly wrong," ^ a mere effort to explain away the difficulty in the text, an effort as old as Cyril For Kvprjvios B^ it. vg. sah. have Kvptvos, of Alexandria on Luke. and A has KvpvuLos, a striking example of Kvpetvos while B* has same sound in these MSS. The the having ei, v itacism, 77, t, 19 12, but Liddell and Thayer in Acts give aLiJUKlvdiov N. T. MSS. spelling like the Latin semialternative as an suggest both crju. cindium. So also the best MSS. in Rev. 18 12 read (tlplkos, though some cursives have a-qpiKos (like Jos, and others), and still others Indeed in 1 Pet. 2 3 for xPW^os L and many cursives avpiKos.^ have XpLffTos. The heathen misunderstood the word XpLaros and confounded it with the familiar xPW'o'i, pronounced much ahke.

The N. T. always has For

Kafxr]\os

in

:

:

:

:

:

Suetonius (Claudius 25) probably confused Christus with ChresIn Ac. 11 26 ^^ 61 have Xpr^crTLavovs, while B has Xpeiar. tus. So in Ac. 26 28 N has Xp-rjaTiavov for Xptcrr., while B has again ei. :

:

The same thing occurs in 1 Pet. 4 16. T| and €1. The Boeotian and the Thessalian :

changed^

7?

for

et,

TldeLiJLL

= TidrinL.

Schweizer^ gives

(Byzantine inscription).

TrapdSeto-os

In Lu. 14

:

dialects

early

irapddTjcros

for

we have

13 (21)

(ABDEL), avaweipos (GHK, etc.), and -Trip- (^{R). This condemned by Phrynichus the Atticist as vulgar.^ In the LXX J^ has draTrctpos in Tob. 14:2 and AV show it in 2

dmTretpos

itacism

is

Mace. 8

:

24 (Thackeray,

J
follow

occurs in the

in reading

LXX

and so

use of ^

2

ei

^i77

=

is i
p.

83).

In Heb. 6

rather than

et nrjv

rj

jii]v.

:

14

W. H.

This form

Moulton' has shown that nrjv by mere itanot due to a confusion between the Hebraistic "^i^, thus correcting Hort. The uncials and the

and

in the papyri.

several times in the papyri cism,

Gr.,

it is

obviously for

ri

Blass, Ausspr. d. Griech., pp. 37, 94. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 151.

3 lb., refers to o-iptKOTrotos in Neap, inscr. (C. I. G. 5834). In the mod. Gk. (j = i in pronunciation. Cf. Thumb, Handb. d. neugr. VoLkerspr., p. 2. W.-Sch. (p. 46) mention ei7/3r?i', ei^v", 6ii0-nv in Ex. 2 3-6. * Cf. Blass, K.-BL, Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 135. 5 Perg. Inschr., p. 47. Cf. also p. 56. See numerous exx. of this change in :

Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 47

f.

pp. 9, 22. It is found also in 2 Mace. 8 24. Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 15) shows that aireipos (not airripos) is read in Herod, 6

i.

Cf. Bekker,

Anec,

I,

:

32. ^

ProL, p. 46; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33.

See also Thackeray, p. 83.

8

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

I93

papyri here agree.

mv in a Doric oJN T Gk., p. (.ci.

Deissmanni calls attention to the use of el inscription of the first century b.c. Blass {Gr 306) observes that a papyrus reads Krjpla for K^pia

Jo. 11:44, Keip^,

KTip-, KLp-iais).

and €1. In the old Attic there was no 771 in writing, only ei, since was not used as a vowel. As early as 400 b.c. the Attic used m and et interchangeably, K\r,c, becoming ^Xetco, /cXjys = «Xets, Xyrovpyos-Xecrovpyos, etc.^ This usage was not very common in Perga111

_

7]

mum3

nor in Magnesia.^

Cronert finds this interchange in the

Herculaneum papyri only in the papyri copies of Epicurus and Polystratus.^ In the N. T. Xecrovpyos, ~ia, -eXu, -ckos are taken over trom the Attic, but they occur also in Pergamum^ and Magnesia.7

The

Attic indeed carried the fondness for ec so far that in writing in the second singular indicative

it

was used always

middle everywhere, the other dialects using save the Ionic. The kocpt, has y ^oOXa, o'la, b^^a. In the N. T. W save y is universal according to W^H. save in Lu. 22 :42 where iSovXec is genuine, though some Mbfe. have ec other passages. Blass ^ observes that this is a hterary touch in Luke for the colloquial ^eXe.s. Hatzidakis^ notes

m

m

how

difficult this

TroL-fiays

and

made it to tell the difference between for instance, because of this Attic intermix-

process

Trotijaets,

ture of the diphthongs. Blass 10 will not hear of this as a possible explanation any cases, but one must remark how well this vowel-blending harmonized with the kinship in meaning between the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative

m

(cf.

some MSS.

for

SchaeL

in

8o:av

in Jo.

17:2) and made it easy for the later so-called future subjunctive (cf. Latin) to develop. WinerSchmiedel indeed accept as possible this vowel confusion in several mstances.ii In Mk. 8 35 (Lu. 17 33) 8s a. a^oXean, Lu. 12 OS av dfxoXoyriaei, 2 Cor. 12 21 fxi) TaireLPuaei, Ro. 3 4 (Ps. 51 6) :

:

:

:

:

B. S pp. 205-8. Cf. Dittenb., Syll., ' ur., pp. 74-79, for careful discussion.

No. 388,

p. 570.

:

See also Mayser,

M^isterh. Gr. d. att. Inschr., pp. 36 ff. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 39 1 and 49. See also Mayser, Gr., pp. 79 f., 126-131. ' Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 60 f. *

Nachm

Magn.

Inschr., p. 50

f.

Mem

^

Graeca Hcrcul., p. 37. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8. /3ouXet, oUl, Einl.

m

d. neugr. Gr., p. 306.

e

Schweizer, op. ciL, p. 60.

7

Nachm.,

op.

cit.,

p. 51.

Ap. Fathers (Goodspeed, Index). gives exx. from the N. T. Apoc

64,u in

He

^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8. W.-Sch., Moulton (Prol., p. 16S) woul.l take indifTerently (nrhy,, p. 47. '; or uxAtt, in Rev. 14 4. For many similar exx. in the inscr. see Dittenb &TVW B.V iw&pxei (117. 17), tlpkB-ntrav (352. '«

'

:

66), etc.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

194

viKrjaeLS (cf.

8LKaL(jodfjs)

,

Ac. 5

:

15

'Iva

8

exicrKtacrei,

:

31 eav

odr^yrjcrei.

Winer-Schmiedel would find the aorist subjunctive and not the future indicative. This is possible but by no means certain, since the future indicative was undoubtedly used both with edp and W. H. read 'IcoaveL instead of 27 in Mt. 11:4; Lu. 7 18. 'iva (oTTcos). In 2 Cor. Tc3 hoiKTirel occurs in papyri Brit. Mus. I, Nr. 2. 135. 2 9 AB 109 have fi where et is probably correct. Irrational Iota. The iota subscript was iota adscript T] and T). till the twelfth century a.d., but as early as the third century B.C. When et was practically equal to r; in it was not pronounced.^ sound, it was natural that xi (^0 should be. The t was then dropped in sound long before it was subscript.^ Gradually it was felt to be a matter of indifference in some words whether this iota was written or not. Examples of i] instead of -q occur in the inscrip:

:

tions of

Pergamum^

finds irrational

t

as ev

adscript

rj

Moulton abundant in the

as well as in the Attic*

(excot,

for instance)

Ptolemaic Tebt. Papyri {Classical Review, 1904, p. 106).

Cf.

Mayser {Gr., pp. 122-126) who gives many examples. In the N. T. has dropped from 6vT]aKoo. Indeed since the second cenadscript in the diphthongs a, tury B.C. v ^^'^ become mute. Hort,^ hoAvever, argues for the retention of i in ^fjv^ and infinitives t

L

27,

in -av instead of the Doric-Attic form, as well as in adcios, eUrj,

\adpa, iravraxd}

fc3ov,

'UpcoSrjs, Kpv(l)fj,

^uiov,

though he hesitated to put

ttclvtii,

irpcopa,

in the text.

crwfoj

cwfco,

It

virepQiov,

is

just as

well to finish the discussion of the iota subscript here, though

some

of these examples go

tors print also drjuoaia,

Tpwas, though

"LanodpaK-q,

beyond the range

i8ia,

iJLLfj.vr]
and

of

J7.

The

best edi-

irarpoXwas, Trarpwos,

jur/rpoXojas,

irpaos.

Tre^fj,

W. H. have forms

in -olv also, as KaraaK-nvoTv (Mt. 13: 32). Moulton^ gives a curious example of the loss of the irrational t in the case of the subjunctive sometimes in the papjTi appears as rjv, having lost the i, II which and taken on irrational v. As a matter of fact iota adscript (iota 1

Blass, Pronun., etc., p. 50.

3

Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 65.

*

Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 64.

wrote €1 for the 1 with a,

rji.,

but not for

p.

^

Hirt,

Handb.

d. Griech., p. 114.

In the Iv/b.c. the Attic often

In the Thess.,

Jilol.

and Ionic

inscriptions

wrongly inserted (irrational i), as in Cf. K.-BL, Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 183 f. Strabo rfj iroXei, to. opu, as early as vi/s.c. in spurious diphthongs. ttoX(14. 41) says that many regularly dropped the \ol yap x^P''^ Tov I ypa^ovai ras Sotikcls, Kal fK/3d\Xoi»(n 8e to Wos 4 rel="nofollow">^(nKriv airlav Schweizer (Perg. Inschr., p. 47) ovK exop. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 29 f. ^ Introd. to N. T. Gk., p. 314. cites T'fiiv evvoiav. 6 Mayser, Gr., p. 121, finds no i with av in the pap. ' Prol., pp. 49, 168, 187. 77,

03

is

freely omitted or

t

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

195

subscript not yet, of course) does not appear in the great uncials fiLdLaav in D (Mk. 1 34) and ^uXojt in K (Lu. 23 31).^ Forms with and without the mute iota appear in the Herculaneum pa-

save

:

Blass^ would also restore

pyri,2 as eUrjc or dKrj.

He

doubts

(Solrjv

if

Attic)

:

was written

t

though

new

in such

t

to avTLTrepa(a).

optative forms as

Scotjj/

should be put in the text.

it

v. Since these two vowels came to be pronounced alike modern Greek/ it was to be expected that some interchange would come, though any early examples are wanting. However, by the second century a.d. the inscriptions give many instances r\

and

as in

such as

drjpa (dupa),

we

{fxvar.), aKvirrpov {aKT]TTpov), etc.^

iJ.r]<JTr]pLOV

already in the Egyptian

is

according to Thumb.^

kolvtj

It

Hence

MSS. get mixed over 17/xets Peter does this itacism lead to a mixing of the historical^ standpoint as in 1 12, where vfxXv is read by are not surprised to see the N. T.

and

Especially in

vixels.

1

:

KABCL,

by

K

and most cursives Syr^<=^ Cop. In 1 Pet. 5 10 the MSS. similarly support vnds and 17/xas. In 2 Cor. the personal relations of Paul and his converts are involved in this piece of orthography as in 8 7 e^ vfxoiv kv rj/juv (J
rjfxlv

:

:

(B 30, 31, 37, etc.). See especially Kad' 17/xas in Ac. 17 28 (B 33 Cop., etc.) which reading would make Paul identify himself with the Greeks on this occasion. el

rjiJLoJv

kv vixtv

:

{d) ri

The Changes with

see under

see under

(c)

(c).

For

i.

and

t

e

see under

for iota subscript (adscript)

;

For

The papyri show

,

mute

(6)

;

for

i

and

or irrational

i,

under Verb. 'KkycoL, P. Oxy. 37

irrational iota see also Infinitive

it

in queer

forms

like

aXrjdiJL,

(a.d. 49). I and €1. The interchange between these vowel-symbols began very early (certainly by the sixth century b.c.^) and has been very

The

persistent to the present day.

inscriptions give

numerous

examples^ in the fifth century B.C., such as airoKTivt], 'E7ra
Gregory, Prol.

2

Cronert,

Mem.

(Now

Test. Gr.), p. 109.

Grace, llercul.,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 7. Griech. d. LXX, pp. 3 ff. '

The

pj).

LXX

*

Hatz., Einl. in neugr. Gr., p. 304.

*

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 48.

41

IT.

phenomena

are Bimilar.

«

Cf. Helbing,

Ilcllen., p. 171.

Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 310. On the subject of -q and v sec Maj^ser, Gr., p. 85 f. He denies (p. 86) that the itacising pronunciation of i)rcvailed in the Ptolemaic period. ^

77

8

Jann., Hist. Gk.

CIr., p.

47.

»

lb.

10

lb.

"

lb., p. 41.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

196

contributed to this confusion as by and rapid spread of was taken by many, not et was pronounced hke t, and as long €, but equal to t. The confusion apparently began in the BcEotian dialect^ and in postclassical times, but swept the field in all the dialects till every et (closed and open) was pronounced By 100 b.c. the Attic inscriptions show a general interas I. change between et and I, and in the second century a.d.^ the confusion exists between et and I. Dieterich^ thinks that this itacism had its widest development in Egypt. The Ptolemaic papyri of It is only the more illitii/B.c. show itacism very frequently. B has opeiov (Thackeray, l, though erate scribes that use et for * between t and the interchange Thumb considers Gr., p. 86 f.). In Pergamum^ between o and co. that €1 in the kolvt] on a par with that from et common than much more is the change from i to et thing The same occur, as d/xeXta. for -ela though forms in -la to t, The Hercuis common." Magnesia, where {fifxTv) rifxelu is true in laneum papyri tell the same story,'' while it is so common in the Egyptian papyri that Moulton^ is unable to set much store by the minutiae gathered by W. H. from the great uncials, "for even W. H. admit that their paramount witness, B, 'has little authority on behalf of et as against t.'" Clearly the partiality of N for t and of B for et throw them both out of court as decisive witnesses on

tion

??

that time

77

So

this point. ^

in the

it is

not merely itacism that we have to deal with of exchange between t and et,

numerous N. T. examples

but "genuine peculiarities of original orthography" also.^'' Whatever Dr. Hort meant, all that is true is that different scribes merely preferred one or the other method of representing Z. The whole matter therefore remains in doubt and one is prepared for all sorts of variations in the N. T. MSS., because the koipt] no 1

lem

K.-Bl., p. 131.

pronunciation of 2

Mayser

(Gr., pp. 87-94)

has a

in the pap. of the first tliree centuries B.C. et

approached that of

closely

Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 49.

full

and

discussion of the prob-

finds that in

Egypt the

t.

In the succeeding pages he gives

between i and «, ^ Unters. etc., p. 45. N. T. exx. * Hellen., The next most common interchange of vowels in the p. 172. and t or «, ot and v (Warfield, Text. Crit. of the N. T. MSS. are ai and e, 5 Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 53 f. N. T., p. 103). « Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 35 f. Cf. Egyp. pap. also.

numerous exx. many of them

in cliron. order of the various interchanges

identical with the

77

^

8

Cronert,

(Gr., p.

K and A. 10

Mem.

Graec. Hercul., pp. 27 ff. see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, pp. 7 S. Thack. thinks that the orthography in this point is older than that of

Prol., p. 47.

86

f.)

For the

LXX

^

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 152.

Warfield, Text. Crit. of the N. T., p. 103.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

on the distinction between long

longer' insisted in the vernacular

or short

and

i

The examples

et.

Where

by Gregory.^

nounced

like

El

I.

here presented will give a fair

For the textual evidence see careful

idea of the situation. cussion

written for

is

et

shortened to

is

197

it is

dis-

to be pro-

some abstract substantives,

in

t

i

-la instead of -ela, as^ 'ArTaKla, ay via (possibly), perhaps aKpi^ia, aXa^ovia, avaSla, apeaKla,

perhaps

perhaps

fiayla, pLtdobla, 6(f)da\fxo8ov\ia :

(8ov\ia doubtful), possibly TratSta (cf. irpayixaTla, Trpaviradia,

5), TToXtrta, -Kopia, xrcoxtct,

2a/iapta,

XeXevKla,

perhaps dTparla,

Deissmann^ shows that so in 1 Cor. 16 (for -la), late

1

:

it is

probably

$tXa5eX(^ta,

(papfiaKla,

co^eXta.

Xo7ek, not \oyia in the papyri and

Some MSS. have

f.

MSS.

The endings alyLos,

tKTevia, eTrteuta, kpidia,

leparla, Katcapta, KaKorjdia, KaKoiradla, KoXaKia, Kv^la, AaoStKta,

epfj.r]v'i.a,

Ps. 53

WeKodp-qaKla (but dp-qaKeia),

aireidla,

etScoXoXarpta (but XaTpela), elXuKpLvia,

cTrapxeta (for -La), evrpaTeXeLa

KoXcovela.

-eiov

and

-etos

appear sometimes as

-lov, -los.

So

"Aptos (nd7os), acrtos, baviov (cf. bavV^o), davLarris), el8o)XLOV,

'ExiKOvptos,

eTLTTjdiOS,

fieyaXia (cf.

fxeyaXLor-qs)

irav8oKiov,

,

(xtolx'lov.

these. So also -lvos for -eLvos Strong testimony appears in opivos, aKonvbs, (pccTipos. Further examples of t for et are found as in the MSS. in aStdexists for all

XiiTTOS, aueKXiirros, aXicpw, cLTvidew, aTndrjs, aindLa, aTro8e8Lyfj,evos, "Apeoirayir-qs, 8iyp.a, e^aXicjicc, KaTaXeXLp.p.epos

(Ac. 25

XiTovpyos, fJLapyapLTrjs (cf.

TexvlTrjs),

dtyfiaTL^co, Tidos,

7roXtrT?s,

uTroXt/xyua, 4>lX6plkos,

itacism.

give both

and

Kpiaffuv, Xinfxa, olKripoj,

xP^o(f)LXeTr]s.

irapa-

This

is

which W. H. count Revelation, but which are pure examples of

In the case of 'Ik.

even

[j.eaiTr]s,

^tXoj^t/cta,

not to mention the verb-forms Uov, alternate forms in

14),

:

'Ikovlov (Ac.

'i8av,

13

:

lueu

51; 14

:

1)

the inscriptions

Elk.*

€i for i is seen in several ways also in N. T. MSS. W. H. give etSea, not I8ea. TeluoiiaL and yeLvcjaKw are very common in the best MSS. 'II/xeTj/ and v/jLeXv are rarely seen,

The use of

In Mt. 28 3 :

however.

'A^elvr],

FaXetXata,

'EXa/jLelTrjs,

'NLvevdrrjs, IletXaros, '^ap.apelTrjs all

Aevelr-qs, A€V€ltlk6s,

arc found, as well as

Xelap,

rpaTrefetrT/s,

appears in John and Hebrews. In the PasHort^ finds -XetTr- for -Xlt- forms. Ketpmts is correct in Jo. 11:44. Hort*^ also prefers iravoLKei, but Ta/jLTrX-qdei is undisputed. Such verb-forms occur as iidyvvp-L, ret/^dco, reiaco.

^'apetaatoi.

Tdx^toi'

toral Epistles,

1 ''

"

«

Prol., pp. 83-90.

According to Hort, Notes on Orth., B. S., pp. 142 f., 219 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8.

p. 153. 6

Notes on Orth.,

« lb., p.

154.

p. 155.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

198

Semitic proper names in 'HXct, MeXxet,

*

So also

'Of etas,

'Ic(j(rets,

Likewise the

'

'

'EcXet,

kpvei,

i

x^pov^elv,

liefxeeiv,

Cf. also

pa^^ovvel,

pa/3;Set,

17X61,

Stw,

in 'AnLvada^, MeXxtceSe/c,

usually read 'Ami^tas, Bapaxtas,

pias, 'lepeixlas, 'lexovias,

many

TajSeida.

appears as

MSS.

as 'ASdei,

Guaretpa, 'Idetpos, 'lepetxw,

'HXetas,

'EXetcra/3er,

Sd7r
But

(Ta^axdavei.

€i

N€(/)^aX€t/^, SaXei^t,

'EXia/cet^t, 'loopeln, Keis, Aevels,

Xopa^elv.

have

Cf. also^ 'kbixdv, 'Axd/j., Bepianeip, Aavel8,

^rjpd.

'Efc/ctas,

Stcoi'.

Zaxa-

Maddias, Marradias, Ovpias.

and et the testimony and one must not stickle too much for either The papyri and the inscriptions have nearly all of spelling. them. See 1 (c) for remarks on the difficulty of relying on the In

is

of these examples of changes in

t

greatly divided

uncials in the matter of orthography.

It is impossible to

be dog-

matic on the subject. I a7id 0. It is a peculiar change, as Blass^ observes, that we have in diieLpo/jievoi. for lixapbixtvoL (1 Th. 2:8). It appears in the LXX (some MSS. for Job 3 21 and Symm. at Ps. 62 2). The :

:

only example so far brought to light

Winer-SchmiedeP

sees

is

vireponeipeaOaL in Iren. 60.

no comparison in KaraprpoKv for

Meisterhans^ gives airavrpoKV for airavTLKpv. Jannaris^ defends the exchange of I and OL. early as the fifth century b.c.

AvyovaroLPos occurs in the inscriptions.^ et

and

as well as with

ji

t.

t

and

Certainly in the Ot

first

ot

KaravTiKph.

possibly as

century B.C.

was exchanged with

In the N. T. the only example

is

in

Mk. 11 8 where ACSVXr Or. have aroL^as for the usual o-7t/3ds Zonar. (from (7T€ti3co). N and a few other MSS. read arv^as. :

illustrates this also etc.

This word

by using

o-rot/3ds.

Cf. also

thus illustrates well the

(ttol^t],

common

c7rot/3dfco,

itacistic

ten-

dency, showing forms in -t, -ot, -v and -et (in the verb). The LXX has only arixos and crrtxtr<^, not aroLx- (Thackeray, Gr., p. 92). I

and

u.

These two vowels sometimes have the force of the

consonants^ j (?/) and v (cf. Latin). Cf. av- (af) and eu- (ef) in modern Greek, and e in TroXecos. In modern Greek "every i- or e-sound which collides in the middle of a word with a succeeding 1

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 155.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.

of prothetic

But

it is

quite possible (see

j)

that this

is

a case

o. *

3

W.-Sch., p. 52.

6

Hist.

6

Jann.,

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 27, 55, etc.

Gk. Gr., ib., p.

52.

Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 81.

on the other side K.-BL, Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 112.

p. 53.

Cf.

I, 3,

p. 53.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS vowel, loses

its syllabic

199

value and becomes consonanted" (Thumb,

So ayLos = mjos. The t is the last of the five p. This relative value e, t. original vowel-sounds in this order: a, o, has persisted in modern Greek (Thum])'s Handbook, p. 12 f.). Jannaris^ gives a-rro^doviJLevoi as an illustration of this gradation in sound. But as a matter of fact the interchange between t and v Meisterhans^ finds only five examples in the is not frequent. Attic inscriptions, two of which, ^v^Xiop and MltvXtjvolos, are found

Handh.,

10).

i;,

N. T. MSS. (assimilation). Examples occur in the kolvt] of Asia Minor, though Thumb ^ agrees with Kretschmer in calling it a "barbarism." Still the old distinction in sound between t and u slowly broke down till in modern Greek the two vowels have the same sound. BiypuXXos in Rev. 21 20 is spelled also in MSS. ^-q-

in

:

piWos, /SiVtXXos, jSyiSXos

for

jStpuXXtos,

/3i/3Xos

in

Mk.

D

reads a fine illustration of itacism. In Ac. 20 14 12 26 and Lu. 20 42. :

:

:

AE

have Mtri;the Byand For the TpwylXiov of Strabo Xlpri and L MvTv\ivr]. 20 to Ac. 15 has zantine writers the Textus Receptus addition shows LXX The TposyvMa, other MSS. TpuyvWiov, Tpo:yv\Lou.^ in papyri vary Ptolemaic The also niJLvav in 9 Dan. 7:25 (B).

McTv\r]vr] is the correct text for

the old Mur., but

:

word (Thackeray, Gr., p. 95). In Lu. 19 8 For changes with (e) The Changes with o. and e under (h), for o and t under (d). for this

D

:

has

vi^vaov.

a see under (a),

and ov. The old Attic used AtoaKopos, which Phrynichus^ prefers, though Thucyd. and Plato have the form in -ovpos also (Epic In Ac. 28 11 only some of the cursives have the form or Ionic). in -opos. Both forms appear in the inscriptions.^ This exchange :

is

rather

116

common In the

f.).

in the

LXX

{<

Ptolemaic papyri (Mayser, Gr., pp. 10 f., shows sometimes 6k for ovk (Thackeray,

The modern Greek dialects have much Of. Thumb, Handh., p. 8. point. this usage on

Gr., p. 91).

^

1

lb., p. 84.

3

Hellen., pp. 139, 193

Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 28

pap.

f.

Cf. Kretschmer, Einl. in d. Gesch. d. griech. Grace. Hercul., p. 21 f .) gives exx. in Hercul.

225 f. Croncrt (Mem. Cf Mayser, Gr., pp. 100-103, for exx. like m\os, ^vjiUov, < Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22. In Athens before 403 03, ov (Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 24).

Spr., p.

o,

ff.

diversity of

.

the pap. stood for

etc., in

B.C. o

6 Lobeck, Cf. K.-Bl., I, p. 140 f., for this p. 235; The New. Phryn., p. 310. change in Old Attic and New Ionic. The N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, Do Grace, Nougr. etc., p. 41) has exx. hke i^oU/jL-nv as the mod. Gk. vernac. (Thumb,

Volksspr., p. 6). to Jann., Hist. 8

Cf. Buresch, Phil.

Gk. Gr.,

l\,

p. 37.

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. GG

f.

89.

Most common

bet. vi/iii u.c. ace.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

200

and

Mt.

V.

The MSS. vary between*

11 29; 1 Pet. 3 :

:

NEW TESTAMENT irpaos (Syrian)

and

7rpai5s

in

as well as between Tpaorrjs and Tpavrrjs in H. adopt the form in -v. Von Soden varies

4,

Pauline Epistles. W. between these forms, giving no reasons. It has the surviving in the kolvt]. The

LXX

is i;

the old distinction

The papyri

form.

have other illustrations (Mayser, Gr., p. 97). Cf. UotLoKol in Ac. 28 13 for the Latin Puteoli. and (0. Originally o represented both the short and long sounds, :

so that it was easy with careless pronunciation for more or less confusion to exist after co came into use. The Boeotian Pindar, for The New Ionic ^orj instance, has Aidowaos instead of Aiowaos.^ (parox.) appears in heu of fcoi]. However, the introduction of the

Ionic alphabet in 403 b.c. kept the two vowels pretty distinct in Attic till the Roman time, though the change began in the third century b.c.^ After the second century b.c. the exchange

two vowels was indiscriminate in the more ilHterate vernacular.^ The confusion was earliest in Egypt, but the Attic of these

100 a.d. The early unand the N.T. show httle evidence of the intercials for the change (Thackeray, Gr., p. 89). Jannaris finds it common. The

inscriptions kept the distinction well

till

LXX

modern Greek makes no

difference in

sound between

o

and w

ex-

"In the early papyri the instances of cept medial o as in not. confusion between o and co are innumerable."^ The inscriptions Pergamum.'' tell the same story about the kolvt] in Magnesia^ and is shortened an co and irpodofxa, In some instances,^ like Sofxa for 5cbixa from 77 in ^e^a. In the N. T. MSS. and w, chiefly is that of permutation "probably the commonest

to o after the analogy of

e

exemplified in the endings -onev and -uixepJ' ^ It is useless to follow the MSS. through their variations on this point. In Ro. 5 1 excojuei' is supported by all the best documents and gives a :

difficult exoiJiev.

though a better one on reflection than the evidence is so nearly balanced that 49 Cor. 15

sense at

In

1

first, :

1

Gregory, Prol., p. 82.

3

Meisterh.,Gr. d. att. Inschr.,p. 24

'

f.,

gives

K.-Bl.,

numerous

I,

p. 141.

exx. of the exchange

in inscr. of various dates.

6

Jann. quotes a Louvre pap. (165 b.c.) which ff.) finds only two exx. of this confusion and CO in the Ptol. pap. of iii/s.c, but seventy in the next two. lb. Cf. Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 19 f.

6

Nachm., Magn.

4

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 37.

has r5 abro of o

Tp6ivu,i.

Mayser (Gr., pp. 97

Inschr., p. 64.

8

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 95. Cf. Thumb, Hellen., pp. 143, 172. 108. Reinhold, De Graec. Patr., p. 41, and Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p.

9

Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 309.

»

.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS W. H, cannot

decide between

Von Soden

in the margin).

tinguishing between o

increased in later

kolvt]

:

gives

:

(Rev. 6:11), kav

I'm avairamovTai

:

(the latter

(})opkcronev

-o-co-.

13), I'm avaTrar]aovTaL

as read

aTodvn(XKOfj,ep

8), I'm yLva}<xKoixev (1 Jo.

Tisch. (Gal. 6

and

This difficulty of disand w in the indicative and subjunctive times.^ Several further N. T. examples of

interest are ayopaaccixev (Lu. 9

(Ro. 14

(f)ope(TO}iJ.ev

201

12), i'm dLepxoiJ.aL

5

:

(Rev. 14

13),

:

by Lachmann

20), I'm StwKovrat according to

according to Treg. (Jo. 4

15),

:

Sucunev according to Treg. and Tisch., and preceded by ayopa15; cf. Is. 6 10), i'm Kavdr](jwnai acofxiv (Mk. 6 37), laaop.ai (Mt. 13 :

:

:

In all or Kavxriawp-aL (1 Cor. 13:3), I'm ^vprjaopraL (Ac. 21:24). these instances syntactical questions enter also besides the mere question of vowel interchange.^

The 19

:

appears instead of w in

o

Trpoi'juos

4),

nor xpew^etXerTjs according to LU, correct apparently in ayaOooavvr],

Soden

Cor. 10

:

4;

7:41; 16

etc. (Lu.

aycwavvr],

Heb. 9

10),

:

(from

i)7rw7ridfco

vir-coTnop)

Cor. 9

1

5).

and

:

But w

(Rev. 21

also the

Codex B shows others

(Thack., Gr., p. 90).

In Lu. 18:5 and

:

ei^Sw/xTjcris

So

-dop.-), iepcoavvr], p.eyaKwahvq, xpcotVos.

irpoipos (ih.).

ttomci (1

5:7), Ztolkos (Ac. 17: 18),^ avKop-opea, not -/xcopea (Lu. xp^o4)Lh.eTr]s according to W. H. and not xP^o4>eL\eTr]s (Soden) (J as.

:

LXX,

in the

is

18,

but

LXX

MSS. vary between

27 the

vtotlol^co (-Trtefco

old form), though

In Ro. 13 3 tw ayadQ epyu) may So in 2 Pet. 3 6 5t' o}v may be^ for possibly be rcS ayadoepyco. In Rev. 4 7 f ex^^v, not exov (Soden), is read by the best 5t' 6v. MSS., though the substantive is ^wof. Now second century B.C.

MSS. read

the best

uttcott.*

:

:

.

:

papyri have (/)

viropvrjpa exo)v

The Changes with

where co and o are exchanged.^ and v. For the changes with i;

under (d) v and o under (e) V and €\). Only one example of

t

see

,

N.

this

exchange appears in the

Here the sense seems to Bentlcy suggested it long ago and Lightfoot

T., that of Tpea^vTTjs in Phil. 9.

demand

Trpea^evriis.

(comm. in loco) collected a De

Grace. Patr.,

1

Cf. Reinhold,

2

W.-Sch., p. 48.

3

Hort thinks so "perhaps."

p. 22) prefers >

ical.

the correct

Ace. to W.-Sch.

Why

(p.

2rcotK6s,

48

f.)

of instances of the omission

p. 102; Hatz., Einl. etc., p. 306.

The Doric had (ttolo.. Von Soden 2toik6s.

this

is

Blass (Gr. N. T. Gk.,

not orthographical at

all,

but etymolog-

not both?

6

lb., p. 48.

«

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 37.

may have

number

Doubtless other vowel-exchanges in Rev. a similar explanation and so do not violate concord of gender.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

202

MSS.

Hort^ thinks it due to a scribe and not to Paul, since the earher Greek shows no examples of this interchange. However, Wood^ has found irpea^evTepos for irpea^vrepos in an Ephesian inscription (analogy: in modern Greek of

€

from

= e/).

€u

LXX

ev in single

Thackeray

(Gr., p. 97) finds this

"natural error" in the

MSS. This has always been a rare exchange in the Greek,

V and ov.

the Boeotian dialect having retained the original v sound of after the Attic

gave

it

The Zaconian

up.^

preserves

v

in the

it

modern Greek.^ The kolvt] has sometimes xpov(r6s for xpi^cos-^ But was rather frequent in the kolvt] to represent the Latin u as

ov

In Rev. 3

Apovcros.^

:

18 the Latin collyrium

as KoWovpLov, KoWvpiov, KovXKovpiov, ctc.

though long

KBC

i;

and

in the

(Mayser, Gr., p. 118).

ov

MSS.

prefer KoWovpLov,

we have

LXX shows the same variations (Thack.,

The Ptolemaic papyri have few

Gr., p. 92).

of

B

given in the

Blass^ observes that

read -vptov (so Soden).

V in -hpiov.

is

W. H.

Thumb

instances.

Of. change

{Hellen., p. 193

German

f.)

thinks

and also u. In Rev. 1 5 the distinction between Xvaavn (J^AC) and XovaavTL (BP) is more than mere orthography, though the confusion was rendered easy. TI is always so written in the N, T. uncial MSS.,^ though the iota was sometimes dropped in the inscriptions. For changes with co and a see under {g) The Changes with «, (a), for CO and o under (e). The Thessalian dialect^ exchanged co and ov as in ca and ov. This change reappears in Rhodes and Tov KOLvov for Tco KOLvoj. the iEolic-Doric.^" Buresch^^ finds the change between co and ov common in the Egyptian vernacular, as in the Sahidic Greek oo that

i;

in the

Koivi]

was pronounced

like

il,

i

:

It is, of course, possible, according to the is often used for co.^^ view of Winer-Schmiedel,^^ that some indicatives in ov may really

»

Notes on

s

Thumb, HeUen.,

<

Hatz., Einl. etc., p. 103.

6

Cf.

Sel.

Read., p. 136. p. 31.

Nachm., Magn.

2

djsc. at Ephesus, App., p. 24.

Cf. Bnig., Griech. Gr., 4th ed., p. 32 ^

Inschr., p. 62.

Thumb, HeUen.,

Schweizer, Perg.

f.

p. 85.

Insclir., p.

71

f.

Mayser, Gr., p. 118. 8 Cf. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 46 f.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 9 f., observes that B occasionally divides thus v/i6s at end of a hne and so practically 7

A

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.

Cf.

and D. 9

'"

K.-Bl.,

I,

p. 135.

Common

in

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 70

mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb.,

p. 8).

f

" Jahrb. f. klass. Philol., 1891, p. 434. 12 Tattam's Egyp. Gr., p. 5. " P. 52. Reinhold (De Grace. Patr. Apost., p. 41) gives similar exx. TIwkvCf. Mayser, Gr., p. 99 f. pOivra appears in Egyp. pap. (B. M., vol. II, cUv).

203

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS The

con-

be subjunctive as a result of this vowel-interchange. vlkovvtl is read by AC in tract form for the present participle t<2 likely due to confumore change Rev. 2 17 and A in 2 7, a (Gal. 4 17) and ^rjXovre tva with So sion of -dco and -ew verbs. can be used indicative present the but Ua 4>vcnomde (1 Cor. 4:6), vowelmere to a form this credit to with Iva, and one is slow marg. H. (W. Tpecf^ovatv tva to applies exchange. The same remark Jo. Treg., 17 3) and (Tisch. jiPcoaKovaLv Rev 12 6) as well as I'm :

:

:

:

•

and Treg.,

a<,4>povi^ovaLv (Tisch.

and tm

indicative with

tm

Tit. 2

:

4).

The

future

as KaradovXc^aovaLP (Gal. 2:4), rpoaKwiiaovcnp (Tisch., Treg., Lach., Mk. 15:20),

aravpi^aovatv

(Rev. 9:20), readings with co, aorist subjunctive. aci)6.^ov(n (Rev. 6 4) has rival Similar instances are fxijTOTe similarity. vocal mere It is hardly (Rev. 2 22), w eav 8ovneravoi,(xovaLP kap (Mt. 7:6), KaraTarrjaovaLV In these and similar examples where the :

:

\ehaovaLP (Ac. 7:7).

and e, o MSS. vary between w and ov it is probable that, as with the tenand CO, the difference in mode may have been blurred by is question dency to exchange these vowels. But the syntactical 77

orthographical problem. not essentially altered by this incidental

and (ou. Lachmann, Tregelles, W. H. all write cou urges that the word is a trisyllable Mc^mrjs Thayer but

in Moivarjs,

(0

(Fritzsche,

Cf. trisyllable. Gesenius, Tisch., Soden). The Ionic eoovrov is a wu diphthong Mayser, Gr., p. 138. Blass^ indeed says that the Rec. Text. The the Attic. is non-existent in the N. T. as in the Antiquities, reads Ucoarjs, following Strabo and Josephus in McouaTjs. have and Josephus elsewhere we though in the the kolvv uses and Syncope. In general

LXX

(h)

Contraction

though a contraction of vowels from the standpoint of the Attic,^ opku^, xetXt"", like forms strong Ionic infusion^ is present also as in illustration" find contraction etc. The N. T. examples of unusual In the N. T. contraction is rarely neglected, as in the KOLpi,. read Winer^ saw, though kdkero (NC for Lu. 8 38, though BL 33 :

ede-LTo),

pot (1

Cor.

1 :10,

etc.),

oarka (Lu.

24:39),

dcrrko^u

(Mt.

xeiXecoi/ 23:27, etc.), dpko^p (Rev. 6 15, Attic as well as Ionic), the that show Treg.) Lach., (Heb. 13 15), xpv<^^^v (R^v. 2:1, :

:

and not the literary Attic. did not go quite as far in Greek T. Blass« observes that the N.

N. T.

in this respect

was

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.

3

Thumb,

Ilollcn., p. 237.

like the kolpt]

-

C^f.

also

ih.,

Schwcizor, Perg. Inschr., p. 100. For the mod. Gk. contracp. G3.

Cf. K.-Bl., Bd. I, pp. 201-21S. Iiisclir., pp. 68 Schwcizor, Perg. Insdir., pp. lOUlT.; Nachiu., Magn. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22 f. 51. W.-Th., p. 40; W.-M., p.

tion sec p. 249. *

»

ff.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

204

In illustration can be menayadovpyoov is the corthough tioned ayadoepyelv (1 Tim. 6 18), lepovpyetv, aiiirekovp'yb^, have rect text in Ac. 14 17. But we conjectural readthe mention to KaKovpyos, okovpyos, iravovpyos, not Col. 16 hand. In other 2 the on ing ayadoepyos for Ro. 13 3 supported though H., by read W. is veonrjvla for the Attic vovfi7]vla only by BFG 121 f g vg. So the LXX (Thack., Gr., p. 98). In the case of eXeLvos W. H. have the regular form in Rev. 3 17, but Blass^ reminds us, however, that even eXeetj'os in 1 Cor. 15 19. contracting vowels as the Attic did. :

:

:

:

:

:

tXeivos

2

:

may

represent

24 (hke the

The N. T.

eXe'ivos.

LXX) and

Phrynichus^ condemned

37.

likewise has voaaos in Lu.

voaaia (or voaaLo) in Lu. 13 this

dropping of

e

34;

:

Mt. 23

in veoacros.

:

Kaixp.vca

both from Is. 6 10) comes from the Epic Kar was an old form parallel with /card. and points about t. The t is retained noteworthy several are There The same thing is true with 4 15). Pet. dXXoTpteTTttrKOTTos (1 in (Mt. 13

:

15; Ac. 28

:

27,

:

the old vernacular.

:

The rip.L(jipov (Rev. 8:1), like riixiw^oKov in the Attic inscriptions.^ form 'iadoiv in Mk. 1 6 (already in Homer) is a twin rather than a syncopated form of kadlo^v (Mt. 11 19) .^ In the N. T. the i :

:

is

not dropped in such forms as

Blass^ calls the contraction of

though

When

it

et

appears in the

came

LeL

= ii = l "an

(nwindv,

entirely

new

vlos.

kind,"

as in cTrei/ccos, rap,eiov, vyeta, etc.^ the two sounds naturally blended

kolvt],

to be equal to

jSLooaeade, evvirvLov,

t,

Cf. the Ionic dative xoXt for ttoXu. So in the N. T. we (BCD), even tIv (NAL) for Tnetv in Jo. 4:9, and elsewhere in the N. T. In Mt. 6 6, etc., raixetov is read for Tap.ia.ov.'' On the other hand in Rev. 21 20 A reads aapbibwi, for aapbbvv^. W. H. read rerpaapx^oj, reTpaapxn'^ rather than rerpapxew, etc. The

into one. find

iretv

:

:

use of yXucraoKonov instead of the earlier y'KcoaaoKop.eLov {-lov) should For the use of edj' = modal av see under (c). also. and Diuresis. The Boeotians monoph(i) Diphthongs

be noticed

thongized the diphthongs 1

2

at,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 23. Rutherford, New Phrjm., p. 287.

LXX

ov

in the fourth

and

For other syncopated forms

fifth

in the

see Thack., Gr., p. 99. * Hort., Notes on Orth., Omitted by Debrunner.

^

Meisterh., Gr. etc., p. 23.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 23.

6

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 101.

iireiKCos

(565. 19), raptelov (515. 26

in the

LXX

^

ol,

ei,

ff.),

see Helbing, Gr. d.

See Deiss., B.

S., p.

Cf. Dittenb., Or. Graec. Inscr. Sel.,

vyelas (618. 2).

LXX,

p. 10

For the same phenomena

f.

183, for pap. illustrations of

ton, Prol., p. 45, calls this coalescence of

law of Hellenistic phonology."

p. 145.

TreTf, irlv, ratietov.

Cf. for the

LXX

Moul-

sounds "a universal Thack., Gr., pp. 22, 63 f., 98.

two successive

i

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS The Boeotians pronounced

centuries b.c.^

vernacular

kolvt]

Thumb

did.

205

xo-'t-P^i-

= cheri

as the

(Hellenismus, p. 228) objects to "this

emphasizing of Boeotian" by Kretschmer {Die

griech.

Vasenin-

Moulton {Prolegomena,

p. 33 f.) with a "perhaps." The itacising process still further developed this use of the diphthongs as monophthongs. Indeed Jannaris^ insists that the term bl^Qoy-

schriften; Einleit. in d. Gesch).

allows this Boeotian influence on the

koivt]

70s as applied to avKka^i] concerned the eye rather than the ear

than bivocal. The spurious diphthongs a state of completion. The papyri, unlike the inscriptions, do not dissect a diphthong at the close of a line.' Where two vowels do not blend into one syllable, it is necessary

and meant more show the process

biliteral

in

Hence from very early times marks of diaeresis it. were used to show that each vowel has its own sound. The mark which might otherwise be considered to is put over the i or unite with the preceding vowel. These marks are found in the oldest N. T. MSS. with such words as aXXryXouta (Rev. 19 1; but in the case of proper names transliterated from the Hebrew or Aramaic W. H. follow the Hebrew or Aramaic spelling. Cf. Hort, Intr., p. 313. So in other examples below), 'Axata, 'Axa'iKos (1 Cor. 16 17), Brjdaa'iSa, Taios (also Tatos in Ac. 20:4, etc., but cf. Allen, Harvard Studies in Class. Philol., ii, 1891, pp. 71 ff.), 8Lv\i^eLv {Mi. 23:24), 'E^paiarl, eXcot (Mk. 15:34), 'E0pai/jL, however, or 'E^peju (NL in Jo. 11 54), 'Ho-atas, though B usually without,^ 'lovdaiKuiS, taxi^t (2 Pet. 2 11), KaVd^as, KdiV (W. H. Kail'), so W. H. Katj'dj' (not Ka'ivav nor -ol/jl), Aeveir-qs and not AevLTrjs in W. H., Acots (W. H. -ts), Mwvarjs in W. H., not Mccmfjs, Nii'eueirTjs and not NivevtTT^s, irpoino^ according to W. H., but Trpwi, irpuLvos. to indicate

i;

:

:

:

:

W. H. have

D

HroXejuatSa in Ac. 21

:

7

and

Tco/xaio-rt in Jo.

19

:

20.

The Semitic etymology complicates the matter these words.'' Many of the MSS. use diaeresis at

reads Xopa'^atp.

with some of the beginning of words as in iVa." ^{A regularly write t]v, while See Giles ^ on the subject of diphthongs. For coi; is correct also.^ iota subscript see (j)

under

(c).

Aph^resis and Prothetic Vowels.

only form in the N. T., as is

that used in >

Hatz., Einl.

2

Hist.

^

modern Greek.

etc., p.

304.

Gk. Gr., p. 29. lilass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

lb.

6

Gregory, Prol.

the

It is as old as

Cf K.-Bl., Bd.

I,

»

43.

p. 17.

etc., p. 108.

QeXoo,

common form

.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 34.

"

it is

So

lb.,

j).

not

the

t^eXco, is

in the

kolvt]

Homer, and

and

since

pp. 243 ff. Cf. Mayscr, Gr., p. 153

'Uacral.

^

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.

»

Comp.

Philol., pp.

158

ff.

f.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

206 250

B.C. is the

only form in the Attic ^ and Ionic ^ inscriptions.

The augment, however, The

consonants.

kolvti

vernacular,

KeZ

always

Aphseresis

for eKelvos.

Ketvos

is

and

Cronert^ finds

r].

e/cet,

is

modern Greek But the N. T. has

frequent* in the

for ov8ev, etc.

8ev

LXX) in the best MSS. NBCD; Heb. 13:8 ^
only kxdks (so Ac. 7:28

e^eXco after

does not follow the Ionic in the use of

(cf.

Jo.

4

:

52

kVABCD;

the usual Attic form,

though the papyri sometimes have x^« instead of the common The N. T. does not have Svponai, KeXXco, (xeiponaL, where hxOes. o is dropped. Cf. Kuhner-Blass, Tl. I, Bd. 1, p. 186. The form fielponai (cf. dfxeLpofjLevot. in 1 Th. 2 8) occurs in Nicander for It is possible that in b{o)iielpop.aL we have prothetic o l/jLelponai. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 152; Winerinstead of aphseresis. Schmiedel, p. 141. See Additional Notes for full list. Besides the use of the movable final v and s the (Jc) Elision. Greeks had two other methods of obviating hiatus (elision, erasis). The hiatus was distasteful to the finished writers, though :

more freedom was exercised in poetry. The avoidance of hiatus was always a more or less artificial matter and hiatus was unavoidable in the most careful Attic writers, as in the case of on, xept, irpo, TL, TL, ixT)),

€1,

etc.

the article, relative, the small "form-words"

But the harsher hiatus

avoided by the literary

The

inscriptions

kolvt]

like kblboTo aurw

writers as well as

and the papyri show

tus than do the literary writers of the

by the

(/cat,

would be Atticists.

about hiaAs might be expected

far less concern

Koivi].

the N. T. books agree in this matter with the vernacular kolvt] and the MSS. vary greatly among themselves. Blass^ considers

harmony with the tendency to greater isolation words in the later language. Indeed he thinks that only one^ book in the N. T. (Hebrews) shows the care of an artistic this situation in

of the

writer in the avoidance of hiatus. tions

and chapter 13 he

By

omitting the O. T. quota-

finds that hiatus

where there

is

a pause

a matter of indifference, as also with nal. He finds fifty-two other instances of hiatus, whereas Romans goes beyond that num-

is

1

Meisterh., Gr., p. 178.

2

Smyth, Ionic

3

Mem.

<

Cf.

Dial., p. 482.

Graec. Hercul.,

Thumb, Handb.,

p.

133

Cf.

Nachm., Magn.

Inschr., p. 155.

f.

p. 13.

on hiatus K.-Bl, I, pp. 190 ff Gk. to hiatus see Bischoff, Neut. Wiss., 1906, p. 268; Thieme, ib., p. 265. Moulton (Prol., p. 92) quotes Kaelker (Quaest., p. 245 f.) as saying that Polyb. uses '6(ttl% for 6s merely to avoid hiatus. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 160. 6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18.

8

lb., p.

296

f.

On

Cf.

indifference of later

.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

207

But even then Blass has to admit cases Hebrews, like adeXcpol 0,7101, ivoxoi ^aav, etc. The Attic inscriptions show that the vernacular tongue did not care much about hiatus.^ The Hghter ehsions like 5' were used or not at will, while the heavier ones like Skat' ottojs were rare. The same indifference to elision appears in the koivt] inscriptions^ and in the papyri.^ In general in the N. T. elision takes place regularly before pronouns and particles and before nouns in combinations of frequent occurrence^ like kut' oXkov. Blass ^ has carefully

ber as far as ch. 4

:

18.

of harsher hiatus in

N. T. MSS. Te, ovre, fxTjre, do not undergo elision nor do The verse of Menander quoted in 1 Cor.

worked out the following apa, ye,

alia,

tra,

kfie, ert,

noun- or verb-forms. 15

33

:

is

properly printed XPV'^^^

compound words (Ro. 4

:

facts in the

ware, etc.,

TeaaepaKovraeTris

do not

19)

6/it\tat

(Ac.

suffer elision, while

sion in J
Tout'

by W. H.^ 7:23) and

Even the eKaTovTaerrjs

TeTpa-dpxv^ has no

eo-rt

or rovrkcTi

is

eli-

the only

example in the pronouns that we have in the N. T.'' It is in the particles then that most N. T. elisions occur, though there are 'AXXa, according to Gregory,^ has ehsion in

comparatively few.

215 cases and fails to have it in 130, though the MSS. vary much. Hort^ observes that in dXXa elision is usual before articles, pronouns and particles, but rare before nouns and verbs. Ro. 6 14-8 32 has many non-elisions of dXXd, and the elision varies be:

:

fore the different vowels except that

W. H. read U ahrb^'m Ph. 2 W. H. put 171^1^ 5' av in the Nestle).

constant before

it is

Ae

i.

but here frequently, while In 2 Cor. 3 16 18 after NBP.

6s 5' av,

rarely suffers elision outside of :

:

margin, text

iiv.

U

kav (so Tisch.,

In obbk elision takes place several times, as in ovb' av ohb' d (Ac. 19:2, NAB), ohb' Iva (Heb. 9:25), owS'

(Heb. 8:4),

(Ro. 9:7),

'6ri

14 21). :

^

2 3

Blass

ou5' ^"^

ov

(Mt. 24 21; Heb. 13 :

:

5), ovb' oOrcos (1

Cor.

further notes that prepositions seldom use elision

Mcisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 69 f. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 134; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 71 f. Cronert, Mem. Grace. Hereul., p. 138 f. Cf. also Thumb, Hcllen. *

p. 82.

etc.,

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 146.

Cf. also Gregory, p. 93 f. Feb. 31, 1901) finds that the pap. hke the Lat. have a vowel not used in the metre. The inscr. concur in this practice. Moulton, Cf. also Mayser, Gr., pp. IS.'j-l.^S, 100-162. He shows that in Prol., p. 4.5. the pap. it is largely a matter of inditTerence. On the scarcity of elision in the see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, p. 12 f.; Thackeray, pp. 22, 136 f. 6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18.

6

Moulton

(CI. Rev.,

LXX '

Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 306) refers to the Oxyrhynchus pap., which

have »

tovt' diTosv in Jo.

Notes, p. 146.

20 22. :

*

»"

Prol., p.

93

f

Blaas, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 18.

'

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

208

with proper names, since it was thought better, as on the inscriptions, to keep the name distinct and readily discernible, though W. H. read 8l' 'A^paan in Heb. 7 9. Elision is most common with 5td as 8l' eaoiTTpov (1 Cor. 13: 12), "because there :

were already two vowels adjacent to each other" Blass^ thinks. 'AvtI has elision only in avd' oou (Lu. 1 20, etc.). Elsewhere the prepositions show elision with pronouns and in current phrases, :

as in

air'

apxvs,

air'

ov8ev6s (1 Cor.

2

:

though

Attic

it is fairly

eir'

o:v,

avTU), Kar'

vcj)'

LXX (Thackeray,

So the

15) .2

The

Crasis.

(I)

crasis,

apri, aw' avrov, air' e/xoO,

Kar' oIkov, fxer' e/ioD, Trap'

Iblav {Kad' I8iap),

/car'

'efxk,

(vficou),

vir'

Gr., p. 137).

make

official inscriptions

common

r]ij,oov'

little

use of

in the vase-inscriptions of the

century b.c.^ In Magnesia Nachmanson finds only a few examples of /cat and the article.^ The same thing is true of Pergamum.^ In the N. T. it is confined also to /cat and the article.

fifth

And

in the case of

a pronoun or a

/cat

crasis only occurs

if

the following word

is

Kat thus often, though not always,

particle.

and the oblique cases, as Ka,7cb, /cd/iot, /cd/xe. If a " distinct co-ordination of eycb with another pronoun or

coalesces with kydo

there

is

Even the MSS. vary found as well as /cd/cet and KaKeWev. Kal likewise blends only occasionally with eav in the sense of and if, a substantive," greatly.''

crasis does not take place.^

KaKeivos also

is

'

as in

Mk.

16

18; Lu. 13

:

:

9; Jas. 5

more common,

:

15.

In the sense of 'even

Mt. 26:35;

In uniform as in Mk. 5:28; 6:56; 2 Cor. 11 16.^ Cf. mv Kal 'eav (Jo. 8:14, The article suffers crasis very often in the older Greek, but 16). in the N. T. it is seldom so. Hort^ declines to accent ravTo. for ravTa in 1 Cor. 9 8 or raurd for rd aijrd in Lu. 6 23, 26 17: 30, though supported in Luke by some good MSS. He does, however, accept Tovvoixa in Mt. 27:57 and TovvavTlov in 2 Cor. 2:7; Gal. 2:7; 1 Pet. 3:9 ("stereotyped as a single word," Blass^o). Crasis is quite rare in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., p. 137). the crasis

if'

the sense of

is

be but' or

'if it

'if

as in

only' the crasis

—

:

:

:

1

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18. See Additional Notes. For more minute details about the prep, see Gregory,

3

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 70

^

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 133.

common pap.

exx.

Jo. 8: 14.

is

Uke Kdyw,

ff.

TaXtjdks, etc.

*

Magn.

Prol., pp.

94

ff.

Inschr., p. 74.

Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 158 *

;

ff.,

for the

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 145.

See Gregory, Prol., p. 96; Von Soden, I, p. 1380. See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18, and W.-Sch., p. 38; Von Soden, I, p. 1380. ^ Notes on Orth.,. p. 145. (Lu. 15 16). Blass gives KairfBhuei from 10 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19. see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, For scarcity in '

8

D

:

LXX

p. 13

f.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

209

Consonant-Changes (o-roixeta (n3|X(})
On

nician vau. It is like

the use of

a half-vowel in Latin u

and

{v)

digamma

fact, as i

t

and

v

in

Homer

The dropping

(j).^

see Kiihner-Blass.^

are partly consonant in force, of

digamma

affected

many words, some of which have the rough breathing, though Thumb and Moulton^ think that this is an accident simply, and ^

the rough breathing cases like Kad'

is

due to analogy and not to the digamma

eros, etc.

But changes

in

in the use of the consonants

when the Euclidean spelling reform was instituted As the vowels underwent steady development, so it was and is with the consonants. B early began occasionally to have the force of v, and y sometimes the j value of as in modern Greek, and it was even inserted (irrational 7).^ In general in the kolvt] the did not cease

403

B.C.

t

2 jb. Gk. Gr., p. 21. Cf. Mcisterh., Gr. etc., p. 3. 24 f. On the whole subj. of changes in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., MSS. pp. 163-248. For general remarks about consonant-changes in » Bd. I, Bee Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 301. pp. 85-101. 5 lb., pp. 77-85, 101-103. The mod. Gk. pronounces avT6s = aftos. The 1

Cf. Jann., Hist.

'

lb., p.

LXX

inscr. give the

form

dFuToD.

8

Hellen., pp. 245

^

ProL, p. 44.

breathing *

is

Thumb,

Cf.

Riem. and Goelzcr, Phonet.,

p. 34.

ff.

But Sommer, Gr. Lauistudien, shows

sometimes due to digamma. Ilcllen., p.

187

f.; cf.

p.

134

f.

for

mtervocal 7.

tluit

tlie

rough

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

210

consonant-changes are pecuUarities as

much

NEW TESTAMENT

fewer than those of the vowel.

era, ylvojiaL, \i]ii4/oyLaL

are

common

Such

(Thackeray, Gr.,

p. 100).

The Insertion of Consonants.

(6)

inserted

is

in

and

a.v-b-pbs,

Attic used either form in

14

:

DEP

17

D

In the older Greek in

/3

The

Tiiu-irpaadaL.

in Lu. 2

So in Ac.

e/i7rt(/i)7rpr7;ut.

tii-K[{iji)-K\r}p.L,

LXX

5

The

iiea-qix-^-pia}

read kfXTnfnrXwp (D h-), and in Ac. 28

most cursives have variation.

with

so

:

6 N*'^BHLP

MSS. show the same The retention of

32, etc., has 'la-r-paijX.

:

in all the forms (derivatives also) of Xa/x/Sdj^co (root \a0) is in accord with the usage of the papyri ("almost invariably")- and the inscriptions of the Koivrj, and is due to the Ionic \aii\pofxaL.^ Hence

H

In the Ptolemaic age (iii/i B.C.) the i/iv a.d. the papyri and uncials and N. T.) give almost wholly /x forms. In the Byzantine

\7]iJ.\po{xai,

etc.

tKi]ii4)Qy}v,

From

papyri give both forms.

(LXX

period (vi/viii a.d.) the classic eray, Gr., p. 108

LXX

In the

f.;

Mayser,

reappears.

\i]\pojiaL

Gr., p.

194

f.;

the uncials give the spelling of their

Mk.

Cf.

Thack-

Cronert, Mem., p. 66.

own

date, not

32 the extra 7 in /xo7(7)tXdXoj' In is inserted by the Syrian class only and is not to be accepted. So also in Ac. 3 7 Heb. 11 32 tt is added to 'Laixawv (Sa/zi^coj^) In

that of the translation.

7:

5 is

added to

In the case of

AB

ity of

(c)

o-(j^L'(o)p6i'

'kbpaixvvTrfvQ)

which

is

as yet "unexplained."^

(Ac. 27: 2), read

16 Copt, instead of

situation exists.

name

:

.

:

({
Two ways

'

by W. H. on author-

kbpanvrrripQ, a slightly different

of pronouncing

and

spelling

The Omission of Consonants.

There are not

cases where a consonant drops out of a N. T. word.

13

:

the

of the city existed.

2 the correct reading

(all

the uncials)

is

many

In Rev.

undoubtedly

apKov,

LXX

and in inscripThis form is found also in the tions of the first or second century a.d.^ W. H., following B and 22) read jSeefe/SouX instead of ^eeX^e^ovX. J<, also (save in Mk. 3

not apKTov.

:

and ytvoicrKO} are the exclusive forms in the N. T., though some MSS., as in the papyri and inscriptions, have yeLv-. NachTivo/xai

'

Blass compares the insertion of consonants in Semitic names like "Ecr-52 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.

pas, Ma^l-p-pr]. 3

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 179

f.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 64, for full references

concerning the use of n with XanlSavw. Cf. Gregory (Prol., p. 72) for list and references of the various compounds of Xanfiavu and Xij/ji/'ts in the N. T., The MSS. &va—, iviwir-, &VTI—, aTTO— Kara—, ixera—, irapa—, wpo— irpocr—. have Xrifixpofiat (Q \ri\povTai) and kXr!fji(f)9rjv. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 22.

LXX

,

*

"

Blass, Gr. of lb., p. 65.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 24; W.-Sch., p. 64.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

211

states clearly the facts. The Ionic as early as the fifth century B.C. used the 711^ forms, and the Doric shows the same Even in Athens the jlv forms situation in the fourth century. appear, and in the kolvt] the 7171' forms vanish. To\yo9a follows the Hebrew nibapa rather than the Chaldaic s^n^alba in having only one X. According to Winer-SchmiedeP the two forms Kav5a

manson^

and KKavda (Ac. 27 16) represent two different islands near each other, which were confused in the MSS. It is hardly worth while to remark that aapdcov (correct text in Rev. 4 3) is a substantive, while aaphvos (Text. Rec.) is an adjective. Blass^ and Wineror Double Consonants. (r/) Single concerning the use of single Schmiedel* comment on the obscurity in the N. T. The phenomena kolvt). or double consonants in the the modern In in the kolvt].^ situation the in general correspond to :

:

Greek vernacular

Thumb, Handbook, p. 27) the double conSoutheastern Greek dialects, have the value of

(cf.

sonants, except in

In the oldest Attic inscriptions in most cases where the doubling of consonants was possible the single consonant was used.^ The rule with initial p was that when it passed to the

only one.

middle of a word as a result of reduplication or the prefixing of a preposition,

etc., it

KACDP in Heb. (Mt. 9

:

36),

and

But

was doubled.

pepapTLa/xhos is read

10 22 as in Ionic and late Greek, :

-irepLpepapLixhos

in N* (Rev. 19

:

Blass''

13).

by

pepLUfxeuoL in

D

observes

Inschr., p. 108. Cf. also Hoffmann, Griech. Dial., Bd. Ill, p. 173; Meisterh., p. 128; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 165; Schmid, Atticismus, Bd. IV., p. 579 (for the Atticistic yLyv); Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 91 f.;

Magn.

1

Reinhold,

De

are uniform.

Graec. Patr.

etc.,

In the

pp. 46-48.

illustrations of the omission of intervocalic

pap. (Mayser, Gr., 2 P. 65, where a 3

*

p.

167

full

7

LXX

Thack.

Cf. Holbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 21.

in the

yivoixat

and

(Gr., p. Ill

LXX

yivuaKOi f.)

finds

uncials as in the

f.).

discussion of the geographical points

is

given.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10. P. 55;

cf.

also

Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., pp. 225

ff.

Thumb, Hellen., pp. 20 ff.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., pp. 122 ff.; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., pp. 88 ff.; Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., pp. 74 ff. 6

See

Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 211-219.

For the

LXX

see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp.

The MSS. of the LXX are largely the same as those of the N. T. and show similar phenomena in orthograpliy. So in Ex. 7: 10 B has tpiftv, 'App. Both Appaftuv and kpafiwv occur, and it is in the paji. that we can often find the 14-16.

true Pt()l(Mnai(! spelling. «

A

curiously has usually

yif-rjtxa

and B

yffvrii^a.

Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 93.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 10, 32<S. Similar variations in usage as to p or pp in the inscr. of the koivt) (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 124, Ai'o»'Tipi7rajs, etc.; Nachm., Magn. etc., p. 91) and even in the Attic inscr. (Meisterh., p. 95, '

appear

dvaprjOii'Tts, etc.).

Cf. Reinhold,

De

Graec.

etc., p. 42, for exx. of ipixraro, etc.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

212

S4?3in"i for 'Fufirj, though some Attic In Mt. 9 20 alixoppoovaa is correct inscriptions use initial pp. BD 61 read avavTLpy]To:s, and in Ac. In Ac. 10:29 (NL one p). avavTipi]TOJv. In Ac. 27 43 W. H. follow NC in 19 36 BL have all but the Syrian class read ewLand in Lu. 19 35 awoplxpavTas, In Mt. 9 36 pl\j/avTes and NAB have the same form in 1 Pet. 5:7. the Neutral (and Alexandrian) class has epin/xevoL, the Syrian epp., has pepL/j.^.-. In Mt. 15 30 ^^DL read eptxpav, while only while the Syrian class has lppL\pav, and so in Ac. 27: 19. But in Lu. 17: 2 In Jo. 19 23 'ippiTTTai is supported by all MSS. save 11 and p^'=^ In 2 Cor. 12 4 apprjra apa
that the Syriac versions use

:

:

:

:

:

D

:

:

:

:

BCD

follow

vs.

in its Semitic

NAL

:

word which the consonant and the

in reading appa^cova, a Semitic

form has the doubling

of

--- according to Blass/ who compares also the Latin arrha. W. H. have Staprj^as in Mk. 14 63 after BN, while in Lu. 8 29 Siapricrcrcov is supported by ABCRUA. In Mt. 26 65 W. H. give bCtpri^tv on the authority of only 9f according metrical prosody

:

:

:

BL read dLeprjaaero in Lu. 5 6. But Tpoakprj^ev 48 is supported by }
:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

not

W.

Mt. 5

H.,

In Eph. 3

B

:

:

21, etc.) is the constant reading in the

17 (18) and Col. 2

:

7, all

MSS. have

kppLto^/xhoL.

N. T.

W. H.

7 with epvaaro, while in In 2 Tim. 3 11 AD read epvaaro, and NAC 37 give epvaOrjv in 2 Tim. 4 17. All MSS. have eppcoaOe (Ac. 15 29). Mvppa (B) is changed to Mvpa in the Syrian text (Ac.

follow Col. 1

:

alone in 2 Cor.

13

B

is

joined

1

:

10; 2 Pet. 2

:

by FGP.

:

:

:

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 160), but Winer-Schmiedel found only Mvpa in the inscriptions. Uapapvcipev (Heb. 2 1)

2 5; :

cf.

:

by

all

priaia),

the pre-Syrian classes.

not

Tvapt]-, is

read

UappTjala, Tapprjcna^ofxat. (from Tav-

the usual reading in the N. T. (see Additional

Notes), as occasionally in the inscriptions.^ 1

(p. 58) is

W. H.

read

ivvppbs in

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10. 'Apa/Scoj- "only Western," Hort, Notes on Orth., But the pap. (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33; Deiss., B. S., p. 183 f.)

p. 148.

frequently have apa^6 rel="nofollow">v, and, as Deissmann remarks, people are not always particular to preserve

mere etymology.

2

CIGn,2722.

5.

Cf.W.-Sch.,p. 56.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS Rev. 6 :4 and 12

:3,

though the evidence

is

213

pretty evenly balanced.^

The Alexandrian class has wvpa^eL in Mt. 16 2, but W. H. reject the passage. The MSS. all have XeL/jiappov in Jo. 18 1. The other instances outside of p are not so numerous. The MSS. (all but late Syrian) support ^aWapTLov, not fioKavTiov, as :

:

Blass^ argues for it also on metrical grounds. because given by no grammarian, was "attributed by Fritzsche (on Mark, pp. 619 £f.) to the carelessness of transcribers" (Ezek. 36 30) so in the (Thayer), but as sometimes in the

do the papyri. 2 TevrjfjLa,

LXX

:

N. T. the best MSS. distinguish between yhvqixa (from yepuaoS), 'living creatures,' as yevprifxara extSt-iif (Mt. 3 7) and ykpyjixa (from yivonai), 'the fruits of the earth/ as k rod yePTjuaros ttjs a/xTeXov (Mk. 14:25). Phrynichus* condemns the use of ykppriiia = Kapirbs (Diodorus, Polybius, etc.). Root of both verbs is yep. This distinction between yhrjfxa and y'tvvr}pi.a appears in the papyri also, though ytp-qdePTa occurs in the Fayiim Papyri (B.U. 110. 14) "undoubtedly from yeppao)."^ So N. T. MSS. vary^ about ytppr]p.a. The gram:

marians (Lobeck, ad Phrynichum, p. 726) reject tKxvvoi for e/cx€w, but the best MSS. give eKxvvfo) everywhere in the N. T. W. H. accept this ^olic form in Mt. 23:35; 26 28; Mk. 14:24; Lu. 11 50 marg.) Lu. 22 20 (bracket the passage) Ac. 9 22; 22 20. So also avpxvvpco (W. H.) in Ac. 9 22; 21 31. Cf. vwepeKxvppofxeLikewise MSS. support apa^alppoi, oTTappofxaL, vov in Lu. 6 38. while the ^Eolic airoKTeppu is received by W. H. in Rev. 6:11 and aiTOKTeppvoi in Mk. 12 5, though rejected elsewhere in N. T. on divided testimony. "Emros has been restored throughout the :

;

:

;

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

N. T. by W. H. instead of epparos of the Text. Rec. The inscriptions support the N. T. MSS. in this change (Thayer). So W. H. give epeprjKOPTa (Mt. 18:12 ff.; Lu. 15:4, 7) but kppea always. 'Epeos, not kpueos, W. H. give (Ac. 9 7) as the LXX (Is. 56 10), a word possibly identical with a.peo:s (apaos). W. H. present^ /cpd/SarTos instead of the Kpa^^aros of the Text. Rec, though Kpa^aros would more nearly represent the Latin grabatus as it appears KpajSarptos is found also for the in Etym. M. (154. 34; 376. 36). :

:

1

Tho

2

Cninert,

* s

inscr.

show

irvpd^

also (Dittcnb., 177. 15; 748. 20).

Mem.

Graec. ilercul., p. 76. Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 348. Dciss., B. S., pp. 109

f.,

184.

^

Qr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 11.

Cf. Thackeray, p. 118.

Gregory, Prol., p. 79. ^ In Mk. IJ (.5) has Kp&^aros, but is not followed by W. 11. in .To. and Ac. Thumb, Ilellen., p. 22, argues for (ifi as the correct form from mod. Gk. (6). usage. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328) cites both KpafiaTTo-: anti Kpa^anov from ^

Arrian's Diss. Epict.

and

Kpaliarros

from the pap.

Cf.

Moult on's note

in Einl.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

214

Latin grahatarius (CIGII 2114 d

i)-

{^>

however, has 10/11 times Aaaea (Ac. 15).

the strange form Kpa^aKTos {-tt- only in Ac. 5

27 is

:

8) is Aao-crata in

correct.

some MSS.

Mao-ao/xat is

:

from Aramaic s^^itisiD, the right reading in Rev. 16 10 (NACP). Maixwvas,

:

Only the Western class has TX-quvprjs for irXrjiJLiJLvprjs in Lu. 6 48. W. H. properly have paKos, not pd/cKos, from prjypvjjLL (Mt. 9 16; Mk. 2 21). In the Western interpolation in Ac. 20 15, W. H. :

:

:

:

read TpwyvXiou, not -vWtov nor

hysopus for vaawTos in Jo. 19

Tim.

-eXXos, is read in 2

Cf. ^vyeXios in

CIGn

1

:

15

:

-tXtoj'.

Some Latin MSS.

29 and Heb. 9

by

all

save

A

:

19.

read

^vyeXos, not

and most

cursives.

3027.

The Hebrew and Aramaic proper names

for special re-

call

"Avms = '\-^ (Josephus "Avavos) may be due to the dropping of a or to the analogy of "Aj^m = "jn. W. H. (Ac. 1:23; 15:22) prefer Bapaa^jSas (from i^3"4:i5, 'son of the Sabbath') to The Text. Rec. has Tepr]BapaajSas (from s^nri ^?, 'son of Saba').^ aaper (W. H. Tevvr]aapeT) in Mk. 6 53, elsewhere -vv-.^ V6p.oppa is read in LXX and N. T. (Mt. 10: 15, etc.), nSa^. W. H. accept in Lu. 4 27 = S'^'"'^'*. 'leaaal 'EXio-atos, not 'EXtcro-. (Syrian) (Lu. 3 32, etc.) comes from ^"43^. The N. T. and 1 Mace, have

mark.

:

:

:

but the ancient grammarians and lexicographers preIn Lu. 3 27 'loiavav (indeclinable) is the right text. W. H. prefer 'Icodra (ini'^) to 'Icodvm in Lu. 8:3; 24 10. But more doubt exists concerning 'IcodfTjs, which W. H. read everywhere save in Ac. 4:6; 13:5; Rev. 22:8, following B and sometimes 'loTTTTTj,

fer

'loTrry.^

:

:

D. The single v prevails in D in Luke and Acts, while 'Iwawq^ is more common in D in Matthew, Mark, John.* }< has the single The inscriptions have V in the part written by the scribe of B.^ Blass^ finds the explanation in the Hebrew termiit both ways. nation -an, which was treated as a variable inflection in the Greek, MSS. having now 'loiavav and now 'Iwavov. This fact the

LXX

opposes the derivation of the name '\wavvr]s from 'lwavav-y}s, leaving Maptd/x {"^T^p) = MapLafxp.rj in Josephus.* the -jjs unexplained.^ Mecalas is from the Aramaic i*n;^":;?3 = Hebrew niffi^n, but the Syr-

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 57.

Cf. Pliny (Nat. Hist., V, 15. 71 for Tevv) also. In W.-Sch., p. 57, the point is made that the unpointed Targums do not distinguish between "^Q'^ and ^Qli. 3 W.-Sch., p. 56, =13' or "2\ Cf. on this subject Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., 2

p.

26 6 6

f.

*

Blass,"Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328, quoting E. Lippett.

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 159. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11.

' «

W.-Sch., p. 57; E. Bibl., p. 2504 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11.

f.

215

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

Sdppa, Heb. ian class reads Meaias in Jo. 1:41 (42); 4:25. n-iic (feminine of ^ia), is read by MSS. generally in N. T., though

has ^apas in Ro. 4:19 (vulg. Sarae). All the MSS. have vv Xappav is in Xovaavpa (Lu. 8: 3) after the Heb. nr^^T:; ('a lily')and a few cursives have supported by most MSS., though has Xappap Xapap in Ac. 7:2 after the Hebrew T)n. The

L

D

LXX

and the Greek writers (Strabo, etc.) have Kdppat, Latin Carrhae. Doubling of the Aspirate. As a rule the aspirated mutes (0, x, are not doubled in more correct writing either in early or late Greek, but N. T. MSS. give examples of 66, xx, 00- In Philemon 2 D has 'A(t>(pia, while 3 has 'AxTria (so vulg.) and FG, etc., even In Mk. 7 34 all MSS. have e(j)cj)ada (or €a6a. W. H. give Ua66ato^ = Hebrew .-"in?? in the N. T. (Mt. 9:9ff., etc.), and ^la66av in Mt. (f>)

:

1

15.

:

In Ac.

W.'h. read MaT^dr 1

:

23, 26

fer Marra^tas to Ma66a6las.

Western and read

Hebrew

24, but Ma^^dr in Lu. 3 29. Ma66im, but in Lu. 3 25 f they pre-

in Lu. 3

W. H. have

:

In Ac. 5

SdTr^etpa (either

:

1,

W. H.

.

consider 2d0(/)etpa

Aramaic »TQp,

The

'precious stone ').^

^"^QP,

:

:

LXX MSS.

'beautiful,' or

show the same

Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 121. Assimilation of Consonants. In the early period of the Greek language the inscriptions often show assimilation of consonants between separate words. The words all ran together in the writing {scriptura continua) and to some extent in proUsage varied nunciation like the modern French vernacular. the distowards constantly very early, but the tendency was e^ However, (dissimilation). tinctness of the separate words Ikk, though ky, ex, consonants, before came finally to be written k

variations. (e)

and even e (cf. Latin) are found in Attic inscriptions,^ as ky Only sporadic examples outside of e^ and k appear vTja^v, etc. in the N. T. as di^e7Xt7rros in D (Lu. 12:33), aireySvaeL in B (Col. 2 11), eyyova in D (1 Tim. 5 4), eggona, not cngona? The Attic The most inscriptions even have s assimilated in tovK \ldovs.

k^K

:

:

» On the whole subject see Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 159, and Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11, Cf. also Schweizer, Pcrg. etc., pp. 110 f., 114 f. Cf. for the pap., Mayser, Gr., pp. 190-224; Soden, I, pp. 1372 ff. 2 Cf. Meistorh., In North Engl, one hears "ith wood" for pp. 105-109. the LXX show the same phenomena as one of MSS. The "in the wood."

MSS. and the pap., like iy yaarpL, tfj. nfcrv, avyypa(l)fi.i', etc. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 16 f.; Thack., Gr., pp. 130 ff. Alexandrian ' Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12; Ausspr. etc., p. 123. writers followed the Attic in this assimilation. Rlass compares the gullural

sees in the N. T.

use of a

in aijXi

(Mt. 27

:

4())

in

L and

in

the

LXX

'Atpudif, 'Atvdup.

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

216

common

assimilation between separate words

is

in

Examples

with the article and h.

in -V, especially

words ending like

ToK \6yov, Top 'F68lov, eX Aea^co, ea XlSuvi, etc., are very

Similar

phenomena occur

failure to assimilate is far

in the

more

kolvtj

inscriptions,

noticeable.

See

list

-koXlv,

tthjl

common.

though the examples

of

Nachmanson.^ As a rule the papyri do not assimilate such In the N. T., as in the later kolpt] generally, only a few remnants survive of this assimilation of v between words. Blass,* who has used the MSS. to good purpose, finds several, as, for instance, ky yaarpi in A (Lu. 21 23), ey Kavd in AF (Jo. 2 11), e^i in

cases.^

:

fikaoi

AC

in

(Rev. 1:13; 2:1,

(Mt. 18 2; Lu. 8:7), :

AE,

etc. (Lu.

2

:

Trpaurrjrt

e/x

5), avfx iraaiv in

papyri (up to 150

:

etc.),

in J<

EG,

AP

(Heb. 2:12), in LA (Jas. 1 21), av^ Mapta^ in

in

:

etc.

(Lu. 24

show a good deal

b.c.)

:

21).

The

earlier

of this assimilation be-

tween words (Thackeray, Gr., p. 131). This assimilation between separate words is common in modern Greek (cf. Thumb, Handh., pp. 16 ff.). So Tov TaTepa = tombatera. But a much more difficult matter is presented in the case of h and avv in composition, though in general "assimilation is the rule in compounds of ku, retention of v in those of avv."^ But in 1 and 2 Peter assimilation is the rule (only two clear exceptions) for both avv and h, due possibly^ to the absence of uncials. The later papyri as a rule do not assimilate avv, though often h.'' In the N. T. no examples occur of h or avv before ^ or p.^ Hort^ gives a list of what he considers "the certain and constant forms" of h and aiiu in composition. "All other compounds of avv and h are included in the list of alternative readings." Hort thus reads kp.- before the labials (x, j8, 0) and the liquid p except evTepLiraTTjcrco (2 Cor. 6 16), possibly kvTvv'eoiv (Ac. 9:1), and evwpoadev once (Rev. 4:6) and Western class elsewhere. So assimilation takes place before the liquid X, as hWoyaw. But before the palatals k, y the usage varies, though before % we have kyxp'^crai (Rev. 3 18) with K reading h. :

:

1

Meisterh., p. 110

2

Magn.

Hist.

p.

Gk. Gr.,

Cf. Jann., Hist. f.

Gk.

Gr., p. 97.

Cf. also Schwcizer, Perg. etc., p. 127; Jann.,

p. 92.

Mem.

Graec. Hercul., p. 57; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12. 6 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149. In general see Wecklein, Curae Epigr. ad Gr. Graecae etc., 1869,

3

Cronert,

*

lb., pp. 11

8

lb.

47

f.

Inschr., p. 100

f.,

30G.

f.

N. T. Gk.,

Mem.

'

Blass, Gr. of

8

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149. See for Thackeray, pp. 132 ff. lb. For the inscr. see Nachm., Magn., p. 104 f. The Coptic shows similar

^

variation.

p. 12.

Cf. Cronert,

Graec. Hercul., p. 61.

LXX

For the loss of final u in mod. Gk. vernac. see Thumb, Handb.,

p.

24 f.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

We

read hy^y pafxfihr] in 2 Cor. 3

vt.a,

kvKaLvi^o:,

2

:

f

217

(NABCDFG) and

.

tPKaroLKeoo, ej^/cayxw/xat, kvKevTpi^u, kvKplvoi,

and

kvKai-

though

€7-

except in Acts.^- As to avv here is Hort's decision. Zwir- he accepts save in avfj-iroaLa. On the other hand Hort has only aw^aaCkeboo, aw^i^a^w, elsewhere avu^as in avfjL^alvcj; only avv^y-qpn, cvp(f>vcj:, but cru/z^- as in (Tun4)epo:. With Kokkiji,

eyK\T]na, etc.,

tyKaTaXelTTOj

the palatals Hort reads awK- always, as in

avvKa.Q-np.aL, only avyyibut avvxpo^paL and avyxv(n%. He has both avvkakku), avvKvirovpai and avWap^avw, avWeyco; avvpadrjTrjs, etc., but avppop-

(7vy KaXviTTO},

vr]s,

Hort has

(jvppop4)os.

<^tfco,

has both avvoTavpow,

but ch^vye;

aw^C:, etc.,

avp\Pvxos,

but

and
doubtful about Kevxptal,

is

(/)

iravTX-qdei.

Interchange and Changing Value of Consonants. One

cannot here go into the discussion of the

labial, palatal, dental,

velar stops, the spirants, liquids, nasals.

One can give only the special variations in the N. T. The 6 sound was rare in the older Indo-Germanic languages and easily glided into u or v.^ The Greek /Saifco is

like venio in Latin,

In modern Greek

tory.

/Stos is

^=v

LXX all the uncials have

like vivus

(English

though

different in his-

In the N. T. as in the

v).

(W. H.) where the minuscules Cor. 6 15) it is from n?: 5? ('lord of the forest'), while the Text. Rec. /SeXtaX is from "2?^^|i ('worthlessness').^ The variation between pa and pp, Moulton^ obread

v in

In the case of

AajSiS.^

AaveiS

I3e\iap (2

:

down to modern Greek. The Attic pp did not displace the Ionic and early Attic pa entirely in the Attic inscriptions.^ In the N. T., like the rest of the kolvt], usage is divided.^ Hort (p. 149) serves, runs

prefers aparjv except apprju perhaps 4/4 times in Paul. pels

and Acts

dapaos

and the two imperatives

uniform, but in 2 Cor. (5 '

About

p. 1383. iKK6Trr]v. »

iv

in

'Ep in

On

6, 8; 7: 16;

tvirpoadev f.

in

Cf. Jann., Hist.

p.

70

f.;

(13

:

6)

Sodcn,

I,

ey- and even «-, as

p. 45.

Gk. Gr., pp. 91-97,

for the history of

during various stages of the language.

Man.

Comp.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 66 note.

of

PhiloL, pp. 98, 124

58 note, for further discussion.

'

Cf.

«

Pro!., p. 45.

^

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 99 f. Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 125;

33).

and Heb.

2)

iv-,

Cf. Giles,

ib., p.

6.PP7IV

1,

etc.,

composition as in the pap. see Mayser, Gr.,

*

'

:

composition see Gregory, Prol.

»

pap.

10

MSS. appears

Prol. etc., p. 73

this subject

:

In the Gos-

Oapaei, Oapae'lre are

Cf. also

Thumb,

Thcol. Literaturzeit.,

Nachm., Magn.

"greatly preponderates over

Cf. also Reinhold,

De

Grace,

XXVIII,

Inschr., p. 91.

44

f.

Thumb,

122.

In the

Rev., 1901, p. llellen., p. 77 f.

&pcrriv" (INIoulton, CI.

etc., p.

p.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

218

dappttv is the correct text,

f displaces

NEW TESTAMENT o-

in a

few words.

Voiced

had the sound of z, and f was pronounced ad} "Afcoros (Ac. 8 40) lilffi!!*!, Ashdod. Lagarde's LXX has 'Aae8d6}8 in Josh. 11:22 (A has 'Ao-rjSwS, B 'AaeXSw). »nt? is rendered also "Efpas or "Ecrdpas. But in the N. T. period 'Ap/iofoj, not the Attic f is changing from the ds sound to z. Lachmann has /xa^os for /j-aaros in dpjUOTTco, is the N. T. form.^ 0-

in union with voiced consonants :

Rev. 1 13. In 1 Th. 5 19 BDFG (Western class) read ^(3hpvre,^ simply phonetic spelling. Hort^ considers Zfxuppa as Western only in Rev. 1 11; 2 8, but the papyri and inscriptions both give it.^ The most noticeable feature of all is, however, that :

:

:

:

the Attic and Boeotian tt did not hold against the Ionic aa (though even Thucydides and the Tragic poets used o-cr). Papyri,

and N. T. MSS.

inscriptions

though

all

all

unite in using aa as the rule,

occasionally have tt.

It

does not seem possible to

reduce the usage to an intelligent rule.'' 'EKirXrjTTOfxevos is accepted by W. H. in Ac. 13 12, elsewhere aa. Both eXaaacov :

2:10; Ro. 9:12) and eXaTTuv (1 Tim. 5:9; Heb. 7:7) are found, but only the "Hterary" (so Blass) words eXarroco (Jo. 3 30; Heb. 2:7, 9) and eXarroj/ew (2 Cor. 8: 15). Similar diversity exists between riacov (1 Cor. 11 17; 2 Cor. 12: 15) and i](rGudr]Te 13) on the one hand and riTTrjjxa (1 Cor. 6:7; Ro. (2 Cor. 12 11 12) and riTTaadai (2 Pet. 2 19 f.) on the other. In Heb. 6:9; 10:34 W. H. read Kpdaaova, elsewhere KpeWTova (Heb. 1:4; 7:7, (Jo.

:

:

:

:

:

19,

22; 8:6; 9:23; 11:16,

some

literary influence,

has KptLTTov only in 1 Cor. 7 7

38; 11

:

:

17; Ph. 1

:

40;

35,

an argument :

9,

12:24), and Hebrews has

while Kpetaaov

Hort accepts

23.

Paul

for Blass' idea above. is

found in

KpelTTov in

1

1

Cor.

Pet. 3

:

17

1 Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 113, 115. On the whole subject of the exchange of consonants in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 169-188, 219-224. For the LXX exx. {ovbkv, oWkv; yX&aaa, yXcoTTa; <j}v\aaao}, (f)vXa.TTu', kXdacrcov,

kXcLTTuv; apprjp, dappo), etc.) see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 17-20;

pp. 100-124. 2 Cf. Rutherford,

New

N

Phyrn., p. 14.

(Mk. 9

3

Cf. a^^ecTTos in

*

Notes on Orth.,

6

Deiss., B. S., p. 185.

Thack., Gr.,

:

43), iyvw^ixhos, etc., in pap. (W.-Sch., p. 59).

p. 148.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 45; Dittenb., 458.

41, ku

ZnvpfiJ. 6

Cf.

Thumb, HeUen.,

pp. 53, 78

ff.;

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 125;

Nachm., Magn. etc., p. 95 f.; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32; Prol., p. 45; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 23; Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 148; Reinhold, De Graec. etc., p. 43 f. Giles (Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 115) thinks that the aa in Athens was a literary mannerism and pronounced just like tt.

;

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS and 2

Pet.

2:21

(doubtful).

Cf. arifxepou for the Attic

Trjfiepou.

Western by Hort, though Moulton^ has some papyrus support and is like the modern

"OpvL^ (Lu. 13:34)

observes that

219

it

called

is

Greek (Cappadocian) dpvix. (g) Aspiration of Consonants.

There

is

besides

some

fluc-

tuation in the aspiration of consonants.

See under (d) for the This uncertainty of aspiration is

double aspirates Hke 'k^cfila, etc. very old and very common in the inscriptions and papyri, ^ though the N. T. has only a few specimens. W. H. read "kKt\bap.dx in

^W

Ac. 1:19, bm. So paKo. (Mt. 5:22), S^p^^:,, but aa^axdavd (B has -KT~) in Mt. 27:46. TivvqaaptT is correct; the Syrian class has -ed in Mt. 14 34. W. H. have uniformly Ka0apj'aou/x, :

and read ^a^apkr save in four passages, Na^apW in Mt. 21 11; Ac. 10 38, and Nafapa in Mt. 4 13; Lu. 4 16. In Lu. 11 27; 23 29 DFG have fiaadoi for fxaarol, likewise {< in Rev. 1 13. 'EdWri is read by cursives, Clem., Or., etc., in 1 Cor. 5:7. In oWeis and :

:

:

:

:

:

:

H-ndels

after elision of

the

e

8

has blended with the eh as

if it

were

and become d. It is first found in an inscr. 378 b.c. and is the usual form in the pap. in iii/B.c. and first half of ii/B.c. By I/a.d. the 5 forms are supreme again (Thack., Gr., pp. 58 ff) Blass^ finds T

.

ovdepos in

23 1

:

14

(NET)

Cor. 13

in the

Lu. 22

:

;

35 (ABQT); 2 Cor. 11:8

:

Ac. 15

LXX and

9

:

2 (kVABCL)

;

(BHLP) fxrjdh in

;

19

:

27

Ac. 27

:

(NBMP); oWh in Lu. (NABHP) 26 26 (NB) ;

33 (N*AB).

the N. T. prevails, though

W. H.

:

But

(after

k^ovdeveo:

BD)

read

and KD read the Attic TravSoKdov, -evs in Lu. 10:34f., but W. H. accept iravBoxelop, -evs (from dexonai). Zapewra in Lu. 4 26 is the LXX rendering of riQi;^. T poirocfyopeo} and Tpo(t)0(i)opew are two distinct words, though the MSS. differ widely in Ac. 13 18, the Neutral and Western supporting rpoir-. Hort considers a4)vph for cnrvph right (Mt. 15:37, etc.). It is well attested by the papyri." W. H. read 6^'qdpov; not (p6(3r]Tpop, inLu. 21:11. (h) Variable Final Consonants. The use of p e(t)e\KvaTLK6v (paragogic p) cannot be reduced to any clear rule. The desire to avoid hiatus extended this usage, though it probably originally had a meaning and was extended by analogy to cases where it had none. Cf. English articles a, an (Giles, Man. of Camp. Philol, p. 208). e^ov8€P7]drj

in

Mk.

9

:

12.

N

:

:

Prol., p. 45. Cf. Thumb, Ilellon., p. 90. « Cf. W.-Sch., p. 59. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 24; W.-Sch., p. (jl. Cf. Mcisterh., p. 48, for this interuspiration in the old Attic inscr. Cf. Mayser, pji. ISO fT. '

»

*

Moulton,

p. 185.

Prol., p. 45.

The

Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 173.

Ptol. pai).

have both

spellings, Deiss., B. S.,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

220

In the old Attic before is true of movable final s. movable v was seldom used. It is more frequent in the new Attic up to 336 b.c, and most common in the kolvt], vanishing again in the modern Greek, as v easily disappears in pronunciation. Meisterhans^ has an interesting table on the subject, show-

The same 403

thing

B.C. this

ing the relative frequency in different centuries.

This table

proves that in the kolvt] it came to be the rule to use the movable This is shown also by the V both before consonants and vowels.

and the Ptolemaic papyri. Per contra note the disfinal V in modern Greek vernacular, when not pronounced (Thumb, Handh., pp. 24 ff.). However, as a rule, this movable final v occurs only with the same classes of words as in the Attic as after -ct, karl and e in verbs (3d sing, past tenses). The irrational v mentioned as common later by Hatzidakis^ is The older N. T. MSS. (^^ABC) are in harmony with the rare. Koivq and have the movable v and s both before consonants and vowels with a few exceptions. The later N. T. MSS. seem to Moulton* feel the tendency to drop these variable consonants. mentions ixd^oiv (Jo. 5 36) as a good example of the irrational v inscriptions^

appearance of

:

N. T. MSS. (ABEGMA). Cf. also the irrational v with the subjunctive in the papyri. So eav r]v apaevov P. Oxy. 744 (i/s.c.) for See Moulton, Prol., pp. 168, 187, for further examples. The %. failure to use this v was originally most common in pause, sometimes even before vowels.'^ Blass^ observes that it was only the Byzantine grammarians who made the rule that this v should be used before vowels and not before consonants, a rule of which their predecessors did not have the benefit, a thing true of many We moderns can teach the ancients other grammatical rules. the T. MSS.'' show no knowledge of this Since N. much Greek! H. follow a mechanical one indeed, "rule," grammatical W. later in

1

Att. Insclir., p. 114.

"^

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 137, whose table confirms that of Meisterh.

von Magn.,

Cf. also Thieme, Inschr.

The pap.

with similar table.

Mayser, Gr. sonants

d. gi-iech. Pap., pp.

also.

236

ff.

Mem.

In the

s.

Cf.

i^expi- vixo>v

3

Einl. etc., p. Ill, like

*

Prol., p. 49.

and

ff.;

m«xpis ov in

laToprje-rjv 6 uaos.

Cf. also Reinhold,

Inschr., p. 110,

Graec. Hercul., p. 137, and v ke\K. occurs before con-

LXX

Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 22

So as to movable

Thack., Gr., pp. 134

ff.

LXX.

Cf. Schweiz., Perg. Inschr., p. 137.

De Graec,

p. 37.

« Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19. W.-Sch., p. 62. 7 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 147 f.; Gregory, Prol., p. 97 f. In simple truth movable was not so uniform in the earher Gk. (esp. Thuc.) as the grammars ^

V

Nachm., Magn.

p. 8;

agree, Cronert,

imply.

.

Cf.

Maasson,

De

Uttera

v

Graec. parag., 1881, pp. 47, 61.

.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

221

but the only practical guide under the circumstances. They go by the testimony of the oldest uncials. Hort gives a considerable list of examples where the v is wanting in one or more of the older uncials, but where W. H. have v, as in apovcnv (Mt. 4 6), iraffLv (Mt. 5 15), etc. But in Lu. 1 3 eSo^e is read by J
:

:

:

jrepvaL is

The

correct in 2 Cor. 8

variable

s

calls for

avTLKpvs Xiov in Ac.

usually have

axpi-

20

and

:

:

10; 9:2.^

a few words more.

But

15.^

/x^xpt

All good

even before vowels.

MSS.

give

N. T. MSS.

as in Attic, the

"Axpt (always

before consonants) thus precedes vowels some fifteen times, and

once only do we certainly^ have axpts (Gal. 3: uncertain whether

it is

followed by av or

ov.

19),

Mexpt

is

though it is always used

N. T. before a consonant and once before a vowel, M^xpt 'Iwavov (Lu. 16 16). The early N. T. editors used to print ovtoj before consonants and ourcos before vowels, but W. H. print ovtcos 196 times before consonants and vowels and only ten times outco These ten instances are Mk. 2:7; Mt. (air before consonants). 3: 15; 7: 17; Ac. 13:47; 23:11; Ro. 1:15; 6:19; Ph. 3:17; Heb. 12:21; Rev. 16:18." ^atXoi'Tjs (2 Tim. 4: 13), Latin paenwZa. (i) Metathesis. See in the

:

Additional Notes. IV. Breathings. (a)

Origin of the Aspirate.

ern Greek no distinction tus asper '

'^

and spintus

is

lenis,

made or

As

known, in the modbetween spiridaav and iruevfjia \pL\bv. That is

well

in pronunciation

-wvevp-a

See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19; Gregory, Prol., p. 97. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328, and references there given.

Cf. Thack.,

Gr., p. 135. *

Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19) quotes Attic usage for

irkpuffiv

before vowels.

For the Horn, avrupv and further items see W.-Sch., p. G3 and note. 'S.VTIKPVZ {KaravTLKpv) in Attic is 'downright,' not 'over against' (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20). Cf. for the pap. Mayscr, Gr., pp. 242 ff. * Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 148. But W. H. read dxp« ov in Heb. 3 13, elsewhere axpi ov. ¥oT further discussions of axpt and m«xp' see W.-Sch., p. 63 note. ' For illustrations from the Koturj inscr. sec Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 1 12. Cf. Reinhold, p. 37 f ''

:

to say, the

is

in writing. '

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

222

and

"rough" breathing

This sign

is

is only a conventional sign used indeed a comparatively modern device,

in use in the MSS. generally since the eleventh century This form was an evolution from H (Phcenician B, he), and H, then L and J.^ This breathing (rough or smooth)

',

A.D.^

then did not find a place in the Greek alphabet, and so is not found in the early uncial MSS. It becomes therefore a difficult question to tell whether the modern ignoring of the rough breathing was \-

the rule in the

first

century a.d.

The MSS., as Hort^ points out, The original use of H as

are practically worthless on this point.

equal to h or the rough breathing was general in the old Attic

and the Doric, not the

vEolic

And even

in the Attic

inscriptions the usage

very irregular and uncertain.

Numerous

is

and

Ionic.

examples like HEKATON occur, but some like HEN also, so that even H was not always rough.'* The modern English cockneys have no monopoly of trouble with /I's. In French h is silent as Vhomme. The Greeks always found the matter a knotty probThe use of H = in the Ionic and Attic (after 403 B.C.) lem. The inscriptions left the Greeks without a literary sign for h. show that in the vernacular II continued to be so used for some 7j

time. (fe)

Increasing De-aspiration

But

(Psilosis).

there

was a

steady decrease in the use of the h sound. The Ionic, like the ^olic, was distinguished by psilosis, and the kolv-t] largely^ fol-

lowed the Ionic in this respect. More certain is the use of the which succeeded the older KH, TH, aspirated consonants x, &, IIH.^ But certainly the rough breathing was in early use as the >

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 63.

The marking

general in the earlier forms in vii/A.D., 2

Anec, Gk. N. T.,

Cf. Beldcer,

II. 692,

ib., p.

and Jann.,

of the

rough breathing was

65.

Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 63.

MSS. of the Gk. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 25 f., for remarks on breathMSS., where ^olic and Ionic psilosis occur in iw' 65o0 ings in the /car' «Va as well as exx. of aspirated consonants like KaO' 6(p0a\novs, Kad' kviavrbv, »

Intr. to

p. 310.

Cf. also Sitterley, Praxis in

Test., 1898, p. 32.

LXX

k(f)'

eUev, not to

mention

breathings in the *

Giles,

Man.

LXX

of

ovk kcopaKaaiu

and ovx

For further remarks on

l5ov.

see Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 302.

Comp.

Philol., pp. 81, 91.

The

becomes breathed (rough). ijber d. Spir. Asper. im Griech., 1888, p. 63. ^ Cf. Thumb., p. 73 f. The Laconic Gk. used

stop for the opening of the Cf. also

glottis (lenis) easily

as at the beginning

(ib., p. 8).

Dawes (Pronun.

H

Thumb,

Unters.

in interaspiration as well

of the

Gk. Aspirates, 1894,

not able to reach a final decision as to whether the Gk. aspirates are genuine aspirates Uke the Sans, according to Brugmann, Curtius, etc. « Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 91. On the whole subject of the aspirated p. 103) is

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

223

though not with much consistency.^ Somemay be due to the disappearance of a digamma, though sometimes a smooth breathing displaces it, as Then again the disapepyov from Fepyov"^ (cf. Enghsh 'work'). 0= lep6s.^ It is not strange result, as Laap6s same pearance of has the therefore that usage in the kolvt] is not uniform. Examples like vt' avTov, v(j>' avTov, ovk eoipconev, etc., appear in the Pergamum inThe same scriptions, not to mention Ka9' eVos, Ka9' I5iav, etc* inscriptions show,

times the rough breathing

is told elsewhere in the kolvt] as in Magnesia,* Herculaneum.^ Some of this variation is probably due to analogy,^ so that though "de-aspiration was the prevailing tendency," ^ yet the N. T. shows several examples in the opposite direction.

story of uncertainty

Variations in the MSS. {Aspiration and

(c)

aspiration of the consonants

k,

The

Psilosis).

t, t in case of elision is therefore

a matter of documentary evidence ^ and occurs in the case of olvtI, The N. T. MSS. vary considerably among kwi, Kara, fieTo., ovk, vtto.

D

in the Gospels themselves as in the LXX, though some like and Acts are wholly untrustworthy about aspiration.^" In general

Attic literary usage cannot be assumed to be the

Hort^^ prefers

'AdpaiJ.vvTr}v6s

(Ac. 27: 2) like

vernacular.

kolvt]

Hadrumetum.

'AXodco

Tim. 5 18) is connected with aXcjs or aXoorj and may be compared with dTTTjXiojrr/s (r?Xios).^^ Hort (p. 144) prefers a\v(TLs (Mk. 5:3), but elXiKpLvrjs and eVKLKpLvla, though eiX. has (1

Cor. 9:9

f.; 1

:

'A^eXTrtfoj^res is read by DP in Lu. 6 35 has several similar instances," not to mention one

ancient authority.

and the

LXX

:

consonants see Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., pp. 194 ff., and for the dialects and interaspiration see K.-Bl., Bd. I, pp. 107-114. 1 Cecil BendaU, Jour, of Philol., 1904, pp. 199 ff. R. Weiss,

2

De

Dig.

etc.,

1889, p. 47.

De

Cf. also Panes,

Dig. Hesiodea

Quest., 1887, p. 48. Cf.

'

aa Ixco article

dans

Sommer, Griech. Lautstudien, 1905,

{ix'^),

by Pernot

in

Rev. des

ioprij

*

Cronert,

Mem.

Thumb,

Hellen. etc., p. 64.

Moulton,

9

(p. 106).

lb., p.

Grace. Hercul.,

Prol., p. 44.

iUav (233. 49),

1904

pp. 116

etc.,

(Meistcrh., p. 87).

» 8

in aspiration,

See also

on La Metathese

Grq., 1906, pp. 10-23,

fit.

•

KoJB'

On metathesis

de Chio.

les Dial,

Schweizor, Perg. Inschr.

*

p. 2.

see Meistcrh., p. 102, exx. of txw in Attic inscr. v/b.c.

and

" Intr. to Gk. N. " W.-Sch., p. 40.

The

Attic

p.

152

had only

i5ios,

but

Inschr., p. 83.

f.

Cf. also for the inscr., Dittenb.,

e'

Ito% (458. 71),

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901 (pp. 33, 434) and to Gk. N. T., p. 312.

for the pap.,

Cf. also Hort, Intr.

311.

ff.

Nachm., Magn.

'«

Bla.ss,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 15.

T., p. 313; App., p. 160.

" Gregory,

Prol., p. 91;

Thack., p. 125.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

224

Hermas and

in

in the Attic.^

In Ro. 8

MSS. support

while various

eXiridL,

NEW TESTAMENT

it

W. H.

20

:

in Ac. 2

:

26;

accept Cor. 9

1

€'

10;

:

Ro. 4 18; 5:2; Tit. 1 2, and FG have Kad' k\Trl8a in Tit. 3 7. Hort^ thinks this is due to digamma dropped as well as in the case of d(/)t5co (Ph. 2 23), but analogy to a4)opav may be the explanation.^ "E^tSe is read by a few MSS. in Ac. 4 29 as k4>Zbev in Lu. 1 25. Gregory* gives many examples of d(/)-, e^-, Kad- with eXxtfco and dbov in the LXX. W. H. offer ohx l5ov as an alternative :

:

:

:

:

:

reading in Ac. 2 eUop in Gal.

1

:

:

7,

while

19.

A

B

reads ovx

has ovx

Ibovres in 1 Pet. 1

Lu. 17: 22.

oiPeade in

:

8 and ovx

W. H.^ put

Ka^' idiav appears in K the margin in Gal. 2 14. B eight times, in D three times, in A once (Mt. 14 23; 17: 1,19; 20: 17; 24:3; Mk.4 :34; 6 :31; 9 :28; 13:3). But W. H. nowhere accept it, not even when B combines with }< or D. }
'lovdaLKoJs in

:

once, in

:

Mt. 24 3. The form Kad' IBlav is common in the kolpt] inscripin Ac. 17 16. On the and the papyri. KadeiSoAov is read by other hand Kad' eros, so common in the kolv-q (cf. Latin vetiis), is not found in the N. T., all MSS. in Lu. 2 41 reading Kar' 'eros. Hort^ considers ovk loT-qKev (Jo. 8 :44) to be merely the imperfect indicative of (xttjko}. So also as to lar-qKev in Rev. 12 4. f< has k(})iopKr](T€Ls in Mt. 5 33, a form common in the Doric inscripDP have 'e4>lopKo% in 1 Tim. 1:10. Li Rev. 12:11 A tions.^ reads ovx vyaT-rjaeu, while ovx oXiyos is read in the LXX and papyri as well as a number of times in Ac. (12 18 by }
in

:

M

tions

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

N. T. Gk., p. 16. Cf. Thumb, Unters. d. Spir. Asper, p. 65. Notes on Orth., p. 143. 3 Moulton, Prol., p. 44} Thumb, Spu-. Asper, p. 71. Moulton (CI. Rev., Mar., 1910, p. 53) now says: "I am quite wilhng to be convinced that the long-lost digamma was an accessory here if no better explanation turns up." Thumb (Spir. Asper, pp. 11, 71) admits the possibihty of the digamma ex1

Blass, Gr. of

2

planation in some eases.

*

Prol., p. 91.

313 f., where Hort really favours ovx 'lov8. and the rough breathing for all the forms of 'lovdas, 'lovdalos, etc. For the variations in the LXX MSS. see Thack., p. 125. 6 Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 312. ^ Rutherford, New Plu-yn., p. 363. For this transfer of aspiration cf. Cmiius, Gk. Verb, II, 109. Nestle (Am. Jour, of Theol., July, 1909, p. 448) urges that, since the Gk. of the Bible is an "east-west language," attention must be paid to oriental tongues. He notes that the Coptic has aspiration in ^ Notes on Orth., p. 168. helpis, hisos, for eXn-ts, laos. ^

Cf. Intr. to

Gk. N.

T., p.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS Th. 5

in 1

:

3 (like

aspiration in

B

in Sap. 6

compounds

see Thackeray, Gr., p. 127 pojiai

or

oixelpoiJLaL

is

:

8),

225

a wholly unusual^ absence of

of

taT-qixt.

f.

It is

LXX

For the

phenomena

wholly doubtful whether

Om

right (1 Th. 2:8).

evpov in

o/xet-

some MSS.

and ouk IveKev in 2 Cor. 7 12, Blass^ considers as clerthough they are common in the LXX and in the inscriptions.^ N.T. MSS. (late cursives) even have atrew, ocrrecbi', For nrjdels, .oWeis see this chapter iii (/), the Intero-x\os, etc. change of Consonants and chapter on Pronouns. (d) Transliterated Semitic Words. The aspirate in the case of transliterated Semitic words (chiefly proper names) causes some difficulty. Blass^ calls it "insoluble," though he accepts Hort's practice as rational,^ expressing J»{ and V by the smooth breathing and H and H by the rough breathing. The MSS. disagree and are not consistent, but Blass calls the result of this procedure "strange." Hence Hort argues for "A/SeX (,1), 'A/3pad/i (J rel="nofollow">{), "Aya^os (J/), "Ayap (n), 'A/ceXSa/xdx (H), aXkrj'KovLa (H), 'AX^atos in Lu. 24

:

3,

:

ical errors,

(n), ^Avaulas

(il),

"Awa

(H), 'Aperas (H), 'Apt^a^ata (H), "Ap

(n), 'E^3ep (p), 'E/3paTcs (p), 'E/3pats

(;?),

'E^paiari

'EXjua5d/i (X), eXcot (J<), 'E/Jixcop (Pi), 'Eudox

(n, but 'EaXei, N), Eua (H), i;(r(rco7ros

(^),

ijXet

(N),^ o^aavva {r\) ,

the smooth breathing to

Besides he considers

it

all

Ma7ei5ci>j'

{^),'' 'EXtcraTos

(H, but

(^),

'Evccs, {<),'Epp(i/x

(K), but "HXei (H), 'HXetas (X), "Up '^o'rje

(M).

Hort^

gives,

names beginning with

*>

moreover, as 'llaalas.

a "false association"^ to connect

with

'lepetxw, 'lepocroKvfjLa (-/ietrT/s), 'lepovaaKrjiJ.

lepos,

'lepefiias,

though Blass

retains 'lepocroXu/xa rather inconsistently.^"

The Use of Breathings with

p and pp. W. H. follow dropping the breathings in pp as in dppr/ra (2 Cor. 12:4), though retaining the rough breathing with initial p as in prjiiara {ih). Winer ^^ argued that the Romans heard an aspiration with pp, since they used Pyrrhus, Tijrrhenus, etc. W. H. seem justified in using the smooth breathing with the (e)

Tischcndorf and

first p in 1

^

in

the word pepavTcafxhoL (Hcb. 10

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 144. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 16.

Hort, Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 313. of these words.

6

list

Lachmann

s *

:

22)

by old Greek

W.-Sch., p. 39. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

cus-

p. 16.

Cf. also Gregory, Prol., p. 106

f.,

for

it may seem, "Hebrew "rather than "Ebrew" is modern (Hort, Gk. N. T., p. 313). ^ Hort (Notes, etc., p. 144), however, merely follows custom and prints vffcr. " 8 Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 313. » lb. »» Gr. of N. T. Gk., Cf. Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 30 f. p. 16. " W.-M., p. 53. "

Strange as

Intr. to

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

226

The MSS.,

tom.^

breathing with p

of course, give

text as in Pallis or (/)

no help

The

in the matter.

not written in the modern Greek vernacular

is

Thumb.

The Question of Avtov.

This

is

somewhat knotty.

It

seems clear that as a rule avTov and not avTov is to be printed in the N. T. A number of reasons converge^ on this point. The older Greek often used avrov rather than eavTov as shown by the In the N. T. aspiration of the prepositions like d^' avrov, etc. there is not a single case of such aspiration after elision save in a few single MSS. Add to this the fact that the N. T. uses the reflexive pronoun much less than the earlier Greek, "with unusual parsimony" (Hort). Besides the personal pronouns of the first and second persons are frequently employed (Buttmann) where Buttmann urges also the the reflexive might have been used. point that in the N. T. we always have aeavrov, not aavrov. The earliest uncial MSS. of the N. T. and the LXX that use the diacritical marks belong to the eighth century, but they all have Even in the early times it was largely a matter avTov, not avTov. of individual taste as to whether the personal or the reflexive pro-

noun was used. Blass avTov. But the matter tions give examples of

Mayser^

also gives a

(p. 35) is

indeed decides absolutely against

not quite so easy, for the

v(f>'

kolvt]

avrov in first century B.C.

number

of papyri

examples

inscrip-

and

a.d.^

like Kad' avrov,

avrwv, where the matter is beyond dispute. Hort Winer in thinking that sometimes avrov must be read unless one insists on undue harshness in the Greek idiom. He instances Jo. 2 24, avrbs be 'IrjcroOs ovk kwiarevcrev avrov avrols, and

IJLeO'

avrov,

vcf)'

agrees with

:

Lu. 23

:

12, irpovwrjpxov

yap

tv

exdpa ovres

irpos

avrovs.

There are

other examples where a different meaning will result from the

smooth and the rough breathing as in 1 Jo. 5 10 (avrui), 18 {avrov, avrov), Eph. 1 5 (avrov), 10 (avrcp), Col. 1 20 (avrov), 2 15 (avrui). W. H. print avrov about twenty times. Winer leaves the matter "to the cautious judgment of the editors." :

:

:

:

V. Accent. (a)

The Age of Greek Accent.

tle for

accent as for breathings.

The MSS. are worth as litThe systematic application of

accent in the MSS., like the regular use of the spiritus 1

Cf. W.-Sch., p.

40

lenis,

dates

f.

On

the whole matter see Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 144 f.; W.-M., p. 183 Buttmann, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. Ill; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35. 2

'

*

Nachm., Magn. Inschr., pp. 84, 144; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 161. Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 306.

f.;

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

227

from the seventh century a.d.i Hort^ caustically remarks that most modern grammarians have merely worked out " a consistent system of accentuation on paper" and have not recovered the Greek intonations of voice, though he has little to offer on the subject. Chandler^ indeed laments that modern scholars scatter their Greek accents about rather recklessly, but he adds: "In England, at all events, every man will accent his Greek properly who wishes to stand well with the world." It is a comfort to find one's accents irreproachable, and Chandler rightly urges that the only

way

to use the accents properly

is to pronounce according to the ancients were interested in Greek accent. Herodian in his KaOoKiKri Tpoaudla investigated the accent of 60,000 words,

accent.

The

but the bulk of his twenty books is lost. Chandler ^ found most help from Gottling, though others have written at length on the subject.^ There are no accent-marks in the early inscriptions and papyri; in fact tradition ascribes the invention of these signs as a

system to Aristophanes of Byzantium in the third century b.c, though the beginnings appear in the preceding century.^ He and his disciple, Aristarchus, made the rules at any rate.^ The Alexandrian grammarians developed these rules, which have shown a marvellous tenacity even to the present day in the modern Greek,

though, of course, some words would naturally vary in accent There is the Harris papyrus of Homer in the first century a.d. which has accents, and clearly the word had

with the centuries.^

the accent in pronunciation like English long before it was writAfter the fourth century a.d. the use of accentual rhythm in Greek in place of quantitative rhythm had a tendency

ten out.

'

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 66.

Cf. also pp. 507

ff.

on the Origin and History

of Accent. Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 314. Gk. Accentuation (1881), p. xxiii. * lb., p. xvii. " Cf. Meister, Bemerk. zur dorischen Accentuation (1883); Hadley, On the Nat. and Theory of the Gk. Accent. (Ess. Phil, and Grit., pp. 110 ff.); Wheeler, Die griech. NominaIaccente(1885); Bloomfield, Study of Gk. Accent (Am. Jour, 2

^

Wack., Beitr. zur Lchre vom pjiech. Akzent; Brusmann, Griech. Gr. (1900), pp. l.Wff.; K.-Bl., I, pp. 317 ff.; for further ht. see Brusmann above. On accent changes in mod. Gk. see Ilatz., Einl., pp. 418-440; of Philol., 1883);

For the accent in the LXX see llelbing, Gr. d. p. 28 f. Here the same MSS. present the same problems that we have

Thumb, Hundb., Sept., p. 24. in the

N. T.

«

Jann., Hist.

«

Krumb.,

Gk.

Gr., p. 62.

Ricm. and Goclzer, Phonet., p. 77. Kuhn's Zeitschr. fiir Einl. etc., p. 418; Chandler, Gk. Accen^

Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr.,

Sprachl., 1885, p. 521. Cf. also Ilatz., tuation, p. v; Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 150.

make

to

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

228

the accent rather more stable.^

pecuHarities of a language accent earlier use of accents

is

"Of

all

the phonetic

The

the most important." ^

and breathings was probably "for the text

of poetry written in dialect"^

(cf.

our reading-books for children).

They were not written out "in ordinary minuscule writing," though Euthahus

prose

(a.d.

till

396)

the times of

made use of hymns early

them in his edition of the N. T.^ The Christian show signs of changing from tone (pitch) to stress as is the rule in modern Greek. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 6. In Greek it is (6) Significance of Accent in the Kolvij. pitch, not stress, that is expressed by the accent, though in modern Greek the accents indicate stress. "In the ancient Sanskrit and the ancient Greek the rise and fall in musical tone was very marked."^ In English we are familiar with stress-accent. "Hadley has ably argued that the compass of tone used by the Greeks was a musical fifth, i.e. from C = do to G = sol, involving also the intermediate third or E = me."^ It was not a stronger current of breath,'' but a higher musical note that we have. It was in a word "das musikalische Moment."^ Hadley (" Nature and Theory of Gk. Accent," Essays Philol. and Crit., p. Ill f.) points out that TTpoawbla comes from a root meaning to sing (like the Latin accentus) and so 6^us and 0apvs answer to our high and low pitch. Giles ^ thinks that in the original Indo-Germanic language pitch and stress-accent were more evenly balanced. The accent singles out one syllable sharply and raises it higher than the rest, though as a matter of fact each syllable in a word has an accent or pitch '

'

lower

down

in the scale.

Cf. the secondary accent in the English

The Harris papyrus of Homer even accents each word.^*^ Then again " the accent of a sen-

"incompatibility."

every syllable in tence

is

as

much under

accent of the word." Sophocles, Lex. of

2

Giles,

*

lb.

6

Giles,

6

Harris,

of

the influence of a law of some kind as the

Language without accent or musical va-

Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 48. Comp. Philol., p. 91. ^ Blass, Gr.

^

Man.

^^

Cf. Gregory, Prol., p. 114, for

of N. T. Gk., specimen from Euthahus.

Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 92. MS. Notes on Gk. Gr. Cf. Riem. and

p. 14.

Goelzer, Phonet., p. 77

f.,

for a discussion of the musical aspect of the matter. ^

Arnold and Conway, The Restored Pronun. of Gk. and Lat., 1895,

*

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 129.

10

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 65.

11

Bloomfield, Study of Gk. Accent,

Plato, Crat., 399

^

Am.

Man.

Comp.

p. 18.

Philol., p. 94.

Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 22.

A-B. Hirt (Der Indoger. Akzent,

the two-tone principle.

of

Cf.

1895, p. 17) contends for

'

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS riety in tone

229

would be hopelessly monotonous and

ineffective.

An

instance of the importance of accent and breathings ov oh, Ac. 19 40.

is

seen in

:

(c) Signs of Accent. In practical usage (in our school grammars) there is only one distinction, the accented syllable and the unaccented syllables. The Greeks themselves distinguished the pronunciation of the acute and the circumflex. The differ-

ence

is

well illustrated

or b^da, grave or

by

fiapeta,

etjut

and

dixl.

circumflex

The

or

three signs (acute

TepLairaifxepr])

come

to

symbolize the higher pitch of the accented syllable. Originally the accented syllable was marked by the acute and all the unaccented syllables by the grave (merely the absence of the acute), but by and by this use of the grave accent was felt to be useless ^

and was dropped.^ Then the grave accentual mark of falling inwas used for the acute when an oxytone word comes before another word (not enclitic), though this "grave" accent has the

flection

pitch of the unaccented syllable.

Similarly in contraction of two and grave (' ') arose the circumflex, the grave and the acute making acute still. The actual use in pronunciation of both acute and grave in the contracted syllable disappeared, so syllables with acute

that the circumflex in pitch differed

The

difference, for instance,

circumflex in

dr]\u>aaL

little, if

any, from the acute.

between the acute

was not perceptible

in STjXoxrat

in sound.^

and the

The Greek

and the Latin agree in having the accent only on one of the three and thus differ from English and French for instance.

last syllables

It is not necessary here to go into the rules (not wholly arbitrary) which the Greeks developed for the accent of words. In the use of unaccented words (proclitics or enclitics) Greek does not differ radically from English. If the Greek has ev oIkco, the English has "at-home." If the Greek has elirk (xol, the English has "tcll-me." (d) Later Developments in Accent. There was not indeed uniformity among the dialects in the use of accent. They agreed only in the one point of not accenting further back than the third syllable from the end. "In other respects the Greek

show the widest divergencies in their accentuation. The two antipodes are ^olic and Doric, which are so closely i\\Vn\\ phonetically: JEoVic throws the accent as far back as possible in dialects

Gk. (!r., p. 6G. Uber Wcscn und Thcorie der

'

Jaiin., Hist.

'

Iladloy,

*

Giles,

originally p. 80, for

2

lb., pp. 05, 68.

griech. Bcton., 1872, pp. 409, 415.

Man. of Coinp. Philol., p. 9G. Giles thinks that words like ^tp6Mefla had the accent further back. Cf. Rieni. and Goelzer, Phonet., Plato's word of 17 syllables and Aristophanes' word of 7S.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

230

words,

all

e.g. /SaatXeus

= /SaatXeus,

.

.;

.

Doric, on the contrary,

oxytone accent. Between these Ionic and Attic, which, however, are much nearer

faithfully preserves the original

two

dialects

lie

But

to Doric than to ^olic.

all

the dialects, including Doric,

observe the rule that, in those forms of the verb which are capable of being conjugated, the accent goes back as far as possible."^ But all arj where the Attic has ^ 0-17. iEoHc, for instance, has r)

the dialects 2 have

eyoo,

On

eyoije.

this

point

in

general

see

The Dorians even had avOpoiTroL, Kiihner-Blass, I, pp. 323 ff. was no more possible in Greek uniformity Perfect eXvaav, etc. The modern Greek preserves the three-syllable Examples like eTrtao-e, k^paSvaae are not exceptions,

than in English. accent rule.

Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 28. t and i; count as consonants. Pecheur is 'fisher,' Greek. ancient the Hke tone follows French only in quality, difference example, a for 'sinner,' is pecheur while

since the

not in accent. (e) N. T. Peculiarities. cessive refinement

is

Where

so

much

is

ing points call for remark,

in doubt,

But the

certainly not desirable.

ex-

followfor the

and Gregory ^ can be consulted

actual evidence (very slight) from the N. T. MSS. on the subject alone among the older uncials has the accent (and of accent.

D

that the occasional circumflex) save

Shortening Stem-Vowels.

1.

by the hand

There

is

of a corrector.

quite a tendency in the

towards shortening some of the stem-vowels, especially in words in -/xa. Hence W. H. do not follow the Attic accent here, but that of the kolvy], and give us KXl/xa, Kpifxa, fj.iyfj.a (cf. eXLyna), irojia, xpto-^a, though as to xP^o-^a Blass^ suggests that xpto-^a is correct because of xpi-<^Tos and because B (1 Jo. 2 20, 27) has XpeUp-a. Analogy plays havoc with rules. Herodian^ says that and were usually shortened before ^ So W. H. give us ktjpv^, KOLvt]

:

t

i;

(jrqpi^aL

KTipv^at,

(Ro. 16:25), probably

(i)oivL^,

ing to Winer-SchmiedeP this rule appHes to

and Blass^ do not

agree.

So

W. H. have

yp

Accord-

xoi-vi^-

also,

0Xti/'ts,

but

W. H.

1 Henry, Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 93 Meister, Bemerk. zur dorischen Accentuation, p. 1.

2

Cf. Wheeler, Griech. Norn, etc., p. 11,

3

Prol., p.

«

99 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

W.-M.,

p. 57.

p. 15. ">

and Wack.,

(Lu.

pl\l^av

f.

Cf.

Beitr., p. 19.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 67, for further parallels. Also « P. 68. N. T. Gk., p. 15.

Blass, Gr. of

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 15. Blass urges that B has e\e"l^pLs, but W. H. refuse B in matters of orthography. But the Herculaneum rolls here reinforce B with et before yp. On the whole subject see Lipsius, Gr. Unters., pp. 31 ff.; Lobeck, Parall., pp. 400 ff.; Cobet, N. T. Vatic, pp. xHxff. 7

to follow

6;

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

231

4:35). By parity of reasoning W. H. reject the circumflex accent in eXKvaaL, ytpov, ^xvpov, airiXos, (ttvXos, <JvvTeTp[cj)dai (Mk. 5:4),

though

9:39) and

(TvvTpl^ov (Lu.

<jKv\a (Lu.

W. H.

fxapyapXraL, vIkos, (tItos, (jvkov, etc.

length of

V in kutttco is

11:22).

read

Cf. nWos,

The

ypbxos also.

uncertain; avaKvxpaL and Trapa/cu^at usually W. H. have, however, Kpa^ov in Gal. 4

appear in the N. T. and XaiXai/' in Mk. 4 37. But eardrnt (Ac. 12 14) is right, though apai (Mt. 24 17), ^wAttao-at. (Lu. 1 9) because of long o. Cf. also :

:

:

:

kirapai TTtdo-at

and

:

(Lu. 18:13), eTVL^avai (Lu. 1:79), TrpS^at (Ac. 26:9), but (Jo. 7 30). So KaToXvaai (Mt. 5 17), KaTtvOvvaL (Lu. 1 79) :

:

KcoXOaat (Ac. 10

:

47).

:

2. Separate Words. These are not so easily read ayopaloi, not ay opatoL; avTLKpvs, not avriKph;

Trepa(p);

not

aw68eKTOs,

apeada (from

apeaKevoi),

W. H.

classified.

not avn-

avTlirepa,

but e/cXe/cros, evXoyrjTos, lULadooTOs with which compare epLOia (from epLOevco);

cnrodeKTOs

axpetos (Attic dxpetos), as also

eprjfjLos

(Attic

eroLpos (Attic

kprjfxos),

eTotpos), p-wpos (Attic pccpos), opoios (Attic dpotos), xXcopos (Attic

-eioi'

and

dbwXiov, with

which compare

for the earher yXwaaoKoixLov;

not

5terr?s

bkapuri,

reXcovtoj',

not

SecrAtj?;

yXuaaoKopov being

Steriys

(Mt. 2:

16),

and so with other compounds of -er-qs, like but eKaroPTapxojP (Ac. 23 17) is from -dpxvs, not

(Attic),

tKaTOVTaerifs, etc.,

-apxos;

xXw-

(3d decl.), but adpoTrjs (3d dccl.); ya'^ocpvXdKLOP, not

pos); (3pa8uTr]s

etxoj/

is

:

the imperative (Mt. 18

:

17),

for dirop

only

is

and Charax calls eiirop Syracusan,^ with which one may compare 'i8e (t5e only Attic according to the Alexandrian gram-

Attic,

Bornemann urged ide when verb and I8e when exclamation) and \d^e (Xa^e only Attic); dprjaKos (J as. 1 26), not 6p^
:

Attic ipapTa; Uos, not the Epic laos^; IxOvs (Mt. 7: 10), not IxOvs; 6vs (Mt. 3:4), not dacjivs; laxvs, not iaxvs; KXets in nominative singular (Rev. 9:1), though /cXeTs (I 18) and KXeldas (Mt. 16 19) :

:

in accusative plural, etc.,

with which compare irovs (Mk. 9 45), not TTovs, and ar]s (Mt. 6:19), not arj^; Krlar-qs (1 Pet. 4:19), not KTLaryjs, as ypcoarrj^, etc.; KpvwTr}, not KpuTrrij (Lu. 11 33); poyiXdXos (Mk. 7 32), not -XaXos; pvXcop (Mt. 24 :41) is read only by :

:

:

DHM

and most of the cursives, nvXos being correct; nvpiaboip (-ds) as in Lu. 12: 1; Rev. 5: 11, not the Attic pvptad^p, and so as to xiXiddup; opyvLo. (Ac. 27:28), not opyvLa; oi'd (Mk. 15:29), not ova; TToippLop (Lu. 12 '

2

not

W.-M., p. 58. As shown in W.-M.

:

32),

not

-koiixpIov,

and

Tpv^Xiov in

Mk.

:

20

thouf^li

tij,

14

Cf.

es.

(p. GO),

the N. T.

MSS. have

la^,,

not

n
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

232

no diminutive by some)/ but TtKviov always; ir'K-niifj.vpa (Lu. 6:48) is preferred by Winer-SchmiedeP as nominative to ttXt^mnvprjs rather than -/xupa iropripos always, not irbvripos in the physical sense (Rev. 16:2) and Tovrjpos in the moral (Gal. 1:4)^; Trpu>pa (Ac. 27:41), not xpcbpa; aireipa (Mk. 15:16), not airelpa;
;

Tim. 5 13), not (pXvapos. The compound adverbs eTrketm, i;7repketra have thrown back the accent. With some words the accent makes a 3. Difference in Sense. We have, for inis quite important. and sense in the difference read aXXd, not tiXXa, H. 9:2. Heb. W. in ayla, not "A7ta, stance, -eco), not cnroKvel (from have H. 15 1 W. In Jas. 6:23. in Jo. So W. H. print apa (interrog.) in Gal. 2 17, airoKvei (from -kuw). not apa (illative). Aiirr] and avrrj are easily confused, but W. H. prefer avrrj to avri] in Mt. 22:39 {avrfj in margin); Ro. 7:10; 1 Cor. 7:12; and airij to avrr] in Lu. 2:37; 7:12; 8:42; Ro. (1

:

:

:

16

:

In Rev. 2 24 the adjective ^adea

2.

:

^os

possible in Ac.

is

W. H.

23:23

(cf.

correct, not the sub-

is

stantive I3adea (uncontracted from ^ados).

Ae^ioXd/3os or

Winer-Schmiedel,

give us e7xpto'at (infinitive) in Rev. 3

(imperative).

Cf. also

eTrtn/xiyo-ai

(Jude

18,

:

Se^ioXa-

So

p. 69).

not

e7xpto'ai

optative, not infinitive

9),

between ^o/Sry^ryre (subjunctive) and In Jo. 7 34, 36, W. H. prefer 5. (t)o^T]dr}Te (imperative) in Lu. 12 elfii rather than dp-L (not elsewhere used in the N. T. save in comIn Mk. 13:28 position with prepositions airo, els, k^, eirl, avv).

Note the

-TJaaL.

difference

:

:

and Mt. 24:32 W, H. have not 21 1

:

k'(/)uf]

12,

:

W. H.

37

k^vrj (present active subjunctive),

and possibly

in

Luke

also according to the papyri,

the text and

eV in

the margin.

several times, once (1 Cor. 6

read eTL^Xeipai

(infinitive),

W. H. read Ro. 1 30 W. H.

5

11

:

:

sive),

not

19:29;

prefer 'EXatwj', not 'EXatwv (the correct text in Ac.

'EXatcom would be the form expected).'* kv in

In Lu.

(second aorist passive subjunctive).

fj

:

not

5)

ok

most

deo(TTvyeLs (active

"Ei^t,

Mk. 4 not

:

8, 20,

kvl,

r)

though

W. H. put

occurs with ovk

In Lu. 9 38, (imperative). In

'hi kv.

eirl^XtxpaL

(subjunctive), not

follow

In

:

W. H. Cor.

1

(conjunction as Rec).

In

editors in giving deoarvyels (pas-

In

sense of the adjective).

Mk.

5

:

29

have the perfect iarai, not the present iarat. In Lu. 22:30 W. H. read Kadrjade (subjunctive), not KadrjaOe (indicative) nor KaOrjaeade (future, margin). In 1 Cor. 9:21 W. H. prefer Kepdavoj (future indicative) to KepSavo) (aorist subjunctive), and in all

editors

1

Cf. W.-S., p. 73.

*

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 69.

T\u(T(TiKai

MeXerai (1906).

2

On

lb., p. 72.

3

lb.,

p 69.

accent of the vernac. see Apostolides,

6

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS Cor.

6:2

marg.).

In

1

W. H.

to Kplvovaiv (present indicative in

KpLvomiv (future)

Mk.

prefer

12

In

40 we have nanpa, not naKpa.

Cor. 3

1

14

:

and in Jo. 14 17 they Cor. 4 15 (14 19) and Mt. 18 24 no distinction the accent of tivploL C innumerable') and juuptot (future) to

p.evel

have ixkvei. In 1 can be made in

:

233

tikvei

(present),

:

:

:

:

ten thousand') because of the cases. Dr. E. J. Goodspeed, of Chicago University {Expository Times, July, 1909, p. 471 f.), suggests ('

in

(h(t>e\ridris

Mk. 7:11

instead of

w0eX77i9fj$.

It

is

entirely possible.

correct, not ojuws = o/iotcos.

In Jo. 18:37 In Ac. 28 In print Kip.irpaaBai {pn verb), not inpTrpaadaL (w verb). Rev. 17 5 ivopvlxiv (feminine) is probal^ly right, not iropvoiv (masripcoToro/cos (Col. 1 15), not tpuitotokos, is manifestly culine). In

Cor. 14 :7

1

W. H. W. H.

is

o^ucos

give ovKovv, not omow, in Pilate's question.

:

:

:

between the interrogative tLs and the inIn Heb. 5 12 W. H. definite Tts calls for frequent attention. have TLva, not rtm, but in Heb. 3 16 ripes, not Tives, and in 3 17 rlaiv, not Ticrlp, while in Mt. 24 41, 1 Th. 4 6, 1 Cor. 15 8 and 16 16 the article tw is to be read, not the indefinite rw, which right.

The

difference

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

form 'does not occur in the N. T. In 1 Cor. 10 19 H kariv (twice) is not interrogative, but the enclitic indefinite with the accent of In Jas. 3:6 Tpoxos ('wheel') is properly read, not rpoxos kcTTLv. In Mk. 4:12 W. H. read awiwaLv, not awLwaiv, as ('course'). :

avvLov(7ivm.M.i. 13 for

a)Tcoi'

in Jas. 1

:

4>o:t(^v

Proclitics are regular in the

N. T.

comment. As a So we have avrov rtms (Mk. 12

accent of enchtics calls for

accent them. 5:36),

:

Ibov TLves

(Mt. 28:

11), 686v elaLv

(Mk. 13

(Mk. 7 18), yap However, plenty

kare

example, in

nvas (Ac. 19:

:

and

of

^

17 "altogether absurd."

{and Proclitics).

4. Enclitics

The

Winer considers the suggestion

13.

:

cf.

evpelp

Mt. 14

:

of cases

25

8; Ac.

:

:

5,

1)

on the

for emphasis, yap, :

25;

1

for emphasis, deov

though some

The use

:

eaph

21). critics

of eaTlv

In

(1 Jo.

oTvov

3:2),

dpi (Jo. 7

:

bird tlvC^v :

10

31; 25

:

24).

:

enclitic, as^ for 4)r]aiv

(Heb. 8:5

Cor. 6 :16; 2 Cor. 10

for clearness in punctuation, Kal elaiv (Mt. 19

ovK dpi (Jo. 1

13), elval Tiva (Ac.

11), rat 0r?(7t (Ac.

22; 26

W. H. do not

(Lu. 8: 12), aavveToi tare

for accent

call

rule

12 and (Lu. 9

cf. :

:

10)

Ac. 5 25) :

8) likewise,

34, 36) the accent is regular,

wrongly prefer dpi. and Iotlv demands

special

comment.

When

uncmphatic, not at the beginning of a sentence, not preceded by dXX', d, Kal, OVK, on, tovt', or a paroxytone syllable, as, for example, in 'lovdaiuiu tarlv (Jo. 4 22), we have unaccented (.ctlv as in aypbs In some exkaxLv (Mt. 13:37, 39), Ka^ojs kariv (1 Jo. 3:2), etc. :

1

W.-M.,

p. 62.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

234

amples of mild emphasis W. H. have earlv, as in vvp eaTiv (Jo. 4 23; 5 25), wov kaTiv (Mt. 2:2; Mk. 14 14). But the cases are numerous where 'Iotlv is correct, as when it is emphatic, and :

:

:

expresses existence or possibihty, as in avTOV

17

:

(Ac. 2

ecTTLV

(Lu. 1

10), ov8eis i(JTLv

:

61; 7

28; 18

:

2), 6 els earLV

:

29).

:

-'Ecttlv is

accent at the beginning of sentences, as in Jo. 21 Jo. 5

1 1

:

16

:

Heb. 11:1.

f.;

4

:3),

'6ti

(Ac. 23

11

:

:

10),

:

Th. 2 :4; Mk. 6

(2

when the

5)

Cor. 15

(1

et

20; Ro. 8

only harlv after

:

9

ttoO (Jo.

:

U

:

44;

15 and eaTiv in

to the usual rule, iarLv :

:

:

not stressed, ovk

is

Ro. 7

2;

57;

:

also the

(Mk. 12 11; 2 Cor. Heb. 11 6), but on karlv

55;

(Mk. 7

12;

:

18),

:

(Rev.

25; 1 Cor. 15

44), Kal

:

idea of existence

9, etc.), tovt'

:

:

Cf. karlv in Col. 1

Then again we have, according

17.

after dXX' (Jo. 13

(Rev. 17

eartv

ei5es

29), ayiov eariv (Ac. 19

:

Mk.

14

18).

:

:

(1 Cor.

W. H.

give

14).

Sometimes two enclitics come together. Here the critics differ and W. H.^ do not make clear the reasons for their practice. In Ac. 13 15 W. H. have d tls earLv, and in Gal. 6 15 TepiTOfj-rj tl :

:

because they take eaTLv to be emphatic in both instances. In Jo. 6 51 W. H. have aap^ ixov kariv. But in many examples the first enclitic is accented and the second unaccented as in Lu. 8 46 eaTLv,

:

:

}xov

Tjxl/aTO

29

:

nou eare, 12

jjiadrjTai

8e^Lcov

10

TLS,

fjLov kcTTLu,

dbiSKbdvTOV TL

2 Cor. 11

:

:

tcxTLV

16

:

25

2

:

6

kav tls

and

14

eiboSKbv

t'l

:

28

14

:

tls,

Tit. 1

when

6

14

x^'^pov aoi tl,

11

Ac. 2

:

25

:

19

24 tovto TLves,

4>aa'Lv

et t'ls

the accent

:

eaTLv.

is

8:31

Cor. 10

ne'i^wv /lov tOTLV,

earLV,

:

:

avi]p TLS kcTTLv, 1

Ro. 3 :8 Kadws

xou

only has a second accent

/xov,

25

fj.e,

5e

Jo. 5

ixov,

koTLv,

€t TL

t'ls

yui?

X^i'P<Jov <Jov dcTLv,

47 5

kariv

tLs

(xov

Heb.

kcxTLV,

1

:

10

Modern Greek

in the third syllable

(Thumb, Handbook, p. 29). The personal pronouns now have the accent in W. H. and now are without it, as 6(f)daXnu) aov and 6cf)da\iJ.ov gov (both in Mt. 7:4). Cf. also eyw ae (Jo. 17:4), av fxe (17:8), but t'l kfxoi Kal (jo'l (Lu. 8 With prepositions generally the enclitics are 28). accented, as kv aoi (Jo. 17 21), though ewpoadev ixov and ottio-co jiov (Jo. 1 :30 both, and so continually with these two prepositions). ''EiVLOTVLov e/ioO (Lu. 4 7) and kvdoirLov fiov (Ac. 2 25) both appear. With the prepositions usually e/ioO, not nov, occurs as 'eveKa eiJ.ov

as in

t' dpfxaTCL juas

:

:

:

:

only with irpos that we have much trouble. have generally printed wpos at, but W. H. have that only in Mt. 25 39, elsewhere irpos ak as in Mt, 26 18.

(Mt. 5

:

It is

11).

The N. T.

editors

:

Usually Jo. 6

:

we

65; 7

:

have, according to :

37, etc.,

W.

H.,

irpos

and where the "me" 1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 77.

/xe

is

as in

Mt. 25 36; :

emphatic in sense,

i

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

235

as Mt. 3 14; 11 28, in the first of which Tisch. and Griesbach have Trpos /xe, a usage not followed by W. H., though kept in the LXX text of B, as in Is. 48 16, etc.^ W. H. a few times prefer Trpos k/xk (not enclitic) as in Lu. 1:43; Jo. 6:35, 37 (both ways Occasionally here), 44 (marg.), 45; Ac. 22 8, 13; 23 22; 24 19. the enclitic nves is found at the beginning of a sentence, as in Mt. 27 47; Lu. 6 2; Jo. 13 29; Ph. 1 15; 1 Tim. 5 24. 5. Proper Names cannot always be brought under rules, for in :

:

:

:

:

:

:

Greek, as in English,

names names

as they will.

why

3

after

/x.

:

But

'

(Rev. 2

make a

clear line of

13) is proper,

:

and

18)

:

but

'Apre/xas

was already

Aprenidupos the accent

24

own

right to accent their

of the abbreviated proper

It is difficult to

'Ai'TtTras

KXeoTras (Lu.

cf.

:

men claim the On the accent

save that in

12),

:

:

see chapter V, v.

distinction as to (Tit.

:

KXcovras (Jo. 19

25) .^

:

may

say that proper names (geographical and personal) throw the accent back, if the original adjectives or sub-

In general one

stantives were oxytone. This

27

SpLvos (Ac.

:

28

6;

:

is

for the sake of distinction. 'AXe^ai'-

"Aaaos (Ac. 20

11) is the adjective.

is

doubtless correct, though Pape gives 'Aaaos also.^

(1

Cor. 16

(1

Cor. 16

17) the accent is

:

'Ao-w/cptros

12).

:

not thrown back nor (Ro. 16

20

the adjective, like Tp60i/xos (Ac

:

20).

But we have BXdaros

veros

(Ro. 16:5), "Epaaros (16:23),

(Ac. 12

Tim.

llvvrvxv

1

16;

:

4

:

19),

and

4)

20:4)

Tim. 2

^l\r]Tos (2

So Tiros

by W. H.

But

13),

:

:

'

:

1

15),

:

OviaL(i>opos

Hippos (Ac. 20:4),

But XpLaros always

17).

:

2

:

name

:

:

:

Atj'os,

17

1

not

re-

1)

:

or

Atvos,

Zi^prts is

read

22, etc.

These always give occasion

transliterating

Tim.

(1

21

In Ac. 27

13, etc.).

Ac. 24

them

for diversity

into another tongue.

the Greek equivalent for Latin words.

W.

but

H. do not accept

in Ac. 12

'

1

Blass'*

the quantity of the vowel in Latin determine the accent in

lets

*

Tim.

Tim.

(2

probably

1),

In 2 Tim. 4

16).

:

(2 Cor.

^fj\L^ in

Foreign Words.

of usage in

»

'T^teratos (1

'Eppioykpr]s

ndrapa (Ac. 21

verbal adjective (Mt. 16

6.

in 'AttoXXws

(Ph. 4 :2), Zoiadh-qs (1 Cor. 1:2), Tipwi/ (Ac. 0:5), Ty-

XiKos (Ac.

read.

f.)

20), Atorpe^Tjs (3 Jo. 9), 'ETrai-

:

tains the oxytone accent whether proper

is

is it

13

:

'Axa'tKos

14) retains the accent of

:

EvTuxos (Ac. 20:9), KdpTros (2 Tim. 4 (2

In

:

25, etc.,

So Marcus, Map/cos, etc., and give us IVIdpKos etc. W. H. likewise 14),

this easy principle

Kptaxos

(1

Cor.

1

:

Cf. Lipsius, Gr. Unters., p. 01.

Cf. .ilso W.-Sch., p. 78. In W.-Sch., p. 74 f., sec remarks on the subject. Thi.s word is, of course, not to be confounded with Cf. W.-Sch., p. 7.3.

&a

(Ac. 27

:

13) as Text. lice. did.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 15.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

236

throw the accent back on Latin names

like Kovapros (Ro. 16:23),

18:2), i:€Kovu8os (Ac. 20:4), TepruXXos (24:2), but have on the other hand Talos (Ro. 16 23), not rdtos, Ovp-

Upi(TKi.\\a (Ac.

we

:

^avos (Ro. 16

:

9), ZiKovavos (2

Cor.

But not even Blass attempts regular rules.

Still, it is

1

:

19), ^Kevas (Ac.

to bring the Semitic

true, as

19

:

14) .^

words under

Winer ^ shows, that indeclinable

Semitic words (especially proper names) have the accent, as a

though the usage of Josephus is the conwords that in the LXX and the N. T. are indecHnable. So 'Aapwp, 'A^a88cov, 'A/Sta, 'A/3tou5, 'A^paa/jL, to take only the first two pages of Thayer's Lexicon, though even here we find on the other side "A/SeX and 'A^Ladap. If you turn over you meet "Ayap, 'Aoap, 'Ad8ei, 'A8p.eiv, 'Afwp, etc. It is not necessary here to give a full list of these proper names, but reference can be made to Lu. 3 23-38 for a good sample. In this list some indeclinable words have the accent on the penult, as 'EXie^P (29), Zopoi3d/3eX (27), Ad^ex (36), *dXe/c (35) .^ The inflected Semitic words often throw the accent back, as "Afwros, Many of the Aramaic words accent the ultima, 'Id/cw|3os, Adf apoj. as 'AjS^a, ToXyoda, Kop^av, 'EXcot, aajSaxdavei, etc. For further remarks on the subject see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 26-31. The rule,

on the

last syllable,

trary, because he generally inflects the

:

difficulties of

the

LXX

translators are well illustrated here

by

Helbing.

This is indeed a knotty VI. Pronunciation in the Koivii. problem and has been the occasion of fierce controversy. When the Byzantine scholars revived the study of Greek in Italy, they introduced, of course, their

own

spelling.

own pronunciation

as well as their

But English-speaking people know that

spelling is

not a safe guide in pronunciation, for the pronunciation may change very much when the spelling remains the same. Writing

an effort to represent the sound and is more or less but the comparison of Homer with modern Greek is a fruitful subject.* Roger Bacon, as Reuchlin two centuries later, adopted the Byzantine pronunciation.^ Reuchlin, who introduced Greek to the further West, studied in Italy and passed on the Byzantine pronunciation. Erasmus is indirectly responsible is

originally

successful,

for the current pronunciation of ancient Greek, for the 1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 75.

3

Cf. also Gregory, Prol., p. 102

2

f.;

Orth., pp. 155, 159; Thackeray, pp. 150

W.-M.,

Byzan-

p. 59.

W.-Sch., p. 75; Westcott, Notes on ff.

*

Blass, Ausspr. des Griech., 1888, p. 7.

5

Nolan, The Gk. Gr. of Roger Bacon, p. xx.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS tine scholars

pronounced ancient and modern

237

alike.

Jannaris^

quotes the story of Voss, a Dutch scholar (1577-1649), as to how Erasmus heard some learned Greeks pronounce Greek in a very Erasmus published a different way from the Byzantine custom. discussion between a lion

and a bear

De Recta Latini made such an impres-

entitled

Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione, which

who accepted the ideas advanced in this book were Erasmians and the rest Reuchlinians. As a matter of fact, however, Engel has shown that Erasmus merely wrote a literary squib to "take off" the new non-Byzantine pronunciation, though he was taken seriously by many. Dr. Caspar Rene Gregory writes me (May 6, 1912): "The philologians were of course down on Engel and sided gladly with Blass. It was much easier to go on with the totally impossible pronunciation that they used than Cf. Engel, Die Aussprachen des Griechischen, to change it." In 1542 Stephen Gardiner, Chancellor of the University 1887. of Cambridge, "issued an edict for his university, in which, e.g. it was categorically forbidden to distinguish at from e, et and ot from I in pronunciation, under penalty of expulsion from the Senate, exclusion from the attainment of a degree, rustication for students, and domestic chastisement for boys."^ Hence though the continental pronunciation of Greek and Latin was "Erasmian," at Cambridge and Oxford the Reuchlinian influence Geldart,^ however, prevailed, though with local modifications. complains that at Eton, Rugby and Harrow so little attention is paid to pronouncing according to accent that most Greek sion that those called

scholars handle the accents loosely. 1906, p. 146 cieties of

f.)

Cambridge and Oxford

tion of Latin," which principle. sist

Classical Review (April,

is

for

"The Restored Pronuncia-

the virtual adoption of the Continental

The modern Greeks themselves

rather vehemently in-

that ancient Greek should be pronounced as Miiller,^

is.

The

has the scheme approved by the Philological So-

for instance,

"false" because

it

treats

calls

modern Greek

the "Erasmian" pronunciation

Greek "as dead."

Gcldart {Modern

Gk. Language in Its Relation to Ancient Gr., p. vii) says: "Modern Greek is nothing but ancient Greek made easy." It is not Gk. Gr.,

p. 31

Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 138-151.

1

Hist.

2

Blass, Pronun. of Anc. Gk., Purton's transl., p. 3.

8

Guide to Mod. Gk.,

*

Hist. Gr. dor hell. Spr. (pp. 2G, 30).

f.

p. x.

against the squib of Erasmus.

In pp. 35-40 he states the case

Cf. Engel (Die Ausspr. dcs Gricch., 1S87)

defends the mod. Gk. method, as already stated.

who

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

238

Foy^ properly distinguishes between the and the modern Greek and refers to the Latin into the several Romance languages. There

quite as simple as that.

old Greek vocal sounds

development of

this difference in the Greek,

is

however, that

has only one

it

modern representative (with dialectical variations) of the ancient tongue. One must not make the mistake of comparing the pronunciation of the modern Greek vernacular with the probable fifth century b.c. Then, and the vernacular pronunciation. The changes in pronunciation that have come in the modern Greek have come through the Byzantine Greek from the kolvtj, and thus represent a common stream with many rills. The various dialects have made contributions to the pronunciation of the In cultivated Athens at its KOLvrj and so of the modern Greek. best there was a closer approximation between the people and the "Demosthenes, in his oration xept aTe4>avov, educated classes. called ^Eschines a ixiado^Tov, but had accented the word erroneously, namely, iiladc/iTov, whereupon the audience corrected him by crying uLadojTov."^ Like the modern Italian, the ancient Greek had a musical cadence that set it above all other European tongues.^ We can indeed appeal to the old Greek inscriptions for the popuAccording to this evidence lar pronunciation on many points.*

pronunciation of the literary Attic of the

as now, there

was the

literary

in the first century b.c. in Attica at = ae, /3

=y

(English

v).^

Clearly then in the

ei

=

i, 17

was already at work before the N. T. was true of the

=

1,

i;

=

i,

vl

= v,

et=t,

the process of itacism

kolvt]

written.

What was

vernacular then does not of course argue conclu-

kolvt]

sively for the pronunciation of cultivated Athenians in the time

In versatile Athens "a stranger, if introduced on the always represented as talking the language or dialect of the people to which he belongs."^ Blass^ indeed thinks that in Tarsus the school-teacher taught Paul Atticistic Greek! ""lafxev, of Socrates.

stage,

^

is

Lautsystem der

griech. Vulgarspr., 1879, p. 83

f.

and Living Gk., 1898, p. 61. 3 Cf. Mure, A Grit. Hist, of the Lang, and Lit. of Anc. Greece, I, p. 99; Bolland, Die althell. Wortbet. im Lichte der Gesch., 1897, p. 6. Cf. Pronun. of Gk. as deduced from Graeco-Latin Biling. Coins. By Cecil Bendall in Jour, of Philol., vol. XXIX, No. 58, 1904. Here the rough breathing is represented by h, d = th, <j>=ph. * Thumb, Unters. etc., 1888, p. 1. Cf. Sophocles, Hist, of Gk. Alph. and 2

Achilles Rose, Chris. Greece

Pronun., 1854. ^

Telfy, Chron.

und Topog. der

griech. Ausspr.

nach

d.

Zeugnisse der

Inschr., 1893, p. 39. «

Rutherford,

The New Phryn.,

p. 32.

'

Philol. of the Gosp., p. 9.

239

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

are the true forms which you a cultivated speaker or considered must employ if you care to be has oiSafxeu, -are, constantly he Epistles Yet in Paul's writer." successful than more no was pronunciation -aoLv. The Atticistic be sure of one may We syntax. and forms the Atticistic spelling, koij'i? was not exactly vernacular the of thing, the pronunciation modern Greek the ancient literary Attic nor precisely like the

Ure,

he must have

'l<xa<xLV,

said,

like

more towards the latter. In Greek as has perhaps varied more than the pronunciation in English the 1 English pronunciation "is really that observes Giles spelling. history of the English language." the tracing in a stumbling-block discussion of this matter of sane and able very a ^as

vernacular, but veering

Hadley2

changes in Greek pronunciation.

He

insists

on change

all

through

position. If we the centuries (p. 139), which is the only rational undoubtedly traces turn to the earUest N. T. MSS. we shall find toward the Byzantine of this process of change from the old Attic in the fourth and fifth or modern Greek pronunciation. Indeed the process is centuries a.d.,^ the date of the earUest uncials, no hesitation in pretty well complete. The N. T. scribes make or indiconvenience according to writing at or e; t, et, -q, r, oi Tarsus, about view vidual taste." Blass,^ contrary to his former in anybody was there says that it is impossible to suppose that correct the Paul the schools at Tarsus who would have taught student of the kocj'i?, historical spelling or pronunciation. To the were dead symbols, as to us, in a sense ''the Greek rd ypafxfxara ^ Of one thing sounds." from which must be recovered the hving the Attic besides dialects sure, and it is that other

ow

we may be

The kolvv would be pronunciation. Alexanpronunciation. its in dialect-coloured here and there present the of steamship the and der's conquest, like the railroad whereas points, many in variations day, levelled the dialectical pronunciation of before every valley in Greece had its own environment Doric in a KOLvi, the taught One certain words.^

contributed

1

2 »

* 8

to

the

Man. of Comp. "Gk. Pronun."

kolvt]

Philol., p. 103.

in Ess. Philol.

Cf. also Ellis, Early

and

Crit., pp.

Eng. Pronun.

128-140.

Hatzidakis, Einl. etc. ' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 6 f. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 34 f. the objection that Nicklin, CI. Rev., Mar., 190G, p. 116. This is precisely grammarians aa ancient the against brings Gr., 33)

p. Jannaris (Hist. Gk. the pro"post-Christian scribes" and unable to "speak with authority of

nunciation of classical Greek." '

Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 75.

Cf.

Oppcnhcim und

Zeitschr., 1905, p. 13, for cxx. of phonetic .spelling.

Lucixs,

Byz.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

240

would show

somewhat.

NEW TESTAMENT

As a matter

of fact the Boeotian diavernacular pronunciation (and so the modern Greek) in points where the Boeotian differed radically from the old Attic.^ Boeotian Greek "modified its vowelit

lect contributed largely to the kolvt]

system more than any other Greek dialect." ^ Thus already in Boeotian at and e are confused and interchanged (yhrire, for instance), not to mention ae and 77. So in Boeotian -q, ei and t blend^ in sound, as eTrLdd = eTreLdr]. The early Greek generally, as already shown, made no distinction in sound between and co, and 77 was a slow development from e. The Ionic dialect never took kindly to the rough breathing and greatly influenced the kolptj and so the modern Greek. By the Christian era (3 is beginning to be pronounced as v, as the transliteration of Latin words like BepyiKios shows. Z is no longer ds, but 2, though 5 seems still usually d, not th. Who is right, therefore, the "Erasmians" or the Reuchlinians?

Jannaris^ sums up in favour of the Reuch-

Riemann and Goelzer^ the "Erasmians" As a matter of fact neither side is wholly right. In speaking of ancient Greek one must recognize other dialects than the literary Attic of the fifth century B.C. If you ask for the linians, while

according to

are wholly right.

pronunciation of the vernacular

kolvt] of the first century a.d., be found as a whole neither in the literary Attic alone nor in the N. T. MSS. of the fifth century a.d. The papyri* and

that

Avill

the inscriptions of the time throw light on a good

many

points,

though not on all. But even here the illiterate papyri do not furnish a safe standard for the vernacular of a man like Paul or Luke. It is small wonder therefore that N. T. MSS. show much confusion between -aet (future indicative) and 0-77 (aorist subjunctive), -ojjLev (indicative) and -co/xej' (subjunctive), -adai (infinitive)

and -ade

(indicative middle), etc. It is possibly as well to go on pronouncing the N. T. Greek according to the literary Attic, since we cannot reproduce a clear picture of the actual vernacular KOLVT] pronunciation, only we must understand frankly that this

^

Cf. Riem.

2

Giles,

3

Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., pp.

and Goelzer, Phonct.,

Man.

of

Comp.

us against overemphasis of

p. 41.

Philol., p. 540.

thje

41, 46.

Thumb

(Hellen., p. 228)

warns

Ba?otian influence.

"The pronunciation of ancient Gk. in the manner Greeks had been traditionally accepted at all times, before and through the Middle Ages, as a matter of unquestioned fact." ^ Phonet., p. 56. "En resume, la prononciation grecque ancienne etait, 6ur presque tous les points, diflerente de la prononciation moderne." *

Hist.

Gk.

of the present

Gr., p. 31.

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

241

was done. On the other hand the modern Greek by excess, as the literary Attic does by default. There was, of course, no Jewish pronunciation of the KOLpfj. The Coptic shows the current pronunciation in many ways and probably influenced the pronunciation of the kolpt] in Egypt. Cf. a German's pronunciation of English. is

way

not the

method misses

it

it

VII. Punctuation.

words

is

made by

it is difficult

spoken language the division of

In the

the voice, pauses, emphasis, tone, gesture, but

to reproduce all this

on the page

for the eye.

Many

questions arise for the editor of the Greek N. T. that are not easy

Caspar Rene Gregory

of solution.

insists that

MSvS. have punctuation of any kind, since

whenever N. T.

must be duly weighed,

represents the reading given to the passage.

it

The Paragraph. As

(a)

it

early as Aristotle's time the para-

A dividing horizontal stroke was (7rapaypa(t)os) was known. written between the lines marking the end of a paragraph. Some other marks like > (SLTrXrj) or 7 (/copwfts) were used, or a slight break in the line made by a blank space. Then again the first letter of the line was written larger than the others or even made to project out farther than the rest.^ The paragraph was to the ancients the most important item in punctuation, and we owe a debt to the N. T. revisers for restoring it to the English N. T. Cf. Lightfoot, Trench, Ellicott, The Revision of the N. T., 1873, Euthalius (a.d. 458) prepared an edition of the Greek p. xlvi. N. T. with chapters (Ke<j)a\aLa) but long before him Clement of Alexandria spoke of Trepi/coTrat and Tertullian of capitula. These "chapters" were later called also tLtXol? The arlxos of Euthalius was a line of set length with no regard to the sense, like our pringraph

,

ter's

ems.

W. H. have made

Greek N. T.

The

careful use of the paragraph in their

marked off by spaces and the larger paragraphs are broken into smaller sub-paragraphs (after the French method) by smaller spaces.^ Another division is

made by W. H.

larger sections are

in the use of the capital letter at the beginning

an important sentence, while the other sentences, though after a period, begin with a small letter. This is a wholly arbitrary method, but it helps one better to understand W. H.'s interpreof

tation of the text. '

On

pp. G7 2

the

fT.

para^aph

soc

Thompson, Handb. of Gk. and Lat. PaliroR., (;) was used to close a paragraph.

Occasionally the double point

Cf. Warfield, Text. Crit. of

N.

T., pp. 40

Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 319. Prol., p. 112 f. '

ff.

For the arlxos see further Gregory,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

242

W.

NEW TESTAMENT

H.^ have also printed in metrical form passages metrical in like the Magnificat of Mary (Lu. 1 46-55), the fragment

rhythm of a

:

hymn

in 1

Tim. 3

:

16, etc.,

while Lu. 2

:

14 and the non-

hymns in Revelation are merely printed in narrower columns. The Hebrew parallelism of 0. T. quotations is indicated

metrical

also.

The

Sentences.

oldest inscriptions and papyri show few between sentences or clauses in a sentence,^ though punctuation by points does appear on some of the ancient inscriptions. In the Artemisia papyrus the double point (:) occasionally ends the sentence.^ It was Aristophanes of Byzantium (260 B.C.) who is credited with inventing a more regular system of sentence punctuation which was further developed by the (6)

signs of punctuation

Alexandrian grammarians.'' As a rule all the sentences, like the words, ran into one another in an unbroken line {scriptura continua), but finally three stops were provided for the sentence by the use of the

full point.

Tekda, 'high point')

The point

was a

full

at the top of the fine

stop; that on the hue

(.)

(•) (orrtTMi)

(vToaTLyni])

was equal to our semicolon, while a middle point (aTLynij /xecrr]) was equivalent to our comma.^ But gradually changes came over these stops till the top point was equal to our colon, the bottom point became the full stop, the middle point vanished, and about the ninth century a.d. the comma (,) took its place. About this time also the question-mark (;) or epwrr/^art/coj' appeared. These marks differed from the cTTlxot in that they concerned the sense of the sentence. Some of the oldest N. T. MSS. show these marks to some extent. B has the higher point as a period, the lower point for a shorter pause.^ But still we cannot tell how much, if any, use the N. T. writers themselves made of punctuation points.

We may

be sure that they did not use the exclamation point,

the dash, quotation-marks, the parenthesis, etc.^ clauses were certainly used,

which

will

Parenthetical

be discussed elsewhere,

though no signs were used for this structure by the ancient W. H. represent the parenthesis either by the comma (Ro. 1 13) or the dash with comma (1 Tim. 2:7). Instead of Greeks.

:

Gk. N.

319

1

Intr. to

2

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 62.

^

I follow

(pp. 6

6.3

and

f.

^

Thompson, Handb.,

etc., p. 69.

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 67. (Handb., etc., p. 70) on this point instead of Jannaris

Thompson who makes

67),

*

lb., p. 70;

the vTroaTLynr]

= our comma.

Of. Gregory, Prol., pp. 345, 348; Blass, Gr. of

the arlxoL in the ^

T., p.

way

of sense-Unes (Blass, ib.).

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 67.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 17.

D

has

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

243

quotation-marks W. H. begin the quotation with a capital letter with no punctuation before it, as in Jo. 12 19, 21. One way of expressing a quotation was by to, as in Ro. 13 8. In the case 13). of O. T. quotations the Scripture is put in uncial type (Jo. 12 The period (ireplodos) gives very Httle trouble to the modern edi:

:

:

editor has to ful,

as

W. H.

W. H. read

Here the

obviously necessary for modern needs.

tor, for it is

make give

his interpretation

ev.

h, not

5 yeyovep

dav/jLa^ere. 5td

it is

ev 6 yeyoveu. kv (Jo.

tovto Mcouo-tjs in Jo. 7

The colon

5id TOVTO. Moivarjs, etc.

sometimes when

(kcoXov),^

:

doubt-

So

1:4).

22, not davnai^ere

'limb of the sentence'

formed a complete clause. See Jo. 3 31 for example of use of colon made by W. H. The comma {kohho) is the most conunon division of the sentence and is often necessary, as with the vocative. So AtSdcr/caXe, tL TroLr]acon€p; (Lu. 3 12) and many common examples. In general W. H. use the comma only where it is necessary to make clear an otherwise ambiguous clause, whether :

:

it

be a participial (Col. 2

or appositive (Col. 1

:

2)

or conjunctional phrase (Col.

18), or relative (Col.

:

ter of Colossians has a rather unusual

2:3).

number

The

first

1

:

23),

chap-

of colons (2, 6, 14,

Paul struggles with several long sentences,

16, 18, 20, 27, 28) as

not to mention the dashes (21, 22, 26). The Germans use the comma too freely with the Greek for our English ideas, leaving

out the Greek! Even Winer defended the comma after Kapirov in Jo. 15 2 and 6 vlkc^v in Rev. 3 12, not to mention Griesbach's "excessive" use of the comma, Winer himself being judge.^ My :

:

friend.

Rev.

stop before

S.

M.

jua^coj^

Provence, D.D. (Victoria, Tex.), suggests a full in Ac. 23 27 f. That would help the character :

of Claudius Lysias on the point of veracity.

The continuous writing of words without any space between them was not quite universal, though nearly so.^ The oldest Attic inscription (Dipylon vase, probalily eighth century B.C.) is written from right to left. With the common method (c)

Words.

was not always easy for the practised eye to distinguish between words. Hence there arose the SiaaroX?; or virohaaToXi}, a comma used to distinguish between ambiguous words, as eort vovs, not But W. H. make no use of this mark, not even in o, tl cffTii' oDs. it

to distinguish OTL 1

(Lu. 10

:

it

from the conjunction on.

35; Jo. 2

Thompson, Handb.,

division of the sentence,

period and 2

:

5;

14

:

13;

1

Cor. 16

They :

print uniformly

2, etc.),

not to mcn-

So Suidas. The colon is the main semietc., p. 81. but mod. Eng. makes less use of all marks save the

comma.

W.-M., pp.

63, 07.

»

Thompson, Handb.,

etc., p. 07.

tion doubtful cases like

Cor. 3

:

As

14.^

Mk.

9

marks

to the

W.

II (i).

H., like other

and

smooth breathing)

modern

8:25; Ac. 9:27; 2 may be had in this chapter under

11, 28; Jo.

:

of dieeresis

to the discussion of diphthongs

The

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

244

reference

(")

diaeresis

apostrophe

editors, Use the

to represent elision, as

air'

apxrjs

(or

(')

(Mt. 24: 21) .^

the smooth breathing used also to show

when crasis The hyphen, a long straight line, was used in the Harris-Homer MS. to connect compound words, but it is not in the N. T.^ The editors vary much in the way such words as dXXd ye, ha ri, tovt' 1(tti, etc., are printed. The MSS. give no help at all, for tovto 8e karLv in Ro. 1 12 is not coronis

is

has taken place, as in

(Lu. 1:3).^

Kaixoi

:

conclusive against tovt' eaTLv elsewhere.^

24 21;

1

:

Cor. 9

ye (2 Cor. 5

et

5td TravTos etc.), et

where

:

(Mk. 5

nrjTOTe),

Cor. 16

Tts

(1

ovv

(Mt. 18

as

etre,

:

:

ixi)

:

12),

:

ye (Ac. 2

/xij

prefer dXXd ye (Lu.

30), 5td ye (Lu. 11 :

18; 7

:

(Mt. 9:11,

nrjKeTL,

cicrre,

oi'KeTC,

:

29),

So also Kalirep,

iirjirco,

iW

etc.),

xws

f^i]

(1

Cor. 9

8rj\ov 6tl in 1

ixrjrroTe

oviroo,

18

:

:

5),

:

32), 4,

:

Mt. 25 9 :

27, etc.), :

fXT]

27, oo-rts

print Slotl as well

(once),

fj.r]TLye,

8;

(Mt. 9

tI

Cor. 15

But on the other hand W. H.

fxriTe,

:

27), 6s ye (Ro. 8

woTe (everj^where save in

tov (Ac. 27

11, etc.).

:

4).

ovTe,

dpd ye (Ac. 8

5, etc.), 5td tL

(Ac. 27

TTcos

ovSeiroTe,

2),

:

3, etc.), Kai

W. H.

iJ,r]8eiroTe,

even

jurjSeTrco,

(Mt. 6:1), wairepei (1 Cor.

iiriye

Kadd, KaQb, Kad6:s, KaBdirep, nadoTL, KadoXou, ihairep, ojael,

15 8), etc. But W. H. give us Kad' eh in Ro. 12 5, di'd neaov in Mt. 13 25, etc.; KaTo. /xoms in Mk. 4 10, Kad' 6<jov in Heb. 3 3. Adverbs hke eireKeLva (Ac. 7 43), vrrepeKeiva (2 Cor. 10 16), irapeKTos W. H. prop(2 Cor. 11 28) are, of course, printed as one word. erly have virep eyoo (2 Cor. 11:23), not i'7repe7cb. In Ac. 27:33 :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

one word, but W. H. have 'lepd IloXts in Col. Ac. 16 11. It must be confessed that no very clear principles in this matter can be set forth, and the effort of Winer-Schmiedel ^ at minute analysis does not throw much light TeacrapeaKacSeKaTos is

4 13 and Nea :

on the (d)

1

:

subject.

The

fusion,

ttoXls in

Editor's Prerogative.

what

is

Where

the editor's prerogative?

there

Blass

^

is

so

much

con-

boldly advances

W.-Sch., p. 35.

See this ch. ii (k) for discussion of elision. For origin and early use of the apostrophe see Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 73. ^ See this ch. ii (Z) for discussion of crasis. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., * Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 72. p. 88. ^ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 14. For the usage of Tisch. in the union and the separation of particles see Gregory, Prol., pp. 109-111. In most cases * P. 35. Tisch. ran the particles together as one word. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 17. Left out by Debrunner. 2

ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

245

the German idea: "The most correct principle appears to be to punctuate wherever a pause is necessary for reading correctly." But Winer ^ shrinks from this profusion of punctuation-marks by

the editors, which " often intruded on the text their tation of it."

The

own

interpre-

editor indeed has to interpret the text with

but certainly good taste demands that the miniof punctuation-marks be the rule. They must of necessity decide "a multitude of subtle and difficult points of interpretation." 2 Hort indeed aimed at "the greatest simplicity compatible with clearness," and this obviously should his punctuation,

mum,

not the

maximum,

be the goal in the Greek N. T. But the editor's punctuation may be a hindrance to the student instead of a help. It is the privilege of each N. T. student to make his own punctuation. 1

W.-M.,

p. 63.

2

Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 318.

.

CHAPTER

VII

THE DECLENSIONS Space

will

(KAI2EI2)

not be taken for the inflection of the nouns and programmar may be assumed to know

nouns, for the student of this the normal Attic inflections.

Aristotle ^ used the

term " inflection "

of noun and verb and even adverb, but practically inflecappHed to nouns and conjugation (kXIctls priixa.TUiv = av^vyLa)

(TTTcoo-ts)

tion

is

Noun

to verbs.

(ovo/jlo)

does, of course, include both substan-

and adjective without entering the psychological realm and affirming the connection between name and thing (cf. Plato's

tive

Cratylus)

THE SUBSTANTIVE (TO "ONOMA)

I.

The Substantive (TpdyiJLa),

(to

ovo/jlo)

ordinary appellative

is

either concrete

(aoJ/jLo)

{ovoiia TrpoarjjopLKov)

or abstract

or proper {ovo/xa

Kvpiov) . 1. History of the Declensions. It is only since the seventeenth century a.d. that modern grammarians distinguish for convenience three declensions in Greek. The older grammars had ten

In the modern Greek vernacular the

or more.2

first

and third de-

clensions have been largely fused into one, using the singular of

the

43

Thumb

{Handbook, pp.

divides the declension of substantives in

modern Greek

first

ff.)

and the

vernacular neuter).

plural of the third.^

according

This

to

gender simply

the simplest

way out

(masculine,

feminine,

of the confusion.

In Sanbut Whitney^ says: "There is nothing absolute in this arrangement; it is merely believed to be open to as few objections as any other." Evidently is

skrit five declensions are usually given as in Latin,

^

Donaldson,

New

Crat., p. 421.

It is in the accidence that the practical

identity of N. T. Gk. with the popular

Koivii is best seen, here and in the lexical point of view (Deissmann, Exp., Nov., 1907, p. 434). 2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 102; Gildersl., Am. Jour, of PhiloL, 1908, p. 264. 3 *

lb., pp. 10.5, 111. Sans. Gr., p. 111.

Cf. Hatzidakis, Einl. etc., pp. 376

246

ff.

THE DECLENSIONS

(kaISEIS)

247

therefore the ancient Greeks did not have the benefit of our modern theories and rules, but inflected the substantives according to

now known to us. The various dialects exercised great freedom also and exhibited independent development at

principles not

many

points, not to

mention the changes

in time in each dialect. purely a convenience, but with this justification: the first has a stems, the second o stems, the third consonant and close vowel (i, v) stems. There are some differences in the suffixes also, the third declension having always the genitive

The

threefold division

ending in

In the third declension especially

-os.

to give a type to

conform.

Much

is

which

all

Besides, the

freedom

is

the words in

all

it is

not possible

the cases and numbers

same word may experience

to be recognized in the

clensions within certain wide limits.

variations.

whole matter of the de-

See metaplasm or the fluc-

tuation between the several declensions. 2.

The Number

Cases

of the

(irToxreis).

The meaning and

use of the cases will have a special chapter in Syntax (ch. XI). (a)

The History of the Forms of the

for before the declensions are discussed.

casus)

is

Cases.

This

considered a "falling," because the nominative

as the upright case fact the accusative oponacTTLKr]

or

opOrj).

is

is

The term "case" is

called

(Trrcoo-ts,

regarded

though as a matter of probably older than the nominative (Trrcoo-t?

(tttcoo-u

The

6pdr},

eWela),

other cases are called oblique

(7rXd7tat)

as deviations from the nominative. (KXrjTLKT]

case in

or

Trpoa-ayopevTLKr])

In simple truth the vocative has no inflection and is not properly a

its logical relations.

It is usually the noun-stem or like There are only three other case-endings preserved in the Greek, and the grammars usually term them accusative (TTTcocrts aiTiartKij), genitive {ttcoctls yeviKYj) and dative (tttuxtls boTui})} There is no dispute as to the integrity of the accusative case, the earliest, most common of all the oblique cases and the most persistent. In the breakdown of the other cases the accusative and the prepositions reap the benefit. In truth the other oblique cases are variations from the normal accusative. But this subject is complicated with the genitive and the dative. It is now a commonplace in comparative philology that the Greek genitive has taken over the function of the ablative (d0at-

the nominative in form.

ptTiKi])

also.

In the singular the Sanskrit had already the same

' Mod. Gk. vernac. has only three cases (nom., \:,n\. and ace.) and these are not always formally ditTcrcntiated from each other. The mod. Cdc. has thus carried the blending of case-forms almost as far as mod. Eng. Cf. Thumb,

Handb.,

p. 31.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

248

and ablative, while in the plural the Sanhad the same form as the dative {bkiyas; cf. Latin Thus in the Sanskrit the ablative has no distinctive endihus). ings save in the singular of a stems like kamat ('love') where the ablative ending -t (d) is preserved. In Latin, as we know, the ablative, dative, locative and instrumental have the same ending

{-as) for genitive

skrit ablative

endings in the plural.

The Latin

ablative

inscriptions

show the

d,

singular

is

partly

Some

old Latin

as hened, in altod marid, etc.

In Greek

ablative, partly locative, partly instrumental.

the ablative forms merged with the genitive as in the Sanskrit

but not because of any inherent "internal connecbetween them, as from accidents affecting the outward forms of inflection."^ The Greek did not allow r or 5 to stand at the end of a word. So the Greek has irpos (not irpor for irpoTi). KaXcos may be (but see Brugmann^) the ablative KokuiT and so all adverbs in -cos. The meaning of the two cases remained distinct in the Greek as in the Sanskrit. It is not possible to derive the ablative (source or separation) idea from the genitive (or '^kvos) idea nor vice versa. The Greek dative {Sotlkt]) is even more complicated. " The Greek dative, it is well known, both in singular and plural, has the form of a locative case, denoting the place where singular,

tion

or in which; but, as actually used,

it

combines, with the mean-

ing of a locative, those of the dative and instrumental."^

only true of some datives.

is

xcopa.

had

The Indo-Germanic originally

There are true datives

stock,

three separate

sets

as of

shown by the

This

like 68(2,

Sanskrit,

endings for these cases.

Hadley, Ess. Philol. and Crit., Gk. Gen. or Abl., p. 52. Cf. also Miles, of Gk. and Lat., 1893, p. xvii. This blending of the cases in Gk. is the result of "partial confusion" "between the genitive and the ablative 1

Comp. Synt.

between the dative and the locative, between the locative and the instrumental" (Audoin, La Decl. dans les Lang. Indo-Europ., 1898, p. 248). In general on the subject of the history of the eight cases in Gk. see Brugmann, Griech. Gr., pp. 217-250,375 f.; Comp. Gr. of the Indo-Ger. Lang., vol. Ill, pp. 52-280; Kurze vergl. Gram., II, pp. 418 fT.; K.-Bl., I, pp. 365-370, II, pp. 299-307; Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 268-301; Bopp, tJber das Dem. imd den Urspr. der Casuszeichen etc., 1826; Hartung, tJber die Casus etc., 1831; Hiibschmann, Zur Casuslehre, 1875; Rumpel, CasusL, 1845; Meillet, Intr. h I'Etude Comp., pp. 257 ff.; Penka, Die Entst. der Synkr. Casus im Lat., Griech. und Deutsch., 1874. See also p. 33 f. of Hiibner, Grundr. zu Vorles. viber die griech. SjTit.; Schleicher, Vergl. Griech.; Schmidt, Griech. Gr., etc. 2

Brugmann

(Griech. Gr., 1900, p. 225),

who

considers the

s

in ovtcjs, kt\.,

due to analogy merely, like the s in iyyv-s, kt\. But he sees an abl. idea in * Hadley, Ess. Phil, and Crit., iK-rds. Cf also ovpavo-de like coeli-tus. p. 52. .

THE DECLENSIONS The Greek tive in -ats,

Latin

uses

plural

for all

three cases either "the

or the instrumental forms in -ots."^

-(TL

-4s,

249

(kaIZEIS)

loca-

"The forms

in

from -o stems, are a new formation on the analogy

from -o stems." ^ singular of consonant, and

of forms

t

locative plural.

'AdT]vr}aL is

In the

stems, the locative ending -t

i;

is used In the a declension the

for all three cases in Greek, as wktI.

dative ending -at usually answers for

The form few examples

three cases.

all

-at contracts with the stem-vowel a into ^ or

ij.

A

of the locative -t here survive, as in vraXat, 'OXv/xTriat, Qrj^at-yevr]?.^ Xa/jLai

may

be either dative or locative. In the o declension also is the usual form, contracting with the o

the dative ending -at into

But a few

CO.

locative endings survive, like kei,

distinct

Thc Homeric

'ladjxol, o'lkol (cf. oLKcp), TToT, ctc.

the infinitive like

c{>epeLv

while the infinitives in —at are datives.'*

etc.)

infinitive 86ixev

and

are probably locatives also without the {bbixevai, bovvai, 'KeKvKevai, \veadaL,

The instrumental has

t,

XDuat,

left little of its original

form on the Greek singular. The usual Sanskrit is a. Cf. in Greek such words as a/xa, eveKa, ha, ixtra, irapa, TreSd, possibly the Doric

Lesbian aXXd.

Kpv(j)a,

Brugmann^ thinks the Laconic

7n7-7roKa= Attic Toj-TroTe is instrumental

why). -
Cf. the in " the

more the

(Indo-Germanic,

But

(plural).

bhi)

this -0t

M

Uke the Gothic (English Another Greek suffix

better," etc.

found in Homer, as

is

was used

/Stry^t,

^e60tv

also for ablative or locative,

and

even genitive or dative. It is clear therefore that in Greek the usual seven (eight with the vocative) Indo-Germanic cases are present, though in a badly mutilated condition as to form. The ideas, of course, expressed by the cases continued to be expressed by the blended forms. In actual intelligent treatment it is simpler to preserve the seven case-names as will be seen later. This is a marked pe(h) The Blending of Case-Endings. culiarity of the Indo-Germanic tongues. Neuter nouns illustrate Comp.

1

Giles,

Man.

of

^

lb., p.

290.

For survivals

De

Philol., p. 287.

of the dat. -at sec the

Rhodian

tSi (Bjorkegren,

Sonis dial. Rhod., p. 41).

' Brugmann, Cf. the Lat. doml, Ro»icr{i). For nuGrie(!h. Or., p. 228. merous exx. of loc. and dat. distinct in form in the various dialects see Meistcr, Griech. Dial., Bd. II, pp. 61 ff.; Hoffmann, Griech. Dial., Bd. I, p. 233 (dat. -dt, loc.-i; dat. -wt, loc. -oi). Cf. Collitz and Bechto?l, Samml. d. griech. dial.

Inschr., p. 308. 6

"

Griech. Gr.,

the survival of Griech. Dial., eLlXw^a).

3. Aufl., p.

abl., loc.

II., p.

220.

and

Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., p.

278

f.

Cf. K.-Bl., II., pp. 301-307, for examples of

in.str.

forms

in

Gk. adverbs.

Cf. also Moister,

295, for survivals of instr. forms in Cypriotic dial, (ipa,

See Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

I. 'II., p.

194.

'

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

250

NEW TESTAMENT

the same tendency, not to mention the dual. The analytic prohas largely triumphed over the synthetic case-endings. Originally no prepositions were used and all the word-relations cess

were expressed by

cases.

are no case-endings at

In modern French, for instance, there but prepositions and the order of

all,

the words have to do

all that was originally done by the caseIn English, outside of the old dative form in pronouns like him, them, etc., the genitive form alone remains. Finnish indeed has fifteen cases and several other of the ruder tongues

forms.

have many.^ On the other hand the Coptic had no case-endbut used particles and prepositions like NTE for genitive,

ings,

It is indeed possible that all inflectional languages passed once through the isolating and agglutinative stages. English may etc.

some day

like the

for the relation, of

Chinese depend entirely on position and tone words to each other.

(c) Origin of Case Suffixes. Giles ^ frankly confesses that comparative philology has nothing to say as to the origin of the case-suffixes. They do not exist apart from the noun-stems. Some of them may be pronominal, others may be positional (postpositions), but it adds nothing to our knowledge to call some of the cases local and others grammatical. They are all gramma-

The

and the locative

clearly

had a

local origin.

cases were used less often than others.

Some

of the case-

tical.

Some

ablative

forms became identical. Analogy carried on the process. The desire to be more specific than the case-endings led to the use of prepositional adverbs. As these adverbs were used more and more there was "an ever-increasing tendency to find the important part of the meaning in the preposition and not in the case-ending." In the modern Greek vernacular, as already stated, only three case-forms survive (nominative, genitive, accusative), the dative

vanishing like the 1

ablative.**

Farrar, Gr. Synt., p. 23.

Man.

Comp.

Bergaigne (Du Role de la Deriv. dans la de la Soc. de Ling, de Paris, to. ii, fasc. 5) and G. Meyer (Zur Gesch. der indo-germ. Stammb. und Decl.) both argue that caseendings had no distinctive meaning in themselves nor separate existence. 2

of

But

On

Philol., p. 271.

Mem.

Decl. Indo-Europ.,

see also Hirt, Handb. etc., pp. 231-288, for careful treatment of the cases. the general subject of syncretism in the Gk. cases see Delbriick, Vergl.

Synt.,

1. Tl.,

abl., loc.

ff., 195 f. See also Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 15, for traces of forms in Horn. (loc. -i, -Ol; instr., -4>i, -Lv; abl., -dtv).

pp. 189

and

instr.

p. 273.

3

Giles, op.

*

Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 149.

Rednern

etc.,

cit.,

1882.

Cf. also Keck,

Uber

d.

Dual

bei d. griech.

THE DECLENSIONS

251

(kAISEIs)

The N. T. Greek has (epiKos) and the singular the only uses and lost the dual (ouuos) had the dual, Hebrew the and Sanskrit The plural {Tr\ridvvTLK6s). odo and vipossibly (and amho and duo only had but the Latin (dpiefios) in Substantives.

Number

3.

which had a plural inflection in the oblique cases. Coptic^ had no plural nor dual save as the plural article distinguished words. English has only the dual twain, but we now say twins.

ginti)

scholars do not agree as to the origin of the dual. Moul" when ton2 inclines to the idea that it arose in prehistoric days

The

men

could not count beyond two."

It

is

more

likely that

it is

due to the desire to emphasize pairs, as hands, eyes, etc., not to accept "Du Ponceau's jest that it must have been invented for

and married people." ^ In the oldest Indo-Germanic languages the luxury of the dual is vanishing, but Moulton considers It never won a foothold in the its use in the Attic as a revival.'' and ^Eolic and the New Ionic, and its use in the Attic was hmited lovers

not consistent.^ The dual tions,^ while in the kolvt} it

is is

nearly gone in the late Attic inscriponly sporadic and constantly vanish-

ing in the inscriptions and papyri.'' In Pergamum*^ and Pisidia^ no dual appears in the inscriptions. The only dual form that and the N. T. is 8vo (not 5uco) for all the cases occurs in the

LXX

Tim. 5: 19), save 8val{v) for the dative-locativeinstrumental, a plural form found in Aristotle, Polybius, etc., and Only in 4 Mace. 1 28 is called a barbarism by Phrynichus.i^ and the Atticists Polybius SvoiP A found, but 8velv in ^{V, as in Mt. 6:24; Lu. see 8v(tI{v) of (Thackeray, p. 187). For examples however, papyri, the In etc. 16 :13; Ac. 21:33; Heb. 10:28, In the 8v(tI{v). with along 8vco, 5uco, 8ve2v occasionally appear" in vanished has "Am
(as genitive in 1

:

the N. T. while d/x^orepot occurs fourteen times (Mt. 9 1 3

Tattam's Egyp. Gr., Farrar, Gk. Synt., p.

Man. 6 '

»

of

Comp.

^

p. 16.

PhiloL, p. 264.

<

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 101. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436.

Compemass, De Serm. Vulg.

17, etc.),

Prol., p. 57.

Cf. Geiger, Ursp. d. Spr., §

23.

:

ix.

Cf. Giles,

Prol., p. 57.

Meistorhans, Att. Inschr., p. 201. Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 138. Tatian (p. 96 of his works) p. 15. «

»

etc.,

shows a dual. '» Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 289 f. But cf. K.-Bl., I, p. 362, for further items about the dual. '1 Dcissmann, H. S., p. 187. For Svalif) in the inscriptions see Dittcnberger, For similar situations Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pa))., p. 313. 118. 22, etc. see Hclbing, Gr. d. Svtiv) Svolv, and A K dvai, roh 5uo, MSS. (rots in the

LXX

Sept., p. 53.

Cf. also C.

and

S., Scl.

from the

LXX,

p. 25.

A GRAMMAR OF

252

TilE

GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

once (Ac. 19 16) apparently in the sense of more than two, like the occasional use of the English "both" and the Byzantine use :

and "two clear examples of it in NP 67 and 69 Once for all then it may be remarked that in the N. T, both for nouns and verbs the dual is ignored. The dual was rare in the later Ionic and the kolvt) follows suit (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 184). The syntactical aspects of number are to be of d/i^orepot (iv/A.D.)."^

discussed later. 4.

Gender

(-ye'vos)

in Substantives.

In the long history of the

Greek language gender has been wonderfully persistent and has suffered little variation.^ It is probably due to the natural difference of sex that grammatical gender^ arose. The idea of sense gender continued, but was supplemented by the use of endings This personification of inanimate

for the distinction of gender.

was probably due to the poetic imagination of early peoples, Imt it persists in modern European tongues, though French has dropped the neuter (cf. the Hebrew) and modern English (like the Persian and Chinese) has no grammatical gender save in the third personal pronoun (he, she, it) and the relative.^ Analogy has played a large part in gender.^ The Sanskrit, Latin and Greek all gave close attention to gender and developed rules that are difficult to apply, with many inconsistencies and absurdities. In Greek i]\Los is masculine and aekrjvq feminine, while in German we have die Sonne and der Mond. Perhaps we had better be grateful that the Greek did not develop gender in the verb like the Hebrew verb. Moulton^ thinks it "exceedingly strange" that English should be almost alone in shaking off "this outworn excrescence on language." The N. T., like Homer and the modern Greek, preserves the masculine (apaevLKOp), feminine (drj'KvKov) and neuter (ovSerepov). Some words indeed have common {kolvov) sex, objects

like 6

7]

epicene

while others, applied to each sex, are called

TOLs, ovos, Beds, {eirlKOLvov)

,

like

-q

dXcoTrr?^, apKTos.

have das Weib ('wife')! (o) Variations in Gender. a^vaaos (x^po)

is

the N. T. (Lu. 8:31, 1

Moulton,

They

a substantive in the etc.), else

Prol., p. 80.

^

In are

LXX

where soonly

German we

actually

not numerous. (Gen. in

1

:

2, etc.)

'H

and

Diogenes Laertes.

jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 103.

Paul, Prin. of Hist, of Lang., pp. 289 fT. Brugmann thinks that gender came largely by formal assimilation of adj. to subst. as avOpuiros kclkos, x<^po^

iepa. 4

^

Dan. Crawford, the Bantu missionary, claims 19 genders Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 26 Prol., p. 59.

On

f.

^

Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

for

Bantu.

Philol., pp. 64, 259.

the whole subject of gender see K.-Bl.,

I,

pp. 358 ff.

.

THE DECLENSIONS

253

(kAISEIs)

In Mk. 14 3 W. H. and Nestle properly read rriv aXa^aarpov, though the Western and Syrian classes give t6v dX. after HerodIn Rev. 8:116 (not 17) otus, and a few of the late MSS. to dX. a\J/tvdos is read, though K and some cursives omit the article, beIn Mk. 12 26 all editors cause the word is a proper name. have 6 /Sdros (the Attic form according to Moeris), elsewhere :

:

17

(Lu. 20

/Sdros

in Ac. 19

have

:

deos is

:

Qeos

35).

may :

37,

be either masculine as but in Ac. 19 27 we :

Rcc. also in 35, 37), an "apparently purposeless Thieme {Die Inschr. von Magn., p. 10) says that

1

used in the inscriptions of Asia Minor in formal religious

language. p. 96)

37; Acts 7

dea (Text.

variation." 17

:

11 or feminine as in Ac. 19

Burnet {Review

says that in Athens

-q

Theology and Philosophy,

of

was used

deos

1906,

in every-day language,

but 17 dea. in the public prayers, thus taking the Ionic ded. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Papyri {Laid- und Wortlehre, 1906), p. 254 f., for papyri illustrations. Blass^ considers 17 'lepovaaXrjij. (Ac. 5 28, etc., the common form in LXX, Luke and Paul) feminine because it is a place-name, and hence he explains Traaa 'lepoaoXvixa (Mt. 2 3) rather than by toXls understood. Ar]v6s in Rev. 14 19 strangely enough has both masculine and feminine, riiv \r}vbv :

:

:

.

TOP neyav

but

Ji{

fem.

(his)

.

The feminine

is

the

common

.

construc-

but the masculine is found in LXX in Is. 63 2 only. At^os always 6 in the N. T., even when it means a precious stone (Rev. 5 times), where Attic after 385 b.c.^ had 17. Al/jlos is masculine in Lu. 4 25 as in the Attic, but is chiefly feminine in Acts and Luke, Hke the Doric and late Attic, as in Lu. 15: 14; Acts 11 28.* In Lu. 13 4, Jo. 9:7, 11 we have 6 2)tXcod/i, while Josephus has both ii {War, V, 12. 2) and 6 {War, II, 16. 2). Blass* explains the use of 6 in the Gospels by the participle dTreo-raX/xej'os in Jo. 9 7. ^rdnvos in Heb. 9 4 is feminine after the Attic instead of the Doric 6 ar., as in Ex. 16 33. In Rev. 21 18 (21) uaXos as is customary with we read also 6 vaKos rather than tion,

:

is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

17

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 60,

Nachmanson, Magn. 2

12(),

for

many

t6 'lepoaoXvua

Cf.

exx.

Cf. Ilort, Notes on Orth., and Mt. usually.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32.

have only ^

but he adds "is explained by inscriptions."

Inschr., p.

p. IGO.

Mk. and

Jo.

Mei.sterhans, Att. Inschr., p. 129.

Moulton (Prol., p. GO) fuuls Xtjuos MSS. show similar variations. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 45; Thack., p. 145 f., for same situation in LXX concerning /Jdros, iXafiaaTpos {-ov), \tjv6s, ardnvos. Cf. C. and S., Sel. from the *

Cf. llort,

Notes on Orth.,

now masc. and now

LXX, »

p.

fem. in the pap.

p. 27, for further exx.

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 32.

157.

LXX

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

254

NEW TESTAMENT 19:29) reveals its where it is masc. in

precious stones.^

"Taawiros (Heb. 9:19; Jo.

gender only in the

LXX

BA, fem.

in

E

and

1 (3)

(Lev. 14

Ki. 4

:

19

:

6,

51

f.)

The neuter

BA.

in papyri as early as third century B.C.

to aXas occurs

(Moulton and Milligan,

Expositor, 1908, p. 177).

Interpretation of the LXX. In Ro. 11:4 Paul uses than the frequent LXX tQ /3daX. The feminine is due, according to Burkitt, to the Q'ri ti'^'2. (alaxwrj)- Moulton /3daX as occurring "three times in LXX and in Ascenspeaks of jSdaX occurs "everywhere in the prosio Isaiae ii. 12." ^ But phetic books, Jer., Zeph., Hos., etc." (Thayer), though not so common in the historical books, far more than the "three times" of Moulton. In Mk. 12 11 and Mt. 21 42 the LXX avr-q is due to nsir, though the translators may have "interpreted their own Greek (6)

/3daX rather

TTj

fj

17

:

by

recalling

KecfyaX^nv

:

yo^vlas."^

In Gal. 4:25 Paul has not misname as a word

takenly used TO with "Ayap, for he is treating the merely. Any word can be so regarded. (c)

Variations in Gender Due to Heteroclisis and MeThese will be discussed a little later. Delbriick thinks

taplasm.

all the masculine substantives of the first or a dewere feminine and that all the feminine substantives of the second or o declension were masculine. There was a general tendency 5. The First or a Declension. towards uniformity* in this declension that made it more popular than ever. Here only the N. T. modifications in this general development can be mentioned. This form (a) The Doric Genitive-Ablative Singular a. survives in /Soppa (Lu. 13:29; Rev. 21 13) and was common in the Attic after 400 b.c. Note also fjLafxwvd (Lu. 16 9). It is frequent in the LXX, papyri, inscriptions, though mainly in proper

that originally

•clension

:

:

These proper names in -as, chiefly oriental, make the So A^uXa and if unaccented -as, in a. 'AkuXoi; m papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 187), though no gen. in N. T. (only -as and -av) 'AypiirTa^ (Ac. 25 23), 'Avavla names.

genitive-ablative in -S or,

:

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26.

2

Moulton,

Prol., p. 59.

Cf. Theophrast,

He

De

lapid. 49, for

r,

SeXos.

corrects this erratum in note to H. Scott.

3

lb.

"

Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. lOG.

Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 304

f.,

has some

good illustrations and remarks about the declensions in the LXX. * Both 'Aypinira and 'Ayplirirov occur in the pap. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34 and 434. This gen. in -a gradually became "a ruling principle" for all substantives in -os (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 108, 110). See Thumb,

THE DECLENSIONS

255

(kAISEIs)

here (from -as, so Thayer), "kvva (Lu. 3 2), 'AvrtTras (indeclinable Bftpa^^a 11 Cor. "Apera 32), (2 2 Rev. 13), or mere sHp for -a, accus. -av (gen. does not appear, only nom. -as as Mk. 15 7, and :

:

:

:

15:11,

as

etc.),

Bapm/3a (Gal. 2

1

:

Col. 4:10; see Deissmann,

;

Bible Studie&, p. 187), 'Era
hkewise

accusative), Zrjvdu

ing to

Mt. 2

NB :

(so

6;

:

8; land,

Lu.

K#a

(Lu. 3:2; Jo. 18: 13), AovKOis (only in

7), 'Epfxap

1

(1

:

(Ro. IG

13); 'IlXeta (Lu. 1

:

H.); 'lohda (person, Lu. 3

W.

Heb. 8

(Tit. 3

:

:

39), 'Icora

Cor.

nominative, as Col. 4

1

:

12),

:

14,

Doric

17) accord-

Mk. 6:3;

(Mt. 12

:

KXcoTra (Jo.

tribe,

Katd^a

39),

19:25),

but genitive would be

14,

:

33;

:

-a),

Xarava (Mk. 1 13), StXas (dative 2tXa in Ac, and genitive SiXa Nachin Jos. Vit, 17), 2/ceua (Ac. 19 14), ^Te(t>aud (1 Cor. 1 16). short such finds the Doric genitive fairly common with

•

:

:

:

manson

proper names and mentions Stj^^S in his list.^ Very common in modern Greek, cf. Hatzidakis, Einl, p. 76. The usual Attic form for (b) The Attic Genitive-Ablative. the genitive-ablative (ov) is found also as in Alueas (so Lobeck, Prol. Pathol, p. 487), 'AvSpkou 'E^eKlov (so

LXX),

(Mt. 2:

'lepetiiov

(Mk.

1

:

29), Bapaxiov

(Mt. 23

35),

:

'HXetou (Lu. 4:25), 'Uaaiov (Mt. 3:3, etc.),

17), Avaaviov (Lu.

3:1), Ohpiov (Mt. 1:6), Zaxa-

These Hebrew proper names ended in n— but first receive the regular inflection for masculine nouns of the with in -^s names proper declension. There are likewise some 8) only 'laup'fjs and 'lap-^pvs (2 Tim. 3 genitive-ablative in -ov. and Tim. 4 10) Kp-fjaKTis (2 nominative. appear in the N. T. in the (Rev. Ev(t)pdTrjs declension. 3d the Uov8r]s (2 Tim. 4:21) belong to 9 14; 16 12) has only accusative and dative (instrumental-locagenitive-ablative tive) in the oblique cases in the N. T., though the (Mt. 'lopSavov 3 5) follow the and 2 (Mt. 1) form is -ov. 'llpvdou

piov (Lu. 1 :40).

,

:

:

:

:

:

:

usual rule like a8ov (Mt. 16: 18). 'AvreXX^s (Ro. 16: 10), 'EpMr?s (Ro. 16 14), like Kodpavrr^s (Mt. 5 26) and cj^eXovris (2 Tim. 4 13), have no oblique case in the N. T. save the accusative (-vv).^ in -ov for the Apostle 'Icodvrjs in W. H. always has genitive-ablative

and in though

Jo. 1 :42; 21

Handb.,

p. 49.

for

Baptcora in

LXX

:

:

:

:

15, 16, 17, for

Mt. 16

:

17.=^

So

the father of Simon Peter, John Mark (Acts 12 12).

for

Cf. Thackeray, Gr., pp. IGO-IGG.

:

Ilelbing, Cr. d. Sept., p. 33,

illustrations.

1

Magn.

2

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 94.

Inschr., p. 120.

Cf. also Schweizor, Terg. Iiischr., p.

1:59.

Notes on Orth., p. 159. See Naiainumson (Maf^n. Insehr., p. and Schweizcr (PcrR. Inschr., p. 138 f.) for illustrations of these jwinta that m from the KocfTj inser. The gen. iu -ov is more common in the paj). than 3

119)

Cf. Hort,

'

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

256

Iiojadkpris

and

has accusative in

We

heterochte.^

is

-^i>

(Ac. 18

17) for the first declension

:

have only ^earuv

in

Mk.

(c)

7

:

Words

4.

like

have the genitive-ablative in -ov (Ac. 7 58). Voc. in -a of masc. nouns in -rrjs in dkaTora, kirLaTaTa, Kap-

veavlas

:

Cf.

dioyvcoara, VTroKpna..

Words

ixdr].

and Participles in -via.

These come regand the dative-locativeinstrumental in -r; like the Ionic. Moulton^ indeed thinks that "analogical assimilation," on the model of forms like 56^ci, hb^-qs, had more to do with this tendency in the KOLvi) than the Ionic influence. Possibly so, but it seems gratuitous to deny all Ionic influence where it was so easy for it to make itself felt. The "best MSS."* support the testimony of the papyri and the inscriptions here.^ So W. H. read p.axa-lp-ns (Rev. 13 14), w'Krjfjifxvprjs (Lu. 6 {d)

in -pa

ularly ^ to have the genitive-ablative in -^s

:

:

48), irpwpris (Ac. 27

27

:

but

1).

B

In Acts

W. H. do

LXX,^ but The period.'^

30), SaTrc^etpTj (Ac. 5

prone to have

is

not follow

compared with the

:

B

1), (nreiprjs

-a as with

-as,

In Ac. 5

here.

Sam. 25

einl3e^r]Kviris (1

:

the forms -vlas, -via

:

20),

:

(Ac. 21

D

:

in Ac. 5

2 aweLdvirjs

31; :

may

1,

be

and other examples

in

survive in the Ptolemaic

still

LXX MSS. and the early papyri shows that it is a matter of growth with time. In the early Empire of Rome -prjs forms are well-nigh universal. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 142. On the other hand note the adjective cTeipa (Lu. 1 36). Words like rnjiepa (-pa) and oXrjdeLa, ixia (m, eta) preference of the

for naxalpas (-pa)

:

preserve the Attic inflection in -as, (e)

a.^

(d). We see it in such exambut Soden reads -Brjs with EHLP) and Moulton^ finds the Egyptian papyri giving

The Opposite Tendency to

ples as Av88as (Ac. 9

Mdp^as

(Jo. 11

:

1).

:

38,

Qepfxa is given by Lobeck, though not in N. T. (genitive ^s, Ac. 28:3), and note irpvtxva in Ac. 27:41. Ta/jLvadas as genitive.

See Mayser, Gr. griech. Pap., 1906,

-a.

the contracted forms see p. 252. Thackeray, Gr., p. 161 f. 1

W.-Sch., p. 94.

3

Prol., p. 48; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.

Cf.

Thumb,

pp. 31-33, and Thack., Gr., p. 140 4 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 1.56.

Gregory, Prol.,

7

Moulton,

p. 117.

For

LXX.

Cf.

B.

S., p.

where a number

Hellen., p. 69. f.,

(Laut- u. Wortlehre).

for similar ^

in the

186.

of exx. are given

hke

Cf. Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept.,

phenomena

in the

Deissmann, B.

LXX.

S., p. 186.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 81.

N. T. Gk., p. 25. For examples in Attic inscriptions see MeisterCf. -ou^dwas in LXX, C. and S., Sel. fr. the LXX, p. 26.

8

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434. f.

f.

more frequent

Prol., p. 48.

'

hans, p. 119

250

2

apovprjs, Ka6r]Kvir]s, etc.

6

p.

It is also

.

THE DECLENSIONS

257

(KAir:EI2)

Moulton' suggests that Nvn<}}av (Col. 4 15 according to the correct text) is not due to a Doric Nu/x^av, but by a "reverse analogy process" the genitive Nu^a :

hkc 86^a, 86^r]s. Blass^ calls xpv(tS.p (Rev. 1 13) "a gross blunder, wrongly formed on the model of xP'^o'Ss 1 12," but Moulton' holds that we have "abundant parallels." This phenomenon appears in the (/) Double Declension. and 'lepS HoXet (Col. 4 13), the (Ac. 16 UoXlp 11) case of Neav :

:

:

:

adjective as well as the substantive being treated separately in

and third declensions. Heteroclisis (erepd/cXtcrt?) and Metaplasm (ytteraTrXacr/Lto?) Blass"* makes no distinction in his treatment of heteroclisis and metaplasm, though the distinction is observed in Winer-SchmieFor practical use one may ignore the distinction and call del.^ all the examples metaplasm. with Blass or heteroclisis with Moulton.« The fluctuation is rare for the first declension in the N. T. In Ac. 28 8 editors properly read SvaeprepLov rather than SvaevreThe usual Attic form Oea pla (supported only by a few cursives).

the

first

(fif)

:

This variation deos (Ac. 19 37) are both found. and the second declensions is well illustrated by ToLxbppas (2 Pet. 2:6) and Tofioppoiu (Mt. 10: 15; -ots, Mk. 6: 11 Moulton^ Rec), Amrpav (Ac. 14:6) and AvarpoLs (Ac. 14:8). finds abundant parallel in the Egyptian papyri use of place-names. In Rev. 1 11 ABC and some cursives read 'QvareLpap instead of the usual evaretpa. So in Ac. 27 5 some of the MSS. read Mvppav instead of Mvppa as accus., a reading confirmed by Ramsay, ^ who found the accus. in -av and the gen. in -up. Moulton^ cites 17 (Ac. 19

:

27)

between the

and

:

17

first

:

:

from two MSS. of xI/a.d. (Usener, Pelagia, p. 50). between the first and second declensions appears in the compounds in -apx^s and (Attic) -apxos. Moulton^" finds examples of it passim in the papyri and calls the minute work of Winer-Schmiedel "conscientious labour wasted thereon." But Hort" does not think these variations in good MSS. "wholly 'lepoaoXvfjLa

The

1

chief variation

Prol., p. 48.

Cf. also his pai)cr in Proc.

Camb.

Philol.

Soc, Oct., 1893,

p. 12. 2

Gr., p. 25, but 4th cd., p. 28, cites P. Lond. I, 124, 26, xpwar "Falschc Analogic" ace. to W.-Sch., p. 81.

»

Prol., p. 48.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28

6

Pp. 83

«

Prol., p. 48.

8

St.

'0

ff.

Thack.

p. 150.

apyvpdv.

f.

(Gr., p. 153) inckidcs heteroclisis

Paul the Traveller, p. 129. Cf. Moulton, lb. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.

" Notes on Orth.,

rj

under metaplasm.

Prol., p. 48.

'

lb., p. 244.

»

lb.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

258

NEW TESTAMENT

In the N. T. forms in -apxvs, like most of the dialects and the kolvt], are greatly in the majority.^ Thus in the N. T. we have 'A(na,px7?s (Ac. 19:31; not in nom. in N. T.), kSvapxn^ (2

irregular."

Cor. 11:32), TrarpLapxn^ (Heb. 7:4), 7roXtTapxr?s (Ac. 17:6, 8), Terpaapxv^ (Lu. 3 19), but always x'^^apxos- In the addition of :

the

text to Ac. 28

/3

(HLP) and -apxv^ Mt.

in

(8

:

27

5, 8;

:

16 the

MSS.

:

54),

divide between aTpaToirkSapxos

"EKaTourapxos

(cursives).

and the accusative

is

the nominative

in -xov

found once

is

Matthew, Luke and

in Acts (22:25). Elsewhere in all cases in Acts the form in -xvs is read by the best MSS. (as Ac. 10 1). The first and the third declensions show variation in 8i\pos (old form 8l\J/a) in 2 Cor. 11 27, where indeed B has dl\py instead of Ni/cT7 (the old form) survives in 1 Jo. 5 4, but elsewhere the dlipei.. hkewise The late form v2kos prevails (as 1 Cor. 15:54 f.). :

:

:

LXX

shows

TO bbpos, TO vIkos

interchangeably with the

49; Thackeray,

Gr. d. Sept., p.

(third declension) instead of

few times by

W. H.

(Mt. 11

Gr., p. 157.

'Icoavy (first

4; Lu. 7

:

:

17

Helbing,

forms.

The

dative

declension)

'Icodi/ti

accepted a

is

18; Rev. 1:1).

(first declension) for ^akapXvi (third declension) in Ac. 13

^a\a}xlvri :

5,

Hort^

considers only Alexandrian.

The

MSS. have

third declension nouns often in various N. T.

the accusative singular of consonant stems in -v in addition to -a,

20 25 (NAB),

xeTpai' in Jo.

as

Rev. 12

:

first

6 (NA). This is after the Other examples are apaevav in

Pet. 5

1

:

analogy of the

declension.

13 (A), aae^ijv in Ro. 4

:

5

:

(NDFG),

Mt. 2 10

aaTkpav in

:

Heb. 6: 19 (ACD), Mau in Ac. 14 12 (DEH), (KC), elKovav in Rev. 13 14 (A), fx^mv in Rev. 22 2 (A), iroBijprjv in Rev. 1 13 (A), avyyepfjv in Ro. 16 11 (ABD), vyiijv in Jo. 5:11 (N). Blass^ rejects them all in the N. T., some as "incredible," though properly recalling the Attic Tpii]pr]v, Arfixoadhriv. Moulton^ finds this conformation to the "analogy of first declension nouns" very comjnon in "uneducated papyri, which adequately foreshadows aacjiaXvp in

:

:

:

:

:

1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28; K.-Bl., I, 3, 502. Cf. also W.-M., p. 70 f.; see W.-M. W.-Sch., p. 82; Soden, p. 1387 f. For illustrations from the Cf. also Nachmanson, Magn. Inschr., p. 121. For numerous pap. examples

LXX

of

compounds from

p.

256

f.

For the

p. 156, finds

Notes on Orth.,

*

Frol., p. 49.

f.,

for this

Pap., p. 286

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap. (Laut-

see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 37

f.

u. Wortl.),

Thack., Gr.,

-apxv^ ousting -apxos.

2

542; Psichari,

34

dpx<^ see

LXX

f

p. 156.

'

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26.

Not

in ed. 4.

W.-M., p. 76; Jann., pp. 119, Grec de la Sepf., pp. 165 ff. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. See Mayser, Gr. d. griech. "very common" ace. in the pap. Cf. Gregory, Prol., p. 118;

THE DECLENSIONS

259

(kaISEIs)

its victory in modern Greek." The inscriptions' as well as the papyri have forms like ywoLKav, Ixvbpav, etc. It is these accusative forms on which the modern Greek nominative in ixpxovTas is made

Thumb, Handh.,

and thus blended the first and the accept none of these readings in the N. T. because of the "irregularity and apparent capriciousness" of the MS. evidence, though he confesses the strength of the testimony for a(r(})a\rju in Heb. 6 19, avjyeprjv in Ro. 16: 11, and xeipai' in Jo. 20 25. These nouns are treated here rather (cf.

third declensions.^

p. 47)

Hort^

will

:

:

than under the third declension because the precincts of the

nomena

first.

The

in this point

LXX MSS.

they invade

same pheSee Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 50; The opposite tendency, the dropping of exhibit the

(eXTiSav, fjLovoyeprjv, etc.).

Thackeray,

Gr., p. 147.

declension accusative, so common in modern Greek, appearing in the papyri, as 5e^td x^ipa (Volker, Papyrorum Graecorum Syntaxis etc., p. 30 f.). V in

the

first

is

Indeclinable Substantives. These are sometimes inflected some of the cases in the first declension. B-qOavLa is accusative Lu. 19 29, and so indeclinable, hke BrjOcjiayr], but elsewhere it is

(h)

in

in

:

Mk. 11:1, etc.) has accusative B-qdaatdav in be only another alternate inde-

inflected regularly in the first declension (so -Lav

save once or twice in B.

Mk. 6:45; 8:22, but clinable

it

form (Thayer)

accusative in -au in

BrjOaaLda

may

So likewise ToXyoda has Hort^ finds "the variations

Ma7a5dj^.

like

Mk. 15:22.

between Mapla and the indechnable Mapid/x" "singularly intricate and perplexing, except as regards the genitive, which is always -las, virtually without variation, and without difference of the persons intended."

It

not necessary to go through

is

details save to observe that as a rule the

the sister of

Martha

are Maptd^u, while

Mary Magdalene

Mapla.

is

now

mother

all

the

of Jesus

and

Mary of Clopas is always now Mapla. In the

Maptd/x,

in the Hebrew probably all were called Mapia/j.. merely the Hellenized form of Maptd^t. It is probably splitting too fine a hair to see with Hort^ a special appropriateness in Maptap. in Jo. 20 16, 18. 6. The Second or o Declension. There is no distinctively feminine inflection in the o declension, though feminine words oc-

Aramaic as Mapla

is

:

'

Nachm., Magn.

^

Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 156

'

Notes on Orth.,

Inschr., p. 1.33.

p. 158.

f.; Sohmid, Atticismus, IV, 586. Kretschmcr (Entst. dcr Koiptj, p. 28) finds

ace. in -av in various dialect inscriptions. p. 24, for xApiToi', etc.

*

Cf. also Reinliold,

Notes on Orth.,

p. 156.

Dc

Grace, ^

this etc.,

Jb.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

260

cur, like

17

But the neuter has a separate

656s.

Greek preserves (a)

ver}^

few feminines in

The main

gives none.

NEW TESTAMENT

-os.^

inflection.

Modern

Thumb (Handb., p. 53 f). N. T. are here noted.

peculiarities in the

The So-Called Attic Second Declension.

It is nearly

Indeed the Attic inscriptions began to show variations fairly early .^ The kolpt] inscriptions^ show only remains here and there and the papyri tell the same story."* Already Xa6s (as Lu. 1 21) has displaced Xecbs and va6$ (as Lu. 1 21) vedos, though veo)Kopos survives in Ac. 19 35. 'AvayaLov hkewise is the true text in Mk. 14 15 and Lu. 22 12, not av6)yeoop nor any of the various modifications in the MSS. In Mt. 3 12 and Lu. 3 17 17 aXcov may be used in the sense of aXcos (see Thayer) by metonymy. The papyri show aXws (Attic second declension) still frequently (Moulton and Milligan, Expositor, Feb., 1908, p. 180). Cf. same gone.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

17

LXX. LXX, p.

thing in Sel. Jr.

Helbing, Gr.

d. Sept., p.

49

26; Thackeray, Gr., p. 144.

tive in -6iv in 1 Cor. 4

6 and Tit. 3

Con. and Stock, has accusa-

f.;

'AttoXXcos

13, though the Western and both instances. In Ac. 19 1 'AttoXXw is clearly right as only A^L 40 have -coj/. The genitive is 'AxoXXcb without variant (1 Cor. ter). So the adjective I'Xecos is read in Mt. 16 22 and Heb. 8 12, though a few MSS. have I'Xeos in both places. The best MSS. have riiv Kw in Ac. 21 1, not KcDi' as Text. Rec. Cf.

Syrian classes have

:

:

:

-co in

:

:

:

1

Mace. 15 23. Blass^ compares alBoas of the third declension. There is little to say here. The adjectives (6) Contraction. :

will

be treated

MSS.

the best

later.

'Oarovv (Jo. 19

in Lu.

24 39 and

:

36) has baTta, accus.

pi.,

in

Mt. 23 27 and Heb. 11 22. So also oarecov in the Western and Syrian addition to Eph. 5:30. 'Opi'eou (Rev. 18:2) and opvea (Rev. 19:21) are without variant. The papyri show this Ionic influence on uncontracted vowels in this very word as well as in various adjectives (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 435). For examples in the LXX (as barko^v 2 Ki. 13 21) see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 82, and Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 36; Thackeray, p. 144; Con. and Stock, Sel. jr. LXX, Moulton « considers it remarkable that the N. T. shows p. 27. :

ocrrecoi/

in

:

:

:

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. Ill

f.

2

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 127

f.

Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 123 f.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 142. * Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, See also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 34. 1906, p. 259 f. For the LXX see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 38 f., where a few 3

exx. occur. « 6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25. 48 f. He thinks

Prol., p.

appears in 2 Mace. 6 2, etc. proof that the N. T. writers were not iUiterate,

Necos it

:

since the pap. examples are in writers "with other indications of illiteracy." Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.

THE DECLENSIONS no traces of the contraction of

261

(kAISEIs)

and

kvplos into kvpls

irai8lov

into

papyri have so many illustrations Tvaidlu, for instance, since the ^ show the same frequency of inscriptions The of this tendency. Greek. Cf. modern in day the won finally which forms the -Ls, -Lv

Thumb, Handb., (c)

p. 61.

The Vocative.

In the o declension

it

does not always end

masculine singular. Geos in ancient Greek is practically the same always retained in the vocative singular. The N. T. has once Oek also form as in Mk. 15 34 (cf. also Jo. 20 28), but in

e

in the

:

:

found occasionally in the LXX and twice (1 Tim. 1 :18; in the late papyri.^ So also Paul uses Tifxodee and the inTt/x69ee, Aristophanes had kix4>i0ee, Lucian 6:20). (Mt. 1 20) AaueiS utos Note also the vocative scriptions
This usage

is

'

:

The common use

in apposition with Kbpie (Mt. 15 22). vocative, chiefly in the of the article with the nominative form as an instance of third declension, belongs more to syntax. Take as

and even

:

the second declension

m^? o^ov,

to (xiKpbv -koijivIov (Lu. 12

:

32).

Variations between the

Heteroclisis and Metaplasm. and second declensions have been treated under 5 (/). The number of such variations between the second and third declendeclension, sions is considerable. NoDs is no longer in the second 14 15, Cor. vot Th. (1 2:2), vob$ (2 but is inflected hke /3oCs, viz. interfrequent most The ttXoO.^ not 19). So ttXoos in Ac. 27 9, (d)

first

:

:

in -os, masculine in second declension these examples the N. T. MSS. show In and neuter in the third. wholly supplants tov eXeov (Attic) 'ekeos To frequent fluctuations.

change

is

between forms

N. T. (as in the LXX), as, for instance, Mt. 9 13; 12 7; which read 23:23; Tit. 3:5; Heb. 4:16, except in a few MSS. other hand the On eXeet. and eXeovs have we eXeov. Without variant (so ^-qX^, Greek ancient the in as form T. N. 6 r^iXos is the usual

in the

:

:

in 2 Cor. Ro. 13 13; 2 Cor. 11 2), but rd f^Xos is the true text all read and has B tv^ovs, only 17 5 Ac. In 3:6. 9 2 and Ph. second in the and masculine usually is 45. 'Hxos 13 f 77X01; in Acts for the and Ac. 2 4 2), Lu. 37; (cf. 19 12 Heb. in as declension, :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

On Schweizer, Perg. laschr., p. 143. 1 Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 125; Brug., Grundr., ii, § 02 n.; the origin of these forms sec Hatz., Einl., p. 318; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34. 2 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34, 434. both OtSs and 9ek occur. Cf. Ilclbing, 3 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 81. In the Thack., p. 145. Gr. d. Sept., p. 34; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 26; the * See W.-Sch., p. 84, for similar exx. 17(3.

LXX

m

Cf. Arrian, Peripl., p.

Gk. For pap. exx. of (iovp, Pap., pp. 257 f., 268 f.

inscr., as f>ods, pod': in late

Gr. d. griech.

irXovf

and xovu see Mayser,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

262 earlier

read

17x17

rixovs

possible,

C

according to Moeris and Blass.^

from

but Hort^ admits

rjxo},

and Nestle reads

In Lu. 21

from

i]xovs

ijxovs in his sixth edition.

reads dan^ov instead of

:

25

W. H.

to rjxos to

be

In Ac. 3

10

:

In eight instances in Paul

danlSovs.

8:2; Ph. 4 19; Col. 1 27; 2 2; Eph. 1:7, 2:7; 3:8, nominative and accusative we have to tXovtos, but 6 t\ovtos m Gospels, Jas., Heb., Rev. The genitive is always -tov. To (jKOTos instead of 6 okotos is read everj^where in the N. T. save in the late addition to Heb. 12 18 where o-zcorw appears, though ^b4)u> is the true text. The form baKpvaiv (Lu. 7 38, 44) is from boLKpv, an old word that is found now and then in Attic, but to doLKpvov appears also in Rev. 7: 17; 21 :4; baKphwv may belong to either decl. Sd/S^aro?/ {-tov, -rw) is the form used in the N. T. always, as Mk. 6 2, but aa^^aaiv as Mk. 1 21, etc. B has (7al3j3a.TOLs, like the LXX sometimes, in Mt. 12 1, 12. KaTr]yu)p is accepted by W. H. and Nestle in Rev. 12 10 on the authority of A against XBCP, which have the usual KaTriyopos. According to WinerSchmiedeP this is not Greek, but a transliteration of the Aramaic ^la'itjp. Blass,"* however, thinks it is formed on the model of pi77cop. Several words fluctuate between the masculine and the neuter in the second declension. In Lu. 14 16; Rev. 19 9, 17, several (2 Cor. 16)

:

:

:

in the

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

MSS. read

instead of the usual

Selirvos

has the plural

:

8e1irvov.

Like the old Greek,

Lu. 8 29; Ac. 16 26; 20 23, but Before Polybius ^vyov was more common (Thayer), but in the N. T. it is ^vyos (Mt. 11 30). '0 depieXios is SeafjLos

ol

decr/jLoi

in Ph. 1

:

deafxd in

:

:

:

13.

:

the only form of the nom. sing, in the N. T., as 2 Tim. 2

(supply like the

\idos)

Rev. 21

;

19,

:

but

to.

The

plural depLeXlovs

LXX and the Attic.

6ep.k\La

:

19

26 we have in Heb.

(ace.)

in Ac.

16

:

may be either mascuhne used in the quotation from the O. T. instead of the older to vwtov. In the early Greek 6 o-iros (never to cjItov) had a plural in atra as well as o-Trot. The same thing is true of the N. T. MSS. for Ac. 7 12 except that they diRev. 21 :i 14, or neuter. In Ro. 11 11

:

10;

19.

:

QefxeXiov (ace.)

10 6

vcoros is

:

vide between

1

and

to.

alra

and rd

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28. 6 f ., 6 eXeos

and

Gr. d. Sept., p. 47

f.

See

p.

Cf. also Thack., Gr., pp. 153 2

Notes on Orth.,

Of.

t6 eX., 6 fixos

p. 158.

aiTla,

LXX

cnTia is the correct text.

Uke variations in rb fiJXos and to ttX. See Helbing, aa^^aai and ffafiffdroLs, baKpvov and Sd/cpwi.

and

49 for

and

to

MSS.,

fj.,

for

6 irXoDros

ff.

See W.-Sch.,

p. 84, for exx. of t;xoi;s in

the

LXX.

For similar variations in the inscr. see Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 135. ' P. 85. So also Thayer, the Rabbins' name for the devil. 4 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 29; Deiss., Light, p. 90; Raderm., Gr., p. 15.

THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIS)

263

Blass^ indeed objects that aiTia does not suit the sense.

has aradiovs rather than the Attic

o-rdSta in

Lu. 24

:

Zradtou

13; Jo. 6

:

19

(W. H. and Nestle, but Tisch. o-rdSia ND), and is a marginal reading in Rev. 21 16 instead of (jTablwv. (e) The Mixed Declension. Some substantives with special inflection have this. It is particularly in foreign names in the a and o declensions that this inflection became popular. " The stem ends in a long vowel or diphthong, which receives -s for nominative and -V for accusative, remaining unchanged in vocative, genitive, and dative singular. 'Irjaovs is the most conspicuous of many N. T. examples. It plays a large part in modern Greek." ^ Hence we have 'Irjaovs nominative, 'Itjo-oO genitive-ablative, as Mt. 26 6; dative, etc., as Mt. 27 57; vocative Mk. 1 24. Some MSS. of the LXX have dative 'I-qaol in Deut. 3 21, etc. The accusative is 'Irjaovv, as Mt. 26 4. 'Icocrrj is the genitive of 'Icoarjs according to the reading of Mt. 27 56 in W. H. instead of 'Icoo-170, but in Mk. 6 3 'looarJTos is the reading. So runs Aevels :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

(nominative, Lu. 5:29), Aevel (genitive, Lu. 3:24), Aeveiu (accu-

Dative appears only in the

sative, Lu. 5:27).

34 30

LXX

as Gen.

10 and the genitive in -^ (Rev. 7:6), but Hort^ calls attention to the fact that ii.^B have Mavaaarj instead of the nominative in Mt. 1 10, making the word indeclinable. :

Mamo-arjs has accusative Mavaaaij in

Aevel.

Mt.

1

:

:

Proper Names.

(/)

have

'IcLKw^op in

Mt. 4

'IaKw/3 is

(Mt. 2

Kav8a (Ac. 27 (Lu. 4

:

:

16),

26), 265o/xa

and ixaKeWov

(1

Avarpav see 5

:

:

:

1,

:

(Jude

Cor. 10

like 'lovaTos (Ac.

:

18, but B -prj but wdaa 'I., 2 :3), ^lXlttol (Ac. 16:12), Mvppa (Ac. 27: 5), Uarapa (Ac. 21 1), "LapeiTTa

plural, as Qvaretpa (Rev. 2 'lepoaoXvixa

Mt. 1 2, but we names have only the and ABC -pav, 1 11),

indeclinable in

Several proper

21.

:

:

7).

25)

The Latin words nbhos (Mt. 5 15) are inflected. So Latin proper names :

18:7) and IlaOXos (Ro. 1:1).

For Tonoppas and

(/).

The Third Declension (consonants and close vowels and The third declension could easily be divided into several and thus we should have the five declensions of the Sanskrit and the Latin. But the usual seven divisions of the third declension have the genitive-ablative singular in -os (-ws). The consonantal 7.

i

v).

»

and

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28. -a,

Oe/jikXioi

and

-o, vutoi

In the

and

LXX

MSS. wc

-o, arddtov

and

and -a, ^vyol and aiTa. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 49.

find

Sec^tiol


" Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 46 f.; Thack., p. 154 f. ' In the proper names have great liberty in inflection. natural in a transl. Cf. Thack., Gr., pp. 160-171.

LXX

This

is

quite

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

264

NEW TESTAMENT

stems show more sweeping changes than the vocahc (sonantic) stems in this declension.^ Only those changes that are related to the N. T. Greek can be here discussed. (a) The Nominative as Vocative. There is an increasing use of nominative forms as vocatives. This usage had long existed for nouns that were oxytone or had labial or guttural stems. Elsewhere in g"eneral the stem had served as vocative. No notice is here taken of the common use of the article with the nominative form as vocative, like rj ttols (Lu. 8 54), a construction coming under syntactical treatment. According to WinerSchmiedel- the use of the singular without the article belongs also to syntax and the solution of W. H. is called "certainly false." :

Hort ^ had suggested that in the case of OvyaT-qp as vocative (Mk. 5 34; Lu. 8 48; Jo. 12 15) and TrarTjp (Jo. 17 21, 24, 25) the long vowel (??) was pronounced short. Why not the rather suppose that the vocative is like the nominative as in the case of labial and guttural stems? The usage is thus extended sometimes to these liquids. Indeed, in Jo. 17 25 we have iraTrip ayaQ'e, the adjective having the vocative form. In Mk. 9 19 (Lu. 9 41) we have d> 7ej'ea aTrto-ros and a(})pu)v in Lu. 12:20; 1 Cor. 15:36). See also w TrXiyprjs (Ac. 13 10) for -es, which might be an indeclinable form like the accusative (ii, 2 (/)). But these adjectives show that the usage is possible with substantives. There are indeed variant readings in the MSS. above, which have dvyarep and Tarep, but in Mt. 9 22 DGL have Ovyar-qp. Note also o.vep (1 Cor. 7: 16) and yvvai (Lu. 13 12). For peculiarities in nom. see (d). (fe) The Accusative Singular. The theoretical distinction that consonant-stems had the accusative singular in -a and vocalic stems in -v began to break down very earh\ From the third century B.C. Jannaris^ suspects that popular speech began to have all accusative singulars vnih. v, an overstatement, but still the tendency was that way. The use of v with words hke -koKiv, vavv (Ac. 27 41, only time in N. T., elsewhere vernacular ifKotov), etc., together wnth the analog}^ of the first and second declensions, had a :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

positive influence. tive ending -a plus

v,

See 5 (/) for discussion of the double accusalike avbpav in the papjTi.^ These forms belong

though formed after the analogy and so were presented when first reached in the dis-

in realit}' to the third declension,

of the

first,

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 121.

'

Notes on Orth.,

p. 158.

Moulton,

2

P. 90.

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35, gives mi7T7?p as

voc. three times in a iii/A.D. pap. (B.U.). 4

Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 119.

b

Moulton,

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 435.

265

(kAISEI^)

THE DECLENSIONS

However, there are other consonant-stems which form In Tit. 3 9 and Ph. 1 15 the accusative in -v instead of -a. Rev. in 3 7 and 20 1 the Attic So eptda.' of instead we have epcp by any means, but tendency new not a is this for KXeTu is read, /cXeTSa, though here also D has have MSS. the 52 11 in Lu.

cussion.

:

:

:

:

:

LXX

found in the appears in Ac. 24 27 and Ju. KXet5a

KXetv.

is

4,

:

as in Judg. 3

and

A

has

it

:

Xdptra

25.

in Ac. 25

:

9,

but

LXX

the holds the field (forty times) .2 In the and Ionic and poetical xo-pi-ra occurs only twice (Zech. 4:7; 6 14) the Roman period. Cf Thackis absent from the papyri before For the irrational p with M«tf^ in Jo. 5 36 see Gr., p. 150.

the Attic

xapii'

:

:

eray,

In Ac. 27 40 the correct text

Adjectives.

is apreixo^va,

:

not -ova,

from nom. aprknuv. In Winer-Schmiedel (p. 88) (c) The Accusative Plural. except in 1 Cor. 1:11 epeis is given as nominative and accusative but as a matter of fact the accusative plural reading does not appear in the N. T. except as an alternative 5 20 In Gal. eptp). text (correct 9 'ipeis in {^''ACKLP, in Tit. 3 "an probably epis, than rather W. H. put epets in the margin K\el8as but 1 Rev. in 18, /cXets W. H. read ras itacistic error." nom.),

{iptSes,

:

:

=^

:

and Mt. 16 19. In Ac. 24 27 x^ptras is supported by HP (N^EL, and xapti' text) (correct most of the cursives against x^-pi-Tf^ The accusative in -vs has changed into -as with -i; and -ov etc.).

in

:

:

stems, as

/36as

from

/3o0s (Jo.

2

:

14

f.,

cf.

LXX),

from

Ixevs

(Mt. 14

tion of the accusative plural

was

carried

rpvs (Rev. 14

:

18), IxOvas

jBdrpvas

from ^6-

This simplificaJust as further.

17) .^

:

still

TroXeis, so ^aaiXkas has beTToXeas had long ago been dropped for accusative plural is regthis "and nominative, come -eTs hke the LXX -eas appears a the In -evs."^ in words all ular in N. T. for show -eis as inscriptions Attic the B.C. 307 since few times, but and Xenophon in sometimes indeed found is It accusative.6

1

Cf. Hort,

HelNotes on Orth., p. 157. For the LXX sec Thack., p. 140; 40 f., where the N. T. situation is duplicated.

bing, Gr. d. Sept., p.

aces, in the insor.

See Schweizer, Pcrg. Inschr., p. 151, for illustr. of these and x-ip'", etc. For the pap. see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35, both x&P^ra f. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., p. 271 3 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157. Arrian has IxBvas. 4 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26, and W.-Sch., p. 86. 2

LXX

MSS.

(Thack., Gr., p. 147) show

Usually

vt^os

Holbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 43. 6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26. 8 Meisterh., p. 141. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 86.

p 147

f.;

and

vtchs, vrjo-^

and mDs,

P6as.

Cf.

ixOvas, p. 44.

Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 43.

So the LXX. Cf. Thack., Gr., Wackcrn. (Indogcr. Forsch., 1903,

'

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

266

Thucydides, though the rels in Mt. 23 34, etc. :

scriptions.^

^{

:

:

this itacism (Hort,

disown it. Cf. ypaufxafew forms in -eas survive in the in-

strict Atticists

A

(from

Niyo-reis

8 3 and Mt. 15 32.

NEW TESTAMENT

the correct accusative in

vrjaris) is

here reads

Notes on Orth.,

vrjarLs,

p. 157).

but

Mk.

unrehable on The Achaean, Elean, is

Delphian and Phocian inscriptions^ (Northwest Greek) have the accusative plural in -es just like the nominative (cf. Latin) .^ It is very common in the modern Greek vernacular and in the papyri.* Moulton^ finds many examples like ywalKes, nrjves, ovres, Travres, In the LXX reacrapes as accusative is very TeKToves, Teaaapes, etc. common as a variant in the text of Swete.^ In Herodotus reaaapeaKaldeKa is indeclinable and TptiaKalbeKa in Attic since 300 B.C. ^ So in the N. T. some MSS. read rkaaapes (though the most still have Teaaapas) as J^A in Jo. 11 17, X in Ac. 27 29, AP in Rev. 4 4; 7: 1, N* in Rev. 9 14.^ In Rev. 4 4 the best authority (N, AP, etc.) is really on the side of reaaapes (second example).^ Indeed "in the N. T. reaaapas never occurs without some excellent authority for reaaapes." ^^ In the first 900 of Wilcken's ostraca, Moulton (ProL, p. 243) finds forty-two examples of accusative reaaapes and twenty-nine of reaaapas. Moulton ^^ considers it probable that other nominative forms in Revelation, like aarepes in A (Rev. 1 16), may be illustrations of this same tendency. :

:

:

:

:

:

due not to the nom. but to compensative

p. 371) thinks the ace. in -€is is

lengthening. ^

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 150.

2

Also early in Phthiotis

Forsch., 1903, p. 368).

Pap., 1906, p. 270

Man.

Wackernagel, Zur Nominahnfl., indoger. Gk. Gr., p. 119; Mayser, Gr. d. griech.

(J.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

f.

of

Comp.

PhiloL, p. 546.

3

Giles,

4

Moulton, ProL,

6

CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34, 435.

6 8

W.-Sch., p. 87. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

9

Cf. Hort,

10

Moulton,

p. 36.

Notes on Pro!.,

Sel.

Cf. Volker, Pap. Graec. Synt., p. 28. Cf. also Buresch, Rhein. Mus.,

lb.

'

p. 26.

XLVI,

218.

Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 163

f.

Cf. Jann., p. 120.

Read., p. 138.

p. 36.

"In Rev.

CB

have

-pas,

ik

3/5,

AP

3/6."

H.

Scott. 11

lb.

This use of -es as ace.

in -es in the

mod. Gk. vernac.

may be compared

Cf.

with the common ace. pi. Cf. nom. like pp. 47 ff.

Thumb, Handb.,

de Gr. Hist. Neo-grecque, 1886, P partie, p. xviii). In the Eleatic dial, the loc.-dat. pi. is -ots as in Cf. Meister, Bd. II, p. 61. The LXX MSS. show rtaaapes as ace.

6 irarepas (Psichari, Ess.

Even

vfxkpes,

XPVfJ-a-TOLs.

iroXires,

etc.

LXX

See Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 54. The ace. in -es rare in MSS. outside of Thack., Gr., p. 148 f. Moulton (Prol., p. 243, ed. 2) suggests that Ttaaapes. this tendency started with reaaapes because it is the only early cardinal that had a separate form for the ace. plural.

THE DECLENSIONS

267

(kaIZEIS)

(d) Peculiarities in the Nominative. In general one maysay that the various ways of forming the nominative singular in Greek are blending gradually into unity, the masculine in s and the feminine in a or 77. Many of the new substantives went over

Luke has gen. 'EXaLoJvos, in Ac. 1 12 from and the papyri give nearly thirty examples of this

to the first declension.^

nom.

'EXaiOiv,

noun.2

:

Jos. also (Ant. vii, 9, 2)

hand the use

of 'EXala

is

On

has 'EXaicows.

frequent (in Jos. also), as

the other to 6pos tCov

eis

But in Lu. 19:29 we have Trpos to opos rb (W. H.),and in Lu. 21:37 els to opos kt\. In both these examples it would be possible to have 'EXatcbi/, not as an indeclinable substantive, but as a lax use of the nominative with 6 KoXovfjiepos (cf. Revelation and papyri). So Deissmann.^ But even so it is still possible for 'EXatuiv to be proper (on the whole probably correct) in these two disputed passages.* It is even probable that the new nominative 'EXaidov is made from the 'EXaicoj'

(Mt. 21

:

1).

KoKovfjLevov 'EXaioov

genitive 'EXatcof .^

a variant with

epts in Gal. 5 20 ( marg. Tim. 6:4, but in 1 Cor. 1:11 all MSS. have €>5es. W. H. once (Ac. 1:10) accept the rare form eadriats (2, 3 Mace.) rather than the usual kadrjs, though the Alexandrian and Syrian classes have it also in Lu. 24 4. In Lu. 13 34 J
W.

H.),

1

"Epets is

Cor. 3:3; 2 Cor. 12:20;

:

1

:

:

:

:

inflection in -as, -aos = -a;s, has nearly vanished.^ A few examples still survive in the inscriptions.^ In Lu. 1 36 the Ionic form yrjpet from yfjpas is found, as often in the LXX and Test.

The

:

12L

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p.

2

Moulton,

3

B.

*

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 93. Moulton (Prol., pp. 69, full presentation of the facts.

S., p.

Prol., p. 49; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

Deiss., B. S., pp.

208

ff.

210.

235) has a 6

Moulton,

*

The form

1901, p. 35.

Prol., p. 235. opvi^i ai)i)ears several

times in the pap.

Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149.

LXX

7

W.-Sch., p. 89.

8

Blass, Gr. of

*

Schweizer, Perg. Insclir., p. 156.

6pi'Lduii>.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 26.

Moulton, CI. Rev.,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

268 XII

The 8

and

plural Kpka (from Kpkai)

Rom.

13;

:

LXX)

Kepas always in the N. T. (as in

Pat.^

plural Kepara (Rev. 8 times)

14

:

the only form in the N. T.

is

21) as in the

has the Attic

repas regularly rkpara (11 times).

LXX, though

a

MSS.

(1

Cor.

or so in each

case has Kpkas (singular).

The Genitive-Ablative Forms.

These call for little rewhich see later. ZtmTrecos (from alvain) is uniform in the N. T., as Mt. 17 20. Tlr]xvs has no genitive singular in the N. T. though Trrjxeos is common in the LXX,^ but has irrjxociv (from Ionic Tni]x^(^v or through assimilation to neuters in -os), not the Attic Trjxecoi'. In Jo. 21 8 only A Cyr. have Trr]xeo}v and in Rev. 21:17 onl}^ K.^ For the genitive singular of 'lucrrjs and Mavaaarjs see 6 (e). It is not observed in dpeoov (Rev. 6 15) if) Contraction. and xetXecoj' (Heb. 13 15). In both instances the Ionic absence of contraction is alwaj^s found in the LXX (Prov. 12 14). This open form is not in the Attic inscriptions, though found in MSS. of Attic writers and the poets especially.^ In the kolvt] it is a "widespread tendency" to leave these forms in -os uncontracted, though huv is correct in Ac. 4 22, etc.^ So the LXX, Thackeray, (e)

mark save

in the adjective, for

:

:

:

:

:

:

Gr., p. 151.

Proper Names.

Mcouo-^s has always the genitive-ablative though no nominative Moivaevs is known. The genitive Mcoarj appears usually in the LXX, as Num. 4 41, and the vocative Mojo-^ as in Ex. 3 4. Cf Thackeray, Gr., p. 163 f. W. H. have McovaeX (always with v. r. -afj) as in Mk. 9 4, except in Ac. 7 44 where the form in -f? is due to the LXX (usual form (g)

Mcoucrecos (Jo.

9

28),

:

:

:

.

:

:

there).^

where

The

-7]v,

accusative

as in Ac.

inative, not -u!v)

the

LXX.

ZoXo/xoim, a

'^oKofxuv (so

in the

else-

nom-

Mt. 1 6 as usually in 6 have the accusative So the genitive llo\ofjt,ojvos in Mt. 12 42,

best

-oopra.

once only (Lu. 16:29),

LXX).

(so

indeclinable in

is

But the few

Mcouo-ea

is

7:35

MSS.

in

J<

in

Mt.

1

:

:

:

LXX

W.-Sch., p. 86. So Sir. 2.5 3, etc. The also has the Ionic gen. See Thack., Gr., p. 149; Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 42. Cf. Mayser, ^ As Ex. 25 Gr. d. Griech. Pap., p. 276. 9. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87. ' Hort, Notes on Orth. But Xen. and Plut. (often) have ir-qx^v. See 1

:

yr)povs.

:

W.-M.,

p. 75.

In

LXX

Gr., p. 45; Thack., p.

note

7n7xeos

and

Tnyxews,

irrixeoji'

and

TT-qxi^v.

Helbing,

15L

5 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 27. W.-Sch., p. 88. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 58-60, for discussion of the dccl. of proper names in the LXX. The phenomena correspond to those in N. T. MSS. UpofjLrjdtvs had an Attic nom. -rjs, gen. -ews,

^ «

Thumb, Handb.,

§

330.

1.

4

.

THE DECLENSIONS though a few MSS. have

269

(kAIZEIz)

The Gospels have uniformly the

-ojvtos.

W. H. accept SoXo/xw^ros (so though BD etc. have covos in 5: 12. Cf. Eew^coj/ros (from nominative -oiv). ALOTpe<j)r}s (3 Jo. 9) and 'Ep/jLoykv-qs (2 Tim. 1 15) occur in nom. There are other proper names (Roman and Semitic) which are inflected regularly hke Ba(3v\cov (Mt. 1:11), But

genitive in -uvos. also 5

:

in Ac. 3: 11

12),

:

TaXKloiv (Ac. 18: 12), 'EXato^p (Ac. 1

(Ac. 9

:

35),

2t5cbj'

(Mt. 11

:

12)

:

21), Zl^o:v

Kalaap (Mt. 22: (Mt. 4:

18).

17), Sapcbv

There should

be mentioned also SaXa/xts (dative -Tvl, Ac. 13:5). names in the LXX, Thackeray, Gr., pp. 163 ff

Cf. proper

Most of the examples (h) Heteroclisis and Metaplasm. have already been treated under the first declension 5 (g) or the The accusative iiXa (Mk. 9 50) is like second declension 6 (d) the old Greek 6 aXs. Some MSS. (Western and Syrian classes) in Mk. 9 49 have dXi also. In Mk. 9 50 KLA have to a\a as nominative (cf. Lev. 2 13) Hke yaXa. But the best MSS. (k\BDLA) give TO aXas in the first two examples in 9 50 and aXa (accusative) in the third (so W. H.). So also Mt. 5 13 and Lu. 14 34. Cf. .

•

:

:

:

:

:

:

dative aXart in Col. 4

:

In the

6.

LXX

:

to aXas is rare

(Thackeray,

Papyri show to aXas in third century b.c (Moulton, and Milligan, Expositor, Feb., 1908, p. 177). Instead of opvis in Rev. 18 2 we have the genitive bpvkov, from opveov (good old Greek word), opveoLs in Rev. 19 17, and opvea in 19 21. In Mk. 6 and Lu. 2 44 avyyevemi (cf. 1 Mace. 10 88) is probably^ from This is a good Cf. 1 Mace. 10 89. cvyyevevs, not avyyevr]s. place for me to record the admiration which has possessed me as I have tested the work of Hort through the maze of details in the

Gr., p. 152).

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

MS.

evidence concerning the forms.

These do not, of course, belong to Indeclinable Words. any declension. Josephus Grccizcd most of the Hebrew proper names like 'A/xtra/Sos (Mt. 1:4, kixivaba^) ? Some he put in the Blass* first declension, many in the second and third declensions.^ sums the matter up by observing that "the Hebrew personal names of the O. T., when quoted as such," arc indeclinable. This is an overstatement. But certainly many that in the LXX and inflected, might have been, such, for instance, the N. T. are not -i^/xecoj', to go no further.-'' KeSpwp, waX/xcof, It 'laKujS, as Kapwv, is hardly worth while to give the entire list of these words. 8.

'

'

1

2 ^

^ W.-Sch., p. 91. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., j). 20. lb. for extensive list. Thack., Gr., p. 169, suggests that i)laoe-namc3 in -uv are declined or in-

declinable according to rank and distance.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

270

They

include such other words as the majority of those in the

1 and that in Lu. 3, besides many other proper names/ including such geographical names as Alv6:v, Bri9(f)ayri,

genealogy in Mt. Hlwv,

etc.

"ZlvS.,

There are other indeclinable Hebrew and Aramaic words such as Kop^dp (Mk. 7 11), /xdwa (Rev. 2 17), Trao-xa (Lu. 2 :41), aiKtpa (Lu. 1 15 as in LXX). The gender (fem.) of the indeclinable oval (Rev. 9 12; 11 14) is probably due, as Blass^ suggests, to 6\i\l/Ls. In 1 Cor. 9 16 oval is used as a substantive (so :

:

:

:

:

:

LXX). The use of

also

airo in

Rev.

1

6 cop :

It is evidently

God), just as 13

:

/cat

4, etc.,

6

rju

Kal 6 epx6n€vos in

the nominative after

belongs more to syntax than to accidence.

on purpose

(to express the

unchangeableness of

apposition with

6 SidaaKoKos Kal 6 Kvptos is in

ixt

(Jo.

13) in lieu of quotation-marks.

II.

Donaldson^

THE ADJECTIVE ("ONOMA 'EniGETON) probably right in saying that, in general, the

is

explanation of the adjective belongs to syntax rather than

etymology. that 1.

But

there are

[to

some points concerning the adjective

demand treatment here. The Origin of the Adjective.

Adjectives are not indis-

pensable in language, however convenient they

may

be."*

In the

an unimportant part. Whitney^ says: " The accordance in inflection of substantive and adjective stems is so complete that the two cannot be separated in treatment from one another." He adds^ that this wavering line of distinction between substantive and adjective is even more uncertain in Sanskrit than in the other early Indo-Germanic tongues. Most of the Sanskrit adjectives have three endings, the masculine and neuter being usually a stems while the feminine may have a or i, this matter being "determined in great part only by actual usage, and not by grammatical rule." So likewise Giles in his Comparative Philology has no distinct treatment of adjectives. The adjective is an added descriptive appellative {ovofxa eTlderop) while the substantive is an essential appellative [ovotxa ovcnaaTLKou). But substantives were doubtless Sanskrit, for instance, the adjective plays

2

See further list in W.-Sch., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32.

6

Sans. Gr., p. 111.

^

lb. Cf.

1

Monro, Horn.

p. 91.

^

^ew

*

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 29.

Crat., p. 502.

Gr., p. 117, for the adjectival use of the substantive.

THE DECLENSIONS

271

(kAISEIs)

used in this descriptive sense before adjectives arose, as they are So, for instance, we say brother man, Doctor A., still so used. Cf. in the

Professor B., etc.

3:6),

etc.

position,

This

and

it is

is,

N. T.

h

'lopdavp iroTa^w

tc3

indeed, apposition, but

it is

(Mt.

descriptive ap-

just at this point that the adjective emerges in

Other Greek adjectives in form as in idea are variations from the genitive case, the genus In itself the adjective is as truly a noun as the substantive. case."^ As to the form, while it is not necessary^ that in every case the adjective express its gender by a different inflection, yet the adjectives wath three genders become far commoner than those with two or one.^ From the etymological point of view this inflection in different genders is the only distinction between subThe Greek has a much more highly stantive and adjective.^ developed system of adjectives than the Sanskrit, which has survived fairly well in modern Greek, though a strong tendency is present to simplify adjectives to the one declension (-oj, -77, -ov). Participles, though adjectives in inflection, are also verbs in sevthe early period of the language.^

eral respects

and

call for

separative discussion.

The

process of

treating the adjective as a substantive belongs to syntax.^

substantivizing of the adjective

is

The

as natural, though not so com-

mon

in Greek as in Latin, as the adjectivizing of the substantive which we have been discussing.'^ The distinction between adjective and substantive is hard to draw in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 66). In modern Greek every adjective has a special feminine form. The development is complete. Cf. Thumb, pp.

66

ff.

2. Inflection of

Adjectives.

In Greek as in Sanskrit, the ad-

jective has to follow the inflection of the substantive in the various

declensions, the three genders being obtained first

by combining the

with the second or the third declensions.

Adjectives with One Termination. Of course at first been the way the earliest adjectives arose. Then the genders would be formed. But analogy soon led to the formation of most adjectives with three endings. Some of these (a)

this

1

may have

Delbriick, Syntakt. Forsch., IV, pp. 65, 259.

Cf. Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Phik)l., p. 239. * Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 139. Donaldson, Now Crat., p. 474. » Donaklson, Now Crat., p. 502. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30. " Brug. (Griooh. Gr., pp. 41.3-417) has no discussion of the adjective save from the syntactical point of view. ^ See Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 414 f., for numerous exx. in the carHer Gk. 2 3

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

272

NEW TESTAMENT

adjectives with one ending were used only with the

mascuUne

the feminine, and few were ever used with the neuter.^

or

Jannaris^

them rather substantives than

considers

adjectives, but they ilfrom substantive to adjective, like In fact they are used of animated beings.

lustrate well the transition airaLs,

fxamp, 4)vyas.

In the N. T. we have ixpiva^ (Mt. 7 15; 1 Cor. 5 10), irkv-ns (2 Cor. ZvyYevls 9 9. Cf. TrXarrjTes, Jude 13 B), and avyyevl'i (Lu. 1 36). is a later feminine form lilce ehyevls for the usual avyyevrjs (both masculine and feminine) which Winer ^ treats as a substantive (so Thayer). Strictly this feminine adjective belongs* only to words :

:

:

:

in -Ti7$

and

by way

Blass^ quotes evyevldwv ywaiKo^v

-evs.

Modern Greek

parison.

still

of

com-

has a few of these adjectives in use.

The ancient adjectives in -tjs (evyevqs) have disappeared from the modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handb., p. 72). Some adjectives (6) Adjectives with Two Terminations. never had more than two endings, the masculine and the feminine having the same form. In the so-called Attic second deBut a few simple clension this is true of tXecos (Mt. 16:22). adjectives of the second declension never developed a feminine ending, as, for instance, ^dp^apos (1 Cor. 14

21:34), to

acori7ptos (Tit.

eu7ei/?7s

:

in

(Lu.

:

In the N. T.

11)."

The

Pet. 3:4).

Tjavxi-os (1

which end

2

11), e{al)ct)vi8Los (Lu.

riavxos

has changed

adjectives in the third declension

or ~o)v have no separate feminine form.

-ijs

19:12),

(Ac.

emel3rjs

Then again some simple

10:7)

ixei^c^v

So

(Jo. 15:13), etc.

adjectives varied'' in usage in the earlier

Greek, especially in the Attic, and some of these have only two endings in the N. T., like dtStos (Ro. 1 20), epTj/xos (Ac. 1 20, etc., :

:

and often as substantive with yrj or x<^po- not expressed), Koapnos (1 Tim. 2:9), ohp6.vLos (Lu. 2:13; Ac. 26:19), X6apos (1 Tim. 5:13), 4>pbvip.o^ (Mt. 25:2, 4, 9), co^^Xt/xos (1 Tim. 4:8; 2 Tim. 3: 16). With still others N. T. usage itself varies as in the case of atcbi/ios (Mt. 25:46, etc.) and aloivia (Heb. 9:12; 2 Th. 2:16, and often as a variant reading); 'tTOLjjios (Mt. 25 10) and ItoIixt] (1 Pet. 1:5); ixdraios (Jas. 1 26) and fiarala (1 Pet. 1 18); o^otos (Rev. 4:3, second example correct text) and d/jLoia (Rev. 9:10, :

:

:

1

K.-BL,

3

W.-M.,

p.

547

f.

But

4

W.-Sch., p. 97. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33.

6

Cf. K.-BL,

also

had no

p. 80.

I,

fern.,

LXX

2

Hist.

^

ib.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 143.

cf.

p.

535

as

ihvrjTos.

f.,

for fuller

list.

Some

of the simple verbals in -ros

we see a very slight tendency towards giving a In the adjs. Thack., Gr., p. 172.

'

all

I,

fern,

form to

273

THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIs)

though W. H. put dfxoLOLs in the margin instead of ofiolas, 19) oo-tos construed with (1 Tim. 2:8; so probably, though daiovs may be ;

The

instead of xetpas)-

kiralpovTas

early Attic inscriptions furnish

examples of two endings with such adjectives as doKLfxos (no feminine example in the N. T.) and Xoittos with either two or three (N. T. only three). ^ The papyri furnish eprjfjLos and ovpavLos as feminine and others not so used in the N. T., as 5u-atos, ixerpLos, It was the rule with compound adjectives to have only aTTopipos.-

two endings,

most

for the

them never developed a feminine

of

This tendency survives in the inscriptions, (17) especially wth compounds of a- privative and prepositions, and in the papyri also we have abundant examples.^ The N. T. usage

form, as 6

is

iiXoyos.^

well illustrated

rov Kal afxapavTOP

by

1

Pet. 1

Cf. Jas. 3

.

:

:

4, els KXrjpovofjiiav a
17.

The great maAdjectives with Three Terminations. Greek adjectives, like d7a06s, -fj, -6v, developed three endings and continue normal (cf. Thumb, Handbook, p. 68), as (c)

jority of

modern Greek. Some of the compound adjechad three endings, especially compounds in -lkos and The same thing is observed in -LOS, as {jLovapxt-KV, ava^ia (Plato) .^ the inscriptions" and the papyri.^ In the N. T. we have several examples, as apyos, -n (Attic always apyos, though Epimenides has

is

universal in the

tives also

20 according to BC. In Mk. 4 28 avToparr] is not entirely new, for classic writers use it. In 2 Jo. 13 (and probably also 1) we have kXe/cri?. In Mt. 4 13 has -Lov. However, in Lu. the MSS. give irapadaXaaala, but in 1

-17)

Tim. 5

:

13; Tit. 1

:

12; Jas. 2

:

:

:

D

LXX

the feminine form, though occasionally the and older Greek had -la, varying like the other compounds in Other adjectives of three endings belong to the third and -LOS.

6

17 TrapaXtos

:

is

Cf. also

Cf. Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 148.

1

aicovios, Koanio^, in

Magnesia

Aristophanes used PaaiXetos, ^e/3aios, fiaKa(Nachm., Magn. Wirth, De Motione Adjcctivorum, pios, oijpavios, warpios with two endings (G. For further discus(ib., p. 49 f.). Euripides of also true This is 51). 1880, p. dreier sion of adjectives with two endings see Willielm, Zur Motion der Adjec. etc., p. Lukianos der Sprachgebr. Der Wilhelm, 23; etc., Griech. p. in End. Inschr., p. 140).

LXX

shows the exCf. llelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 57 f. On the whole the terminations tension of the fcni. so that adjs. which in Attic have two or three

23.

have

tliree in

the

LXX

{aypios, ^e^aios, dUaLos, eXeWtpos, /xdraLos).

Thack., Gr.,

p. 172. 2

Mayser, Gr.

*

Cf.

d. griech. Pap., p.

Nachm., Magn.

Mayser, Gr.

289

f.

'

K.-Bl.,

Inschr., p. 141; Schweizer,

I,

p. 538.

Terg. Inschr., p.

158;

d. griech. Pap., p. 291.

6

K.-Bl.,

7

Mayser, Gr.

I, p.

538

f.

d. griech. Pap., p. 291.

^

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 158.

4

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

274 the

first

declensions, like o^vs, o^ela, d^v;

ttSs, iracra, tcLp;

hcov, eKovcra,

eKov] fxeXas, fieKaiva, /xeXav; jikyas, /JieyaKr], iJ-eya; ttoXvs, iroXKi], toXv.

Cf. the perfect active participle in

sometimes have

t6v

{tolv

by Swete

retained

totov,

:

like

etc.)

Indeclinable

Cf. Helbing,

19 26.

in Sir.

LXX MSS.

The

-cos, -via, -~6s.

as indeclinable

Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 51.

Tr\rjpris.

is

irav

ttXtjpt??

See

ib.

(/)

below. (d)

The Accusative

declension have this chapter,

them

(Ro. 4:

(Ro. 16: (Jo. 5

though

all,

aae^rjv

:

5, (g), for

i,

in

a few cases the testimony

5), aaaKT]v

ixd^oiv in

adjectives of the third

W. H.

the discussion in detail.

(Heb. 6:

ABEGMA)

to irrational v with subjunctive

fi

They

strong.^

use of irrational

likened

is

is

See reject

are

19), iiel^wv (Jo. 5: 36), avyyevriv

The

11), vyiriv (Jo. 5: 11).

36

Some

Singular.

after the analogy of the first declension.

v

{^v).

by Moulton Cf. ch. VI,

?/

with

ixei^o)

{Prol, p. 49)

ii

(c).

m

Adjectives. Two points are involved, (e) Contraction absence (or the of it) and the use of a or the fact of contraction forms uncontracted of adjectives are not so The t, p. 77 after e,

common

as

The

(6).

—ovs,

is

the case with substantives.

like

aTrXoOs,

dp7i;poOs,

StTrXoDs,

Here again we have a

Xpvaovs.

Cf. this chapter,

6,

i,

contracted forms are practically confined to forms in Trop4>vpovs,

still

(nSrjpovs,

xciX/v'ous,

further limitation, for the

uncontracted forms occur chiefly in the Apocalypse and in {< and in the case of xp^(^ovs.^ Cf. Rev. 4:4; 5:8, where J^ reads But in Rev. 2 1 XPB read xpi^cwv, while AC have Xpvaeovs, -eas. Xpvadv in Rev. 1 13, though accepted by W. H. and xpvaecov. :

:

read by J^AC, (p. 28), as

L. P.^

is

rejected

shown on

(ii/iii

by

Blass, but achnitted

P. Lond. reads xpvaav

p. 257.

a.d.) also has xpvf^W V apyvpTJv.^

r)

In each instance

Thackeray

probably analogy has been at work."*

by Debrunner apyvpav, and

gives a very few uncontracted forms in -eos in the

(Gr., p.

172

f.)

LXX. W. H.

1 and xpaews in 1 Pet. 3 Hort^ considers the variations as "curious," but they find abundant parallel in the

accept the genitive

^adeoos in

Lu. 24

:

:

instead of the usual form in -os. in

TjiiLavs ^

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157

griech. Pap., p. 295.

Thack.

f.

For pap. exx. of

vyi^v see

Mayser, Gr. though

(Gr., p. 146) considers it a vulgarism,

d. it

began as early as iv/B.c. (see ScoKpdxTjj', rpLrjptjv). It is common u/a.d. 2 Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 34 f., for LXX. 3 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 35, 435. * Moulton, Prol., p. 48. Cf. T-qv Itp-qv Kt(t>a\r]v on Rom. tomb (Kaibel, Epigram. Graeca, 1878, p. 269). 6 Notes on Orth., p. 158.

THE DECLENSIONS

275

(kAI2;EI2)

papyri as does xpv<^^^^ abovc.^ In Mk. 6 23 rnjLla-ovs, not -eos, is the genitive form, the usual (probably only) form in the pa:

The neuter

plural riniaea has practically no support in Lu. though ruilarj is the Text. Rec. on the authority of late uncials and cursives. Td rjulav has slight support. W. H. read rd r]nlaia (NBQ 382, L having itacistic -eta) and derive it from a pyri.-

19

8,

:

possible

rnxiaios.^

was the

earlier

But

it is

possible,

if

not probable, that

rj/jLiaeLa

form changed by itacism to rudiaLa^ The plural of vrjaTLs is i>7]aT€Ls (Mk. 8:3; Mt. 15: 32), and not vrjaTLs as already sho^vn.^ For participles in -via, -vlrjs see this chapter, i, 5, (c). As a rule the forms in -virjs and -prjs predominate, but note aTdpq. in Lu. 1 36.'^ In the case of v'^i-ns, whereas the Attic had accusative v'Yio. {vjLy) in Plato, Phadr. 89 d), the N. T., like the inscriptions, papyri and the LXX, has only vyLTJ (Jo. 5: 11, 15; 7: 23).^ In Jo. 18 1 x^i-mppov is almost certainly from x^'i-f^o-ppos instead of :

:

the classical xetM^ppoos.^

In 2 Pet. 2 5 oySoov :

is

not contracted,

though sometimes the papyri have 6y8ovs, 6y8ovvy The papyri have cleared up (/) Indeclinable Adjectives.

two points of much interest here. One is the use of ir\r]pr]s in N. T. MSS. in an oblique case. In Mk. 4 28 Hort (Appendix, p. 24) suggests Tr\r]py]s alrov (C* two lectionaries) as probably the original. In Ac. 6 5 W. H. put ap8pa irXriprjs in the margin, though Tr\r]pT] is read only by B among the MSS. of importance. In Jo. 1 14 all the MSS. (save D 5 followed by Chrys. and Theoph.) have irXripris. Moulton^'' indeed suggests that 7rXi7p7y was the original text, which was changed to the vulgar irXrjprjs. But the argument can be turned round just as easily. In almost every N. T. instance of an oblique case of ttXtjptjs good uncials :

:

:

have the indeclinable form (Moulton, Prol., p. 50). The LXX examples of indeclinable irXrjprjs (cf. Hort, Appendix, p.

also has 1

Xpvakifi is

exceedingly

common

in the pap.

(Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901,

p. 435).

Mayscr, Gr.

2

d. grioch. Pap., p.

ton, CI. Rev., 1901, p.

M. So

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158.

3

294

f.

Cf. also Deiss., B. S., p. 186;

Moul-

LXX,

Thack., Gr., p. 179. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d.

also the

Sept., p. 52.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87.

*

and

oLKtlos is

^

added,

—r;^)

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 25.

adjs. with ace. in-r; (and ('f.

this ch.,

ii,

2,

sometimes

((/).

N. T. Gk., p. 25. " Mayscr, Gr. d. griech. Bap., p. 294. See Croncrt, Mem., p. 179; Turner, Jour. Tlieol. St., I, pp. Milligan (N. T. Doc. $, p. 05) finds one ex. of indecl. wXripr]s b.c.

Prol., p.

ff.

«

For

see Dieterich, Unters., p. 175.

Blass, Gr. of

8

10

100

occurs in Antoninus Libcralis (ab. 150 a.d.)

Notes on Orth., p. 157. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

Ilort,

6

;'

'II/xt(7£ta

analogous.

.50.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

276

So Job 21

24).

J^ABC.

24,

:

common"

"fairly

The examples of TrXiypiys so used are and come as early as the second

in the papyri^

There seems therefore no reason to refuse to con14 as accusative and to accept it as the text in Mk. 4 28 and Ac. 6:5. The other example of indeclinable adjectives is found in comparative forms in -co, like TrXeiw. Moulton^ points out that in Mt. 26 53 NBD read TrXetw 5co5e«;a Xeytcofas, while the later MSS. have mended the grammar with irXeiovs. He quotes also Cronert^ who has furnished abundant evidence from the papyri and literature of such a use of these forms just like irXrjprjs. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Papj/ri, p. 63 f. The comparative is a natural 3. Comparison of Adjectives. development in the adjective, as the adjective itself is a growth on the substantive. (a) The Positive (OercKov ovojxa or ovofia airXovv). This is the oldest form of the adjective, the most common and the most persistent. It is not always true that the comparative and superlative forms represent an actually higher grade than the positive. The good is sometimes more absolute than better or even best. See ayados in Mk. 10 18, for instance. Sometimes indeed the positive itself is used to suggest comparison as in Mt. 18 9, koXov aol century

sider

B.C.-

in Jo. 1

7rXi7p7js

:

:

:

:

:

k(TTLv

daekdelv

.

.

^ bvo xetpas, kt\.

.

This construction

is

common

LXX,

Hebrew.^

suggested perhaps by the absence of comparison in The tendency of the later Greek is also constantly to

make one

of the degrees

in the

But

p. 181.

this

do duty for two. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., matter belongs rather to the syntax of compari-

Participles are, of course, used only in the positive save in a few cases where the adjective-idea has triumphed wholly over the verb-conception.^ Verbals in -tos sometimes have comparison, though jiaXKov may be freely used with participles. son.

(6)

The Comparative

{avyKptTtKov

oi^o/xa)

.

The stem may be

(besides adjective) either a substantive (^aaiKev-Tepos) or {irpo-Tepos)

Cf.

.

Monro, Homeric Grammar,

p. 82.

an adverb

The primary

comparative-ending -iwv (Sanskrit iyans) jective-ending ^

is probably kin to the adThis form along with the superlative -tcrros is

-tos.'^

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

Reinhold, p. 52.

thinks

De

Graec.

.

:

not till I/a.d. that it not genuine in the LXX.

It is it

For the indecl. wXr/pris in Acta Thomae see Cf Sir. 19 26. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., is common in the pap. Thack. (Gr., p. 176)

p. 35.

etc., p. 24.

But

2

lb., p. 435.

3

Prol., p. 50.

fi

K.-Bl.,

I,

see Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 297. 4

p. 553;

Heft, 1895, pp. 152

ff.

Philologus, LXI., pp. 161

W.-M., p. 302. Comparative, 3. 290; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30.

Schwab, Die Hist. Synt. "

Hirt,

Handb.

etc., p.

ff.

d.

^

griech.

THE DECLENSIONS

(kAISEIs)

277

probably originally qualitative in idea and does not necessarily imply excess. In the modern Greek these forms are not used at all.^ They have disappeared before the secondary comparative form -Ttpos, which even in the earlier Greek is far more common. The ending -repos docs imply excess and appears in various words that are not usually looked upon as comparatives, as e-repos ('one of two'), eKCL-Tepos ('each of two'), we-Tepos {nos-ter), vfie-repos (vos-ter),

So also biv-repos like wpo-Tepos (cf. Latin al-ter, Enga comparative form.^ "The comparison-suffixes lwv, LOTOS, repos belong to the Indo-Germanic ground speech."^ In the N. T. the forms in -lwv, as in the papyri,^ hold their own only ua-repos."

lish other) is

in the

most common words.

older than -raros.

Schwab

'Kptdvoiv is

(op.

cit.,

p. 5)

makes -aros

not used in the N. T. and

/3eX-

only as an adverb once (2 Tim. 1:18). 'Ekaaauv appears four times, once about age as opposed to p-d^wv (Ro. 9: 12), once TLov

about rank as opposed to Kpdaawv (Heb. 7:7), once about excellence (Jo. 2:10) as again opposed to Kpelaacov, and once as an adverb (eXaaaov, 1 Tim. 5:9) in the sense of 'less, not /juKpoTepos ('smaller'). ''E.aaov (neuter only) is found in 1 Cor. 11: 17 as opposed to Kpeiauov, and as an adverb in 2 Cor. 12 15. KdXXtoj' (Ac. 25 10) is an adverb. Kpelaawv is confined to Peter, Paul's Epistles and Hebrews (some eighteen examples, ten of them in Heb.). Meifcov is common (some fifty times), though some of them dis:

:

place the superlative as {p.d^ova)

we

appears once as

shall see directly.

^etfco (Jo.

1:50).^

The neuter Once

plural

also (3 Jo. 4)

double comparative form fxeL^orepos occurs, several simiexamples appearing in the papyri, as ixeL^orepos, fxeKavrcoTepov, Kpta^vTepwTtpa.'' A few other examples in poetry and late Greek are cited by Wincr-Moulton,^ like KpeLTTorepos, pLeL^ovorepos, fia^othe lar

Thumb, Handb.,

1

Cf.

2

Cf. Hirt,

2

Cf. Ascoli in Curtius' Stud, zur gricch.

Handb.

p. 73.

etc., p.

292; Brug., Indoger. Forsch., 1903, pp. 7 und lat. Gr., 1876, p. 351.

ff.

Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft I, 1893, p. 3. Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., p. 298. He mentions ^eKrlwp, iXaaauv, vaaojif, ir'ktlwv {irXkoiv). For the inscr., Nachm. (Magu. Inschr., p. 143) adds 6.ixtivoiv and ixti^wv. « The pap. have many exx. of the form without v as in TrXeico (ou$), etc. See Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., pp. 298 ff. But the usage varies greatly. The LXX MSS. show similar variations. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 54 f. As LXX exx. of uniformity in form of comp. note LyaBiloTepos and alaxporepos, but only 677(011' (-a Tos), not kyyvrtpos (-raros), C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 29. Thack. (Gr.,pp. 184 ff.) gives a careful sunnnaryof the exx. of -MVy-iaros in the LXX. ^ Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 35, 435. *

*

*

P. 81.

Cf. also Dieterich, Untcrs. etc., p. 180, for dXt-iSrepos.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

278

Tepos itself,

the papyri

Mt. 9:16).

(cf.

one.

Cf.

kacoTepos (Ac.

tives are

Cf

the N. T. form as

is

Jo. 20 4, etc. :

-Tepo's

Some comparative

(Heb. 4:12).

like

16:24), KaTcorepos (Eph. 4:9).

Attic sometimes.^

LXX

in the

AtrXorepos

So Appian

also.

we read

in

Xdpwv is found a dozen times is more and more the usual

from positive adverbs

common

StxXoucrrepos.

.

The ending

To/jLcoTepos

derived

are

not daauov,

eLov),

also.^

Cf. English vernacular "lesser,"

TrXetorepos.

jjLeioTepos,

TaxLov (W. H.

and the :

(Mt. 8:12),

These

latter adjec-

later Greek,

(Mt. 23 15)

adjectives

e^wrepos

is

not to say

for the old Attic

Cf. airXbrepov, Anthol. Pal., Ill,

The Ionic already had oXtycorepos and Taxvrepos (Radermacher, Gr., p. 56). Cf. ayadcorepos (Hermas, Mand. VIII, 9, 11) and ayadi^Taros (Diod., 16, 85). The rules for the use of -dorepos and -orepos apply in the N. T. As iJ.aX\ov 158 (Dieterich, Unters.,

is

p. 181).

often used with the positive in lieu of the comparative ending,

sometimes with the comparative, a double comparative Kpelcraov, Ph. 1:23; yuaXXov TepLcraorepop, Mk. 7:36), a construction not unknown to the classic orators of Athens where emphasis was desired.^ Paul did not perpetrate a barbarism when he used k\axt-
it is

(ixclXKop

:

^

Moulton,

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

Cf. also aneiforepos in the older language

4

2 w.-M., Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft HI, p. 65. » W.-M., Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 34.

6

K.-Bl.,

(Blass, Gr. of 3

I,

N. T. Gk.,

p. 34).

p. 554; Hirt,

Handb.

etc., p.

p. 81;

Thack., Gr., p. 183.

p. 81, Jann., p. 147.

291.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 144.

»

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30.

9

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 160; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 143. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 298.

10

«

THE DECLENSIONS

(kAISEIz)

279

Mk. 6 36. '0 e\axi-(^Tos (1 Cor. 15:9) is a true superlathing so rare in the N. T. that Blass^ attributes this extive, a

7t(rTa in

ample

:

either to the literary language or to

corruption in the

But Moulton^ is able to find a parallel in the Tb.P. 24, ii/B.c. But more about true and elative superlatives in Syntax (eh. XIV, xiv). In 2 Cor. 12:9, 15 (D in Ac. 13:8), we have text.^

"only a

TJdLara.

Kparto-re (Lu.

p. 78).

MdXto-Ta appears a dozen times only, though (jloWop

exceedingly

common.

1

etc.)

3,

:

much more

is

naWov

or

adverb

(Moulton, is

was found

in the use of wepLaaos.

true of the use of irepLaaos as the equivalent of

TrXetwj' (cf.

wepLacroTepoos

Mt. 5 37; 27 :

(Ph.

1

:

14.

23).

:

Paul uses the comparative

In Heb. 7: 15 (cf. 2:1; 13 19 we have more than /jlolWop. Cf.

-cos)

:

Mt. 11 20; 21

Mk.

Cf. double comparative in

7:36). dr]\ov

title"

Blass^ indeed suggests that a popular sub-

stitute for jiaKiaTa as for xXeto-ra

This

is

8; 1 Cor. 14

irepLaaoTepov

fxeyLaros (2 Pet. 1

en :

/cara-

and

4)

Tdxtcr™ (Ac. 17 15) Blass^ credits again to the literary element in Luke. In u^toros TrXelaTos in

:

:

:

27.

:

we have a superlative that occurs thirteen times and always about God or heaven (as Mk. 5 7; 11 10). When we take up the form in -raros in the N. T. the story is soon told. Brugmann^ finds the origin of this ending in forms :

:

Latin decimus), Trpwros (cf. Latin primus), vTaros, has no direct parallel in the other languages.^ Hirt^ suggests -Tap-os and -aros as two forms which finally resulted in like SeKUTos (cf.

vararos.

It

-Taros.

tives

It

and

is

true that the forms in -aros faded

eaxa.rov

became

eaxarcoTaTov in the

away

KOLVT]

as superla-

inscriptions,^

but this is true also of the forms in -raros.^ The papyri have "scores" of examples of superlatives in -raros (chiefly elative). The rarity of the -raros forms in the N T. ma}^ be purely accidental (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154). It is not quite true that ''^

1

lb.

8

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33

2

Prol., p. 79.

*

lb., p. 33.

B

Indog. Forsch., 1903, pp. 7-9. Ascoli (Curtius' Stud., Tp'iTos (cf. Horn. TpiraTos.) also. Cf. also ?(rxaros.

etc.,

f.

1876, p. 351)

suggests

Handb.

294.

«

Hirt,

*

Sc^hweizer, Perg. Iiischr., p. IGl.

etc., p.

^

jb.

" This double superl. does not appear in the N. T., but various instances are noted in the paj). and the latcT Gk. as eXax'^Toraros, neyiaToraTos, Trpwriara,

So Lat.

rninissitnus,

pessinm^simus.

Cf.

W.-M.,

p.

81; Dieterioh, Unters.,

p. 181. »o Moulton, Trol., p. 78; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Tap., j). 297 f. Sec Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 54-57, for corresponding infrequency of the supeii. forms in the LXX. The compar. is driving it out. Cf. also ib., p. vii.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

280

"only one example of the -raros superlative" (Moulton, Prol., N. T. There are three with -raros, besides those with -aros: aytdoTaros (Ju. 20), aKpL^karaTos (Acts 26 5), rtyutcjraros (Rev. 18 12; 21 11). Thackeray {Gr., p. 182) finds -raros much more common in the LXX, though chiefly in the elative sense and in the more literary books of the LXX (Wisd., 2^ p. 78) survives in the

:

:

:

Mace,

Prov., Esd.).

'

AKpLJ3eararos (Ac. 26: 5) Blass again credits

"Eaxaros and

to the literary language. d)

The very

contrasted wpccroL eo-xarot Kr\.

from cofa, Doric See Mt. 19 30 for the

Trpcoros (co

are both very frequent in the N. T.

:

great

number

of times used in the N. T. (some 200) in contrast to only ten instances of irporepov and one of irporepa (Eph. 4 22) deserves comment. This seems in conflict with the ob-

that

Trpojros {jpCorov

included)

is

:

served disuse of the superlative in favour of the comparative.

But work here. The disappearance of duality before plurality has worked against irporepov. Luke does not use irporepov at all and it appears only once in Grenfell and Hunt's four volumes of papyri.^ The LXX shows vrpcoros displacing irporea counter-tendency

is

at

(Thackeray, Gr., p. 183). So in English we say first story of a house with only two, first edition of a book which had only two, It is almost an affectation in Greek and English, however etc. good Latin it may be, to insist on irporepos. So in Jo. 1 15 (rpcopos

:

Tos p-ov), 15: 18 {irpCirov vpcov),

merely

first of

two and

in the

Ac.

1

two

both

eaxo-Tos

and

irpooros

1 {rdv irpLcrov \6yov)

first

struction as with the comparative. of rpwrov to be true to the

:

Greek

we have

instances the ablative con-

Winer properly saw this usage In Mt. 27: 64 we have

genius.^

used of two, earai

ri

eaxarT] tXclvt] x^tpwj'

indeed used in the sense of the former in Eph. 4 22, whereas irporepov in the sense of the first of two does TTjs Tpcorr]s.

Uporepos

is

:

—

exetra).^ appear in Heb. 7:27 {irporepov It is probably a defect in both Latin and Greek that the same forms were used to express the elative and true superlative sense (so as to comparative also).^ As the dual vanished, so it was inevitable that with the same principle at work either the comparative or the superlative would. Outside of ecrxaros and Trpcoros where the principle crossed with a different application because irporepos was disappearing, it is the superlative that goes down, especially the true superlative as opposed to the elative (intensive) Hermas, though .

in the vernacular,

1

«

Moulton, Prol., W.-M., p. 306.

still

p.

79

uses the superlative in the elative (inten-

N. T. Gk.,

^

Blass, Gr. of

*

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30.

p. 34.

THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIS)

281

very often.^ In the N. T. then the comparative is beginning to take the place of the superlative, a usage occasionally found in classical Greek,^ and found now and then in the sive) sense

See

papyri.^

See also

1

Cor. 13: 13 rd rpia raDra /xetfcoj'

6 /jLei^uv

(Mt. 18:4).

comment under Sjmtax

(ch.

But

great space

is

demanded

a-yaivri.

57

more

for the discussion of the

non-

XIV

matter

xiii, (i)).

m. NUMERALS

No

8e TovTuiv

will call for

this

('API0MOI).

syntactical aspects of the numerals.

The Origin

1.

the

first

of

Numerals.

ten numerals

may

Donaldson^ thinks that seven of

be traced to primitive pronominal

ele-

Pronouns and numerals belong to the stable elements of language, and the numerals are rather more stable than the pronouns in the Indo-Germanic tongues.^ See the numerals in substantial integrity in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., pp. 80-84). The system of numeration is originally decimal (cf. fingers and toes) with occasional crossing of the duodecimal.^ There possibly were savages who could not count beyond two, but one doubts if the immediate ancestors of the Indo-Germanic peoples were so ments.

See previous discussion in this chapter, i, 3. one of the first and easiest things that the child learns. It is certain that the original Indo-Germanic stock had numerals up to 100 before they separated.^ The roots are widespread and fairly uniform. 2. Variety among Numerals. (a) Different Functions. The numerals may be either subprimitive as

Counting

stantive,

that.''

is

adjective or adverb.

(2 Pet. 3 :8),

eTrrciKts

So

(Mt. 18:21).9

17

x^^'ds (Lu. 14:31),

Number

x^^tot

thus embraces sep-

arate ideas. (b)

Thu C AB.DIN Ahs (6v6 fiara

fined principle.

frequent

use.^'^

and

apiOfirjTiKa).

They may be

either

no very well-deThe first four are dcclina!:)lo, possibly from their After 200 {bia-KoaLOL, -at, -a) they have the regular

declinable or indeclinable,

this according to

' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. He cites the mod. Italian also which makes no distinction between the comp. and supcrl. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. gricch. Comp., \\, j)]). 172 iT. 3 IVloulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439. ^ Giles, Man., etc., p. 393. ''

*

^ 8 »

New

Crat., p. 294.

However, see Moulton, Moulton, Prol., p. 58. Cf. K.-BL, I, p. G21 f.

"

Prol., p. 58.

lb.

Cf. Taylor, Prim. Cult.,

»"

I,

p.

242

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 35.

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

282

second and first declensions. The very interesting, for which see the compara-

inflection of adjectives of the

history of

els, /xta, ev is

tive grammars.^

Els

cardinal (Mt. 25

common

exceedingly

is

15)

:

and as an

in the N. T. as a pronoun (Mt. 8 19),

indefinite

:

approaching the indefinite article. For the use of els in sense of ordinal see Syntax, ch. XIV, xv, (a), but it may be remarked here that the papyri have rfj ulS. Kal et/cd5t (Moulton, CI. Rev.,

The

1901, p. 35).

common

indeclinable use of

els

(or adverbial use of Kara)

Mk. 14 19; (Jo. 8:9); So modern Greek uses ha as neuter with which Mayser^ compares eva as feminine on an early ostrakon. But the modern Greek declines eVas, nia, eva in all genders (Thumb, Handb., Ov8els and ixrjdeis are both very cormnon in the N. T. with p. 81). the inflection of els. Mrjdeis occurs only once (Ac. 27 33). W. H. admit oWels only seven times (all in Luke and Paul, as Ac. 20 33), and once (Ac. 15 9) ovSkv is in the margin. Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 170) calls this form in 6 chiefly Alexandrian, rare in Attic, but Mayser (Gr., p. 180) notes ov8eis as "Neubildung" while oWeis is good Attic. For history of it see Orthography and Phois

Ro. 12

:

in later Greek.

Cf. Kad'

els

in

:

5.^

:

:

:

The

netics, 3, (/).

frequent use of 8vo as indeclinable save in the

plural form 8vai in the later

on

in this chapter

fore a/x^orepot. is

(i,

3)

Greek has already been commented

as well as the disappearance of

,

Indeclinable 8vo

is classical,

and

a/x0co

be-

after Aristotle

8v(rl

the normal dative (Thackeray, Gr., p. 186). Tpia (possibly also occasionally indeclinable in the papyri.'* The common use

rpTs) is

and the occasional occurrence of reaaapes MSS. (like Northwest Greek) have been noticed in chapters VI, 2, (a), and VII, i, 7, (c).^ Uhre, e^ and iirra need not detain us. The originally dual form oktco is found only ten times, and five of them with other numerals. 'Ewea appears of reaaepa in the

kolvt]

as accusative in N. T.

only five times, while 5k-a

nothing

common

as eTrrd, not found six times, but 8co8eKa is quite common, due chiefly to the frequent mention of the Apostles. From thirteen to nineteen in the N. T., like the papyri ^ and the modern Greek, Ska comes first, usually without Kal,

to mention the

1

first five

is

cardinals.

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 211; Hirt,

On numerals in LXX, p. 30 f.

the

LXX see Thack., 2

Cf.

like so

"Eu8eKa

Handb.

is

etc., p.

311; Giles, Man., p. 394.

and S., Sel. fr. the W.-M., p. 312. So dm eh (Rev. 21 21). Perhaps the earliest ex. of indeclinable eW. Gr., pp. 186-190; C.

:

Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 312. For the usage cf. W.-Sch., p. 90. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 315. 3

LXX

6

lb.

Cf. also Dittenb., 674. 28.

*'

«

Mayser, Gr.

d. griech. Pap., p. 316.

.

THE DECLENSIONS

though once with

as 8eKa oKTio (Lu. 13 :4),

283

(kAISEIS) Kal (Lu.

13

:

But

16).

unlike the papyri the N. T. never has beKabvo} But SeKairevTe (as Jo. 11 18) and SeKarkaaapes (as Gal. 2 1) occur several times :

:

Ekocri

each. 'EKaTov

is

a dual form,

is

one hundred like

wtiile TpcaKovra

W. H.

d-ira^.

and so on are

accent

plural.^

not

eKaTOPTaerrjs,

used with these numerals, as 15), but recraapaeiKocrt reaaapes (Rev. .19 :4), eKarov e'UoaL (Ac. 1 In the LXX there is Kovra Kal e'^ (Jo. 2 20). Cf. Rev. 13 18. Thackeray, Gr., ''teens." the no fixed order for numbers above Usually no conjunction

-€77/5.

is

:

:

:

The N. T.

p. 188.

and

uses xiXtot often

5t(Txt>*>tot

once (Mk. 5

:

13)

and TpLaxi^^LOL once (Ac. 2 41). The N. T. examples of p-vpios by reason of case do not distinguish between phpioi, 'ten thousand' :

(Mt. 18

:

and

24)

N. T. uses

pvpLOL^

pvploi,

'many thousands'

Cor. 4

(1

:

The

15).

several times for the latter idea ('myriads'), some-

So also xiKias times repeated, as pvpiaSes pvpLabwv (Rev. 5:11). appearing chiefly both than xt>^toi, in the T. N. common is more in Revelation

(cf.

5:11).

ffLoi

As

8eKa e^.

In Rev. 13

:

18

B and many

cursives

while the cursive 5 has x«' = t^a/c6a rule in the N. T. MSS. the numbers are spelled

have x^^' = ^^(^'
e^rjKovTa e§,

out instead of mere signs being used.

The Ordinals

(c)

They describe rank and They are all adjectives of

{ovofiara TaKriKo).

raise the question of order, Toaros.^

all have the superlative form -ros save irpowhich are comparative.^ In most cases the But ordinals are made from the same stem as the cardinals.^ this is not true of Trpcoros nor indeed of dev-repos (not from 8vo, but

three endings repos

and

from

5e6o/xat).^

and

dev-repos

Cf. the

EngHsh

superlative

'first'

UpCJTos has driven Tporepos out of use in the

adverb (or to (Eph. 4:22). use of

save in one instance, irporepau avaaTpo4>r]v of irpuros before the ordinal

The disappearance

In the N. T. as in the papyri^ the

belongs to Syntax.

els

up

ordinals

irpbTepov)

to twelve are regular.

vernacular papyri^ (so Ionic and 1

Aka

bvo is

normal

Thack., Gr., p. 188.

6ka

also

Ska

6ka irivre, dtKa oktw. Man., p. 398.

Giles,

3

K.-Bl.,

*

These both have a

p. 622.

From kolvt}

13 to 19 the N. T., like the

generally), puts the smaller

Cf Cf. Rec, Ac. 19 7. and even Ska yua^ once. Always Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

in the pap. of the Ptol. age.

So

reaaapts,

2

I,

(with suffix -4sto).

N. T. except as an

Cf. BruM;.,

:

rpels,

Tro^rro^,

suporl., as Trpcoros

CI. Pliilol., 1907, p. 208.

and

5tvraTos (Honi.).

Brug., Gk. Gr.,

p. 212. ''

" ^

Man., j). 400. C^f. Brug., Grioch. Gr., Mayser, Gr. d. grioch. Pap., p. 318. lb. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

C;ilrs,

p. 212;

Moulton,

Prol., p.

95

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

284

number first and as a compound with /cat, only the second half of the word in the ordinal form. So TeaaapeaKaideKaTos (Ac. 27:27), not T€TapTos Kal BeKUTos (Attic). But the papyri show examples of the usual Attic method,^ as evaros Kal eUoaTos. The distinction ^

between the decades (like TpLaKoaros) and the hundreds (like rptaKoaioaTos) should be noted. In modern Greek all the ordinals have disappeared out of the vernacular save Trpajros, devrepos, rplThe article with the cardinal is used instead. Tos, Tcrapros.^ Distributives in the N. T. The multipHcative distrib(f/) utives (with ending -ttXoDs) occur in the N. T. also. 'AttXoDs as an adjective is found onty twice (Mt. 6 22; Lu. 11 34), both times about the eye. AlttXovs appears four times (as 1 Tim. 5:17). :

:

Cf. the Latin sim-plex, du-plex, English simple, diplomatic.

proportional

may

distributives

end

in

The

As examples one

—wXacrioiv.

and TroWaTrXaaiova (Lu. 18 One of the commonest ways of expressing distribution is by repetition of the numeral as in 8vo 8vo (Mk. 6:7). Cf. avinvbaia avpTrbaia (Mk. 6 39 f.). In Lu. 10 1 we have ava bho 8vo in the text of W. H., a "mixed distributive" (Moulton, ProL, p. 97). The modern Greek has either aird dv6 or 8vd 8v6 (Thumb, Handb., p. 83). It is a vernacular idiom which was given fresh impetus (Brugmann, Distributiva, p. 9) from the Hebrew idiom. Deissmann cites rpla Tpla from 0. P. 121 (iii/A.D.). j Moulton {ProL, p. 21) follows note iKaTOVTaivXaaiova (Lu. 8

:

8)

:

Cf. English "two-fold," "three-fold," etc.

30).

:

:

Thumb

(Hellen., p. 152) in

further ch. (e)

XIV, xv

denying that

a Hebraism.

See

These are of two kinds, either

like

it

is

(d).

Numeral Adverbs.

ana (Ac. 24: 26), bixa, 'in two' (not in the N. T., though see Stxaf'^ Mt. 10 35), or like aira^, 8'ls, rpis, etc. The one kind answers to :

multiplicatives

and the other to proportionals.^ The numeral ad-

verbs continue in use in the

modern Greek Handb.,

1.

PRONOUNS

Idea of Pronouns. is

p.

189

f.).

The

(Thumb,

p. 83).

IV.

that

LXX (Thackeray, Gr.,

instead of the numeral adverb uses 4>opd

set forth

It is

CANTfiNYMIAI)

not the idea of a subject or object

by the pronoun, but the

object to the speaker.^

relation of a subject or Sometimes, to be sure, as in conversation,

N. T. Gk., p. 35. So the LXX also. Thack., Gr., p. 188. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35. And even the use of forms like tv Kal elKoarop, Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 318. ^ Thumb, Handb. d. neugr. Volksspr., p. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., 56. " Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 36. ^ K.-Bl., I, p. 579. p. 175. 1

^

Blass, Gr. of

THE DECLENSIONS

285

(kAISEIs)

the pronoun does not strictly stand in the place of a substantive.

When

one person addresses another, "I" and "thou" are plain enough from the nature of the circumstances. The pronoun inIn a sense then dicates, but does not name the speaker, etc. language is a sort of drama in which there are three characters, the speaker, the person addressed and the person spoken of.^ Hence the first and second personal pronouns have no gender, while the third person, der.

tive so

reverse is

or

may

not be present, has gen-

Macaulay who repeated the substanoften as almost to make the pronoun useless, though the tendency is more common. The right use of pronouns

a good index of 2.

who may

Giles ^ cites the case of

style.

Antiquity of Pronouns.

The

personal pronouns are prob-

ably the oldest part of the Indo-Germanic declension.^

Pronouns

(and numerals) are the most persistent parts of speech.

They

essential to the very life of

a language.*

are

Strange enough, the

Coptic and the Hebrew, for instance, are only alike in their pronouns and their numerals.^ In Greek as in Sanskrit and English the pronouns maintain themselves with great tenacity. The pronouns are also closely akin in all the Indo-Germanic tongues. Cf. Sanskrit aham, Greek e7cb(i'), Latin ego, Gothic ik, Anglo-Saxon They retain the case-forms ic, German ich, English /, French je. better than any other parts of speech. Indeed pronouns present an indepen3. Pronominal Roots. dent set of roots parallel to the verbal and nominal roots. As verb, noun, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunctions, inten-

grow up around the old verbal (and nominal) roots, There are two great root-stocks then (verbal or nominal and pronominal).^ The pronouns can be resolved into monosyllabic roots.'^ One may not follow Donaldson^ (now obsolete), when he calls all the pronouns originally demonstrative, and yet something can be said for that idea. In the -Sanskrit Whitney^ calls this "very limited set of roots, the so-called pronominal or demonstrative roots." Monro'" remarks that noun-stems name or describe while pronouns only sive particles

so pronouns represent a separate history.

'

this «

' « ^

8

Farrar,

Gk. Synt.,

p. 32.

He

accents irpoaunvov (persona) as illustrating

dramatic aspect. ^ jb., Giles, Man., p. 238. lb., p. 297. Renan, Ilist. des Lang. Somit., p. 84 f. Cf. Bopp, Uber den Einfl. der Pron. auf die Wortbild., 1832. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 241. •"

lb., p. 245.

" Horn.

Gr., p. 57;

9

Bopp, Vcrgl. Gr., § 105.

p. 13.

Sans. Cr., p. 185.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

286

point out; the one

is predicative, the other demonstrative. The fundamental. "Pronouns are found to contain the same elements as those which furnish the person-endings of verbs." (Monro, ib.)

difference then

is

Pronouns are either substantive

Classification.

4.

cation and inflection as eyu, adjective as

The other

ourcos.

rjiJ.€Tepos,

in

signifi-

or adverb as

classification is into nine or ten great classes:

personal, intensive,

reflexive, possessive,

demonstrative, relative,

The

interrogative, indefinite, distributive.^

correlative pronouns can be regarded separately also. These classes will call for special comment in detail See also ch. XV, i. (a) The Personal Pronouns. In all the Indo-Germanic tongues the personal pronouns vary a good deal in inflection from

the substantives and adjectives.^ The various Greek dialects show great variety in the inflection of the personal pronouns.^ The nominative singular has a different stem in the first personal

pronoun from the other cases in all the Indo-Germanic languages. The N. T. follows current and ancient usage fairly well in the form of the first and second personal pronouns. The same thing is true as to the enclitic and the emphatic forms in the oblique cases. The MSS. vary between nov and enov, etc. Not only do

MSS.

fjLov,

read

is

editor. 6(j)da\iJLcp

viro

jiov.

jue,

The question whether

aov in the

same sentence (Mt.

7:4.

Cf. also the next

Nestle here has no such refinement, but aov

verse).

these

but the papyri* furnish eU ixt, cov or coD should be a very delicate one and rests almost wholly with the W. H. have, for instance, k tov d(})da\iJLov aov and h ti2

give the regular wpos

irepi

verses.

Greek as

The some

third

personal

all

through

pronoun gave trouble

in

In Attic the old ov, ot, e (without nominative) was chiefly reflexive,^ though not true of the Ionic. Possibly this pronoun was originally reflexive for all the persons, but came to be used also as the simple pronoun in

other languages.

of the third person, whereas in Latin

was

restricted to the third person.*'

it

remained

The N. T.

is

reflexive

and

like the kolvtj

I, p. 579, have only five. Handb., p. 296. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 84, for mod. Gk. ' Cf. K.-BL, I, pp. 580 £f. See briefer summary in Giles, Man., p. 298 f., and Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 244 f. On the multiplicity of roots in the pers. pron. see Riem. and Goelzer, Phon6t., p. 336. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 302 f. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 165. 6 Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 33. He illustrates by the Eng.: "I will lay me down and sleep." Cf. vixlv in Mt. 6 19 f. * Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., p. 341. 1

K.-Bl.,

2

Hirt,

:

THE DECLENSIONS in the use of avros

(common

third personal pronoun.

287

(kAISEIs)

also in Attic) instead of ov as the

used in all three genders and nominative it usually has emphasis (cf. Mt. 1 21), a matter to be discussed under Syntax. Indeed avTos, whatever its etymology, is originally an intensive pronoun (like Latin (pse), not a personal pronoun.^ The "frequent and almost inordinate use" (Thayer) of avros in the LXX (cf. It

is

in all cases save that in the :

18 3 f and the N. T. is noticeable. So modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 86) (b) The Intensive Pronoun. The N. T. has nothing new to say as to the form of the intensive avros. It is usually in the nominative that it is intensive like avros iibvos (Jo. 6 15), though not always (cf. Jo. 14 11). The modern Greek ^ uses also a shorter form rov, etc. (also Pontic arov), as personal pronoun. The use of 6 abrb's may be compared with 6 tStos. See ch. XV, iii, yg). (c) Reflexive Pronouns. The reflexive form is nothing but the personal pronoun plus the intensive ahrbs. The reflexive is Jer.

:

.)

:

:

one use of this intensive in combination with the personal pronoun. They were originally separate words.'' So avrbs 'eyio (Ro. 7: 25) which is, of course, not reflexive, but intensive. The Greek reflexives have no nominative and the English has almost lost ''himself," "myself" as nominative.^ In the N. T. the first and second persons have a distinct reflexive form only in the singular {k^xavrov, aeavrov).

sive,

ch. is

not

reflexive.

XV,

In 2 Th. 1:4 avrovs rjfxas In 1 Cor. 7 35 rnxoiv avraiv :

LXX

obviously intendoubtful.^

See

The contracted form aavrov common in the Kingdom books in

for further discussion.

IV,

not found in the N. T.

the

is

it is

and occurs

It is

in the papyri.

See even aarbv in aii /SXeire carov airo ruv 'lovbalwv, B.G.U. 1079 (a.D. 41). So as to avrov. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 190. The modern Greek uses rod enavrov nov for the reflexive (Thuml), Handb., p. 88). The reflexive for the third person^ (usually eavrov in the singular, about avrov, etc., in

W.

twenty times

H., as avrbv in Jo. 2: 24), while the only reflexive

form for all persons in the plural in the N. T. has no secure place in the N. T. for the first and second person singular. The possil^le

reflexive (or demonstrative?) origin of ov

natural. >

it is

It

appears in the papyri'' (rd avrov, Pet.

made I. 15,

this usage 15)

and the

Flcnsborg (dbcr Urspr. und Bild. dos Pron. avrd^, 1893, p. 69) denies that from av, but rather from ai, ava. Cf. BruR., Griech. Gr., p. 244.

2

Thumb, Handb.,

"

K.-Bl.,

*

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

I,

p. 85.

p. 596. p. 62.

^

q{

6

Cf. Farrar,

^

Mayscr, Gr.

ii^rt,

Notes on Orth., p. 144. Gk. Synt., p. 33. d. griech. Pap., p.

303

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

288

late inscriptions ^ for the first

Greek the same thing

modern MSS. read Gal. 5

d^' eavTov against

and second person singular. In the is true.^ But in the N. T. only late

a-rro

aeavrov

(NBCL)

:

This use of eavrojv for all three persons Indeed the personal pronoun

aeavTOP.^

in classical Attic.

times so used

{8oKu} ixoL, for

what

difficult

in

is

In

34.

:

eavrov for

fairly

common

was some-

itself

instance).^

Possessive Pronouns

(d)

in Jo. 18

and Ro. 13 9 only Syrian uncials have

14

:

NEW TESTAMENT

{icT-qriKal avToow/xiat).

It is

some-

the discussion of the pronouns to keep off

and this is especially true of the possessive For the etymology of these adjectives from the corresponding personal pronouns one may consult the comparative grammars.^ But it is the rarity of these adjectives in the N. T. that one notices at once. The third person possessives {6s, 1,6$ is found in only two of (T(j)€Tepos) have entirely disappeared. Paul's letters: 1 Cor. and Phil., and these only three times. I,ds is found about twenty-six times and viikrepos eleven (two doubtful, 'T/xerepos appears in Paul only in Lu. 16:12; 1 Cor. 16:17).

syntactical ground, adjectives.

1

and 2

Cor., Gal., Ro.

'H^eT-epos

appears only nine times counting

where W. H. have viikrepov in the margin, and Ac. 24 6 which W. H. reject. It is only e^tos that makes any show at all in the N. T., occurring some seventy-five times, about half of them (41) in the Gospel of John. Thumb and Moulton^ have made a good deal of the fact that in Pontus and Cappadocia the use of Lu. 16

:

12,

:

*^

common, while elsewhere the genitive perThe point is that the Gospel of John thus shows Asiatic origin, while Revelation is by another writer. But one can easily go astray in such an argument. The Gospel of Luke has e^tos three times, but Acts not at all. The large etc., is still

(Tos,

t/x6s,

sonal pronoun prevails.^

amount

of

dialogue

in

the Gospel of John perhaps explains

the frequency of the pronoun there. The possessive e/x6s is naturally in the mouth of Jesus (or of John his reporter) more

than

for Jesus

CTos,

possessive

is

is

speaking so

much about

more formal and more emphatic

The

himself. in

the solemn

^ Thumb, Handb., p. 88. Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Insclir., p. 161. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 167. These last two quote Lev. 19 18. Cf. Simcox, ib.; Dyroff, Gesch. des Pron. Reflex., 2. Abt., pp. 23 ff. (Hefte 9 1

3

:

und 10

in

Schanz's Beitr.

etc.).

N.

T., p. 63; Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk., p. 167. Handb. etc., p. 307.

*

Cf. Simcox, Lang, of the

6

Giles,

6

Theol. Literaturzeit., 1893, p. 421. Prol., p. 40 f. He admits that the other possessives do not

^

Btory.

Man.,

p. 301; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 250; Hirt,

^

Cf.

tell

the

Thumb, Handb.,

same

p. 89.

THE DECLENSIONS words of Jesus

This

in this Gospel.^

289

(kAISEIs) is

probably the explanation

coupled with the fact that John was doubtless in Asia also

when

he wrote the Gospel and was open to whatever influence in that direction later, as will

was

the

The

there.

common

discussion of details will

come

use of the genitive of the personal pro-

nouns rather than the possessive adjective, not to mention the The reflexive pronoun itself is really possessive when in article. '

the genitive case.

But

this as well as the

common

The Boeotian

need only be mentioned here.

idiom

inscriptions

6 tSios

show

sense as early as 150 b.c. (Claflin, Syntax of Boeotian Inscriptions, p. 42). The line of distinction between the pronouns fldLos in this

is

thus not always distinct, as

reciprocal sense (Lu. 23

The

necessity in the

nouns

:

12),

N. T.

when

eavrwv {avTOiv)

a usage

known

used in the

is

to the ancients.

of using the genitive of personal pro-

in the third person after the disappearance of 6s is like

the Latin, which used ejus, suus being reflexive.

Farrar (Greek

modern,

his being origi-

Sijntax, p. 34) recalls

the fact that

its is

nally neuter also.

Demonstrative Pronouns (SeiKTiKol avrcovu/jLLai). But must have a special limitation, for all pronouns were possibly originally deictic (marking an ol^ject by its position). The anaphoric (avacfiopLKai) pronouns develop out of the deictic by usage. They refer to or repeat. The true relative is a further (e)

deictic

development of the anaphoric, which includes demonstrative in the narrower sense. In a strict historical method one should begin the discussion of pronouns with the demonstratives in the larger sense

must

and show how the others developed.^

treat the demonstrative

But here we

pronouns in the narrower sense

The

as distinct from the original deictic or the later relative.

demonstrative thus applies both to position and relation. The declension of the demonstratives is more akin to that of substan-

than any of the other pronouns.^ "05t'' occurs only ten times N. T., and eight of these in the form raSe, seven of which come in the formula in Rev. rade Xeyet (as Rev. 2 1, etc.). The tives

in the

:

others are rdSe (Ac. 21

1

:

11), rfide (Lu.

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 54.

that John's love of contrast leads 2 *

the 6

him

10

:

39), rrivSe (Jas.

Dr. Abbott (Joh. Gr.,

to use

ujueTs

:

13).^

p. 295) thinks

as often as all the Synoptists.

So Iliem. and Goelzcr in their PhonC't., pp. 31G fF. Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of Phil., liK)7, p. 'I'AFi) con.siders first

4

»

65€

lb.

the pron. of

person, ovto^ of the second, eKetvos of the third.

Cf. Bla.ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35

see Brug., Cik. Gr., p. 242

f.

f.

For the etymology of the dem. pron.

5

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

290

The

NEW TESTAMENT

and the papyri agree with the N. T. in the great kolvt].^ But in the LXX it is commoner, here also rdSe Xeja (Thackeray, Gr., p. 191). There

inscriptions

rarity of 65e in the later

but

chiefly

are also

many examples

and

cf. 6,

to with

of 6s as a demonstrative, as Ro. 14

:

Mt. 27 4. This latter demonstrative construction is very common. Autos is beginning to have a semi-demonstrative sense (common in modern Greek) in the N. T., as in Lu. 13:1, kp aura) tQ KaipCo. There is little to say on the non-syntactical side about kttvos and oCros save that both are very common in the N. T., oSros extremely so, perhaps four times as often as keTws which is relatively more frequent in John.^ also

17,

5e,

as

ol 8e

in

:

Blass^ points out the fact that ovToa-i does not appear in the

N. T. (nor in the LXX), though the adverb vw-l is fairly common in Paul and twice each in Acts and Hebrews. Ovxl is much more frequent especially in Luke and Paul. Smith ^ compares k-KeXvos (Kelvos in Homer) to Oscan e-tanto. Modern Greek uses both forms and also e-roOros and tovtos in the nominative.^ Of the correlative demonstratives of quality roTos is not found in the N. T. and roLoaSe only once (2 Pet. 1 17). Totouros (neuter TOLOVTO and -ov) occurs less than sixty times, chiefly in the Gospels and Paul's earlier Epistles (Gal. 5 21). We find neither rocros nor Toaoade and roaovTos (the only correlative demonstrative of quantity) is less frequent than tolovtos (cf. Lu. 7:9). The neuter is also in -op and -0. Of the correlatives of age t7}\lkovtos alone is found four times (cf. Jas. 3:4). See also ch. XV, vi. Homer (/) Relative Pronouns (ava^opiKal avrcow/XLai). shows the transition of the demonstrative to the relative, using five forms (6, 6 re, 6s, 6s re, 6s rts). Attic dropped 6 and 6 re as well as 6s re. This use of re with 6 and 6s may be compared with the common use of the Latin qui = et is. So the Hebrew mt (' this') is sometimes relative. Cf. German der and English that.^ Relatives in the narrower sense grew naturally out of the anaphoric use of the demonstrative. The weakening of 6 to the article and :

:

the introduction of the longer demonstratives left 6s

more and more

for the true relative use.

(65e, ouros, tKeiPos)

'0

and

6s

have a

1 See Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 145; Dieterich, Unters., p. 197; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 308. » Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 171. » lb., p. 35; Thackeray, p. 191.

<

The

5

Cf.

Ionic Dial., p. 448.

Thumb, Handb.

d. neugr. Volkspr., p. 64.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

p. 161. 6

Cf.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., pp. 185

ff.;

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 35.

Gk. Gr.,

THE DECLENSIONS different etymology.

Relative

6s

291

(kaISEIS)

= Sanskrit

There are thus

yds.

only two pure relatives that survive in the N. T., 6s and bans, for oairep and oadrjiroTe are not found save that the Western and

Syrian classes read ovirep in Mk. 15 6. 'OadrjiroTe in Jo. 5 4 disappears with the rejection of that verse. Already the papyri^ and the inscriptions^ show the rare occurrence of octtls, confined as :

:

a rule to the nominative and gradually disappearing in the modern Greek before 6 owolos and even tov.^ Compare the vulgar

"whar"

"the

in

man whar

"0
said that."

merely

any one or again of somebody in particular. Both of these senses occur in the N.T. usage. The N. T. follows the papyri and inscriptions in using only the OS

plus the indefinite

rts

in the sense of

'

'

'

'

nominative of

oarts

and the genitive

save the neuter accusative

in set phrases like

6 tl

(Lu. 10

otov (Jo. 9

ecos

:

used in both the singular and the plural, however, but wise nearly indeclinable.

"Os ye (Ro. 8

plus the intensive particle ye.

OS

common

N. T. than

in the

syntactical ones.

OIos,

"Os itself

and

oo-ns

raises

oaos,

ottoTos,

32)

:

is,

is

is

35),

other-

of course, simply

many

times more

no questions save

-qXlKos

:

It is

18).

many

are also relatives of

and age. OIos is found only fourteen times in them in Paul's writings (cf. 2 Cor. 10 11). can count up only five examples, four in Paul if we credit

quality, quantity

the N. T., ten of "Ottoios

him Ac. 26

to

common are

it is

weak

:

:

This

29.

in the

(Jas. (g)

a

in the vernacular'*

nor modern Greek, but rjXlKos, it

is

little

strange

modern Greek. But the Cor. 7

:

recalls

how

correlatives generally

'Oiroaos is

kolvt].

oo-os (1

when one

not in the N. T.

own.

39) holds its

As

to

drops to four instances, two of them in the same sentence

3:5).

Interrogative Pronouns.

the N. T. both in direct (Mt. 21

:

Tis

(ri)

and

31)

is

common

fairly

in

indirect questions (Mt.

in the Thessalian Greek Gothic hwa, English loho, German wer. In Latin and English the relative is formed from the same root, but not so in the Greek. In modern Greek, however, Tts has vanished before ttoTos (cf. oo-rts before 6 ttoTos),*' accented xotos, though Tt (indeclinable) survives strangely enough in the sense of "what sort."^ In the N. T. the qualitative cor-

20 22) :

like

is KLs,^ kL.

the papyri usage.

So Sanskrit

Mayser, Gr.

«

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 167

*

Mayser, Gr.

"

K.-Bl.,

«

Thumb, Handb.,

d. griech. Pap., p. 310. f.

d. grioch. Pap., p.

p. 013;

^

Nachm., M:ign.

Inschr., p. 145.

Thumb, Handb., p. 93. 311; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., Cf.

Hoffmann, Die p. 94.

tL

kds, Latin quis,

'

I,

Tts,

gr. Dial., ^

lb.

Bd.

II, p.

558.

p. 145.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

292

relative xoios is used fairly often as a direct interrogative

Mk.

(cf.

11:28) and sometimes as an indirect interrogative (Mt. 24:42). XIoraTTos is used a few times in direct (Mt. 8 27) and indirect Uoaos is still used as a direct interrogative also (Lu. 7:39). :

(Mt. 12

:

12) in quantitative questions

rect questions

(Mk, 15:4).

these doubtful, Gal. 6

:

11,

IlrjXt/cos

W. H.

in indirect question (Heb. 7:4).

and a few times

in indi-

occurs only twice (one of

tiXIkols

margin) and both times

The disappearance

of duality

has taken Torepos entirely away, though irorepov occurs once as an adverb in an indirect question (Jo. 7: 17). In the we find

LXX

Modern Greek

only once in Job (Thackeray, Gr., p. 192). does not use TrrjXlKos, though Toaos survives. -wbrepov

(h)

Indefinite Pronouns.

ative quis) the Greek accent.

It is

common

very

way

Like the Latin ali-qids (interrog-

from the interrogative rts only in the N. T. (as Lu. 1:5), but already

tIs differs

in

(Mk. 8: 19), a usage not unknown to the older Greek.^ In the N. T. we have els rts together (Mk. 14: 47; Lu. 7: 19). Modern Greek has supplanted ris, ri by Kaveis {kHu, The negative forms juiyrts els) and Ka^ets (cf. Kad' eh in N. T.).^ and ovTLs do not appear in the N. T. save that fxrjTL occurs in questions (Mt. 12 23) and firj rts with IVa. But ixTjdeis and ovdels The old delua meets us only once (Mt. 26 18), are very common. but hangs on in the modern Greek.^ Oi; ttSs and fxi] was belong it is

giving

to

els

:

:

wholly to Syntax. (i) Distributive

and Reciprocal Pronouns. These pronouns have an insecure place in the N. T. with the exception of 'E/cdrepos like irbrepos has vandXXos, aX\r]\o:v, eKaaros and erepos.

ished, as impljdng duality.

It is rare in the

LXX

(Thackeray,

on in some fourteen instances (cf. Mt. 9 17). 'AW-q'Kcov (composed of aXXos, aXXos) is naturally only in the oblique cases of the plural, but is fairly common (cf. Jo. 4 33). It has vanished in the modern Greek. "Eicacrros on the other hand appears only in the singular Gr., p. 192).

"Am0co

is

gone, but

ajjLcjjoTepoL

lingers

:

:

except in Ph. 2:4 (probably twice there). It too has disap"Erepos is beside d/x06repot the only peared in the modern Greek. and it dual pronoun, surviving goes down in the modern Greek

along with

dAt^orepot.'*

It is less

common

(97 times) in the

1

Dieterich, Unters., p. 202; Hatz., Einl., p. 207.

2

Thumb, Handb.,

p.

95

f.

^

N. T.

jb.^ p. gg.

N. T. Gk., p. 179. The pap. (Mayser, Gr. d. gxiech. Pap., Once (Prov. p. 312) show a few examples of eKarepos, ^irjSerepos, b-Korepos. 24 21) the LXX has uriOtTepos. ^

:

Blass, Gr. of

THE DECLENSIONS

293

(kaISEIS)

than aXXos (150), chiefly in Matthew, Luke, Paul, Heb., never in Revelation, Peter, and only once in Jo. (19: 37) and Mk. (16: 12)

and

this latter in disputed part.

The

(73 times, plural 24).

It

is

usually in the singular

distinction (not always observed in

the N. T.) between aXXos and erepos belongs to Syntax.

The use

eh Tov €va as reciprocal (1 Th. 5:11) and of tavTihv (1 Cor. 6: 7) along with other uses of dXXos and erepos will receive treatment under Syntax. of

ADVERBS ('EniPPHMATA)

V. 1.

A

Neglect of Adverbs.

glance at the average

grammar

will

show that the grammarians as a rule have not cared much for the adverb, though there are some honorable exceptions. Winer has no discussion of the adverb save under Syntax. Still others have not understood the adverb. For instance, Green says that once in the N. T. "a preposition without change is employed as an ^

adverb,"

Cor. 11:23).

viz. uTrep eya; (2

That

is

a perfunctory

which assumes that the preposition is older than the adverb. It is of a piece with the idea that regards some adverbs Donaldson^ says that, with comas "improper" prepositions. pliments to Home Tooke, "the old grammarian was right, who error

said that

when we know not what

we may

safely

else to call

an adverb."

a part of speech,

Certainly

it is not easy nor practicable always to distinguish sharply between the ad-

and

verb

particles.^

it

preposition,

But the

history of the shall

call

conjunction,

Greek language makes

be done to

it.

This

is

and by the adverb

other

interjections

great part played it

in

the

imperative that justice

essential for the clear understand-

conjunctions and particles as well as Substantive and verb blend at many points

ing of the prepositions,

the adverb

and

itself.

glide easily into each other in English, for

tention has often been called to the use of

instance.

"but"

At-

in English

as adverb, preposition, conjunction, substantive, adjective

and

pronoun.''

Handb. to the Gr.

of the N. T., p. 138. Gk. Gr., p. 37. Dolbiiick, Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 535-G43, has the most complete treatment of the adv. ' Brug., Gk. Gr., p. 250. In the Sans, the line is still loss clearly drawn between the various indeclinable words (Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 403). * Giles, Man., p. 237 f. Cf. Schroedor, Ubor die form. Untersch. der Redet., 1

2

p.

35

f.;

Dclbriick, Grundr., Bd. Ill, p.

.5;5() f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

294

NEW TESTAMENT

The name suggests a mere 2. Formation of the Adverb. addendum to the verb, an added word (hke the adjective) that is not necessary. But in actual fact adverbs come out of the heart of the language, expressions fixed by frequent usage. (a) Fixed Cases. A large number^ of words retam the caseending in the adverb and often with the same function. Perhaps the bulk of the adverbs are either the simple case used directly in an adverbial sense or the formation by analogy. It is just be-

cause adverbs are usually fLxed case-forms or remnants of obsolete case-forms that they deserve to be treated under the head of De-

They have

clensions.

to be approached from the standpoint of

the cases to understand their history.

Leaving analogy for the

moment let us see some examples of the cases that are so used. The cases most commonly used thus are the ablative, locative, instrumental and accusative.^ The dative and genitive are sel-

dom employed sense,

phrase like

eh (Ro. 12

in this

(so occasionally in Sanskrit) only in

a eh in the addition to John's Gospel (Jo. 8 9), ro Kad' Cf. ava-txl^. Examples of the various cases as used

Kad' :

The vocative never occurs

as adverbs.

and the nominative

:

5).

N. T. will be given without attempting to be exhaustive. and the modern Greek illustrate the same general tendencies as to adverbs that we see in the earlier Greek. Here the N. T. is in close accord with the papyri as to adverbs in use.^ The most obvious illustration of the ac(1) The Accusative. in the

The

KOLvi]

cusative in adverbs is the neuter of adjectives in the positive, comparative and superlative (singular and plural). In the comis the rule, in the superlative the plural, but In the modern Greek accusative plural is more common even in the comparative (Thumb, Handh., p. 77). Take for the positive avpiov, eWv (s added later), €7711(5), iJ.eya, ixeaov, TrXtjaiov, to\v, raxv, (rrjiiepov, dXXd {iiWo.), TroXXd, /laKpav. The com-

parative the singular

variations occur.*

parative

by

may

TrpooTov

be illustrated by varepov,

(and

TcpCbTa)

and

rfhara.

^ekriov,

Cf. also

and the superlative Sometimes

Ta-xl(TTr]v.

used with the adjective where the adverbial idea is \ol-k6v, to. iroWa, and note also rriv apxw (Jo. But the substantive alone has 8:25), substantive with article. abundant examples also, as 6.Kixi}v, apxw, 5wpeav, wepav, xapLV. the article

is

encroaching, as to

1

Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 250

^

Mayser, Gr.

2

ff.

d. griech. Pap., pp.

456

jjirt,

Handb.

etc.,

pp. 320

ff.

ff.

4 Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 251; Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 322. In the Sans. the ace. also is the case most widely used adverbially (WTiitney, Sans. Gr., 408). Cf. Delbnick, Grundl., pp. 34 ff.

THE DECLENSIONS SxfSoi' is

(kAISEIS)

295

-8op, -8a.

Cf. also o/iodvfia-

a specimen of the adverb in

bov, poL^ribbv.

The

accusative in adver})s

is

specially characteristic

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 459; Schmid, In the modern Greek the accusative for the adverbs is almost universal. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 77. All adverbs in -cos are probably ablatives. (2) The Ablative. KaXws, for instance, is from an original koKccS. The 5 (Sanskrit t) is dropped and a final s is added. ^ Cf. old Latin meritod, facilumed.^ The outcjos, cos of the Greek correspond exactly with the old Sanskrit The ending in -cos comes by analogy to be exceedingly tad, ydd. common. Practically any adjective can by -cos make an adverb in the positive. Some, like dStaXetTrroos, belong to the later Greek Participles also may yield such adverbs as (^et^o^iei'cos (KOLvrj).^ (2 Cor. 9:6), 6tio\oyovixho:s (1 Tim. 3:16), 6vtus (Mk. 11 32). of the

Koivrj

(cf.

Attic, II, pp. 36

ff.).

:

Radermacher (A''. T. Gk., p. 54) cites apKovvTws, TeToXurjKOToos (Diod., XVI, 74. 6), etc. The bulk of the adverbs in -cos are from adjectives and pronouns. But the examples of -cos are rare in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 77). There are not many adverbs in this case (3) The Genitive. outside of those ending in -ov, like avrov, oirov, tov, 6/xoD and -tjs This use survives in modern Greek. Cf. the local use of (e^rjs). the genitive in 'E^eo-ou (Ac. 19: 26). vvKTos verges

toward the adverb.*

The

is

genitive

(4)

The

Locative.

etc.

Hirf

like drjfxoaLa, ioia,

but

it

of

rifxepas, :

17).

almost never used adverbially in Sanskrit.^

frequent in Greek. irepvaL,

The common use

Cf. also rod XoixoO (Gal. 6

This

a rare use in Sanskrit,^ but more

is

Instance (but not

Tre^fj,

etc.,

cKeT,

kvkXw,

o'Uol,

Brugmann)

as locative.

does not appear in the N. T.

So also

irpwl.

act,

likewise treats examples

Certainly

Cf. also

irol is

locative,

rco ovti (article

and

participle) in adverbial sense (Ro. 7:23).

This case lends itself naturally to the (5) The Instrumental. adverb where the idea of manner (associative) is so common.* In the Sanskrit it is very common for adverbs to be in the instrumental.^ Such adverbs as a/xa (cf. ablative o/icos from same root), ekr], Kpv(})7]{fi), '\a.dpa{a), p.a'Ka,

TravT7](ji)

,

-wavTaxviv)} "^^X^y etc., are

doubt-

^ Hirt, Ilandb. etc., Man., p. 240. p. 320. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 457 f., for further exx. Cf. the Lat. adv. (abl.) ram, quomodo etc., Bopp, Vergleich. Gr., § 183. Cf also Delbriick, Grundl., pp. 48 ff. ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 410. * « lb. Brug., Griocli. Gr., p. 252. ^ Handb. etc., p. 321. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 252 (dat. ace. to Drug.). 8 Ilirt, Handb., p. 321. » Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 409. 1

Giles,

'

Cf

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

296

less instrumental. In some cases l is added to bring it in harmony with the locative-dative cases with which it blended.^ Brugmann^ also puts here such words as avw, kLtw, e^w, dj/cortpco, di^w-IIco is by al)laut from -Trr? (so Laconic Trrj-iroKa) rdrco, ou-ttco. As in the Sanskrit/ so in the Greek the dative (6) The Dative. Indeed Hirt* is not far wrong when is very rare in adverbs.

he says that

from the

it

is

locative,

not easy to find any dative adverbs distinct

though he accepts

as dative

irapal, xo^Mot, kt\.

Brugmann^ thinks otherwise, and one is slow to dissent from the modern master of comparative grammar. He cites But Delbriick^ is TrdXat, xo-fJ-(^h Karat, irapai, kvkKco, awovofj, etc. against Brugmann here. Besides the dative in its proper sense is a little difficult to fit into an adverb. But we have given enough (p. 260).

to justify the treatment of adverbs under the declensions.'^

Other adverbs are formed by suffixes which case-endings that are no longer clear to us. Here only the main suffixes in use in the N. T. will be mentioned. For -ciKL-s take iroWaKLs and the numeral adverbs hke rerpd/cts, etc. For -axov note wavTaxov. For -8e take oUade. For -8ou take oijloFor —?7s we may note e^ai
may

Suffixes.

be

relics of lost

wxa. The papyri furnish parallels for practically all these N. T. examples (and many more).^ "Aira^ seems to stand by itself. Some adverbs are due to the blend(c) Compound Adverbs. Handb.,

321

1

Hirt,

2

Griech. Gr., p. 252

p.

f.

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

f.

Cf. Delbriick, Grundr., Ill, p. 581

f.

Handb., p. 321. * Griech. Gr., p. 252. Cf. also p. 229 f., where he acknowledges the other ^ Grundl., point of view as possible. p. 60 f. ^ In Lat. adv. are partly remnants of case-forms and partly built by analogy. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 109. For Gk. see also Lutz, Die Casus-Adv. 3

bei att. * 9

son,

Rednern

p. 410.

*

(1891).

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 456. lb., pp. 455-459. See also Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 253-257.

New

Cf.

Crat., pp. 449-501, for discussion of these adv. suffixes.

Donald-

THE DECLENSIONS

297

(kAISEIs)

one word, perhaps with modification

ing of several words into

by analogy. The kolvt] is rather rich in these compound adverbs and Paul fairly revels in them. As samples take e/c7raXai (2

irapavTiKa

(2

12:19), KaTevco-mov (Eph. 1:4),

KarhavTi (2 Cor.

Pet. 2:3),

Cor. 4:17),

d7rpoo-a)7roXi7jU7rrcos

(1

Pet. 1:17), Trapa-

XPWo- (Lu. 1:64), vwepavoj (Eph. 4: 10), virep'tKeiva (2 Cor. 10: 16), virepeKTrepLcraov (1 Th. 3:10), vwepXiav (2 Cor. 11:5), virepTrepiaaCis (Mk. 7:37), etc. The intense emotion in 2 Cor. explains the piling-up

and doubhng

of

some

of these prepositional phrases.

blended into one word and an ad-cos. So (from vovv ex^) vowexl^'i (Mk. with analogy by verb made bins along with another adPoly and Aristotle by used 12:34), in Mark it is used without But Isocrates.^ in vovvtxovTiMs Uke verb Cor. 11:23) is made from 'Tirep^aXKSvTws (2 adverb. other any

Occasionally a verbal clause

the participle and

is

is

common

There are, (Mk. 15 40) oltt' avwCon. and Stock, Sel fr. LXX,

in Attic (Xen., Plato).

besides, adverbial phrases like

cltto

/xaKpodev

:

(Mt. 27: 51), etc. Cf. IV, iv, (/), for discussion of the formation of chapter See 47. p. compound adverbs which are very common in the kolvt]. Paul uses the idiom frequently. For the use of adverbs in the kolvt],

dev, ews Kctrco

see Mayser's careful

from the papyri, pp. 455 ff

list

.,

and Nach-

New

adverbs are continually made in the later Greek, though many of the older ones survive He groups Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 78 ff. in the modern Greek.

manson, Magn. Inschr.,

p.

138

f.

them under place, time, manner and quantity. A word is needed to accent the part played by (fl) Analogy. analogy in the formation of adverbs, though it has already been The two examples mentioned above, povvex(^s and alluded to. serve as good illustrations of the work done by the principle of analogy. The bulk of the -m adverbs are ablavirepj3a\\6uTO)s will

tives

made by

analogy.^

In general the adverb is like the adjective save that in the comparative the accusative singular is used, like rdxi-ov, and the accusative plural in the super(e)

The Comparison of Adverbs.

lative, like raxifrra.

But, per contra, note

irpC>Tov

and

KaTurepco

(Mt. 2 16), Trepia-o-orepcos (2 Cor. 1: 12), (TTTovdaLOTkpcos (Ph. 2:28), Cf. fur-pov). eaxdrcos (Mk. 5:23), Troppwrepw (Lu. 24:28. :

AB

ther ch. XII,

III.

The derivation of the adverb deserves the facts have already been hinted at. though a further word, Brief mention is all that is here called for by way of illustration. 3.

Adverbial Stems.

1

Giles,

Man.,

p. 240.

»

lb.

,

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

298

NEW TESTAMENT

Substantives.

As N. T. examples of adverbs from subbe mentioned apxhv, Scjopeav, x^-pi-v. (h) Adjectives. It was and is always possible to make an adverb from any Greek adjective by the ablative ending -u>s. Cf. both Taxv (accusative) and raxews (ablative). Indeed the line be(a)

may

stantives

tween the adjective and adverb was never sharply drawn, as will be shown when we come to the study of the syntax of the adjective

(cf.

Enghsh

''looks bad," "feels bad," a different idea

the adverb, however).

from

In passing note hovaa (Ro. 8 20) and SevTepaXoL (Ac. 28 13) in strict accordance with the Greek idiom. The comparison of adverbs is another link between adverb and :

:

In most cases, however, it is merely the use of the comparative and superlative forms of the adjective as an adverb. But in some cases the comparative and superlative adverb is made without any corresponding adjective, done by analogy merely. So fxaXXov, /idXio-ra, from ^tdXa, avcorepov from the adverb av(a. Cf. also kyyvTepop (Ro. 13 11) from €77115, KaroiTepco (Mt. 2 16) from kcltco, and woppccTepov (Lu. 24 28) from Toppoj. Comparative adjectives made from positive adverbs are, on the other hand, seen in e^cbrepos (Mt. 8 12), kaurepos (Heb. 6 19), Karoirepos (Eph. 4:9). Karcorepco, TreptaaoTepus (Heb. 2:1, often in Paul; adjective.

:

:

:

:

:

Gal. 1:14), o-xouSatorepcos (Ph. 2:28), ToXixrjpoTepcos (Ro. 15:15) rather than the forms in -repov are due to analogy of the ablative

-COS.

Adverbs made from

participles can be looked

adjectival or verbal in origin, since the participle

and

is

upon

as

both verb

adjective.

(c)

Numerals.

words as

All that

is

necessary here

In Ac. 11

irpC^Tov, bis, Itttclkls, etc.

to

is :

26

mention such

we have

Trpwrcos

instead of xpcDrov.

Clem., (d)

Hom.

Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 58) cites for -ws 4; 16, 20; Polyb. vi, 5. 10; Diod., etc.

9,

Pronouns.

The pronominal adverbs

are very numerous,

like ourcos, oxravTcos, etc., avTov, Trore, Tore, w5e, etc.

As with the the correlative adverbs are lessening. Of the indefinite adverbs only tot€, ttov (a few times), and xcos (only in el-Kws, /xr] xcos) appear.^ Forms like ol, 6tol, ttoI have vancorrelative pronouns,

ished before

ov,

'whither') are

10

:

18)

(e)

=

oirov,

so

wov.

English,^

Cf.

you going?"

Cf.

"where (rather than H (Mk.

the accusative

'why.'

Verbs.

Besides such words as vowexojs (verbal phrase) and

participles like ovtws, bpiokoyovukvois,

should note 'E^paiaTi (from 1

also

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 59

ei,8oiJLhcjos,

f.

2

one (from 'E\\r]d^cS)

virep^aXKovTois

'EjSpat^u), 'EWr]VL(7Tl

Green, Handb. to N. T. Gk., p. 137.

•

THE DECLENSIONS

299

(kAISEIs)

In Jas. 4 13; 5:1 a7e is used with the phiral as an adverb, The modern view of it is not in reahty an interjection. the imperative forms Hke iiye (cf. vocative 0,76 from ayos) is that In the case of devpo we it is merely the root without suffix.^

etc. if

:

indeed

actually have a plural Sedre. Moulton^ illustrates the close connection between inter jectional adverb and verb by the English "Murder!" which could be mere interjection or verbal injunction

according to circumstances. 4. Use of Adverbs. This subject, but

it is

another

is still

way

a convenience rather than a

of looking at the

scientific principle.

Grammar follows this method solely. Adverbs of Manner. These are very numerous

Blass^ in his N. T. (a)

indeed,

'E(Txarws ex^L (Mk. 5:23) is not like TTvev/mTLKCjs, airovdaMS, etc. The phrase really means that she has it like the English idiom. in the last stages. Cf. /Sapecos exovaa (Pap. Brit. M., 42). ES, so common in Attic, has nearly gone in the N. T. (only in Mk. 14 7; Mt. 25 21, 23; Ac. 15 29; Eph. 6 3 quot.). ESts occurs also in Lu. 19 17 (W. H. text, margin ev). KaXws is common. BeXrLov appears once (2 Tim. 1 18) and Kpdaaov often (1 Cor. 7: 38). The comparative adverb Snr'KoTepov (Mt. 23 15) is irregular in form :

:

:

:

:

:

:

and late.^ Adverbs of Place. These answer the questions "where" (6) and "whence." "Whither" is no longer a distinct idea in N. T. Greek nor the kolvt] generally. Even in ancient Greek the distinction was not always maintained.^ Blass'' carefully illustrates how "here" and "hither" are both expressed by such words as kvdade (Ac. 16 28; Jo. 4 16), oddly enough never by evravda, though 33, Side (especially in the Gospels) is the common word (Lu. 9 41). But ket is very common in the sense of 'there' and 'thither' 'EKelae (here again chiefly in the Gospels) as in Mt. 2 15, 22. ('thither') is found only twice, and both times in Acts (21 3; 22 So ov in both senses (Lu. 4 16; 5), which has a literary element. 10 1) and oirov (very common in John's Gospel, 14 3 f.). The The indefinite interrogative ttou (Jo. 1:39; 3:8) follows suit. irov is too little used to count (Heb. 2 6) and once without local 'AXXaxoO occurs once (Mk. 1: idea, rather 'about' (Ro. 4 19). (airXowTepov)

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

38),

but wavraxov several times (Lu. 9 6, 36, etc.), and once :

four times only (Jo. 4 1

Moulton,

'^

lb., p.

Man., 5

:

'Onov

etc.).

D

adds

ofxoae

17L But adv. from verbs arc "late and always

found

is

(Ac. 20

:

Prol., p.

171

f.

rare," Giles,

p. 342.

Gr. of N. T. Gr., pp. 5S

ff.

"

lb.

'

lb.

«

lb.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

300

UavTaxviv) likewise is read once (Ac. 21:28), Syrian class In Ac. 24 3 TravTrjiri) is contrasted with iravraxov. Other adverbs of place in the N. T. are avco, €pt6s, kros, ecroo, e^oo, kLtw. 18).

-oO.

:

A number

adverbs answer to the question "whence." They 'AWaxodev (Jo. 10 1) is found only once in the N. T. "kvwdev (Mk. 15 38) is more frequent, though never Karcodev. The only pronominal forms that appear in the N. T. are eKetdev (Rev. 22 2, rather common in Matthew), evdev (Mt. 17 20), euT.vdev (twice in Jo. 19 18, and in contrast with of

are usually words in -dev.

:

:

:

:

:

Rev. 22:2), TavroOev (Mk. 1:45),

eKeWep

odev (Mt. 12:44), wodeu (Mt. 21:25). The last two are fairly frequent. Blass^ notes how "stereotyped and meaningless" the ending -dev has become in many examples, especially with enrpoadev (common in Matthew

and Luke) and oirMdev (rare). See both in Rev. 4:6. In some cases by a little effort the real force of -Oev may be seen, but the old Greek soon allowed it to become dim in these words. In the case of laoidev and ^i^}^ev Blass^ insists on the force of -dev only in

Mk.

7: 18, 21, 23; Lu. 11:7.

addition of avb occasionally

Cf. also KVK\6dev (Rev. 4:8).

The

may

be due either to the weakened sense of -dev or to a fuller expansion of its true idea. So air' avcodev twice (Mt. 27:51, so W. H. against ^VL Hvicdev, Mk. 15:38), (ZTTo

(Mk. 5:6; 15:40,

jiaKpodev

U

etc.),

Blass^ observes that both naKpoOev and

TatdLodev

TvaLbibdev

(Mk. 9:21). and

are late words

that late writers are fond of using prepositions with -dev as Homer had oltt' oi'pavodev. But Luke used only oi'pavodev in Ac. 14 17. (c) Adverbs of Time. The list is not very great, and yet ap:

preciable.

not in the Gospels at all and is 34) hke the kolvt] and modern read twice only (2 Cor. 3 15 f.). "ETretra (1 Cor.

'Aet (Ac.

largely supplanted

Greek.

'Hi'I/ca is

7:51)

by

is

iraPTore (Jo. 6

:

:

12 28) and etra (Mk. 4

about equally frequent. "Ore (Mt. 9:25) and orav (Mt. 9:15) are both used freely. 'OwdTe :

:

17) are

appears only in the Syrian class in Lu. 6 3 against the neutral ore (so W. H.). Uore (Mt. 17:17) and vrore (Lu. 22:32) are both far less common than ore and orav. But rore :

and Western

and

ttoXlv

verbs

amply atone

(ciTra^,

Scope

irpuiTov,

his,

All the numeral ad-

for this scarcity. ewTciKLs etc.)

belong here

also.

Adverbs. Here again we are retracing ground and crossing our steps, but a brief word will be useful to show how from adverbs grew other parts of speech. The fact has been 5.

of

stated before.

What

is

here called for

is

some

of the proof

illustration. 1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 59.

2

lb.

^

Jb.

and

THE DECLENSIONS

301

(kAIZEIs)

Relation between Adverbs and Prepositions. When we come to study prepositions (ch. XIII) a fuller discussion of this matter will be given. Here the principle will be stated. (a)

"The

a case-usage." older

is only an adverb specialized to That puts the matter in a nutshell. Many

preposition therefore ^

The use

grammars have the matter backwards.

define of the

of prepo-

not the original one. In Homer they are will. So with substantives. "Anastrophe is therefore no exception, but the original type"^ like tLvos eVera (Ac. 19: 32), To quote Giles^ again, "between adverbs and prep-

sitions with verbs scattered about at

ositions

is

no distinct

As samples

can be drawn."

line

prepositions take vap-bs (gen.), Tvap-al (dat.),

used

of cases in

(loc), irap-a

speak of adverbs which "may be nouns "^ and then term them

It is unscientific to

(instr.).

irep-l

to govern

like prepositions

Preposiadverbs" or "spurious prepositions." do not "govern" cases, but more clearly define them. When adverbs do this, they are just as really prepositions as any These will be treated therefore in connection with the others. other prepositions. They are words like ai^a, avev, e^w, ottIo-co, etc. These are usually of pro(6) Adverbs and Conjunctions. nominal origin like o-re (ace. plus re), ov (gen.), ws (abl), dXXa

"preposition

tions

(ace plural),

marks on the poverty erty as early as

the

ticles in

3: 30), eweLTa, Jo, 12:43), KalTOiiye),

eo)s,

by Blass: ho,

eireib-qTvep, rj

or

el nrju,

iievovvye, /levTOL,

dXXd,

eTreiirep tjSt?,

ome,

jikvTOi, etc.),

irep

p.'exp'-i'i)

TOL-^ap-ovv, Toivvv,

COS,

Several of these occur only once ^

Giles,

Man.,

2

478 *

Giles, ib.

I,

On "Nouns

re-

apa, apaye, apa, apa

(only as variation in Ro.

KadoTi,

only variation in Kaddct,

Kai, Kalirep,

variation for),

nrj,

orav, ore, otl, ov, ovx'h ov8e, wplp, re, roi (in Kairoi,

ucrel, ooawep, oiairepei, (hare.

{drjirov,

eireLb-qirep,

oiroTe,

vi],

Die Priipositionsadverbion

in

ov-

der

1884.

used as Prep." see Donaldson,

ff.

Green, Handb.,

apia,

ttXtji^,

uaav,

Cf. also Krebs,

p. 341.

60)

povof Aristotle, which is

ov (p-expi-b]

with other words,

spiitcron hist. Griic, Tl.

p.

in particles, a

riuLKa (r/Trep

Uribe, fxrjTe, ixt^tl, val, vr],'6pws, bivore, ottojs,

ovKovp, ovv,

Gk.,

bioirep, eav, eavirep, el, elirep, elra,

tra, Ka9a, Kaddirep, Kado,

7/rot,

p.'ev,

t),

most cases the

in

T.

These conjunctions and other par-

Si], br}irov,

elre, kirav, eirei, eireLdr],

XloXtreta

'ASr/ratcov

the N. T, are cited

But N.

of

N, T, Greek

of the

barer than the N. T,

ye, axpt(s), yap, ye, be.

conjunctions are so early

etc.^

re,

de,

Blass {Gr.

history can be traced.

much

Some

X-va (instr.), etc.

as to elude analysis, like

etc., p. 138.

"

lb.

^

Giles,

New

Man.,

Crat., pp.

p. 343.

\j

302 Kovf).

A GEEEK GRAMMAR OF THE

But Blass has not given a complete

oQev, ov, OTTOL, TTore, etc.

from (c)

NEW TESTAMENT Cf. also 8l6tl,

list.

Fifteen other Attic particles are absent

N. T. list. The matter will come up again in ch. XXI. Adverbs and Intensive Particles. Hep is an older form

this

Trep-t. Usually, however, as with ye, the origin is obscure. Others used in the N. T. are 8r], drjirov, n'ev, roi (with other particles). Seech.

of

XXL

(d)

Adverbs and Interjections.

Interjections

are

often

merely adverbs used in exclamation.

So with aye, Sevpo, Sevre, ea, ISe, Iboh, ova, oval, co. Interjections may be mere sounds, but they are chiefly words with real meaning, "kye and Ibe are both verbstems and Ibov is kin to Ue. The origin of the adverbs here used not always clear. Oi^at as in Mt. 1 21 (common T. and Epictetus) has the look of a dative, but one As a substantive 17 oval is probably due to B\l\l/i.s or

as interjections in the

is

:

LXX, N.

hesitates.

and XVI, v, (e), for use For the adverb like adjective, as ovTws xipo. (1 Tim. 5:5), see ch. XII, vi. In Lu. 12:49 tI may be an exclamatory adverb (accusative case), but that is not certain. Aevpo sometimes is almost a verb (Mk. 10 21). The relative adverb cos is used as an exclamation in cos copatot (Ro. 10: 15) and cos ave^epevvrjra (Ro. 11 33). The interrogative ttcos is likeTaXatTTOjpta

(Thayer).

Cf. chapters XII, v,

of article with adverb, as ro vvv. 17

:

:

wise so employed, as

ttcos

(Lu. 12: 50),

TTCOS

Gk., p. 258.

Thus we

of

making them.

8vaKo\6p

ean (Mk. 10:

e0iXei avrop (Jo. 11

see

many

:

36).

24),

ttcos

avvexofxai

N. T. and many ways

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

sorts of adverbs

CHAPTER

VIII

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (THMA) I.

Difficulty of the Subject.

The discussion noun for two

greater difficulty than that of the

For one thing the declension

of

(/cXto-ts)

nouns

of the verb gives

reasons especially.

is

more

stable than

the conjugation (av^vyla) of the verb. This difficulty applies to both the forms and the syntax of the verb.^ There is besides special difficulty in

the Greek verb due to the ease and

verbal formations. ^

number of new

Sanskrit and Greek can be compared with

more ease than Greek and Latin.

Giles ^ indeed calls the Latin

verb-system "only a mutilated fragment" of the original parent stock, so that "a curious medley of forms" is the result, while in the syntax of the verb no two Indo-Germanic languages are further apart than Greek and Latin. Both noun and verb have suffered greatly in the ravages of time in inflection.

It is in de-

and conjugation (personal endings) that noun and verb mainly differ."* "These suffixes [used for the present tense],

clension (cases)

however, are exactly parallel to the suffixes in the substantive, and in many instances can be identified with them."^ II.

Nature

of the Verb.

verhum is merely 'word,' any word, and so includes noun also. As a matter of fact that was probably true originally. In isolating languages only position and the context can determine a verb from a noun, and that is often true in English to-day. But in inflected tongues the case-endings (a)

Verb and Noun.

In

itself

and the personal endings mark off noun and verb. But in simple truth we do not know which is actually older, noun or verb; both probably grew up together from the same or similar roots.^ Schoemann,'' however, is much more positive that "the first word Man.,

403

»

Giles,

*

Steinthul, Zcitschr.

Bchcidung von

f.

fiir

Hirt,

«

Handb.,

Volkerpsych.

Nomen und Verbum Giles,

^

p. 509. 8

p.

p. 332.

etc., p.

etc., 4.

Man.,

351.

»

Man.,

Bd. der Abh.

d. phil. etc., 1865,

p. 424.

Schroeder, tlber die form. Untersch. d. Rcdet. im Griech.

pp. 10

ff.

'

p. 404.

Cf. Schleicher, Unter-

Die Lehre von den Redet. 303

und

etc.,

Lat., 1874,

1864, p. 31.

304

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

NEW TESTAMENT

which man spoke was essentially much more a verb than a noun." But, whether the verb is the first word or not, it is undoubtedly the main one and often in the inflected tongue forms a sentence in itself, since the stem expresses the predicate and the ending the subject.^ It is worth noting also that by the verb-root and the pronominal root (personal endings) the verb unites the two ultimate parts of speech. The verl) and noun suffixes, as already In all said, are often identical (Giles, Manual, etc., p. 424). sentences the verb is the main part of speech (the word par excellence) save in the copula (eo-rt) where the predicate is completed by substantive or adjective or adverb (another link between verb and noun). "A noun is a word that designates and a verb a word that asserts" (Whitney, Aw. Jour, of Philol., xiii, p. 275). A man who does not see that " has no real bottom to his grammatical science." Scholars have found much diffi(b) Me.\ning of the Verb. culty in defining the verb as distinct from the noun. Indeed there is no inherent difference between nouns and verbs as to action, since both may express that.- The chief difference lies in the idea of affirmation. The verb affirms, a thing not done by a noun except by suggested predication. Verbs indicate affirmation by the personal endings.

Affirmation includes negative assertions also.^

Farrar^ cites also the

German "abstract conception

of existence"

(Humboldt) and action (Tdtigkeitswort) but they do not fit the Curiously enough many ancient grammarians found time facts. to be the main idea in the verb. The close kinship between (c) Pure and Hybrid Verbs. nouns and verbs appears in the verbal nouns which partake of both. The infinitive is a verbal substantive, and the participle is a verbal adjective. There is also the verbal in -tos and -reos. Some of the properties of both verb and noun belong to each. ,

They

are thus hybrids.

Thej' are generally called non-finite

^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 1. In the Sans, it is to be noted that the noun had an earher and a more rapid development than the verb. The case-endings appear first in the Sans., the verb-conjugation in the Gk., though the personal Cf. Garnett, Philol. Ess. endings are more distinct in the Sans. 3 Cf. Gr. Gen. of Port Royal; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 38. * lb. He considers the verb later than the noun because of its complex idea. Cf. Schramm, tjber die Bedeutung der Formen des Verbums (1884); Curtius, Die Bildung der Tempora und Modi im Griech. und Lat. (1846); Junius, Evolution of the Greek Verb from Primary Elements (1843) Lautensach, Verbalflexion der att. Inschr. (1887); Hogue, Irregular Verbs of Attic '^

;

Prose (1889).

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB

305

("PIIMa)

do not make affirmation. They have no perfall short of being mere verbs, but they are more than the noun. The pure verb has personal endings and is thus finite (limited). The two must be kept distinct in mind, though they run together sometimes in treatment. The finite verbs, because they

sonal endings.

They

verb has person and number expressed in the personal ending.^ The verhum finitum has modes while the verbum infinitum (infinitive and participle) has no modes. III. The Building of the Verb. This is not the place for a full

phenomena concerning verb-structure. The' essential facts as to paradigms must be assumed. But attention can be called to the fact that the Greek verb is built up by means of suffixes and affixes around the verb-root. So it was originally, and a number of such examples survive. Afterwards analogy, of course, played the main part. The oldest verbs are those which presentation of the

have the simple root without a thematic vowel like 0rj-/xt or e-pr]-v. This root is the ground floor, so to speak, of the Greek verb. On this root the aorist and present-tense systems were built by merely adding the personal endings. This was the simplest form of the verb. There is no essential difference in form between e-^ij-j^ and We call one imperfect indicative and the other second 'i-arrj-v. but they are originally the same form.^ The term second aorist is itself a misnomer, for it is older than the so-called first aorist -
aorist indicative,

The personal endings have to carry a heavy burden. They express not only person and number, but also voice. There are mode-signs and tense-suffixes, but no separate voice suffixes apart from the personal endings. The personal pronouns thus used with the verb-root tribute their special part to the whole.

antedate the

mode and

tense suffixes.

The

Sanskrit preserves

than the Greek, though the Greek has a more fully developed system of modes and tenses than the later classical Sanskrit.^ It seems certain that these prothe person-endings

*

more

clearly

On

Cf. Bru^., r.niiulr., Bil. II, pp. 2, 837.

non-finite vcrh.s wee Curtius, Diis 2

Hirt, Ilundb., p.

^

Donaldson,

New

3(j:i f.

Vcrbinn

Cf. also Giles,

Crat., pp. 570

IT.

differciu'c

bctwocn

d. f^riecli. Spr., p. 1

Man., pp. 425

ff.

f.

finite

and

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

306

NEW TESTAMENT

nominal suffixes, like -jut, -ai, -n, are not in the nominative, but an oblique case^ connected with the stem: ne, o-e, tl (cf. demonstrative to). But the subject of personal endings is a very extensive and obscure one, for treatment of which see the comparative grammars.^ There is a constant tendency to syncretism in Homer has fewer than the the use of these personal endings. dual is gone in the N. T. The Plato. more than but Sanskrit, The nominative progradually. drop away endings other and modern English. hke and more, more expressed be to has noun

The Survival of -ijll Verbs. Before we take up modes, voices, Cross Division. tenses, we are confronted with a double method of inflection that cuts across the modes, voices and tenses. One is called the -fxi IV. (a)

A

inflection

from the immediate attachment of the personal endings The other is the -co inflection and has the the-

to the stem.

matic vowel added to the stem. But the difference of inflection is not general throughout any verb, only in the second aorist and the present-tense systems (and a few second perfects), and even so the -Mt conjugation is confined to four very common verbs {tr]fXL, in the 'i(TTr]iJ.L, di8o:fxi, ridrj/jLi.), except that a number have it either present system, like like e-^r}-v.^

The

delK-vv-nL

(with

w inserted here),

or the aorist,

much in the use of non-thematic Buck, "The Interrelations of the Greek

dialects differed

and thematic verbs

(cf.

Dialects," Classical Philology, July, 1907, p. 724). This is now a commonplace in Greek (6) The Oldest Verbs.

grammar.

probable that originally

It is

all

verbs were -mi verbs.

This inflection is preserved in optative forms like Xuot/it, and in Homer the subjunctive* WeKufxi, Uc^fXL, etc. The simplest roots with the most elementary ideas have the -fxi, form.^ Hence the conclusion is obvious that the -^t conjugation that survives in some verbs in the second aorist and present systems (one or both) is the original. It was in the beginning \ey-o-ixL with thewith non-thematic verbs.^ In Latin the -/jll ending is seen only in inquam and sum, though Latin has many athematic stems. In English we see it in am. Even in Homer the -/xi

matic as well as (c)

(jbij-jut

Gradual Disappearance.

New

1

Donaldson,

2

Cf. Hirt, Handb., pp. 355

3

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 232

*

Monro, Horn. Monro, Horn.

«

Crat., pp.

570

ff.;

ff.

Giles,

*

Cf. Clyde,

and Goelzer, Phonct., pp. 347

ff.

p. 39.

f.

Gr., p. 51. Gr., p. 2.

Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., Man., pp. 413 ff.

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 46.

Gk. Synt., 5th

ed., 1876, p. 54;

Riem.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) forms are vanishing before the

-co

307

Jannaris (Hist.

conjugation.

Gk. Gr., p. 234) has an excellent brief sketch of

vanishing of the

The

Greek.

the gradual forms which flourished chiefly in pre-Attic MSS. show the same tendency towards the

-jui

LXX

disappearance of

forms

-/jll

so

noticeable

and other representatives

papyri

of the

the N.

in

T., the

See numerous

kolvt].

in Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 104-110.

In advanced than in the the LXX N. T. (Thackeray, Gr., p. 244) and the middle -/il forms held on In the koiptj this process kept on till in modern Greek longest. vernacular et/iat is the only remnant left. In the Attic SeUvvfii, for instance, is side by side with SeiKvvw. In the N. T. we find parallel illustrations

the transition to -co verbs

such forms as Cor. 3

:

(Rev. 3:9),

5t5co

is less

(Ro. 3:31,

icrrco

EKL),

avvLaroo (2

BD).

1,

-^it Verbs. The -/xt verbs in the N. T. as in the papyri are badly broken, but still in use. We take first the 1. The Second Aorists (active and middle). so-called second aorists (athematic) because they come first save where the present is practically identical. In some verbs only the second aorist is athematic, the stem of the verb having dropped the -jut inflection. A new view^ makes the second aorist some-

(d)

times

N. T. Usage as to

root," but this does not

"a reduced

show that in the parent Analogy worked here

stock the old aorist was not the mere root.

Kaegi^ properly calls the old aorists of verbs like instead of the thematic and later e-jSaX-e-ro) "primIn the early Epic the root-aorists and strong aorists."

as elsewhere.

/SctXXco (c-jSXtj-to

itive

thematic aorists outnumber the o- or weak aorists by three to one.^ The important N. T. -/it verbs will now be considered.

Only

BaCvo). ava-,

CLTTO-,

LXX

it is

6ta-,

composition in N. T. (ava-,

in e/c-,

irpoa-ava-,

Kara-, nera-, irapa-, irpo-, avjx-).

ejLt-,

aw-

In the

The papyri use it freely with nine Note the common forms like ave^r] (Mt. 5:1). The

rare in simplex.

prepositions.^

"contract" forms are in the imperative as in the Attic poets Mayser^ gives no examples from the papyri, nor (ela^a, Kara^a).^ does the

LXX have

-^r}TW(Tav)

.''

So

(Syrian class in *

2

any

avafia

Mk.

(LXX

:

King and Cookson, Prin. Gk. Gr., 1893, p. 245.

Thompson, Horn.

*

Maysor, Gr.

'

W.-Sch., p. 115.

ava^rjOL, Kara^-ndL, -^-nre, -/Sijrco,

:

:

Cf.

=>

only

(Rev. 4:1), dm/Sare (Rev. 11 12), Kara^a. Cf. 15 30), KaraiSdrco (Mt. 24 17; 27 42. of

Sound and

Gr., 1890, p. 127.

d. sriech. Pap., p. 389.

Cf. Veitch,

Gk. Verb,

:

Inflexion, ISSS, pp.

»

Hlasa, Gr. of

*

Gr.

tl.

p. 110.

225

ff.

N. T. Gk., p. 50. 3C4 f.

gricch. Pap., p.

also

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

308

Mk.

13

15; 15

:

32; Lu. 17

:

:

31), ^xeTa(3a

/3rj0t

(Jo.

7:3),

irpoaavaQrjdL (Lu. 14

-cLTooaav are like

:

20).

On

40, etc.),

(jLera-

(Mt. 17

the other hand note the usual Kara^-qdc (Mt. 27

:

The forms

10).

:

in -arw, -are,

the Doric.

This verb in the Ionic and

kolvti jlv. form is very Gospel and the First Epistle. It is used in composition with dm-, 5ta-, ewt,-, Kara-, Trpo-, the papyri adding still other compounds.^ The N. T. shows the usual second aorist forms like eyvcov (Lu. 16 4). What calls for remark is the second aorist subjunctive yvol instead of yvQ. W. F. Moulton's view^ on this

rivwcrKo).

common in John's

:

point

confirmed by the papyri^ parallel in

is

by W. H. and

make

yvol like

d7ro5ot and accepted Analogy seems to have worked here to But Winer-Schmiedel (p. 115) cite yvol from

Nestle. 8oX.

Hermas, Mand. IV, tion of -00) verbs

1,

= Q. For

It is in

5 N.

when wc

stead of

bri

see also

71^05

(ert-).

But the MSS. vary

in Jo. 7

71^01 :

accordance with the contrac-

find forms like

51; 11

{ava—, avT—,

papyri.^

airo-,

The

5ta—

:

verb

kwi—,

eK—,

,

in-

But :

:

LXX

in each passage.

common

This very

— oi

Lu. 19: 15.

57 (D has 7^1); 14 31; Ac. 22 24 In the the

:

regular yvQi occurs save in Judith 14 Ai8(i>|JLL.

71^01, do2, etc., brj

Mk. 5:43; 9:30;

see

5,

where

B

has kinyvot.

frequently

is

irapa—,

fxera—,

compounded

Trpo-)

as in the

old indicative active appears only in TrapkSoaav in

the literary preface to Luke's Gospel

2).^ Elsewhere the first (1 forms in -Ka (like rjKa, Wr]Ka) sweep the field for both singuThese k forms for the plural appear in the Attic lar and plural. inscriptions in the fourth century b.c.^ and rapidly grow. In the papyri Mayser'' finds only the k aorists. The other modes go regularly 56s, 8oj, etc. The indicative middle occasionally, as the imperfect, has e for o of the root. This is possibly due to :

aorist

— eKvero

These forms are aTedero (Heb. 12 16), k^kdero (Mk. 12 1; Mt. 21 33; Lu. 20 9). The usual form aireSoaOe, etc., appears in Ac. 5 8; The subjunctive active third singular shows great varia7 9. proportional analogy {e^kSeTo

:

e^e86i.i.r]v

:

kXvo/xrjp) :

:

.^

:

:

:

:

tion between

dol,

Paul's Epistles).^

5c3

(cf.

The

yvol

LXX

above), and

MSS.

durj

(especially in

occasionally give -80I and

2 w.-M., p. 360 note. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 391. Moulton, Prol., p. 55. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 137, 325, for oTTcos So2. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 37, 436. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 392, " Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 188 f. B ^ Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 367 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49. 8 So W.-H., Notes on Orth., p. 167 f. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 121. For pap. exx. » Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49. see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37. 1

5

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('PHMa)

309

even -6fj by assimilation (Thackeray, Gr., p. 255 f.). For papyri examples see references under 'ylvcjcko:. Mark four times (all the examples) has wapaBol according to the best MSS. (4 29; 8 37; 14 10 f.) and John one out of three (13 2). Tisch. (not W. H.) reads dToSoT in 1 Th. 5 15, but all MSS. have d7ro5c3 in Mt 18 30. W. H. accept 5c3 in Jo. 15 16; Eph. 3 16; 1 Th. 5 :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

15

Most MSS. read

(dTTo-).

both of which places

in

25,

the text and

LXX

(Jer.

LXX,

9

Scot? :

times as variant. 8l8o:iJLL

and

its

W.

The

in the margin.

1

They

in the

LXX.

list

Hort^

in

5oIr?)

appears in the

8ccr;

LXX

give an interesting

compounds

(opt. for

dcorj

opt.

twenty-nine times in

dco-q

17 and 2 Tun. 2

:

Con. and Stock,

the text of Swete.

2) in

p. 45, give

Eph. H, put

in

8oon

and

from

Sel.

three

dolrj

of other forms of

doubtful about

is

such a subjunctive in ddori except in the epic poets. Blass^ is willing to take dcorj, and Moulton^ cites Boeotian and Delphian inscriptions which preserve this Homeric form. He adds that the 2 Tim. 2

:

The

25.

syntactical necessity" in Eph. 1

"a

subjunctive seems

opt.

out variant in 2 Th. 3 the idea of a possible (Jo. 17

and

2 N'^AC),

:

and

et,

co

8cc7]

=

16;

:

first

8ooawiJL€v

8o'lt]

subjunctive

(cf.

2 Tim. aorist

1

:

"Itijii.

Not

is

quite

less

rj

in the

position with 15),

:

common

N. T.

(see p.

The XIX).

kolvt].

314 for

so-called

details),

(especially in the Gospels),

and

but

awlrjiJLL

Besides a few examples occur also of aviriiJLL, Kadlrjiii, The papyri^ use the various prepositions freely in com-

so.

wapiritxL.

3

in simplex in

and

with-

eScoo-a

future subjunctive will be discussed later (ch.

d0tT7/xt

is

from tua 8uari ND), on the ground that

active

(Mk. 6 37, sound

so often blend in

17

:

= 8ui)

Blass^ scouts

18."

16,

:

86ri

d(/)fj

The common

trjiJiL.

(Mk. 12

:

/xi

second

aorists,

hke

acfies

19), apevres (Ac. 27:40), are found.

indicative active, however, the form in -Ka

is

(Mt.

In the

used alone in both

27), d0i7KaTe (Mt. 23 and plural, as a(i>r]Kajx€v all the compounds of is true of This 23), acjifJKav (Mk. 11 :6). Gr., The (Thackeray, in LXX as p. 252). in the N. T. I'rjMt with the second person sinpar is on a 2 form d0r)/c€s (Rev. 4) by in KeKoirlaKes accepted H. indicative as W. active gular perfect

(Mt. 19

singular

:

:

:

(Rev. 2

-

:3), ireTruKes

aorist

is

1

2

* 8 ^

in

Mk.

10

(Rev. 2:5), etXTj^es (Rev. 11 17).^ 'A
:

:

Notes on Orth., p. 168. Cf. also W.-Sch., j). 121. Prol., p. 55. Cf. Dittcnb., Syll., 462. 17, etc. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48 f. ^ Qr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 49, 212. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 166. The evidence is "nowhere free from =>

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

310 (cf.

fect (cf.

Mt. 13 51. The perin -eT/ca does not, however, occur in the N. T. nor in the LXX Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51), though the papyri have it

Lu. 18

also as to avvrjKaTe in

So

28).

:

:

Pap., p. 331).

(Mayser, Gr.

d. griech.

"lo-T-nfii.

This verb

is

used freely by

itself,

especially in the

Gospels, and occurs in twenty prepositional combinations according to Thayer {av-, kw-av-, k^-av-, avd-, d0-, 5t-, kv-, e^, ctt-, I0-, Kar-icf)-, avv-ecf)-, Kad-, avn-Kad-, aTO-Kad~, fxed-, Tap-, irepL-, irpo-, <xvv-), going quite beyond the papyri in richness of expression.^ The

second aorist active indicative

eaTrj (cnreaTr], etc.) is

common and N.

intransitive as in Attic, just like karadr] (cf Blass, Gr. of .

is

T. Gk.,

other forms are regular (o-rco, ar^dL, etc.) save that avaara (like ava^a) is read in a few places (Ac. 9 11; 12 7; Eph. 5 14), but ffTijOi, ava
The

p. 50).

:

:

:

:

writers

and a few

few examples

earlier

authors for avaara.

The

LXX

shows a

also.^

This classic word (not given in the papyri, according is found only once in the N. T., the secGramniatik) Mayser's to (Phil. 20). 6vaip.y}v middle opt. aorist ond 'OvivTiiJLi.

The compounds

Tl9t||xl.

airo-, hia-, avTi-ho.-,

k-,

of rld-qpi in the

eTrt-,

N. T.

{ava-, irpocr-ava-,

cvv-ein-, Kara-, avv-KaTa-, pera-, ira-

vie with those of

pa-, irepL-, irpo-, irpoa-,

aw-,

equal the papyri use.^

The second

viro-)

'larrjpL

and

aorist active in -/ca alone ap-

in the indicative singular and plural as Wr^Kav subjunctive in -6cb (Mt. 22 44), imperative the but 29), The middle has the regular second aorist Tpoades (Lu. 17:5).

LXX)

pears (so

(Mk. 6

:

:

19

edero (Ac.

:

21 and often).

one is surprised to see this verb put under the list of second aorists, he can turn to Blass,^ who says that it is "at once $T||XL.

If

doubt," some say

MSS. read

«a)paK6s (Jo.

8

:

?5co/ces

(Jo. 17

57), k\v\vee^ (Ac. 21

:

7 :

f.)

22,

and

B

(i(^i^«re

also).

(Mt. 23

Moulton

:

23),

not to

(Prol., p. 52)

"mark of imperfect Gk." For further exx. of this -es ending in and kolpt, see Buresch, Rhein. Mus. etc., 1891, p. 222 f. For tv/xi and its compounds in the LXX see C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 45 f., showing numerous -co forms, acprjKav (Xen. fjKav), etc. considers -es a

the

1

2 *

LXX

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. ^ w.-M., p. 94. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168. Thack., Gr., p. 254. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 122 f. On iardvai and

in the

LXX

-w forms, 6

that

see interesting

list in

C. and

S., Sel.

fr.

LXX,

its

p.

compounds

43

f.,

giving

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 411. The verb is mentioned here to impress the fact

transitive taraKa, etc.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 50. it is aorist as well as imperfect.

^

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) imperfect and aorist."

4

7,

:

2.

for instance,

Some

It

Presents.

-/it

common

is

It is

t^??).

It

311

in the N. T. as aorist (Mt. not always possible to decide.

is difficult

group these verbs ac-

to

cording to any rational system, though one or two small groups (like

those in

mon

in the

-vv/jll,

-^/jll)

appear.

N. T. than the compounded forms.

aorists.

Already in the Attic

AcLK-v\j-|JiL.

The presents are more comThe list is based on the undeLKvvo: is

common, but

observes that in the N. T. the middle-passive

common.

-/xt

Blass^

forms are still h-, ctti-, utto-.

compounded with dm-, arro-, dm- and utto-. The word itself is not used very extensively. The form deUvvni is found once (1 Cor. 12 31), -Oco not at all. So on the other hand deuvvtis occurs once (Jo. 2 AelKwaLv is read by 18), -us not at all. the best MSS. (Mt. 4 8; Jo. 5 20). The middle hdelKPWTaL appears in Ro. 2 15. The -fXL participle active is found in Ac. 18 28 (eTndeLKvvs) and 2 Th. 2 4 {airobuKvhvTa) The middle -/xt parrather

No

It is

presents (or imperfects) occur with

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

:

ticiple is

seen in Ac. 9

Heb. 6:11 the

B

21

The

-hvai).'^

^uvvvfxi,

:

39; Tit. 2

:

10;

3:2

other N, T. verbs in -vul

(Mt. 16

:

(dTroXXu/zt, ^dcwvixL, viro-

The

will

be dis-

inscriptions

in use (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 178).

still

In

etc.).

beLKvveLv

a^eppvfjLL, (TTPCCVVVIJ.L, vToarpwvvviJLL, ktX.)

o/jLvvfiL,

cussed in alphabetical order of the simplex. these forms

{-vfievos,

but

infinitive evMnvvudai. is read,

show

The

were the first to succumb to the -co inflection. In the LXX the -/zt forms are universal in the middle, but in the active the -co forms are more usual (Thack., Gr., p. 245). AC8a)|xi. See under (d), 1, for list of compounds in the N. T. Attic Greek had numerous examples from the form 5t56-co {8i8ov, eSLdovv, -ovs, -ou). This usage is extended in the N. T. as in the papyri^ to Sidco (Rev. 3:9), though even here BP have 5t5co/xi. In VVisd. of Sol. 12 19 SlSols occurs, but Lu. 22 48 has the regular TTapa5i8(x)s. Al8co(n is common (in LXX, Ps. 37:21, 5t5oT appears) and hihoaaLv in Rev. 17 13. The uniform imperfect khibov (Mt. 15 36) is like the Attic. Hort observes that Mk. (15 23) and Ac. (4 33; 27 1) prefer kbibovv. Jo. (19 3) has, however, kbiboaav and Acts once also (16 :4). Albov (Attic present imperative) is read by some MSS. in Mt. 5 42 for bb%. In Rev. 22 2 the verbs in

-vv/xi

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

'

lb., p. 48.

*

In the pap. both

-I'/it

and

-6co,

but only

-u/^at.

Mayser, Gr.

d. grioch.

Pap., p. 392. '

£i5co.

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

p. 37.

Cf. Dciss., B. S., p. 192.

Mod. Gk.

lias

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

312

text has participle aTo8i8ovv for -6v (marg. -om), while irapaSiin Mk. 14 42, etc.^ The 8cov is read by N* in Mt. 26 46 and

D

:

:

middle-passive forms in -ero (imperfect) from a present StSco are like the aorist forms, which see above. So 5ie5t5ero (Ac. 4 35) and So also subjmictive -KapaMot is found irapeblbeTo (1 Cor. 11:23). :

(1 Cor. 15:24) and is probably to be rejected (BG), though the papyri amply support it.^ In the imperfect kbiboaav holds its place- in the LXX, while in the present the -^t forms

only once

LXX

generally prevail (Thackeray, Gr., p. 250). The behind the N. T. in the transition from -p.L to -co forms.

is

quite

AvvaixaL. The use of bhvri (Mk. 9: 22; Lu. 16: 2; Rev. 2:2) instead of bvvaoai argues for the thematic 5uw/xat. Elsewhere bwaaai (Lu. 6 42, etc.). This use of bvvri is found in the poets and from :

Polybius on in prose (Thayer), as shown by inscriptions^ and papyri.^ Hort^ calls it a "tragic" form retained in the kolvt). It (also -o/xeda, is not surprising therefore to find B reading bbvoixai -bfxevos) in Mk. 10:39; Mt. 19:12; 26:53; Ac. 4:20; 27:15; Is.

28 20 (so :

N

in Is. 59

:

15).

The papyri«

give plenty of

illus-

MSS. in the LXX give bbvoixai and bbvri. The compounds are with oltt-, kv-, k^- (only e^e
trations also. EljiL. Trap-,

verb has not undergone many changes, though a few call for notice. In the present indicative The imperfect shows the middle there is nothing for remark. weda regularly (as Mt. 25 :43; 23 :30), as modern Greek riijLriv,

of prepositions.

This very

common

uniformly has the middle present

elfxai, etc.,

as well as imperfect

middle. Cf. already in ancient Greek the future middle eao^xaL. The use of riny]v, seen in the papyri^ and inscriptions^ also, served But examples of we" to mark it off from the third singular rjv. still

survive (Ro. 7:5,

etc.).

Moulton^'' quotes from Ramsay^^

a Phrygian inscription of elfxai for early fourth century a.d. He cites also the Delphian middle forms rJTaL, eoiVTai, Messenian ^j/rat, Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167. Cf. also W.-Sch., p. 121. ^ Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 177. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37. Cf. * Mayser, Or. d. griech. Pap., p. 355; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. also Dieterich, Untersuch., p. 222; Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 597; Deiss., 1

2

B.

S., p. B 6 ^ 8

193.

Notes on Orth., p. 168. Cf. Lobeck, Phryn., p. 359 f. Mayser, Or. d. griech. Pap., p. 355; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, Mayser, ib., p. 394. ^

lb., p. 356.

"

Prol., p. 56.

11

Cities

D

and Bish.

(M. shows) alone has of Phrygia, II, 565.

p. 36.

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 178. fiv

in Ac.

20

:

18.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) Lesbian

as early instances of this tendency, not to

'iaao,

The pecuHar

the Northwest Greek. ^

32, etc.),

stance)

"Htw (as

"'EiCTOiaav

1:8).

^llre

(Ro. 6

:

So with the imperative ladi (Mt. 2 Cor. 16: 22) is less common^ than the usual

1

(never

ovtoov

nor

r)ada

elsewhere ^s (Jo. 11:21,

regular.

is

mention

second person

classical

Mk. 14:67; Mt. 26:69, but the common form in the KOLvi]}

found in

is

313

tGTiiov),

20, for in:

13, etc.).

ecrrco

as in Lu. 12:35,

(Gal. is

a

form found in Attic inscriptions since 200 b.c* Some of the papyri even have rjTo:aav.^ Mention has already (Orthography) been

made

of the irrational v with the subjunctive

in orav

3

:

—

Tjv

28, etc.)

8r]\coao}.

an old

is

xi

in the papjTi,^ as

The use of evL='eveaTL (as 1 Cor. 6:5; Gal. idiom. "EvL=h and in modern Greek has

supplanted karL in the form ehe or etmt (so for Sir. ^37

:

elai also).''

Cf.

2.

Only in compounds (d7r-, etcr-, e^-, Itt- crvv-). The paand the inscriptions^ show only the compound forms. Blass^'' indeed denies that even the compound appears in the popular KOLvr], but this is an overstatement. The Attic employed epxoiJLaL for the present indicative and kept ei/xi for the fuEifJLi.

pyri*^

The

ture indicative.

kolvt]

followed the Ionic (and Epic) in the

et/^t. In the N. T. only Luke and the writer of Hebrews (once) use these compound forms of elfXL and that very rarely. "AireinL only occurs in Etcrei^ut appears the imperfect indicative (Ac. 17: 10, airfieaav). four times, two in the present indicative (Ac. 3:3; Heb. 9:6), two in the imperfect indicative (Ac. 21:18, 26), while elakpxonat appears over two hundred times. "E^et^it also occurs four times, all in Acts (13 42; 17: 15; 20 :7; 27: 43), against a host of instances of e^epxo/xat. "ETretjut is read five times in Acts and all of them in the participle rrj enovar} (Ac. 7: 26, etc.). Xwet/JLL is found only in Lu. 8:4. B reads etcn^t in Ac. 9:6, not daeXde. Blass" rather

use of

for all the tenses to the neglect of

epxofjiaL

:

1

Prol., p. 37.

2

W.-Sch., p. IIV.

'

Cf.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 56.

flufOa, fiTco, iarccffap in

dr., p. *

^ « ' * »

"

256

f.

thc

Beyond

LXX

this the

Both forms in pap. and inscr. On i^firiv, ^s, and S., Hel. fr. LXX, p. 31 f. Thack.,

see C.

LXX

goes very Httle.

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 191.

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Cf. Gen. 6 17 E, according to Moulton, Prol., p. 49. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51 f.; Thack., p. 257. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 355. '« Gr. of N. T. Gk., Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 157. pp. 52, 54.

lb., p. 38.

lb., p. 52.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

314

needlessly construes e^Lovruv (Ac. 13

as to 17: 10, 15; 21

(Thackeray,

:

Et/xt is

18, 26).

:

42) in the aoristic sense (so

nearly gone from the

LXX

Gr., p. 257).

This verb occurs fifteen times in the N. T., chiefly 28, etc.) and always in the present tense.^

'ETTLCTTaixaL.

in Acts (10

:

Only

ZiVYVv\Li.

in the

active alone, awk^ev^ev

compound

(Mk. 10

:

The compounds

ZcowuiJLi.

9;

(Tv-^evypvtJ.(,

Mt. 19

:

and

in the aorist

6).

are with ava-, ha-,

irepi-,

vtto-.

Curiously enough the verb does not appear in Mayser, Nachmanson nor Schweizer, though Mayser (p. 397) does mention ^evyvv/jLL, which on the other hand the N. T. does not give save the one form above. But the uncompounded form is read in the

N. T. only three times, one aorist indicative (Ac. 12 8), one future 18, k^covwes, a 18), and one imperfect (Jo. 21 form in -vco, not -vnC) There is only one instance of the compound with dm- and that an aorist participle (1 Pet. 1 13). The three examples of Staf., all in Jo. (13 4, etc.), yield no presents nor im:

indicative (Jo. 21

:

:

.

:

:

The same

perfects. Treptf .,

as Lu. 12

-vijll,

thing

is

The

35.

The one

Gr., p. 269).

the form in

:

true of the half-dozen instances of

LXX

instance of

has irepi^wvvvTaL (Thackeray, in Ac. 27

viro^. is

:

17

and shows

vTro^o^pvvPTes.

It is only in the compound form Kadriixai that this verb seen in the N. T. and thus very frequently, twice with awIt is usually the participle prefixed (Mk. 14 54; Ac. 26 :30). The imperKadrjuevos that one meets in the N. T. (as Mt. 9:9). '^H|Jiai.

is

:

fect is regularly hKadriro, etc. (as (as

Mt. 19

(Ac. 23

:

:

28).

No -w

Mt. 13

:

1),

the future Kadrjaonai

forms appear in the present, though Kady

a contract form like dvprj for KaOrjaaL (already in HyThe short imperative mdov for Kad-qao (as Jas. 2 3)

3) is

perides).^

:

LXX

110:1) and

(cf. Mt. 22:44 from Ps. already in the indeed in the late Attic (Blass, ih), though chiefly postclassical.^ Like elixi this verb only appears in the N. T. in the "It1|Jli. compounded form {ap-, acf)-, Kad-, wap-, crvp-). The same thing

is

appears to be true of the papyri as given by Mayser," though fifteen combinations greet us in the papyri. But the papyri and the KOipi] inscriptions have not yet furnished us with the -co formation with »

2

'irjfjLL

compounds which we

find in d<^-

and

avpLrjtit

Just so the pap., Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 395. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 52. Cf. also for pap., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

p. 38.

For

LXX

see Thackeray, p. 272.

W.-Sch., p. 118; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 177; Rcinhold, De Graec, ^ Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. p. 89. 3

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB

315

("I'HMa)

N. T.^ and the LXX.^ But Philo^ and the N. T. Apocrypha and early Christian writers^ follow the LXX and the

in the

N. T.

'kvL-qixL

indeed has only avLhres (Eph. 6

:

the present

9) in

shows only Kadikixevov {-iikv-qv) in Ac. 10 11; stem. So has no present, but only an aorist (Lu. 11: irapl-qtii while 11 5, (Heb. 12 12). 'A^trj/xi is the form of passive perfect and a 42) In Rev. 2 20 dc^eis is in the N. T. common is that verb the probably a present from d^eco.^ But Blass (p. 51, of A''. T. Grammar) compares the Attic d^iets and Tideis. Only acjiirjfjn (Jo. 14 27) and d(/)t7?(7t (Mt. 3 15) occur, but in Lu. 11:4 a4)ionev is from the Ionic d
Kadi7]fjLL

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

7

:

25 (TWikvaL gives us the only undisputed instance of a -^t form.

forms or have

All the others are -co avvikvros is correct in is

Mt. 13

:

MSS.

a good deal of fluctuation in the

read awlovcnv (Mt. 13

In 2 Cor. 10

11).

avv[y]ixL

"laT-qiii. TT?xa,

Cf. also

list

of

p.

tTT-to-rajuat

eoTTj/ce

compounds^

:

see

cases.

W. H. (Ro. 3

In the -/xt

:

LXX

forms save

f.).

above) and

(see

list

There

45.

:

12), o-wicov

and usually the

250

Rev. 12

in

most

in

read awidaLu after B.

occurs,

However

variations.

(Mk. 4

13), owlioaiv

W. H.

(Thackeray, Gr.,

imperfect

For the

:

12

compounded verb

only the

with

:

-co

19 and awikvaL in Lu. 24

:

4, o-rkco in

of aorists (1).

aTi]K03

(from

ecr-

modern Greek). But the essen-

can be briefly set forth. The -jut form in the present stem has disappeared in the active voice save in KadiarrjaLu (Heb. tial facts

7:28; 2 Pet. 1:8), (xvpiaTr]ixL (Ro. 16 1) and avpiaTrjcn (2 Cor. 10 18; Ro. 3:5; 5:8).^ The middle (passive) forms retain the -Ml inflection regularly with IVrTjAit and its compounds (di^-, d(/)-, avd~, e^, €
:

:

*

Mayser,

*

W.-Sch., p. 123.

ib., p.

354; Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167.

Herod,

is

cited for the use of i^iu

and

neTlei as -co presents.

De Grace, p. 94. So Ilort, Notes on Orth., p. 167; W.-Sch., p. 123; Hatz., Einl., pp. 309, 334. « Moulton, Prol., p. 38 f. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51. He gives the MS. variations and parallels in Hermas and Barn. See further A. Buttmann, Gr., p. 48. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. » Ilort, Notes on Orth., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T., p. 48. '

'

Ib.

«

Reinhold,

(2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

316

Tim. 2 and

Two

16).^

:

-co

forms supplant the

-fxL

conjugation of

compounds, that in -dw and that in -avw, though usually the MSS. vary greatly between the two.^ In 1 Cor. 13 2 NBDEFG read ixeQiardvaL, though W. H. follow ACKL in txtBiThe form in -dw is found in various MSS. for to-rdco (as (jTOLveiv.^ laTLOixev Ro. 3:31), airoKad- (Mt. 9:12 Rec), k^Loraw, KadiaTaw, nedcarao}, avvLaraco, but is nowhere accepted in the W. H. text, though Hort^ prefers avvLarav to avvLaraveLv in 2 Cor. 3:1. In 2 Cor. 4:2a threefold division occurs in the evidence. For avui(TTCLVovTes we have ABP (so W. H. and Nestle), for avvLardPTes NCD*FG, for avvLarCiVTes D^EKL.^ The form in -dvco is uniformly given by W. H., though the form in -dco comes from Herodotus its

'iaTTjfjLL

:

on and

frequent in the

is

LXX.^ But

the -^t forms hold their

LXX

(Thackeray, Gr., p. 247). The form in -avi>i may be compared with the Cretan aravveiv and is found in the late Attic inscriptions.^ Instances of the form in -dj/cj in

own

pretty well in the

the W. H. text are Ac. 1:6; 8:9; 17:15; 1 Cor. 13:2; 2 Cor. 3:1; 5:12; 6:4; 10:12, 18; Gal. 2:18; Ro. 3: 31; 6: 13, 16). In Mk. 9 12 W. H. (not so Nestle) accept the form dTro/carto-rdj/et after B, while ND read dvoKaTaaTaveL (cf. Cretan oraj/uoj). D has this :

in Ac.

form also

1

:

6 and 17

:

15.

This defective verb is only used in the present and imperfect in the N. T. as in the papyri,^ and with a number of prepositions in composition like the papyri also. The prepositions KeLjJLai.

are

di^a-,

aw-ava-, dvTL-, dwo-, kin-, Kara-, irapa-,

Trept-, Trpo-.

The

forms are always used, and sometimes as the passive For dm/ceiMai only ireplKeLiJLaL (Ac. 28: 20; Heb. 5:2). the participle dvaKeiiJiepos appears (so Mt. 9 10) save once dve/cetro (Mt. 26: 20) and twice with aw- (Mt. 9 10 = Mk. 2 15). In

regular of

-fXL

Tldr]fjLL,

as

:

:

:

Lu. 23 53 :

vos in Jo.

rjv

follows the Attic, but

Kelp-evos

So

19:41.^

in the

LXX

TldyjixL

KB

have

yj^

reOeLixe-

partially replaces

KeT/xai

(Thackeray, Gr., pp. 255, 272). This verb is used as the middle of the active Kpe/xduKpe|JLa'H''a''" hst vvfiL (this form not in N. T.) and does not appear in Mayser's N.

T., p. 49.

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49.

3

Here Hort (Notes,

4

lb.

6

lb.

7

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 177.

etc., p. 168) differs 6

from Westcott and prefers -avaL. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.

W.-Sch., p. 122.

Thumb, Handb.,

p.

133

For many -vu verbs

in

mod. Gk. see

f.

8 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 354, 399. For the Byz. and mod. Gk. ^ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk*., p. 51. usage see Dicterich, Unters., p. 223.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('PHMa) The form^

for the papyri.

W. H. and

(so

read in Mt. 22:40 and the 28 4. In Lu. 19 48 NB

KpenaTai. is

participle Kpenayievosiy) in Gal. 3

Nestle) read

:

317

13; Ac.

:

an

e^e/cpe^tero,

:

form and the only The other forms are

-co

compound form of the verb in the N. T. which come from an active present KpenawvfXL, -awvoi, -doj or -afco. They are Kpetxaaavres (Ac. 5 30) and Kpe/jtaadrj (Mt. 18 But none of these presents occurs in the N. T. Cf. Veitch, 6). aorists

:

:

f., for examples of the active and the middle. So also no present of K€pdvvu|XL (compound aw-) is found in the N. T., but only the perfect passive (Rev. 14 10) and the aorist

Greek Verbs, p. 343

:

active (Rev. 18

:

6).

The

MiYvuixt.

only-^tt form

Cor. 5:9, 11) and so 2 Th. 3

(1

the

is

:

compound

14 according to

avv-ava-p.iyvvadaL

W.

H., instead of

Elsewhere, as in the papyri,^ the N. T. has only

cvv-ava-fjiiypvade.

the perfect passive (Mt. 27 34) :

and the

aorist active (Lu. 13

:

1).^

This verb does not appear in the N. T. in the simple form, but always compounded with av- or 8L-av-. Besides it is always an -co verb as in the papyri^ and the LXX.^ It is worth Oiyvv\LL.

mentioning here to mark the decline of the -/jll forms. "OXXvfii. Only in the common dr- and once with auv-air~ (Heb. 11 31). In the active only the -co forms are found as aroWvet. (Jo. 12:25), airoWve (Ro. 14:15). But in the middle (passive) :

only the

-/xl

forms^ meet us, as airoWuraL

So the

Cor. 10:9).

(1

"0(ivi)|xt.

A

(1

half-dozen examples of the present tense of this

verb occur in the N. T. to the -co inflection, as

Mk. 14:71) belong The Ptolemaic parest from bfxvvw.^ The

All but one {bp-vvvai, bixvvei

(Mt. 23

:

21

f.).

have one example of opvvpn, the sometimes has the -fxi form in the active and always

pyri also

LXX

Cor. 8: 11), awciAXwro

LXX.

in the

middle (Thackeray, Gr., p. 279). Neither -niy^vv^i (aorist Heb. 8 2) nor Trpoair-qypvpL (aorist Ac. 2 23) appears in the present in :

:

the N. T. ni'fnrXT|}xi.

aorists, -dco.

No

save the

present tense in the N. T., though a good

compound

participle

efiinirXoiu,

from the

LXX

Mayser^ gives no papyri examples.

has

many

-co

-co

verb

form

usually.

LXX

^

In the

^

Mayscr, Gr. 404.

the active goes over to the -w class.

And

indeed the old Attic avoLyu, Meistcrh., p. 191.

'

lb., p.

*

Thack., Gr.,

'

So the pap. Mayscr, Gr., p. 352; Thackeray, Mayser, ib., pp. 351 f., 404.

• ^

lb., p.

406.

Thack., Gr., p. 273.

d. griech. Pap., p. 403.

p. 277.

p. 246.

The simple verb occurs once

nL}JLTrpTi|xi.

28

6)

:

according to

present occurs at

No

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

318

W.

all in

simplex in the

This

H.^

The papyri

the N. T.

LXX,

but

only, TriixirpaadaL (Ac.

the only instance where a

is

give no light as yet.

2 Mace. 8 6 (Thack-

evewlnirpo^v in

:

eray, Gr., p. 249). '

The compounds

Pii"YVU|XL.

are with 5ta-,

irept-, -Kpoa-.

ents appear save in the simple verb and 5tap-. -co

forms are used as

But we have

p-qyvvvTaL

SceprjaaeTo (Lu.

(Mt. 9

:

17)

With

No pres-

hap. only the

5:6), dcap-naawv (Lu. 8 29). MayprjaaeL (Mk. 9 18). :

and

:

no papyri examples of the present. 'Pwwujii has no presents at all in the N. T., but only the per-

ser gives

fect passive imperative eppcoa^e (Ac. 15

:

29).

This verb has only three presents in the N. T. and all of the -/zt form, one active a^twvTt (1 Th. 5 19, Tisch. ^^evv.), two middle a^kwvTai (Mk. 9 :48) and (x^kvvvvTai (Mt. 25 has only -jxl forms and in the more literary books The 8). Sp€vvv|i,i.

:

:

LXX

(Thackeray, Gr.,

p. 284).

The compounds

STp(bvvi)|ii.

There are

are with Kara-, vwo-.

only two present stems used in the N. T., earpuvpuop (Mt. 21 8) and vTToaT. (Lu. 19 36). Thus the -pa form is wholly dropped as :

:

and the LXX.' For the list of compounds see Aorist (1). This verb has preferred the -pn form of the present stem as a rule in the kolvt]. The inscriptions^ do so uniformly and the papyri^ use the -co inIn the present indicative D flection far less than is true of 8i8wixi. in the papyri^ Tl9t||jli.

has

tIOl {rWeL)

twice (Ac. 2

:

for

rt^Tjo-t''

In the imperfect

(Lu. 8:16).

47; 2 Cor. 3

:

13)

from

rt^eco,

eTldei is

read

as already in the Attic.

So likewise kridow (as in Attic) twice (Ac. 3 2; 4 35), but the best MSS. have hideaap in Mk. 6 56 (NBLA) and Ac. 8 17 (NAC, though B has -oaav and C -ei.aav).'' The reading of B in Ac. 8 17 (eTidoaav) calls for a present rt^co which the papyri supply against :

:

:

:

:

the idea of Winer-Schmiedel,^ as TapariOdpevos (BM 239), irapaKaTarWoixai (B.U. 326).^ Good cursives show that the late language

used

Tt^eco

in the present

(Mk. 10

:

16; 15

:

17).

Cf. viroTLdovaa in

350). In the LXX -pa forms presecond century papyrus (B.U. vail in the present and imperfect (Thackeray, Gr., p. 250). i**

1

Tisch. reads

2

Mayser, Gr.,

4 5

(ninTrpc.(T9ai

-rrnrpaco.

Nestle agrees with

W. H.

Thack., Gr., p. 286. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 156; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 176. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 352 f. ^ Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167.

N. T. Gk., p. 49. f.; Moulton, Mod. Gk. has dkru.

6

Blass, Gr. of

9

Deiss., B. S., p. 192

10

from

p. 352.

lb.

»

»

P. 121.

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) ir\\ii.

The only N. T. compound

pyri according to Mayscr.^ is

07/^1.

The

participle

^Tj^tt

The only forms 13

regular -^t in the

so used in the N. T. (Ac. 24 :

16).

The

:

-fxi

:

Ro.

9;

1

:

inflection (aorist).

N. T. are c^rjjut (1 Cor. 7 29), ^tjo-ij/ (Mt. It is 8), and the common €0?? (Mt. 4:7). :

LXX.

This impersonal verb had a poetic infinitive

XpTJ.

the pa-

in

(lengthened

0a
both in the present and the imperfect

in the

29), (j)aalv (Ro. 3

:

is

appears only once (Ro. 7

I,vv
uniform in

is

with evv-, none

is

In the papyri

usually employed for the participle and infinitive^ of

form)

22).

319

xP'j^'cit

of the

but Veitch (p. 627) and L. and S. get it from xpaco. At any rate XPV is found only once in the N. T. (Jas. 3 10), Set having supplanted it. Mayser does not find it in the papyri nor Nachmanson and Schweizer in the inscriptions.

-fiL

inflection,

:

Some

There are only three verbs that show the N. T. (mere root, athematic). ©VTjCTKw. The compounds are dxo- (very common), avu-airo(rare). The uncompounded verb occurs nine times and forms the perfect regularly as an -co verb {redv-qKa), save that in Ac. 14 19 DEHLP read redvavaL instead of TedvrjKevaL, but the -/xt form is not accepted by W. H. The N. T. has always TedprjKws, never redvecos. In the LXX these shorter second perfect forms occur a few times in the more literary books (Thackeray, (7r., pp. 253, 270). They show "a partial analogy to verbs in -jui" (Blass, Gr., p. 50). Ot8a is a -/xl perfect in a few forms ('laidev, 'iare) from root l8- (cf. Latin vid-eo, Greek eUov). The word is very common in the N. T. and avvoiba is found twice (Ac. 5 2; 1 Cor. 4:4). The present per3.

-/jll

Perfects.

active perfects without (K)a in the

:

:

fect indicative like the papyri^ usually

has oUa, oUas, oUe,

o'ldafiev,

which was the Ionic inflection and so naturally prevailed in the ^011^17. Three times indeed the literary Attic I'crre appears (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17). The passage in James -are, -aaiv,

:

may

:

be imperative instead of indicative.

erary Attic also)

is

The imperfect

read.

In Ac. 26 also runs

:

4

'(.aaaiv (lit-

etc.

f]5eiv, j/Sets,

(Mk. 1 34; 14 40) is like larr]K€Laav (Rev. 7 11).' The other modes go regularly elbch (Mt. 9 6), dbhat (1 Th. 5 12), dbw (Mt. 12 25). The LXX usage is in accord with the N. T. "EtSeLaav

:

:

:

:

:

:

Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 278.

See Aorist (1) for compounds. The second perfect is N. T. only in the infinitive iaravaL (Lu. 13 25; Ac. 12 14;

"I(rTT||i,i.

in tlie

:

*

Cr.

'

MayKcr, dr.

*

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114

(1.

(rricch.

Pap.,

\^.

2

.355.

n,

>^„ inscr.,

:

Nacliin., p. 157

d. sriccli. iVip., p. ,372. f.

Neither

olaOa.

nor VibuaOa

apjx^u-.s in

the N. T.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

320 1

Cor. 10

and the participle earws (Mt. 20 3, 6, form) also sometimes (Mk. 13: 14; 15: 35,

12)

:

eaTTjKcos (-co

(1

Cor. 7

:

NEW TESTAMENT :

26; 2 Pet. 3

eaTrjKos also

(Rev. 5

:

:

5), earos

6 text,

etc.)

though

etc.), earuxxa

(Mt. 24: 15; Rev. 14 1) although marg. -cos). The same variation :

W. H.

Curiously enough the earlier LXX books show less of the short perfect than the later ones and the N. T. Thackeray (Gr., p. 253) suggests an "Atticistic reversion" for a while. The form earaKa (papyri also) belongs to the -co form as occurs in the papyri.

'^

well as the late present perfects of

and

tive

eo-ra/ca is

transitive.^

verbs in the N. T.^ in the

o-nyKco

from the perfect stem.

are always intransitive, while earajKa

laTtjixL

The new

This in brief B.C.

onwards.

is

-fxL

intransi-

the story of the

transitive perfect earaKa

from second century

kolvt]

is

These is

-fii

common

Cf. Schweizer,

Perg. Inschr., p. 185; Mayser, Gr., p. 371.

The Modes (c-yKXio-eis). The meaning and use of the modes moods belongs to syntax. We have here to deal briefly with any special items that concern the differentiation of the modes from each other by means of mode-signs. There is no clearly proper method of approaching the study of the verb. One can begin with tense, voice and then mode or vice versa. The first is V.

or

probably the historical order to a certain extent, for the matter is complicated. Some tenses are later than others; the passive voice is more recent than the other two, the imperative as a complete

system possible

is

a late growth.

by reason

ideas in

is

There are reasons of this nature for taking which do not apply to syntax. The two main a verb are action and affirmation. The state of the action

treatment

up modes is

Since no purely historical treatment

of this complicated development, a practical

set forth

is

best.

first

by the

tense, the relation of the action to the subject

by mode. Tense and voice thus have and mode with affirmation. Mode deals only with the manner of the affirmation. The same personal endings used for voice limit the action (hence finite verbs) in person and number. (a) The Number of the Moods or Modes (Modi). This is not so simple a matter as it would at first appear. Modern gramby

voice, the affirmation

to do with action

marians generally agree in declining to call infinitives, participles and the verbal adjectives in -t6s and -Aos moods. Some refuse to call the indicative a mood, reserving the term for the variations 2 lb. Mayser, Gr. d. gi-iech. Pap., p. 370 f. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 119. See Hoffmann, Die gricch. Dial., Bd. II, pp. 572 ff., for -^i verbs in North Achaia. For the "strong" perfects, Hke yeyova, see vii, (g), 2. 1

'

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

321

from the indicative as the normal verb by means of mode-signs. Thus Clyde ^ thinks of "only two moods, viz. the subjunctive and the optative, because, these only possess, in combination with the personal endings, a purely modal element." There is point in that, and yet the indicative and imperative can hardly be denied the use of the term. Jannaris^ admits three moods; inHe follows Donaldson' in dicative, subjunctive and imperative. treating the subjunctive and optative as one mood. Others, like Monro,^ find the three in the subjunctive, optative and imperaOnce again five moods are seen in early Greek by Riemann tive.

and Goelzer^: the

indicative, injunctive, subjunctive, optative,

the injunctive see Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik, p. 332, though he does not apply the term mode to the So Hirt, Handbuch, p. 421 f. Moulton'' admits this indicative. imperative.

On

primitive division, though declining to call the indicative a mode save when it is a "modus irrealis." The injunctive is no longer

regarded as a separate mood, and yet it contributed so much to the forms of the imperative that it has to be considered in an hisThe indicative can only be ruled out when it is torical review. regarded as the standard verb and the moods as variations. Cerbest to let the indicative go in also. Greek, having no optative, has a special conditional Indeed, the future indicative Cf. Sanskrit. TiKT]).

tainly

The modern mode (virode-

it is

by some grammarians Sijntax of Attic Greek,

as a separate mode. p.

is

Cf.

considered

Thompson,

494; Moulton, Prolegomeim, p. 151.

Thumb accepts the four modes

in

modern Greek {Handbook,

p. 115).

The Distinctions between the Moods.

These are not form or in syntax. The indicative and the imperative blend in some forms, the subjunctive and the indicative are alike in others, the injunctive is largely merged into the imperative and subjunctive, while the subjunctive and optative are closely akin and in Latin l)lend into one. Greek held on to the optative several centuries longer than the San{b)

absolute, as will be seen, either in

skrit.^

Moulton^ indeed despairs cf our being able to give the That subject belongs to root-idea of each mood.

primitive 1

2

Gk. Synt., p. G2. Cf. Hirt, Handb. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 179.

3

New

8

Prol., p.

who '

first

Crat., p. 617

1G4

f.

f.

Farrar (Gk. Synt.,

etc., p.

417. ''

Horn. Gr., p. 49.

"

Phonet., p. 455.

p. 45) refers to

Protagoras as the one

distinguished the moods.

Giles,

Man.,

p. 459.

*

Proh, p. 104.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

322

NEW TESTAMENT

syntax, but the history of the mode-forms

is

in

harmony with

As with the cases so with the moods: each mood this position. in its development and long history. differently Not fared has mood perform more functions than one, but each does only may sometimes expressed function be by several^ same the moods. The names themselves do not cover the whole ground of each mood. The indicative is not the only mood that indicates, though it does it more clearly than the others and it is used in questions also. The subjunctive not merely subjoins, but The optative is not merely is used in independent sentences also. a wish, but was once really a sort of past subjunctive. The imperative has the best name of any, though we have to explain some forms as "permissive" imperatives, and the indicative and subjunctive, not to say injunctive, invade the territory of the im"It

perative.

is

probable, but not demonstrable, that the indica-

was the original verb-form, from which the others were evolved by morphological changes" (Thompson, Syntax of Attic tive

The

Greek, p. 494).

origin of the mode-signs cannot yet be ex-

plained. (c)

The

Indicative

There

{opiaTLKri eyKXtai';).

to say as to the form of the indicative since It

is

the

mode

that

is

used in

it

is

indeed

little

has no mode-sign.

the Indo-Germanic languages

all

a special reason to use one of the others.

In fact probably the earliest Per contra it and the one from which the others are derived. may be argued that emotion precedes passionless intellection. The indicative continues always to be the most frequent and perunless there it is

sists

only

is

the normal

when mode

mode

in speech.

others, like the injunctive

that uses

all

Greek save

and optative,

It is the

die.

is

In the

found only in the indicative (as

in the optative in indirect discourse to represent

a future indicative of the direct)

and

the indicative

is

the tenses in Sanskrit and Greek.

Sanskrit, for instance, the future in

It

and the perfect appears only

participle, barring

many examples

in

of the other

modes in the early Sanskrit ( Vedas) In the Sanskrit the modes are commonest with the aorist and the present.'^ And in Greek the imperfect and past perfect never got beyond the indicative. The .

till the Byzantine and optative, not to say imperawere always a rarity outside of the periphrastic forms and

future barely did so, never in the subjunctive period. tive, *

dee s

The

Clyde, Gk. lat.

perfect subjunctive

Sjiit., p. 62.

Verbums

Cf.

(1883).

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 201.

Kohlmann, Uber

die

Modi des

griech.

und

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB in the

kolvt]

have practically vanished.^

323

('PiniA)

Thus we can

clearly see

we have

In modern English

the gradual growth of the modes.

almost dropped the subjunctive and use instead the indicative. In the modern Greek the indicative survives with as much vigor

The N. T.

peculiarities of the indicative

can best be be here remarked, however, that besides the regular indicative forms a periphrastic conjugation for all the tenses of the indicative appears in the N. T. The present is thus found as earlv TpoaavaTr\7]povaa (2 Cor. 9 12), the as ever.

treated under Syntax.

It

may

:

perfect as eariv ireTpaynhov (Ac. 2G (TKcop

:

26), the imperfect as

even the aorist as

riu /SXT^^et?

5t5d-

rjv

(Lu. 5: 17), the past perfect as ^aau TpoecopaKores (Ac. 21

:

29),

(Lu. 23: 19), the future as eaeade \a-

Xovvres (1 Cor. 14:9), the future perfect as

2: 13).

tion (d)

is

ecrofiai irewoLdo^s (Heb. This widening of the range of the periphrastic conjugaseen also in the LXX. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 195.

The Subjunctive

{viroraKriKrj)

modes

junctive as of the other

.

The

function of the sub-

be discussed under Syntax. Changes come in function as in form. Each form originally had one function which varied with the course of time. But the bond will

between form and function is always to be noted.^ The German grammarians (Blass, Hirt, Brugmann, etc.) call this the conjunctive mode. Neither conjunctive nor subjunctive is wholly good, for the indicative and the optative both fall often under that technical category .^ It is in the Greek that mode-building reaches its perfection as in no other tongue.^ But even in the Greek subjunctive we practically deal only with the aorist and present tenses, and in the Sanskrit the subjunctive rapidly dies out save in the first person as an imperative.^ In Homer lixev is indicative^ and 'iopi€v is subjunctive so that non-thematic stems make the subjunctive with the thematic vowel o/e. Thematic stems made the subjunctive with a lengthened form of it co/rj. Cf. in the Ionic, Lesbian, Cretan inscriptions^ forms like ap.el\l/eTaL. The same thing appears in Homer also in the transition period.^ Jannaris'' indeed calls the aorist subjunctive a future subjunctive because he *

See discussion bet. Profs. Harry and Sonnensrh(Mn in CI. Rev., 1905-6. La Roche, Beitr. zur prioc^h. Gr., 1893; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 197. For contrary view see Burton^ N. T. Moods and Tenses*, p. 1.

Cf. also 2

Gk. Synt.,

'

Farrar,

*

K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 40.

p.

45

f.

6

Giles,

Man.,

p.

458

f.

In the Bo-otian dial, the subj. does not api)ear in simple sentences (Claflin, Hynt. of Bcrotian, etc., p. 73) ^

lb., p.

^

Rieip.

8

4.'39.

and Goelzer, Phont't., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 49.

p.

450

f. a

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 179.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

324

NEW TESTAMENT The

conceives of the aorist as essentially past, a mistaken idea.

subjunctive does occur more freely in

Homer than

in the later

Greek, partly perhaps because of the fact that the line of disit and the indicative (especially the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative) had not been sharply drawn.^ Add to this the fact that iroirjari and Toc-qaeL came to be pronounced tinction between

exactly alike and one can see Cf. tVa SuxreL

and

of the subjunctive recall

edo/jLat,

its

the confusion would

On

N.

in the

T., futures

strange likeness to the Homeric subjunctive

subjunctives in origin. future indicative or in part

again.

They

'ioiJt.ev.

may

which have a are really

mooted question whether the

It is still a

always derived from the aorist subjunctive

is

corresponds to the Sanskrit sya.^

subjunctives that

come

the short vocal ending

connection with the indicative one

(payo/jLat

iriofxai,

how

N. T. MSS.^

in the

{8coar])

comment

The only

aorist

N. T. are the forms yvol and 5oT, for which see this chapter, iv, (d), 1^ There are parallels in the papyri as is there shown. The form oxf/rjade in Lu. 13 28 (supported by AL, etc., against 6\peade, BD) is probably a late aorist form like edwaa (Bccari) rather than the Byzantine future subjunctive.^ As already pointed out, the examples in N. T. MSS. of the Byzantine future subjunctive are probably due to the blending of o with co, et with ry, e with rj, etc. N. T. MSS., for instance, show examples of apKeadrjao^fxeda (1 Tim. 6:8), yvuKxcovTai (Ac. 21 24), yevr^a-qaee (Jo. 15 8), bo^awaiv (Lu. 20 10; Rev. 4 9), evprjacoaLv (Rev. 9:6), ^r]a7]TaL (Mk. 5 23), i]^coaLu (Rev. 3 9), call for special

in the

:

:

:

:

:

:

KavdrjawfxaL (1

(Ro. 15

:

Cor. 13

:

3), Kepbrjd-qao^VTaL (1

24), (roid-qa-qraL (Ro. 11

:

26), etc.

:

Pet. 3:1), It

is

wopevao^/jLat

to be admitted,

however, that the Byzantine future subjunctive was in use at the MSS. Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 107. Hort dismisses them all {Appendix, "Notes on Orthography," age of our oldest Greek N. T. p. 172).

1

The present subjunctive

Sterrett, Horn.

II.,

Dial, of

of the Subj.

(Am. Jour,

Formen des

Perfects (Beitr.

2

Homer,

81801 is parallel to 8o2.

p.

of Philol., 10, 185 I,

pp. 161

For

this

ex-

27 (1907). Cf. Moulton, The Suffix f.); La Roche, Die conj. und opt.

fT.).

Cf. ah-eady in the Attic inscr. the spelling of the subj. in

Att. Inscr., p. 166.

No

phenomenon

in the pap. see

-et.

Meisterh.,

Mayser, Or.

d.

griech. Pap., p. 324. 3

*

Comp. Or. of Gk. and Comp. Philol., p. 459.

Cf. Henry,

note; Giles,

Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 115

Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37,

and 1904,

f.

and

p. Ill, for subjs. dTroSoT,

fTnyvol in the pap. 5

Cf.

dp^ri
in verse 26.

Lu. 13

:

25,

but dp^^ade (BEG,

etc.)

and

apk-nade

(«AD,

etc.)

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB

325

('I'IIMa)

ample of the periphrastic present subjunctive appears in the N.T. In Gal. 4 17 (iVa fTjXoOre) the contraction of or] is hke that of the indicative oe/ unless indeed, as is more probable, we have here :

also 1 Cor. 4

(cf.

as in IJo. 5

20

:

:

Cf. Ro. 14

hCiKovTaL.

the present indicative used with I'm

6, (l>vaLova6e)

In Gal. 6

(yLvwcTKoixev).

19.

:

Cf.

:

ACFGKLP read

12

The

Homer.

tva

jxi]

perfect subjunctive

does not exist in the N. T. save in the second perfect db(h

{'iva

and the periphrastic form as y TrexoiTy/cws (Jas. 5 15. Cf. ireiroLdoTes wjxev, 2 Cor. 1 9) and usually in the passive as TeTrXripuiJLevr] (Jo. 16 24). In Lu. 19 40 Rec. with most MSS. read KeKpa^ovrai (LXX). In the papyri rjv sometimes is subjunctive Cor. 2

1

eidooijiev,

12)

:

:

:

:

:

J7

= ^t.

Cf.

Moulton,

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 38, 1904, p. 108;

He

Prolegom-

But the modern Greek constantly uses eav with the indicative, and we find it in the N. T. and papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 203 ff.). Some of the papyri examples may be merely the indicative with ena, pp. 49, 168.

kav,

cites oaa eav

in

rjv

Gen. 6

but others undoubtedly give the irrational

v.

:

17E.

In the

LXX the

subjunctive shows signs of shrinkage before the indicative with eav, orav, Iva

(Thackeray, Gr.,

The Optative

p. 194).

Like the subjunctive the optathe wishing mood. As Giles ^ remarks, difference of formation is more easily discerned (e)

tive is poorly

named, as

subjunctive

(save

much more than

it is

two moods than

in these

the

{evKTiKrj).

difference of meaning.

in

first

person)

optative, as in Latin the optative tative)

disappeared

already stated,

is

the

before

In the Sanskrit gave way before the {sim originally op-

largely

The Greek,

subjunctive.^

as

the only language that preserved both the

and the optative,* and finally in the modern Greek the optative has vanished, jxr] yevoLTo being merely "the coffin of the dead optative."^ It is doubtful if the optative was ever used much in conversation even in Athens (Farrar, Greek Syntax, p. 142), and the unlearned scribes of the late Greek blunsubjunctive

I

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Ck.,

durai (marg. evoSwdfj).

(MioTai

10

:

"

of

is

p. 48.

But

in 1 Cor. IG

:

2

we have

Ilort (Notes on Orth., pp. 167, 172)

perf. ind. or subj. (pres. or perf.).

and ha^tjiaLovvTai. (1 Tim. 1 Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 458.

22)

works on optative. » Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 202.

On

:

7)

He

is

resularly evo-

uncertain whether

cites irapa^riXodiiei' (1

Cor.

as [)ossible pres. subjs.

Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 337, for hst

Giles,

Comp.

Philol., p.

503

f.

the blending of subj. and opt. in Ital., Germ, and Balto-Slav. tongues sec Brug., Kurze vergl. Gr., 2. Tl., p. 585. Cf. the Byz. Gk. mingling of subj. and ind. in Hatz., Einl., p. 216 f. •

Giles, ib., p. 459.

^

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 84.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

326

dered greatly

when they

did use

it

NEW TESTAMENT

(Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p.

Moulton {Prol, p. 240) agrees with Thumb that the optative was doomed from the very birth of the kolvt}, and its disappearance was not due to itacism between ol and y, which was late. 204).

Clyde/ however, suggests that the blending of sound between ol and n had much to do with the disappearance of the optative. But apart from this fact the distinction was never absolutely rigid, for in Homer both moods are used in much the same way.^ And even in the N. T., as in Homer and occasionally later, we find an instance of the optative after a present indicative, ov iravofiat

evxapLffTuiu tva

8cor]

(Eph.

1

:

W.

17, text of

H., subj.

dooy

or

8(2

in marg., question of editing).

Jannaris^ calls the Greek optative the subjunctive of the past or the secondary subjunctive (cf. Latin).

Like the indicative (and originally the subjunctive) the non-thematic and thematic stems have a different history. The non-thematic stems use lt] (te) and the thematic ol (composed of o and t)-

The

a+t besides the form in -eta. This two-fold the optative goes back to the earlier Indo-Germanic tongues^ (Sanskrit ja and i). The optative was never common in aorist has

0-

affix for

the language of the people, as inscriptions.^

The Boeotian

in simple sentences,

is

shown by

and Dr. Edith

amples in subordinate

rarity in the Attic

its

dialect inscriptions

clauses.^

show no optative two ex-

Claflin reports only

The

optative

is

rare also in the

Pergamum.^ The same thing is true of the papyri.^ In the N. T. the future optative no longer appears, nor does the perfect. The classic idiom usually had the perfect subjunctive and optative in the periphrastic forms.^ Examples of the periinscriptions of

phrastic perfect optative survive in the papyri, ^^ but not in the

N. T. There are only sixty-seven examples of the optative in the N. T. Luke has twenty-eight and Paul thirty-one (not including Eph. 1 17), whereas John, Matthew and James do not use it at all. Mark and Hebrews show it only once each, Jude twice and Peter :

four times. times, as

54)7?

The non-thematic aorist appears in the N. T. some(perhaps by analogy). So W. H. read without reser-

vation in 2 Th. 3: 16; Ro. 15:5; 2 Tim.

1

16, 18.

:

This

is

the

Gr. S., p. 85. 2 Monro, Horn. Cxr., p. 219. » Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 179. Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., p. 461. Cf K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 40 f Brug., Gk. 6 Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 166. Gr., pp. 337 ff. 1

*

.

.

« ^ 8 >"

;

Synt. of BoDot. Dial. Inscr., pp. 77, 81. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 191.

Mayser, Gr. Mayser, Gr.

d. griech. Pap., p. 326.

d. griech. Pap., p. 327.

^

K.-BL, Bd.

II, p. 99.

;

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) preferred text in Eph.

3

:

16,

5c3

1

same form

siders

{-ccrjv

:

Tim. 2

17; 2

The

:

but in Jo. 15 16; Eph. 1 17 the margin has

25,

:

In Eph.

(subjunctive).

(subjunctive) also.^

5a)j7

the

W. H. read

inscriptions^

instead of

:

and the papyri^ show 1 17 Moulton^ con-

In Eph.

-olrjv).

327

:

(subjunctive) a "syntactical necessity" in spite of the

doi-g

evidence for

8cor]

But

(optative).

The

see above.

aorist optative

Th. 3: 11), xXeomaai koI irepLaaevaai (1 Th. 3:12), KarapTiaai (Heb. 13:21), etc., not the ^oHc-Attic -ete. So also iroLrjaaLep (Lu. 6 11), but \l/r]\a(^T](TeLav in -at is the usual form, as Karevdhvai (1

:

MSS.

Blass« comments on the fact that only one example of the present optative appears in the simple sentence, viz. eirj (Ac. 8:20), but more occur in dependent clauses, as Tracrxotre (1 Pet. 3: 14). The optative is rare in the LXX save for wishes. Thackeray, Gr., p. 193. The imperative is a later (/) The Imperative {irpoaraKTiKr]). development in language and is in a sense a makeshift like the passive voice. It has no mode-sign (cf. indicative) and uses only personal suffixes.'' These suffixes have a varied and interesting (Ac. 17:27) according to the best

(B, etc.).^

history.

An

The Non-Thematic Stem.

1.

a later growth, as

will

early

imperative was just

In the imperative the aorist

the non-thematic present stem.^

be shown directly.

Forms

like

1(jt7],

is

deUw

are pertinent. 2.

The Thematic Stem.

terjection

(cf.

Cf. aye, Xeye.

This

vocative \6ye).^

is

This

is

merely an

in-

the root pure and simple

with the thematic vowel which is here regarded as part of the stem as in the vocative \6ye. The accent elire, eXOe, evpk, t5e, Xa/3e was probably the accent of all such primitive imperatives at the beginning of a sentence. ^° We use exclamations as verbs or nouns.^^ '

Hort, Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 168.

*

Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 191.

' Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. Ill

p. f.

326

Cf.

f.

;

LXX.

Cronert,

Mem.

Gr. Hercul., p. 215

f.

Aol also appears in pap. as opt. as well aa

subj.

Cf. Blass' hesitation, Gr. of

*

Prol., p. 55.

'

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114.

bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 68

8

»»

f.

The

N. T. Gk.,

p.

49

f.

LXX the <'orm in -eie very rare. LXX has also -oiaav, -aiaav for 3d is

Opt. is common in 4 Mace. « Giles, Comp. Philol., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p 220. 9 lb., p. 269. K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 41.

Thack., Gr., ^

In the

It

is

Cf.

p. 215.

p. 464.

Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, §958; Iliem. and Goelzer, Phon^t., coming more and more to be the custom to regard the thematic

lb., p. 464.

p. 359.

Cf. Helplu.

vowel as part of the root. Giles, Comp. " Moulton, Prol., p. 171 f.

Philol., p. 415.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

328

In Jas, 4 13 we have aye :

vw

oi Xeyovres, an example that will ilNote the common interjectional use

lustrate the origin of aye.

N.

of Ue (so

:

3.

The

The adverb

Cf. also accent of \a^e.

T.).

11:43, Aa^ape 8evpo

(Mt. 11 28,

NEW TESTAMENT

8evTe xpos

Suffix -6l.

has a plural

e^co) /Jte

like

8evpo (Jo.

the imperative in -re

iravres ol KOTLcovTes).

The non-thematic stems

fix -di (cf.

Sanskrit dhi, possibly an adverb;

yvcodi for

second aorist active,

cf.

also used the suf-

"you

there!").

for present active,

'iaOc

<j)avr]di,

So \v-

and first aorist passive.^ In the N. T. sometimes dropped and the mere root used as in ava^a (Rev. 4 1), fxera^a (Mt. 17:20), avaara (Eph. 5:14; Ac. 12:7) according The plural apd^are (Rev. 11:12) instead of to the best MSS.^ The LXX MSS. exhibit these short ava^r]Te is to be noted also. forms (avaara, airoara, but not avd^a) also. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 70; Con. and Stock, Sel. from LXX, p. 46. See en^a, Kara^a, etc., in Attic drama. But dvdarrjdL (Ac. 8 26), kiriaTrjdL 2 Tim. 4:2), /xerdjSry^t (Jo. 7:3), Kara^ridi (Lu. 19:5), Trpoaavd^7]dL for second

6t]tl

this -9l is

:

(Lu. 14

:

10)

4.

In the papyri -di has practically

occur as usual.

disappeared save in

'iadt.^

The

Suffix -rw. It is probably the ablative of the demonpronoun (Sanskrit tod). It is used with non-thematic and thematic stems (Xtye-roS). The Latin ^ uses this form for

strative (earw)

the second person also the N. T. has also 17)

t/tco

In the case of

(agito).

(Jas. 5

:

12)

The form

.'^

has the unlengthened stem, but

earo) (Jas.

1: 19)

Kara/Sarw (Mt. 24:

eX^arco is like

the

first

aorist

The N. T. like the koivt] generally^ has the plural only in Twaav which is made by the addition of aav to rco. Cf. eo-rcoaai' (Lu. 12:35). The middle aQw (of uncertain origin)^ hkewise has k-KKXTpeparoi.

the plural in the N. T. in aOo^aav.

This

is

So Tpoaev^daduxxav (Jas. 5 14). and aorist as in papyri :

true of the plural of both present

So the LXX cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 69 f. The Old Injunctive Mood. It is responsible for more of the imperative forms than any other single source. "The injunctive

and

inscriptions.

5.

1

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 341.

*

Mayser, Gr.

Comp.

Giles,

^

So pap. and

late inscr.,

«

Cf. for pap.

Mayser, Gr.

It

is

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168.

Cf. Brug., Gk. Gr., p. 341.

Philol., p. 466.

4

p. 343.

2

d. griech. Pap., p. 327.

after

Moulton,

iii/s.c.

Prol., p. 56.

d. griech. Pap., p. 327.

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr.,

that -Tcoaav completely supplants -vtoiv.

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 167.

Nachm., Magn.

Inschr., p. 149.

Cf.

Schweizer,

Perg. Inschr., p. 167. ^

430.

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 343 (he Giles

(Comp.

Philol., p.

cfs. iireadu}

467

f.)

gets

it

with

(TreaOai)

;

Hirt,

Handb. etc., p. of re and ade.

from tw by analogy

329

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

was simply an imperfect or aorist indicative without the augSo XttiSoD was originally e-XajSeao, XajSeade was k-Xa^eade, ment." was e-XajSere.^ So ctx" (f-o-X«) may 'Kr](l>driT€ was k-'KT]er]T€, Xa^ere be compared with e-\ves (diyes with e-OLyes), but 56s, h, 6es Brug^

considers of uncertain origin, possibly subjunctive.^ Forms hke Xvere may be injunctive (e-Xuere)" or merely the indicative.^ Note the difficulty of deciding on imperative and indicative in

mann

like epavvdre (Jo. 5:39),

forms

But

19).

imperative.

In

oUare.'^

7rto-rci»ere

in these cases, except Jo. 5

:

(Jo. 14:1), laTe (Jas. 1:

39,

we probably have

the

In the case of tare the N. T. indicative would be the N. T. Kadov (Jas. 2:3) is the shorter form of

though not by phonetic processes. The injunctive survives to some extent in the Sanskrit and borders on the subjunctive and the imperative and was specially common in prohibitions.'' It consists of the bare stem with the personal endings. These, hke ^aTTLaai (Ac. 22 16), are prob6. Forms in -aau sigmatic aorist.^ Cf Set^ai. Cf. also Latin infinitive the ably just

KaOriao,

:

.

Homeric infinitive Xeyefxevai.^ The infinitive is inscriptions in the sense of an imperative.^" Greek common papyri this use is not infrequent. So the in as T. the N. In (Ph. 3:16), Ml? (TwavaiiiyvvadaL (2 Th. aroLX^lv as. (J 1:1), Xaipeiv

legimini with the in the

3

:

In modern Greek instead of the imperative in -aai the

14).

form \vaov occurs with the sense of Xu^rjrt.^^ It It is difficult of explanation. 7. The Form in -aov (Kvaov). may be injunctive or a verbal substantive.^' The N. T. has eiirov (Mt. 4 3) rather than elire (Mt. 8 8) in about half the instances in W. H.i^ This is merely in keeping with the common kolvtj cus:

:

tom form 8.

of using first aorist endings with second aorist stems. elTTov is

traced to the Syracusan dialect.^* The Sanskrit used the first person subjunctive

First Person.

as imperative of the

first

person.

this idiom.

use of the imperative

d
subjunctive)

So

is

a(^€s

Cf English .

" charge

we

the foe."

But already in the N. T. the modern Greek as and third person

The Greek continued

tive.

The

creeping in as a sort of particle with the subjuncCf. Enghsh "let" ^v^th infinikiSdXco (Mt. 7:4).

» lb. * lb. ^ Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 332. Moulton, Prol., p. 165. Moulton, Prol., p. 165. ' « W.-S(!h.,p. 119. Handb., p. 429 f. 8 Ricm. and Goelzcr, Phonet., p. 372. Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 345. 9 Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 468; Hirt, Handb., p. 430; Wright, Conip. Gk. '° Moulton, Prol., p. 179 f. Gr., p. 334. II V. and D., Handb., p. 81. Cf. Dietcrich, Unters., p. 205. '2 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 345; Hirt, Handb., p. 427. " K.-BL, Bd. II, p. 45. » Hurt, Notes on Orth., p. 164. I

'

Hirt,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

330

Cf. 5eDre

tive.

may have

airoKTelvcoiJLev

indicative (Heb. 3

:

own

Mt. 21

:

Besides aye, SeDre

38.

/SXeTrere

we

with future

12).

Here the

Prohibitions.

9.

in

6pa with the subjunctive (Mt. 8:4),

aorist subjunctive with

held

fxi]

its

In the

against the aorist imperative quite successfully.

Veda the negative md is never found with the but only with the subjunctive.^ Later the Sanskrit present imperative with md, but not the aorist. This history in the Greek ^ is interesting as showing how the

impera-

Sanskrit

uses the

tive,

piece of

imperathan the other modes and how the aorist imperative never won its full way into prohibitions. However, in the N. T. as in the inscriptions and papyri, we occasionally find the aorist imperative with ii-q in 3d person. So fxri KaTa^aToo (Mt. 24 17). In the Sanskrit the imperative is 10. Perfect Imperative. tive

is

later

:

The

nearly confined to the present tense.

perfect imperative

is

very rare in the N. T. (only the two verbs cited) as in all Greek. We find eppwaOe (Ac. 15: 29; in 23 30 W. H. reject eppcoao) and :

(Mk. 4 39). The perfect imperative also occurs in the periphrastic form as ecrTwaav irepie^waiikvai (Lu. 12 35). Other periphrastic forms of the im11. Periphrastic Presents. Tre^t^wo-o

:

:

perative are

Icrdi

evmccv (Mt. 5

irepo^vyovvTes (2 Cor. 6 12. Circumlocutions.

:

14)

:

25), tadi

and even

But even

excoj'

(Lu. 19

:

17),

/xi)

ybeade

(Eph. 5:5).

iVre yivcoaKovres

so other devices (see Syntax)

are used instead of the imperative, as the future indicative {ayairrjaeis,

Mt. 5

:

43)

;

Iva

and the subjunctive (Eph. 5

tion of impatience like ov Kavari Staorpe^coi' (Ac. 13

VI.

The Voices

:

:

33)

;

a ques-

10), etc.

(SLaGeo-cis).

Transitive and Intransitive. The point is that ''transitive" is not synonymous with "active." Transitive verbs may belong to any voice, and intransitive verbs to any voice. Take kblba^a, edida^afXT^v, ehibaxdiqv, which may be transitive in each voice. On the other hand eiVt, yivo/jLai, eXWrjv are intransitive. The same verb may be transitive or intransitive in the same voice, as ayo}. A verb may be transitive in Greek while intransitive in English, as with KarayeKdoi} and vice versa. This matter properly belongs to syntax, but it seems necessary to clear it up at once before we proceed to discuss voice. Per se the question of transitiveness (a)

belongs to the idea of the verb

itself,

not to that of voice.

1

Monro, Horn.

2

lb.; cf. also Delbriick, Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 120.

We

Gr., p. 240.

that the aorist imper. did not

come

Hence Delbriick argues

into use until after the pres. imper.

imper. was originally only positive, not negative.

The

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) Green

actually find

331

making four voices, putting a neuter (ovSkand middle endings) on a par with the

^

Ttpov) voice (using active

The

others!

Stoic grammarians^ did speak of a neuter voice as

neither active {Kar-qyop-qua bpObv) nor passive

middle

though he properly says transitive,"

{v-ktlov),

meaning the

Jannaris^ confounds transitiveness with voice,

{txear]}.

(p.

356) that "the active voice

is

usually

verbs in the active voice, not the voice

i.e.

Even Whitney^ speaks

of the antithesis

itself.

between transitive and

Was

reflexive action being effaced in Sanskrit.

that antithesis

Farrar^ speaks of verbs with an "active meaning,

ever present?

but only a passive or middle form," where by "active" he means Even the active uses verbs which are either transitransitive. or intransitive

tive (aWoTrad-qs) voices.

If

we

(avToiradr]s)

clearly grasp this point,

we

.

shall

So may the other have less difficulty

with voice which does not deal primarily with the transitive idea.

That belongs rather to the verb itself apart from transitive and intransitive verbs in modern Greek

voice.^

see

On

Thumb,

Handb., p. 112.

The Names of the

(6)

The

active (evepjeTtKri)

is

They

Voices.

by no means good.

are

not distinctive, since the other voices ex-

This voice represents the subject as merely act-

press action also.

The Hindu grammarians

called the active parasmai padam word for another,') and the middle (iJLeari) dtmane padam ('a word for one's self').^ There is very little point in the term middle since it does not come in between the active and the passive. ing.

('a

Indeed reflexive

a better designation of the middle voice

is

direct reflexive is

not meant.

That

stresses the interest of the agent. p.

155

In truth

f.

(Tradr}Ti.Kri)

is

the best term of

But

Cf.

when the

Handb.

Cf. Dion. Thr., p. 886.

»

Hist.

*

Sans. Gr., p. 200.

6

Gk. Synt.,

"

Giles, CoHip. Pliilol., p. 476: "Tiio (listiiiction

Gk. Gr.,

of

N.

for this voice.

Passive

is

transitive, as in

upon syntax.

2

Gk.

Moulton, Prolegomena,

passive verb

this point encroaches

to the

if

voice

for here the subject does experi-

'

intransitive in

all,

The middle

rare.

we have no good name

ence the action even thboLxd-qv.

is

T., p. 55.

Cf. Farrar,

Gk. Synt.,

p. 40.

p. 179.

p. 41.

meanings

Cf. Bnip;., Griooh. Gr., p. 4()7

of the active; voice

(lei)(>ncls

f.

hctwoon the transitive and upon the nature of the root

each case."

' Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. ('f. also 15rug., Kurze verj^h Gr., II, p. 492. See also Clark, Comp. Gr., p. 182, for the meaningless term "middle." It is as active as the "active" voice. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 119.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

332 (c)

The Relative Age of the

Voices.

as between the active and middle. later

The

development.

Homer

The

It is

passive

Sanskrit passive

the passive has not reached

sive future occurs there only twice.

a matter of doubt

known

is

the yd

to be a

In development. The pasThe aorist middle is often used is

class.^

its full

in passive sense ('^XrjTo, for instance). ^

That is to say, in Homer the tenses of the middle with no distinct forms save sometimes in the aorist. In later Greek the future middle (as TLfxrjaoixaL) continued to be used occasionally in the passive sense. the passive uses

all

The aorist passive in fact used the active endings and the future passive the middle, the passive contributing a special addition in each case (??, 6r], rja, drja). Some languages never developed .a passive (Coptic and Lithuanian, for instance), and in

modern Enghsh we can only form the passive by means of auxiliary verbs. Each language makes the passive in its own way. In Latin no distinction in form exists between the middle and the passive, though the middle

exists as in potior, utor, plangor, etc.

thinks that the causative middle (like

dLdaaKOfxai, 'get

Giles^

taught')

is

the explanation of the origin of the Greek passive. Cf. j8dxTio-at (Ac. 22 16). It is all speculation as between the active and mid:

An

makes the middle a mere doubling of the active Another view is that the middle is the original and the active a shortening due to less stress in accent, or rather (as in TtdefxaL and TidyjiuL) the middle puts the stress on the reflexive ending while the active puts it on the stem.^ But Brugmann^ considers the whole question about the relation between the personal suffixes uncertain. Of one thing we may be sure, and that is that both the active and the middle are very old and long dle.

(as

/ia-/it

old theory

= /iat)

."*

antedate the passive. (d) The So-called ''Deponent" Verbs. These call for a word (cf. ch. XVII, iii, (k)) at the risk of trespassing on sjTitax. Moulton^ is certainly right in saying that the term should be ap-

plied to all three voices if to any. The truth is that it should not be used at all. As in the Sanskrit^ so in the Greek some verbs were used in both active and middle in all tenses (like X6aj) some verbs in some tenses in one and some in the other (like ^abu, ;

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

2

Sterrett, Horn.

3

Comp.

II.,

Thumb, Handbuch

of Horn., p. 27.

*

Philol., p. 477.

Griech. Gr., p. 346. Philol., p. 419. «

^

p. 275;

Diah

Prol., p. 153.

Cf.

»

Kurze

d. Skt., pp. 394 ff. Clyde, Gk. Sjoi., p. 55.

Moulton,

vergl. Gr., II, p. 599.

8

Prol., p. 152.

Cf. Giles,

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

Comp.

p. 200.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB some on one voice only

PrjaoiJLaL);

333

('I'IIMa)

(like Kelixat).

As concerns voice Note also the

these verbs were defective rather than deponent.^

common

use of the second perfect active with middle verbs

A

number

{ylvotiai,

sometimes have the future in the active in the N. T. which usually had it in the middle in the older Greek. These are: olkouo-co (Jo. 5 25, 28, etc., but aKovao/xai, Ac. 17 32), a/jLapTrjcroj (Mt. 18 21), airaPTrjao} (Mk. 14 13), dpTracroJ (Jo. 10 28), ^Xex^co (Ac. 28 26), yeUaoo (Lu. 6 21), Slu^co (Mt. jkyopo.).^

of verbs

:

:

:

:

23

:

34), fiycrw (Jo. 5

6:25),

/cpd^co

Gm-Kr}(T(i}

:

:

:

:

25), kiriopKiiao:

(Mt. 5

(Lu. 19 :40), GTrovbacoi (2 Pet.

10).

But

HaL,

6\{/op.ai,

still

note

N. T.

ton, ProL, p. 155.

1

:

33,

LXX),

15), avvavrrjao} (Lu.

:

(Lu.

/cXauaco

34), pehao: (Jo. 7

:

38),

22

:

a-rroOavovixai, laoixaL, ^rjao/ML, davp.a(JOjxai, XrjfxxJ/o-

Treeov/jLai,

Blass, Gr. of

:

(Lu. 19 :40), rat^co (Mk. 10

TriofiaL,

Gk., p.

42

rk^opaL, f.;

4>ayojj.at,

0ey^o/iat,

Winer-Schmiedel,

See Helbing, Gr.

etc.

p. 107;

Cf.

Moul-

89 f.; Thackeray, term ''deponent" arose from the idea that these verbs had dropped the active voice. Verbs do vary in the use of the voices in different stages pp. 231

ff.,

for illustrations in the

d. Sept., p.

LXX. The

of the language. (e) The Passive Supplanting the Middle. In Latin the middle and passive have completely blended and the grammars speak no more of the Latin middle. Greek indeed is the only European speech which retains the original middle form and

when we consider other tongues, it is not strange made inroads on the middle, but rather that there was any distinction preserved at all.^ In most modern languages the middle is represented only by the use of the reflexive pronoun. The Greek itself constantly uses the active with reusage.^

In

fact,

that the passive

flexive

pronoun and even the middle.

Jannaris^ has an interest-

ing sketch of the history of the aorist

and future middle and two voices differ. As

passive forms, the only forms where the

already remarked, the old Greek as in Homer'' did not distinguish sharply between these forms. In Homer the middle is much

more common than

in later Greek,^ for the passive has no distinct form in the future and not always in the aorist. In the modern Greek the middle has no distinctive form save Xvaov (cf. XOcrat)

'

2 3

4 « ^

BruK., Kurzo vcrgl. dr., p. .598; Moulton, Prol., p. 153. Ilirt, Hand})., p. ;}34; Moulton, Prol., p. 154. Dolbriick, Synt. Fors(;h., Bd. IV, p. ()!). ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 55. pp. 362 Storrett, Honi. II., Horn. Dial., p. 27. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7.

ff.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

334

and this is used as passive imperative second singular.^ Elsewhere in the aorist and future the passive forms have driven out the middle. These passive forms are, however, used sometimes in the middle sense, as was true of aiveKpldt], for instance, in the N. T. The passive forms maintain the field in modern Greek and appropriate the meaning of the middle. We see this tendency at work in the N. T. and the kolvt] generally. Since the passive used the middle forms in all the other tenses, it was natural that in these two there should come uniformity also.^ The result of this struggle between the middle and passive in the aorist and future was an increasing number of passive forms without the distinctive passive idca.^ So in Mt. 10 26 (mi? o(37]dr]re avrovs) the pas:

sive

used substantially as a middle.

is

Cf. the continued use of

Greek as a tendency the makes intelligible what would be otherwise a veritable puzzle in language. Here is a list of the chief passive aorists in the N. T. without the passive idea, the so-called "deponent" passives: aireKpld-qv (Mt. 25 9 and as future passive in the earlier

TLfxrjaofxai,

The

other way.

history of this matter thus

:

often, as John,

Luke alone having

huKpWy]v (Ro. 4

:

but see 12

14,

but also

often, as Ac.

12)

:

New

9

34), edavjjLaaOrjp

:

32),

and

(Mk.

eeafjL^r]9r]v

1

:

;

LXX) and (Rev. 13

:

18)

:

3,

(Mt. 8

10

:

6),

:

hrpaTrjaovraL

(Mt. 24

:

30),

(Mk. 12

:

.

(Mt. 6

:

:

10,

yeyopa and yeyemjuai.,

34), rjSvvaadTjv

(Mt. 17

(Mk. 7

16), bLeK'exQw

:

:

24,

(Mk.

p. 238.

by the

(Mt. 25 :

8),

:

For the The future passives without (Heb. 11

:

(Heb. 13 :6).

TTopthcjojxaL.

:

etc.

7),

following: dm/cXtSiyo-o-

37),

(Lu.

eTTavaTarjaerai

KOL/JLTjOrjaofxaL

6), fieTa/Jie'KTjdrjaoiJ.aL


dvvqaonai, kinfxeXrjaofxaL,

cf

;

kyev-qdrju

:

evXa^rjdels

(Rev. 17

35),

:

11), aTTOKpLdrjaoixai

dav/jLaadrjaofjiaL

:

12),

:

13), dTreXoyr]dr]v (Lu. 21

:

but passive sense in 2 Th. 1 10), (Mt. 1 20), ixereixeX-qdriv (Mt. 21

certain passive sense are illustrated fiaL

:

ri^vvrjdriv

27), kvOvii-neds

(Mt. 10 :26), usage see Thackeray,

20

(Lu. 24

riy€pdr]v

ko^i]dr]v

LXX

5

11), riyaWLadr^u (Jo.

:

as

Ionic

2

20), avvvirtKpl6y]v (Gal.

eyevotJiTjv

(Lu. 5

ed(r]dr]v

Attic aireKpivaTo also, Ac. 3

Cor.

(1

(Heb. 7

:

:

51),

21), <j)avr]aofxaL

But we have N.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

15

yevrjao/iaL,

T. Gr., p.

44 f.; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 108. For the rapid development of. this tendency in later Greek see Hatzidakis, Einl., p. 192 f. See Hel-

and Thackeray, p. 240 f., for simiphenomena in the LXX. These so-called deponents appear modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 113). Cf. ch. XVII, iv, (c).

bing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 97-100, lar

in

' Thumb, Handb., p. 111. So mod. Gk. has only two voices; V. and D., « jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 362. Handb., to Mod. Gk., p. 81. ' lb. KoiJ'^ exx. are numerous, Uke fidkaOrjv, kveOvfxrjOriv, eiroptWy^v, eo^T)d-qv, etc.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA)

335

They are probably pronominal/ (/) The Personal Endings. though Brugmann- does not consider the matter as clear in all One point to note is the heavy burden that is placed respects. upon these endings. They have to express voice, person and numMode ber, everything in truth that has to do with the subject. and tense are indicated otherwise. There was a constant tendency to slough off these personal endings and get back to the mode and tense-stems. Hence Stow/xi becomes 6i5a> (papyri) in late Greek.

Ae7co

was

originally Xeyoni.^

These personal endings have two and middle have a separate list, the passive having none of its own. Then there is another cleavage on the line of primary and secondary tenses in the indicative, i.e. The subjunctive the unaugm exited and the augmented tenses. mode falls in with the primary endings and the optative uses the (g)

Cross-Divisions.

The

cross-divisions.

secondary endings.

active

But the

first

person active singular of the

Xyoijut).^ But may it not be a reminiscence of the time when there was no distinction between subjunctive and optative? The imperative has no regular set of endings, as has already been shown, and does not fall in with this development, but pursues a line of its own. As a matter of fact the imperative always refers to the future. They have received some modifica(h) The Active Endings. The imperative can be passed by as tion in the N. T. Greek.

optative has one primary ending (as

The disappearance

already sufficiently discussed.

forms in favour of the

-co

inflection

of

the

-/it

has been carefully treated

The subjunctive Sot and optative Swtj acjiiofiev (Lu. 11:4). have likewise received discussion as well as the optative -at and also, as

But some interesting points remain. The use of -oaau instead of -ov is very common in the LXX (as Jer. 5 23, 26) and was once thought to be purely an Alexandrian peculiarity (Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 37). For the LXX phenomena see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 65-67; Con. and Stock, Sel. from the LXX, p. 32 f. The LXX is the principal

-ete.

:

witness to the -oaav forms (Thackeray, Gr., p. 195), where they

1

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 53.

'

Cf. Clyde,

Gk. Synt.,

p. .54.

"

Gk.

Gr., p. 346.

The same thing has happened

in

Eng.

save 2d and 3d pors. sing. • It is not worth while here to take time to make a careful discussion of each of these endings. Vov the hist, treatment of them see Brug., Griech. Gr.,

where the

pp. 34.5

348

ff.

loss

ff.;

is

nearly

Giles,

e()rni)l('te

Comp.

Philol., pp.

413

ff.;

Riem. and Goclzer, Thonet., pp.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

336

It is not so abundant (/&., pp. 212 ff.). but the Boeotians used it for the imperfect and optative.^ Mayser^ has found more examples of it in the Tebtunis Papyri, both aorist and imperfect, than Moulton'^ had discovered. The inscriptions also show it."* In the N. T. the contract verb eSoXiovaav (Ro. 3 13) is a quotatipn from the LXX. In Jo. 15 22, 24, the imperfect dxooav has to be admitted. In 2 Th. 3 6 irapeKa^oaav is read by {
are exceedingly frequent

outside of the

LXX,

:

:

:

use of the

-/^t

inflection

may

be compared with the use of rco-aau

In the modern Greek

in the imperative.

LXX)

it is

common

with con-

The modern Greek

tract verbs

(cf.

kpccTovaa

a new formation (Thumb, Handb., p. 171) modelled

after

is

like edoXiovaav

above.

it.

Blass^ needlessly hesitates to accept ~av in the present perfect

instead of the usual -dat, and even Moulton^

is

reluctant to ad-

mit it for Paul and Luke, preferring to regard it "a vulgarism due to the occasional lapse of an early scribe." It is certainly not a mere Alexandrianism as Buresch'^ supposed. The ending -avTL in the Doric usually dropped v and became -do-t in Attic, but the later Cretan inscriptions show -av after the analogy of the aorist.^ The Alexandrian kolvt] followed the Cretan. The papyri examples are very numerous'-* and it is in the inscriptions of Per-

gamum^"

also.

Hort (Notes on Orthography,

"curious," but has to admit

it

though there is Thackeray (Gr., pp. 195,

always some MS. evidence for -dai. 212) thinks that in

uine in the \7}4)av

p.

some instances -av with the perfect is genearliest examples are from Lydia, Trapel-

The

(246 B.C.) and aTearaXKav (193 B.C.).

235 1

LXX.

f.

The N. T. examples

Moulton, ProL,

p. 166) considers it

in various cases,

p. 33.

Cf. Dieterich, Unters.,

are direaToXKav (Ac. 16

:

36), 7670-

Cf. Dieterich, Unters., p. 242.

Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 323. 3 Prol., p. 52; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36, 1904, p. 110. * Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 148; Sehweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 166. See further Dieterich, Unters., p. 242 f. Cf. Deiss., B. S., p. 191; W.-Sch., p. 112 f. 6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 46. « Prol., p. 52. 2

^

Tiyovav

und anderes Vulgargriechisch, Rhein. Mus.,

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. 8 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., Moulton, Prol., p. 52. 1°

that

»

p.

Sehweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 167. merely Alexandrian. For

it is

bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 67.

323

"A

f.

Thumb

LXX e.xx.

1891, pp. 193

Cf.

ff.

K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 48

fair

show

f.

in the papyri,"

(Hellen., p. 170) rightly denies

{kwpaKav, wkirpaKav, etc.) see

Hel-

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ("PHMa) 16:7; Rev. 21:6),

vav (Ro.

3), dffeXrjXvdav (Jas.

(Rev. 18:

eyvcoKai'

337

17:7), elprjKav (Rev. 19:

(Jo.

5:4), ewpaKav (Lu. 9:36; Col. 2:

On

3), reriyprj/caj' (Jo. 17: 6).

1), Tr'e-KTWKav

the other hand the Western

documents (KADN Syr. Sin.) read yjKaaLv in Mk. 8:3 But it is in the LXX (Jer. 4: 16), and Moulton^ The form of r}Kw is present, but the finds riKaixev in the papyri. sense is perfect and the k lends itself to the perfect ending by anclass of

instead of dalv.

alogy.

Another ending that

explanation

calls for

and the

stead of -as in the present perfect

is

the use of -€s in-

first aorist (in -/ca es-

Hort considers the MS. evidence "scanty" save in The papyri give some confirmation. Moulton^ Revelation. act)rjKes, cites €ypa\}/es, etc., from "uneducated scribes" and thinks

pecially).

it is a mark of "imperfect Greek." Deissmann^ finds the phenomenon common in a "badly written private letter" from Fayum. Mayser^ confirms the rarity of its occur-

that in Revelation

In the inscriptions Dieterich^ finds

rence in the papyri.

more frequent and

B

has

17:8 will

one

in Jo. 8

d
B

B

has

in Jo. 17 :7

ewpa/ces;

B

has UoiKes; once more in Ac. 21:22

hardly

may

accept

57

:

possible to call

l^e

D

think of John.

it

Rev. 2:3

in

has

B

in

a'ir.eKa\v\pes

2:4

rather

gives

:

and

eXrjXvdes.^

23 in

It

nor Luke, whatever

illiterate,

(/ceKoxta/ces),

it

In Mt. 23

in widely separated sections.

Mt.

{a(j rel="nofollow">rjKes),

11

:

25.''

2: 5

W. H.

(TreTrrco/ces),

LXX

11:17 (etXry^es), all perfects save a(j)rjKes. It is rare in the (Thackeray, Gr., p. 215); found in A (Ex. 5 22, cnrkaTakKes) and in e5coKes (Ezek. 16:21; Neh. 9:10). The modern Greek has it :

(Thumb, Handb.,

as in Ueaa, -es

We

p. 152).

have both ^ada (Mt. 26 69) and :

^s

(Mt. 25 21). :

The form

vanishing (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 166). Cf. also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 321. The papyri have oUas, as in -da

N.

is

and

T.,

e^rys.

But

see

Much more common

-/xl

Verbs.

the use of the

first aorist endings -a, with the second aorist stem and even with the imperfect. This change occurs in the indicative middle as well as active. This matter more technically belongs to the treatment of the is

-as, etc.,

1

I,

Cf. Hort,

Prol., p. 53.

illiterate jjiip. in 2

lb.; Prol., p. 52.

»

B.

"

Untcrs.

S., p.

192. etc., p.

10, p. 37, as

trouble.

Notes on Orth.,

*

239.

saying that o

p. 169.

Tlio N. T. does not follow

putting -aai to aorist stems (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36).

Blass, Gr. of

Gr. d. griech. Pap.,

N. T. Gk.,

dpijKes, iLypa\pes, ypaxpkrw, etc.,

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Glc,

p. 46.

]).

321.

p. 46, citee Apoll., Synt.,

'

gave the grannnarians Cf. W.-Sch., p. 113.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

338

aorist tense, as the -a

part of the tense-stem, but

is

veniently discussed here.

The

Attic inscriptions

imperfects

riXin^a,

NEW TESTAMENT it is

also con-

The Attic already had el-pra, eireaa, ^veyna. indeed show eo-xa, evpafi-qv and even the This

e^epa.^

somewhat

tendency towards

uniformity

strong aorists with -a chiefly in

Moulton^ finds the "uneducated writing" in the

common

This process of assimilation of

spread in the papyri, but

kolvt]

extensively. ^

in general.

weak

was not yet complete.* Blass^ thinks it an "intermediate" form already in the ancient Greek which spread in the kolvt]. Cf. the liquid form riyyeiXa. But both the strong and the weak aorists appear in the N. T. Thackeray the strong with the

aorist

210 ff.) notes that the -av termination past tenses, though in the LXX the imperfect forms are due to later copyists. In the modern Greek we note it regularly with KaTe\a(3a, rjdeKa, elxa, etc. (Thumb, Handb., pp. 152, 160, etc.). Hort*^ has a detailed discussion of the {Gr., p. 195;

was

finally

also pp.

cf.

extended to

matter in the N. T. The -a form eLTTOv.

all

This mixture of usage is shown in elwa and uniform wdth endings in -r (etTrare, etTrarco,

is

Both dirov and etTre occur. We have aireLTraiJieda (2 and TrpoeiTranev (1 Th. 4:6). The participle is usuBoth eliras and etvres, elirov and ally -6:v, but sometimes et-rras. We always have the ripeyKa inflection save in the elirav meet us. And even here we once have di'einfinitive and the imperative. pkyKaL (1 Pet. 2 5) and once also wpoaeveyKou (Mt. 8 :4 BC). So also with eweaa we have the weak or first aorist inflection in the indicative and imperative plural Treaare (Lu. 23 30; Rev. 6 16). But in these two examples Hort^ (against W. H.) favours Trecrere on MS. grounds (N*ABD, kS*BC). In Lu. 14 10; 17 7 apaireae is correct. The other forms that are accepted by W. H. are 'i^oKav eiirancaav)

Cor. 4

:

.

2)

:

:

:

1

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 1S3

2

Dieterich, Unters., p. 237

p. 181

f.;

Nachm., Magn.

3

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36.

*

lb.

f.

Cf.

:

f.

For the

Inschr., p. 166

inscr. see Schweizer, Perg. Inschr.,

f.

Mayser, Gr.

Cf. Deiss., B. S., p. 190

:

d. griech. Pap., p.

368

f.

f.

LXX

is in harmony with this tendency also. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 45. The Cihcian according to HeracUdcs? W.-Sch., p. Ill note. Cf. in Horn, forms Uke fi^ovTo, kfUjatTo, where the sec. aorist endings go with the first aorist *

Is

it

stem (Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 6 Notes on Orth., p. 164 f.

42).

See also Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 45; W.-Sch., with the N. T. in the use of -o. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 62-65; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 35 f. ^ Notes on Orth., p. 164. Moulton (Prol., p. 51) speaks of "the functionally useless difference of ending between the strong and the weak aorist." p. Ill

f.

The

LXX

MSS.

tally

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) once (Ac. 16

:

37); tTrkfiaXav twice

a few places (Mt. 13

dbaixev in

the indicatives aveTKav (Ac. 10

:

:

339

(Mk. 14 46; Ac. 21 27); 24; Mt. 25 37, :

:

17; Lu. 10

:

:

39), dveiXare (Ac. 2

:

tlbav,

etc.);

23), avtlKaTo

Th. 2 13), i^eCkayn^v (Ac. 23 27), k^eikaro (Ac. 7 10; 12 11); evpav once (Lu. 8 35, or avevpav), evpa^ev once (Lu. 23 2), and eupafxeuos once (Heb. 9 12); the imperatives eXdare, eX^droj uniformly, both rjXdav and rj\dov, once a-Krfkda (Rev. There are many other ex10 9), regularly T]\dap.ev (Ac. 21 8). amples in various MSS. which W. H. are not willing to accept, but which illustrate this general movement, such as airkdavav (Mt. (Ac. 7:21), eCkaro (2 :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

8

:

32, etc.), eXa/Saj^ (Jo. 1

12), kXa^anev

:

(Lu. 5:5), eXd/Sare (1 Jo.

(Mk. 12 8), emap (1 Cor. 10 4 D), '^clivyau (Lu. 8 34 D), KaTe4>ayav (Mk. 4:4D), avvkaxo-v (Ac. 7 57 D), yepa/jLevos (Lu. 22 44 N), etc. But let these suffice. Moulton^ is doubtful about allowing this -a in the imperfect. But the papyri support it as Deissmann- shows, and the modern Greek ^ reinforces it also as we have just seen. W. H. receive elxav in Mk. 8:7; Ac. 28 2 Rev. 9:8; elxap^^v in 2 Jo. 5. But D has elxo^v in Jo. (TrapeTxai') 15 22, 24; N* has 'eXeyav in Jo. 9 10; 11 36, etc. There is a dis2

:

27), €te/3aXai/

:

:

:

:

:

:

;

:

:

:

tinct increase in the use of the sigmatic aorist as in rnxapTrjcra

(Mt. 18

15), 6^Pr]a^e (Lu.

:

13

:

It appears already in the

28).

LXX

(Thackeray, Gr., p. 235). But see further under vii, (d). The past perfect has the -eiv forms exclusively as uniformly in

So eiaTr]K€Laav (Rev. 7 11), t^eLcrav (Mk. 14 40), 7re(Mk. 15 7). So the LXX. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., But the imperfect e^fjeaav (Ac. 17 15) is to be observed. p. 68. (?') The Middle Endings. These call for less remark. BovXet (Lu. 22 42) is the only second singular middle form in -ei, for The inscriptions^ sometimes show 4) displaces oi/'ct. 6\pii (Mt. 27 /3oi/Xr/. Blass^ regards ^ovXh a remnant of literary style in Luke, the

KOLvr].^

:

7roir]KHaap

:

:

:

:

:

Hort (Notes on Orth., a second aorist imper. instead of the present. Cf. e^ex^af (usual form in Rev. 16:6). Cf. W.-Sch., p. 111. But Karex^ev (Mk. 14 3) is the usual Attic aorist. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 55. 1

Prol., p. 52.

So Buresch, Rhein. Mus.,

p. 1G5) needlessly considers iKxeere

(Rev. 16

:

46, 224.

1)

:

2

B.

»

Cf. Siiiicox, Lang, of the

S., p. 191, eXeyas, etc.

N.

T., p. 36; Geldart's

Guide to Mod. Gk.,

p.

272 note. *

With

rare variations in the inscr.

Mayser, Gr. ^

328.

d. griech. Pap., pp.

320

Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 168.

The

pap. do not

show

oUi

and

and pap.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 53.

Cf.

ff.

Cf. also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 6\pti,

but only

0ov\ei.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47. For oln, 6^v, arid ^o6Xjj in Gr. d. Sept., p. 60 f.; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 33 f.

LXX MSS. sec Helbing, B in the LXX shows a

fondness for -u forms

217.

8

(itacisni).

Cf. Thack., Gr.,

j).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

340

but the papyri also have ^ovXei. The occasional use of 8vvr} (Mk. 9 22 f.) has been discussed under -jjll Verbs. It appears only once in the LXX, but the "poetic and apparently Ionic" kwiaTji is more frequent (Thackeray, Gr., p. 217). Cf. also kclBov (Jas. 2 3) as LXX and Kadrj (Ac. 23 3). On the other hand we have (fyayeaai and TTtecrat (Lu. 17 8). This revival of the use of -o-at parallel with -fj-ai, -rat in the perfect of vowel verbs in the vernacular amounts to a "new formation" in the view of Blass.^ So Moulton, Prol., :

:

:

:

54

p.

ogy."

To

f.

a "survival"

call this revival

In the

LXX

universal

irkcraL is

"antediluvian philol-

is

and

0d7ecrat outside of the

Pentateuch where (l^ayri holds on (Thackeray, p. 218). The -aai form is universal in modern Greek. The love of uniformity made But see Contract Verbs for further discussion. The it triumph. middle form r^ix-qv (Mt. 25 35) and riixeda (Mt. 23 30) is like the KOLvi] generally and the modern Greek et/xat. Cf. also eaofxat. For k^kdero (Mt. 21 33) with loss of root o and w inflection (thematic :

:

:

e)

see

-/it

Verbs.

Cf. also

e^eKpefj-ero

(Lu. 19:48).

The

LXX

has

-evTo for -ovTo (Thackeray, p. 216). (j)

As already observed, the passive voice its own. The second aorist passive,

Passive Endings.

has no distinctive endings of

an active form like l-^-q-v {t-(i)6.vr]-v is the So i-xa-p-q-v from xatpeco. The first aorist in -d-qv seems to have developed by analogy out of the old secondary middle ending in -^tjs {k-bb-d-qs) parallel mth (TO (Sanskrit thds).^ The future passive is a late development and merely adds the usual ao/e and uses the middle endings. The ending in -O-qv is sometimes transitive in Archilochus,^ as the middle often is, and perhaps helps to understand how in the KOLVT] these forms (first aorist passive) are so often transitive ("delike k-^avr]-v, is really

proper division) .^

ponents") as in

Cf. Latin tace-re.

The second

aireKpidriv, kcj^o^-qd-qv , etc.

aorist passive

an active form. So the passive forms have a decidedly mixed origin and history. There is nothing special to note about these passive endings in the N. T. save the increased use of them when even the passive idea does not exist. In some verbs a is inserted contrary to Attic practice. So /ckXeio-rat (Lu. 11:7), XeXovafxaL (Heb. 10:22). It is a common usage in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 219 ff.). See also vii, as noticed above

is

really

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47.

2

Giles,

*

lb., pp. 411, 422.

Man.

Grit., p. 199.

p. 41.

On

of

Comp.

On

Cf.

Mayser, Gr.

d. griech. Pap., p. 328.

Philol., pp. 410, 427.

"Passive Formations" see Hadley, Ess. Phil, and see C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX,

the strong passive forms in

LXX

Giles,

Man.

*

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 411.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

In Rev. 8:12; 18:23, W. H. print ^ai/T? (first aorist kinct)avai, in Lu. 1 79) rather than the passive apfi.

9.

(g),

cf

active,

Note 13

:

.

(Mt. 24

eK(f)vn

28),

:

Mk.

235)

In the

1

:

:

32,

but Rec.

(Lu. 8

crvv(l)velaai.

(Rec. .

341

:

LXX, when

passive forms, the

Mk.

for

Uvv

retains (Thackeray, Gr.,

a verb had both

disappeared

first

in

k
(Ju. 4)

TraptLaehh-qaav

LXX

which the

32)

though

e/c^uf},

and

7)

first

237).

{ih., p.

p.

and second aorist But see vii, {d),

for further discussion,

Contract Verbs.

(/v)

The use

It appears^ in Kavxaaat (1 Cor.

was mentioned above. 17, etc.) and oSwaaaL

of -(rai

4:7; Ro. 2

:

where ae regularly contracts into a. Sec x^pteaat (=-eT
(Lu. 16 25) :

in the Ionic (Herodotus).

tinction

between

-aoj

The

LXX

in general preserves the dis-

NAB

and -ew verbs, but

occasionally have

the confusion (Thackeray, Gr., p. 241). In the modern Greek the blending is complete. One conjugation is made up, some forms

from -aw, some from -eco (Thumb, Handb., p. 169 f.). The N. T. MSS. vary. W. H. receive rip6:Tovv in Mt. 15 23 (}
:

single

MSS.

elsewhere.

Hatzidakis {Einl. in d. Neug., p. 128 f.) In Mt. 6 28 we have

considers rjpwrovv due to Ionic influence. KOTTLovaip in

B

33,

but

W. H.

reject

:

as they do vlkovvtl in Rev.

it,

and KareUyovu (Lu. 8 53) .^ In Mk. 14 5 W. H. read helSpLfjLojpTo (i^C -ovvto) and in Jo. 11 38 eiJi.(3pLiJL6)nevos (HA. So there is a variation as to iiTTchvTaL (2 Pet. 2 20) -ovjxevos) from rjTTaofiat. and y]a<TioQr}Te (2 Cor. 12:13) from eo-o-oco after the analogy of eXacraoco.^ W. H. print ^fiv (Ro. 8 12). This is a matter of much dispute with the editors, but it is more than doubtful if W. H. are correct. On the other side see WinerSchmiedeH and Moulton.^ But both faco (Ro. 8 12) and xP<^o1 8) have the 77 contraction rather than a (-ijco ixai (1 Tim. 2

7, 17;

:

15

:

2,

:

:

:

:

.

:

:

:

verbs, Moulton, Prol, p. 54). i'^wv.

But the

KOLvi]

uses

In Ro. 7

xpao'^cti,

:

9

though not

B

even has t^j]v for N. T.^ Paul

in the

LXX (1 Ki. 14 LXX is /cratrat (Sir.

Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 328, for xapteTaat. The 6 A) shows 6iTrti,evov
:

:

Moulton

*

lb.

*

Pp. 42, 116 note.

^

Prol., p. 54.

(CI.

Rev., 1901, p. 36) cites IvLkh and Tinodvres from pnp.

Cf. Brus., Griech. Gr., p. 61.

The pap.

sujiport ^vv, not

fjjj'.

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 347. So in general the pap. are in harmony « Moulton, Prol., p. 54. with N. T. usage here, Mayser, pp. 346 ff.

,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

342

has XP'?™^ (pres. subj.) in 1 Tim. 1:8. forms prevail in the kolvt] as in dL^pdu and 11: 21), ireLPaw (Ph. 4

:

12),

8i4^q.

(Ro. 12

Elsewhere also the a So ireLvq. (1 Cor.

Tretuap. :

20) as subjunctive (so

same verse). The LXX keeps Attic ^ijv and xpwdo^i-, but 8L\pdp and veLvdv (Thackeray, Gr., p. 242).^ Verbs in -ew sometimes show forms in -aco. So €XX67a in Phil. 18, eWoyoLTaL in Ro. 5 13, eKeoLTe in Ju. 22, 23, and eXeco^/Tos in ireLvq.

:

LXX has both forms. The For further examples of this confusion between -aw and -eco in LXX and isolated N. T. MSS. see Winer-Schmiedel.^ In 1 Cor. 11:6 all editors print ^vpaadat (cf. Keipaadai just before), though in 1 Cor. 11:5 k^vprjukpr] and ^vprjooPTai (Ac. 21 24) probably come from ^vpkw} Cf. edoj, edcrco.^ Ro. 9

KOLvr}

:

but

16,

eXeet in

Ro. 9

:

18.

usually has the -etp forms.^

:

Contraction does not always take place with

In Lu. 8: 38

W. H.

follow

BL

ee

in verbs in -ew.

Horf

but

in giving ebdro,

admits

and Moulton^ consider kbktTo correct and the contraction a mere correction, and it is supported by the LXX and papyri. AP even have eSeetro. In Rev. 16 1 kx«Te is undoubtedly right and e^exeej/ in 16 2, but note that

it

not free from doubt.

is

Blass''

:

:

kKxtiTai (cf.

(Mt. 9

:

Attic aorist).

(Ac. 18

:

On

TrXtZp,

18),

In

17).

Mk.

14

:

3 Karexeep

the other hand in Jo. 3

diroTr^eip

(Ac. 27

:

to be noticed also

is :

8 note

In the

1 f.).

irpei, e^cTrXet

LXX

these

words appear now one way, now the other.^ Aew ('to bind'), pew have no ee forms in the N. T. W. H. accept in text only e^ov9eP€(a in all the dozen examples in the N. T. (as Lu. 18 9, e^ovdepovpras) but in Mk. 9 12 they have 5 instead of 6.^'^ Observe also d(f)ecovrai (Lu. 5 20, etc.) instead of d0covrat or the regular a4>a.PTaL. In the N. T., W. H. give kppkdr] (Gal. 3 16; Mt. 5 21, etc.), but Hort^^ thinks the Attic eppr]dr] should appear always in Matthew. Verbs in -oco have two knotty problems. In Gal. 4 17 frjXoOre and 1 Cor. 4 6 cf)vaiou(Tde are regular if indicative. But if they are subjunctive, the contraction 077 is hke the indicative oe (cf, indica:

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

W.-Sch., p. 116 note.

Cf. Karvpa/xhos (Mt. 25

2

Hatz., Einl., p. 128

Moulton

f.

:

41).

(CI. Rev., 1904, p. 110) cites (ppovcovres

per contra ayairodi'Tes from pap. *

Hort (Notes on Orth.,

^

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 116

'

and

P. 117 note.

p. 166) prefers ^vpaadai after Plut. and Lucian. See further on this mixing of contract verbs, Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 349. The MSS. show much the same situation as to contract verbs that we find in the N. T. and the pap. Helbing (Gr. d. Sept., pp. 110-112) gives the facts in detail. 6 Notes on Orth., p. 166. » Cf. Thack.,Gr., pp. 242ff.; W.-Sch.. p. 115 note. 7 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47. " Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 166. f.

LXX

8

Prol., p. 54.

"

lb.

BD always have

it.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa)

343

So Blass^ and Moulton.^ tive and subjunctive of -ow verbs). Hort^ doubts the indicative here. If evoSoJTaL (1 Cor. 16 2) be regarded as a present subjunctive no problem in contraction is raised.* But in Col. 4 17 we have the subjunctive in I'm ttXtjpoh as in Attic for both indicative and subjunctive. In Ro. 3 13 k5o\tov(rau is the common LXX form in -oaau. The other point is the infinitive in -ovv or -olv. W. H. give -olu for Cf. -q.p this infinitive everywhere except TXrjpovv in Lu. 9 31.^ and -fjv in W. H. Blass*' considers the -olv termination "hardly established for the N. T." since even in the N. T. the evidence is "small," though "of good quality" Hort contends.'^ In Mt. 13: 32 KaTaaKr]uo7v is supported by BD (in Mk. 4 32 by B), in 1 Pet. 2 15 (t>tiJ.0Lv has N, and in Heb. 7 5 dTroSe/carotj' has BD. Moulton^ finds no support earlier in date than B save one inscription cited in Hatzidakis {Einl., p. 193) and one papyrus of second century A.D. Mayser^ likewise finds no infinitive in -olv till after :

:

:

:

:

:

:

first

century a.d. and gives some references for this late infinitive

form.

and

if the case will go against W. H. on this point. probably due to some late grammarian's refinement

It looks as

The form

is

linguistically unintelligible.

is

ULiiv is often contracted (sounded finally

W.

(so

H., Jo. 4:

But

irlv.

TTteiv

traction in -aoj,

(a)

in

-eoo, -ooi

into

ireXv

into

ZI,

:

I)

22, etc.).^»

Con-

verbs, of course, takes place only in the

and present

The Tenses

then

some MSS. (N 8/9 times)

the Syrian reading (Mt. 20

is

present, imperfect

VII.

and

7, 9, etc.)

participle.

(xp6voi).

The Term Tense.

It

is

from the French word temps,

a misnomer and a hindrance to the understanding of this aspect of the verb-form. Time does come finally to enter 'time,'

and

is

and in a limited way affects the opand participle. But it is not the original nor the general idea of what we call tense.^^ Indeed it cannot be shown of relatively into the indicative tative, infinitive

1

Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.

2

Prol., p. 54.

*

Moulton,

"

Ilort, ib., p. IGG.

^

Notes on Orth., p.lGG.

«

Prol., p. 53.

fjia(TTiyYoti>

Cf. K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 5S7. 3

Prol., p. 54.

Cf. Nestle

in Coptic.

" Hort, Notes on

Notes on Ortli., p. 171 f. Notes on Orth., p. 1G7. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.

Cf. Hort, «

(Am. Jour, of Theol., July, 1909, "

p. 448) for Gr. d. griech. Pup., p. 349; Raderm., p. 74.

Orth., p. 170.

» Cf. D(;lbrtick, Grundi. d. Kriech. Synt., Bd. IV, p. SO; BruK., Grioch. Gr., p. 469 f.; Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 481 f. See Swetc, O. T. in Gk., p. 305, for remarks about tenses in the LXX.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

344

any verb-form that it had originally any reference to time. We must therefore dismiss time from our minds in the study of the forms of the tenses as well as in the matter of syntax. late to get a new name, however.

It is too

The greatest confusion prevails in (6) Confusion in Names. the names given to the various tenses. The time idea appears in the names present, past perfect and future. The state of the action rules in the

names

aorist,

imperfect and perfect.

clear that the time idea did not prevail with all the

Thus it is names that

the grammarians used.

In the indicative, indeed, in the past three tenses appear, in the present two, in the future one (sometimes In the other modes as a rule only three tenses are found;

two).

in truth, in the subjunctive, optative

only two are in

common

and imperative practically and the present.

usage, the aorist

As a matter of fact there are nine possible tenses for each voice in the indicative: the aorist present, the imperfect present, the perfect present, the aorist past, the imperfect past, the perfect past; the aorist future, the imperfect future, the perfect future.

These ideas do occur. In the past the distinction is In the present no sharp hne is drawn between the and durative (unfinished or imperfect) save when the peri-

clear cut. aorist

phrastic

conjugation

help out the word at

all is

used

is

itself.

made between

or

when Aktionsart comes

In the future, as a

the three ideas.

phrastic conjugation can be employed.

rule,

in

to

no distinction

But here again the periAs a rule the future is

anyhow.

For further discussion see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Greek Syntax, p. 120, and the references there to Harris' Hermes, Harper's Powers of the Greek Tenses, and H. Schmidt's Dodrina Temporum Verbi Graeci et Latini. The modern Greek preserves as distinct forms the aorist, present, imperfect; the future, the perfect and past perfect using periphrastic forms. Mr. Dan Crawford reports 32 tenses for Bantu. (c) The Verb-Root. There were originally two types of verbroots, the punctiliar and the durative. The tense called aorist (aopLdTos, 'undefined action') is due to the use of the punctiliar verbs (the idea of a point on a line). The present tense comes out of the durative verb-root. But it is worth repeating that tenses are a later development in the use of the verb.^ Hence it was natural that some verbs never developed a present tense, like eldov, and some made no aorist, like opdco. The defective verbs thus throw much light on the history of the tenses. aoristic

Gr., p. 180; Farrar,

1

Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Pliilol., p.

482

f.

345

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (pIIMa) Out

of these

two ideas grew

own development. Some

all

Each language had

its

aorists in Sanskrit had no presents, like

Each tense

the Greek ecTov.

the tenses.

in the

Greek pursued

its

own way.

The idea of comIt is a complex development as will be seen. present to a line is due to the point and paring the aorist to a Curtius, but

it

has since been worked out at length.^

Instead of

saying "irregular" verbs, Delbruck (Vergl. Sijntax, Tl. II, p. 256) speaks of "several roots united to one verb."

This Aktionsart or kind of action belongs more specifically to syntax.2 g^^ i^ is not possible to make a modern study of the tense formations without having clearly in mind this important matter. It will come out at every turn. Along with the various

which came to be used to express the tense-distincwere developed there remains also the meaning of they tions as This is never to be left out of sight. Prepoitself. verb-root the sitions also enter into the problem and give a touch much like a

tense-suffixes

suffix (perfective).

die'

and

and

KaTe4>ayov.

So

dvr]aKuv

aTOTedvrjKevai is 'to

But more

is

'to be dying' while airodavetv

be dead.'

Cf. exei,

of this in Syntax.

and

airexet.,

The point

is

'to

Ha'yov

here

is

simply to get the matter in mind. (d)

The Aorist Tense

this tense

(adpio-ro? xP'^^°^)- ^^ '^^ ^^t true that original form of the verb.

was always the oldest or the

As seen above, sometimes a durative root never made an aorist or punctiliar stem. But the punctiUar idea is the simplest idea of the verb-root, with many verbs was the original form, and logically precedes the others. Hence it can best be treated first. This is clearer if we dismiss for the moment the so-called first aorists and think only of the second aorists of the -jxl form, the oldest aorists. Henry ^ has put this It is here that we see the rise of the aorist. matter tersely: "The ordinary grammars have been very unfortu-

nate in their nomenclature; the so-called second perfects are much more simple and primitive than those called first perfects; the same is the case with the second aorists passive as contrasted with the first aorists," etc.

The same remark

applies to second aorists active

and middle. The non-thematic second 1

Cf.

aorists represent, of course,

Mutzbauer, Gruiull. der Tenipuslohre (1893); Dolbriick, Grundl. d. fT.; V>v\i^., Griech. Gr., pp. 470 IT.; Giles, Man. of Comp.

griech. Synt., II, pp. 13

480 f.; Moulton, Prol., pp. 108 ff. (Handb., p. 123) likewise feels the necessity of a word about Aktionsart under Morphology. Cf. ' Comp. Gr. of the Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 105 f. note. Leo Meyer, Griech. Aoriste, 1879, p. 5 f.

Philol., p. 2

Thumb

346

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

•

The

the most primitive form.

NEW TESTAMENT

survivals of these forms in the

N. T. have been discussed under -/it Verbs. The difference between the strong aorist (both thematic and non-thematic) and similar presents is syntactical and not formal.^ The point is that the strong aorists and the corresponding presents represent the simple stem of the verl). Brugmann^ indeed treats them together. It is not possible to make an etymological distinction between the imperfects e(t)r]p, eypa(})OP and the aorists eaTrjv, ecfyvyov. The imperfect, of course, differs from the present only in the augment and secondary endings.^ The kinship l^etween the aorist and present stems is further shown in reduplication. Reduplication in the aorist, as riyayov,

Cf. the use of aorist

was quite common

later language.^

is

supposed to be originally causative.*

with inceptive presents like

it

7t(7)j/djo-/ca;.

but

in the older Sanskrit,

Cf. the blending of the aorist

perfect forms in Latin.

The

is

The

rare in the

and the present

strong aorist (both non-thematic

is far more common in Homer than in the later Indeed in the modern Greek the strong aorist has well-

and thematic) Greek.^

nigh vanished before the weak

aorist.'^

As often, the grammars have it backwards. The so-called second is the old aorist, and the so-called first is the late form of the verb. This weak form of the aorist has a distinct tense-sign, a, the sigmatic aorist. The a (-aa) was not always used, as with verbs,^

liquid

like

in the Sanskrit.^

ecxTeLXa.

The

This sigmatic

distinction

tween the two forms, and mixed

Homer,

like i]^ovTo,

r/i/et/ca.^"

aorist

appears also

was not always observed beaorists of

No wonder

both kinds occur in

therefore that uniformity

gradually prevailed at the expense of the strong aorist in two

ways, the disuse of the strong aorist (so rj^a) and the putting of endings to the second aorist stems, as elira, eVxa.

first aorist

The

K aorists in

hold their 1

2

own and

the indicative

{edccKa,

W-qKa,

rJKo)

continued to

to be used usually in the plural also.

An

ex-

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 268. lb. Cf. also Riem. and Goelzor, Phonct., pp. 396, 410, 414. So K.-BL, II,

3 Cf. Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 4.5.3 f. 92 f. * So Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 308. Cf. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 371. Cf. K.-BL, ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 298. for list. II, p. 30 f 6 See interesting lists in Sterrett's II., N. 38 ff. 7 V. and D., Handb. etc., p. 79 f. 8 K.-BL, II, p. 102 f. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 313; Delbriick, GnindL, Hartmann (De aoristo secundo, 1881, p. 21) makes too etc., IV, pp. 75 ff. much distinction between the second and first aorists. " Sterrett, Horn. IL, N. 42. 9 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 313.

p.

.,

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (*PHMa)

347

tension of this usage (after the analogy of the perfect)

is

seen in

modern Greek ^ form eXWrjKa for eXW-qv. one more aorist form, the aorist passive. As already

the Byzantine and

There is shown, the so-called second aorist passive {-^p), like k4>avr]u, kxapw, The so-called first aorist is merely the second aorist active.^ passive in Sriv is a Greek creation after the analogy of the old Indo-Germanic.^ Homer makes little use of either of these passive aorists, but the second is the more frequent with him and the

form in

very rare.'* emphasis upon the aorist forms seem unusual to nfodern students, they may be reminded that in English we have only two tenses (apart from the periphrastic conjugation) and that they One is a present are usually punctiliar, as "I sing," "I sang." aorist, the other a past aorist.^ We do not here enter into the Aktionsart of the aorist (whether ingressive, constative or effec-6Tf]v is

If this

That belongs

tive).*^

The

to syntax.

development shown above in Mayser^ gives a In brief it is in careful discussion of the papyri development. harmony with what has already been observed. The non-thematic strong aorist is confined to a few verbs like ^ijvai, yvcopac, The k aorists are used exdovvai, 8vvat, delvai, Tpiaadat, aTTJvaL. clusively in both singular and plural. The thematic strong aorist inscriptions agree with the

the aorist and support the N. T. phenomena.'^

is

weak sigmatic

disappearing before the

In the N. T. the cept that

k aorists

Luke (1:2

etc.,

and

aorist.

WrjKa,

a.(j)7]Ka

quite

:

35), WrjKav

frequently.^

(Mk. 6:29),

(hva/jLTip,

and

of all

-/it

verbs and includes

also

(Mt.

nearly

The non-thematic list is

ave^rip,

the forms of dovpai, elmt and

a(t>r]KaT€

LXX

The

always has k with these aorists in the plural.^" The aorists in the N. T. are not numerous. discussion

occur always ex-

in the literary introduction) has wapedoaav.

Elsewhere eSwrare (Mt. 25 23:23),

eSco/ca,

found in the

lyvoiv,

OeLPai.

eaTrjv,

e4>r]v,

save the indica-

tive active. '

V. and D. Handb.,

2

Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 93

*

Storrett, Horn.

6

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 126.

6

Munro,

f.

N. 42

but in particular Thumb, Handb., p. 144. 3 Hirt, Ilandb. etc., p. 399 f.

f.

Cf.

Monro, Horn.

ff.; 8

Gr., p. 45.

47.

Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., pp. 180

^

162 '"

ib., p.

II.,

etc., p. 81,

fT.;

Nachm., Magn.

Inschr., pp.

Mcisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 181, 185, 187.

^ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 119. Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 358-370. See Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 94 f ., for similar exx. in the LXX, and Thack.,

Gr., p. 255.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

348

strong aorist in the N. T. shows the two developThe use of -a instead of -ov with the strong above. noted ments aorist-stem is very common. See this chapter, vi, (/?), for N. T. hst Hke el3a\av, etc. The MSS. vary much in the matter.^ The other

The thematic

Here again is the increased use of the sigmatic aorist. 'E^lcoaa (1 Pet. Blass^ has a careful presentation of the facts. 4 2) is a case in point instead of the old Attic k^ioov. So is e/3Xdchange

:

(Mt. 13:26; Heb. 9:4; Jas. 5 18) rather than 'i^XaaTov. (Mt. 5 32) and cT^JMa (Mt. 22 25) occur. Cf. Helbing,"Gr. d. Sept., p. 93 f., and Thackeray, Gr., pp. 233 ff., for

arrjaa

Both

:

eyo-l^woi

:

:

LXX illustrations. "H^a occurs a few times instead of the (2 Pet. 2:5), evrtaura^at (Lu. 13:34).

common

ijyayov, as cTrd^as

Blass justifies

it

as appear-

LXX

and late writers.^ It is part of the ing at least in dialects, tendency towards the sigmatic aorist. Likewise anapT-qaco is slipping in beside dMdprco (Mt. 18

:

15;

Ro. 5

16, cf. verse 12).

14,

:

Emped., LXX, Lob., PJmjn., 732. W. H. accept edvaev (Mk. 1 32 on the authority of BD (fCA, etc., edv). Luke in Ac. 24: 21 has the redupHcated aorist eKeKpa^a like the LXX; but usually the N. T. has the late form hpa^a as in Mt. 8 29 (eKpa^av), though once the Attic dveKpayop appears (Lu. 23 18). Once Luke (Ac. 6 2) has KaTa\el\(/avTas, a form that Blass^ finds in Herm., Blass finds

in

it

:

:

:

:

and Mayser^ observes di'raX#at in the papyri. (Lu. 13 28) finds a parallel in an old Homeric aorist

Vis. VIII, 3. 5, "Oxj/rjcrde

:

(Winer-Schmiedel,

cbi/'d/xr?!'

known some MSS. have

(without any Jas. 4

:

13

dropped the strong ixai,

p. 109).

In Rev. 18:14 the Text. Rec.

So in evpriaa. Indeed some verbs have

authority) has an aorist form

aorist

eix-rropevauixeda.

form entirely

like /Stow, ^Xaardvoj, kyelpo-

See careful discussion of Winer-Schmiedel, p. 109

KTeivu.

f.

MSS. frequently read dcoay, 8<xiacofj.ev, etc., as if from an aorist Ucoaa, Cf. Helas Jo. 17:2; Rev. 4:9. Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 120. parallel further that examples for f., 90 Sept., d. Gr. p. bing,

LXX

these illustrations. is to be noted a new strong aorist dvkdakov (Ph. 4 which Blass^ takes in a causative sense (dveddXeTe to virep e/xoO

Conversely 10)

:

({)poveLv)

Verbs in

-fco

make

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

'

lb.

Mayser

the aorist both in a and

N. T. Gk.,

p. 4.5

^

f.

^.

Most

of these

lb., p. 43.

(Gr. d. grioch. Pap., p. 369) finds

it

in the pap. as well as

i.yayfj(Tai.. *

6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 43. Cf KaraXeLxPy Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 370. .

Mk.

12 «

:

19 S.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 43.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMA)

349

verbs have dental stems in Attic, but some have guttural. the a forms prevail

(Thackeray, GV., p. 222 (Mt. 20:19),

(Lu. 9 51),

aaXiriajis

(Mt. 6:2).^

Like eppWrj

and

KoKeco

reXew^

21),

:

but

-qpiJLoaafjLrju

hand

(2 Cor. 11

2),

:

and the

in the papyri

towards the use of a and not

is

we have

e

in-

^

with

:

49)

:

22)

and and

in €4>opeaapep (1 Cor. 15

(Lu. 12

ev(t>bpr](Ta

Pet. 2:2).

er(ir6dr]aa (1

k/xTOL^aL

Cf. BaTrrtfco, Xoytfo/iat, vofxi^w, etc.

-fco.^

(Mt. 5

(Ac. 8: 39),

The tendency

on the whole

scriptions

the verbs in

Hence

agrees with the N. T.

(Ac. 15:32); but on the other

rjpiraaev

:

LXX

So hvara^av (Mt. 25:5),

f.).

kireaTTipL^av

karripKTev

The

to-day.

till

Cf. also ijveaa,

16), p-qdkv

:

(Mt.

i]pKeae, e^tecrai.

1

Cf. tTrdvaaa

though D has -a- in Jo. 6 35 and {< in Rev. The liquid verbs in -aivco and -alpoo generally retain d even when not preceded by e or as in Attic. So ejSdaKava (Gal. 3:1); once Kep(Mt. 4:2), but

dLiprjau,

:

t

Cor. 9

5apu} (1

(Rev. 7 14) :

and 18

:

:

(Rev. 1:1); 23 note (}>ap7], not (j)aprj.

-dpa with

karjpiava

;

all

verbs,

LXX agrees

The

elsewhere -^(ra; k^eKadapa

21),

and

it is

The

(1

(Lu.

eTrL4>duaL

kolpt]

Cor. 5:7); kXemavap

1 :79).

In Rev. 8 12 :

begins to use -dra and

modern Greek.

well-nigh universal in

A few forms survive in modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 140 f.). The second aorist passive has a few late developments of its own. This substitution of the second aorist passive for the first with the N. T. (Thackeray, Gr.,

p. 223).

-7]va

is

The

a favorite idiom in the N, T.*

ness for the

-r]p

the papyri.^

formations.^

This

This development

the case of the second and

is

is

shows likewise fondand

directly the opposite of that in

first aorist

already been observed that in

Koipi]

true of the inscriptions''

active

Homer

and middle.

It

the passive aorist

has

very partly due is

Perhaps the increase in the use of --qp forms is encroachment of aorist passive forms on the middle, and this is the simplest one. The Attic, of course, had many such forms also. Here are the chief N. T. examples: rjyyeX-qp {air-, ap-, 8l~, KaT-, Lu. 8 20, etc.) is in the LXX and the papyri; rare.

to the general

:

rjpolyrjp

(Mk. 7:35,

irayrjp (2

pvyrjpaL is VTrerayrip

Cor. 12

:

2, 4),

read by some (Ro. 8

:

but

etc.),

iipolxdwo-v

but the Attic

also (Rev.

i)pTvaad-n

MSS.

20, etc.),

20:12);

(Rev. 12

:

5);

rip-

ho-

in Mt. 24:43; dieTaynp (Gal. 3 19), but the Attic StaraxOtPTa (Lu. 17:9f.); :

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 105.

"

Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 3G0

ff.,

for carcfuf discussion

and

references for further research. '

So

*

Blass, Gr. of

• ^

Toptic

and

opkw{e) in

N. T.

the

LXX.

GIv., p. 43.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 105.

Cf. Schniid, Atticismus, IV, p. 594 Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 171; Schweizer, IVrg. In.schr., p. 190 f. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 381 f. Cf Roinhold, De Grace, p. 7G ^

.

f.

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

350 KareKarjv

(Rev. 8

7; 1 Cor. 3

:

15),

:

but Attic

27); Karepvyrju (Ac. 2 :37); tKpv^rjv (Jo. 8

stead of

:

e^eKavdiiaav (Ro.

So also

59).

follows the analogy of kppvrjv (Heb. 2

e(j)vv

1)

:

€c})vr]v

1

:

in-

and exapw

Thus we have kK4>vfj (Mk. 13 28) and avix^yvdaai (Lu. 8 :6-8). Forms Hke eTrXrjyrjp (Rev., 8 12) and e^dj^T/z/ (Mt. On the other hand the poetical kKkW-qv (Mt. 1 20) are Attic. (Lu. 22

:

5)

.

^

:

:

:

14

19

:

has displaced the Attic

avaK\i.9r]pai.)

casionally appears (as in

eKkiv-qv.

Mk. 8:31 and Rev.

'

KirtKravO-qv oc-

six times)

when

Attic would have airWavou, and krexQw (Lu. 2:11)

where the the Attic

would usually have kyevonrip. Both eyep7]dr]p (Mt. 6 10 and often in 1 Th.) and eyepofxrjp (Mt. 7 28) are common, as r]8vpr]dr]p (Mt. 17 16) and edvpaadrjp (Mk. 7 24). The many aorist passives in the deponent sense have already been noticed under vi, (e). :

:

:

:

(e)

The Present Tense

(6

The present

eVeo-TW"? ;^poVo9).

from the nature of the case, is the most frequent in actual use and hence shows the greatest diversity of development. Brugmann- finds thirty-two distinct ways of forming the present tense in the Indo-Germanic tongues and thirty of them in the Greek. But some of these represent very few verbs and for practical purposes a much simpler classification is sufficient.^ Unfortunately the grammars by no means agree on the As samples see Giles, Man. of Comp. PhiloL, p. simplification. 425 f.; Hadley and Allen, p. 122 f.; Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 9; Riemann and Goelzer, Phonetique, pp. 394 ff.; Kiihner-Blass, indicative,

II, pp. 88 ff. In simple truth the facts are so varied that they lend themselves to many combinations more or less artificial.

One

most satisfactory

of the

torical instinct at least in his 1.

like

The Root

tljj.1,

is

elfXL

This

that of Monro,

is

who has

the his-

arrangement. is

the simple non-thematic present

the logical one to put

This class

like e-^t]-p. fjLai,

Class.

This

0r?/xt.

is

as with the aorist

first,

disappearing in the N. T. though 8vpa-

in composition

e^),

(etcr— ,

Kad-r]-iJ,aL,

Kei-fiaL, Kpefj.a-iJ.aL

appear. 2.

The Non-Thematic Reduplicated Present.

'i-(JTri-p.L,

p.1,

very large

common 1

iriiJ.-Tr\r]-iJ.i.,

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 110, for exx. in Jos. f.

Grundr., Giles,

TL-d-q-fii.

but holds on in the N. T.

class,

MSS. simply read II,

pp. 836-1330.

several ways, as tx^, 3

bp'LPr}-p.i,

So

bl-bw-fxi,

It

And

'i-rj-

was never a

-co

forms are

with these verbs.

Sept., p. 95 ^

KL-xpri-p-i,

Man.

of

to^xt^,

Comp.

and

LXX.

Cf. also Helbing, Gr. d.

-
In Horn, the same root wiU form a present in

t^xai'w.

Cf.

Monro, Hom. Gr.,

PhiloL, p. 423.

p. 40.

351

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) The Non-Thematic Present with -va- and

3.

N. T.

So

-vv-.

in the

a.TT-oX-'Kv-iJ.L, SeiK-vv-fiL, ^evy-vv-fxt, ^63V-vv-hl, Kar-

aii4)L-e-vvv-p.i,

ofi-vv-idt, ir-qyay-vv-ixi, Ktpa-vvv-ixL, Kope-PVV-fXL, Kpe-fia-vvv-ni, fxly-vv-nt,

commonly the

So

This was a

\eyo), Xuco.

expense of the

constantly increasing class at the

-/ti

several branches also including root-verbs like

a strengthened vowel

like Treid-w

d\Wc^,

Tr)Ku, Tpooyo:,

<x7]Tio,

have more

all

forms.^

-co

The Simple Thematic Present.

4,

had

but these

(TTpw-vvv-fjLi,

aj3e-vpv-fjiL,

prjy-vv-ixL,

vv-fiL,

Xet7r-co

(Xitt),

Hadley and

It

ypa-^,

(pevy-w (0iry),

Allen's "strong

contract denominative verbs hke

many

vowel class,"- and the

{tvlO),

TTviyoi, etc.,

verbs.

ayc^},

But see the Class for these contract verbs. to this list from nouns and some also from added were New verbs

Tt/xa-co, c^tXe-co, d^i6-co.

t

verb-stems, ypriyopk-oi from the old perfect kypr)yopa (this tense

never in the N.

or-qK-w

T.),-'^

(Mk. 11:25) from

taT-qKo.

(modern

probably imperfect, Greek The LXX shows eKpv^r]v} Cf. {kov-ktw). Kpv^w from aorist, not Gr., p. 224 f.). (Thackeray, stems perfect from presents new these So yivonai (ylyv-o-nai, 5. The Reduplicated Thematic Present. In Lu.

o-rkaj)."

*yL-ykp-OHaL), ])eing

1

:

24

TTtTTT-CO (*7rt-7r€r-Co)

-KepieKpv^ev

,

is

ri/CT-O) (*Tt-T€K-C0),

from iVxco {* ai-akx-^) The Thematic Present with a

-^V-, —WT-, -KT-,

The N. T. has

of --yev-, -irer-, -reK-.

weak forms

also

tcrxi'-co

6. -o-^^

-T^ _0).

Each

Suffix.

There are

of these divisions furnishes a

five (-i, -v,

number

of verbs.

The L class. It is very large. This suffix is used to make verbs from roots and substantives. It is probable that originally the suffix was -71. It is thought that contract verbs in -aw, -eco, It -oco, etc., originally had this t as j or ?/ which was dropped.'' preis thus the chief way of forming denominative verbs and is (a)

"^

eminently a secondary

some

some

intensive,

suffix.^

Some

desiderative.^

of these verbs are causative,

The

special

Greek desidera-

appear in the N. T., but forms like KOTridw are found. In particular, forms in -tfw become so common that ^" they no longer have an intensive, iterative or causative force,

tive in -aelo) does not

1

Blass, Gr. of

'

HlasH, Gr. of

*

lb., p. 41.

N. T. Gk., p. 48. N. T. Gk., p. 40.

The

LXX

^

Gr., p. 122.

MSS. show both

ypr,yopecj

and

arriKoi.

Cf. Helbing,

Gr. a. Sept., p. 82.

N. T. Gk., p. 41. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 34; Hirt,

^

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

«

Cf.

^

Hirt, ib., p. 38.3

»

lb.,

pp. 44.5

ff.

Gk. Gr., pp. 207

iT.

»

f.

On

llio

llaiulb. etc., p. .380. Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 440.

whole subject of contract verbs see Jann., Hist. '»

Jann.,

ib., p.

222.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

352

but are used side by side with the older form, as /SaTrroj, jSaTrrtfco; In all the -fco forms the t has united with a palatal (guttural) or lingual (dental), a matter determined by the aorist or future. So 4)v\aa-ao: is from (j)v\a.K-jo:, ^pdfco from 4>pa8joj. Other familiar combinations are i and X, as l3a\-ja) = ^aK\oj, t with V by transposition, as 4)a.v-jw = cl)aivco, i with p hkewise, as palvio, pavTi^oi, etc.

ap-joj

= aLpcio.

In

and

Kaioj

In the N. T. verbs in

/cXatw

v has dropped between a and t. have -dm, -dpa in the first aorist

the

-aipo}, -alpco

shown under the aorist tense (d). 'A/i^tdfco (Lu, an example of a new present for a.4>Lkvvvp.L. Cf. also aTTOKTtvudvTojv (Mt. 10 28) in some MSS. for the older aTOKrelvu, active as already

12

28)

:

is

:

See Blass^ for the variations in the MSS. at many places in the N. T. with this word. So eKxvwca (Mt. 26 28, etc.)

-vvui, -pjcjo.

:

MSS.

Mt. 9 17 we have €/cxetrat from kxeco and in Rev. 16 1 kxeare^ in some MSS. The V class is also well represented in the N. T. with the(iS) matic stems. It takes various forms. There is the v alone, as KdfjL-vo:, -av as ajxapr-avui -ve as a4>-LK-veo-jjLaL. Sometimes the p is in the best

for kxeco.

Only

in

:

:

,

repeated in the root, as Xa^lSaPCjO (Xa/3), fxapdapa: (fxad), ruTxdj^co (tvx). In the KOLPT] (so and N. T.) this inserted p (n) is retained in the aorist and future of \afxj3ava} {e\r]fj.
LXX

to literary Attic. (7)

The

briick'*

So the papyri.

commonly

It is

class.

(TK

Monro ^

calls attention to

with the

suffix -aKe, -ctko.

out reduplication, as

the iterative idea

The verbs with

/So-o-koj,

reduplication as yL(y)pw-aKw, jra-axco

Reduplication

thematic) like (TK

8'L-8o}-fj.i.

but Del-

The

cr/c

common in Homer may be either with-

tXd-o-Ko/xat, 4)a-aKoo,

(for 8L-8ax-(TK(jS)

yap.-iaKco,

,

or with

p.L-ij.pi]-aKoi,

yr]pa-(JKco,

evp-laKoi,

thus a feature with root-verbs (nonand thematic like yl(y)po-naL as well as is

For reduplication in the aorist and the perfect some of these ctk verbs suits well the

class.

see (h).

Bp-q-aKw, 5t-5d-o-Kco

Cf. ape-aKoo,

(for irad-aKcS).

fiedv-aKO).

the

called inceptive,^

considers these verbs originally terminative in idea, while

iterative idea of

reduplication. (5)

The

T class.

verbs), though

It

some

not a very numerous one (about 18

common.

The verb has

N.T. Gk.,p.41. The LXX has these new presents. Thack., p.225. The LXX MSS. illustrate most of these peeuUarities of verbs

1

Gr. of

2

Blass, ib.

in the present tense.

Man.

of

Cf. Helbing, Or. d. Sept., pp. 82-84.

Comp.

3

Giles,

*

Grundr., IV, p. 59. Horn. Gr., p. 34.

«

is

of the verbs are

Philol., p. 436.

Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, § 669.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA) always a labial stem in

as in koKv-k-toi,

j3

possible that (e)

The

ttt

as in

may

tvtt-toj,

or

(f>

as in

represent an original x/

Cf.

6 class.

The

like clt-tw, /3d7r-Tco, tvtt-to).

tv

root

jSaTr-rco.

(cf.

353

may end

It is

even

iota class).

aKrj-da), ea-doo, Kvrj-Oo), vrj-doj

in the present.

The modern Greek has developed many new presents on the basis of the aorist or the perfect (Thmnb, Handb., p. 143). The origin of this (/) The Future Tense (6 fieWojv ;)^poV 09) tense has given rise to much discussion and some confusion. .

Vincent and Dickson^ even say that the first aorist is derived from the a future! Like the other tenses there has been a development along several lines. No general remark can be made As already remarked, the future that will cover all the facts. tense is fundamentally aoristic or punctiliar in idea and not durative or linear. The linear idea can be accented by the periphrastic form, as eaeade XoKovvres (1 Cor. 14:9). Cf. also Mt. 24:9; Lu. 1:20; 5 10; Mk. 13:25. But as a rule no such distinction is drawn. The truth is that the future tense is a late development :

In the Sanskrit

in language.

it is

practically confined to the in-

and the participle, as in the Greek to the indicative, infinitive and participle (optative only in indirect discourse, and rarely then, not at all in N. T.). And in the Rigveda the sya form occurs only some seventeen times.- The Teutonic tongues have no future form at all apart from the periphrastic, which existed in the Sanskrit also.^ In the modern Greek again the future as a distinct form has practically vanished and instead there occurs da and the subjunctive or deXoo and the remnant of the indicative

finitive, like

certain

our English "shall" or "will."^

how

far the old

Giles^ thinks

it

un-

Indo-Germanic peoples had developed a

future.

Probably the

earliest use of the future

vives in most languages.

respond

and yet

So Jesus used

2 3 *

^

inra-yoi

it

sur-

disciples

This usage belongs to the realm

throws light on the origin of the future tense.

(Jo. 14

:

3)

the present and future side

Handb. of Mod. Gk., p. 82. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 401. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 446; Whitney, Sans.

Thumb, Man. of

The other

oKLehnv (Jo. 21:3).

tpxcixeda Kal qixeh avv aoi.

of syntax

»

did,

still

a vivid, lively

So we say "I go a-fishing" as

sense projected into the future.

Simon Peter

was one that

It is just the present in

llandb., pp. 161 (k)in]). Philol., p.

Futures" see Hadley, Ess.

f.,

333

side {epxo-

f.

173.

On

446.

Phil,

Gr., p.

by

and

the whole subject of "Indo-European

Crit., pp.

184

ff.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

354

NEW TESTAMENT

We have seen already that a number of and presents hke (ji-q-iii had identically the same root and with no original distinction. That is, the durative idea was not distinguished from the aoristic or punctiliar. It is not strange, therefore, to see a number of these roots with primary endings (cf subj. and opt. aorists) used as futures without any tense-suffix at all. Some were originally either present or future in sense (cf. epxonaL above), others came to be used only as future. These Kal irapa\ritx\poiJLaL).

fjLai

aorists

appear in Homer naturally, as ^lofxaL, Uonai, dfiL, TviofiaL, etc.^ N. T. (payo/jLaL. It is possible that those with variable vowel like UofxaL may really be the same form as the Homeric subjunctive (like loiJiev as opposed to lfxeu)r Ilto/zat is common in Attic (N. T.) and is from aorist root {e-irL-ov). The form 4)ay ofxaL (LXX and N. T.) is analogous (aorist, e(l)ayop). The Attic used x^^ as future also, but LXX and N. T. have x^co (Blass, Gr. of N. T. ver])s

Cf.

GL,

LXX

Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 88, for

p. 42).

same

tions to the

The

effect.

LXX

has the classic

illustra-

Uoixat.;

not in

the N. T. (Thackeray, p. 231). It used to be said that the a future was merely a variation of the Sanskrit sya, the y or j sound disappearing in the Greek. This gave a simple explanation of the a futures. But a rival the-

ory has been advanced which derives the a future from the oThe frequency of the aorist subjunctive in Homer with

aorist.^

K€ (oLp) in

principal clauses

much

like the future indicative in Attic,

and the absence of a future passive, not to say future optative, in Homer give some colour to this contention.'* Thus del^o^ and the Latin dixo would be identical in form and meaning.^ But Brugmann'' has perhaps solved the problem by the suggestion that both explanations are true. Thus ypa\pco he derives from the aorist subjunctive ypa^oi, a mixed tense with a double origin.

The

use of -aio/e in the Doric lends weight to the derivation of these verbs at least from the sya (Sanskrit) type.^ Hirt^ regards aeo/e (Doric) as a combination of the
formation.

This Doric future therefore

1

Sterrett, Horn.

2

Giles,

Man.,

II.,

may

it

a

new Greek

be as old as any,

N. 38.

p. 447.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 184;

Riem. and Goelzer,

Phonct., p. 438. '

lb., p. 446.

«

Sterrett, Horn.

«

Griech. Gr., p. 320.

»

lb., p.

105

Cf. also Hirt,

f.

II.,

Handb.

etc., p.

N. 27. This position

401

f. 6

is

Giles,

Man.,

accepted by K.-Bl., 8

Handb.

p. 446.

II, p. 105. etc., p.

403

f.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (thMa)

355

not the oldest suffix, in fact the really distinctively future In the N. T. this Doric form survives in ireaoviiaL^ (Mt. 10 29). Teco has pemca (Jo. 7: 38), /cXalco has KKavaco (Lu. 6 25), while 4>€uy(io has 4>ev^oiJLaL (Jo. 10 5). The other forms common if

suffix.

:

:

:

have no future in the N. T, This mixed ^ origin of the future (partly aorist subj., partly Indo-Germ. sya) shows itself So Moulton notes rpod^co (Mk. in the Aktionsart of the tense. Cf. 14 28) as durative, but d^et (1 Th. 4 14) as aoristic. Thumb, Handb., p. 123. Thus we may gain further light ^ on the Ionic-Attic future of verbs in -t^co. It is like the Doric -aeo/e. So we have -taeoo, dropping 0" we get -teco = -tw. These verbs in -ifco are very common in the later Greek. In the N. T. the usage varies between this form of the future and the aoristic form in -ao/e. The LXX, like the in Attic

:

:

Ptolemaic papyri (Thackeray,

Elsewhere

quotations.

W.

H.'*

has usually

p. 228),

gular and so neroiKLw (Ac. 7:43)

and

-tco in first sin-

(Ro. 10

7rapop7tai

prefer the forms in

-io-co,

:

both

19),

and Blass^

thinks that in the original passages of the N. T. the -laco forms are genuine.

So the forms

the N. T. (Lu. 3

(Mt. 3 -icret,

the

:

12)

MSS. vary between The

4.

:

pLovatv,

The in the

Lu.

2

»

W.

KoXeaco, reXkaoj

(Mt. 21 41), though :

this ireffovnai is possibly

Henry (Comp. Gr.

*

So

and

in

Some MSS. read

Koniaerai.

All editors^ accept Koptttade in 1 Pet.

13.^

active plural

N. T. in

And

affix of

KOfiLelTaL

H.^" print as -lomi always (as pana-

1 :48)

which always retain the dTroXci

is

not from

common

Trer-o-oO/xat,

<x.

in the

^^

So even

LXX

but a change of

and

t to


107; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 322; Hirt. Handb., p. 404.

K.-Bl., II, p.

Cf.

:

and haKadapiel and -lati,
:

save in yvojpiaovaiv (Col. 4:9). syncopated futures" from the dropping of a do not survive

dTToXeo-o) *

in 2 Pet. 2

cK^opLtt

Cf. Blass.''

-tcrei.

uniform in

in -laei (like jSaTTiaeL) are

save Kadapiei (Hel). 9

16)

MSS. vary between

xpovid and

KonLovfjLevoL

5

.^

:

of

Gk. and

Lat., p. IIG) considers the

the fviture twice over, as

Moulton, Prol., p. 149. Notes on Orth., p. 163. Cf. Mayser, Gr., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 42.

*

lb.

But Blass

^

Ib.

See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 84

(ib.)

Doric future to be the

aecro, aeo.

prefers e77ieT (Jas. 4 f.,

:

»

Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. lOG

f.

p. 35G.

8).

87

f.,

for the

LXX

exx. of verbs

in -foj. 8

Ib.

Notes on Orth., p. 163. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., »

p. 41

f.

10

Ib.

"

Giles,

Brug. (Griech. Gr.,

a new formation after the aor. subj. suffix. Gr. d. Sept., p. 86; Thack., Gr., p. 230.

The

LXX

Man.,

p.

446

f.

p. 321) considers this

keeps

a.

Cf. Helbing,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

356

quoted once in the N. T. (1 Cor. 1 19). However, the middle the N. T. form (Lu. 5 37) like awoOavovnaL. 'EXai'i'co has no future in the N. T. The N. T., like the LXX, has a future form d^eXw (Rev. 22 19) from the aorist elXov of alpkoj. The liquid verbs in X, v, p present few problems. They belong to the aorist subjunctive type of formation.^ Here again we have syncopation of the a. Verbs like /SdXXco (|3aXco), fxhoo (fJLepoi), a'ipca (dpoi) form the future with the variable vowel o/e added to the stem without a in the N. T. as in the earlier Greek. Blass^ has shown that in the N. T. the future active has largely displaced the future middle with verbs that were defective in the active voice. These futures are as follows: anapr-qaw (Mt. 18 21), kTvavTr)a<^ (Mk. 14 13), dpTrdaw (Jo. 10 28), ^U-^oi (Ac. 28 26), yeXaaco (Lu. 6 21), 5tcb|co (Mt. 23 34), KXavaoo (Lu. 6 25), /cpd^w (Lu. 19 :40 N*BL), Tra^^w (Mk. 10: 34), j6e^(rco (Jo. 7 38), awovdaaoi We see this tendency al(2 Pet. 1 15), GvvavTj^aw (Lu. 22 10). is

:

cnroXovfxai, is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ready in the

LXX

(Thackeray, Gr.,

231

p.

hand the future middle alone occurs with Cor. 4: 19),

Tj'coaoMdt (1

Mt. 10

(Doric,

ireaovixaL

15), 4)tv^oixai (Jo.

10

:

(Ac. 21

:

22, chiefly in

8

24),

:

(Mt. 10:41), o^o/xat (Mt. 24: 30), Trlo^at (Mk. 10 39), 4>ayofjLaL (Lu. 14

29),

:

:

XaprjaofxaL (Lu. 1

5).

:

14) Blass^ regards as

compared with the future 5 25) and aaovaofxai the Acts) are found, and ^rjaco (Jo. 5 25)

from the present. :

the other

\y]ix^op.aL

Attic future from the aorist XCLLpTjao)

On

f.).

airodavovixaL (Jo.

as

{hxo-p-qv)

Both

d/couaco (Jo.

:

:

and ^riaoixai (Jo. 11 25). The so-called second future passive :

nai

above

as seen in the case of x^piycro-

really just the middle ending with a put to the aorist

is

There is no difference in form or sense between and (XTaK-T]-(To-p.ai save the -17- which was really a part the active stem of these verbs.^ The point is that fundamentally

active stem. fi-q-ao-jxai

of

these so-called second future passives are really future middles

corresponding to active aorists like the future middles and presents above

by the (i)ri(7a.

{\i]p.'\pop.aL,

This point

for instance).

is

made

clearer

fact that the Doric ^ used only active endings like avaypa-

(not -erat)

.

Homer,

besides, only has one second future pas-

sive (pLyrjaoiML, really middle)

and none

in -drja-.^

Instead he uses

the middle future as later Greek continued to do with verbs like TifjLrj(roiJiaL.

both

this

Cf.

yevrjao/jLaL

from

Some verbs indeed used

e-yev-ofxrjv.

second future passive like

(pavrjaojjLaL

(Mt. 24

:

30)

which

Man., pp. 410, 427.

1

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 321.

*

Giles,

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 42.

^

ib., p. 447.

3

lb., p. 43.

6

K.-Bl., II, p. 111.

.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

357

punctiliar and ^awO/xat (1 Pet. 4 18) which may be durative Hke the Attic as Moulton^ argues. So iravaovTai (1 Cor. 13:8) and e-iravaTari<x€TaL (Lu. 10:6). Cf. also avoiyrjaoiJLaL (Mt. 7:7), apTrajT] aopLat (1 Th. 4 30), VTroTayr]arofj.at 17), 4>avr]aoixai. (Mt. 24 14, see 12), xc^pWo/jlcll (Lu. 1 (1 Cor. 15:28), 4/vyriaop.ai. (Mt. 24 is

:

:

:

:

:

above)

The Greek

first

upon the distinctively ^ unknown to Homer, as stated above, passive, is aorist in origin and idea.

future passive so-called

aorist in -dr]-.

It is

and, like the second aorist

is

built

Here again the Doric used the active endings^ like awaxQwovvTi.. This later form in -^770— grew continually in usage over the merely middle form

like

TL/irjaoiJiaL.

But the passive future did not always

have the passive sense, as has been shown in the case of crofiaL

(Mt. 8

:

11), aTVOKpidriaoixaL

also appears in Lu. 11

:

9

f.

in

the N.

(not

jxeixvy^aoixat)

:

37), etc.*

some MSS.

usual forms in the N. T. take fxv-qadrjao^iaL

(Mt. 25

and

'

avaKXidi)-

h.voLx^i](Jop.ai

As an example

yvcoadrjaoixaL (1

aradrjaoixaL

Cor. 14

(not

earrj^o:)

:

7).

of the

Only

appear in

T.=^

For a periphrastic future passive expressing continuance see eaeade ixiaoviiivoL (Mt. 10 22).^ This is naturally not a very common idiom for this tense, though the active periphrastic future is less infrequent as already shown. :

{g)

The Perfect Tenses

{reXeLoi 'y^povoi).

The Name. It does fairly well if we do not think of time in connection with the tense, a mistake that Clyde makes.'' The completed state does not of itself have reference to present time. That comes later and by usage in the indicative alone in contrast to past and future. Originally the perfect was merely an in1.

tensive or iterative tense like the repetition of the aoristic present.^

The Greek perfect is an inheritance 2. The Original Perfect. from the Indo-Germanic original and in its oldest form had no reduplication, but merely a vowel-change in the singular.^ Indeed olba (Sanskrit veda, Latin vidi, English wot) has never had reduplication.^'^ It illustrates also the ablaut from t5- to ot5- in the singular, se(>n in Sanskrit and Gothic also.^^ Cf. Latin ceyi. Note also Kel-iiaL in the sense of Te-0et-/xat.

1

Pro!., p. 150.

2

Giles,

7

Man., pp. 420, 447.

3

lb., p. 447.

*

See

6

lilass,

6

lb., p. 204.

VI, (r), in this

« »

chapter.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 3G.

Gk. Synt., p. 7L Giles, Man., p. 449. Ilirt,

Ilandb.

'"

Giles,

Man.,

"

Ilirt,

Ilandb.

etc.,

pp. 406, 410.

p. 449. etc., p.

410.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

358

But the vowel-change

NEW TESTAMENT

characteristic of the original perfects

is

seen in other verbs which did use reduplication. Reduplication will receive separate treatment a little later, as it pertains to the present and aorist tenses also.

It

may

be here remarked that the

reduplicated form of some iterative presents doubtless had some influence in fastening reduplication

the English

"mur-mur" (Greek

upon the

perfect tense.

yoy-yv^co, dp-ap-iaKco),

Note

where the

doubled in the repetition. It was a natural process. these reduplicated forms Avith the mere change in the vowel appear in the N. T. This so-called second perfect, like the second aorist, is a misnomer and is the oldest form.^ In Homer indeed it is the usual form of the perfect.^ These old root-perfects, syllable

is

A number of

old inherited perfect forms according to Brugmann,^ persist in

and are reasonably common in the papyri,"* the inscripand the N. T. They are of two classes: (1) real /xt perfects without any perfect suffix, like earavaL (Ac. 12 14) (2) second perfects in -a, like yeyova, XeXotTra. As N. T. examples may be mentioned aK-qKoa (Ac. 6:11), yeyova (1 Cor. 13 1)), elooda (Lu. 4:16), yky pac^a (Jo. 19:22), oUa (Jo. 10:4), oXcoXa (oltt-, Mt. 10 6), etc. These forms are found in the LXX. Cf. Hel-

the

KOLVT]

tions^

:

;

:

:

bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 103; Thackeray, Gr., p. 252

f.

But the

kolpt]

gave up the shorter (without -a) forms of the plural indicative See this chapter, active perfect of 'iarr}p.L (eara/JLev, earare, taTaaiv) .

IV, {d), 3, for details.

This is a new type created by the Greek lan3. The K Perfect. guage of which no adequate explanation has yet been offered. The Attic inscriptions already had the k form (Meisterhans, p. 189 f.). It

is

apparently at

first in

the singular, as in laTriKa

(pi. ea-Tanev), etc.^

like KetixaL and had a few perfect forms ^ (like TjKaaLv), so by analogy some verbs became the type and analogy did the rest. But Giles ^ ob-

One might think that

just as

t/kco

has a perfect sense

finally K

Homer And then the

serves that the stems of the twelve or fourteen k perfects in all

1

2 3 * ^

«

end

in

a vowel, a liquid or a nasal, not one in

Riem. and Goelzer, Phonct., p. 445. II., N. 43. So 7670^, elcoOa, Gk. Gr., p. 323. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 372 ff. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 159 f. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 412 f. Sterrett, Horn.

LXX

\k\onra,

k.

Tr'tTvoiOa,

etc.

ijKafxev, ^Kare, rjKaffLV OCCUr. The pap. add KaO-rjKvlaS; rjKOTccv, In the Wackern., Theol. Literaturzcit., 1908, p. 38. Cf. Ilclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 103 f.; Thack., Gr., p. 269. The pap. show the perfect forms in the plural. « Man., p. 450. Mayser, p. 372,

'

^Kkvai.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB three k aorists (UcoKa, W-qKa, contra there are

some

'ioLKa, T€TT]Ka,

8opKa,

rJKo)

perfects in

etc.

So that

call for

359

('PIJMA)

explanation.

But per

Homer which have k stems like okafter all analogy may be the true

explanation of the k perfects which came, after Homer's time, to

be the dominant type in Greek. But the -Ka perfects are rare in Homer. The examples are so common (5e5co/ca, etc.), in the kolutj list. Note earrjKa intransiand earaKa transitive. They are made from labials and 4. The Aspirated Perfects. Even in the early palatals (4>, x) and are absent from Homer. classical period they are confined to xeTro/i^a and rerpocfya.^ Homer did use this aspirate in the peculiar middle form like rerpd
as in the classic Greek, as to need no tive

fact that

forms.

K,

X were not distinguished

7,

As a N. T. example

irpoaevrjvoxo.

(Heb. 11

:

17).

in

the middle perfect

of this later aspirated perfect take

Cf. also

e'C\ri4>a,

irkirpaxo., Teraxa..

Middle and Passive Forms. It is only in the active that the perfect used the k or the aspirated form ((/>, x)- We have seen already that in the kocvt] some active perfect forms drop the distinctive endings and we find forms like ecopaKav and ecbpa/ces. Helbing {Gr. d. Sept., pp. 101-103) gives LXX examples of rootperfects like eppwya, k perfects like redeiKa, earrjKa and transitive The middle and passive earaKa, aspirated perfects like Ipprjxa. perfects did use the reduplication, but the endings were added directly to this reduplicated stem as in Xe-Xv-nai. On the history of the ending -/ca see Pfordten, Zur Geschichte des griechischen 5.

Perfectums, 1882, p. 29. 6.

The Decay

of the Perfect

Forms.

In the Sanskrit the per-

fect appears in half the roots of the language,

but in the later tends more and more to be confused with the mere past tenses of the indicative (aorist and imperf.) and grows less

Sanskrit

it

common

also.^

In the Latin, as

the aorist tenses blended.

is

well

known, the perfect and

In vidi and dedi we see preserved''

we see the old aorist. The Greek Byzantine period, shows a great confusion between the perand the aorist, partly due to the Latin influence.'^ Finally

the old perfect and in dixi of the fect

Man.,

p. 451.

1

Giles,

2

Brus-, Gricoh. Gr., p. 325.

»

Sterrett, Honi.

*

Giles,

Man.,

p.

II.,

N. 43.

451.

» « '

Whitney, Suns. Or., pp. 279, 295 f. Giles, Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 451. Moulton, Prol., p. 142.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

360

modern Greek vernacular the

in the

the perfect passive participle like

now made with

is

or with exw

junctive

only

or

Seo-et

(ex<^

K perfect in

and the passive

exco

and a root

14

8

:

17).

:

This

is

perfect active

participle (exw

Thumb, Handb.,

Cf.

bkaxi).

modern Greek

is evprjKa,

beiikvo)

(ih., p.

much hke

The

p. 161.

"the only certain remCf. exe

148).

Cf. also TreTrwpwfxeprjv exere

18).

save in

lost

is

The

similar to the third singular aorist sub-

nant of the ancient perfect" (Lu.

perfect form

KtKK-qtxkvos.

ttjv

TraprjT-qfxhov

Ate

KapSiav

(Mk,

v/jluiv

the English perfect in reality, not like

the Greek exw and aorist participle (like exw aKovaas).

Sonnen-

Cf.

Grammar, Syntax, 1894, p. 284. The perfect passive in modern Greek vernacular is formed like exco \vdri (-et) or \e\vphos el/jLai.^ But we are in no position to throw stones at the Greeks, for we in English have never had a perfect save the periphrastic form. How far the perfect and the aorist may have become confused in the N. T. in sense is a matter of syntax to be schein, Greek

discussed later.^ 7.

The Perfect in

the perfect

the Subjunctive, Optative,

of the perfect optative occurs

even

Here example

Imperative.

practically^ confined to the indicative.

is

No

The

in the periphrastic form.

subjunctive perfect, except the form

appears only in the periphrastic conjugation, of which a few examples remain.

et5co (elSrjTe,

So the active, as TewoiriKcos and the passive, as ooaiv fi

(2 Cor. 1:9),

KeKXriphos (Lu. 14

(Jas. 5

:

1

Jo. 5

13),

:

15), TrcTrot^ores Cofxev

TeTeXecwpevoL (Jo. 17

:

23), ^

So also Jo. 17 19, 1 Cor. 1 10, etc. The imperative makes a little better showing. We still have tare (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17 all possible indicatives), Tre^t^'^^ao (Mk. 4 39) and eppcoade (Ac. 15 29). The periphrastic imperative perfect is also found as earcoaav :

9), ^ ireirXTjpiOfjLevr] (Jo.

16

:

24).

:

:

:

:

:

irepLe^oicTjjikvaL

marked

12

(Lu.

:

:

In simple truth, as previously re-

35).

proof in Prof. Harry's articles), the perfect subjunctive, optative and imperative never had any considerable

vogue

(see

in Greek, not as

fect subjunctive active it is

8.

'

much is

as in Sanskrit.

more common than

The Perfect Indicative.

Thumb., Handb.,

p. 165.

It

is

to the indicative that

Certainly the aorists in -Ka are very

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

jx

200

f.

Prof. Sonnenschein in CI. Rev., 1906, *

Homer

the per-

in later Greek,

but

rare in Homer.^

the mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb., pp. 140, 146 2 Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 143 f. '

In

Sterrett,

Hom.

II.,

N. 43.

we turn

common

in

ff.).

Cf discussion between Prof. Harry and and La Roche, Beitr. z. griech. Gr., 1893. .

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tiIMa) development

for the real

361

Here the perfect was

of the perfect.

for

long very frequent indeed, and the time element comes in also. The ancients did not agree in the names for the three tenses of per-

The

fect action in the indicative.

Stoics^ called the present perfect

cvvTeKLKos (or reXetos) xpovo% hearoos, the past perfect crvPTeXtKos (re-

the future perfect avvreXiKos

Xetos) xpovos Trapcoxw^i'os,

IxtWwv.

Sometimes the present perfect was

(reXetos) xpovo's

called merely 6 irapa-

Kdnevos xpovos, the past perfect 6 virepawTikiKb'i xpovos,

and the future

The name The tense occurs in the N. T. have the augment (H. Scott). Thus reOene-

perfect 6 net 6\iyov /jieWcov xpovos {futurum exadwri).

plu-perfect

is

not a good one.

with 22 verbs and 15 XtcoTo (Mt. 7 25) and eX^XWet :

and

xepieSeSero (Jo. 11

44).

:

(Jo.

6

:

Cf. elxov

17),

but

k^t^\y]To (Lu. 16

airoKeLjjikvrjv

(Lu. 19

:

:

20)

20) in the

modern Greek. In the N. T. the past perfect is not very was it ever as abundant as in the Latin.^ It goes down as a distinct form with the present perfect in modern Greek. Hirt^ calls attention to the fact that Homer knows the past perfect only in the dual and the plural, not the singular, and that the light of

frequent, nor

singular ending

-r? is

a

new

formation, a contraction of -ea into

In the N. T., however, only

—q.

-eiv is used.

It is

not certain

whether the past perfect is an original Indo-Germanic form. The future perfect was always a very rare tense with only two active forms of any frequency, eo-riy^co and redv-q^u. The middle and passive could make a better showing. In Heb. 8:11 eldqaovcnv is probably future active (from LXX),* and in Lu. 19:40 some MSS., but not i^BL (rejected by W.H.), give KeKpa^opraL (cf. LXX). In Heb. 2 13 (another quotation from the LXX) we .have the periphrastic form eaonai, TeiroLdcos. The future perfect passive occurs in the N. T. only in the periphrastic form in such examples as ecrat bebep-kvov (Mt. 16 19), eaTai. \e\vp.kva (Mt. 18 18), ecrovTac hianefxepKTpkvoL (Lu. 12 52). Cf. ecTTj Kar[a]Te0et/x[€]i'o(s) B.G.U. 596 (a.d. 84). In the nature of the case the future perfect would not often be needed. This 'periphrastic future perfect is found as early as Homer.^ The papyri likewise show some examples.^ :

:

:

:

1

K.-BL,

2

Blass, Gr. of

3

Handb. etc., p. 415 f. So Hirt follows Wackorn.

II, p.

2f.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 201.

Drug,

calls

the past perf. a "neue Bildung."

in seeing a new stem here db-q-. Cf. ib., p. 416. Deut. 8 3 has db-qaav like the aorist t'Lbr)ffa from .\rist. onwards. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 370; Thack., Gr., p. 278. * Sterrett, Hom. II., N. 27. ^ Mayser, Gr. d. griceh. Pap., p. 377. In the Boeotian inscr. the past perf. and the fut. perf. are both absent. *

B

in

:

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

362

The

NEW TESTAMENT

present perfect and the past perfect also have the periphrastic

So we find with comparative indifference^ ecrrti/ So also 30) and in the next verse yeypaTrrai. rjv yey paniJievov (Jo. 19:19) and kireyeypaiTTo (Ac. 17:23). Cf. also Lu. 2 26. The active has some examples also, though not so many, as eo-rcbs eifxi (Ac. 25: 10), and rjaav irpoeojpaKOTes (Ac. 21 29). 9. S in Perfect Middle and Passive and Aorist Passive. It may be due to a variety of causes. Some of these verbs had an original conjugation.

yeypanneva (Jo. 20

:

:

:

(T

Hence

in the present stem, like TeXe(a-)w, dKov(a)o}.

Others are dental stems

etc.^

(rjKovadrjv) ,

riKovcFixaL

TereXeafxaL,

like irdd-w,

-wk-

stems which in Attic (apparently analogical) changed to a, as (palpoo, Tre^acr/xat, but in the N. T. this V assimilates to the p, as in k^r]paiJ.p.kvos (Mk. 1 1 20) from ^rjpalvo:, Then again some verbs take Htp.Laixpkvos (Tit. 1 15) from jutalrco. the a by analogy merely, as in the case of eyvcoaixai, eyvcoaOrjv 12), KkXecapLaL (Lu. 11:7), UXovapaL (Heb. 10 23). (1 Cor. 13 Others again are

Keiaixai.

v

:

:

:

(h)

many

{SiirXaaiacrno'; or avahiirXcocri.'^).

Now

Primitive.

1.

to

:

Reduplication

this primitive repetition of the root belongs

much

languages and has a

Hence

perfect tense.

it calls

this repetition or intensifying of a

nouns or the conjugation

of

wider range than merely the

for separate treatment.

It is older,

word, than either the inflection

Root reduplication

of verbs.^

ex-

isted in the parent language.^

Both Nouns and

2.

Among nouns note ay-coyos, ^apwas among verbs that reduplication

Ve7-bs.

But

etc.

jSapos, /Se-zSr/Xos,

it

found its chief development.^ It is in the aorist, the present 3. In Three Tenses in Verbs. and the perfect. This is precisely the case with the Sanskrit,

where very many aorists, some presents and nearly all perfects have reduplication.^ In Horner^ the reduplication of the second 1

Blass, Gr. of

out

how

and

opt. middle

N. T. Gk.,

in prehistoric

and

p.

202

f.

Bnig. (Griech. Gr.,

p.

330

f.)

points

times the periphrastic form alone existed in the subj.

passive, as indeed

was

practically true always for

all

the voices. 2

3

Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 100

lb., p. 326.

LXX

illustr. of

Brug.,

both a and

Comp.

Reduplication.

f.;

Thack., pp. 219

ff.,

for

v (n).

See note there for books on Lautensach, Gr. Stud. (1899).

Gr. (transl.), vol. IV, p. 10.

Add

Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 8.

4

lb., p. 11.

5

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 176.

Fritzsche (Ques. de redupl. graeca; Curtius,

Stud, zu griech. and lat. Gr., pp. 279 ff.) considers the doubling of the syllable (iteration) the origin of all redupUcation like Ap-ap-iaKw, fii-fia-^o:. 6

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 222.

^

Sterrett,

Hom.

II.,

N. 32.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) aoriet is

much more

frequent than in later Greek, but forms like

T]yayov, ^vejKov, dirov, persist in

Of.

ally.

kkpa^a

(like

5t-5co/ii,

yi-yvo-ixai,

classes

voices

presents,

of

It is

and persons. is

(like etc.).

is, of course, that in not like augment, mode-sign or peran integral part of the tense in all modes,

it is

And

yet

it

is

just in the perfect that re-

In the vernacular

duplication disappears in the later Greek. the extinction

the root class

viz.

the

reduplication in Greek

the perfect tense, where sonal endings.

N. T. Greek and the kolvt] gener21. The Greek present shows

thematic presents inceptive verbs (like yc-yvco-aKo:,

etc.),

The most common

:

etc.),

t-arrjui,

t-ri-in,

ttI-tto),

24

Ac.

in

in three

reduplication

363

nearly complete.^

occur in modern Greek.

Even

presents^ like

yvojaKcxi

Dieterich^ gives numerous examples of

dropped reduplication in inscriptions and papyri. It is absent in the modern Greek vernacular, even in the participle.* 4. Three Methods in Reduplication. Perhaps the oldest is the doubling of the whole syllable, chiefly in presents and aorists, like yoy-yv^w, ap-apiaKco, i]y-ay-ov, etc. This is the oldest form of reduplication^ and is more common in Greek than in Latin.^ The later grammarians called it Attic reduplication because it was less common in their day,^ though, as a matter of fact. Homer used it much more than did the Attic writers.^ But perfects have this form also, as d/ciy/coa, e\r]\vda, etc. But the reduplication by t is confined to presents like

bi-bwixi,

And

yi-yvoy.aL, yL-yvicaKoi, etc.

most perfects form the reduplication with

and the repetition of the first letter of the verb as \k-\vKa. But Homer had irkindov and other such aorists. ^1-kov is really an example of such an aorist. 5.

Reduplication in the Perfect.

follows in the main.

e\-r]\v6a, dTroXcoXa, etc., like

*

we

e

like

probably as

is

perfects without

The doubling

a.K-r}Koa,

k-ypij-yop-a,

the present and aorist usage.^"

with repetition of the

See Jann., Hist. Gr., p. 190

some

see in oUa.

whole syllable was the next step

comes the

history

Originally there were

redupHcation,^ a remnant of which of the

The

e

for exx. like traKTo

f.,

even

Then

a consonant-

initial letter of

in Polyb.,

and

later

ypaufxtuos, etc.

Cf.

Thumb, Handb.,

2

lb.

3

Unters.

<

Thumb,

6

Hirt,

9

Cf. BruR.,

etc., p.

Haridb., p. 148

Handb.

p.

148

f.

215.

etc., p.

f.

369.

Comp. Gr.

(transl.),

Comp.

Philol., p. 409.

8

Giles,

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 190.

«

Sterrett, Horn.

IV, p. 384.

II.,

Cf. also Hirt,

N. 32.

Handb.

etc.

p. 407; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 259. ^^

lb.,

Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 70-82, treats together augment and redu-

plication, not a very satisfactory

method.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

364

stem like

The

But here some

Xe-XotTra.

NEW TESTAMENT

further modifications crept in.

we have

aspirates did not repeat, but

rk-deLKa. Those with abut instead used the rough breathing as 'icxT-qKa or the smooth hke 'i-axn'^o.- This was all for euphony. But forms like e-crxijKa, 'i-airaanai fall under another line also, for, if the verb begins with a double consonant, the consonant need not be used. So e-yvojKa, but ^e-^XrjKa, yk-ypa4>a.. The Cretan dialect has indeed t'YpaTTaL = yk-ypaivTaL} So far the N. T. phenomena are in harmony with the general Greek history, as indeed is the case with the papyri^ and the inscriptions.^ In Lu. 1 27 and 2 5, we have Just as a verbs did not repeat, e-ixvr](jTtvixk.vri, not juejuv. (cf jxeiiv^iiaC) so with p verbs sometimes. So epLii/jihoL (Mt. 9: 36), eppaxrde (Ac. 15 29), etc. But in Rev. 19 13 W. H. read pepavnaixhov, though Hort^ advocates pepa/ipievov. D has pepiixjikvoi in Mt. 9 36 above. This reduplication of initial p is contrary to Attic rule. For the

did not repeat

it,

:

.

:

.

:

:

:

LXX see Thackeray,

204

Gr., p.

f.

This use of

e

begins to spread

and is seen in LXX MSS., as in A kirkypaivTo (Deut. 9 10). For similar forms in Ionic and late writers see WinerSchmiedel.^ Once more several verbs that begin with a liquid have et as the reduplication in the Attic and Ionic, though not in all dialects. Perhaps euphony and analogy entered to some extent in the case of ei-Krj4>a (Kaix^avcS) etprjKa (cf. eppr]dr]v). Note also e'lXrjxa and ti'Xoxa. With verbs beginning with a vowel there was sometimes the doubling of the syllable as aKrjKoa, or the mere in the

KOLvrj

:

,

lengthening of the vowel as

riKovaixai,

with contraction as

or uncontracted as

In Jo. 3

Cf. dwda.

Attic

and

eiX/cco/xews

Paul's Epistles (1

ddi.ap.kvos,

21 (so

:

1 Pet.

in Lu. 16

Cor. 9

:

:

20.

4

or the addition of

In Col. 2

:

1

alone e'tKco).

3)

reduplication (like do^da) as ewpa/ca (Jo.

Additional Note.

e

(from

we have eipyaafxai as In opaco we have ibpaKa

:

and sometimes a

1)

eot/ca

1

:

18).

in in

sort of double

So Attic.

See

the form eopaKav calls for notice

both for its reduplication and its ending (cf. echpaKav Lu. 9:36). So also aveojyev (1 Cor. 16 9; }< i]veo:y6)s, Jo. 1 52) and avewyfievi^s (2 Cor. 2 12). Indeed in this last verb the preposition may re:

:

:

ceive additional reduplication (treble therefore), as in rjveuynevrj

(Rev. five times). a.ii(j)LkvvvpLi.

But

Handb.

See also

r]p4)Le(Tfihov

as a rule with

(Mt. 11:8; Lu. 7 25) from in the N. T. re:

compound verbs

408.

1

Hirt,

2

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 338 ff. Nachm., p. 150 f.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 171. Notes on Orth., p. 170. P. 103. Cf. also K.-Bl., II, p. 23, and Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

'

* 5

etc., p.

p. 38.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ("PHMa)

365

duplication comes only between the prepositions and the verb.

Sometimes the reduplication is not used, as in evapearriKevat (Heb., 11 5), but J
Augment

(i)

(av^r]ai
The Origin of Augment. It has never been explained. It is generally conceded to be an independent word, an adverb, added to the verb, which is an enclitic after the augment like e-XtTre.^ We have mere conjectures for the origin of the adverb, possibly a 1.

locative of the pronoun-stem. 2.

W^here Found.

It is

In Sanskrit it is a. found in Sanskrit, Iranian, Armenian

and Greek, and only in the past tenses of the indicative. But in Mt. 12 20 we actually have /cared^et (fut. ind. of KaTayvvpLi), and :

in Jo. 19

31 KareayojaLv (aor. pass, subj.), probably to distinguish

:

these forms from Karayoj.

So Winer-Schmiedel, p. 98. This in later Greek (Hatzidakis, Einl., Augment persists in modern Greek (Thumb, p. 117). p. 64). 3. The Purpose of Augment. It denotes past time. The secondary endings do that also and with sufficient clearness at first. More than half of the past tenses of the Sanskrit do not have the augment.^ In Homer some verbs like opdco never had augment, "false

augment"

and often mer.

He

is

very

common

for metrical reasons the

used

much freedom

augment

ably right in the opinion that this freedom fulness of the verb-endings.

prose before

it

not found in Ho-

is

in the matter.^ is

Jannaris^

is

prob-

due to the original

Augment won a

firm foothold in

did in poetry,'' but never was every^vhere essential.

It varied greatly in its history as will

The Syllabic Augment

be shown.

Its use with the past tenses of the indicative was not exactly uniform, being less constant with the past perfect than with the aorist and imperfect. 4.

The

syllabic

augment occurs

due to original digamma 1

Moulton

(au^rjaLs o-uXXa/Su-ij),

(CI.

F,

also with

some

a in the anlaut.

Rev., Feb., 1901,

initial

So

e'laaeu

vowel verbs (Ac. 28 4),

p. 30) cites airaiTTjaOai, eroiixaKafxtv

:

from the

pap. 2

it is 3 *

Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, p. 25. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1S5) thinks an archaic form of the imperf. of dni (e, ev). » iii^t_ qj^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 221. c,r., p. 185. « Brug., Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, Sterrctt, Ilom. XL, N. 30 f. p. 32. Brug.,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

366

(Mt. 2:2),

(Mt. 2:8), e'CXaro (2 Th. 2 13), etc. 200 f. In the N. T. it is absent from the past perfect more frequently than it is present, as is true of the elSofiev

elirev

:

Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p.

papyri^ and late Greek generally.^

(Mt. 7: 25),

(Mk. 15

TreiroLTjKeKjav

e\r]\WeL (Jo. 6

:

17), etc.

On

:

So, for instance, re^e^ueXicoro

7), TrapaoeSoiKeiaap

the other hand the

(Mk. 15 10), augment does :

appear in such examples as 16

:

20), kyeyovei (Jo.

6

:

17),

was only

eTreToidet (Lu. 11:22), k^ejSXriTo (Lu. aweTkdavTO (Jo. 9 22), TrepLeSkdero (Jo. :

both augment and reduplication appeared. The kolvyi strove to destroy the distinction between reduplication and augment so that ultimately reduplication vanished (Thumb, Hellenismus, p. 170). But first the augment vanished in the past perfect. The Attic sometimes had earrjKeLv (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 100). Hort (Notes on Orthography, p. 162) contends for larriKeLv uniformly in the N. T. as more than mere itacism for elarTjKeLv, for even B has t five times in spite of its fondness for et. So W. H. uniformly, as Rev. 7: 11 and even in Jo. 1 35 and Lu. 23 49. Cf. similar itacism between eUop and 'IBov in the MSS. (Hort, Notes on Orthography, p. 162). On augment in the LXX see Conybeare and Stock, Sel. from 11: 44), etc.

It

in the past perfect that

:

LXX,

pp. 36

ff.;

:

Swete, Intr.

to

0. T., p. 305; Thackeray, Gr.,

Syllabic augment was much more pp. 195 ff. the aorist and imperfect than the temporal. 5.

The Temporal Augment

(av^-rjcns

xpovlkt]).

tenacious with

The

simplicity of

the syllabic and the resulting confusion of the temporal had un-

doubtedly something to do with the non-use of the temporal augment in many cases.^ The kolvy] shows this tendency.^ Even the Attic was not uniform in the use of the temporal augment. At bottom there is no real distinction between the temporal and syllabic augment. Both express time and both make use of the syllabic e. The difference is more one of the eye and ear than of fact.

What we

call

the temporal

augment

is

the result of the con-

vowel of the verb.^ As remarked above, this very confusion of result, difficult to keep clear as the vowel-sounds tended to blend more and more, led to the disuse of this e and contraction A^^th initial vowel verbs, especially with diphthongs." Hence in the N. T. we meet such examples as the traction of this

e

with the

initial

2 w.-Sch., p. 99. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 333. See good discussion in Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 186. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 336. ^ jann.. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 185. ' lb., p. 186. Hence in mod. Gk. temporal augment is nearly gone. Already in the the movement toward the loss of the temporal augment is 1

'

LXX

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) Tim.

following: of at, ewaLaxvi'O'n (2

14

:

19),

(Mt.

evdoK-qaa

(Mk. 6:31), SpofjLrjaafxeu

other hand

17

:

1

(Mt.

19

(Ac. 11:29), eWu-

€vcf)paiuoPTo

(Ac. 7:41),

eviropelro

evxaplcrT-qcrev

(Ac. 27:35).^

(Mk. 14

evKaipovi>

12),

:

(Ac. 16:11),

we have

(Mt.

16); of ev, ev\6yr]aeu

:

evpovxi-frav

5),

307

But on the

8 15), 9:3), rjvdoKrfaav (Ro. 15:26); of ot, olKodofxrjdr] (Jo. 2 20), etc., but ccKobbixriaev (Lu. 7 5), etc.; of et, e'l^afxev (Gal. 2 27), SuyelpeTo (Jo. 6 5) just like Attic; of e, dtepprjuvaev (Lu. 24 •qvxop.r]v

-qvpLcrKov

:

55), TpoarjO^avro (Ac.

:

(Ilo.

:

:

:

:

16

18), avedv (Ac.

:

26), acjiWriaau (Ro.

4

7,

:

:

Ps. 32

1); of o, Trpo-

:

(Ac. 2 25; Ps. 16 8), and some MSS. in Lu. 13 13 (auopand Ro. 9: 29 ipjxoLoid'r^iJ.ev); of i, taxvcrep (Lu. 8 43), iKavccaev (2 Cor. 3 6) and ta ro (Lu. 9 11); of oo, (hveo/xaL has no augment, uvrjaaro (Ac. 7: 16), and the same thing is true of chdeco, as dTrcbopwMr?!'

:

:

:

6u}drj)

:

:

:

aaTo (Ac. 7 its

:

always

'Ep7dfo/xat has

27), k^cbaev (Ac. 7 :45).

augment according

to

W. H.

So

rj,

not

ripya^ovTo (Ac. 18

:

€t,

3),

as

but

etxov.

Compound Verbs (TapaavvOeTo) The language varied in the way it regarded compound verbs, though usually a verb derived from a compound is treated as a unit. So Wr}poiiax'n
.

fioKr\(xav, k/jLoaxoT^olrjaav

6), €Trappr](na(TaTO

(Mk.

(Ac. 7:41), evavayrjaa, kTrpo4)r}Tevaev

(Ac. 9

:

27),

kavKOipavTrjaa,

but

7:

evTjyyeXicraTO (Ac.

35) in late Greek and TpoevrjyyeXlaaTo (Gal. 3:8). If the compound embraces a preposition, the augment as in Attic usually

8

:

Some verbs

follows the preposition hke aTr-qvrqaav (Lu. 17: 12).

derived from nouns already

compounded

are

augmented

compounded with a preposition, as dirjKopeL (Mt. 8 tic. As further examples note aTre8r]ixr]aev (Mt. 21

:

like

verbs

15) unlike At-

:

33), kTvedhjxy]aav

(Mt. 13: 17), KaTiqyopouv (Mk. 15 3), erexdprjaav (Lu. 1 1), aire\oydro (Ac. 26:1), uvvqpytt (Jas. 2:22). Cf. Winer-Schmiedcl, But in Mt. 7:22 and 11 13 the Syrian class of MSS. p. 102. have Tvpoec^yiTevaajxtv and -aav. Sometimes the preposition itself is :

:

:

treated as a part of the verb ri(i>i.iv

Bivbov

ek^tTo

(Mk.

1

:

(Mt. 25 (Jo.

when put

34), rivoL^ev (Rev. 6 :

5), kd^Tjro

(Mt. 13

In Mt. 13

4:6).

:

directly to the verb, as

1), h7]VQLytv

:

(Lu. 24

tKadiaev (Jo.

19

15 tKap^tivaav (from

Is.

:

1),

:

:

32),

e/cd-

13),

ka-

6

:

10)

is

Verbs bc^ginning with eu- vary in augmented tenses between ev- and -qv-, but when followed by a vowel, the verb is treated as a compound like ehriyyiKlaaTo above. 7. Double Augment. It is fairly common in the N. T. In the assimilation of

KaTajxboo.

seen (Thack., Gr., pp. 19G, 199 (Mayser, pp. 127, 3:35). »

See W.-Sch.,

i).

100

f.

f.).

Cf. llort,

The pap.

often have

Notes on Orth.,

-eipidT]i>

p. IGi:

f.

for -TipkO-qv

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

368

and elirov the augment is added to the aoristic reBut in ecopccu (Jo. 6 2 in Tischendorf s text, W. H. there is a clear case of double augment like the double

case of riyayov

duphcation. ideoopovv)

:

So also the N. T. regularly ridw-qO-qv (Mt. and even rjdvi^aadr] (Mk. 7 24). Both edvvaro (Mk. 6 5) and rjdvvaTo (Mk. 14 5) appear and the MSS. vary much. This reduplication in icopaKa.

17

16)

:

:

:

:

7]

(analogy to

in the Attic in 300 b.c.i

iideXov) first arises

With

the usual form (Jo. 4: 47), though ep.eX\ov occurs

jueXXco, riij.eX\ov is

also (Jo. 7:39).

N. T. never has

though the always has ?? (Gal. 4:20, rjdeKov) even after the initial e was dropped. 'ATroradlartiixi has always a double augment, one with each preposition. So cnreKaTeaTr] (Mk. 8 25) and cLTreKaTeaTadr] (Mk. 3 5).2 So LXX Text. Rec. has

BouXoyuat in the

it

On

in 2 Jo. 12.

the other hand

:

and

later Greek.^ 'Ai'ot7a;

text."*

:

But

Heb. 12

in

:

has a peculiar history.

on the preposition, as

^voL^ev

(Rev. 6

the verb, as avew^ev (Jo. 9:14),

now a

4

avTLKareaTrjTe

It :

3),

:

Gr., pp.

VIII.

202

For double augment

now now

is

the true

has single augment

double augment of augment on verb and 'Aj/exoAtat, on the other (Ac. 18 14) and avelxecrde

triple

preposition, as rjvewxGwa-v (Mt. 9 30). hand, has only one augment, as ave<jx6p.vv (2 Cor. 11:1).

77,

deXco

:

in the

LXX

see Thackeray,

ff.

The

Infinitive

d'irap€(x<{)aTos

{r\

€"YK\icris).

striking development of the infinitive in the

syntax, and not accidence.^

The most

belongs to Hence a brief discussion will here kolvti

Blass, for instance, in his Grammar of N. T. Greek, has no discussion of the infinitive under "Accidence," nor has Moulton in his Prolegomena. But the infinitive has a very interesting history on its morphological side. suffice.

No

Terminology at

First.

action {nomen actionis).

Not

it was a mere noun of nouns of action developed into infinitives. Brugmann*^ quotes from Plato Ti]v rod deov Soaiv vplv where a noun of action {bbcns) is used with the dative. This is, of course, not an infinitive. The older Sanskrit shows quite a variety of nouns of action used in a "quasi-infinitive sense," ^ governing cases like the verb, but having no tense nor voice. 1.

Originally

all

2. Fixed Case-Forms. The first stage in the development was reached when these nouns of action were regarded as fixed case-

1

Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 169.

"^

So

» ^

inscr.

Letronne, Rec.

II, p.

W.-Sch., p. 103. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 203.

IV, p. 599.

On

463.

*

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 163.

^

Dieterich, Unters., p. 209.

6

Comp. Gr.

(transl.), II, p. 471.

these infs. in posse see Brug.,

Comp.

Gr.,

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (pIIMa)

369

That stage was obtained in the Sanskrit. At first the dawas the most common case so used along with the accusative, genitive, ablative and sometimes the locative. In the later Sanforms. tive

skrit the accusative

Latin supine.^

supplanted the rest {turn or itum).

But the Sanskrit

infinitive,

Cf. the

while governing cases,

never developed tense nor voice, and so remained essentially a substantive. 3. With Voice and Tense. But the second stage appears in the Greek and Latin where it had its most characteristic development.^ The infinitive becomes a real verbal substantive. Here voice and tense are firmly established. But while, by analogy, the Greek infinitive comes to be formed on the various tense and voice stems, that is an after-thought and not an inherent part of the infinitive. There was originally no voice, so that it is even a debatable question if TL/jirj-aai., for instance, and haheri are not formed exactly alike.^ The active and the passive ideas are both capable of development from dvparos Oavfiaaai, 'capable for wondering.'^ The passive infinitive had only sporadic development in single languages.^ The middle is explained in the same way as active and passive. The tense-development is more complete in Greek than in Latin, the future infinitive being peculiar to Greek.

The Latin missed

But here and we are not to think of XDo-at, for instance, as having at bottom more kinship with eXvaa than with Xvais.*^ Indeed the perfect and future infinitives are both very rare in the N. T. as in the kolvt} generally.^ This weakalso the distinctive aorist infinitive.

also analogy has played a large part

ening of the future infinitive AteXXco

have KOLvr] ^

is

general in the kolvtj, even with In Jo. 21 25 late MSS.

as well as in indirect discourse.

:

Indeed, the papyri in the later x^PW'^'- instead of x^PW^i-^show a hybrid infinitive form, a sort of mixture of aorist and

Whitney,

ib., p.

347.

Cf. ger. of Lat.

For

special treatises

on the

inf.

see

Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, pp. 595 ff.; Griech. Gr., p. 359. Cf. also Griinewald, Der freie formelhafte Inf. der Limitation im Griech. (1888); Birkloin, Entwickelungsgesch. dcs substant. Inf. (1888); Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk. (189G); Allen, The Inf. in Polyb. compared with Bibl. Gk. (1907). Brug.,

Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 480 ff., 568 ff.) has a very good sketch of the history of the inf. in Gk. On p. 572 f. he discusses John's use of the inf. with verbs (129 exx.). Cf. Jolly, Gesch. des Inf. im Indog. (1873); Gildersleeve, Contrib. to the Hist, of the Articular Inf. (Transl. Am. Phil. Ass., 1878, A. J. P., vol. Ill, pp. 193 ff.; vol. VIII, pp. .329 ff.; vol. XXVII, p. 105 f.).

Comp. Gr.

2

Brug.,

3

Ilirt,

*

Moulton, Prol., p. 203. Hirt, Handb., p. 431.

6

Ilandb.

(transl.), II, p. 471.

etc., p.

433.

« ^ »

Moulton, Prol., p. 204. Votaw, U.se of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Moulton, Prol., p. 204.

p. 59.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

370

NEW TESTAMENT

future like eTreXemaadai (even in early papyri).^

In the

LXX

we

Macc. 15 7) and eK4)ev^aadaL in 2 Mace. 9 22. In other cases the two are used side by side. It is only in the state of the action that the infinitive has any true tense-action developed save in indirect discourse where the infinitive tense

find Tev^aaOaL (2

:

:

represents the time of the direct discourse. is like

and

a verb in that

it

The

infinitive

thus

expresses action, governs cases, has voice

tense.-

No

4.

Personal Endings.

The

infinitive

never developed per-

The

sonal endings and remained undefined, unlimited.

and the

infinitive

participle are thus both infinitives in this sense, that they

are the unlimited verb so far as personal endings are concerned.

They

are both participles in that they participate in both

The terms have no inherent

and verb.

noun

but serve merely as a convenience.^ In the nature of the case neither can have a subject in any literal sense. But it is to be admitted even here that the line between the finite and the infinite verb is not Cf. the forms

absolute.^


and

(f)epeLv,

distinction,

for instance.

But the

cases used with the infinitive will be discussed in Syntax. 5.

The

Dative and Locative in Form.

continued a

infinitive

substantive after the voice and tense-development.

At first the was observed, but gradually that disapThe Greek infinitives are peared, though the form remained. always either datives or locatives, "dead datives or locatives" usually.^ All infinitives in -at are datives. Thus all those in -rat, Those in -adau alone give -trat, -erat, -fxevaL (Homer), -adai (-^at). any trouble. It is probably a compound (a, 6ai), but its precise origin is not clear.^ The locative is seen in -eiv, and Homeric -yiev, but the origin of -av is again doubtful.'' But no distinction remains between the two cases in actual usage. ^ In Horner^ the dative sense as well as form remain extremely common, as indeed is true of all Greek where the infinitive remains. The very case-idea of the form

common

infinitive of purpose, like riKdov ayopaaai, is

a true dative.

Mt. 2 2.) But the very essence of the infinitive as a complete development is that this dative or locative form could be (Cf.

:

Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., 36 f Cf Hatz., Einl., p. 190.

»

p.

.

p. 38.5.

Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., Feb., 1901,

.

Comp.

Gr. (transl.), IV, p.

2

Brug.,

3

K.-Bl., II, p. 4.

6

Cf. Giles,

7

Hirt, Handb., p. 4.32; Giles,

8

Moulton,

Man.

of

Comp.

Prol., p. 202.

7.

Philol., p.

Man.,

Comp.Gr.

•

Brug.,

5

Clyde, Gk.

469

f.;

(transl.),p.7.

S>Tit., p. 90.

Brug., Grundr.,

II, §

1093. 8.

p. 470. »

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 154.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB used in any case

any other substantive without

like

371

('PIIMa)

inflection,

an

indeclinable substantive in a fixed case-form.

The Presence of

6.

mon and

The point

ther in Syntax.

make a

not

After Homer's day

the Article.

chiefly in the Attic/

but this

a matter to

is

to observe here

substantive of the infinitive.

is

It

])e

it

was com-

treated fur-

that the article did

was that before voice

and tense were used with it. But it is true that even in Homer is more prominent than the substantival. In the vernacular the article was never much used with the infinitive; perhaps for convenience it was not so employed. 7. The Disappearance of the Infinitive. The old forms in -hv and -vai remain longest (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 210, 257). The causes for the disappearance of the infinitive in later Greek till in the modern Greek vernacular it is (outside of the Pontic dialect) dead and gone, lie largely in the region of syntax. The infinitive as a whole disappears before 6tl and Iva (modern Greek va). Farthe verbal aspect

rar^ calls attention to the absence of the infinitive in Arabic.

It

was always a matter of discretion with a Greek writer whether in certain clauses he would use the infinitive or an object-clause (oTt, oTTOJs, 'iva).^ Cf. Latin. The English infinitive has an interesting history also as the mutilated form of the dative of a ge-

rund.* 8. Some N. T. Forms. Not many N. T. forms call for special remark and those have been explained already, such as -otv (Mt. 13 32; Heb. 7 5), T\-elv and even irlv for inelv (Jo. 4: 9). In Lu. :

1

:

79

:

instead of the Attic

ein(l)dvac

eTL<j)rjpaL is

noticeable.

In Ph.

we have ireLvav, not -riv. The Coptic has the infinitive juaaTiyyoLv (cf. W. H. KaTaaKTjvotv, Mt. 13 32; Mk. 4 32, and dTroSeKarolv in Heb. 7:5). In 1 Cor. 11:6 we find both KdpaaBai and ^vpaaOaL. In Mk. 14 71 bixvvvai is the regular -;ut form. In Heb. 4

12

:

:

:

:

11:5 18 (11

evapearriKhaL :

1)

cevxofJLevop.

The augment

The

in

1

2 '

occurs with

h

AKT.

In Lu. 9:

rw ehat avTov

irpo-

Lu. 3 21.

Cf.

dveux'^v^o-i- in

:

Tob. 5:15 B.

Participle

The Name. jective from the 1.

without reduplication in

a periphrastic infinitive appears,

ecro/iat 6t56rai

IX.

is

(r]

|jl€toxii).

This does not really distinguish this verljal substantive, the infinitive.

Moulton, Prol., p. 213 f. Gk. Synt., p. 164. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 221.

Thumb

(Ilandb. of

vcrlial

Mod. Gk.) has no

diwoussion of the infinitive. ^

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 109.

Cf. Donaldson,

New

ad-

Both are par-

Cnit., p. 003.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

372

and both are infinitives. Voss^ calls the participles "mules" because they partake of both noun and verb, but the infinitives are hybrid in exactly the same sense. Like the infinitive, the Greek participle has voice, tense, and governs cases, and ticiples

may

Unlike the infinitive the participle has reg-

use the article.

Clyde ^ would include partiSo Kiihncr-Blass.^ Dionysius Thrax^

ular inflection like other adjectives. in the infinitive.

ciples

puts the participle right: Merox'? eori Harcov Kai

rrjs

twv

Xe^ts fxerexovaa.

twv

ttjs

p-q-

ovofxaTOiv iSiOTrjTos.

Verbal Adjectives. As a matter of fact no absolutely clear can be dra^vn between verbal adjectives and other adjec-

2.

line

An

tives.^

adjective

may not only be used may even take on a

with the ablative, but

Some,

tain connections.^

Avith

completion, as ayaTrjTos ('beloved,' Mt. 3

:

that of

also, either

17), or of possibility or

to suffering,' Ac. 26

Tra^r/ros ('liable

like Kevos

were always purely adjecare adjectival, but

like kXvtos,

Most of the forms in -ros in Greek man}^ of them have a verbal idea developed tival.''

capability, as

a case

verbal nature in cer-

:

In Greek

23).

these verbals in -tos never became a part of the verb as in Latin perfect passive participle.^

"he

Moulton^ shows how amatus

est

and

loved" represent different tenses, but scriptum est and But there was no reason why the -ros "it is written" agree. should not have had a further verbal development in Greek. For is

the structure of this verbal adjective see the chapter on Formation of Words, where a

list

of the chief

is given. Mouland passive idea by the example of a8v-

examples

ton^" points out the wavering between the active

when

the true verbal exists in the N. T.,

varov in Ro. sible' as is

8:3.

Is it 'incapable' as in

:

7 or 'impos-

N. T. to any examples except iradrjTos (Ac. 26 23). Moulton^- clearly proves. 'Aavveros is

-ros

form

But

this is too extreme, as

in the

active in Ro.

Ro. 15

Blass^^ indeed denies the verbal character of the

usual?

:

1

:

31 while aavvOeros

is

middle

(avvTiOefxaL)

With

.

the forms in -ros therefore two points have to be watched:

first, if

they are verbal at all, and then, if they are active, middle or pasThere is no doubt as to the verbal character of the form in

sive.

-reos,

which expresses the idea

of necessity.

1

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 169.

^

Giles,

2

Gk. Synt.,

s

15.

3

II, p. 4.

*

§ 19.

p. 94.

9

" Comp.

Gr., IV, p. 605.

5

Brug.,

6

lb., II, p. 456.

Comp.

is

in fact a ge-

Philol., p. 474.

Prol., p. 221.

lb.

" Gr. 12

This

of

N. T. Gk.,

Prol., p. 222.

p. 37.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB rundive and

closely allied to the -ros form.^

is

373

('PUiMa)

It has

both a per-

and the impersonal, and governs cases like the verb. It is not in Homer ^ (though -ros is common), and the first example in Greek is in Hesiod.^ The N. T. shows only one example, (3\r]Teou (Lu. 5 38), impersonal and governing the accusasonal construction

:

MSS. in the parallel passage in Mk. 2 One further remark is to be made about the verbals, which that some participles lose their verbal force and drop back to

tive.

appears in a few

It

:

22. is

So eKcoi>, /xeXXco;' in the sense of and sapiens in Latin.^ In general, just as the infinitive and the gerund were surrounded by many other verbal substantives, so the participle and the gerundive come out In the Sanskrit, as one would of many other verbal adjectives. expect, the division-line between the participle and ordinary adthe purely adjectival function. Cf. eloquens

'future.'

jectives

sharply drawn.^

is less

True Participles. These have tense and also voice. Brugmann^ indeed shows that the Greek participle endings go back to the proethnic participle. Already in the Sanskrit the present, perfect and future tenses (and in the Veda the aorist) have parti3.

and middle), thus showing an earlier The endings of the Greek participles are practically the same as those of the Sanskrit. The Latin, unlike the Sanskrit and the Greek, had no aorist and no perfect active participle, and the future participle like acturus may have come from the infinitive.^ The Greek has, however, two

two voices

ciples in

(active

development than the

'^

infinitive.

endings for the active, -vt for

The

the Sanskrit.

-vl) is difficult of

skrit.^

The

all

tenses save the perfect, just like

perfect ending {-^wes, -^wos, -us,

explanation, but

perfect participle

is

is

Greek

-ws, -or,

hkewise parallel with the San-

more common

Homer than any The Sanskrit. The Greek in

other form of the perfect (Sterrett, Homer's Iliad, N. 44).

uniform and is like the ending (-devr) is peculiar to the Greek and made by analogy from the old active form like ipav-ePT-s {^av-di),

middle ending

-fievo is

aorist passive participle is

Comp.

^ Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 28. Moulton (CI. Rev., Mar., 1904, p. 112) finds one the pap. and "the -ros participle is common in neg. forms."

Gr., IV, p. 60.5.

1

Brug.,

»

Hirt, Ilandb., p. 438.

ex. of -rto^ in

Note that he

calls it

Comp.

a participle.

Or., II, p. 457.

*

Brus.,

*

Whitney, Sans. Or.,

«

Indog. Forsch., V, pp. 89 fif. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 202.

">

8

Giles,

Comp.

'

Hirt,

Handb.,

p. 347.

Philol., p. 474.

p.

436

f.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 221.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

374

Latin,

like

though the

The

manens}

participles survive in

modern Greek,

active, like the third declension, takes

ypd4>0PTas (y pa.(i)Cov)

on the form

."^

The modern Greek uses chiefly the present active, the past passive participle (Dieterich, Unters., p. 206), and some middle or passive participles in -ovixevos or -anevos (Thumb, Handb., p. The use of the aorist and perfect active participles gave 167). Greek a great superiority over the Latin, which had such a usage only in deponent verbs like sequor, secutus. But Greek used the other participles far more than the Latin. English alone is a rival for the Greek in the use of the participle. One of the grammarians calls the Greeks 0iXo/xeroxot because they were a participle-loving The use of the tenses One may merely remark here people.^

of the participle belongs to syntax.

that the future participle

is

very

N. T. as in the papyri and KOLvi] generally (cf. Infinitive). The LXX has it seldom (Thackeray, Gr., p. 194). It is found chiefly in Luke in the N. T., as Lu. 22:49; Ac. 8:27; 20 22; 22:5; 24: 11, 17.^ The N. T. itself presents no special peculiarities as to the forms of the participle. In Rev. 19 13 pepaixukvov has been cited under the question of reduplication. "Eo-rws is more frequent than ecrrTj/ccbs. Other perfects like dTroXcoXdjs call for no comment. 4. In Periphrastic Use. The participle is common in the N. T. in the periphrastic tenses. These have been given in detail under the various tenses, but a summary at this point is desirable. This use of the participle with various forms of the verb 'Ho be" is so common in all languages, ancient and modern, as hardly to rare in the

:

:

require justification. inflection, as

Modern English The

does modern Greek.

uses

it

largely in its verb-

use of the participle as the

is found all through the Indo-Germanic languages.^ It very frequent in the Sanskrit, especially in the later language.^ Its oldest usage seems to be in the perfect tense, which exists as far back as we can go.'' In the N. T. the perfect optative does

predicate

is

^

Giles,

Comp.

Philol., p. 473.

Cf. the Sans, passive part, in -td or -7id,

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 340. 2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 206. Cf. Hatz., Einl., p. 143. 3 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 169. * Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 37. He cites elsewhere Mt. 27 41, adia^v, Jo. 6 64, 1 Cor. 15 37; Heb. 3:5; 13 17; 1 Pet. 3 13. Then these are the doubtful forms Kavcrovneva (2 Pet. 3 10, 12) and Kotxiovufvoi (2 Pet. :

:

:

:

:

:

2

13).

:

Comp.

6

Brug.,

«

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

Gr., IV, p. 444. p. 394.

»

Brug.,

Comp.

Gr., IV, p. 446.

CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

375

not appear, though once a good chance for the periphrastic perfect optative arises as in Ac, 21 33, eirwOaveTo tLs e'l-q /cat tI kanv Trtiroir]:

The

Kojs.

perfect subjunctive

form both

is

seen in the N. T. only in the

in the active, as

TreTronjKcbs (Jas. 5 15), and xi the passive, as ^ -KeTrX-qpoinkv-q (Jo. 16 24).^ So 2 Cor. 9 3. The periphrastic perfect imperative is illustrated by eaTwaav Trepie-

periphrastic

:

:

^wafxhaL (Lu. 12

:

No

35).

:

example of the periphrastic perfect inI have noticed, except

appears in the N. T., so far as

finitive

KareoraX/xeTOus virapx^iv (Ac. 19

also

ticiple

observed in

is

Colloquial Attic has

:

A

36).

oj^ras

periphrastic perfect par(Col.

airr]\\oTpiojiJLei>ovs

1

21),

:

Ran. 721) and the inscriptions (Syll. 928^2 ii/B.c.) aTOKeKpLiJihi]s ouarjs (Moulton, ProL, p. 227), In the indicative the periphrastic form is the common one for the future perfect, both active, as eo-o/xat rexot^cos (Heb, 2 13), and passive, as earai XeXv/iha (Mt. 18: 18). Cf. Lu. 12: 52. Moulton (Prol, p. 227) finds three papyri with aorist participles in future perfect sense. With ylvoiiaL note yeyomre exovres (Heb. 5 12). Cf. Rev. 16 10, eyhero eaKOTtafievr]. Cf. 2 Cor. 6 14; Col. 1 18; Rev. 3 2. The past perfect is very common in the passive, as rjv yey panptvov (Jo. 19 19), but less frequent in the active, as riaav (Arist.

it

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

irpoecopaKOTes (Ac. ireiTTcoKws,

but even

Keipevos as

TJv

dxov

/cet/xat

(SejSawTLaiJLevoL

equal to

airoKeipkvrjv

:

:

53);

rjv

The

form

present perfect

The

(Lu. 5:1);

earcos

:

The

periphrastic future indicative

active, as eaovrat TrLTTTovTes

The present

:

Col. ciple,

1

(Mk. 13:

tense

is

18

we

find

(Mk. 9

19)

:

:

3).

found several times in the

and the

25),

passive, as eaeade

Lu. 19

cf.

17),

:

(2 Cor, 6

:

and even with Cf, Rev. 3

14),

ylvopai, :

In

2.

an aorist subjunctive with a present parti-

tva yevr]TaL Tpoorevoov.

elvaL avTov irpoaevxopevov

The present

(Lu. 9

:

infinitive occurs in ev t<2

18; 11: 1),

As an example

present indicative active take a eanv ixovra (Col. 2 '

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 331.

2

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

facta in thia auniinary.

10),

31).

(Lu. 23

iSXrjdds

eyevero arlX^ovTa is

:

also :

written periphrastically in the imperative,

yiveaOe erepo^vyovvres :

rjv

25

17).

as ladL ei'vowv (Mt. 5: 25; pr]

But not

in the indicative.^

ptaovpevoL (Lu. 21

18), since

common

is

in the active, as earus dpi (Ac.

periphrastic aorist appears only in

kin-

rjv

Cf. also

36).

especially in the passive, as yey pappevov earlv (Jo. 6

and only

as

23

:

20), like exe irapj]Tr]pevov (Lu. 14

perfect in sense.

is

we not only have

16

:

vTrjpxou (cf. also 19

TtOeipevos (Lu.

rjv

(Lu. 19

in the periphrastic

and

In Ac. 8

21:29).

KtKrunai and KeKTynrjv had no

p. 204.

I

am

:

23),

of the

and

followiiifj; in

of

Gk.

chiefly indebted to Blasa for the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

376

the passive take

NEW TESTAMENT

kariv ixtdtpix-qvtvbixevov (Jo. 1

6

not strictly an instance in point.

last is

T\r]povaa (2 Cor. 9

:

:

42),

though

this

Cf. also karlv irpoaava-

12).

The periphrastic imperfect is the most common of all. It is not unknown to the old Greek, and is abundant in the papyri and the KOLPT] generally, but it is even more frequent in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., p. 195) and in the Aramaic. As Blass^ shows, not rjaav

all .

.

the examples in the N. T. are strictly periphrastic, like .

But they are abundant enough, any page of the Gospels. Take rjaav am(Mk. 10 32). So Ac. 2: 2, rjaap Kadrj/depoi,

aypav\ovvTes (Lu. 2:8).

as one can see on almost ^alvovres Kal

fjp

irpoaycov

:

and Gal. 1 22, rjjxrip ay poovfxepos. For hst of important verbs in the N. T. see Additional Notes and my Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (third ed.), pp. 48-56, 241-244. For such verbs in the LXX see Thackeray, Gr., pp. 258-920 (Table of Verbs); Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, pp. 128-135. For list in the papyri see Mayser, Gr., pp. 387-415. :

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 203.

PART

III

SYNTAX

CHAPTER IX THE MEANING OF SYNTAX Backwardness

I.

in the

(STNTAEIS)

Study of S3mtax.

What

Laut- und Formenlehre has received far more

call

the

Germans

scientific treat-

ment than has syntax. In 1874 Jolly lamented that so little work on syntax of a really valuable nature had been done. To a certain extent it was necessary that the study of the forms should precede that of syntax.^ The full survey of the words and their inflections was essential to adequate syntactical investiga^

tion.

And

behind.

It

yet one can but

feel

has been the favourite

to operate in,

that syntax has lagged too far

grammatical charlatans

field for

men who from a few examples drew

large induc-

grammars with "exceptions" to their own hastily made rules. Appeal was made to logic rather than to the actual facts in the history of language. Thus we had grammar made to order for the consumption of the poor students. Others perhaps became disgusted with the situation and hastily concluded that scientific syntax was impracticable, at least for the present, and so confined their researches either to etymology or to the forms. In 1891 Miiller^ sees no hope of doing anything soon for modern Greek syntax except in the literary high style tions

and

filled their

on which he adds a few remarks about prepositions. Thumb ^ likewise has added a chapter on syntax to his Handbuch. If you turn to Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar, you will find no separate syntax, but merely some additional remarks on the "uses" of the aorist,

Monro

the present, the subjunctive, etc.

Grammar

in his

Homeric

somewhat the same plan, but ^^^th much more attention to the "uses" of cases and modes. Brugmann^ in his Griechische Grammatik devotes far more space to Formenlehre, follows

und Sprachw.,

*

Schulgr.

*

Ricm. and Goelzer, Or. Compardc du Grcc

»

Hist. Gr. der hell. Spr., p. 172.

*

Handb. der neugr. Volksspr., 1895; Handb.

p. 71.

179-206.

du

et

of 6

379

Lat., Synt., p. 7.

Mod. Gk. Vcrnac,

p. vu.

pp.

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

380 even

in the third edition,

which

NEW TESTAMENT

chiefly differs

the increased attention to syntax.

from the second

Giles in his

Manual

in

Com-

of

parative Philology, even in the second^ edition (1900), kept his

discussion of the uses of the noun and verb apart and did not group them as syntax. When he wrote his first- edition (1895) nothing worthy of the name had been done on the comparative syntax of the moods and tenses, though Delbriick had written When Brugmann his great treatise on the syntax of the noun. planned his first volume of Kurze vergleichende Grammatik (1880), he had no hope of going on with the syntax either with the "GrundriB" or the "Kurze," for at that time comparative grammar of the Indo-Germanic tongues was confined to Laut- und Formenlehre} But in the revision of Klihner the Syntax by B. Gerth has two volumes, as exhaustive a treatment as Blass' two volumes on the Accidence. In the Riemarm and Goelzer volumes the one on Syntax is the larger. Gildersleeve {Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 115) boasts of his freedom from bias, "being of an impressionable nature and having no special views of my own on any subject except Greek syntax and all that Greek syntax implies, I

As

am

carried about

by every

^\^nd of doctrine."

to the dialectical inscriptions the situation

is

still

worse.

Dr. Claflin^ as late as 1905 complains that the German monographs on the inscriptions confine themselves to Laut- und For-

Meisterhans in Schwyzer's revision Thieme'' has a few syntactical

menlehre almost entirel3^ (1900)

is

nearly the sole exception.^

remarks, but Nachmanson,'^ Schweizer^ and Valaori^ have nothing about syntax, nor has Dieterich.^" The same thing is true of of course, is not a formal have touched on the syntax of the Attic inscriptions" and Schanz in his Beitrdge has several writers ^^ who have noticed the subject. The inscriptions do in-

Thumb's Hellenismus, though grammar.

A

few additional

this,

essaj^s

deed have limitations as to syntax, since much of the language is Thackofficial and formal, but there is much to learn from them. eray has not yet published his Syntax of the LXX. nor has Helbing. p_

3

Kurze

vergl. Gr., 3. Lief., 1904, p.

1

P.

*

Sj'nt. of the Boeot. Dial. Inscr., p. 9.

^

Gr. der att. Inschr.

8 ^ 8

9

10

xi.

2

viii f.

iii f.

But even he has very much more about the forms.

Die Inschr. von Magn. etc., 1906. Laute und Formen der magn. Inschr., 1903. Gr. d. perg. Inschr., Beitr. zur Laut- und Formenl. etc., 1898. " Claflin, Synt. of the Bosot. Dial. Inscr., Der delph. Dial., 1901. ^- D>TofT, Weber, Keck. Unters. etc., 1898.

p. 10.

381

THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (STNTAEIS)

We

somewhat better off as to the papyri as a result chiefly of the work of Dr. James Hope Moulton, who has published his reCronert searches in that field as apphed to the New Testament. remarks syntactical many good a has Hercul. Graeca Mem. his in especially on the cases,^ but no formal treatment of the subject. Volker^ has not finished his good beginning. No syntax has come are

^

from Mayser yet, who stopped with Laut- unci Formenlehre, though he is at work on one. Moulton does not profess^ to cover all the syntactical points in the papyri, but only those that throw light on some special points in the N. T. usage.

New

Testament Limitations. It is evident therefore that grammarian is in a poorer plight when he approaches syntax. And yet, strange to say, the N. T. grammars have largely confined themselves to syntax. Winer-Moulton, out of 799 pages, has only 128 not syntax. Buttmann, out of 403 pages (Thayer's II.

the N. T.

translation), has only 74 not syntax. is

reached on p. 145.

In Winer-Schmiedel syntax

Blass begins syntax on p. 72, out of 305

Moulton in his Prolegomena starts syntax on p. 57 (232 The present book has given the discussion of the forms more space at any rate. It is at least interesting to note that N. T. grammarians have reversed the example of the comparative

pages. in

all).

philologists.

One may

a case of rushing in where angels fear to tread? plead in defence that the demands of exegesis are Is it

and urgent, not to say more congenial. The distinctive character of the N. T. teaching is more closely allied to lexicography and syntax than to mere forms. That is very true, but many a theologian's syntax has run away with him and far from the sense of the writer, because he was weak on the mere forms. Knowledge of the forms is the first great step toward syntax. Deissmann even complains of Blass for assuming too much in his Syntax and not making enough comments "to rouse up energet-

great

ically this easy-going deference of the tor,

Blass ^ urges, besides, that 1

youthful reader" (Exposi-

Jan., 1908, p. 65). it is

just in the sphere of syntax that

See CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, pp. 436 ff.; Apr., 1904, p. 150; Exp., 1904, series of N. T. Gk.; ProL, 190G. * Synt. dor griech. Pap., I, Der Art., 1903. Pp. 159 ff.

on Charact. 2

<

CI. Rev.,

Dec,

1901, p. 43G.

Debrunner

(p. xi of his 4. Aufl. of Blass'

N. Griech., 1913, which he has kindly sent me as I reach this point in the galley proof) laments: "Fiir die Studicn dor hcllenistischcn (nnd der mittel- und neugriechischen) Syntax gilt leider noch das Wort ttoXus ixlv 6

Gramm.

d.

OtpLcrnoi, oi 5k kpyaTai. oXiyoi.. ^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 72.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

382

NEW TESTAMENT

the N. T. variations from the ancient Greek can be best observed, in this and the change in the meaning of words. This is true, but just as much so of the kolpt] in general. This is just the opposite

view/ who held that the N. T. pecuUarities of syntax were very few. The explanation of the difference lies partly in the undeveloped state of syntax when Winer wrote, though he wrote voluminously enough himself, and partly in the wider conception of syntax that Blass^ holds as being "the method of employing and combining the several word-forms and 'form-words' of Winer's

current in the language."

On the other hand attention must be called to the fact that the study of the forms is just the element, along wath vocabulary, mainly relied on by Deissmann in his Bible Studies to show the practical identity of the vernacular

N. T. Greek. writers:

"The

Burton ^ puts

it

kolvt]

rightly

in the papyri

when he

and

in the

says of the N. T.

divergence of their language from that of classical is greater than in reference to forms

waiters in respect to syntax

and less than in respect to the meaning of words, both the Jewish and the Christian influence affecting more deeply the of words,

meanings of words than either their form or their syntactical employment." Deissmann^ readily admits that Christianity has a set of ideas peculiar to itself, as has every system of teaching which leads to a characteristic terminology. But one is not to think of the N. T. as jargon or a dialect of the less systematic and orderly than the and the kolpt] is as much a real language with its own laws as the Greek of Athens.*^ As remarked above, the KOLPT] showed more development in syntax than in forms, but it was not a lawless development. It was the growi^h of life and use, not the artificial imitation of the old language of Athens by the Atticists. Blass^ properly insists on the antithesis here between the artificial Atticist and "the plain narrator of facts or the letter-writer" such as we meet in the N. T. Deissmann {ExKOLVT)

in syntax.^

It is

rest of the vernacular

not

kolvt],

positor, Jan., 1908, p. 75) holds that Christianity in its classical

epoch "has very jects

1

2

3 6

— this

is

little

connection with

W.-M., p. 27. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 72; cf. p. 3 also. Notes on N. T. Gr., 1904, p. 22. Thumb, Die sprachgeschichtl. Stell. des

culture."

official

the second result of our inquiry

—

<

it

B.

bibl. Griech.,

S., p. 65.

Theol. Ru., 1902,

p. 97. 6

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 3.

^

"It re-

rejects, in this

jb., p. 72.

THE MEANING OF SYNTAX epoch,

all

the outward devices of rhetoric.

syntax and style

lary,

(:;TNTAHIS)

it

383

In grammar, vocabu-

occupies a place in the midst of the peo-

and draws from the inexhaustible soil of the popular element which it was native a good share of its youthful strength." This is largely true. Men of passion charged with a great message do strike forth the best kind of rhetoric and style with simplicity, power, beauty. It is blind not to see charm in Luke, in John, in Paul, James and the writer of Hebrews, a charm that is th6 despair of mere "devices of rhetoric" or artificial rules of style and ple

to

syntax.

not surprising to find variations in culture

It is

men who had

writers,

different antecedents

ferent environment (Palestine, Asia

in the N. T. (Jew or Greek), dif-

Minor and possibly Egypt),

natural gifts and educational advantages, as seen in

different

These individual peculiarities show themselves and naturally in syntax and style. See chapter IV, The Place of the N. T. in the KoLvrj, for a larger discussion of this matter of the peculiarities of the N. T. writers. But even in 2 Peter and the Apocalypse one has no difficulty in understanding this simple vernacular kolvt], however far short these books come of the standard of Isocrates or Demosthenes. The study of N. T. syntax is a worthy subject and one entirely within the range Peter and Paul. easily

of scientific historical treatment so far as that subject has ad-

vanced. III.

Recent Advance by Delbriick. Just as Brugmann is the in the accidence of comparative grammar, so Del-

great

name

briick

is

his

own

briick

the great

name

Brugmann

in syntax.

He

indebtedness to Delbriick.

in

gladly recognises

has sought to follow Del-

the syntax of his Griechische Grammatik^ and in the

Kurze vergleichende Grammatik." count the story of

Brugmann

how

It

is

not necessary here to re-

Delbriick was finally associated with

and the S>yntax by Delbriick lirought tells the story well in Kurze vergl. Gr. (pp. v ff.) and Delbriick in the GrundriB itself. It is a great achievement and much led up to it. Delbriick has recounted in the GrundriB,

to completion in 1900.

Brugmann

the progress of comparative

grammar

in his Introduction to the

In 1872 he had published Die Reder vergleichenden Syntax. In 1879 lu^ l>rought out Die

Study of Language (1882). sultate

Grundlagen der griechischen Syntax »

P.

vii.

^

P.

ix.

Ho

feels "als Schiller

gleichenden Syntiix."

("

Syntaktische Forschungen,"

unseres Bepxiindcrs uiul Meisters der ver-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

384

That marked him

Bd. IV).

Brugmann would do

as the

NEW TESTAMENT

man

to

do

what

for syntax

Delbriick does not claim

for forms.

all

the

had published Wissenschaftliche Syncredit. Sprache, but Bopp, Schleicher and the rest griechischen der tax besides. The very progress in the knowledge of much done had forms called for advance in syntax. In 1883 Hiibner wrote GrundBernhardy

in 1829

It is not a treatbut a systematized bibliography of the great works up to date on Greek syntax. It is still valuable for that purpose. One can follow Brugmann and Delbriick, Vergl. Syn-

riB zu Vorlesungen iiber die griechische Syntax.

ment

of syntax,

^

tax, Dritter Teil, pp. xvi-xx, for later bibliography.

As the founThrax and

ders of syntax Hiibner ^ points back to Dionysius

Apollonius Dyscolus in the Alexandrian epoch. themselves felt httle concern about syntax.

but were not grammatical anatomists. language instead of inspecting and dissecting it.

rectly,

The older Greeks They spoke corThey used the

Delbriick {Vergleichende Syntax, Erster Teil, pp. 2-72) gives a lucid review of the history of syntactical study all the

way from

Dionysius Thrax to Paul's Principles of the History of Language. He makes many luminous remarks by the waj^ also on the general subject of syntax. I cannot accent too strongly my own debt to Delbriick.

Syntax, especially that of the verb, has peculiar

Not

all

he is Syntax der griechischen Sprache. Many of the American and Euro-

fully appreciates the situation that

cellent Beitrdge zur historischen

He

is

difficulties.^

Indeed Schanz so publishing a series of ex-

the problems have been solved yet.^

gathering fresh material.

pean universities issue monographs by the new doctors of philosophy on various points of syntax, especially points in individual Thus we learn more about the facts. But meanwhile writers. we are grateful to Delbriick for his monumental work and for all the rest. IV. (a)

The Province

of Syntax.

The Word Syntax

means arrangement '

'

(o-vvra^L'i).

(constructio) .^

It

is

from awTaaao: and

It is the picture of the orderly

marshalling of words to express ideas, not a mere medley of words. The word syntax is indeed too vague and general to express clearly all the uses in

modern grammatical Comp.

discussion, but Philol., pp.

404

'

Giles,

*

Iliem. and Goelzer, Syiit., p. 7.

it is

475.

1

Griech. Gr., p. 363.

2

Grundr. zu Vorles.,

^

Farrar (Gk. Synt., p. 54) quotes Suetonius as saying that the first Gk. Rome was by Crates Mallotes after the Second Punic War.

brought to

p. 3.

f.,

gr.

THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (sTNTAHIs) make a change

385

Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of some syntacticians treat "syntax as a rag-bag for holding odds and ends of linguistic observations." But the difficulty is not all with the (6) Scope of Syntax. term, for the thing itself is not an absolutely distinct province. What the Germans call Lautlehre ('teaching about sounds') is indeed quite to itself. But when we come to define the exact line of demarcation between syntax or the relation of words on the one hand and single words on the other the task is not always so easy. Ries- indeed in his very able monograph makes the contrast between syntax (or construction) and single words. His scheme is this: Under Wortlehre ('science of words') he puts Formenlehre ('theory of forms') and Bedeutungslehre ('meaning of words').' He also subdivides syntax in the same way. Syntax thus treats of the binding of words together in all relations. Brugmann^ follows Delbriick'^ in rejecting the special use of syntax by Ries. Brugmann^ considers the breaking-up of the sentence by Ries It is ininto single words to be wilful and only conventional. have teaching both the word single words a as to true that deed itself (form-word, as prepositions) and the form (inflection).'' That is to say, two things call for consideration in the case of single words: the facts as to the words and the inflection on the one hand and the meaning of these facts on the other. Now Ries refuses to give the term syntax to the meaning of these

too late to Philol.,

now.^

1908, p. 269) says that

facts (words, inflections, etc.),

but confines sjmtax to the other

One is bound to go against Ries here and side with Delbriick and Brugmann. We use syntax, (c) Construction of Words and Clauses. therefore, both for construction of the single word and for clauses. But one must admit the difficulty of the whole question and not conceive that the ancients ran a sharp line between the form and the meaning of the form. But, all in all, it is more scientific to

field of

word-relations.

gather the facts of usage interpretation

first

themselves syntax.

1

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 3G4.

'

lb., p.

take

it

f.

Ries calls

in this sense.

it

Griech. Gr., p. 363

^

Grundr., V, pp.

*

Kurze

This

words themselves, the forms of the

2 Was ist Syntax? 1894, p. 142. a "naive misuse of the word syntax" not to not himself wholly consistent.

But he is f.; Kurze

*

facts.

while the facts of usage are

Thus considered one may properly think

of syntax in relation to the

142

and then interpret these

scientific syntax,

is

vcrgl. Gr., Ill, p. vii.

1 ff.

vergl. Gr., Ill, p. vii.

''

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 363.

,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

386

words, the clauses and sentences, the general style. Clyde makes two divisions in his Greek Syntax, viz. Words (p. 126) and Sentences (p. 193). But this formal division is artificial. Here, as usual, Delbriick has perceived that syntax deals not only with

words (both Wortarten and sentence as a whole and

How

all

Wortjormen), but

also

with

the

parts {Vergl. Syntax, Erster Teil,

its

to keep syntactical remarks out of acciThackeray's vol. I and in "Morphology" dence may be seen in in Accidence of this book. well as in Thumb's Handbook as p. 83).

hard

it is

But this is not to fall into the old Historical Syntax. the Stoic grammarians and apply logic to the phenomena of grammar, using the phenomena of various grammatical catePlato indeed first applied logic to gories previously laid down. grammar.^ The method of historical grammar and comparative grammar has had a long and a hard fight against the logical and (d)

pitfall of

method of syntax. "They sought among the facts

But

philosophical

it

has at last triumphed.

of language for the illustration

of theories," as Dr. Wheeler^ so well puts

but we

it.

We

still

need logic

two agents into service after we have gathered the facts, not before, and after the historical and comparative methods have both been applied to these facts. Thus alone is it possible to have a really scientific syntax, one "definitely oriented" "as a social science" dealing

and philosophy

with the total (e)

find

in syntax,

life

these

of man.^

We

Irregularities.

many

call

shall

not therefore be surprised to

so-called "irregularities" in the use of syntactical prin-

Greek writers. This is a point of the utmost importance in any rational study of syntax. The personal equation ciples in various

of the writer

amount is

must always be taken into consideration. A certain and play must be given to each writer if one

of elasticity

to understand

human

of the mind's activities.

was meant

speech, for speech If

is

merely a reflection

a tense brings one to a turn, perhaps

This is not to say that there are no barFar from it. But it is unnatural to expect all speakers or writers in Greek to conform slavishly to our modern grammatical rules, of most of which, besides, they were in The fact is that language is life and responds blissful ignorance. to the peculiarities of the individual temper, and it is to be reit

to do so.

barisms nor solecisms.

membered that the mind ^

itself is

not a perfect instrument.

Sandys, Hist, of CI. Scholarship, vol. I, p. 90. of the Mod. Sci. of Lang.,

2

The Whence and Whither

8

lb., p. 107.

p. 97.

The

THE MEANING OF SYNTAX mind

is

not always clear nor

The

logical.

387

(:STNTAHI2)

ellipses,

anacolutha,

of language represent* partially the imperfections of the

etc.,

"It often depends on the writer which of the two tenses he will use," Winer ^ remarks about the aorist and the past perIt always depends on the writer which tense and which fect.

mind.

everything else he will use.

The

whom

Pray, on

can

else

He

writer happens to be doing the writing.

it

depend?

decides whether

he will conform to the usual construction or will give added piquancy by a variation. This assumes, of course, that he is an educated writer. If he is not, he will often have the piquancy just the same without knowing it. "Syntactical irregularities are numerous in Greek," Clyde* observes, and, he might have added, in all other living languages. Greek is not, like "Esperanto," made to order by any one man. In point of fact what we call idioms are the very peculiarities (tStcbyuara) which mark it off from other languages or at least characterize spring out of the

common

Some of these idioms men and belong to many

it.

intelligence of

tongues, others mark the variations of certain minds which gain a following. Compare the rapid spread of "slang" to-day, if it happens to be a "taking phrase." Hence rules of syntax ought not to be arbitrary, though many of them are. Those that really express the life of language are in harmony with the facts. In general I would say that the fewer rules one gives the better for the student and for the facts.

V. (a)

The Method

of this

Grammar. As far as possible principles and The Greek grammarian is an interpreter

Principles, not Rules.

not rules will be sought.

of the facts, not a regulator of the facts. special

This point calls for emphasis in syntax where the subjective element comes in

so largely. (6)

The Original This

The

Significance.

fore in the explanation of

any given idiom

starting-point thereis

to find the original

not always possible, but it generally is. Historical and comparative grammar lend strong help in this endeavour. Always the best place to begin is the beginning if you significance.

can find (c)

is

it.

Form and Function.

function always correspond.

would not

I

One

did so correspond in the beginning in

insist

not

do(^s

that form antl

know

that the two

It is hard to prove a universal proposition. But certainly one is justified in beginning with one function for one form wherever he finds it to 1

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 4

f.

2

all

W.-Th.,

instances.

p. 276.

^

gynt., p. 5.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

388

NEW TESTAMENT

be true. Burton^ saj^s: ''It is by no means the case that each form has but one function, and that each function can be discharged by but one form." Certainly the same function can come to be discharged by various forms, as is the case with the locative and dative infinitive forms (Xajdelp, aKovaai). But that is not to say that originally the locative and dative verbal substantive were identical in idea. The Sanskrit completely disproves it. It may very well be true that each form had one function originally, whereas later the same function came to be expressed by various forms. As a starting-point, therefore, one may assume, till he learns otherwise, that form and function correspond. The necessity of getting at the ground-idea of an idiom is rightly emphasized It may indeed come to pass as p. 1). "but," that the one form may be used for most of the parts of speech (Giles, Man. ofCotnp. Philol., p. 237 f.). On the whole subject of the agreement of form and idea see Kiihner-

by Delbriick (Grundlagen,

in the English

Gerth, {d)

I,

pp. 64-77.

Development.

But the beginning

is

not the end.

The

ac-

Greek language up to the time must be observed. Each idiom T. has a history. Now it N. cannot be expected that the space can be given to the actual working-out of each idiom in history as Jamiaris has done in his Historical Grammar, or minute comparison at every point by means What is essential is that the gramof comparative grammar. marian shall have both these points in mind as he seeks to explain the development from the etymological basis. This is the only secure path to tread, if it can be found. Burton ^ indeed distinguishes sharply between historical and exegetical grammar and conceives his task to be that of the exegetical grammarian. For tual development of a given idiom in the

myself

I

regard exegetical

grammar

as the last stage in the pro-

and not to be dissociated from the historical. Indeed how a Greek idiom is to be represented in English is a matter of little concern to the Greek grammarian till the work of translation is reached. The Greek point of view is to be observed all through the process till translation comes. It is Greek syntax, not English. There is one more stage in the interpretation (e) Context. of the Greek idiom. That is the actual context in any given instance. The variation in the total result is often due to the difference in the local colour of the context. The same idiom with a given etymology may not have varied greatly in the long course cess

of history save as 1

it

responds to the context.

N. T. Moods and Tenses,

p. 1.

In a word, etymol2

lb., p. 3.

THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (STNTASIS)

389

ogy, history, context are the factors that mark the processes in the evolution of a Greek idiom in a given case. These are the things to keep constantly in mind as we approach the idioms of

Greek syntax.

We may

not always succeed in finding the solu-

tion of every idiom, but most of

them

will yield to this process.

The result is to put syntax on a firmer scientific basis and take it out of the realm of the speculative subjective sciences. This is the translation of the total result, (/) Translation. not of the exact Greek idiom.

Translation crisply reproduces the

harmony with the language into made, often into an utterly different idiom. It is folly to reason backwards from the translation to the Greek idiom, for the English or German idiom is often foreign to the Greek and usually varies greatly from the original Greek. English is English and Greek is Greek. Syntax is not translation, though it is the only safe way to reach a correct translaExegesis is not syntax, but syntax comes before real tion. The importance of syntax is rightly appreciated by exegesis. result of all the processes in

which the translation

is

Gildersleeve.^ (g)

Limits of Syntax.

After

all is

done, instances remain where

syntax cannot say the last word, where theological bias will inevitably determine

how one interprets the Greek idiom. Take

in Ac. 1:5, for instance.

In

instrumental Avith

/SaTrrifco.

express design (see

Mt. 10

:

itself

So 41),

in Ac. 2

but

it

:

38

may

eis

'

does not of

be so used.

grammarian has finished, the theologian steps before the grammarian is through.

life

uSart

the word can be either locative or

in,

itself

When

the

and sometimes

Synt. of CIass.Gk.,p.iv. C.andS.,Sel.fr.theLXX,p.22,observe that the of a

language

completely. in syntax.

lies in

The more

the syntax and that literal

a translation

it is is,

impossible to translate syntax

like the

LXX,

the more

it fails

CHAPTER X THE SENTENCE In point of fact syntax deals I. The Sentence and Syntax. with the sentence in its parts and as a whole. And yet it is not tautology to have a chapter on the sentence, a thing few grammars do. It is important to get a clear conception of the sentence as well as of syntax before one proceeds to the

The sentence

the thing in

work

of detailed

all its

parts that syntax

treats,

but the two things are not synonymous.

At bottom gram-

mar

teaching about the sentence.^

criticism.

is

II.

(a)

is

The Sentence Defined. Complex Conception.

A

sentence

the idea or ideas in the speaker's mind.

is

It is

the expression of

an opinion (senten-

This idea is in itself complex. combination of "the small coin of language" into an intelligible whole that we call a sentence.^ Just a mere word accidentally expressed is not a sentence. "The sentence is the symbol whereby the speaker denotes that two or more ideas have expressed (avToreXris \6yos).

tia)

It

is

this

combined

in his mind."^

Two

Essential Parts. Only two parts are essential to complex intelligible whole to form a sentence. These two A statement is made about parts are subject and predicate. something and thus an idea is expressed. These two parts are called substantive and verb, though the line of distinction between substantive and verb was originally very dim, as is now often seen in the English ("laugh," "touch," "work," etc.). Many modern linguists hold that the verb is nominal in origin, (b)

this

K.-G.,

1

Synt., ^

1.

Cf. Brug.,

I, p. 1.

Giles,

Man.

of

vergl. Gr., Ill, p. 623; Delbnick, Vergl.

Comp.

due to synthesis

as

Kurze

TL, pp. 73-85. is

Philol., p. 235. Opposed to this idea of a sentence the modern psychological definition of Wundt who

defines a sentence as "die Gliodening einer Gesamtvorstellung." '

Strong,

1891, p. 93.

Logeman and Wheeler,

Intr. to the

Study

Cf. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p.

Philol., p. 13G.

390

iii;

of the Hist, of Lang.,

Sayce, Prin. of

Comp.

THE SENTENCE

391

some primitive languages know only nominal sentences. do not know which is the oldest, subject or predicate.^ In the Greek verb indeed subject and predicate are united in the one form, the original sentence.^ The sentence in form may be (c) One-Membered Sentence. very brief, even one word in truth. Indeed the long sentence may not express as much as the short one. In moments of passion an exclamation may be charged with more meaning than a long rambling sentence.^ We have plenty of examples of one-word sentences in the N. T., hke airexei (Mk. 14 :41), Trpo^Tjreuaoj/ (Mk. 14 65), Trpo€x6fj.eda (Ro. 3:9), deXco (Mt. 8:3), ovxl (Lu. 1 Com60). pare also iropeWrjTL, epxov, iroirjcTov (Mt. 8:9). (d) Elliptical Sentence. Indeed, as seen in the case of ovxl (Lu. 1 60) the sentence does not absolutely require the expression of either subject or predicate, though both are implied by the word used. This shortening or condensation of speech is common to all the Indo-Germanic languages.^ Other examples of such condensation are the vocative, as Kupte (Mt. 8: 2), with which compare viraye, liarava (Mt. 4 10), the interjections like 0,76 (Jas. 5 1), ea (Lu. 4 34), l8ov (Rev. 14 14), 'I8e (Jo. 1 29), oval (Rev. 8 13). These interjections may be used alone, as ea (Lu. 4 34), or with other words, as oval and tSe above. Cf. Martha's Nat, since

We

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Kvpie (Jo. 11 is

:

27),

two sentences.

Jo. 11

:

35 (kdaKpvaev

6 'Irjaovs)

the shortest verse, but not the shortest sentence in the N. T. (e)

Only Predicates.

predicate will

still

The

subject

constitute a sentence,

may i.e.

be absent and the

express the complex

This follows naturally from the preceding paramay imply the subject. The subject in involved in the verbal personal ending and often the

idea intended.

The

graph.

Greek

is

predicate

makes it clear what the subject really is. Indeed the Greek only expressed the personal subject as a rule where clearness, emphasis or contrast demanded it. The N. T., like the KOLvq in general, uses the pronominal subject more frequently than the older Greek (cf. English). Often a glance at the context is context

» Thompson, Gk. Synt., 1883, p. xv. Delbriick (Vcrgl. Synt., 1. TL, p. 77) quotes Schleicher as saying that nouns either have or had case-forms, verbs cither have or had pers. endings, and that all words were originally either nouns or verbs. But it is not quite so easy as that unless pronouns be included in 2 K.-G., I, p. 2. nouns.

'

*

Man.

Giles,

Kurze

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 23G.

On

sentence-building see Brug.,

vergl. Gr., Ill, pp. 623-774.

lb., p.

R. Nicoll

624

f.

in Br.

The mod. Gk. shows it (Thumb, Handb., W. instances the Scotch "aweel."

p. 179).

Sir

W.

:

that

all

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

392

needed, as with

is

(Mk. 2

Kal Tapeylpovro Kal k^awTl^ovTo (Jo.

3

Sometimes indeed close attention is required to notice a change of subject which is not indicated. So Kal 'icj^ayov iraPTes Kal exopTaadrjaav, Kal rjpav to irepLaaevop tC:v K\a(Tp.aTwv (]Mt. 14:20). For this change of subject with no indication see Lu. 8: 29; Jo. 19: 31; 2 Cor. 3 16; 1 Jo. 5 16.^ Sometimes the subject is drawn out of the verb itself, as in aaXTrlaeL (1 Cor. 15:52), 'the trumpet shall trumpet.' So in ovre yanovaiv ovTe ya/jLL^ovTaL (Mt. 22 30) men have to be supplied with the j5rst and women with the second verb. God is considered by some the unexpressed, but well-known subject, as with /Spexet (Mt. 5 23), epxovraL

3), etc.

:

:

:

:

:

(Eph. 4:8), (}>7]alu (Heb. 8 5). Often what is said is a matter of common remark or usage and the subject is designedly concealed, indefinite subject. So when Paul uses (f)7]aiv (2 Cor. 10 10) of his opponent unless we follow 45),

(Ac. 13

e'iprjKev

:

34), XeTet

:

:

B

and read

(Mt. 5

oveLblcxwaLV vixas

(Rev. 2

yovffLP

also,

The

0ao-t.

not to

23; Jo. 15

:

:

common

very

is

German man

up examples, Mt. 8

20

:

2; Ac. 3

:

:

sagt,

6.

:

:

16), ws Xe-

French on

Mk.

16;

Rev. 12

2;

in this sense as orav

avXKeyovaLv; (Mt. 7

p.r}TL

11),

:

like

24)

pile 6;

plural

10

Cf.

dit.

13; Lu. 17

:

and bvpaprai (Heb. 10 1) Moulton (ProL, p. 58) cites KXeTTTovres Sometimes the plural purposely conceals

rhetorical plural appears in irpoacpepovaLP

the text

if

(Eurip.

is

T.,

I.

genuine. 1359).

:

This impersonal or :

when TedprjKaaLP (Mt. The same principle apphes to

the identity of the person referred to, as

2

20)

:

is

used of Herod the Great.

alrovaLP (Lu. 12

:

20).

Then again the verb may be merely im-

personal, as with e^pe^ep (Jas. 5

24

:

21), ov fie\€L aoL

ky'tpero

(Mk.

11

:

(Mt. 22

:

17), airexei

:

16),

d

(Mk. 14

rhxai (1 Cor. 14

So the modern Greek

19).

sive voice, so that the subject

is

:

41), ayei (Lu. 10).

Cf.

oi/^e

(Thumb, Handb.,

still

Usually the impersonal verb in the N. T.

p. 179).

:

is

in the pas-

involved in the action of the verb.

Thus nerprid-qaeTaL (Mk. 4 24), dodrjaeraL (Mk. 4 25), TnareveTaL and o/jioXoyeLTaL (Ro. 10: 10), aireiperaL and kyeiperaL (1 Cor. 15:42), etc. Sometimes indeed a verb appears to be impersonal at first blush, when really it is not. So earoo de (2 Cor. 12 16) has the :

:

:

previous sentence as the subject. Treptexet

is

In

the following quotation.

infinitive is

sonal, as

ous, 1

Pet. 2

:

6 the subject of

In Ac. 21 35 :

used with a verb as subject, the verb

apelSy] eTTLaKeiJ/aadaL

as e^eaTLP

iroLtlp

See Viteau, Et. sur

le

(Ac. 7

(Mt.

:

23).

12:2),

Grec du N.

avpejSrj

has as

So in general whenever the

subject the infinitive ^aaTa^eadaL.

its

1

is

The examples

ebo^e

T., Sujet,

ypa\pai.

Compl.

not imperare

numer-

(Lu. 1:3), et Attr., p.

55

e5et f.

THE SENTENCE 4

8iepx^<^9aL (Jo.

(Ac. 22

:4), Trpeirou earlu

ir'KrjpoJa-at

22), evdex^rai airokeaOat (Lu.

:

kaTLv rov

iii]

17

kXQeiv (Lu.

:

and

1)

393

13

:

(Mt. 3 33),

15), KadrJKev ^fjv

:

and even avhoeKTOV

kykvero tov daekdeiv (Ac. 10

:

25)

where the genitive infinitive form has become fixed. 'Eykvero does indeed present a problem by itself. It may have the simple infinitive as subject, as dtairopeveadaL (Lu.

Cf.

6).

a

2

Kal kyepero,

So also

37).

:

But often

15.

6

:

1)

Kal eyevero or

and

6

elaeXdelv (Lu.

eyhero

8e is

:

used with

verb as a practical, though not the technical, subject.

finite

So

Mk.

eXaXovv (Lu. 2 Kal

:

15), eyevero 8e, avurjurrjaev (Lu.

earaL, k'xtco (Ac.

2

:

One

17).

is

9

:

strongly re-

minded of the similar usage in the LXX, not to say the Hebrew *iri'?l. Moulton^ prefers to think that that was a development from the

KOLPT]

I see

(papyri) usage of the infinitive with ylvop.aL as above, but

no adequate reason

point, especially as the eyevero

/cat

rjv

didacrKOJv

for

denying a Semitic influence on this

LXX

(Lu. 5

:

also parallels the other idiom, 17, cf. 5

:

1,

12, etc.),

/cat

a construction

and so like the Hebrew vav. Here /cat almost equals on and makes the second /cat clause practically the subject of The use of a 6rt or 'iva clause as subject is common eyevero. either alone or in apposition with a pronoun. Cf. Mt. 10 25 (tra); 1 Jo. 5:9 (ort); Jo. 15: 12 (tm). In a case like dp/cet (Jo. 14 8), avrJKev (Col. 3 18), ekoylddr] (Ro. 4 3) the subject comes

so un-Greek

:

:

:

:

So also the subject is really implied when the partitive genitive is used without the expression of rives or TToXXot as uvvrfKdov be Kal rcov jxaO-qroiv (Ac. 21 16) and elirav ovv easily out of the context.

:

a clear case of the ablative with e/c. The conclusion of the whole matter is that the subject is either

€/c

roiv ixadr]ruiv (Jo.

16

:

17),

expressed or implied by various linguistic devices.

The

strictly

impersonal verbs in the old Greek arose from the conception of debs as (/)

doing the thing.^

Only Subject.

and only implied

Likewise the

in the subject.

predicate

may

be absent

Yet naturally the examples

of

than those when the predicate implies the subject. Sometimes indeed the predicate merely has to be mentally supplied from the preceding clause, as with dXi^bjieQa (2 Cor. 1:6), ayaTV-qaei (Lu. 7:43), exet (Lu. 20:24), Xafx^aveL (Heb. 5:4). Cf. Eph. 5 22. It may be that the verb would be this nature are far fewer

:

1

Prol., p. 17.

On

the whole matter of subjectless sentences see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 23-37. Cf. Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., pp. 35-41, for classical illustrations of the absence of the subject. Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rov., 1901, p. 436, for exx. in the pap. of the absence of the subject in standing formulas. ^

3. Tl., pp.

changed

slightly

14

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

394

in form,

29), viroTaaaeado)aav

expressed, as aKavdakLadrfaonai (Mk.

if

(Eph. 5

Cor. 7: 19; 10

as in

1

to be

drawn from the idea

:

In

24.

(2 Cor. 3

TiOeiJLev

13), etc.

:

to be inferred from a negative

is

Mk.

12

two

of the

In particular ^\^th

Tevpvvres.

24),

:

Sometimes again the affirmative

:

5 the principal verb has

and

participles depopres

(or

ye) the

verb

dTroK-

very often absent (as Mt. 6 1), so that the idiom becomes a set phrase (Lu. 10 6; 13 9). In Ro. 5 3 with ov iibvov be, KavxoifJ.eda is to be el 8e ht]

/xiy

is

:

:

:

:

and in 5 11 ao)6r]a6iJ.eda. In Ro. 9 10 the verb has to come from verse 9 or 12. In Ro. 4 9 probably XeyeraL (cf. verse supplied,

:

:

:

be supplied. Often etirep is not expressed, as in Ac. 25 22. In Ro. 5 18 Winer^ supplies aire^rj in the first clause and cnro^r}-

6) is to

:

:

ceraL in the second.

ing

56rco

mentally insert tations Jas.

In 2 Cor. 9

7 he likewise

not

it is

difficult

ellipsis,

is

right in suggest-

9 after

:

In

evayyeXi'^wixeBa, evayyeXi^copTai.

1:1; Ph. 1:1; Rev.

simple

:

from the context, as in Gal. 2

we must

tpa

epistiolary salu-

to supply Xe7et or X67et xoiipcv as in 1

These are all examples of very 22 in the proverb. Cf. also 1 Cor.

4.

:

as in 2 Pet. 2

:

4:21; 2 Cor. 5:13; Gal. 3 5. (g) Verb not the Only Predicate. :

But the predicate is not The verb indeed is the usual way of expressing it, but not the only way. The verb eiyut, especially eari and elaiv, may be merely a "form-word" like a preposition and not be the predicate. Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in eycb ein'i (Jo. OaXaaaa ovk Icftlp en (Rev. 21 1). Cf. Mt. 23 30. 8 58) and But more commonly the real predicate is another word and et/xt merely serves as a connective or copula. Thus the predicate may be complex. With this use of elixL as copula ("form-word") the quite so simple a matter as the subject.

17

:

predicate

may

:

be another substantive, as

(Mt. 13 :38); an adjective, as to ^peap

6

:

aypos

4

prepositional phrase, as €771-? aov to pijua taTip (Ro. 10 especially the participle, as

besides

eifil,

may

KadiffTanaL (Ro. vo/jiaL

1

5

(2 Cor. 13

W.-Th., p. 587.

(Mt. 7

:

29)

.

11);

8)

(Jo. 1 :

7), vivapxo^

(Ac. 16

Cf. also Gildcrslecve,

The

9), /caXoO^at

:

:

3).^

a

and

;

Other verbs,

5

19), eaTrjKa (Jas.

of the omission of the pred. inscr.

diSaaKuip

:

:

be used as a mere copula, as yiponai :

:

rjp

6 Koafjios

kcxTip

earl 0a9u (Jo.

(Mt. 5

:

14),

9), 0at-

Predicative amplifica-

Gk. Synt., pp. 41-44,

eUipsis of the pred.

is

for class, exx.

common

in the Attic

Cf. Meisterh., p. 196.

2 Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., 3. Tl., p. 12, for the origin of the copula, and pp. 15-22 for the adj., adv., subst. (oblique cases as well as nom. as pred.). Cf. also Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., pp. 30-35,

THE SENTENCE tions belong to apposition

and

395

be so treated as an expansion

will

The subject also has amplifications, Copula not Necessary. Naturally this copula

of the predicate. (h)

is

not

al-

ways considered necessary. It can be readily dispensed with when both subject and the real predicate are present. This indeed is the most frequent ellipsis of all in all stages of the language, especially the form eart. But strictly speaking, the absence of the copula is not ellipsis, but a remnant of a primitive idiom, since some primitive tongues could do without the copula.

became a

the ellipsis never

on

drj'Kov

Cor. 15

(1

:

27) or

Still,

as Blass^ observes,

fixed usage save in a

on

.

.

few phrases

like

H

In ha

3:11).

drj^ou (Gal.

.

(Mt. 9:4), jkvqTaL has dropped out. There are many idiomatic uses of tI without the copula. So tI rifuv /cat aol (Mk. 1 24), ri irpos ae :

(Jo. 21

and

:

H

22), ovTos 8e

(Jo. 21

:

21),

H

60eXos (Jas. 2

:

14), tI ovv

yap (Ro. 3:3), etc. Exclamations, as well as questions, show the absence of the copula. Thus cos tIs

w^eXeta (Ro. 3

rj

(Ro. 10

cbpaTot

'E(f)eaio:v

:

15),

(Ac. 19

1), rt

:

ape^epavvrjra (Ro. 11

cos

As a matter

28).

:

/xa/cdpioi ol

13

:

KadapOL (Mt. 5:8),

8), a^tos 6 epycLTTTi

(Mt. 10

yuKpbv oaov oaov (Heb. 10

5: 13),

ojs ol

vTvoKpLTai

:

:

'iTycroOs

10), trt

37), ttSs

(Mt. 6

.

.

may

free

is

:

\6yov

aTretpos

Cf. Ro.

16).

:

.

"Aprefjus

i}

be from aml)iguity, Xptcros ... 6 auros (Heb. fiLKpov (Jo. 14 19), en yap

absent from any Idnd of sentence which as

33), ixeyoKyj

:

of fact the copula

11

:

SiKaLoavprjs

15

f.

(Heb.

several

for

further examples, which could be easily multiplied not only for koTL

and

but for other forms as well, though the examples for Forms of the elul and et are not very numerous.

dal,

the absence of

and part, (often) are absent For djil see 2 Cor, 11 6. For d see Jo. 17 21; Gal. 4 7 Observe ^oyl^oixat in verse 5 and t5tdjrj/s in verse 6, but the

imp., fut., imper., subj., opt., inf. also.

:

his.

:

participle dXX' ev Tavrl ipavepojaavres ev iracnv

eis

u/^Ss

:

goes over to

the literary plural, about which see further in this chapter.

pare also 2 Cor. 8

:

14

In

Mk.

12

:

26

et/xt is

Com-

absent, though kyo)

For further examples of the absence of eapikv see Ro. 15. For d see Rev. 15 :4 {otl /jlouos oaLos). In Jo. 11 both dixi and ka-Tlv are absent, 6tl kyo^ kv tQ Trarpl Kal 6

17; Ph. 3 :

irariip

6pop.a 5),

1

23,

used.

is

8

:

:

kv knot.

(Lu. 2

In

:

1 Pet.

Cor. 15

:

The

imperfect

rjv

may

25), ovofxa avTU) (Jo. 3

4

21 for

:

17 rjv

we and

,

also be absent as with

1), Kal

find

wanting

eorai.

The

oj

to ovojxa avrrjs (Lu, 1:

kaTlv

and

earai.

Cf. also

other moods, besides indica-

show occasional lapses of this copula. Thus the subjunctive 8:11) and after 'im (2 Cor, 8 13), The op-

tive,

D after ottws (2 Cor. »

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 73.

:

Cf. Gildcrsleevc,

Gk. Synt., pp. 41-43.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

396 tative

more frequently drops out

€177

(Ro. 1:7), 6

eiprjVT]

(Mt. 16

iXecos aoL

evXoyrjTos 6 deos

earip or

e'lrj

:

8e

As

22).

necessary because of the

is

erly points to Ro. 1

:

LXX kanv

25, 6s

4:11, where A drops examples of the dropping of 1 Pet.

12

indicative

33),

evXoyriTds

supply either

insists that

etri

But Blass very prop-

examples.

eh rovs

Cf also

alQ)uas.

.

The imperative shows a few

eaTiv.

eare as

Winer ^

and imperative.

is

fusing to supply eare after the second

Eph.

:

with the participles in Ro.

though, of course, only the context can decide between the

9,

:

may

though Winer^ strongly

earco,

Kal

vjjuu

(Ro. 15

Blass^ observes, in the doxologies Hke

1:3; Eph. 1:3) one

(2 Cor.

or even

in wishes, as xo^pts

deos elpijprjs fxera TravTwv v/xQiv

1

13.

:

But some

right against

h

Meyer

in re-

& (simply resumptive)

clear instances of

the absence of

in

'icTco

h x^-P'-ti-, Mt. 27 19 Heb. 13 fx-qdep x^^pi-^ TV ^^V) 4 rt/uos 6 yafxos. The infinitive elpat is present in Ph. 3 8, but absent in Ph. 3 7. The participle shows a similar ellipsis as in Jo. 1 50 eU6v The other verbs ae vTTOKaToo rrjs avKtjs, Lu. 4 1 'Irjaovs 8e ir'KT]pr]s. 4:66

appear, as in Col. aoi,

2 Cor. 8

:

\6yos vfxwv Taprore

:

16

:

:

:

:

:

used as copula (Mt. 6

:

may

10; Ac. 10

The absence

also be absent :

if

of the copula with Iboh

tion after the Heb.

not needed, as with

yipoixai

15).

ri.2ri

is

indeed like the construc-

as Blass ^ points out, but

it

is

also in

Moulton^ shows. But it is especially frequent in the parts of the N. T. most allied to the O. T. Like other interjections Iboh does not need a verbal predicate, though it may have one. As examples see Mt. 17 5; Lu. 5 18; Rev. 4:1. In the last example both dbop and Ibob occur and the con-

harmony with the

kolvti

as

:

:

now one now the other, as is seen in The Two Radiating Foci of the Sentence.

struction follows, {i)

we have

verse 4.

Thus, as

and predicate are the two foci of the sentence regarded as an ellipse. Around these two foci all the other parts of the sentence radiate, if there are any other parts. The sentence may go all the way from one abrupt word to a period a couple of pages long, as in Demosthenes or Isocrates. Schoolboys will recall a sentence in Thucydides so long that he forgot to finish it. Giles'' speaks of the sentence as a kingdom with many provinces or a house with many stories. That is true potentially. But the sentence is elastic and may have only the two foci (subject and predicate) and indeed one of them may exist only by imseen, the subject

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 74.

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 74.

"

2

W.-Th.,

"*

Prol., p. 11.

3

lb.

6

Man.

p. 586.

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 236.

'

THE SENTENCE

397

The context can generally be relied on to supply the mind of the speaker or writer. Thus by the by look and by gesture, words can be filled to the full

plication.

other focus in the context,

and even run over with meanings that

of themselves they would not carry. Emotion can make itself understood with few words. The matters here outlined about the Greek sentence apply to Greek as a whole and so to the N. T. Greek. It is immaterial (j) Varieties of the Simple Sentence. whether the simple sentence, which is the oldest sentence, be de-

That

clarative, interrogative or imperative.

the N. T. and need not be illustrated.

may

tence

no way the abundance in

affects in

All three varieties occur in great

essential idea.

So likewise the simple sen-

be affirmative or negative.

That

in getting at the foundation of the sentence.

is

beside the

mark

All these matters

(and also abstract and concrete) are mere accidents that give colour and form, but do not alter the organic structure. For an extensive discussion of the various

kinds of independent sen-

tences in the N. T. (declarative, interrogative, hortatory, wish,

command) see Viteau, Syntaxe des Propositions, pp. 17-40. The matter will be discussed at length in the chapter on M^odes. ni. The Expansion of the Subject. (a) Idea-Words and Form- Words. There are indeed, as already seen, two sorts of words in general in the sentence, ideaw^ords and form-words, as the comparative grammars teach us.^ The idea-words (called by Aristotle cjicoual arjfxavTuiai) have an inner

content in themselves (word-stuff), while the form-words aarjixai)

express rather relations^ between words.

verb, adjective, adverb are idea-words,

some adverbs reality the einl,

for instance,

more

may have

and the

and pronouns,

prepositions,

copula are form-words.

In

been originally idea-words

(cf.

(place, time, etc.), the

form-words

{4>o:val

Substantive,

prepositions).

The

distinction

is

a real

than practical. The form-words, when prepositions, really help out the meanings of the cases. one, but

(6)

logical

Concord and Government.

Clj'de^ offers another distinc-

between concord and government, which has something in it if it is not pushed too far. *'In concord, the substantive is, as it were, a syntactical chief, and all his followers wear the same badge as himself; in government, the substantive aption, that

pears, as

it

were, in various conditions of service,

and

is

dressed

each time according to the particular function he discharges." »

Cf. Brug.,

2

K.-G.,

Kurzc

I, p. 7.

vergl. Cr., Ill, p. G31. 3

Gk. Synt.,

p. 120.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NE"W TESTAMENT

398

He uses concord where the substantive is king and government where the verb rules. There is something in this distinction between the two parts of the sentence, only at bottom the verb has concord too as well as the substantive, as can be shown, and as Clyde really admits by the term congruity for the case-relations with the verb. This distinction is not one between subject and predicate, but between substantive and verb. This may be formed (c) The Group around the Subject. in various ways, as, for instance, by another substantive, by an adjective, by the article, by a pronoun, by an adverb, by a prepositional phrase (adjunct), calls for illustration

and

clause. Each of these They may be explained in

by subordinate

discussion.

^

inverse order for practical reasons.

For Subordinate Clause take Lu. 1 :43. euroXi] With the Article. In Ro. 7 10 we have ds ^corjv. Here the article shows that this prepositional phrase or adjunct In the chapter on is under the wing of the substantive evToXrj. the Article this matter will call for more elaborate discussion. For the article and pronoun take ovtos 6 'I-qaovs (Ac. 1 11). As examples of adverbs with substantives take 3. The Adverb. 4 25) and 8e avcj 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (verse 26). vvv (Gal. Tp 'lepovaaXriiJ, The origin of the adjective and its close The Adjective. 4. relation to the substantive was discussed under Declensions (chapter VII) and will be further shown in the chapter on Adjectives in Syntax. Take as an example 6 tol/jltju 6 koXos (Jo. 10: 11). The earliest and always a common way 5. The Substantive. of expanding the subject was by the addition of another substantive. It was done in either of two ways. (a) By an oblique case, usually the genitive. Even the dative 1.

2.

17

:

ri

:

17

:

may occur. The But the

ablative

is

seen in ^hoL twv

genitive, the case of

8Lad7]Koop

genus or kind,

is

(Eph. 2

:

12).

the case usually

employed to express this subordinate relation of one word to This whole matter will be discussed under the genitive case and here only one example will be mentioned, 6 warrip rfjs another.

Bo^rjs (/3)

(Eph.

1

:

17), as illustrating

Apposition.

common

the point.

This was the earliest method.

to both subject

and predicate.

Apposition

is

Sometimes indeed the

of fact any substantive, whatever its place in the sentence, be the nucleus of a similar grouping. But this is a further subdivision to be noticed later. On the grouping of verbs around the subst. see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 3. TL, pp. 200-221. For various ways of grouping words around the subj. in a Gk. sentence see K.-G., I, p. 52. ^

may

As a matter

THE SENTENCE genitive

is

used where really the substantive

Tov vaov rod

irepl

399

2

aiiTov (Jo.

crco/xaros

:

in apposition, as

is

a predicate example

21),

where "temple" and "body" are meant to be identical. So with But in 1) and many other examples. 17 okia TOV aKTjvovs (2 Cor. 5 general the two substantives are in the same case, and with the subject, of course, in the nominative. As a matter of fact apposition can be employed with any case. The use of avrjp, avOpwiros, 7W17 with words in apposition seems superfluous, though it is The word in apposition conveys the main perfectly intelligible. :

idea,

21

as

6.vr]p

Cf.

33).

:

(Lu. 24:19),

TTpo4>i]Tri
(Ac.

ixvdpes a8e\cj)oL

1

:

avOpw-KOs

and

IG)

(Mt.

olKoSeairoTris

iiudpa (povea (Ac.

3

:

14).

So also av8pes 'lapa-qXelraL (Ac. 2 22), apdpes 'AdrjpotoL (Ac. 17: 22), an idiom common in the Attic orators. Such apposition, of course, is not confined to the subject, but is used in any case in every sort of phrase. So irpos ywoLKa xvpo-v (Lu. 4 26), avdpwwu) olKoSeairoTj] (Mt. 13:52, but note also 21:33), St/iwros Bvpaeoos Sometimes the word in apposition precedes the (Ac. 10 32). other, though not usually. Thus 6 Koa/jtos rrjs aSiKias, yXoJaaa (Jas. 3:6); /cat yap to -waaxo. rjuQiv €Tvdr], XptaTos (1 Cor. 5:7). But this is largely a matter of definition. The pronoun, of course, may be the subject, as eyu) 'Irjaovs (Rev. 22 16). So :

:

:

17

:

The word itself

title

is

Thus

given.

is

word

ay pbv,

OS

(Jo.

:

14).

:

eL

ot

€7cb

in apposition

aixek-qaavTes

8e

:

airrjXdou,

ttju

do not coroj /leu ets tov

:

Ke4)a\ri rrjs eKKXrjaias, avros acoTrip

The phrase

(Eph. 5 :23). 20).

vfxup tovs irbbas,

tVti/'a

Partitive or distributive ap-

tovt' 'Igtlv is

apposition with the subject, as oKlyoi, tovt' 3

in the precise result

is

apposition, as 6 Xpttrros Tos

(Lu. 11:39).

tfiiropiav avTov (Mt. 22 Often the 5). merely epexegetic, as ri eopTri twv 'lov8a[wv 7:2). Auros is sometimes used in emphatic

eirl

in apposition

aKy]voTT't]yla

17

8e

i^apLcraloi,

in 'A/3pad^i 6 vrarptapx??? (Heb. 7 4)

common, when the words

respond to the whole, as I81.OV

ot

vary greatly

Cf. also

6 KvpLos Kal 6 SidaaKoXos (Jo. 13

position

vnels

a matter determined wholly by the word

and the context.

a descriptive

vvu

may

in apposition

the apposition,

of

Cf.

(Gal. 5:2).

ITaOXos

€70)

But the phrase

is

tov

aui/xa-

used in epexegetical

'icTLv 6kt<j} xf'vxal (1

Pet.

a mere expletive and has no effect on

number (as seen above) or case. any case as the locative (Ro. 7

can be used indifferently with 18), the instrumental (Mk. 7:2), It

:

the accusative (Ac. 19:4; Heb. 13:15; Phil. 13), the genitive (Heb. 9 12; 11 16). Any number of words or phrases may be :

:

in apposition, as in Hevos Atd/3oXos

/cat

k^\r]dr] 6 8paKu>v

6 nkya$, b

6 Zarai'Ss, 6 TrXavcoj/

6
b dpxatos, 6 koXov-

Tijv olKOVukvrjv 6\i]v

(Rev. 12

:

9).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

400

An

NEW TESTAMENT

may

be in apposition with the subject, as ov yap 5td tQ airepfxan avrov, to Kkripovbixov avrov Cf. 1 Th. 4 3; 1 Pet. 2 15. Once more, elvai Kbaixov (Ro. 4:13). a clause with otl or Iva may be in apposition with the subject (or infinitive

po/xov

eTrayyeXia, tco 'AfSpaafx

i]

rj

:

:

predicate either), as 5

Beds rifup (1 Jo.

:

avrt] karlv

and

11)

r\

ixaprvpia, otl

yap

avT-q

€(jtlv

fcoTjj'

ayairrj

rj

alcovLov

tov deov

edoiKev 6 'iva

rds

For many more or less interesting details of apposition in the N. T. and the LXX see Viteau, Sujet, Complement et Attribut (1896), pp. 220236. On apposition in John see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, pp. 36 ff. On the general subject of apposition see Delbriick, Vergl. Cf. Jo. 6

kuroXas avTov Ty]pw{xev (1 Jo. 5:3).

:

29, 39, 40.

Syntax, Dritter Teil, pp. 195-199; Kiihner-Gerth, IV. The Expansion of the Predicate.

I,

pp. 281-290.

Predicate in Wider Sense. Here predicate must be its full sense and not merely the verb, but also the other ways of making a predicate -^dth the copula. One cannot do better here than follow Brugmann/ though he makes the verb, not the (a)

taken in

It is simpler just to take the

predicate, the centre of this group.

The prediby other verbs, by substantives, by proby adverbs, by prepositions, by particles, by

predicate as the other focus answering to the subject. cate can be expanded

nouns, by adjectives,

subordinate clauses.

the (6) The Infinitive and common ways of supplementing a

They

both

will

mentioned ^evlaavTes

call for special

Participle.

treatment later and can only be

(Mk. 6 48) and eXaOov TLves But sometimes tw^o verbs are used towithout any connective, as ttov deXeis eTOLfiaawixep Cf. i]9eXep irapeKddv

here.

(Heb. 13

gether directly

:

:

2).

(Mt. 26 17). See discussion of asyndeton Connection in Sentences). :

(c)

These are the

verb by another verb directly.

in this chapter (xii.

The Relation between the Predicate and SubstanThis matter receives

tr^es.

Cases, and a

word

full

tive case alone that occurs, but

pronoun

treatment under the head of

of illustration suffices here.

It is

any oblique case

not the accusaof the substan-

may

be used to express this relation, as wpoaexeTe -svill be the eTrayy eXia (1 nominative and forms the predicate, as avrrj eaTcu tive or

eavTols (Lu. 21

:

34).

In the case of a copula this case ri

Jo. 2 :25). .

{d)

The Pronoun.

sometimes the expanded object, as

It is

TOLOVTOVS ^y]Tel Tovs irpoaKuvovPTas avTOV (Jo. 4: 23). 1

Kurze

vergl. Gr., Ill, p.

Synt., pp. 154-lSl.

634

f.

Cf. K.-G.,

I,

pp. 77-S2; Delbriick, Vergl.

THE SENTENCE

(Jo.

They

Adjectives.

(e)

So

predicates.

20

are

common

aireKaTearaOr] vycrjs

401 with predicates and as

(Mt. 12

:4), airapa^aTou exet ttjv Upo^avvqv

:

Cf. ^\9ev wpuTO^

13).

The

(Heb. 7: 24).

article

and the participle often form the predicate, as Mt. 10 20. The use of the adver!) witli the predicate (/) The Adverb. is so normal as to call for no remark. So o/j.oXoyovij.hws peya karlv TO TTJs evaejSeias nvar-qpLOV (1 Tim. 3 16). Cf. ourcos yap TrXouatcos :

:

kiTLXoprfyqdrja-eTaL (2

Let one example serve for prepositions: (Eph. 3 19).

Prepositions.

(g)

tW

Pet. 1:11).

ir\r}po)dr]T€ els ttSz'

to Tr\ripwp.a tov Oeov

Negative Particles ov and

(/j)

fined to

the predicate, but there find

trations.

Cf. ov yap ToXpccnev (2 Cor. 10

6

:

:

These

fx^.

are

not con-

commonest and p-i] ykvoiro

their

illus-

12)

(Gal.

:

14).

Subordinate Clauses. Most commonh^, though by no means always, they are expansions of the predicate. The adverbial clauses are mainly so, as eypa\l/a vpXv Iva elSrjTe (1 Jo. 5 13), and most object (substantival) clauses, as the 6tl ^corjv exere alcovLov in the same sentence. But adjective clauses likewise often link themselves on to a word in the predicate, as h XpLaT<2 'I-qaou 6v (i)

:

TpoedeTo (Ro. 3

:

24).

(j) Apposition with the Predicate and Looser Amplifications. It is common also, but calls for httle additional remark. Predicative amplifications, as Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 527) calls them, are common. So ets 6 ey(h €Tedr]v K-fjpv^ (1 Tim. 2:7), 6v irpoedeTo 6 deos lkaaTr]piov (Ro. 3:25). The participle with cis is

frequent, as 1

Pet. 2

:

fjpS.s

parallel to the

mon

OTL riyyiKev

case. rj

also

els

as

els

is

4

:

:

in

So we see the accusative as in tovto

^aaiXeia tov Oeov (Lu. 10

:

^pvxw auTov

dfj

vrep tC^v

may

be in apposition with tovto, as

TOVTO, TO pij ttoXlv kv \vTxi Tvpos vpois eXdelv (2 Cor. :

Cf.

yivdoaKeTe

4>'lKuv

avTov

13), locative ev tovtco yLvdoaKopev otl ev avT<Jo fxevopep (1 Jo.

wise the infinitive

Lu. 22

2).

11), ablative as in jiel^ova

Cf. Xeyw TOVTO otl eKaaTos vpQiv Xeyet (1 Cor. 1

13).

:

Greek idiom the LXX. A com-

(Ac. 7: 21), a

to have a clause in apposition with tovto in

TavTTjs ayairriv ovdeis ex^i- tva tls ttjv

(Jo. 15

vl6v

Hebrew and very abundant

construction

an oblique

ws Kara aapKa TeptTarovuTas (2 Cor. 10

Note

5.

37 where

to' Kal

peta avopcou ekoyladrj

TO yeypappevov Set TeXeadrjuaL

h

12).

Like-

2:1).

Cf. also

in apposition

with For an fcxtcnded predicate

epol.

with numerous classes see Rev. 13

:

eKptva e/xaurcS

:

16,

is

TroteT

Trauras, tovs fxiKpovs

Kal TOVS peyaXovs, Kal tovs TrXovaiovs Kal tovs iVTioxovs, Kal tovs eXevde-

povs Kal TOVS SovXovs.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK

402

Each

V. Subordinate Centres in the Sentence.

or phrases that the subject or predicate groups

of the

words

around

itself

may form

a fresh nucleus for new combinations. Thus the long sentences with many subordinate clauses resemble the cell multiplication in life. The N. T. indeed does not show so many complications in the sentence as the more rhetorical writers of In Mt. 7 19 the subject bkvbpov has the participle -kolovv,

Athens.

which

:

in turn has its

own

In Jo. 5

clause with

ixi]

as negative

and

Kapirbv

36 the predicate exw has naprvpiav as object, which has the predicate adjective nel^cc, which in turn is

KoKbv as object.

:

by the ablative rod 'looavov. This is all too simple to need Even adverbs may have expansive apposi-

followed

further illustration. tives as in

(h8e

ev rfj iraTplh

cov (Lu. 4

:

Cf. Delbrlick, Vergl.

23).

Syntax, pp. 222-227, for discussion of the adjective and nection, and p. 228 for the adverb.

The concord between

VI. Concord in Person. predicate as to person

is

so uniform as to call for

its

con-

subject

and

little

remark.

In Greek the person was originally expressed in the ending.

In

the later Greek the pronoun was increasingly used in addition

But only ignorance would allow one The only problem occurs when the subject comprises two or even all three persons. Then, of course, the first prevails over both the second and the third. So e7cb /cat 6 Trariyp eV eafxev (Jo. 10 30). Cf. Mt. 9 14; Lu. 2 :48; 1 Cor. 9 6. But in Gal. 1:8 (eav rifxels ayyekos e^ (see chapter

to

mix

on Pronouns).

his persons in the use of the verb.

:

:

rj

:

ovpavov evayye\L(T7]TaL) the reverse

is

true either because Paul fol-

lows the nearest in both person and number or (Winer-Thayer, p. 518)

because he acknowledges thus the superior exaltation of Then again in cases like Ac. 11 14 ((xoid-qarj av koI iras

the angel.

:

6 oIkos (xov)

the 31.

first

the speaker merely uses the person and

and most important member

The

of the group.

number

of

Cf. Ac. 16

:

subject of person thus easily runs into that of number,

same ending expresses both. Sometimes indeed the first and second persons are used without any direct reference to the for the

Paul in particular is fond of In Ro. 2 1 he calls him u) apdpooTre iras 6 Kpivwv. So also 2 3. In Ro. 9 20 Paul is very earnest, nevovvye ah tIs el; cf. also 11: 17; 14 4. In 1 Cor. 10 30 the first person may be used in this representative way. The same may be true of Gal. 2 18, but not of 2 19. Ro. 7 7-25 The vehemence of passion argues for Paul's is not so clear. but note ae in 8 2. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., own experience, speaker or the person addressed.

arguing with an imaginary antagonist.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

THE SENTENCE p. 317.

On

403

the whole suliject of agreement in person see Del-

briick, Vergl. Synt., p.

229

f.;

Kiihncr-Gerth,

in person see 2 Jo. 8; 1 Cor. 10

:

p. 82.

I,

For change

7-10.

Concord in Number. Here we have a double concord, between subject and predicate (both verb and adjective if that and that between substantive and adjective in used) is copula general. It is simpler, however, to follow another division. (a) Subject and Predicate. VII.

1.

Two

Conflicting Principles.

number, the other the sense matical rule

is,

One

follows

avveaiv).

(/card

the granmiatical

The formal gram-

of course, usually observed, a singular subject hav-

ing a singular verb, a plural subject having a plural verb. the obvious principle in

is

all

This

languages of the Indo-Germanic

was once true of the dual also, though never to the Moulton^ aptly says: ''Many Greek dialects, Ionic conspicuously, had discarded this hoary luxury long before the common Greek was born." The Attic gave it a temporary lease of life, "but it never invaded Hellenistic, not even when a Hebrew dual might have been exactly rendered by its aid." I doubt, however, as previously shown (ch. VII, i, 3), Moulton's explanation group.

same

It

extent.

that the dual probably arose in prehistoric days

count only two.

That was indeed a

when men could Probably

prehistoric time!

the dual was rather the effort to accent the fact that only two

were meant, not more, as in pairs, etc. Hence the dual verb even in Attic was not always used, and it was an extra burden to carry a special inflection for just this idea. No wonder that it vanished utterly in the 2.

kolvt].

Neuter Plural and Singular Verb.

But

the

kolpt] fails

to re-

spond to the Attic rule that a neuter plural inanimate subject takes a singular verb. Homer indeed was not so insistent and the " modern Greek has gone back completely and exclusively to the use of the plural verb in this instance as in others."^ The N. T., hke the KOLPTj in general, has broken away from the Attic rule and responds more to the sense, and also more often regards a neuter plural as really plural. It never was a binding rule, though more so in Attic than in Homer. In the vernacular kolvt] the people treated the neuter plural like other plurals. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 96.) Usually a neuter plural in the N. T. that has a personal or collective meaning has a plural verb.^ So tiravaarijaovTaL reKva (Mt. 10 21), :

1

Prol., p. 57.

On

2

Bliiss, C.r. of

N. T. Gk.,

the whole subject of concord in ntnnber sec K.-G.,

p. 78.

pp. 82-88; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 3. Tl., pp. 230-230; Gildersleevc, Gk. Synt., pp. 52-55.' ^

lb.

I,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

404

2

baiixbvia iviaTevovaiv (Jas.

TO.

:

(Mt. 6

19), Wvt] kirL^r]TOvaLV

:

32), rd

(Mk. 3 11). But the only rule on the matter that is true for N. T. Greek is the rule of liberty. The papyri show the same variety of usage.^ So does the LXX. In the examples given above the MSS. often vary sharply and examples of the singular verb occur with all of them, baiixovta more frequently with the singular verb, as elaijXdev baiixovia roXXd (Lu. 8:30), but TrapeKoKovv in next verse. So in Lu. 4 41 we have daLfxovLa e^rjpX^ro and a little further on 6tl fioeiaav. In Jo. 10 4 we see a similar change in the same sentence, rd vpo^ara avTU) aKoXoudel 6tl otoaaiv. The same indifference to the Attic rule appears about TTvevnaTo. TrpoaeTLiTTou

:

:

:

things as about persons.

9

3)

:

a

and

eiaiv

Thus

Kai

reKva (1 Jo. 3: 10).

if

:

The

a yueXXtt yeveaOai.

course, be plural, even

tva cfyavepudfj

(Lu. 24

e4>avriaav TO. prjp.aTa

the verb

11).

predicate is

epya rod deov (Jo.

to.

In Rev.

:

19

we

find of

will,

singular, as (f>avepa kaTLv rd

Winer ^ and

Cf. Gal. 5: 19.

1

adjective

(to

some extent)

Blass^ feel called on to explain in detail these variations, but one

has to confess that the success is not brilliant. It is better to regard this indifference to congruity as chiefly an historical move-

ment

characteristic of the

kolvj]

as

shown above.

Even the

Attic

did not insist on a singular verb with a neuter plural of animate objects

when the number

of

was

individuals

in

neuter plural was in origin a collective singular. 11 the

MSS.

differ

much between

3. Collective Substantives.

Thus we have

mind.

In

1

The

Cor. 10

:

awk^aivev and ~ov.

These show a similar double usage. oxXos (Mk. 3 32) and so more

eKadjjTo vepl avrdv

:

conmionly with these collective substantives like ox^os, ir\T]dos, But plenty of examples of construction according o'lKia, Xaos. to sense occur. So 6 8e TrXeTo-ros oxXos eaTpcoaau (Mt. 21 8). Sometimes we have both together, as rjKoXoWei avrw oxXos toKvs, OTL Wewpovv (Jo. 6:2). Where there was such liberty each writer or speaker followed his bent or the humour of the moment. The same variation is to be noticed with the participle. Thus 6 yLVioanoiv tov vo/jlov eirapaTol elaiv (Jo. 7:49). oxXos 6 Here the predicate is plural with the verb. Cf. also Lu. 23 1. But in Ac. :

ij.r)

:

5

16 the participle

:

singular hke tX^9os.

though the verb awrfpxeTo

4>kpovTe$ is plural,

Cf. also Ac. 21

:

36; 25

:

24; Lu. 2

:

13.

is

It is

not, of course, necessary that a predicate substantive should agree

in

number with the 4. 1

2

subject. So ecrre k-maroki] XpLarov (2 Cor. 3:3). The Pindaric Construction. Another complication is possible

Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 436. W.-Th., p. 514 f.

"

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 78.

THE SENTENCE when several subjects are united. compound subject, it is put in the

405

If the predicate follows this

But the "Pindaric construction" {(xxwo- UipSapiKov) puts the verb in the Blass says German cannot do this, and he ignores singular. the N. T. examples.^ In Jas. 5 2 f we have a striking explural nearly always.

.

:

ample: '0

irXovTOS

aearjirev, Kal to. lixaTia v/jtwu arjTolSpwTa

vjuLoov

Here

apyvpos KariccTaL.

6 XP^<^os vficou Kal 6

v€v,

KarlwraL

yeyo-

natural

is

Uke the English translation, 'is cankered' (A.V.). Note also Mt. 6 19, oTTov aris kuI ^poJaLs cKpavl^ei (' where moth and rust doth corrupt,' A. v.). Other examples are Mk. 4:41, koI b avtixo^ koI :

ri

ddXaaaa vwaKoveL

Cor. 15: 50,

avTcp; 1

otl

aap^

Kal alp,a

^aaCkdav 9eod

dhvarai. Here the principle of anacoluthon sugby Moulton^ will hardly apply. It is rather the totality that is emphasized by the singular verb as in the English examples. But when the predicate comes first and is followed by sevK\t]povop.riaaL oh

gested

eral subjects,

anacoluthon

may very well

explanation in such cases

Thus ravra

in 1 Cor. 13

:

that the

13 vvvl

English 'and

(cf.

is

now

8e

be the explanation, as in

by Moulton.

the Shakespearean examples given

first

subject

TriarLS,

p.evet

is

The

simplest

alone in mind.

eXxts, aydirri,

rpla

to.

abideth faith, hope, love, these three,'

Tim. 6 4. However, in Mt. 5 18, ecos seems rather the totality that is emphasized as above. See Jo. 12 22. In Rev. 9 12, l8ov epxerat en 8vo oval ixerd ravra, probably the neuter conception of the interjection prevails, though just before we have oval /xia. In Lu. 2 p.'fjrTjp davfxd^ovres, the copula follows one 33, rjv 6 irarrip avrov Kal plan and the participle another. So also rjv Kadrjfxtvai, (Mt. 27 61). Just so aj0077 Mwvarjs Kal 'HXelas avvXaXovvres (Mt. 17 3). Cf. Eph. 4 17 f. In Rev. 21 16, rd /utj/cos Kal rb TrXdros /cat rb v^/os avrrjs laa iarlv, the neuter plural adjective and singular copula are regular. 5. Singular Verb with First Subject. It is very common indeed for the verb to have the singular with the first of the subjects. Cf. Jo. 2 2, 12; 8 5; 18 15; Ac. 11 24. But on the other hand we have Tpoairopevovrai avrQ 'Iclkco^os Kal 'Icodprjs ot viol Ze^edaiov (Mk. 10 35). Cf. also Lu. 23 12; Jo. 21 2; Ac. 5 24. In Ac. 25 23 one particijio j is singular and the other plural. So in Ac. 5 29 we meet aTroKpidels 5e Ilerpos /cat ot dTrocrroXot elirav. With like the Greek).

Cf. also 1

au irapeXdy 6 ovpavos Kal

:

:

yyj, it

rj

:

:

17

:

17

17

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

7)

1

lb., p. 79.

^

Prol., p. 58.

Sometimes Shakespeare used a sinjiular verb for the sak(> of p. 65), at otlier times more like our mod. Kiig.: "It years since," etc. Cf. Ck. ianr o'l, etc. Cf. also Riem. and

metre (Farrar, Gk. Synt., is

now a

hiiruln'd

Goclzer, Hynt., p. 18; Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., pp.

263-2C8.

"

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

406

the verb

is

iraaa ttoXls

usually in the singular in the N. T. oi/cta

t)

(xepiaOelaa

KaO'

eavrrjs

So Mt. 12

:

25

Cf. also

ov (iTadrjaeTaL.

Mt. 5 18; 18 8; Eph. 5:5. In Gal. 1 8 Blass^ thinks it would be impossible to have evayyeXi^uixeda with ly/xtTs ^ ayyeXos. d5eX(/)i7 But the impossible happens in Jas. 2 15, eav d5eX06s :

:

:

rj

:

We

uTrdpxwcrtj/.

yv/jLvoi

have a similar

the

disjunctive

loosely say: "If

any one has

the use

of

in English in

difficulty

One will come and

and other pronouns. left their

books, they can

get them. 6.

We

The Literary Plural.

have already mentioned the use

of the plural in a kind of impersonal

as Tedvy]Kaaiv (Mt. 2 indefinite plural like

sharply about

:

way

20), aiTovaiv (Lu.

cos \k.yovcFLv

have any right to claim

12

:

20)

critics disagree

Blass^ flatly denies that

we

this literary plural in Paul's Epistles be-

cause he associates others with himself in his sists

and the general

The

(Rev. 2: 24).

(the literary plural).

it

to conceal one's identity,

letters.

Winer ^

in-

when he

that Paul often speaks in his apostolic character

uses the plural and hence does not always include others.

Moul-

ton^ considers the matter settled in favour of the epistolary plural

He

from the papyri several examples. So Tb.P. Tpoaeireaev rjfuu, B.U., 449 (iiiii/A.D.) cLKomas OTL vcoOpevr] ayo^vLovjxev, J.H.S., xix, 92 (ii/A.D.), x^tpe Dick^ has made an exfioL, HTjrep yXvKVTCLTr], Kal 4>povTi'^eTe riixcov. haustive study of the whole subject and produces parallels from late Greek that show how easily €70; and 17^1615 were exchanged. The matter can be clarified, I think. To begin with, there is no reason in the nature of things why Paul should not use the literary plural if he wished to do so. He was a man of culture and used to books even if he used the vernacular koivt] in the main. The late Greek writers did; the papyri show examples of it. G. Milligan evpov ^e^ov(Thess., p. 132) cites Tb. P. 58 (ii/B.c.) evpr]Kap.€v bpC^VTes io'iiirjV, P. Held. Xeviieda; P. Hib. 44 (iii/B.C.) eypaxpafxev ypacfio} Kal (jAvaprjaw; and an inscription, 6 (iv/A.D.) TLdTevofiev [fxeTeireix-] possibly a rescript of Hadrian, O. G. I. S 484, Xodfxev in the

26

koivt).

cites

(ii/B.C.) ovTi HOI. kv HroXe/iatSet

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

\}/aiJLr]V

—

j3ov\rideis

vofxl^co.

ypa4>op.ev

— edo^ev

rfjittv

— — edoKifxaaafxev — kirlcmvov —

Besides, Blass^ admits that

does not

differ in reality

21 24 oWafxev probably :

is

we ha

from

,

v/:t in 1

of 2

ypa(f)0}

in contrast to John,

:

who

1.

4,

where in Jo.

uses

:

oi^uat

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 80.

^

W.-Th.,

2

lb., p. 1G6.

"

Prol., p. 86.

6

Dcr

6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 16G.

schriftstell. Plu. bei

Paulus (1900),

p. 18.

qyr](7ap.7]V

But

Jo. 1

p. 517.

just

— THE SENTENCE

407

below. In Jo. 1 14, as certainly in 1 16, others are associated with the writer. The author of Hebrews also uses the singular or plural according to the humour of the moment. Thus 7rei06/xc0a :

exofiev

also 6

he has

one

(13

and the next verse 11, with 13

ov kXa^o/xev

5i'

:

:

attention to

3

f.

Trapa/caXco

Now

— cnroKaTaa-Tadoj.

Surely he

as applicable to

1

Then again

all.

:

5

no word

talking of

is

Blass^ overlooks this

aTro(TToKi]v.

x^-pi-v

Cf.

In Ro.

as to Paul.

followed in the same verse by

is

iituv

22

nal aTcoaToK-qv.

x^-P'-v

when he mentions

calls

Col. 4

18)

1, 3, 9,

:

else

and

:

:

in

It is

5e5e/xat.

—

Th. 2 18, rjdeXrjaaiiev But what €70? /jLev UavXos. whole matter ^ is 2 Cor. 10 1-11 C. Paul is here defending his own apostolic authority where the whole point turns on his own personality. But he uses first the singular, then clear also in 1

:

really settles the

the plural. T€v6p.eda 86^oj

(10

(10 :

:

Thus :

TrapaKoXcb (10

ij^teis

3),

(10

9), eafiev

(10

:

11), Kaux'jcro^teSa (10

:

14-7

:

1), dappco, Xo7tfo/xat

:

(10

:

2),

arpa-

Kauxwco/xat, alaxvv6r](ToiJLaL (10

7),

credible that here Paul has in

Cf. also 2 Cor. 2

:

:

:

13), etc.

mind any one

else

It is

8),

:

not

than himself.

16 for a similar change from singular to

The use of the literary plural by Paul sometimes does mean that he always uses it when he has a plural. Each case rests on its own merits. Jesus seems to use it also in plural.

not, of course,

3:11, o dibapLev \a\ovpev /cat 6 eccpuKafxev paprvpovpev. In Mk. 30 (ttws opoLcoacopev rrju jSacnXeiav rod Oeov;) Christ associates others with him in a very natural manner. The concord between ad(6) Substantive and Adjective. Jo.

4

:

and substantive is just as close as that between subject and verb. This applies to both predicate and attributive adjectives. Here again number is confined to the singular and the

jective

plural, for the dual is gone.

Cf. in lieu of the dual the curious

Kaipov Kol Kaipovs Kal i]ptav Kaipov

(Rev. 12

14).

:

When

adjectives

from this accord in number or gender (Eph. 4:17f.; 1 Cor. 12:2; Rev. 19:14), it is due to the sense instead of mere grammar, Kara uhvecnv. Thus in Mk. 9 15 we have 6 oxXos Iddvres, Ac. 3:11 aweSpapev irds 6 Xaos

and

participles deviate

:

tKdap^OL,

Lu. 2

:

13 (TTpaTids alvovvTuv,

exovTuu (note both), Ac. 21 IwapaTOL (Jo. 7: 49). tive differs little ToaovTOVi (Jo. 6

CIS

In Ph. 2

from :

30

:

:

Mk. 8

:

1

>

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. IGG.

»

Dick, Der

e'i-q

ravra (Lu. 15

sohriftstoll. Plu. hoi P:iuliis,

Epist. to the Thcss., 1908, p. 131

f.

pi]

Cf. 6 oxXos

to etrat tVa deu) the plural adjec-

taov in adverbial sense.

9), tI av

oxXov OPTOS Kal

irXijdos Kpa^ovres, etc.

1900,

:

j).

Cf. xaDra

tI koTLv

20).

53.

agrees with Dick.

Milligan, St. Paul's

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

408

Representative Singular. But other points come up about the number of the substantives. One is the use of the singular with the article to signify the whole class. The examples are frequent, such as 6 ayados av9po:iros (Mt. 12 35), ariixeta (c)

also

:

Tov OLTToaToXov (2 Cor. 12

12), 6 epyaTrjs (Lu.

:

10

7), rod

:

'lov8aiov

This discussion about the number of nouns could more properly be treated under syntax of nouns, but I have no such chapter. Cf. Cases. (Ro. 3:1), TOV TTTwxov (Jas. 2:6).

Idiomatic Plural in Nouns.

{d)

Abstract substantives oc-

cur in the plural in the N. T. as in the older Greek, an idiom foreign to English.

Thus

2

^owt Mt. 15

:

Cf. also

1).

20 and

irXeope^iaL

(Mk. 7

22), TrpoacoTro\7]fx\}/iaLs (Jas.

:

In 2

19; rds iropvelas 1 Cor. 7:2.

:

both the singular and the plural occur. Cf. Mt. 15 19. This use of the plural of abstract substantives does indeed lay stress on the separate acts. Some words were used almost exclusively in the plural, or at any rate the plural was felt to be more appropriate. So alojpes in the sense of 'world' (Heb. 1 2) or 'eternity,' as els tovs alCjvas twv aio^vuv (Gal. 1:5), or with singular and plural, as tov alccvos toop ai6:vcov (Eph. 3:21). Cf. also to. ayia for 'the sanctuary' (Heb. 8 2) and ayta ayluv for 'the most Holy Place' (Heb. 9:3). The word ovpavos is used in the singular often enough, and always so in the Gospel of John, as 1 32, but the plural is common also. Cf. Paul's allusion to "third heaven" (2 Cor. 12 2), an apparent reflection of the Jewish idea of seven heavens. In English we use "the heavens" usually for the canopy of sky above us, but 17 jSacrt\da Twv ovpavihv uniformly in the N. T., as Mt. 3 2. The Hebrew Cor. 12

:

Pet. 2

1

1

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

D'i;ad

majesty" has an element of truth in

N. T.

Blass, Gr. of

Gk., p. 83.

this idiomatic plural,

(Mt. 25

:

33), ds

aird avaToXcop

TTuXat

of

is

20), irpo

such as

:

18), koXttoi

(Lu. 16

TTjs

IfiCLTLOP

dupas (Ac. 12

(not

1

:

The

6).

:

:

6), kv toIs

details see

plural of

19

:

23

(Mk. 16

de^Loh

11), dvpat (Ac.

(Mt. 2

The names

13.

:

But the

23).

in Jo.

also)

x^tcoj'

plural alixaTa note Jo.

:

apaToXfj

ttj

For further

it.

(Mt. 8

airo dva/jLojp

also found, as ev

so-called "plural of

A number of other words have k 8e^LQ>v, e^ apLaTepwv, e^ evoivviiwv

(Jo. 21

to. de^Lo. jiepy]

(Mt. 2:1),

(Mt. 16

them

only

The

partly responsible for ovpavol.

is

:

9),

5

singular of 5e^tS

ei'

5),

:

:

19),

some

(Eph.

1:

seems to mean 19 2). For the

Iixoltlov

(cf.

:

of feasts are often plural,

TO. eyKalvta (Jo. 10 22), to. yeveaia (Mk. 6 21), rd a^vfia (Mk. 14 1), yaiJLOL (Mt. 22 2), (7d/3/3ara (Ac. 17 2). So also some cities have plural names, as 'lepoaoXv/jLa (Mt. 2:1), 'kdrjvai.

such as

:

:

(Ac. 17

:

16), KoXoo-o-at (Col.

:

:

1:2).

:

Different are tTnaroXai (1 Cor.

THE SENTENCE 16

:

3), TO.

apyvpia (Mt. 27:

409

rd oi/'w^a (Lu. 3

5),

(Ro.

14), SiadrJKaL

:

9:4).

Idiomatic Singular in Nouns. On the other hand the where one would naturally look for a plural. A neuter singular as an abstract expression may sum up the whole (e)

singular appears

Thus irav 6 The same

mass.

Jo. 17 2. :

in TO eXarroi'

Cf. also

found and -jrav is

Cf. to yeuvufiepou (Lu. 1:35)

The same concealment of the person The neuter plural in-

Jo. 5:4).

"(1

37 refers to believers.

:

collective use of the neuter singular

(Heb. 7:7).

TO yeyevvT] idhov

seen in to KaTexov otSare (2 Th. 2:6).

is

deed 1

in Jo. 6

in this sense, as

Then again the to more than one

singular

f.).

belongs 8iav

common

very

is

27

:

(Mk. 8

:

WevTo

17),

TrpoacjTTOV avTojv

ttj

(Mt. 17:6),

Tmroipwpikvqv ex^Te

KapSia avTa)v (Lu. 1

:

11),

(Ac. 7:45), 5td aTOfxaros iravToov (Ac. 3

In

(Jo. 10

:

not in

p-eaop,

39).

Cor. 6

1

:

peaov tov

5, di^d

but in the singular

:

66),

ttjv 6a(f)vv vpa>v

TepLi^coaa/jLevoL

(Rev. 6

Cor.

etc. (1

used where the substantive

So

subject.

h

14), eSodT] avTols aToXi] \evKr] poiv

to. fxcopd, to. aadeprj,

is

(ztto :

TrpoadoTrou

18),

etc

a8e\(t)ov,

a8e\(f)ou.

The

ttjs

ttju

ext

(Eph. 6 tcjp

:

iraTe-

x^'pos avTcov

the difficulty

fuller

Kap-

t-wecrav

lies

form would

have been the plural or the repetition of the word, dSeX^oO Kal In all these variations in number the N. T. writers dSeX^oO. merely follow in the beaten track of Greek usage with proper freedom and individuality. For copious illustrations from the ancient Greek see Gildersleeve, Greek Syntax, pp. 17-59.^ Two or three other passages of a (/) Special Instances. more special nature call for comment. In Mt. 21 7 (eireKadLcrev :

probable that

not to T-qv In Mt. 24 26 h ttj eprjfjLco and h toIs ra/xeiois are in contrast. In Mt. 27 44 ot \riaTai is not to be taken as plural

CTrdi/o;

avToov) it is

bvov Kal TOV ttojXov.

avToiv refers to rd liiaTia,

:

:

Probal)ly both reproached Jesus at

for the singular.

first

and

afterwards one grew sorry and turned on the other, as Lu. 23 39 :

In Mt. 22 1 and Mk. 12 1 eWev h Trapa(3o\als is followed by only one parable, but there were douljtless others not recorded. has

it.

In Mt. 9

:

:

:

8, kdo^aaav top Oeop top boPTa k^ovalav TOLavTtjp rots di'^pcoTrois,

we have a double not true of

sense in dopra, for Jesus

who

had the

k^ovaLav in

So

a sense

40 merely equivalent to ev /StjSXo) tQiv irpo
TO Hpr]p.epop tp Tols

got the benefit of

tt po(i>i]TaLs

it.

in Ac. 13

:

is

:

1

Cf. also Dclbriick, Vcrfrl. Synt.,

K.-C, Bd.

I,

pp. 271

IT.;

1. Tl.,

Brug., Griech.

Cir.,

pp. 133-172,3. Tl., pp. 240-248; pp. 3G9-373.

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK

410

NEW TESTAMENT

Here we deal only with nouns, for But gender plays an important part in the agreement of substantive and adjective. (a) Fluctuations in Gender. The whole matter is difficult, for substantives have two sorts of gender, natural and grammatical. The two do not always agree. The apparent violations of the rules of gender can generally be explained by the conflict in these two points of view with the additional observation that the grammatical gender of some words changed or was never VIII.

Concord in Gender.

verbs have no gender.

firmly settled.

All the constructions according to sense are

to analogy (Middleton in Syntax, p. 39).

marks on gender

on Declensions.

see chapter

due

For further general In Ac. 11

:

re-

28 Luke

has XLfjLov fxeyaX-qv, not ixkyav. Ill Rev. 14 19 two genders are found with the same word, e^aXev els ttju \r}v6v rod Ovixov rov 6eov tov Cf. Lu. 4 25 and 15 14. fieyav. The papyri vary also in the gender of this word (Moulton, Prol, p. 60). The common gender of Beds (Ac. 19 37, cf. dea 19 27) and similar words is discussed in the chapter on Declensions. In Rev. 11:4 al eorcores skips over 'KvxvlaL curiously and goes back (the participle, not the article) to :

:

:

:

:

1

ouTOL (ovToi

ai 8vo eXatat Kal al dvo \vxviaL al kvoiinov rov Kvplov

elffLV

But more

TTJs yrjs eaTcoTes).

12

28, TToia karlv

:

evToiXrj

Apocalypse

al)out the

TpcoTT) iravTwv,

later.

In

Mk.

Winer (Winer-Thayer,

p.

general idea of

would be beside the point as it is rather the omnium. Is it not just construction Kara avpeaLv?

In Ph. 2

tls

178) thinks that iraacop

:

TLs KOLvwvla.

1

el

airXaxva

is difficult

after

Blass- cuts the knot boldly

el tl

TrapaiJ.Wt.ov

by suggesting

and

el tl

in

the examples here which Moulton ^ accepts with the sense of valet, but he cites papyri examples like hirl tl ixlav twv

quid

.

Par. p. 15(ii/B.c.);

el

all si .

.

B.U.326 (ii/A.D.). See also eav 8e TL aXXa (nraLTr]dQ)p.ev, Amh. Pap. 11, 85, 11, and eav be TL cijSpoxos yevrjTaL, ib., 15. Cf. Radcrmacher, N. T. Gr., p. 184. Perhaps after all this correction may be right or the text may be corrupt. The scribe could easily have written tls for TLva because of the preceding examples. A nodding scribe may even have thought (TifKaxva feminine singular. But what is one to say of olklCov,

el 8e tl

TepLaaaypanfiaTa,

17

Rev. 9 12; 11 14? Shall we think"* of OXixpLs or TaXatTrwIn Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12 11), rapd Kvplov eyeveTo avT-q Kal Icftlv

oval in

pia?

:

:

:

:

But Moulton

(CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151) cites from the pap. numerous gender concords like rfiv ireirTcoKOTa, etc. Cf. Reinhold, De Graec. etc., p. 57; Krumbacher, Prob. d. neugr. Schriftspr., p. 50. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 81. ^

false

3

Prol., p. 59.

"

W.-Sch., p. 255.

411

THE SENTENCE

translation of the Hebrew nkt (Ps. just before in reference to \idou. used (117) 118 23), for ovtos avrr]. It is even possible that for idiom Greek TovTo would be the also So ycjovlas. rfj BdaX in Ro. 11:4 avrr] may refer to KecfjoXriv

we may have a

eaviiaarri,

is

:

comes from the LXX (Jer. in Tobit Tfi BaaX TTJ oafiaXeL

2:8;2:28;7:9; 1

:

Hos. 2:8).

Cf.

See Declensions for further

5 B.

remarks.

The Neuter Singular. This is not always to be regarded of gender. Often the neuter conveys a different conbreach as a in the question of Pilate, tL karLv dXij^eta; (Jo. 18 38). So ception. 6 vofxos; (Gal. 3 19), tL kanv avOpcoiros; (Heb. 2 6), rt ovv TL also Cf. av e'ir} ravra; (Lu. 15 26), et 8oKe2 tis elvai tl iir]bev cbv; (Gal. 6:3). (6)

:

:

:

:

But on the other hand note (Mt. 22

ya\r] ePToKr]

(Eph.

eXTTts;

12

:

and

18)

2

1 Pet.

1

and

^epei TIS

(Lu. 12

:

where tovto

f.,

may be

Cor. 2:6). So also apKeTOV

Cf. also the reading of

above and

Tov

The neuter persons TTciv

^/vxh TrXetov kaTLv

17

is

6 (Jo.

ttj

rjnepa

D apeoTov in Ac.

eoTLv in

Ikolvov

vto-

el

tt]s Tpo4)r]s

the predicate with persons, as

The neuter

11).

17

Uerpos eyevero (Ac.

adjective in the predi-

perfectly normal in cases like kavov tw tolovtco

is

avTTi (2

:

rl 6

ne-

rj

kcmv

15), tIs

:

Cf. also tovto xo-pls (twice) in

21).

Indeed TavTa Cor. 6

36), avrr] taTiv

:

(Ro. 11

predicate and really refers to

Cf. also

TavTCL TLves rJT^ (1

cate

:

is

vivop.€veLTe.

el

23).

nva (Ac. 5

irp6
rj

In particular observe

18).

:

eluai

38), tIs

ovtos 8i tl (Jo. 21

19

:

:

Lu. 22

:

KaKLa avTrjs

Tj

12

:

kirLTLula :

Blass^ treats dpK€-

3.

Latin

like the

38 as

ri

(Mt. 6 34). satis.

singular in the collective or general sense to represent

So

not peculiar to the N. T. 17:2), TO

(ZTToXcoXos

(Lu. 19

plural also as rd /xcopd tov Koaixou,

:

Th. 2:6), So the neuter

to KaTexov (2 10), etc.

Cor. 1: 27).

to. aadevrj (1

The

neuter article to "kyap (Gal. 4 25) deals with the word Hagar, not the gender of the person. In Jas. 4 4 noLxaXides in W. H. stands without /jlolxoXoI Kai, but none the less may be regarded Cf. Tei'ed ij.olxo.\'ls (Mt. 12 39) and Hos. 2 as comprehensive.^ :

:

:

:

4, 23. (c)

In

1

Cor. 15

Explanatory

10 note

:

6 iariv

elul 6

elfiL,

and tovt

not

6s,

a different idea.

A

eariv.

special idiom

is

and the demonstrative

an explanation which are both used without much regard to the gender (not to say number) of antecedent or predicate. Thus in Mk. 3 17 ovopLa Boaur]pyes, 6 koTLV viol ^poPTr^s] 12 42 Xevrrd 8vo 6 koTLV (6 koTLv)

the relative 6 as TOVT

'i(jTL,

:

:

KoSpavTris;

15

:

16

ttjs

avXrjs,

TOirov, 6 kdTLV KpavLOV TOTTOS (cf.

1:42 Meaaiap

38); 1

kcTLV irpOLLTiopLOV,

Mt. 27

6 taTLP] Col. 3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 76.

:

14

:

15

:

22 Vo\yodav

33)) pa^^el, b XeyeraL (Jo. ttjp aycnrrip, 6 "

1

:

toTLP avpbtap.os;

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 254.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

412

Eph. 6: 17

iJ.axo.ipav,

Blass^ observes that

o kaTLv prjfxa deov.

it is

only in the Apocalypse that this explanatory relative is assimilated to the antecedent or predicate, as Xa/jLiraSes, d daiv to. -Kvevixara (Rev. 4:5), but

6({)da\iJLovs eTrra, ot elaiv to.

But

TPevnara (5:6).

it is

other-

wise with the ordinary

relative, as 6 vaos tov deov, o'lrLves lore u^ueTs (1

Cor. 3

Tjrts

17); $tXt7r7roi;s,

:

karlv wpdoTyj ttoXis (Ac. 16

avTLKeLfievo^v, ryrts earlp avTols evdet^LS aircciXeias

vwep

ypealv p.ov

vp.C:v,

rjrts

earlv 86^a

(Ph. 1

(Eph. 3

hixuiv

:

12); vt6 tojv

28)

:

kv ratj 6X1-

;

The

13).

:

use of

TovT IcFTLv Is a common idiom in the later Greek (less so in the older) and is exactly equivalent to the Latin id est and has no tovt' Utlv dee fxov regard to case, number or gender. So 'EXcot Cf. Heb. 2 (Heb. 7:5). tovs adeMovs Utlv (Mt. 27:46); tout'

—

:

14; 9

See further p. 399,

11, etc.

:

and

ch.

XV,

vii, (d), 10.

The Participle. It often has the construction /card avpeas in Mk. 9 26, /cpd^as Kal ToXXd airapa^as referring to to irvevp.a.

(d)
:

Cf. Lu. 2 res (25

:

So

1).

TwiJLevoL;

:

13 o-rpartas alvohvTOiV,

Kpa^ovTes (Ac. 21

TrXrjdos

But on the other hand note avaaTav

24).

also in 1 Cor. 12: 2 Wvi] aiva'ybixevoi;

Rev. 4

Xat XeyoPTes (cf

:

.

eu Kad'

(f)Oivr]v

XeyovTa,

Rev. 9

Cf. dr}piov y'ep-ovTa (Rev. 17

kvbebvixevoL.

p. 526) takes kaKOTwp.evoL in Eph. 4 Cf. Lu. 19 37. ct>epovTes (Ac. 5 16). :

:

Eph. 4

ep exoiv Xeyovres;

8 fwa,

:

:

:

14)

3).

36)

:

:

17

:

f.

15

^oo:v-

;

(Lu. 23

:

Wvi] eaKofxeya-

c/jcofat

14 aTpaTeufxaTa

Winer (Winer-Thayer,

18 with

So

11

19

;

:

TrXrjdos

vixas.

Cf. also

irXridos

(at eKKXrjaiaL) aKovovTes

(Gal.

Rev. 21 14 to Tetxos exoiv seems a- mere sHp. exwf (Rev. 4 7) may be mere confusion in sound of But ^(^ov XeyoPTes Xeycov (4:1), (jio^val See also (puvi] 'ixov and ex^^v. 1

22

:

f.).

But

in

:

—

:

—

—

(11

:

15), XvxviaL

87) cites ^Qov (e)

form

— eaTS^Tes

(11:4).

Radermacher {N.

T. Gr., p.

— aaTpaiTTcov from Apocalypsis Anastasiae (pp. 6, 13).

The question of an adjective's using one Adjectives. for more than one gender has been already discussed at

length in the chapter on Declensions. Thus oTpaTids ovpaviov (Lu. 2 13) is not a breach of concord, for ovpaviov is feminine. If masculine and feminine are used together and the plural adjective or :

participle occurs, the masculine, of course, prevails over the feminine when persons are considered. Thus r^v 6 iraTrip avTov Kai ly fjLTjTTjp

davfiCi^ovTes

(Lu. 2: 33).

So also

'A7pt7r7ras

/cat

Bepvt/c??

aaira-

as d5eX06s

and even with the disjunctive 77, In Rev. 8: 7 the neuter plural is used 15). a8eX(t>rj yvijivoi (Jas. 2 of two nouns (one feminine and one neuter), x^Wa ko,' ^rOp ne^iiyaafievoL (Ac.

25

:

13)

r)

:

neva.

Cf. also (jidapToh, apyvplcj

position.

t)

xpv(^i-V (1

Ilot/ctXats voaoLS /cat jBaaavots 1

P^t. 1: 18), really ap-

(Mt. 4

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 77.

:

24), xdcnjs dpx^s nal

THE SENTENCE k^ovalas

(Eph.

Kia ixeptadelaa

1

But on the other hand note xoXts ^ olsame gender. But when different

21), etc.

:

(Mt. 12

:

25), the

genders occur, the adjective Kal TTOTairai olKodofiai

usually repeated, as in xoraTroi \i6oL

is

(Mk. 13

1),

:

17), ovpavbv aaivov Kal yrjy KaLvijv

:

9,

Heb. 3

rkXovs ^efSaiav Karaax'^i^^v

note

vlbv

is

8Qipa re Kal OvalaL

followed, while in

iraaa doais Kai irav owprjfxa (J as. 1

(Rev. 21

:

There

1), etc.

:

em-

is

But one adjective with the gender by no means uncommon. Thus in

phasis also in the repetition. of one of the substantives

Heb. 9

413

/jlt]

bvvap.evai.,

the last substantive

is

6, kav rr}v -jrapprjalav Kal TO KavxHIJ-a fikxpi'

:

the

,

apaev in Rev. 12

5.

:

first

rules in gender.^

Radermacher {N. T. XXII, 84.

Per contra Gr., p. 86)

reKvov from the Iliad, Concord in Case. This is not the place for the syntax of the cases. That matter belongs to a special chapter. They concur in the case of the substantive (a) Adjectives. with which they are used. The variations are either indeclinable forms like irXrjpris^ in Jo. 1 14 (agreeing with avrov or 86^av) or are due to anacoluthon, as Jas. 3 8 ttjv 8e yXuaaau ov8els 8aiJLaaai bbvarai avdpoiiroiV aKaTaararov KaKov, fxearri lov (so W. H. punctuate). They lend themselves readily to anacoluthon (6) Participles. cites

(f)i\e

IX.

:

:

Thus

in case.

e8o^e rots awoaToXoLS Kal Tols irpea^vrepoLS, ypOAl/avrts

See Mk. 7 19 KaOapiCccv. Mk. 6 9 has vTo8e8ewhereas before we have avrols and a'ipwaiv, but W. H. read h8vaaadaL (Nestle, h8vcrr]ade). In Mk. 12 40, ol Kareodovres Kal TpoaevxofjLevoL, we have a nominative in apposition with the ablative aird rdv ypafx/JiaTecov rwv deXovTcov. Ill Ph. 3 18 f. tovs ex^povs is in agreement ^vith the case of ovs, while ol 4)povovvTts below skips back to woXXoi. Sometimes, as in kTn<jTeWr]aav to. Xoyta (Ac. 15

:

22

f.).

:

:

fihovs,

:

:

(Ro. 3:2), the substantive will of the verb.

In Heb. 9

:

10

make

sense as subject or object

oiKatcb^cara

— einKdyLeva

in apposition

with dvalai skips over the parenthetical clause between. Cf. also perhaps ap^ap.evoi (Lu. 24 47), ap^ap.evos (Ac. 1 22. Cf. Lu. 23 5), ap^ap.tvos (Ac. 10 37). Note this idiom in Luke's writings. :

:

:

:

(c)

The Book of Revelation.

It is full of variations (sole-

from case-concord, especially in appositional clauses. Thus in Rev. 7 9 after eUov, Kal i8ov we first have the nominacisms)

:

1

On

the subject of gender see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

1. Tl., i)p.

89-133;

Drug., Gricch. Gr., pp. 30.5-369. ^

The

e.x.x.

of this indecl. use of

MSS. of the N. T., See IMass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 81. See Moulton, Prol., p. 50. See ch. VII, 2,

irX-npris

occurring in mo.st passag(!s of the N. T.

The (/),

pap. confirm the N. T. of this book, for details.

MSS.

are abundant in

;

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

414

and then the accusative with

tive with iSov 1

'Irjaov

XpiaTov, whereas in 11

5)

:

papyri show

the idiom.

Letr. 149 (ii/A.D.),

.

with marg.

6 ocpLs (text,

:

The

accusative tov bpaKovra.

the

—6

Cf. tov a8eKcf)ov

'AvTL4>i\ov

Moulton,

Cf.

(i/B.c).

6 fxaprvs

in apposition

/jlikpovs is

Cf 20 2 where

apposition with

in

is

18 tovs

:

the dative toXs SovXols, ktX. ace.)

Thus

eUop.

retains the nominative rather than the ablative dTro

(Rev.

"EW-qv

5tdroxos (=5ta5.) in

— linrdpxTis

in

B.G.U. 1002

The Apocalypse

Pro!., p. 60.

thus by

is

no means alone. See also wapa to[v JloaTJov/jLov rov evpovra B.G.U. 846 (ii/A.D.), i]Kovaa Todrjs Xeyuv P. Par. 51 (b.c. 160), t/xe XeXu/cas In particular the participle

TToXtds exco?', lb.

the nominative

kpxbixivos

God

unchangeableness of 1

:

17; 16

12

:

"0

5.

by

pressed 3

:

vikCov

Cf. this formula in 1

So

follows.

in 2

:

26

appears with

meant

exo)v

1

10:2

exccp

if (j)covr];

4

8;

:

7, 17,

:

8;

the case

The wrong

:

9

14

:

case it

if

is

apposi-

(6 exo)v in

of parenthesis,

(sort

14 exwv (loosely appended); 19

:

:

16 (almost separate sentence)

:

to refer to avrov or gender

tion with ayyeXcS);

14

in

Kal 6

rjv

ainco {ttjpCjv also)

in tw vlkcovtl 8coaw avTui 2

regularly in the dative without anacoluthon.

is

nom-

the

6 cbv Kal 6

evidently intentional to accent the

(1:4).

But

aiiTU).

oltto

occurs as a set phrase, the case being ex-

which

avTos

21

ai'TOP,

is

common in

is

In the case of

inative in the Apocalypse.

cf.

1

12 (loose connection of

16);

:

ex<^'')-

6 and 17:3 exoov has wrong gender and case. This partiseems to be strung on loosely generally, but in 21 11 f. the proper case and gender occur. Cf also 17 \eyovaa (2 20) and \eywv (14: 7). In 14 12 ot TrjpovPTes is a loose addition like More difficult seems tp Kapipco ireTrvpcofxeKaTapalpovaa (3 12). 17 20 T-qp \liipr]p tov irvpos pr]s (1 15), margin TreTvpu/j-kpot. In 19 TTJs KaLopeprjs the participle agrees in gender wdth \inP7]p and in

In 5

:

ciple

:

.

:

:

:

:

:

case with Trap'

Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. (Amh. Pap. 11, m to

ivvpos.

avTov top ofioXoyovpTa

larly the accusative of a participle is in

He

tive or ablative).

yap

rifup

gives Ze^acTTov in the

and

vlos in

N

concord

is

attracts

120, 25, ov SeSo/crat

Pap. Ill 42

C

(3) 3,

But the point

of difficulty

not any one isolated discord in

It is rather the great

that

113,

Dittenberger (Or. inscr. 611)

apposition.

Revelation of John

case or gender. of

gives also Oxy. P. I

'AttoWwpIov hfx^aWwp.

airexoo

where reguapposition with a geni-

ex^LP tl dvaTvxovPTes ; Flinders-Pet.

aSLKovfxeda vtto

86) cites

attention.

number of such violations As showTi above, other

books of the N. T. show such phenomena. Observe especially Luke, who is a careful writer of education. Note also Paul in Ph. 1 30 where exovres (cf. this word in Rev.) is used with ufxlp, :

THE SENTENCE and 2 Cor. 7

LXX,

:

5 rmwu

— 6\i^byLevoL. Dan. 10

415

Similar discords occur in the

1 Mace. 13 16; 1 Mace. and indeed occasionally in the very best of Greek writers. The example in 1 Mace. 13 16 {\a6v Xeyopres) is worth singling out for its bearing on both case and number. Nestle {Einf. in das griech. N. T., p. 90 f.) notes the indeclinable use of Veywv and Xe-

15

as in Jer. 14: 13;

:

5-7;

:

28;

:

:

yovTe^ in the

also

LXX,

Thackeray,

like l>25<^.

Cf. Nestle, Phil. Sacra., p. 7.

such matters at sion of anacoluthon in a sentence off

See

One must not be a slavish martinet in the expense of vigour and directness. The occa-

Gr., p. 23.

and making a new

start.

than these general remarks.

is

just the necessity of breaking

But the Apocalypse demands more Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 534) calls

attention to the fact that these irregularities occur chiefly in the description of the visions where there would naturally be some

Moulton^ argues from the fact that the papyri of uneducated writers show frequent discord in case that John was somewhat backward in his Greek. He speaks of "the curious Greek of Revelation," "the imperfect Greek culture of this book." He notes the fact that most of the examples in both the papyri and Revelation are in apposition and the writer's "grammatical sense is satisfied when the governing word has affected the case of one object. "2 Moulton^ cites in illustration Shakespeare's use of "between you and I." This point indeed justifies John. But one must observe the comparative absence of these syntactical discords in the Gospel of John and the Epistles of John. In Ac. 4 13 both Peter and John are called aypaixnaroL koI iditoTaL. This need not be pushed too far, and yet it is noteworthy that 2 Peter excitement.

:

and Revelation are just the two books of the N. T. whose Greek jars most upon the cultured mind and which show most kinship to the KOLVT] in somewhat illiterate papyri. One of the theories about the relation between 1 Peter and 2 Peter is that Silvanus (1 Pet. 5 12) was Peter's scribe in writing the first Epistle, and that thus the Greek is smooth and flowing, while in 2 Peter we have Peter's own somewhat uncouth, unrevised Greek. This theory rests on :

the assumption of the genuineness of 2 Peter, which

So also

puted.

of

is mucli disActs Luke refines Peter's Greek in the reports

'

Exp.,

2

CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Prol., p. 9.

*

lb.

Gk.

J:in.,

203

1901,

f.

j).

71; CI. Rov., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Trol., pp. 0, GO.

Merch. of Venice,

Rcl., p. 1G8.

the abl., the p.

in

loc.

In

and

tlie

iii,

2.

Cf. also Harrison, Prol. to

Attio insor. the

noun

in absolute expressions.

is

found

in

tlie

Study

apposition with

Cf. Meisterh., Att. Inschr.,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

416

Now

24 we seem to have the comon the Gospel of John which he has read and approved. Moulton^ naturally suggests the hypothesis that the Gospel and Epistles of John had the smoothing hand of this brother of culture (perhaps in Ephesus), while in the Apocalypse we have John's own rather uncultured Greek. One may add to this the idea of Winer about possible excitement and passion due to the great ideas of the book. In the Isle of Patmos John, if still there, would have little opportunity for scholarly help and the book may have gone out unrevised. There are other theories, but this matter of authorship is not the grammarians' of his addresses.

ment

in Jo. 21

:

of a brother (or several)

task.

Other Peculiarities

(d)

apposition e7ra77eXta,

in Apposition.

Thus

call for illustration. rju

avTos eirrjyyeiXaTO

Further examples of

in 1 Jo. 2

rj/juv, Trjv ^oo-qp Trjv

in the case of the relative (incorporation almost)

Then again

the antecedent.

in Jo. 1

:

38

SLdaaKoXe, vocative in the predicate (cf. also

Meaalav

is

cKoXos

in apposition with

But

is

naturally interpreted as Xpto-ros.

In

25, avTrj karlv

we have

and not

pajS^el is

17

ttju

in that of

explained as

20 16), while in 1 41 In Jo. 13 13 6 8180.:

:

:

fxe where we would use quotation-marks. needs to be borne in mind in connection with

this passage

Revelation.

:

alcovLOV,

1

Cor. 16

-.21, rfj enfj

x^m

TlavKov,

note the geni-

tive in apposition with the possessive

the sense of the possessive, not

its

pronoun e^i? according to case. Once more the common

use of the genitive of one substantive in practical apposition has already been noted in this chapter. III, (c), 5, Apposition. Thus 17 Twv a^vfxicp (Lu. 22 1). The use of tovt' earLv with any case has already been alluded to under Gender. Note Mk. 7:2; Ac. 19 4; Ro. 7: 18; Phil. 12; 1 Pet. 3 20; Heb. 9 11; 11 16, etc. In avTos (TcoTTip Tov aiofxaTo^ (Eph. 5 23) auros gives emphasis to the eopri)

:

:

:

:

:

:

apposition.

Inverse attraction of antecedent to case of the rela-

tive (see Pronouns) (e)

is

really apposition.

The Absolute Use of the Cases

and

These

(nominative, genitive, abla-

treatment in the chapter on Cases. Some of the peculiar nominatives noted in Revelation are the nominativus -pendens, a common anacoluthon. Cf. rama ddewpeire (Lu. 21 6), 6 vlkcov /cat 6 TT]pu>v (Rev. 2: 26). The parenthetic nominative is seen in Jo. 1:6, ovopa avT^ 'Iwavrjs, where 'Icoavrjs might have been dative. But here merely the mention of the tive

accusative).

will receive

:

fact of the absolute use of the cases See also Zahn's

1

Prol., p. 9.

2

Cf. Gildersleeve,

Gk. Synt.,

is all

that

is

called for.^

Intr., § 74.

p. 5; Brug., Griech. Gr., pp.

373-376.

i

417

THE SENTENCE Words in the Sentence. Freedom from Rules. The freedom

X. Position of (a)

of the

Greek from

response to the play of the mind is never seen In English, better than in the order of words in the sentence. in the senwords since it has lost its inflections, the order of the is substantive tence largely determines the sense. Whether a thus, or only English subject or object can usually be seen in whether a given word is verb or substantive, substantive or adEven the Latin, which is an inflectional tongue, has jective. much less liberty than the Greek. We are thinking, of course, of the prose, not of poetry, where metre so largely regulates

artificial rules

and

its

Greek

the same freedom independadditional some that the older Greek did with perhaps older litthe with contrasted ence from the vernacular kolvt] as maintained has vernacular The modern Greek erary language. The the Greek freedom in this respect (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). EngIn matter. in this liberty Semitic tongues also have much

The N. T. indeed enjoys

position of words.

lish it is

common

to see words in the

wrong place that make ab-

"The man

rode a horse with a surd bungles, as this, for instance: tou vlbv, 6 iraTraT7]p ^iXet 6 black hat." In Greek one may say the stress in to according iraTrip, vlov 6 Trip <^iXet Tov vlbv or 0tXet tov the

mind of the speaker.^ Predicate often First.

(6)

In Greek narrative, where the

commonly rhetorical element has less play, the predicate very the most is predicate the rule, as a comes first, simply because, important thing in the sentence. Thus ixaKaptoi oi ttuxoI tc3 ivpev(Lu. 1 42), kyeveTO 5e (Lu. fxaTL (Mt. 5:3), evXoyrjfxevr] av ev yvvaL^lv :

2:1),

Kal kiropevovTo

(2:3),

kvk^y] 8k

(2:4),

etc.

But

this

is

true so

predicate often, not because of any rule, but simply because the even Blass^ clause. the in point main is most frequently the subpredicate, thus: scheme tentative undertakes to suggest a rightly Winer^ But etc. participle, complementary ject, object, remarks that he would be an empirical expositor who would insist

on any unalterable rule in the Greek sentence save that of

spontaneity.

one of the ruling ideas in the order of be at the end as well as at the beginin the middle in case of antithesis. even or sentence, ning of the a word from its usual iiosition removing in consists emphasis The

Emphasis. This words. This emphasis (c)

to an unusual one.

is

may

So oXvkou yXvKv

vrotrjo-at

1

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 287.

'

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 312.

*

v8o:p (J as.

3

:

12).

Thus

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2S7. W.-Th., p. 551.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

418

in Lu. 1

:

we have

12

Kai eireTreatu

(j)6j3os

eir' avTov, but in Ac. 19 17 Sometimes the words in con-

Kal 4)6^os kireTeaev

evl iravras avTovs.

:

trast are brought sharply together, as in Jo. 17

and 17:

5, vvi^

bb^aabv

So

ah.

/xe

viiC^v eixov

:

kyw

4,

Lu. 10

:

eSo^aaa,

ere

Note

16.

also

Heb. 7:4a) btmTqv 'A/3pad/i ebu>Kev (.k tCov aKpodivluv, 6 TarpLapxr)^So also in 1 Pet. 2 TLp-i] Tols TTLaTevovaLu, note the beginning and the end 7, vplv ovv of the sentence. This rhetorical emphasis is more common in the Epistles (Paul's in particular) than in the Gospels and Acts for obvious reasons. Thus observe the position of av in Ro. 11: 17 and of KaKelvoL in verse 23. In Heb. 6 19 aa(j)aXrj re Kai ^e^alav do not come in immediate contact with ayKvpav as adjectives usually do. Observe also the emphatic climax in TeTeXeLcofxhov at the end of the sentence in Heb. 7 28. Cf. i]5ri /cetrat in ]Mt. 3 10. Note the intentional position of 6

in

iraTpLapxris

:

Tj

:

—

:

the sharpness given to ov in 10

In

5.

:

The

deov.

1

Cor. 2

:

7 deov

Cor.

1

1

:

:

17

by putting

it first.

position of the subordinate clause varies greatly.

often comes

first,

as in Lu.

1

:

So

throws proper emphasis upon

ao(l)iav

It

1-4.

The Minor Words

in a Sentence. In general they word to which they belong in sense. Thus the adj. is near the subst. and after it. So vSojp ^ojv (Jo. 4 10), 8idadKoke ayad'e (Mk. 10 17), ^wqv aiwvLov (lb.). But observe oXov avdpcoirov vyirj (Jo. 7 23), both adjs. So also note 8l' avbbpwv towcov (d)

come

close to the

:

:

:

(Mt. 12 :43), KoXdv airepfxa (Mt. 13: 27), ex^pos audpuiros (Mt. 13 With the repeated 28), where the adj. gives the main idea. article the adj. has increased emphasis in 6 tolijltjv 6 koXos (Jo. 10:

:

With

11).

Ac.

(h

:

:

13).

1

:

8)

or TO

to ayiov (Jo. 14

1

:

:

:

11),

26).

20, €K irvevpLaros eaTiv aylov.

Cf.

^coriv

exere

but In

and adjective

^awTLadrjaeade aylw) to give unity to the clause. alcjOPLOV

So

(1 Jo.

24 note ae thus, to. toXXo. are ypafifiaTa els fiavlav So also in 1 Cor. 10 4 €tlov comes between to and The position of the genitive varies greatly, but the same In Ac. 26

:

ireptTptTrei,. To/jLa.

irvevfia

5 the verb comes in between the substantive

TTvevfiaTL

Mt.

in

5

1

order (as Mt. 3

Tvevfxa ajLov this is the usual

also TO ajLov irvevixa (Ac.

:

general principle applies.

The

genitive follows as in Tots XoyoLs

emphatic as in tojv aXXoTplcov ttiv (}>o}V7]v (Jo. 10 5). There is sharp emphasis in Toiv twircov in Jas. 3:3. A genitive may be on each side of the substantive as in rjucoi' oMa tov aKTjvovs (2 Cor. 5:1). Sharp contrast may be expressed by proximity of two genitives, as in tov avvaTpaTLWT-qv /jlov, There may be some contrast also vfjLosv di airoaToXov (Ph. 2 25). TTJs

xo-pi-Tos

(Lu. 4

:

22), unless

:

:

in

(TV jjiov

vLTTTeLs

Tovs TTodas (Jo. 13

:

6).

But the personal

enclitic

THE SENTENCE

419

pronouns have a tendency to come early emphasis, as

without

in the sentence

riveooxGwo-^ ^ov ol dcpdaXijLoi (Jo. 9

ttcos

Cf. IVa

10).

:

B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). Radermacher (^V. T. Gr., p. 90) notes great freedom in the position of the genitive in the Attic authors and in the inscriptions. In the case of 6 auOpcoTTos ovTos and ovtos 6 apdpoiiros one must not look for any fine-spun distinction, though the same general principle of emphasis exists. In the matter of ravra iravra (Lu. 12 30) and wauTa ravra (Mt. 6 32) the first word carries the emphasis just as in ttSs 6 oxXos and 6 oxXos ttSs. Cf. iravra ra ix'tkr] tov cco/xaros (1 Cor. 12 12) and aov TpoaKwrjcroo

rrjp x^po-v

:

:

:

Tarepes

01

Tavres (1 Cor. 10

rjucov

Note the common Greek av

ris

:

with

1)

d

8

(Jo.

5

6 ttSs v6p.os (Gal. :

often at the beginning of the sentence, as var-qp bUaie (Jo. 17

but not always, as in TrapaKaXw Jo. 14

:

9 ovK eyvwKas

the pronoun. 1),

p.e,

be vpas, a8eX(j>ol (1

Cor.

1

:

is

:

25),

10).

In

^IXnTxe the vocative naturally comes after

comes within the sentence, as

It

14).

:

The vocative

25).

dj

Beo^tXe (Ac. 1

or at either end according as occasion requires.

phrases come in formal order, as av8pes dSeX^ot Kal

Some

:

set

irarepes (Ac.

7

:

our "brethren and sisters," "ladies and gentlemen," etc. Other conventional phrases are iivSpas Kal yvpalKas (Ac. 8:3), x<^P's 2), like

yvpaiKcJv Kal

aap^

TratStcoj/

10 42)

Kal veKpCbv (Ac.

:

(Lu. 21

aeKr]V[f

X67W (Lu. 24

(Mt. 14

(Mt. 16

Kal alpa

:

:

:

17),

:

21),

/Jpcocrts

pmra

T-qv yrju Kal Tr]v

;

25), rod ovpavov Kal

Kal

Kal wdaLS

daXaaaap (Ac. 4 yrjs

ttjs

19), 'lovSalovs re Kal "EWrjpas

eXeWepos (Gal. 3

:

The adverb

28).

rjpepav

(Ac. 20

(Ro. 14

(Mt. 11:

:

:

24),

:

31),

^wvrwv

17),

lyXto)

Kal

25), epyo} Kal

(Ro. 3:9), SovXos ov8i

generally has second place, as

but not always, as Xiav yap aPTearr] (2 Tim. Matthew often puts the adverb after imperatives, as Kara^arw pvp {Mi. 27:42), but before indicatives, as en v(TTepoo (Mt. 19 20), a refinement somewhat unconscious, one may suppose. In general the words go together that make Xlap (Mt. 4:8),

v\pr]Xdp

4

:

15).

Blass^ notes that

:

and the interpretation

is sometimes left to the reader's inIn Eph. 2 3, ripeOa reKPa 4>v<xet opyrjs, note the position of
sense,

sight.

:

:

Mt. 2

:

2, e'ibopep

yap avTOV

top acrrepa ep

tjj

aparoXy, probably ep

tjj

aua-

ToX^ belongs in sense to the subject ('we being in the east,' etc.).(e)

Euphony and Rhythm.

It will

not do to say that em-

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

'

Porphyrios Logothetca as quoted by Agnes Lewis Smith in Exp. Times,

Feb., 1908, p. 237.

p. 289.

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

420

phasis alone explains every unusual order of words in a Greek sen-

Take

tence.

Jo. 9

:

6, for

instance,

avrov t6v tyjXop ewi tovs

kirkd-qKev

removed from 6(j)da\iiovs and is without particular emphasis. It was probably felt that the geniObserve tive of the pronouns made a weak close of a sentence. also Jo. 9 10, aov ol dcpeaXfxoi (cf. 9: 11). Thus also 9 17, 26, 30. Note eire<jev avrov trpos tovs woSas (Jo. 11 32) and ovk av jjlov airkdaviv 6 a8eX4>6s {ib.). So cv ixov vlttths tovs Tcodas (Jo. 13 6) where some emphasis by contrast may exist in spite of the enclitic form /xov. Cf. vfuv eixoi in Ph. 3:1. But on the other hand we have 6 a8e\(f)6s iJLov in Jo. 11 21 (cf. 11 23 aov) and rod irarpos ijlov (Jo. 10 The tendency to draw the pronouns toward the first part of 18). the sentence may account for some of this transposition, as in to. Here avTov

6(l)daXfj.ovs.

is

entirely

:

:

:

:

:

TToXXa ae ypaixjxaTa

:

ets iJLaviav

Treptrpexet (Ac.

much beyond the personal

goes

26

:

pronouns, as in

24),

but the matter

h irvevfxaTL ^awTLadr]But a such trajection

aeaOe ayiu) (Ac. 1:5), ixupav ex^ts bvvap.Lv (Rev. 3:8), etc.

large

amount

Is there

of words.^

mann^

was exercised

of personal liberty

in

any such thing as ryhthm

scouts the idea.

If

in the N. T.? Deissone thinks of the carefully balanced

sentences of the Attic orators like Isocrates, Lysias and thenes,

Deissmann

is

correct, for there is

rhythm

Demos-

nothing that at

all

ap-

N. T., not even in Luke, Paul or Hebrews. Blass^ insists that Paul shows rhythm in He compares'* Paul with 1 Cor. and that the book is full of art. Cicero, Seneca, Q. Curtius, Apuleius, and finds rhythm also in Hebrews which "not unfrequently has a really oratorical and choice order of words." ^ He cites in Heb. 1 4 touovtw KpeiTTwv proaches such

artificial

in the

:

yevopevos Tcbv ayyeXuv

oaco

8i,a4)opcoTepov Trap'

avTOvs K€KKr]pov6pr]Kev

ovopa; 1:5; 11 32; 12: 1, 8, etc. In Greek in general he suggests that lively and animated discourse gives rise to dislocations of :

words.

Now

Greek

of

one would think Blass ought to know something But Deissmann will have none of it. He refers

style.

Blass to Schramm,

who wrote

in 1710 of

Pauli apostoli and thinks that Blass

De

De stupenda

wilful

Boldt,

Theol. Literatiirzeit., 1906, p.

4:34;

eruditione

and arbitrary

Ling. Grsec. et Lat.' Colloc. Verb. Capita

*

2

lib.

is

in his

Sel., p. 186.

Exp., Jan., 190S, p. 74.

Die Rhythmen der asian. und rcim. Kunstprosa, 1905, pp. 43, 53. Cf. Hadley, On Anc. Gk. Rhythm and Metre in Ess. lb., pp. 73 f., 77. Phil, and Crit., pp. 81 ff. 6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 286 f. Cf. Zarncke, Die Entstehung der griech. Literatursprachen, p. 5 f., for good remarks about rhythm. See also Dewing, ^

<

The

Orig. of the Accentual Prose

pp. 313-328.

Rhythm

in Gk.,

Am.

Jour, of PhiloL, 1910,

.

THE SENTENCE use and proof of rhythm.

On

421

W. M. Ramsay^

the other hand Sir

contends that Paul was a better Hellenist in point of culture than some suppose, and knew Greek philosophy and used it. It is after all

partly a dispute about terms.

and charm

If

by rhythm one means grace

of diction that naturally belong to the expression of

elevated ideas under the stress of chastened passion, surely one

would be hypercritical to deny it to 1 Cor. 13 and 15, Ac. 17, Ro. 12, Eph. 3, Jo. 14-17, Heb. 2 and 11, not to mention many beautiful passages that seem perfect like pearls. At white heat nature often strikes off what is better than anything mere art can do even as to beauty of form and expression. Luke^ may even have known Thucydides, and yet one has, no right to expect the "niceties of language^ in the vernacular which contribute so much to the charm of Plato." Intonation and gesture in spoken 8 and

language take the place of these linguistic refinements to a very large extent. It is true that Paul's "Greek has to do with no school, with no pattern, but streams unhindered with overflowing

bubbling direct out of the heart," but "yet is real Greek," as Wilamowitz-Mollendorff * remarks. Wilamowitz-Mollendorff does indeed hold that Paul knew httle Greek outside of the Greek Bible, but he thinks that his letters are unique in Greek literature. On Paul's Hellenism see chapter IV, and also G. Milligan, Epistles the Thess., p. Iv.

On

p. Ivi

to

Milligan takes the writer's view that

the "well-ordered passages" and "splendid outbursts" in Paul's writings are due to natural emotion

than studied

und

art.

Bultmann (Der

and Stil

instinctive feeling rather

der Paulinischen Predigt

Paul had the argumentative style

die Kynisch-stoische Diatribe, 1910) finds that

essential elements of the Stoic Diatribe in his

(question

and answer,

antithesis, parallelism, etc.).

Paul's art

indeed like that of the Cynic-Stoic Diatribe as described by Wendland,^ but he does not have their refinement or overpunctiliousness.^ It is not surprising to find that occasionally N. T. is

writers

show unintentional metre, as is common with speakers and any language. In the Textus Receptus of Heb. 12 13

writers of

there

is

1

The

«

J.

a good hexameter,

:

koL Tp6xi\as dp\dds ttoI Tjcrare rois iroalpl |

|

Cities of Paul, 1908, pp. 6, 10, 34. Cf. Hicks, St. Paul and Ilellen. H. Smith, Short Stud, on the Gk. Text of the Acts of the Apost., Prcf. 3 J. H. Moulton, Intr. to the Study of N. T. Gk., p. 7. * Die griech. Lit. des Altert., p. 159. Tl. I, .\ht. 8, Die Kultur der Gegenw., 1907. W. H. P. Hatch, J.H.L., 1909, p. 149 f., suf-gests r" ay. in Jas. 1 17. 6 iieitr. zur Gesch. der Gk. Phil, und Rel., 190."), ]). 3 f :

«

J.

Weiss, Beitr. zur Paulin. Rhet., 1897, p. 107

f.

:

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

422

but the

vficbv,

may

one

by reading Trotetre. So also Heb. 12 14 f. (o5 airo), one in epxerat), one in Ac. 23 5 {apxopra KUKcos). the Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 356) cites the acci-

critical text spoils it all

two trimeters

find

4 35 {TeTpaiJ.r]v6s Green {Handbook to

Jo.

NEW TESTAMENT

:

in

—

:

—

—

:

dental English anapaestic line "To preach the acceptable year of the Lord," the hexameter "Husbands, love your wives, and be

not bitter against them," and the iambic couplet "Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace." But surely

no one would call these writers poets because occasional metre is found in their writings. There is an unconscious harmony of soul between matter and form. Paul does indeed quote the Greek poets three times, once an iambic trimeter acataleptus from the comic poet Menander (1 Cor. 15: 33) cf)d~Lpou\alu ri\dfi xpv\(^ra. 6/xt| though one anapaest occurs (some MSS. have XPW^'), once half an hexameter from Aratus (Ac. 17:28) rov 7a,p|/v'at ylvos\t(7iJ.ev, and a full hexameter from Epimenides of Crete (Tit. \Lal\Ka.Kal,

1

12)

:

a

KprjTes

|

el \{/ev

more Paul knew

\

aral KaKo. Oripla yaaTepes dpycu. |

\

\

How much

Greek poetry we do not know, but he was not ignorant of the philosophy of the Stoics and Epicureans in Athens. Blass^ indeed thinks that the author of Hebrews studied in the schools of rhetoric where prose rhythm was taught, such as of

the careful balancing of ending with ending, beginning with beginning, or ending with beginning. it

in

Heb.

1

:

1

f.,

3,

clined to think that

4

f.;

12: 14

we have

f.,

He

thinks he sees proof of

But here again one

24.

is in-

rather the natural correspondence

form with thought than studied rhetorical imitation of the We cannot now follow the lead of the old writers who saw many fanciful artistic turns of phrase.^ Antitheses and parallelisms could be treated here as expressions of rhythm, but they can be handled better in the chapter on Figures of Speech. As a specimen of an early Christian hymn note 1 Tim. 3 16. Harnack {The Independent, Dec. Elizabeth (Lu. 1 28, 1912) takes this as a Christmas hjTnn. 42-45), Mary (1:46-55) and Zacharias (1:67-79) break forth into poetic strains with something of Hebrew spirit and form. In Eph. 5 14 we have another possible fragment of a Christian hymn. The Lord's Prayer in Mt. 6 9-13 is given in metrical arrangement by W. H. Cf. Hort, Intr. to N. T. in Gk., p. 319 f. In general on N. T. parallelism see Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels of

schools of Atticism or even of Asianism.

:

:

:

1

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 297 f Cf., for instance, Gersdorf, Bcitr. zur Sprachcharakt. d. Schriftst. d. N.T.,

1816, pp. 90, 502.

THE SENTENCE

423

and Messiah of the Apostles. In 1 Cor. 13 one can sec the beauty and melody of a harmonious arrangement of words. See also the latter part of 1 Cor. 15.

Prolepsis

(/)

placed out of clause like

ttjv ayairr]v

ex^re (1 Cor. 6

eai'

not

is

uncommon where

either the substantive

:

ha

'yvwTe (2 Cor. 2

(Lu. 19

art.

Cf.

15

:

Mk.

Cf. Ac. 13

3).

8

24; Lu. 10

:

So w^v

36.

{g)

:

in Ac. 3

:

:

But

32.

26; Ro. 9

:

and

4)

^iwtlko. KpLT-qpia

like I8elv t6v 'l-qaovv tLs

this

betokens no studied

19, 20; 14

:

:

We

occasionally

meet

1

But Winer (Winer-Thayer, Certainly not

the N. T.

order of we-jnaTevKafxev that of

p. 553)

(Ac. 3

:

8)

does not admit this figure in

Kai kypc^Kafiev (Jo.

and

The

the apparent examples are real.

all

eyvcioaav Kal kirlaTtvaav (Jo.

6.X\6iJ.€i>os

Kara-

/cat

a natural inversion from our point of view.

51),

:

an ex-

also

of varepov irpoTepov like ay^ekov^ tov deov a.va(3aluovTas

^aivovras (Jo.

Cor.

4, 10; 1

12.

Hysteron Proteron.

ample

:

or the subject of the subordinate clause even

4),

becomes the object of the previous verb kffTLv

is

right place before the conjunction in a subordinate

its

6

:

69)

17:8).

is

Cf. also TeptiraTcov Kal

i]\aTo Kal TepLeirareL (Ac. 14

Cf

order suits the special case.

.

1

just as true as

Tim. 2

:

:

10)

where each

4 and 2 Pet.

1

:

9 for

on close examination. (h) Hyperbaton. Adverbs sometimes appear to be in the wrong place, a phenomenon common in all Greek prose writers. In 1 Cor. 14 7 o/jlos would come in more smoothly just before eav, but it is perfectly intelligible where it is. Cf. also Gal. 3 15 for similar use of ojucos. Cf. distance of ^dr] from Ketrai alleged examples that disappear

:

:

(Mt. 3 1

:

10).

Cor. 16

Trdi'Tes

ov

:

In Ro. 3

:

9 oy

ttclvtcos

is

our 'not at

12 tclutus ovk 'wholly not,' just as in

means

Kotfj,r]dr]a6iJLeda

of us shall sleep.'

Cf

tion of the negative

In the case of ov separated and in 4

.

'all of

while in

Cor. 15

:

51

us shall not sleep,' not 'none

also ou -n-avTus in

ixij

all,'

1

1

Cor. 5 9 :

f .,

an explana-

awavaixiyvvadaL just before, 'not wholly.'

ixbvov in

Ro. 4

:

12, 16,

the words ov novov are

makes ov Winer (Wincr-Thayer, p. 555) is certainly right in insisting that ovx ort (2 Cor. 3:5) is not to be treated as 6tl ovk. Cf. ovx dXX' I'm (2 Cor. 13 7). A more difficult passage is found in Heb. 11:3, eis to fxi] tK 4>aLvofx€vcov to. jSXeTTo/iem yeyovevai, where /xiy is the negative of the phrase Ik (i>aivoixkvwv TO ^XeiTonevov ytyovevai. In general the negative comes before the word or words that are negatived. Hence ovk du^v (Ac. 19 30), oi'K ecTTLv (Gal. 3:20). But note m'7 ttoWoI SiSdaKaXoi yiveade (J as. 3:1). Blass (6V. of N. T. GL, p. 257) notes the possible amnovov

:

12 the repetition of the article toIs

seem quite misplaced.

'-''^a

—

:

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

424

NEW TESTAMENT

biguity in Ac. 7 48 because of the use of ovx before 6 Observe in strong contrasts instead of before KaroLKtl.

Oi/'io-tos

:

how

ov

stands over against dXXd (Ro. 2 13). Blass^ has little sympathy with the grammatical device of hyperbaton to help out exegesis. :

The

construction, found in cos dTro aTablu^v deKairevTe (Jo. 11 18) has been supposed to be a Latinism when compared with Lu. 24: 13. So also with wpd e^ riij.epa)v Tov Traaxo- (Jo. 12: 1) was for:

merly considered a Latinism. But Moulton^ shows conclusively that it is Doric and Ionic before the possibility of Latin influence, and besides is common in the kolvt] papyri, a mere coincidence with See also ch. XIII,

the Latin. (i)

In the N. T.

tive in Greek.

vii, (m), 5.

A number

PosTPOsiTivES.

words are always postposi-

of

dv, yap, ye, 8e, p.h, p-evToi, ovv, re

never

begin a sentence, in harmony with ancient Greek usage. These words commonly in the N. T. come in the second place, always so

with

4

ixkvTOL (Jo.

27, etc.).

:

occasionally found as

Eph. 4 11

fifth in

In the case of

Pet. 2

Jo. 16

;

:

1

4,

:

22, or

:

ixkv

the third place

the fourth as 2 Cor. 10

is

the

1,

even the sixth in Jas. 3 17. It viii, 5 1 (Mr. H. Scott :

occupies the seventh place in Herm. Sim.

has noted).

:

:

In general these words vary in position according to

the point to be

made

in relation to other words.

So also

ovv is

more commonly in the second, but varies to the third (Jo. 16 22) and fourth (1 Cor. 8:4). The same remark applies to yap, for which see Mk. 1 38; 2 Cor. 1 19. As to be, it may not only go :

:

:

to the fourth place (Jo. 8

2:2),

ov irepl

Tojv

16),

:

f]iieTepo^v

but even appears in the It

be.

Test. XII. Patr. Judah, 91 (Mr. H. Scott reports). of ye

follows naturally the

it

fifth (1 Jo.

stands in the sixth place in

word with

w^hich

it

In the case belongs as in

Ro. 8 32 (6s ye), even in the case of dXXd ye (Lu. 24 21) which is always separated in the older Greek. Cf. also ei ye Eph. 3 2. "kv in the apodosis (not = €dj') or with relatives or conjunctives, never begins a clause in Greek. It is usually the second word in :

:

:

the apodosis, either after the verb, as ovK, as ovK dv

(Mk. 13

With the relative dv and OS b'dv (Mt. 23

:

elirov

dv (Jo. 14

:

2),

or after

20), or the interrogative, as rts dv (Lu. 9

:

46).

follows directly or as the third word, as os dv :

Te usually follows the word directly,

16).

even after a preposition, as avv re but note twv edvojv re (Ac. 14 5). There is another group of words (j) Fluctuating Words. Thus dpa that vary in the matter, now postpositive, now not. as in

Tvov-qpovs re

XtXiapxots (Ac. 25

1

2

(Mt. 22 :

:

10),

23);

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 290. Prol., pp. 100 ff. Cf. also

:

LXX,

as

Amos

1:1; 4:7, etc.

THE SENTENCE

may

425

the clause (Mt. 12 28), contrary to older Greek So also apaye (Mt. 7 20) and iipa ovv (Ro. 7:3). Except in a few instances like Ro. 8 1 the examples where apa is postpositive in the N. T. are in questions after the interrogative or after a conjunction. Once (Ro. 10 18) ixtvovvyt begins the senlolvvv occurs only three times and twice begins the sentence, tence (Lu. 20 25; Heb. 13 13) as Toiyapovv does (Heb. 12 1). The indefinite rts sometimes comes first in the sentence, as nves 8e (Lu. 6:2). Enclitics can therefore stand at the beginning, though not commonly so. In the case of eveKev its position is usually before the word except with the interrogative, as tIvos eveKev (Ac. 19 32), or a relative, as ov etveKtv (Lu. 4 18). But x^-P'-v follows

be

first in

:

custom.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

case save in

its

x^-pi-v rivos (1

Jo. 3

:

Xwpls precedes the word,

12).

but note ov xwpls (Heb. 12 14). The N. T. therefore shows rather more freedom with these words. {k) The Order of Clauses in Compound Sentences. Blass^ considers this a matter of style rather than of grammar. When the whole sentence is composed of a principal clause, with one or :

more subordinate

clauses, the order of these clauses is largely

dependent on the flow of thought in the speaker's mind. In the case of conditional as Mt. 17 4, final as in Mt. 17 27, and relative clauses as in Mt. 16 25, the dependent very often precedes the principal clause. There is usually a logical basis for this order. :

:

:

But

in Jo. 19

28 the

:

(jLOVov

TO TOLTJaaL

final clause

dXXd

somewhat interrupts the flow

9:11.

Cf. also Ro.

of the sentence.

In 2 Cor. 8

:

10, o'irLves ov

Kal to deXeiv Tpoeviqp^aade airo irepvai,

violent change of order.

there

is

no

Logically the willing preceded the doing

and makes the natural climax.

Blass^

is

undoubtedly right

in

Xoyw evrjyyeXcaanrjv as dependent on el Karexere (1 Cor. 15 2). In Jo. 10 36 we meet a somewhat tangled sentence because the antecedent of ov is not expressed. Here Xeyere is the principal verb, the apodosis of the condition, and has two objects (the relative clause and the otl clause) with a causal clause added. So in Jo. 10 38 we have a good example of the refusing to take

tIvl

:

:

:

complex sentence with two conditions, a

final clause,

an object-

clause, besides the ])rincipal clause.^

XI.

Compound Sentences.

(a)

Two Kinds

or complex. 1

'

Rfl.

The sentence is cither simple nothing but two simple sentences

of Sentences.

The complex

is

^ lb. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 291. the whole subject of the position of words in the sentence sec K.-G., IT, pp. 592-604.

On

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

426

put together. All that is true of one part of this complex sentence may be true of the other as to subject and predicate. The same linguistic laws apply to both. But in actual usage each part of the complex sentence has its own special development. The two parts have a definite relation to each other. Originally men used only simple sentences.

Cf.

Brugmann,

Griech. Gr., p. 552.

Two Kinds

of Compound Sentences {Paratadic and In parataxis (xapdra^is) we have co-ordination Hypotadic). Take Mk. 14 37 as an example, Kal of two parallel clauses. In hypoepX^Tai Kai evplcFKei avToiis KadevSovTas, Kal Xeyei too Ilerpaj. taxis (uTTora^ts) one clause is subordinated to the other, as in ovk oUare tI aLrelaOe (Mk. 10 38) where tL alTelade is in the accusative (6)

:

:

case, the object of oUare.

Parataxis

the rule in the speech of

is

men, unlettered men and also of Homer. Cf. Sterrett, Homer's Iliad, N. 49. On the two kinds of sentences see Paul, Principles of Language, See also Delbriick, Vergl. Syntax, 3. TL, pp. 259-286; p. 139 f. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., pp. 551 ff.; Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. II, p. 351. They are very common in the (c) Paratactic Sentences. Sanskrit and in Homer (cf. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 555) and in the Hebrew. In truth in the vernacular generally and the earlier children, primitive

It is more common with some writers than with others, John, for instance, using it much more frequently than Paul or even Luke. In John Kal sometimes is strained to mean 'and yet,' as in 3:19; 4:20, etc.^ The KOLVT) shows a decided fondness for the paratactic construction which in the modern Greek is still stronger (Thumb, Handb., As in the modern Greek, so in the N. T. Kal, according p. 184).

stages of language parataxis prevails.

to logical sequence of thought, carries the notion of 'but,' 'that,' besides 'and yet,'

In the use of

ticles.

Kal (cf. Heb."]) after

kyhero the paratactic

borders very close on to the hypotactic on.

— avTos TO (d)

For on Par-

introducing quasi-subordinate clauses.

details concerning paratactic conjunctions see chapter

irpoawTOV eaT-qpiaev (Lu. 9

Hypotactic Sentences.

:

Thus kyhero

Kal

8e Kai

51).

They

are introduced either

by

pronouns or conjunctions, many of which are relatives in origin and others adverbs. The subject of conjunctions will demand special and extended treatment later on (chapters on Modes and on Particles) and so will relative clauses. On the use of the relative relative

,

thus see Brugmann, Griech. Gr., later

Greek

for parataxis led to 1

p. 553.

The propensity

an impoverishment of

Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 135.

of the

particles.

THE SENTENCE

427

Hypotactic sentences, once more, are either substantival, adjectival or adverbial, in their relation to the principal or another

Thus

subordinate clause. stantive object of

As a sample

k^rjTovv,

:

2 rb

aveXuaLv

ttws

is

the sub-

of (Tvu^rjTeiu in Lu. 22

tLs dt] is

of the subject-clause in the nominative take ov

aoL OTL cLToWv/xeda

adjective sentence

an adverb

rire is

in Lu. 22

as to

:

23.

/xeXet

(Mk. 4:38). In Mt. 7: 12 6aa eav de\7]T€ is an and describes vavTa. In Mt. 6 16 orau urjaTeb:

in its relation to ylveade.

In the beginning the hypotactic sentence corresponded closely to the principal sentence.

Brugmann,

Cf.

Griech.

Gi'.,

On

p. 554.

whole subject of substantive, adjective and adverb sentences see Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. II, pp. 354-465. The matter has further discussion under Modes (Subordinate Clauses). Xn. Comiection in Sentences. (a) Single Words. These have connectives in a very natural^ way, as 8vvaiJ.Lv Kai k^ova-lav batixovia koI v6aov% (Lu. 9:1). But

'the

—

common

also

— re (Ac. 26

T€

shown

— Kai

is /cat

:

14), re

— mi

(2

15),

:

and rarely

This tendency to break up into pairs

16).

:

(Jo. 2

well

is

For see Mt. 5 17, dXXd 2 Cor. 7:11, ovbk Rev. 5:3. In enumerations the repetition of Kai gives a kind of solemn dignity and is called polysyndeton. Cf. Rev. 7

12

:

in Ac. 2

9-11.

:

evXoyla Kai

17

17

86^a Kai

tw

r}

rj

:

ao(t)ia Kai

17

ei'xapto'Tta Kai

17

Tifxij /cat

17

Rev. 4:11; 5 12; Ro. 9 4. Note also a similar repetition of ovre in Ro. 8 38 f. For jji-qre see Jas. 5 12. So with r? in Mk. 10 29. Perhaps, as Blass suggests,^ polys3aideton is sometimes necessary and devoid of any particular Svvafxis Kai

rj

tcrxi's

Cf. also

OeQ.

:

:

:

:

:

rhetorical effect, as in Lu. 14: 21.

Cf. avbpes 'lapariXdrai (Ac. 2

But asyndeton

frequent also.

is

See Mt. 15

5:3; 1 For a striking example of asyndeton see Ro. 29-31, where some variety is gained by change in construction 1 (case) and the use of adjective instead of substantive, TewXrjpo)Cor. 14

:

24; 15

1

:

:

22).

:

19; Jo.

f.

:

n'evovi iraaj] d8i.Klq. Trovrjpia TrXeot-e^tg. /ca/cta, ixearovs (fiOovou (povov epiSos

80X0V

KaKorjOlas,

r)(f}dvovs,

^iOvpLara^,

/caraXdXous,

derovs, daropyovs, dveXerjfxovas.

the connective the

rest, for

ample *

deoarvye^s,

dXa^ovas, e^euperds KaKcov, yovevaiv

is

Cf. also

1

used with part of the

vf^pLaras,

virep-

direLOels, davvkrovs,

davv-

Cor. 3

:

1 Tim. compared by Blass^

the sake of variety, as in

like emalpojs dKaipcos is

Sometimes and not with

12.

list (jiairs) 1

:

9

f.

An

ex-

to ?wlcns volcns.

On the whole subject of connection in sentences see Dolbriu-k,

Vorgl. Synt.,

3.TI., pp. 40G-4:j7; Hrufr., Gricch.Gr., i)p. 551-560; K.-G., Hd. II, pp. 224-515. On asyndeton in t;;('nerul sec Ricni. and Goelzcr, Synt., p|). 312-358. 2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 277.

3

n,.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

428

But connection is by no means uniform between This remark applies to both the paratactic and the hypotactic sentences. Asyndeton in hypotactic sentences is on the whole repugnant to the Greek language in the opinion of Clauses.

(6)

sentences.

Hence complex sentences

Blass.^

in the

N. T. usually have con-

nectives, but not always.

The

Paratactic Sentences.

1.

co-ordinating conjunctions form

the most frequent means of connecting clauses into one paratactic

These conjunctions will receive special treatment in the chapter on Particles and here only some illustrations can be given. sentence.

Kai,

T€, 8e, ovbk,

fj-riSk,

and

fiev

8e, ovre,

dXXd are the most frequent

are more common indeed and Acts. But in the Gospels the use of Kai varies a good deal. Mark, for instance, has it more than 400 times, while John contains it only 100.^ Deissmann

They

particles used for this purpose.

in historical writings, as in the Gospels

use of

calls this

Kai

The presence

primitive popular Greek.

dialogue in John hardly explains

of

the difference, and even in

all

John the first chapter uses it much more frequently than the last. As a good example of the use of Kai turn to Mt. 4 23-25. Cf. Lu. 6 13-17 and Mk. 9 2. Te is common chiefly in the Acts, as 14 11-13. Sometimes the use of /cat between clauses amounted :

:

:

:

to polysyndeton, as in Jo. 10 3, :

in clauses (Jo. 4 Jo. 2

:

Ov8e

2.

Ac. 28:21.

5)

:

illustrated

is

Ae

9, 12.

except with

/xev

is

perhaps

(Mt. 3

by Mt. 5

:

15,

But asyndeton appears

:

dXXd by 5

also,

common

less

For

11).

:

8e Kai

see

by

17, ovre

as in Lu. 6

:

27

f.,

even if it be to a limited extent. Cf. Gal. 5 22. Blass^ points out that that is not a case of asyndeton where a demonstrative pronoun is used which red7a7rare, iroielre, evkoyelre, Tpoaevx^c^d^, :

flects

5

6.

:

Cf. thus the use of tovtou in Ac. 16

the connection.

impassioned discourse, as in eT\ovT7](xaT€, x<^pis

gives

life

r]iJLcbv

eyeipe apov

5:1).

Cor. 4

1

h^aaiKehaaTe.

and movement,

serve also vTaye

(Jas.

:

8,

r^Srj

(Mk. 2

:

11),

This use of

Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 276. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 134. ff.

i]8r)

of the connective

Tre(f)iiJ.a)ao (Mk. 4 Ob39). (Mt. 5:24), U7ra7e eXey^ov (18: 15), kydpeade aycofxev (Mt. 26 46), aye, KXavaare

as in

o-tcjTra,

:

:

0,76 is

common

But

Greek (Gilder1:46 we have epxov Kai

in the old

in Jo.

:

pp. 09

KeKopeaixhoi eare-

The absence

In 1 Tim. 3 16 the fragment of an early anced in Hebrew parallelism.

We.

2

3; Jo.

irpaJTOV SLaXXayTjOi

sleeve, Greek Syntax, p. 29).

1

:

Winer"* finds asyndeton frequent in cases of a climax in

3

hymn

is

neatly bal-

On the subject of asyndeton in John see Abbott,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 27G.

"

W.-Th.,

p. 538.

THE SENTENCE "Os

h

e4)avep6}dri

429

aapKi,

kSLKaicoOr] kv irvehpaTi,

eKTjpvxdr] kv

WveaLV,

eTnaTeWf] kv

Kocrfxu},

ave\r]iJ,
Here the connective would be quite out

may

In contrast the connective TpoaKweire 6 ovk

Ac. 25

:

o'iSaTe,

rip.et'i

of place.

also be absent, as in

TpoaKwov/xev 6

Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 15

12.

:

olbajiev (Jo.

42

kyeiperaL kv bvvapec cTretperat

crci/xa

Here the solemn repetition

TvevpaTLKov.

tolling of a bell.

Cf. also Jas.

1

of the verbs

John

the

is like

rather fond of repetition with

/3pa5i)s els opyrjv.

in his report of Jesus' words, as kyw elpi ^cor)'

crireipeTat. kv

19, raxvs els to aKomai, ^padvs els

:

asyndeton

r]

So

cfidopq.,

kyeiperat aoofxa

\pvx'-K-ov,

TO XakijaaL,

a.\r]$eia Kai

y/zets

22).

:

axeipeTai kv

ff.,

eyelperaL kv a(f)dapaia' aireipeTat kv aTL/xia, kyeiperaL kv 86^r]' aadevela,

4

is

ij

686s

ovdels epxerai Trp6s t6v irarepa el pr] 81 kpov

/cat

(14

:

17

6).

Cf. 10 11; 15 13, etc. But this sort of asyndeton occurs elsewhere also, as in 1 Cor. 7 15, ov SeSouXcorat 6 dSeX^os. Cf. also 7: A common asyndeton in Luke occurs after Kal 23; Rev. 22: 13. kyeveTo without another Kal, as el-n-ev tls (11:1). :

:

:

In the nature of the case they usu-

Hypotactic Sentences.

2.

ally

The subordinating conjunctions

have connectives.

more

are

necessary to the expression of the exact shade of thought than in paratactic clauses.

The

closeness of connection varies greatly in

various kinds of subordinate clauses and often in clauses of the

same

The use

kind.

of the correlative accents this point, as olos

6 kirovpavLOS, tolovtol Kal ol kwovpavioL (1 Cor. 15

(Mt. 12 :40).

But

real antithesis

may

:

48)

;

uxxirep

— ourcos

without the correla-

exist

Mt. 5 48; 6 2. In relative clauses the bond is very sometimes made closer by agreement of the relative and antecedent not only in number and gender but even in case, as ols (Lu. 2 20) and t6v aprov 6v (1 Cor. 10 IG). There may be tive, as in

close

and

:

:

is

:

:

several relative clauses either co-ordinate (Ac. 3

nate to another (Ac. 13 t6t€, apa, Kal, dXXd, 8e in

of thought.

Cf.

:

31; 25

:

15

f.).

:

2

f .)

or subordi-

So also the use of

elra,

the apodosis accents the logical connection

Mt. 12

:

28;

Mk.

13

:

14; Jo. 7

:

10; 20

:

21; 1

But much closer than with temporal, comparative, conditional, or even some relative clauses is the tie between the principal clause and the subordinate objective, consecutive, final and causal clauses. These are directly deCor. 15

:

54; 2 Cor. 7

:

12, etc.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

430

NEW TESTAMENT

pendent on the leading

clause.

Interrogative sentences

indirect discourse really

become

object-clauses, like to tLs apa drj

(Lu. 22

:

The

23), object of (Tvv^r]Tdv.

ort, tva, ottcos

(and

when

cos

in

rarely)

clauses are closely knit to the principal clause as subject, object (direct or indirect) of the verb. There is a natural interblending between object and causal sentences, as shown by the use of ort for both and 5t6rt in late Greek in the sense of 'that,' objective 6tl. Cf. quod and quia in late Latin, and English the "reason that" and colloquial the "reason why." In Greek on even interchanges with d (cf. English "wonder if" and "wonder that"). So Wahnaatv d i]5r] redu7]Kep (Mk. 15 44). Cf. Ac. 8 22; 26 8. Clauses with the consecutive idea usually have the infinitive in the N. T. Hypotactic sentences cannot be here discussed in detail, but only as illustrating the point of connection between sentences. Winer is probably right in describing as asyndeton Jas. 5 13, KaKoiradd tls kv vfuv, irpoaevxeffdoo, where d is not used, though the sense is con:

:

:

^

:

He

ditional.

cites also 5oDXos

The questions

in Jas. 2

:

19

f.

tKKi]dr)s,

may

fxi]

aoi ^eXerco (1

Cor. 7:21).

But more

be so construed.

cer-

tain examples exist than these, where either a conjunction has

dropped out

Thus

a0€s

or, as

is

likely, we have original parataxis. 7:4), a^es Uwixev (Mt. 27 49) can loeTe (Mt. 28 6), bevpo dTrocrretXco (Ac.

more

(Mt.

€K/3dXco

:

be compared with 5eDre 7 34), heme aTOKTeivoj/xep (Mk. 12 7) and the common Greek idiom with aye, (})epe. Cf. Jas. 5:1. In Mk. 15 36 note a.(()eTe One verb really supplements the other much as the infiniSoinev. itive or participle. Cf. English "let us see." In the modern Greek :

:

:

:

used uniformly as the English and alOf a similar nature is the asyndeton with ekXeLS avWe^oi/xev (Mt. 13 28) and l3ov\eade aToXvaco (Jo. 18 39). Cf. deXere TOLtjao: (Mk. 10 36). Cf. also eyelpeaee ayo)fxev (Mt. 26 46) above. These are all paratactic in origin, though hypotactic in logical sequence. But see chapter on Modes for further details. as (abbreviation of a^es) is

most

a

like

particle.

:

:

:

In the case of

fii)

line.

(1 Cor. 10

irearf

wapaLT-qcrrjade devl fxiqbh

same

(Mt. 9 30) (Mt. 24 6). :

:

:

/jlt]

and

:

25).

(Mk.

:

44)

1

find

clear cases of

12), ^Xewere

(Heb. 12

eiirris

verse.

we can

examples of both the asyndeton with some on Thus clearly conjunctional firi is found in jSXeTrerco

6pa, opdre, (SXeirere,

conjunctional use of the border

:

/jlt]

eTeXdrj (Ac.

13 :40),

/SXcTrere

p.-q

Asyndeton is undoubtedly in 6pa nrjwith which compare viraye Sel^ov in the

Mt. 8 4. Thus again opSre /xTjSets yiucoaKeTco where note two imperatives as in opSre, fir) dpoelade But in /SXeTrere p.i] TLS vfJias TrXavijay (Mt. 24 4) and Cf. also

:

:

1

W.-Th.,

p. 541.

THE SENTENCE opdre

iirj

since

ni]

431

tls (xttoSw (1 Th. 5 15) the asyndeton is more doubtful, can be regarded as a conjunction. Cf. 2 Cor. 8 20. :

:

and Participle as Connectives. A very common connection is made between clauses by means of the infinitive or the participle, sometimes with particles Hke ware and -n-plv with the infinitive or cos, coarep, Kalwep, with the participle, but 3.

The

Infinitive

usually without a particle.

The

the article and a preposition, as

infinitive kv

tQ

often

dmt

used with

is

(Lu. 9

:

But

18).

brought into the closest connection with the verb as subject (to yap deKeip TapaKeLrai pot, Ro. 7 18) or object (jSovkopaL 7rpoaevx^(^dai avbpas, 1 Tim. 2:8), or in a remoter relation, as t^rjXOev 6 airdpijov tov aireXpaL (Mk. 4:3), The participle sometimes is an essential part of the predicate, as usually the

infinitive

is

:

tTTavaaTo XaXaiv (Lu.

5:4), or again it may be a mere addendum an independent statement. Thus observe

or preliminary or even

/cat TcelBwv in Ac. 19 8. As further examples of somewhat loosely strung together without a connective in more or less close relation to each other and the principal sentence see Ac. 12:25; 16:27; 23:27. The genitive absolute is common in such accessory participles. The only point to consider concerning the infinitive and participle here is the frequency with which they are used in the structure of the Greek sentence. Thus long sentences are easily constructed and sometimes

daeKQdov, StaXeyopepos

:

participles

the connection

is

come from the

free use pf the participle, as will

See

xetporoj'Tj^ets

By means

not

and

clear.

Frequent examples of anacoluthon be shown later.

areXXopevoL as instances in 2 Cor. 8

:

19

f.

and participle the Greek enjoyed much elasticity and freedom which the modern Greek has lost. In modern Greek conjunctions and finite verbs have very largely displaced the infinitive and the participle. Even in the N. T. a tendency in that direction is discernible, as is seen in the use of I'm with ekXco (Mk. 6 25), d^tT/^i (Mk. 11 16). One is inclined to think that Viteau^ overstates it when he says that the N. T. writers have a natural and general inability to combine and subordinate the elements of thought and so express them separately and make an abnormal use of asyndeton. I would rather say that there is a great simplicity and directness due partly to the colloquial style and the earnestness of the writers. They are men with a message rather than philosophical ramblers. But part of this absence of subordination may be due to the Hebrew temper as in John, and of the infinitive

:

:

part to the general spirit of the time as less concerned, save in the '

Lc Vcrbc, Synt. dcs

Prop., p. 9.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

432

NEW TESTAMENT

case of the Atticists, with the niceties of style. Clearness and force were the main things with these N. T, writers. They use connectives or not as best suits their purposes. But the infinitive con-

and the conjunction construction must not be regarded Note koXov avru) el ovk tyevpridr]

struction

as identical even in the N. T.

(Mk. 14

:

21),

h

TOVTCp yLVOjaKOfxev otl (1 Jo.

5:2),

/SouX?)

eyeuero Iva

(Ac. 27:42).

Two Kinds

(c)

of Style.

There are indeed two kinds of style and the periodic {kv irepLoSoLs)

in this matter, the running {elpofxht])

or compact

{KaTeaTpajxiikvri),

to use Aristotle's terminology.^

the words of Blass^ the running or continuous style prose like the vernacular

The

As a matter

KOLv-q,

and hence

is

the usual form in the

periodic style, on the other hand, belongs to "artistic-

developed prose"

ally

In

character-

the oldest prose as well as unsophisticated, unconventional

istic of

N. T.

is

that of Demosthenes and Thucydides.

like

of fact the 0. T. narrative

is

also in the running style,

The

while the prophets sometimes use the periodic.

by

longer N. T.

shown But occasionally something approaching a real period appears somewhat like that of the great Greek writers, but by no means so frequently. Interesting examples of some length may sentences are usually connected

/cat

or use asyndeton as

above.

1:1^;

be found in Lu.

Ac. 15

:

24-26; 26

:

10-14, 16-18; Ro.

18-22; 2 Pet. 1:2-7; Heb. 2

2-A. In Lu. 1 1-4 Blass^ notes that the protasis has three clauses and the apodosis two, while in Heb. 1 1-3 he finds some ten divisions of the 1

1-7; 1 Pet. 3

:

:

:

:

:

sentence which It

is

is

not so neatly balanced as the passage in Luke.

noticeable that

Luke uses

this classic

his Gospel, while the Epistle to the

idiom nowhere

Hebrews has a

else in

fluent oratorical

little beauty. Chapter 11 finds a splendid peroration which should belong to chapter 11 as the closing period Cf. a similar peroration, in the discussion about the promises. though not in one sentence, in Ro. 11 33-36. So also Ro. 8:3139, where verses 38 and 39 form a really eloquent period. Blass^ indeed gives a rather free interpretation to the term period and applies it to sentences of only two parts like a conditional sentence when the condition comes first, sentences with antithesis with

style of

no

in 12

f.,

:

1

:

—

—

Kai. 5e, disjunctive clauses with r), or parallehsms with re even finds a period in a case of asyndeton like 1 Cor. 7 27. But this is to make nearly all complex sentences periods. Blass'

likv

He 1

:

Arist. Rhet.,

iii.

9.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

this point. 3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 280.

^

N. T. Gk.,

lb.

p. 275,

who

amplifies

THE SENTENCE opinion on this point

to be borne in

is

433

mind when he argues

for

hterary rhythm on a considerable scale in the N. T. has some noble periods like Eph. 1:3-14; 2

He would show many more than

:

Paul indeed 14-18; 3 14-19. :

he does but for the fact that he

seems to grow impatient with the fetters of a long sentence and breaks away in anacoluthon which mars the fulness and symmetry of the sentence as a period. Cf. 2 Cor. 8 18-21; Ro. 12 6-8; Col. 1 9-23. In Ro. 3 7 f the m^cos and 6tl clauses make a not very strong culmination. The ground element in Paul's speech is the short sentence. Only occasionally does he combine these into a period.^ But Paul does use antithetic and comparative particles and apposition. One other reason for the absence of rhetorical periods is the avoidance of prolonged passages of indirect discourse. In truth none of that nature occur at all, so that we do not have in the N. T. passages of much length in indirect discourse such as one meets in Xenophon or Thucydides (cf. Caesar). But the quotations are usually direct either with recitative OTL (Mt. 9 18) or without (Mt. 9 22). Winer ^ well remarks that what the style thus loses in periodic compactness, it gains in animation and vividness. But the use of the participle in giving periodic compactness is to be noticed, as in Ac. 23 27. The at:

:

:

:

.

:

:

:

traction of the relative to the case of

its

antecedent, as already

observed, adds another bond of union to the compactness of the relative sentence as in Lu. 5:9. (rf)

The Parenthesis

{irapevOeai'^).

Such a

clause, inserted in

the midst of the sentence without proper syntactical connection, is

quite

common

in the

Once the

N. T.^

parentheses in the N. T., but the

The term

is

somewhat

editors used too

number

is still

many

considerable.

do

loosely applied to clauses that really

not interrupt the flow of the thought. find a parenthesis in Jo. 7

:

The same thing

Thus

The 7ap

39.

it is

not necessary to

clause

is

merely ex-

30 and Ac. 13 8. Certainly not every explanatory remark is to be regarded as parenthetical. On the other hand even a relative clause may be regarded as parenthetical where it is purely by the way as the interpretation of 'Pa/3/3et (Jo. 1 38 o XeTerat) and of Meaalav (o planatory.

is

true of Jo. 9

:

:

:

k<jTLv^

etc., Jo.

1

:41).

But

see

Mk. 7:11.

Editors indeed will

Weiss, Beitr. zur Paulin. Rhot., Thcol. Stud., 1S97, p. 1G7.

»

J.

2

W.-Th., p. 545.

' For the Joh. use of parenthesis see Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 470-4S0. John fond of the resumptive ovv after a parenthesis, as in 2 18; 3 25; 4 28. On the parenthesis in general sec K.-C, Bd. II, i)p. 353, 602.

is

:

:

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

434

differ as to

3

17 where

:

NEW TESTAMENT

what constitutes a parenthesis as in the case of Mk. W. H. use the marks of parenthesis while Nestle does

not consider this a parenthesis. In Jo. 1 15 W. H. print a double parenthesis, using the dash inside the parenthetical marks. Here again Nestle has the colon instead of the dash and the full stop in lieu of the parenthetical marks. W. H. are not uniform in the in:

They do it by the curved lines ( ) as dash as in Jo. 7 22; 10 12, or merely

dication of the parenthesis. in

Mk.

3

:

comma

the

16, 17, or the

:

as in the short phrases like

again with no punctuation at 10

29).

:

sentence v/xlv,

The is

Cor. 8:3).

two words

insertion of one or

(Lu. 13

Cf.

(t>v(rlv

:

24)

(Mt. 14

kv a4>po(jvvri \eyoj (2

and :

8),

10), or

in the

midst of the ttoXXoi, X€7a)

ort /card dvpaiJ.LV, iJiapTvpco, Kal (2

(Ac. 23

ecj)r]

Cor. 11

(j)r]aLv and 6(1)7] between words Language of the N. T., p. 200.

:

as in the case of doKetre (Heb.

all

the simplest form of the parenthesis, like

^riTrjcrovaLV

9:1),

:

(2 Cor. 10

^tjo-Ij'

:

:

35), ov

^Pevdo/jiaL

But the

21), etc.

(Ro.

insertion of

N. T. Cf. Simcox, very interesting parenthesis is

rare in the

is

A

the insertion in the speech of Jesus to the paralytic, of Xe7€t Kapa\vTLK(^

(Mk. 2

:

Mt.

10).

d-Ktv Tc3 TapaXeXvjjLkvco.

(9

:

adds

6)

The Synoptists

all

rcS

Lu. (5 24) has had the same source

roTe.

:

These phrases, common also to the ancient Greek, do not need marks of parenthesis, and the comma is sufficient. A little more extended parenthesis is found in a clause like 6voiJ.a avr^ 'looavris (Jo. 1:6), Ni/c65?7/ios opofxa avTw (Jo. 3:1), though this again may be considered merely a form of apposition. A more distinct here.

parenthesis

still

is

the insertion of a note of time like

rjaav 8^

Thackeray (Gr., p. 149 note) notes a tendency in the LXX to put numeral statements in parenthesis. Note also the explanatory parenthesis in Ac. 1 15 introduced by re. Cf. also (hael i]iikpaL oktw in Lu. 9 28, which can be explained otherwise. In Mt. 24 :15 the parenthetical command of Matthew or of Jesus, 6 avayivdoaKoiv voetrco, is indicated by W. H. only with the comma. In general the historical books have fewer parentheses than the Epistles, and naturally so. In Paul it is sometimes hard to draw the line between the mere parenthesis and anacoluthon. Cf. 1 Cor. 16 5; Ro. 5 12 (18); 9:11; 15 23-28. 05;^ may look back l^eyond the parenthesis as in Jo. 4:7 ff. (Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 470). See Jo. 10:35 Kal ov BvvaTai XvdrjvaL fi/jLepai

To>v a^vp.(jov

(Ac. 12 3). :

:

:

:

7j

7pa(/)T7.

:

Cf. the sharp interruption in Jo. 4

we have two

W.

:

:

H.'s text, besides anacoluthon.

Cf. Lu. 23

But

see 2 Pet. 2

parenthesis of

1-3.

In Gal. 2 5 :

f.

parentheses right together marked by the dash in

some

length.

:

:

51, Col. 1

8 for a

:

21

still

f.

for

longer

THE SENTENCE mention 2 Cor. 9

one, not to

12;

:

As

Viteau, £tude, 189G, p. 11.

435

Hcb. 7

:

illustrating

20 f.; Lu. 6 4. See once more the wide :

difference of opinion concerning the parenthesis, Blass^

comments

on the harshness of the parenthesis in Ac. 5

W. H. do

:

14, while

a parenthesis in the sentence at all. At bottom the parenthesis in the text is a matter of exegesis. Thus

not consider that there

if

in Jo. 13

is

be regarded as a paren-

avTovs

1 ff. els reXos rjyairrjaev

:

and verses 1-5 be considered one sentence (note repetition of elddos) a much simpler construction is the result.^ Instead of a parenthesis a writer switches off to one aspect of a subject and then comes back in another sentence as Paul does in 1 Cor. 8 1-4. He resumes by the repetition of irepl dboAodvTwv oldaideu. Cf also a thesis

:

—

sion in verses 1-13.

.

Eph. 3 14 tovtov xapiv after the long digresThis construction is not, however, a technical

similar resumption in

:

parenthesis. (e)

Anacoluthon. But a more

of sentences than the parenthesis

violent break in the connection is

anacoluthon.

This

when

is

merely

was begun (avaKoXovdov) The completion does not follow grammatically from the beginning. The N. T. writers are not peculiar in this matter, the failure to complete a sentence as intended

it

.

since even in

blemishes,

an

historian like

Thucydides

will

have Uo^ev

It is just in writers of the greatest

36. 2).

such grammatical

artistic orator like Isocrates

they be so considered, are found.

if

'^

And

a careful

avTols — einKakovvTes

(iii.

mental activity and ve-

hemence of spirit that we meet most instances of anacoluthon. Hence a man with the passion of Paul naturally breaks away from formal rules in the structure of the sentence are

common

of Plato

in

have

when he

is

greatly

and 2 Cor.

Such violent changes in the sentence conversation and public addresses. The dialogues

stirred, as in Gal.

many

examples.

The anacoluthon may be therefore The writer may be led off by

either intentional or unintentional.

a fresh idea or by a parenthesis, or he may think of a better way of one that will be more effective. The very jolt that is given by the anacoluthon is often successful in making

finishing his sentence,

more emphasis. The attention is drawn anew to the sentence to see what is the matter. Some of the anacolutha belong to other languages with equal pertinence, others are ])ec'uliar to the Greek genius. »

The

participle in particular

is

a very

common

occasion

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 279.

M.

Provence, Rev. and Exp., 1905, p. 96. N. T. Gk., p. 282. On the anacoluthon 6cc K.-G., Bd. pp. 588-592. 2

S.

«

Blass, Gr. of

II,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

436

The Apocalypse, as already shown, has many examples of anacoluthon. The more important N. T. illustrations of anacoluthon will now be given. It is difficult to make a clear grouping of the examples of anacoluthon in the N. T. on for anacoluthon.

any

But the following

scientific principle.

The Suspended

1.

will

What Abbott^

Subject.

answer.

calls

the suspended

subject finds illustration elsewhere than in John, though he does

have

his share.

may

It

be looked at indeed as suspended object

The point

is that the substantive, pronoun or by the wayside and the sentence is completed some other way. Thus in ttSj' prjiJ-a apyov 6 XaXTjaovaLv ol ixvdpwvot, airoScoaovaLv irepl avTov (Mt. 12 36) observe how TOiv prji^a is dropped In Trds ovv oarts bp.oko'yi}in the construction and xept avrov used. Kayo: kv (Mt. 10 avToo aei, otxoXoyrjaco 32) the same principle holds in regard to ttSs and kv avTQi. But in the same verse the regular

as well sometimes. participle

is left

:

—

:

construction obtains in

6<jtls apv^a-qraL

—

b.pvi]aoixaL

Kayu

avrov.

In

Lu. 6 47 ttSs 6 epxofxevos kt\., inrodei^o: vplv t'lvl eariv ofxoios we see a similar anacoluthon unless ttSs 6 epx- be regarded as a rather violent prolepsis of the subject, which is not so likely in this instance. :

In Lu. 11:11 the anacoluthon is

is

not quite so simple, though riva

after all left to itself (rlva 8e e^ vfxuv rov irarepa airrjaeL 6 vlos

ix^^^j f^v

o.i^Tt

ixdvos

6(})tv

If instead of riva

avTi2 eTrtSwcret;).

the sen-

would go smoothly except that e^ v/jloov would awkward. Observe that aW-qaeL has two accusatives slightly be without Tiva. The apodosis is introduced by p.i] and as an interrogative clause expects the answer "no." But in spite of the gramtence read

el

or kav, all

matical hopelessness of the sentence 12

:

48 the matter

ceraL Trap' avrov).

stranded subject

is

simpler

Here two things are wap' avrov), but

(cf.

it

{iravTl be

17

tcLs 6s epel

—

we merely have

a<j>edi}(Terai

In Lu.

w

^rjTrjdr]-

ebbdt] ttoXv,

toXv

We not only have the

true.

it

has been attracted into the

case of the relative (inverse attraction),

compare

has great power.

iravrl,

12

avrui (Lu.

:

not 10).

With

ttSs.

this

In 2 Cor. 12

:

the anacoluthon -without any attraction, nva (/^i; nva &v aireara\Ka Here indeed o}v is attracted

expecting a verb governing the accusative Tpos vnas,

8l'

avrov ewXeoveKrYjaa

vjjLas;).

into the case of rovrcov unexpressed. (TTJs

ovros

—

olbap.ev ri

A

simpler instance

eyevero avrw (Ac. 7

Mk.

:

40; Ex. 32

:

is 6 Mcoi;-

1).

Blass"

20 {Ibdiv avrov to irvevna crvveairapa^ev avrov), but surely this is merely treating irvevixa as masculine (natural gender). But in Ac. 19 34 (eiTLyvovres be on 'lovbalos eanv (jiv'fj eyevero /xla eK iravrcov) there is a clear case of anacoluthon in

finds anacoluthon in

9

:

:

1

Joh. Gr., p. 32.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 283.

THE SENTENCE the change to

eK

There

is

tions.

The writmgs of John show similar illustrano anacoluthon in Jo. 6 22 in the text of W. H.,

wavTwv.

:

which reads eUov

But

437

instead of

6tl

Ibd^v otl

— oTe (margin

of

W.

H.).

anacoluthon {irav 6 bkbwKh jiol /x-q airoKkcoi e| avTov) in the change from ttSz' to e^ avrov. It is possible to regard TTciv iiT] here^ as equivalent to ovSels and not like irds in Jo. 3 16. In 7 38 another suspended subject is found in 6 irtin 6

:

39 there

real

is

—

:

arevojv

/jlyj

:

But 10 36

avrov further on).

els e/xe (cf.

is

:

hardly anacolu-

thon,2 since one has merely to supply the demonstrative tKelvu or

the personal pronoun aLTc3 with Xe7ere to

In 15:2 wav

smoothly. thon,

any, since both

if

use of

But

ovTos).

dedwKas

(ttSj^

In

coluthon.

may

i/yuets

may

be in the same case

matter

in 15: 5 the

27

(v/JieLS

aiirc^ 8coaeL

Jo. 2

1

24

:

and

u/xets

kv

we have

6 rjKomaTe

avTOV

air'

resumptive

apxvs

.

In

ev v/juu /jLevercS)

less likely in verse

fjihei kv vjja.v) :

epet)

the more usual ana-

(xtt'

In Rev. 2

vixtv.

(cf.

complicated by the in-

Kaych kv avTW ovtos

efxol

avrols)

(ij/xets

TO xplaixa b eXd/3ere

—

is

be merely prolepsis, but this seems

position of

the sentence run

— avro we have very slight anacolu-

sertion of Kayo: ev avrQ (6 ixkvwv kv

17:2

make

KXrjiJLa

where note the

26 the anacoluthon

differ from some of those above.^ So but in 2 7, 17 (rw vlkojvtl Swao) avTw) the case is the same and may be compared with Jo. 15 2, 5. Cf. the probable reading (W. H. bracket avTcS) in Rev. 6 4 as well as Mt. 6 4 (LXX) 5 40 (tw OeXovn avrui), where there is no real anacoluthon, but a resumptive use of avrQ. Cf. also vfxds repeated (6 vLKwv

Scocrco

also as to

does not

avrco)

Rev. 3

:

12, 21,

:

:

:

;

:

—

:

after parenthesis in Col. 1

amples o)

like Josh. 9

:

way a

relative clause

object, as in Lu. 9 avTobs.

Cf.

common use

Mt. 10

W.

2.

:

be ixi]

14; Lu. 10

:

has other similar ex-

similar resumptive use of

H.) of Ro. 16 27. :

left as

bkx'^VTai vixas 8,

10.

eis

Digression.

reXos ovtos cco^Tytrerat

A

In a sim-

a suspended subject or

— aTOTLvdaaere

€7r'

Cf. this with the very

and the

of resumptive ovtos after the article

like 6 VTOfxelvas

thon

oaoi av

5,

:

may

A

15.

:

occurs in the text (not marg. in

ilar

LXX

The

22.

12; Ps. 103

:

(Mt. 10

:

participle,

22).

somewhat more complicated kind

of anacolu-

where a digression is caused by an intervening sentence or explanatory fV.^use. Those naturally occur mainly in the Epistles of Paul where his energy of thought and passion of soul overleap all trammels. In Jo. 5 44 the participle is dropped for the indicais

:

tive ^r}T€LTe.

In Jo. 21

Xi) ris el; el56res) 1

Blass, Gr. of

»

Blass, Gr. of

:

12

{ovdels kToKjia tCjv fxadrjrccv e^erdcrai

the question breaks the smooth flow autl

N. T. Gk., N. T. Gk.,

p. 283. p. 283, calls

=

it

a "very

Abbott, Job. Gr.,

awkward

avrov

eiSores p. 33.

instance."

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

438

agrees in case with

and number with

ovdels

compare the change from tive

7

/iiy

19 (Kadapi^cov iravra

:

With

nad-qruv.

Mk.

aipcjav in

6

:

8 to the

Nestle has, however,

tvbvaaadaL in verse 9.

firj

Mk.

I'm

this

infini-

In

kvbhaiqade.

the participle can be con-

to. iSpcb/zara)

nected in thought, as Mark probably did, with Xe7et in verse 18, but the intervening quotation makes Mark's explanatory adden-

a real anacoluthon. The example in Jo. 1 15 Abbott^ calls "impressionism" due to the writer's desire to make his impression He compares first and then to add the explanatory correction. 4 1 with 3 22. In 1 15 ovtos rjv 6p dirov is taken by Abbott as a part of the Baptist's statement, but W. H. read ovtos rjv 6 elTcou as a parenthetical remark of the writer. So in Jo. 20 18 Kal ravra

dum

:

:

:

:

:

elirep avrfj

does not

fit

comment of John, not

added clause the Ac. 10 36 (W. H.) with is

:

itself is

without

on

in exactly after

6v.

The

'Ewpa/ca tov kvplop.

of

Mary. The margin

of

a case of anacoluthon, but the text

6p is

In Ac. 24 6 the repetition of :

6p

/cat

leaves evpop-

—

from eKpariiaanep In Ac. 27 10 (decopC) ort neWeip) the res the infinitive, phenomenon clause is changed a noted by to oTi Winer- in Plato, Gorg. 453 b. The anacoluthon in Gal. 2 6 (oltto 5e cut

off

.

:

:

SoKOVVTWP elpal Ti

T03V

Beds apdponrov oh is

noteworthy

—

oTToloi TTore ^crap ovb'ep

Xa^ijSdi'et

for the

the repetition of the

—

yap

ep.OL

ol

/jlol

Sta^epei

—

irpdacjoirop 6

8okovpt€s ov8ep irpoaapedePTo)

complete change of construction as shown by

ol SoKovpres

in the

nominative and followed by Observe the two pareneasier in such a case to make

the middle instead of the passive voice. theses that led to the variation.

It

is

a new start, as Paul does here. In Gal. 2:5 Blass^ follows D in omitting oh in order to get rid of the anacoluthon, as he does also in Ro. 16 27 (w), but it is more than likely that the difficulty of the anacoluthon with oh led to the omission in D. One of the most striking anacolutha in Paul's Epistles is found at the end of Ro. 5 12 :

:

where the apodosis to the

coairep

clause

is

The next

wanting.

sen-

tence (dxpt Tap) takes up the subordinate clause e0' w rjixaprop and the comparison is never completed. In verse 18 a new comparison is

drawn

in complete form.

The sentence

in

Ro. 9

:

22-24

is

with-

out the apodosis and verse 25 goes on with the comparative cbs. 2 Pet. 1 17 shows a clear anacoluthon, for the par, t/wj-le Xa^cop is :

left

stranded utterly in the change to

rjKovaaiJiep.

Winer* seems to be wrong

1

2

ravr-qp ttip

:

4-10.

is

Job. Gr., p. 34.

Qr. of

W.-Th.,

*

W.-Th.,

yip-eis

p. 569.

in

really olSep

rightly punc-

N. T. Gk., p. 284.

^

p. 573.

(})o:prip

an anacoluthon

The apodosis 8 being a long parenthesis as W. H.

the long sentence in 2 Pet. 2 in verse 9 (verse

/cat

in finding

439

THE SENTENCE However, Winer

tuate).

^

is justified

in refusing to see

anacoluthon

in many passages formerly so regarded and that call for no disSee further Mt. 7:9; 12 36; Mk. 2 28; 7 3 f. cussion now. :

:

:

12:8, 10; 21:6; Jo. 6:39; 17: 18; Ac. 15: 22 ff. Lu. 11:11 24 20; 26 3; Ro. 16 25-27; 1 Cor. 9 15; Col. 2 2 19 34; 3 Eph. 4 6; 8; 2 Cor. 7 5; 1 Th. 4 1; Heb. 3 15; 10 15 f. f.;

Tim.

1

3-5; Ju. 16.

:

:

:

:

:

1

:

:

:

:

:

in 2 Corinthians

It

very

is

:

:

common

in the

:

Apocalypse as

and Galatians.

The Participle in Anacolutha. It calls for a word of its own matter of anacoluthon, although, as a matter of fact, it occurs in both the kinds of anacoluthon already noticed. The 3.

in the

reason

is,

renders

it

participle sense.

the free use of the participle in long sentences (cf Paul) peculiarly subject to anacoluthon. The point with the .

is

not that

Gal. 6

:

1,

it is

a special kind of anacoluthon in any other

KaTapTi^ere, (JKOTTWV creavTOV,

fxr]

Kal

av reipaadyj^

may

be regarded as anacoluthon in the change of number, but it is a natural singling-out of the individual in the application. In 2 Cor. 5 12 the ellipsis of ypcKpofxev ravra with didovres is so harsh as to :

Cf also dXclSofxevoi in 2 Cor. 7:5. It is about areWonevoL in 2 Cor. 8 20, for, skipping the long parenthesis in verse 19, we have aweirkixypaiiev. But in the parenthesis itself x^i-porop7]dtis is an example of anacoluthon, for regularly exetpoTovTjdr] would be the form. In 2 Cor. 9:11, 13, the participles TrXovTi^ofxepoL and So^a^ovres have no formal connection with a principal verb and are separated by a long parenthesis in verse 12. But these participles may be after all tantamount to the

amount

to anacoluthon.

.

less certain

:

and not mere anacoluthon. Just as sequimini (sec. pi. iironepoL, so other Greek participles may correspond to the indicative or imperative.^ Moulton^ cites numerous examples from the papyri which make this possible for the kolvt}. But Moulton'' sees a sharp difference between the "hanging nominative" like exoiv o vofxos in Heb. 10 1 (if bbvavTai be accepted, W. H. dwarai marg.) and exoptes in Ph. 1 30, where, however, W. H. make a long parenthesis and seek to connect exovT€s with These are indeed mere anacolutha, but one aT7]K€Te (verse 27). wonders if the connection between these and Ro. 12 6 {'IxovTes) is

indicative

mid. ind.)

=

:

:

:

so very distant after

Participles are scattered along in this

all.

chapter in an "unending series"^ mingled with infinitives and imperatives. Thus in 12 9-13 we have participles, verse "14 the :

571.

1

lb., p.

2

Moulton,

s

Bliiss,

Prol., p. 223.

Cr. of N.

'1\ C.k.,

» ]).

2S5.

lb.

*

lb., p.

225.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

440

imperative, verse 15 infinitive, verse 16 ^ participles, 16^ impera-

Here the

17 participles.

tive,

participle does

seem to be

cally equivalent to the imperative (cf. inf. also).

(Verbal Nouns) for discussion of this point. participles skip over verse 2

verse

and

1,

it is

resumed

in

In 2 Cor. 6

:

3 the

and carry on the construction of verse 9. For a group of participles

with the imperative see Eph. 5 point

practi-

See Participle

15-22. Cf. also Col. 3 16. The that these various gradations in the use of the participle

is

:

:

As regards the nominative parthan the genitive absolute, Winer ^ remarks that thus the participle gains greater prominence in the sentence. In Eph. 4 2 avexofjLevoL may not be anacoluthon, but may be in accord with ^s kKXrjdrjTe. Col. 1 26 is the case of the indicative rather than a participle (k4)avepw9r], not ire^avepwiikvov) See 1 Cor. 7:37 where excoj/ is succeeded by ex^i, but (W. H.) eyeipas Kal Kadlaas (Eph. 1: 20). Cf. Rev. 2:2, 9. As to Heb. 8: 10 (10: 16) ScSohs is explained by Winer ^ as referring to had-qaop-ai without anacoluthon, while Moulton^ considers it equal to an indicative and parallel to ewt.ypa^'co. I am inclined to agree with Winer on this are not always clearly defined.

ticiple rather

:

:

.

point. In 2 Cor. 5 6 ff. Paul, after using dappovvres, repeats it in the form of dappovnev because of the intermediate clauses before he expresses evSoKovfiev, the main verb.^ Finally compare c0' ov av :

TO Tvev/JLa Kara^alvov

'L8j]s

p-hov ex' avTov (Jo. 1

/cat

KaTa^atvov ws repiaTepav k^ ovpavov, Kal epeLvev

:

33) wath to irvevpa

avTov (verse 32),

ctt'

where the last clause is the comment of the Baptist to give special emphasis to that point, more than the participle would. 4. Asyndeton Due to Absence of 8e and akXa. Winer'^ considers de or dXXd to correspond with ph as a species of anacoluthon, and Blass^ shares the same idea. As a matter of fact (see chapter on Particles) ph does not require 8e either by et>inol-

the absence of

ogy or usage.

It

is

rather gratuitous to call such absence an in-

The examples

stance of anacoluthon.

be discussed

later,

such

Sometimes indeed the

line

will

as Ac. 1:1; 13:4; Ro. 11:13, etc. (/) 1.

Oratio Variata. Distinction from Anacoluthon.

between anacoluthon and

Thus

m Lu. 17: 31

(^6%

earat

olda) the second clause

use avTQv.

Cf.

Kol avT(hv). 1

W.-Th.,

2

lb., p.

1

p. 572.

573.

kirl

not very clearh' drawn.

tov 8copaTos Kal

to. aKevrj

cannot repeat the relative

Cor. 8

So also in

oratio variata is

:

1

6

(e^ o5

Cor. 7

— Kal :

13

eis ai'Tov),

avTrjs

avTOV

2 Pet. 2

repeats

r^rts.

3

Prol., p. 224.

»

lb.

4

W.-Th., p. 573.

«

Op.

kv tt}

but has to

os,

cit.,

:

3 {oh

Cf.

—

Rev.

p. 286.

THE SENTENCE 17

:

In Ro. 2

2.

:

6

after the relative clause os

ff .

a subdivision of the object, on the one

is

441

—

hand

d7ro5cb(T€i

(rots ixev

there

— ^rjTovatv

alwviov), on the other (rots 5e abLKia opyy) /cat dv/jLos) where the nominative changes the construction and os cannot here be repeated. In Ro. 11 22 indeed both of the phrases that extend the ^(jii}v

:

are put in the nominative Paul changes from kare to This is all oratio variata in reality and is in accord with the ei. ancient Greek idiom. Blass^ considers Tit. 1 2 f an instance of oraiio variata, but t6v \6yov in all probability is to be regarded as in apposition with r/v, which is the object both of eTrriyyeLXaTo and Thus W. H., but Nestle agrees with Blass. e(t)avepwaev.

accusatives xPV^TorriTa Kol

a-KOToixlav deov

In Gal. 4

{airoToula,' xpriaTOT-qi) .

:

6

f.

:

That

Heterogeneous Structure.

2.

is

what

.

oratio variata really

can be illustrated by a number of passages other than the relative and with less element of obscurity about them. In Rev. 2 18 6 exwi/ is followed by Kal avrov just hke the relative sentences above. Thus also 2 Jo. 2. In Rev. 7 9 after eUov Kal iSov we find a mixed construction, oxXos earcbres (constr. /card ahveaiv) with Iboh, Winer^ rightly distinguishes the varia7repLl3e^\r](j.evovs with eUov. tion in case in Rev. 18 12 f. (gen., ace, gen., ace.) and the similar phenomenon in Rev. 2:17 where there is a real distinction between is

and

it

:

:

:

The use

the use of the genitive and the accusative. nkvovs in

Mk.

6

:

8

probably due to the

is

the correct text has

hSvaaadai just after. For similar ellipse and

ait)

oratio variata see 2 Cor. 8 :23. it

InMk.

12 :38 after OeXovrwv KepL-irardv

looks like a sudden change to find

met

W. H. by

in the text of

affiraa/xovs,

The

are in the accusative with deXovrov. is

of virodede-

ellipse of wopeveadaL, for

but after

irregularity in

a parenthesis, but

it

both

all

Mk.

3

:

16

could have

been cleared up also by & (referring to JJerpov instead of Kal as Winer ^ suggests). In Jo. 8: 53 the continuity of the interrogative form of sentence is abruptly broken by the short clause /cat oi wpo(jjrJTaL axkdavov, a very effective interruption, however. The case of 1 Jo. 2 2 is simple where instead of irepl rojv 6\ov tov kogixov (to be parallel with oh wepl rwv r}p.iTkpwv) John has merely -wepl :

6\ov TOV

amph;

is

ouCTt )Lter'

{inr^p

Koa/jLov,

tavTOv

shown

a somewhat different conception.

similar ex-

:

:

/cat

tcou

also in Ph. 2

tov Xaov ayuo-qfiaTcop). :

22

the figure.

In Rev.

Gr. of N. T.

1

:

A

ljetvve(!n Trarpt TeKPov

aw

Paul purposely puts in

1

A

found in Ac. 20 34 as between rats xp^^ats /lov and toTs Heb. 9 7 furnishes the same point in inverse ordrr kfiov. is

e^ol wliere

to break a too literal carrying out of

6 the correct text in

C.k., p. 2SG.

lack of parallel

and avp

2

th(>

W.-Tli., p. 579.

i)arenthesis has »

n,.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

442

^aaiKelav, tepels rep de^,

rifias

See further Ac. 16

16

:

a different conception from

/Sao-tXeis.

f.

3. Participles in Oratio Variata. These offer a frequent occasion for oratio variata, since they can so often be used parallel with subordinate clauses of various kinds. Thus in Jo. 5 44 :

would naturally be followed by ^rjTovvTes, but we have ^T]TelTe. So, on the other hand, in 1 Cor. 7 13 Kal awevdoKel does not fit in as smoothly with ainaTov as /cat avvevdoKovpra would. The Xa/x^avouTes

:

same lack

of parallel in the use of the participle

is seen in Jo. Kay 6)) and in Lu. 17:31 where the relative and the participle are paired off. So also Ph. 1 23 and 1 Jo. 3 24. Cf the Participle in Anacolutha. In Ro. 12 6 f. participles and sub-

15

:

5

(6 nevcav

:

:

:

stantives are placed in antithesis, as in 2 Cor. 6 participles, in 4-7^ ciples.

Cf. 2 Cor. 11

:

we have and partiwhere adverbs, adjuncts and verbs ha, in 9

7*^ f.

in

tv,

23

if.

f.

:

3

f

.

adjectives

are in antithesis.

Exchange of Direct and Indirect Discourse. But the most is that between direct and indirect discourse. It is either from the indirect to the direct or from the direct to the indirect. As Blass^ justly observes, the N. T. writers, like all popular narrators, deal very little in indirect dis4.

striking instance of oratio variata

course.

The

accusative and the infinitive

old sense nor

is not common in the always the sign of indirect quotation. Fre-

is 6tl

quently

it is merely recitative otl and corresponds to our quotationmarks, as in Mk. 14 14, elirare tw olKoSecnroTri otl '0 StSacrKaXos :

So also v/xeh Xeyere otl /SXao-^Tj^teis (Jo. 10 36). This reversion to one form of discourse from another is not unknown to Xeyet.

:

the ancient Greek. But it is peculiarly in harmony with the N. T. vernacular and essentially vivid narrative style. In Lu. 5 14 we have a typical instance of the change from indirect to direct dis:

course (xapriyYeikev

aiiTui ij.r]8eul eiireiv,

dXX' aTreXdcbv Sel^ov aeavTOv).

Exactly parallel with this

is

Tov irarpos

where observe

riv

rjKovaare pov

Ac.

1

:

4 dXXd

TrepLixeveiv ttjv

/jlov.

—

eTayyeXlav

Cf. also Ac. 17

:

3

where after 5ieXe^aro otl 6 'Ir]aovs Luke concludes with the direct words of Paul 6p eycj KaTayyeWw vptv. In Jo. 13 29 we have the reverse process where the writer drops from the direct to the in:

direct statement (aySpaaov wv ttojxo'ls Lva tl 5(3).

{eTOLpdaaTe in Ac. 23 X^o-ai ort

:

—

ttjs

XP^'-O-^

exo/xev els ttjv eoprrjv,

So also we see the same thing

vvktos, KT7]vr] re TapaaTrjaaL Iva

rj

in Ac. 23

— bLacrwacoaLv),

:

rots

23

f.

But

22 the other change occurs, as TapayyeiXas prjded kXakpecpduLa-as irpos kpe. In W. H.'s text of Ro. 12

ravra

:

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2S6.

THE SENTENCE 1

we have irapaKoXu} vfj.3.s In Mk. 11 32 the

f.

-aSai).

irapacrrriaai.' Kal

into

avv(TXfl^>-o.Tl^€ade liis

(not

own remarks

oxKov) after the question rather in the nature of ana-

coluthon, though in Mt. 21

MSS. do

fxri

writer proceeds with

:

(k(j)o^ovvTo Tov

443

:

26

(})o^ovixtda is

read as indeed a few

Mark. So also Mt. 9 6, where the writer injects the words of Jesus rore Xeyei tc3 TapaXvTLKui, we probably have in

:

anacoluthon rather than cranio fan'af a (see

(d),

Parenthesis).

Connection between Separate Sentences.

So far we have been considering the matter of connection between the various parts of the same sentence, whether simple or complex, and the various comphcations that arise. But this is not all. The (g)

Greeks, especially in the literary style,

felt

the propriety of indi-

cating the inner relation of the various independent sentences that

This was not merely an but a logical expression of coherence of thought.

artistic device,

common

in this connec-

composed a paragraph. Kai, be,

dXXd, yap,

ovv,

8r},

etc.,

were very

Particles like

tion. Demonstrative pronouns, adverbs, and even relative pronouns were also used for this purpose. I happen to open at Mt. 24 32-51 a paragraph of some length. The first sentence begins with 8k. The sentences in verses 33 and 34 have asyndeton and so are without a connective. In verse 36 8e reappears, while the two sentences in verses 37 and 38 both have yap. Verse 40 begins with Tore, a common word in this usage in Matthew, as h abrrj rfj chpa is in Luke. Verse 42 begins with ovp as its connective, while 43 drops back to 8e. In 44 Slo. tovto answers as a link of union while 45 uses apa. Verses 46 f. have asyndeton while 48 has 8e. This long sentence completes the paragraph save the short sentence in verse 51 introduced by ket. I think this paragraph a fair sample of the didactic portion of the Gospels. Asyndeton occurs, but it is not the rule. In the Gospel of John ovv is a much more frequent connective between sentences than Kai, as any chapter (11 for instance) will show. The Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-12) have no connectives at all, and are all the more effective because of the asyndeton. Winer^ finds this didactic asyndeton common also in James, the Gospel of John (cf 14-17) and 1 John. But asyndeton is sometimes :

.

noticeable also in the non-didactic portions of John, as 20: 14-18.

No

formal rules on the subject can be made, as the individual speaker or writer follows his mood of the moment in the matter. The point is to observe that, while asyndeton often occurs, in gen(!ral

Greek writers even

in the

N. T. use connectives between

separate sentences. »

W.-Th.,

p. 53G.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

444

Connection between Paragraphs. It is only natural and unite paragraph with

(h)

to carry the matter one step further

paragraph.

For a discussion of the origin of the paragraph see

The paragraphs in our printed Greek texts are partly the work of the modern editors, the chapter on Orthography and Phonetics.

yet not wholly

so.

But even

in real or original paragraphs the

In some there will be none at all, but theme will be presented, whereas with others we

connection varies greatly.

an

entirely

new

merely have a new aspect of the same subject. I happen to turn The chapter opens with /uerd raOra, a to the sixth chapter of John. real connective that refers to the incidents in chapter 5, which may have been a full year before. The next paragraph in W. H. begins At verse 22 there is no connective exat verse 14 and has ovv. cept T7j kirahpiov which may be compared with the roTf: of Matthew. The paragraph at verse 41 has ovv again, which is very common in John in this connection, as can be seen illustrated also in verses 52 and 60. At verse 66 the paragraph begins with Ik tovtov, a real connective.

verse 10,

5e

If

we go

into chapter 7

we

find Kal in verse

1, 8e

in

again in verse 14, ovv in verse 25, no connective in verse

Asyndeton on more frequent in the Gospel of John than in Abbott 2 gives a detailed discussion of Gospels.^ asyndeton in John. In Paul's Epistles one would 32, de in verse 37, ovu in verse 45.

the whole

rather

the Synoptic

is

the kinds of

expect

little

asyndeton between the paragraphs especially in the argumentative portions. In general this is true, and yet occasionally even in Ro. asyndeton is met as in 9 1; 13 1. But in chapter 8 every paragraph has its connective particle. Note also ovv in 12 1 at the :

:

:

beginning of the hortatory portion after the long preceding argu-

As between

is freedom in the individual For Hort's theory of the paragraph see expression on 319. By means of spaces he has a system Gr., Intr. to N. T. in p. is plain in the text of W. H. of sub-paragraphs, as There are things to be considered in Forecast. other XIII. enough has been treated in of the sentence, but construction the examination remains in is the minute What syntax chapter. this pronouns, verbs in words (cases, prepositions, relations of of the relations participles), the tense, infinitives and voice and and mood

ment.

sentences, there

the subject.

of clause with clause in the use of subordinating conjunctions, the particles, figures of speech (aposiopesis, ellipsis, paronomasia, zeugma, etc.). There is a natural order in the development of

these matters which will be followed as far as possible in the dis1

Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 70

f.

^

lb.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 537.

THE SENTENCE cussion of syntax.

The

of sentences or clauses.

445

come before the relation In the discussion of words either nouns

individual words

up first, but, as verbs are connected more with conjunctions than nouns they are best treated just

or verbs could be taken closely

before conjunctional clauses.

Prepositions are properly discussed a variation of the demonstrative pronoun. But at best no treatment of syntax can handle every aspect and phase of language. The most that can be achieved is a presafter cases.

The

article is

entation of the essential principles of N. T. syntax so that the student will be able to interpret his Greek N. T. according to correct grammatical principles derived from the living language of the time.

CHAPTER XI THE CASES

(HTfiSEIS)

History of the Interpretation of the Greek Cases. Perhaps nowhere has confusion been worse (o) Confusion.

I.

confounded than in the study of the Greek cases. The tendency has been usually to reason backwards and to explain past phenomena by present conditions. The merely logical method of syntax has turned the pyramid on into

grammar.

its

apex and has brought untold error

grammar

The' Stoics took interest in

1

for philo-

and gave the logical bent to it in lieu of the hisDionysius Thrax and Apollonius Dyscolus went off on torical. the wrong trail in the matter of the Greek cases. Bopp brought dayhght out of (6) Bopp's Contribution. darkness by comparative grammar. Hiibschmann^ gives an adsophical purposes

mirable history of the matter.

He

illustrates the eight cases

Thanks now

copiously from the Sanskrit, Zend and Persian.

to

such workers as Schleicher, Brugmann, Delbriick, the eight IndoGermanic cases are well wrought out and generally acknowledged. Cf. brief discussion of the forms of the Greek cases in chapter

VH

(Declensions).

Greek grammarians

terminology applied to the cases. bridge scholars issued a tract

still

differ,

however, in the

In 1911 the Oxford and

"On

Terminology

in

Cam-

Grammar,"

but confusion still reigns. See also W. Havers, Untersuchungen zur Kasussyntax der indog. Sprachen. When the Stoic grammarians wrote, the genitive and ablative had the same forms, and the locative, instrumental and dative likewise. There were oc-

and

casional survivals of distinction like oUol

instrumental apa and dative dpat, etc.

But

o'Ikco,

Cypriotic

in general the

work

of

syncretism was complete in the respects just mentioned, though Hiibschmann, Zur Casuslehre, p. v. lb. Cf Dewischeit, Zui Theorie der Casus (1857) Rumpel, Die Casuslehre (1875). Hadley (Essays Phil, and Crit., Gk. Gen. as Abl., p. 46) speaks of "the Beckerite tendency, too frequently apparent in Kiihner, to impose a meaning on language rather than educe the meaning out of it." ^

*

;

.

446

THE CASES

447

(IITHSEIS)

Arcadian the genitive and the locative took the same form^ Latin Romae, domi). But the grammarians, ignorant of the history of the language, sought to explain the genitive and ablative ideas from a common source. Thus Winer ^ boldly calls the genitive the "whence-case" and undertakes to explain every usage of the genitive from that standpoint, a hopeless exercise in grammatin

(of.

The same

gymnastics.

ical

sinuosities

have been resorted to in

the effort to find the true dative idea in the locative and instru-

mental uses of the forms called dative by the grammars. Some modern grammarians^ help mat(c) Modern Usage. ters a good deal by saying true genitive, ablatival genitive, true dative, locatival dative, instrumental dative. nises the real case-distinctions

some confusion

and the

This custom recogoutcome. But

historical

remains because the locative and the dative same thing and are not the same thing in fact. It partly depends on whether one is to apply the term "case" to the ending or to the relation expressed by the ending. As a matter of fact the term is used both ways. "Ovo/xa is called

never

mean

still

exactly the

indiscriminately nominative, vocative or accusative, according to

the facts in the context, not nominatival accusative or accusatival

So with ^aaiXels or TroXeis. We are used to this in it seems a shock to say that TroXecos may be either genitive or ablative, that kfioi may be either locative, instrumental or dative. But why more of an absurdity than in the case of ovofxa and TroXets? The only difference is that in the gen.-abl. the syncretism of form applies to all Greek words. For various examples of syncretism in the forms of the Greek cases with fragments of distinctive endings also see Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 375 f.; Brugmann, Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 420 f.; and chapter VII (Declensions).

nominative.

the grammars, but

Green's Classification. I agree with Green,-* whom I quote at some length: "I shall classify the uses of the cases under the heads of the Aryan Cases, as in every instance the true method of explanation of any particular idiom is to trace its connection to the general meaning of the original Aryan case, to which the case in Greek or Latin corresponds, and not arbitrarily to distinguish the uses of any case in (^ireek or Latin by terms {d)

shall here

which cannot be properly applied to tliat case; e. g., the term dative of manner is no explanation. Manner cannot be expressed 1

Hoffmann, Grioch.

>

Cf. Babbitt,

*

Notes on Gk. and Lat. Synt.,

A

Clr.

Dial.,

Bd.

of Attic

I,

p. 303.

and Ionic Gk., 1902. 1S«)7, p. 11.

^

w.-Th.,

p.

184

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

448

The correct explanation is that the use instrumental case in Greek has coalesced instrumental, but the

by the is

NEW TESTAMENT

true dative case.

form with the dative. This method of explanation has the advantage of demanding fewer set terms, while at the same time it requires a logical connection to be made between the particular use in question and the fundamental meaning of the case involved. Such an explanation is the better the simpler the words used in it are." This is wonderfully well said and has the advantage of being true, a remark not always true of grammatical comments. It in

is

the

method

of history, of science, of

life.

It is the

method pur-

sued in the etymology and history of a word. It is the only way to get at the truth about the significance of the Greek cases. This method of interpretation (e) Syncretism of the Cases. does not ignore the syncretism of the cases. On the other hand it

accents sharply the blending of the forms while insisting on the

There are indeed some instances where

integrity of the case-ideas.

either of the blended cases will vipwdels

(Ac. 2

:

33),

which

tal 'exalted by,' or

So

in

sense, like

de^ta rod 6eov

rrj

locative 'exalted at,' instrumen-

dative 'exalted to' (a rare idiom and in the

older Greek), 'the right

(Ro. 8: 24).

make

may be

hand

of God.'

Cf. also

Heb. 12:11 x^pSj and Xvmjs

rfj eX7r[5t eaooO-rjiJLev

may

be explained

But such occasional ambiguity is not surprising and these instances on the "border-line" made syncretism possible. In general the context makes it perfectly either as genitive or ablative.

is meant, just as in English depend on the order of the words to show the difference between nominative and accusative. Yet no one would say that nominative and accusative are the same in English and French.^ As a matter of fact it was often (/) Freedom in Use of Case. immaterial whether a writer or speaker used one of several ways of expressing himself, for the Greek allows liberty and flexibility at many points. Thus to yevos and ra5 yevec would either answer

clear

which

of the syncretistic cases

and French we have

to

for the specifying idea, TpoaKweoo is

dative,

fxifxvijaKoiJLat

used with either accusative or

with accusative or genitive, etc.^

not to say that one construction

is

with the other. The difference may (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 66). Moulton properly ^

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

But

this

is

used for another or is identical be "subtle, no doubt, but real"

p. 75, illustrates

(i6.)

cites the

the rapid disappearance of

case-endings in the Irish tongue, which as late as I/a.d. had a full set of inflections, whereas by the fifth century only traces of the dat. plur. survive. 2

W.-Th.,

p. 180.

THE CASES

449

(nxfiSEis)

well-known distinction between the accusative and genitive with Ac. 9 7 and 22 9 as disproof of apparent self-contradiction and a gentle hint not to be too ready to blur over case-dis-

aKovoi in

:

:

Luke or elsewhere in the N. T. He notes also genitive and accusative with yeveadau in Heb. 6 4 f and the common use of ets with accusative after verbs of rest and kv with locative even after verbs of motion. But it is hazardous to insist always on a clear distinction between els and h, for they are really originally the same word. The point is that by different routes one may reach practically the same place, but the routes are different. Indeed tinctions in

:

one

may

take so

of the cases

many

come very

.

different standpoints that the border-lines

So e^ apuarepas (abl.), h good Greek for 'on the left'

close sometimes.

apLarepq. (loc), eis apiaT^pav (acc.) are

all

'

(we have also in English 'at the left/ 'to the n. The Purpose of the Cases.

left')-^

Aristotle's Usage. He applied the term tttwo-is to verb, noun, adverb, etc., but the later grammarians spoke only^ of the TTTcoats opoixaros, though as a matter of fact adverbs and prepositions are in cases, and even conjunctions and other particles are usually in cases. But in ordinary parlance substantives, adjectives, pronouns, the article are in cases and have inflection. The cases originally had to do only with these. The adverbs were (a)

merely later modifications or fixed case-forms. The cases were used to express word(h) Word-Relations. relations, the endings serving to

The

case was.

make

it

plain

what the

isolating languages, like the Chinese,

particular

show such

by the order of the words and the tone in pronunciation. and French use prepositions chiefly besides the English Modern relations

These word-relations concern substantives in substantives, with adjectives, with prepother with their relations So adjectives and pronouns have all verbs. with and ositions whether verb or substantive is immaterial is It relations. these with a substantive. In the old case of a use the in earliest the

order of the words.

Sanskrit practically

all

the word-relations are expressed by the

This was a very simple plan, but as language became more complicated a great strain was bound to be put on each of these cases in order to convey clearly so many resultant ideas. As a matter of fact the ground-meaning of the case-forms is not eight cases.

known.^

On

Origin of Case-Forms see chapter VII,

i,

2, (c).

*

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 07. Cf. Stcinthal, G(\s(;h. der Sprachw., p. 259; Ilubschin., Zur Casusl., p.

'

Brugmann, Gricch.

1

Gr., p. 374.

3.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

450

The Encroachment

ni. (a)

Even came

number

in the later Sanskrit a

some

to be used with

on the Cases.

of Prepositions

The Reason. The burden upon

the cases was too great.

of set case-forms (adverbs)

of the cases to

make

clearer the exact

no such helpers

relations of words, whereas in the older Sanskrit

be needed. This was the beginning of prepositions. Prepositions have a wrong name. They do not come before anything essentially, and just as often in Homer came after the noun.

were

felt to

Indeed

dfifxaTo^v airo is

not anastrophe, but the original type.^

Nor

was the preposition originally used with verbs. The preposition is merely an adverb that is used with nouns or in composition with verbs. But more ^bout that hereafter (Prepositions). The point to note here is that when the burden upon the cases grew too great adverbs were called in to make clearer the meaning of the case in harmony with the analytic tendency of language.^ These adverbs chd not (6) No ''Governing" of Cases. govern

cases.

more or

They were merely

the accidental concomitants,

At

less constant, of certain cases.

best "the cases could

express relationship only in a very general way.

Hence arose the

make

the meaning more

use of adverbs to go with cases in order to

These adverbs, which we now

specific.

call prepositions, in

time

became the constant concomitants of some cases; and when this has happened there is an ever-increasing tendency to find the important part of the meaning in the preposition and not in the This quotation from Giles puts the matter in a In spite of the average grammarian's notion that prep-

case-ending."^ nutshell.

ositions govern cases,

osition in question

is

not true. The utmost is that the prepharmony with the case in question.^

it is

in

These prepositions were not (c) Not Used Indifferently. used indifferently with all the cases. They are, of course, imposBut the nominative may be used with sible with the vocative. such adverbs, not called prepositions by the grammarians because it seems difficult to explain a preposition "governing" the nominative. But Paul does not hesitate to say vwep e7co (2 Cor. 1 1 23) where the change of accent is to be noted. Cf. also els Kara eh :

(Mk. 14

:

19), Kad' els

(Ro. 12

:

5).

It is

not certain that any prepand few with

ositions are [see xii, (/)] used with the true dative 1

Giles,

Man.

of

Comp.

Philol., p. 341.

«

lb.

272 f. ^ Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. S>Tit., I, p. 173. Farrar (Gk. S>Tit., p. 94 f.) puts the matter succinctly " It is the case which borrows the aid of the preposition, not the preposition which requires the case." 3

lb., p.

:

THE CASES the instrumental

(a/ia, avi').

451

(nTflSEIs)

Giles ^ denies that the genitive

is

ever

used with a preposition. Certainly what is called the geniProbably kwi and tive with prepositions is often the ablative. Naturally the cases that avri are used with the real genitive. are

more

hke the locative ('where'), the accusa-

local in idea

which

tive ('whither')

partly local, the instrumental ('where-

is

and the ablative ('whence') are those that are most frequently supplemented by prepositions.^ Originally most of (d) Original Use with Local Cases. with')

the prepositions were used with either of these local cases (loc,

Some few

them continued to be so used even in come up again under the head of Prepositions, but we may note here that exi and xapa are the only prepositions that use three cases with any frequency^ in the N. T., and in the case of kiri it is probably the true genitive, not the ablaUpos has accusative 679 times, locative 6, and ablative 1 tive. (Ac. 27 34, a hterary example).^ The bulk of those that have two

instr., abl.).

the N. T.

of

This matter

will

:

are narrowing

only one, and

N. T.

down d/i
situation,

to one case^ while dm,

clptL,

els,

h,

irpo

has disappeared save in composition.

which

amply supported by the papyri,

is

have

If this is

com-

pared with the usage of Homer, the contrast will be very great.'' To carry the matter a step further one may note that in late

Greek there is a constant tendency for all prepositions to be used with the accusative, so that in modern Greek vernacular all the "proper" prepositions are regularly employed with the accusaThe occasional LXX use of aw + accusative, while a mere

tive.^

was in line with this tendency. Increasing Use of PRErosiTioNS. The constantly increasing use of prepositions is one of the main reasons for the blending of the case-forms. This was already partly apparent in the Sanskrit in the assimilation of genitive and ablative singular and in the plural of ablative and dative. So the Latin locative, dative, ablative, instrumental, in most words merged their forms. Moulton** accents the fact that it was the local cases (loc, abl., instr.) in the Greek that first gave way in their endings. That is error, (e)

true with the exception of the accusative (not a purely local »

*

Man. of Comp. Pliilol., lb. But Monro, Iloin.

p. 341.

Gr., p. 125, correctly udinita the gen.

»

Moulton,

'

Cf.

'

Thumb,

Ilandb., p. 9S; Junn., Hist. Ck. dr., p. 366.

8

Pro!., p.

GO

Prol., p. lOd

Monro,

f.

"

f.

Iloni. (!r., pp. 125

lb.

*

ff.

lb., p.

105

f.

452

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

NEW TESTAMENT

which has shown more persistence than any case save the The genitive is a non-local case and has held on, though the dative has disappeared in modern Greek vernacular before els + accusative, the accusative without eis, and the genitive. But this break-down of the case-endings seen in Sanskrit, much more apparent in Greek and Latin, has reached its climax in modern English and French. In modern English the six Anglo-Saxon endings, barring pronouns, have disappeared save one, the genitive (s), and even that can be expressed by the prep. of. In French the process is complete except in prons. Modern Greek vernacular shows the influence of this tendency very decidedly. The Greek of the N. T. comes therefore in the middle of the stream of this analytic tendency. In the old Sanskrit it was all case and no preposition. In modern French it is all preposition and no caseending. The case-ideas have not disappeared. They are simply expressed more minutely and exactly by means of prepositions. By and by the case-endings were felt to be useless as the preposition was looked to entirely for the idea. The case without prepcase),

genitive.

osition belongs to the early stage of language history.^

Delbriick^ speaks of a "living" case, he

means the

When

case-ending,

as does Moulton^ when he asserts that "we can detect a few moribund traces of instrumental, locative and ablative." If he means the case-meaning, the instances are abundant. And even in case-ending

it is

not

all

one-sided, for the locative -t

instrumental -ols both contributed to the

common

and the

stock of forms.

Henry ^ even suggests that in bvona-Tos we have the ablative t (d), for the Latin word is nomen {nominis). But the N. T. has if) Distinction Preserved in the N. T. not lost distinctive use of the cases and prepositions. Special causes explain some of the phenomena in the N. T. The excessive

h

N. T. is parallel to that in the LXX (cf. Jer. 21, and is doubtless due partly to the Hebrew 3 which it so commonly translates as Moulton^ observes. But the socalled instrumental use of h like h poiJ.(j)aiq. (Rev. 6:8; cf. Mt. 12 26 f .) is not due entirely to the Hebrew, for, while very common in the LXX, where it is in "the plenitude of its power,"" yet the papyri show undoubted examples of the same instrumental use of

in the

for instance)

:

»

See further Brug., Griech. Gr.,

2

Vergl. Synt.,

3

Prol., p. 60.

*

Comp. Gr.

6

Prol., p. 61.

of

I,

p. 376; Brug.,

Kurze

vergl. Gr., II, p. 419.

p. 193.

Gk. and Lat.,

p. 217. 6

C. and

S., Sel.

from the

LXX,

p. 82.

THE CASES usage.^

453

(nTOSEIs)

See further Locative Case and also Prepositions (h).

deed in the N. T.

h

outnumbers

els

three to two.^

In-

If these

two

prepositions are left out of consideration, the disappearance of

the locative with prepositions

is

quite

marked

in the

N.

T., a de-

cay already begun a good while before,^ only to be consummated in the modern Greek vernacular, where els has displaced kv (Thumb, Handb., p. 100). When one recalls that dative and instrumental

have gone from the modern Greek vernacular and that aro (els rbv) replaces all three cases in modern Greek and that originally ev and els were the same preposition, he is not surprised to read 6 els rbv aypbv (Mk. 13 16) where Mt. 24 18

also

with the accusative

:

has

6 kv TO) aypQi.

So Mt. 12

:

:

41, fxerevbrjaav

els

to K-qpvyiJLa 'IcofS.

TLarevoo. He omits those examples where the verb means 'entrust' and finds about forty others with the simple dative. In the majority of these forty the verb means 'believe.' There are some debatable passages like Jo. 5 24, 38; 8 31; Ac. 5 14; 16 34; 18 8. He finds only one passage outside of Eph. 1 13 where h w is assimilated (cf. eo-^payiad-qre), viz. Mk. 1 15 (TLcrTeveTe ev to) evayyeXlo:), and he follows Deissmann^ in taking kv as 'in the sphere of.' nto-reiico krl is found six times with the genitive and seven with the accusative

Moulton"* has a very suggestive study of

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

in the sense of 'repose one's trust' arevoj els

upon God

occurs 45 times (37 in Jo. and

'mystical union with Christ,' like Paul's TV. (a)

The Distinctive Ideas of Each of Fundamental Idea. The point

kv

or Christ.

1 Jo.)

But

xt-

in the sense of

XpiaTu.^

the Cases. is,

if

possible, to get at

To do one look at the Greek cases historically and from the Greek point of view. Foreigners may not appreciate all the niceties, but they can understand the respective import of the Greek cases.'' The N. T. writers, as we now know perfectly well, were not strangers to the vernacular KOLvrj, nor were the LXX translators for that matter, though they indeed were hampered by translating a Semitic tongue into Greek. The N. T. writers were in their element when they wrote vernacular the fundamental idea of each of the eight original cases. this

it is

essential that

1

Moulton,

^

lb., p. 02.

pp. 8

ff.,

Prol., p. 61

marks on Helbing's items » <

"

f.

Die Propos. boi Hcrodot iind andorn ITistor. (1004), Cf also Moultou's regives a summary of the uses of tf and ds. Hclbinp;,

Moulton, Prol., p. 62. Prol., p. 67 f. In Christo, p. 46 f.

.

(Pro!., p. 62).

Im Namen

"

Cf. Heitmuller,

^

Farrar, Ck. Synt., p. 68.

Jcsu,

I,

ch. 4.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

454

They knew the import

KoivT].

of

NEW TESTAMENT

the Greek cases as used at

that time by the people at large.

We have no right used for another. That is to say, that you have a genitive, but it is to be understood as an accusative. Winer ^ properly condemns such enallage casuum. Not even in 2 Cor. 6 4 (awiaTavovTes eavroiis cos Beov haKovot) do Cases not Used for One Another,

(h)

to assume in the N. T. that one case

is

:

we have an

instance of

for the

it,

nominative

(lit.

plural)

means

'

as

God I commend myself,' while the accusative {haKovovs) 'I commend myself as a minister of God.' We are then

minister of

would

be,

to look for the distinctive idea of each case just as we find it. In the modern Greek, to be sure, the cases are in such confusion (dative, locative,

instrumental gone) that one cannot look for the old

distinctions.

Vitality of Case-Idea.

(c)

idea

is

This independence of the casenot out of harmony \vith the blending of case-forms (abl.

and gen., loc. and instr. and dat.). This is a very different matter from the supposed substitution of cases alluded to above. The genitive continued to be a genitive, the ablative an ablative in spite of the fact that both had the same ending. There would be, of course, ambiguous examples, as such ambiguities occur in other

The context

parts of speech.

know

to

(d)

always to be appealed to in order

The Historical Development of the

always to be considered.

is

is

the case.

The accusative

is

Cases.

This

the oldest of the

may, in fact, be considered the original and normal case. Other cases are variations from it in course of hnguistic development. With verbs in particular which were transitive the accusacases,

tive

was the obvious case

reason to use some other. (gen., abl., loc, instr., dat.)

was some special The other oblique cases with verbs came to be used with one verb or the

to use unless there

other rather than the accusative, because the idea of that verb and the case coalesced in a sense. Thus the dative with ireWofiaL, the instrumental with xpao/zai, etc. But with many of these

verbs the accusative continued to be used in the vernacular (or even in the literary language with a difference of idea, as d/couco).

In the vernacular

kolutj

the accusative

is

gradually reasserting

itself

by the side of the other cases with many verbs. This tendency kept up to the complete disappearance of the dative, locative and instrumental in modern Greek (cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 31), and the *

W.-Th.,

p.

180

f.

The ancients developed no adequate theory of the

since they were concerned

little

with syntax.

Riem. and Goelzer, Synt.,

cases p. 37.

THE CASES genitive, accusative

dative

popular case. the literary

kolvt],

the literary

kolvti

the verbs

all

els

compete

for the function of the old

ff.).^

and Moulton^ thinks that these tendencies of But not

are really derived from the vernacular.

fall in

Thus

mental.

and

The accusative was always the most Krebs^ has made a useful study of the cases in

pp. 38

{ib.,

455

(nxflSEis)

with the decay of the dative-locative-instruN. T. has the dative twice as often

irpoaKwelv in the

But the

as the accusative, just the opposite of the inscriptions.*

papyri show illiterate

proof of the decay of the dative save in the

little

The accusative

examples.^

gains from the genitive and

ablative in the N. T. also, as Krebs found in the later literary

Moulton^

Greek.

'EvTpkireudaL takes

examples

finds that out of 46

genitive only 8 times,

but

Kparetv has the

has the ablative always.

bta^^kpnv

only the accusative, and the accusative appears

Moulton concludes

resume were once intransitive, but are transitive in the KOLvq. This is a matter that is always changing and the same verb may be used either way. A verb is transitive, by the way, whether it takes the accusative or not; if it has any oblique case it is transitive. As illustrations of this varied usage Moulton cites from the N. T. with verbs of

Krebs by

of

filling

(Rev. 17

:

3).^

his

calling attention to the list of verbs that

ipepyelv, avvepyetp, eTrepxecr^at, KaTa^apeiu, KaTaXoKelu, KaTairoveTv, Ka-

TLaxv^iV, TrXeoveKTeLV, TTpo(jwveiv, I'TrorpexetJ', xopVY^^^-

his discussion of the

thinking that

all

matter with a needed caveat

(p.

He 65

distinctions of case are blurred in the

concludes f.)

against

N. T.

"

We

should not assume, from the evidence just presented as to variation of case with verbs, that the old distinctions of case-meaning

have vanished, or that we may treat ^s mere equivalents those constructions which are found in common with the same word." Analogy no doubt played its part in case-contamination as well as in the blending of the case-endings.^ 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 325.

^

Zur Rection der Casus in der spat.

3

Prol., p. 64.

«

lb.; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 430.

7

lb.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

1887-90.

hist. Gritc, 6

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904,

<>

Prol., p. 65.

p. 102.

Cf.

Thumb,

Theol.

Lit.,

p. 153.

XXVIII,

mod. Gk. usage. As a mattcT of fact the ace. was ahvays more popthe vernac. Gk., and no wonder that the pap. show it to be so even with

p. 422, for

ular in

verbs usually Synt., 1900, *

in

j).

5

the

lit.

lanj^.

used with other cases.

Middletoii, Anal, in Synt., pp. 47-55.

when he

Farrar, Gk. Synt., overstates

says that the ace. alone has preserved

form alone.

Cf. Volker, Pap. Graec.

f.

its

original force.

it

He means

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

456 (e)

The Method of

case the

method

of this

the particular case in

this Grammar. In the study of each grammar is to begin with the root-idea of hand. Out of that by means of context

and grammatical history the instance can be reached.

resultant

This

is

meaning

in the particular

not only more simple, but

it is

harmony with the facts of the linguistic development and usage. Even in an instance like h fxaxalpy (Lu. 22 49) the locative case The smiting {iraTa^oixev) is conceived as located is not out of place. in the sword. Cf, kv pa^Bw (1 Cor. 4 21). The papyri show the same usage, as indeed the older classical Greek did occasionally. In English we translate this resultant idea by Svith,' but we in

:

:

have no right to assume that the Greeks thought of kv as 'with.' LXX shows that the Hebrew ^ corresponded closely to the Greek h in this resultant idea. In translation we often give not the real meaning of the word, but the total idea, though here the LXX follows closely the Hebrew. One of the chief difficulties in syntax is to distinguish between the Greek idiom and the English translation of the idiom plus the context. But enough of preliminary survey. Let us now examine each case in turn. V. The Nominative (TrTwo-is opBr\, evSeia, 6vo|xa(rTiKT|). For the older books on the nominative case see Hiibner, Grund-

The

riss etc., p. 36.

Not the Oldest

Case. The first thing to observe about not the oldest case. The accusative is treated first in some grammars and seems to be the oldest. That is the proper historical order, but it seems best on the whole to treat the so-called "oblique" cases together. The term "oblique cases" (xrwo-ets xXdYtat) has a history. The nominative was not originally regarded as a case, but merely the noun (ovopa). (a)

the nominative

So

Aristotle.^

rectly.

is

it is

The vocative

Hence a

ireirTcoKvIa,

that

a real

is

case (casus)

tttwo-is.

not a real case, as

was considered

cos

we

shall see di-

dTro rod

dvofxaros

All the true cases therefore were oblique.

airTcora. When the nominative was conwas still called by the word for noun {ovofxaaTLKr], nominaiivus) the naming or noun case. The Hindu grammarians

Indeclinable words are sidered a case

it

,

indeed

call

the nominative prathamd

('first')

as the leading case,

merely the logical arrangement followed by the Western scholars. ^ There was once no need felt for a nominative, since the verb itself had its own subject in the personal endings.^ But originally one may suppose a word served not in time, but in service.

'

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 67.

3

Monro, Horn.

This

Gr., p. 113; Giles,

is

2

Man.,

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 301.

p. 89.

THE CASES as subject of the verb

may have become an

and

the impersonal verbs like

457

(nxfiSEis)

ending.

Even

have the subject in the same The use of a special case for this purpose was an after-

way.

/caXais exei

thought. (6)

Why then was the nominative Why was it ever originated? Its earliest use was in apposi-

Reason for the Case.

used?

tion to the verbal subject alluded to above.^ Greater precision in the subject was desired, and so a substantive or pronoun was put in apposition with the verbal ending.^ Sometimes both substantive

and pronoun are employed as

in avros de eyw UavXos Trapa/caXoj

Other languages can even use other cases for such apposition in the predicate. Cf. English It's me, French c'est moi and Latin dedecori est. And the Greek itself shows abundant evidence of lack of concord of case in apposition (cf. Rev. in the N. T.),^ But the nominative is a constant resource in appositional phrases, whatever case the other word may be in. The whole subject of apposition was discussed in the chapter on the Sentence. Cf. 6 avOpooiros ovtos, where the same point applies.'* Cf. avrjp tls 'Avavlas (Ac. 5:1). In the modern Greek this usage partly re(2 Cor. 10

:

1).

places the explanatory genitive, as airvpl aimwL, 'mustard seed'

(Thumb, Handh., p. 33). (c) Predicate Nominative.

The predicate nominative is in with the subject nominative. It is really apposition.* The double nominative belongs to Greek as to all languages which use certain verbs as a copula like elvai, jlpeadat, KaXeladai, etc. Cf. o-y el Uerpos (Mt. 16 18). The Latin is fond of the dative in such line

:

and the Greek can use one dative, as N. T. eK\r]dr] TO ovojxa avrov 'Irjaovs (Lu. Za/cxatos (Lu. 19 2), rjv ovo/xa tCo bovKw MdXxos

examples as id mihi honori

Thus

6vop.a eaTL fxoL.^

2 21), :

(Jo. 18

avrip KoXov/JLevos :

est,

in the

:

10), as well as^

kaTiv ovona avrov (Lu. 1

'Icjo.j't/s

:

The

63).

use of the nominative in the predicate with the infinitive in indirect discourse

{
ject of the principal

verb

is

Ro.

1

:

22)

referred to.

is

proper when the sub-

See Indirect Discourse

(Modes and Infinitive). But the N. T., especially in quotations from the LXX and passages under Semitic influence, often uses 302.

»

lb., p.

2

Cf. Dclbriick, Vorgl. Synt.,

3

Cf. Mcistcrh., Or. d. att. Inschr., p. 203, for exx. of the free use of the

noun in app. * Monro, Horn.

p. 188.

Cr., p. 117.

6

Cf. Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt.,

«

Cf. K.-G.,

I,

I,

p. 44.

I, p.

393

f.;

Monro, Horn. Gk., 7

p.

114

f.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 256.

^

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

458

and the accusative rather than the predicate nom. Moulton^ it is a real Hebraism since the papyri show the idiom eaxov Trap' vjiCiv els d6.(veL0p) airepfxara, K.P. 46 (ii/A.D.), where ets means as' or for,' much like the N. T. usage. But the fact that it is so common in the translation passages and that the LXX is so

els

denies that

'

'

full of it

as a tranlation of ^ justifies Blass^ in saying that

it is

formed on a Hebrew model though it is not un-Greek. Winer finds it in the late Greek writers, but the Hebrew is chiefly responsible for the LXX situation. The most frequent examples in the N. T. are with elvai. (eaoprat els aapKa niau, Mt. 19 5, which can be compared with Lu. 3:5; 2 Cor. 6 18; Ac. 8 23, etc.), yivecrdai (kyevrjdri els Ke(f)a\riv 7coj^tas, Mt. 21 42, with which compare Lu. 13 19; Jo. 16 20; Rev. 8:11, etc.), eyeipetu els ^aaCK'ea (Ac. 13 22), kXoyiarOri els 8iKaLoavvr]v (Ro. 4 3 ff.). Cf. also Jo. 16 20. Probably the following examples have rather some idea of purpose and are more in accord with the older Greek idiom. In 1 Cor. 4 3, e/xot els Cf. also 1 Cor. kXaxt-cTTov effTLP, the point is not very different. 14 22 (els a-nixelov) But observe ixi] els nevov yeur^raL (1 Th. 3:5), :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

iravras avdpojirovs els KaraKpLfxa

els

nepr,

(d) is

(Rev. 16

:

Sometimes Unaltered.

sometimes

left

12

:

:

18), eyevero

17

ttoKls els rpla

As the name-case the nominative

unaltered in the sentence instead of being put in

the case of the word with which

Mk.

(Ro. 5

19).

38-40; Lu. 20

it is

27; Ac. 10

:

the ancient Greek idiom, though the

in apposition. :

37.

Book

This

Cf Rev. 1:5; .

in accord

with

of Rev. has rather

more

is

than the usual proportion of such examples. See chapter on the Sentence for detailed discussion. In Rev. 9:11 observe ouofxa ex^L 'AToXKvoiv (cf. 'A^a88ojv also), where the nominative is retained much after the fashion of our quotation-marks. The same thing* 13 vjj.els ^comre /xe '0 SidaaKaXos Kal 6 kvplos, is noticeable in Jo. 13 This is a classic idiom. Cf. Xenoph., for thus W. H. print it. Cf. Lu. Oec. 6, 14 exovras, to aefxvov tovto to koXos re Kay ados. 19 29; 21 37, where W. H. print els to 6pos to KaXovfievov eXaLcov. But we know from Ac. 1 12 (avro opovs tov KaXovp.'evov eXaiQivos) that eXaiuiv could be in Luke a nominative (abundantly confirmed :

:

:

:

1

Prol., p. 71

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85.

a

W.-Th., p. 184. Moulton, Prol.,

«

that in Jo. 13

:

f.

13

p. 235,

"Ein starker Hebraismus," W.-Sch.,

p. 257.

endorses Blass's view (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85) voc. The nom. is hardly "incredible" (Blass).

we have the

Cf. loose use of the

nom.

in lists in Boeot. inscr. in the midst of other cases

(Claflin, Synt., etc., p. 46).

THE CASES

459

(nTQSEIs)

by the papyri). The most that can be said about the passages in Luke is that the nominative kXaiuv is entirely possible, perhaps probable.^ In Rev. 1 4 (dTro 6 &V Kal 6 rjv Kal 6 epxo/jievos) the nominative is kept purposely, as has been shown, to accent the unchangeableness of God, not that John did not know how to use the ablative after airo, for in the same sentence he has dxo tuv Moulton^ aptly describes the nominative as "residirvevnarcov. uary legatee of case-relations not obviously appropriated by other cases." But as a matter of fact the nominative as a rule is used normally and assimilation is general so that in Mt. 1 21 :

:

(cf.

3

1

:

16

:

25 also)

:

It

2.

/caXeaets to ovoixa

and Ac. 27

Yi'tTpov

ovojia.

Ac. 18

we read

:

1

avrov

tKaTovTapxv ovoixaTL

form in apposition with a vocative, as

11

39), Trdrep rifiuv 6 kv tols ovpavots

ural as the article

and

participles

(Ro. 2:3).

avdpcoire 6 Kpipuv

Mk.

'lovXlco.

Cf.

nomina-

of course, nothing strange to see the

is,

tive :

Cf.

'Irjaovv.

(Lu.

vfiels ol 4)apLaa'L0L

(Mt. 6:9).

This

is

only nat-

have no vocative form.

Cf. even oval vpXv,

Cf.

w

ol enTeirXtjcrnevoi,

where we have really the vocative, not apposition. The nominative is sometimes used absolutely, nominatus pendens, just as the genitive (ablative) and accusative are. Cf. ablative absolute in Latin, locative in Anglo-Saxon, and nominative absolute in modern Greek and modern English. In titles the nominative is the natural case (Lu. 6

:

25),

The Nominative Absolute.

(e)

and

is left

The

LXX

suspended.

Cf. ITaCXos kXtjtos airSaToXos (1 Cor. 1:1), has an abnormal number of suspended nominatives,

the Hebrew.^ But the N. T. has which are due to change of structure, as 6 vlk€>p xotTycrco avTov (Rev. 3 12), 6 vlkoov dwao} avrco (Rev. 3 21), 6 yap Mcoi^ct^s

due to a

literal translation of

some

also

ovTos

— ovK

:

airo8uaovaL TjiiepaL

:

tI

o'lSa/jiev

irepl

avTov \6yov (Mt. 12

(Lu. 21 :6).

6 Tnarevcov ets

eyevero avrc^ (Ac.

In particular

common

e/ie)

in such

:

7:40),

—

(Lu. 12

:

the participle

10; cf. verse 8).

of the examples, like to abhvn.Tov tov

may *

—

(cf.

Jo. 7

:

38,

a nominative, about which see

one of "the easiest of anacolutha."

a(t>edr]aeTaL avrCo

apyov

36), Tavra a deccpelre, eXevaovrac

is

the chapter on the Sentence (anacoluthon). this

irdv prjua

Moulton^ considers

Cf. further

ttSs 6s epel

Cf. Jo. 18

11.

h

w

:

Some

(Ro. 8:3), be regarded as accusative as easily as nominative. The vo/jlov,

'))adeveL

Sec extended discussion in Moulton, Prol., pp. 69, 235. on Orthog. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 250 f.

this Gr. in ch. 2

Prol., p. 69.

»

C. and

4

Prol., pp. 09, 225.

S., Sel.

from the

LXX,

p. 55.

See also note in

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

460

papyri^ show plenty of examples of this suspended nominative.

For For

classical instances see

Riemann and

Goelzer, Syntaxe, p. 41.

nominative see Ev8ia (Mt. 16 2). There was a constant tendency in the LXX to drift into the nominative in a long series of words in apposition (Thackeray, p. 23). (/) The Parenthetic Nominative is of a piece with what we have been considering. So in Jo. 1 6 we have ovo/jia avr^ 'Iwavrjs elliptical

:

:

all

by

itself.

Cf. 3

:

1 {NlkoStj/jlos ovo/xa

avrw).

Similarly the

inative in expressions of time rather than the accusative

nom-

may

be

For example in Mk. 8 2 we read 6tl rjb-q rjfjLepaL rpels Trpoaixkvovalv ixoi. Cf. Mt. 15 32. In Lu. 9 28 wad rip.'epaL okto: the matter is simpler. Blass^ compares with this passage cos wpuiv rpLcov The use SiaaTrjua (Ac. 5: 7) and i5oi; SeKa Kai okto: errj (Lu. 13 16). of l8ov with the nominative is very common and may be a case of ellipsis. Cf. i8ov 4)wvr] Ik tuv ovpavdv Xeyovcra (Mt. 3 17). Cf. Heb, 2 13, etc. In Mk. 6 40 observe aveireaav Tpaaial irpaaial. This leads one to suspect that avfjnroaLa avixTrbcna in verse 39 may be nominative also. The repetition is not a mere Hebraism, since the papyri show examples of it. See Eccl. 2:16 Kadon r/Sr? at This use of the nominative is riiMepat kpxofJLevaL to. iravra eTreXrjadr]. common in the papyri (cf. ert i]p.'epai yap r/5r? rpels Kai vvKres rpets GkXa ovK eynyeprai, Acta Pauli et Theclae in O.P. i., p. 9) and can be traced in the Attic vernacular back to the fifth century b.c* Thumb finds it still in the modern Greek, and Hopkins (A.J. P. xxiv. 1) "cites a rare use from the Sanskrit: 'a year (nom.) almost, I have not gone out from the hermitage' " (Moulton, Prol., p. 235). See other papyri examples in CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 152. Of a piece with this is the nominative with adverbs (prepositions) like CIS Kara els (Mk. 14 19) where the first els is in partitive apposition and the second is kept rather than made accusative. Cf. Kad' els explained.^

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

(Ro. 12

:

5),

ava

els

(Rev. 21

the adverbs rpcoTou, devrepov,

:

21).

etc., in

Brugmann^ indeed

considers

the nominative neuter rather

than the accusative neuter singular. He cites ava/xl^ as proof. Cf. the use of /cat tovto (and also Kat raCra), as Kai tovto eTTt airlaroiv But avrb tovto (2 Pet. 1 5) is probably accusative. (1 Cor. 6:6). The prolepsis of the nominative as in 1 Cor. 14 16 (6 avaTXrjpZv Cf. examples like xpovos TOP TOTTov Tov LSloitov ttcos cpet) Is uatural. :

:

6 auTos in

Boeotian inscriptions (Claflin, Syntax,

1

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904,

2

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 70.

p. 151

f.

Moulton, Prol., p. 70; Meisterh., Or., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 152. *

etc., p. 47).

^

Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85. 203. For pap. exx. see

etc., p. ^

Griech. Or., p. 378.

THE CASES (g)

tions,

4G1

(hTQSEIs)

In Exclamations. The nominative is natural in exclamaa sort of interjectional nominative.^ So Paul in Ro. 7 24, :

ToXalTojpos kyd) avOpoiwos,

and 11:33, w

^ados (a possible vocative)

Ro. 7:24; 2 Cor. 12:18. Cf. xapts rc3 deQ (Ro. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Cf. xap« rots deols, B.U. 843 (i/A.D.). It only remains to consider the nom(^) Used as Vocative. inative form which is used as a vocative. Cf. chapter VII, 7, (a), for details as to form. It all depends on what one means by the term "case" when he says that the nominative is used as a vocative. The form is undoubtedly the same as that of the vocative in a multitude of instances (all neuter nouns, for instance, singular and plural, plural of all nouns in truth). It is only in the singular that any distinction was made between the nominative and vocative in form, and by no means always here, as in the case of feminine nouns of the first declension, deos (usually) in the second, liquid oxytones like ttolhtju in the third, etc. But if by the vpcative one means the case of address, then the nominative form in address is really vocative, not nominative. Thus av, iraT-qp (Jo. 17:21) is just as truly vocative as av, irarep (17:5). Indeed in Jo. 17 25 we have irarrip 5t/cate, showing that rar-qp is here regarded as vocative. The article with the vocative in address was the usual Hebrew and Aramaic idiom, as indeed in Aristophanes^ we have 6 Trais ukoXoWh. It is good Greek and good Aramaic too when we have 'AjSjSa 6 Trarrip (Mk. 14 36) whether Jesus said one or both. In Mt. 11 26 (mt, 6 rarrjp) we have the vocative. When the article is used, of course the nominative form must occur. Thus in Rev. 18 20 we have both together, ovpave Kal ol ayioi. Indeed the second member of the address is always in the nomirXovTov.

6

So.

For

17).

:

parallel in papyri see

:

:

:

:

Thus Kupte, 6 6e6s, 6 iravTOKparup (Rev. 15 3). Cf. 20 28. I shall treat therefore this as really the vocative, not the nominative, whatever the form may be, and now pass on to

inative form.^ Jo.

:

:

the consideration of the Vocative Case. VI.

The Vocative

(a)

Nature of the Vocative.

irpoaayopevTLKr],

(tttcoo-ls k\t]tlktj).

but in reality

it is

Dionysius Thrax called not a case at

all.

it

also

Practically

it

has to be treated as a case, though technically it is not (Farrar, Greek Syntax, p. 69). It is wholly outside of syntax in that the

word

is

isolated

and has no

Cf.

2

Cf. BlaaH, Gr. of

'

word-relations."*

The

isolation of the

Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 41; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 115 f. N. T. Gk., p. SO; Moulton, Prol., p. 70. Riem. andGoclzcr, p. 42. • Brug.,Gncch.Gr.,p.37G;Gilcs, Maa.,p. 302.

*

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

462

may

be compared to the absolute use of the nominaand accusative. The native Sanskrit grammarians do not name it in their hst of cases, and Whitney^ merely

vocative

tive, genitive

the singular after the other cases. Indeed the sometimes as much a sentence as a case, since the word stands to itself and forms a complete idea. Thus Maptdju and 'Fa^^ovvel (Jo. 20 16) tell the whole story of recognition between Jesus and Mary. When Thomas said '0 KvpLos Kai 6 deos fxov, he gave Christ full acceptance of his deity and his treats

it

vocative

in

is

:

resurrection. (6)

Various Devices.

The vocative has no

case-ending, but

has to resort to various expedients. In general it is just like the nominative in form. This is true in all pronouns, participles and various special words like

besides the plurals, neuters and

deos,

feminines mentioned under v,

Cf. the

(h).

same

practical situation

Farrar^ indeed conjectures that originally there

in the Sanskrit.^

was no difference in form at all between the nominative and vocative and that the variation which did come was due to rapid pronunciation in address. Thus xaxTjp, but xdrep. Cf. avep (1 Cor. 7 16). In most languages there is no distinction in form at all between nominative and vocative, and in Latin the distinction is :

rare.* It need not be surprising, therefore, to find the nominative form of many singular words used as vocative as noted above under the discussion of the nominative. Moulton^ indeed remarks: ''The anarthrous nominative should probably be regarded as a mere substitute for the vocative, which begins from the earEven in the liest times to be supplanted by the nominative." singular the distinction was only partial and not very stable at best, especially in the vernacular, and gradually broke down till "in modern Greek the forms in e are practically the only separate

Thus Blass^ observes: "From the earhest Homer) the nominative has a tend-

vocatives surviving."

times (the practice

is

as old as

This nominative form when used

ency to usurp the place of the vocative." in the singular

is

just as really vocative as in the plural

in address.

The N. T.

Greek idiom

in such examples.

merely in line with the oldest (Mk. 5 34; Lu. 8: 48; Jo. 12 15, LXX), but see dvyarep in Mt. 9 22. In Jo. 17: 21, 24, 25, W. H. read Tarrip, but Trdrep in Jo. 12 28; 17 1, 5, 11, etc. Moulton ^ rightly refuses to follow Hort in writing Trdrryp in vocatherefore

is

So

dvydrrip

:

:

:

:

1

Sans. Gr., p. 89.

^

Qk. Synt.,

2

Whitney,

*

lb., p. 69.

7

Prol., p. 71.

p. 105.

p. 70.

Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158.

:

^

prol., p. 71.

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 86.

.

THE CASES (nTQSEIs)

463

In the margin of Mt. 9 27 W. H. read vids AaveiS rather tive. than vU A. Mt. 1 20 has 'Icjo-tj^ vids AavelS, and 15 22 Kvpue vlos Aaveid, all examples of apposition. Cf. Mt. 20 30. But in Lu. 8 28 and 18 38 we have vie. The adjective a(f)puv is vocative in Lu. 12 20 and 1 Cor. 15 36. Cf. also yevea ainaTos in Lu. 9 41. In Acts 13 10 T\r]pr]s is vocative. Cf. indeclinable use of this :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

As

word.

is

known

well

Mt. 27 46

in

:

in quotation

indeed

Jannaris^

thinks

rather frequent. oLKos

'lapaijX

(Ro. 11

:

33),

Cf.

was usually retained in the vocaIn the N. T. dee only appears

6e6s

tive in the older Greek, not

Xaos

dee.

in

pov

in

where it is rare.^ N. T. this idiom is Baruch 4:5. In Ac. 7 42 the

:

LXX).

vocative (from

is

LXX

from the that

Cf.

When

not address, but exclamation.

has a separate form in the singular

it is

also ^ados

ttXovtov

the vocative

usually merely the stem

But it is more than Xeovir), etc. back to the original Indo-Germanic stock.^ Cf. /Sao-iXeO in Ac. 26 7. In the second declension masculine nouns in the singular show a change in the stem-vowel, o changing to e. This usage has persisted in modern Greek vernacular in most words; but note deos above and the variations about But see avOpwire (Ro. 2 1) as usual. In yvvo-L (Mt. 15 28) vlos. K has dropped from the stem, as in forms like \eov the t vanishes for euphony. In dbyarep and Trdrep the mere stem suffers recessive accent. In Ps. 51 6 {yXwaaav SoXiav) we actually have the accusative form used as a vocative.'* See further discussion in ch. VII of the word, like ToXlra,

doubtful

Sol/jlov,

this usage goes

if

:

:

:

:

(Declensions) (c)

Use of w with the Vocative.

only 16 times,

Debrunner,

all

p. 90, the rarity of

co

The common absence

fluence.

It

is

rare in the

but four of these in Luke and Paul. is

of

N.

T.,

In Blass-

attributed to the Semitic init

gives a sort of solemnity

Moulton^ observes that it is only in Luke's writings that it appears in the N. T. without emphasis after the classical fashion. Take as an instance of this literary usage cj Moulton Geo^tXe (Ac. 1:1), but KpaTiare Geot^tXe in Lu. 1 3. likewise notes the absence of w in prayer in the N. T. (though sometimes in the LXX) and considers "the progressive omission of co" in Greek not easy to explain. It came up from the vernacular and then gradually vanished from the vernacular much as where

it is

found. ^

:

»

W.-Sch., p. 258

2

Hist.

Gk.

f.;

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk., p. 86

f.

Gr., p. 327.

3

Dclbriick, Syntakt. Forch., IV, p. 2S.

*

C. and

S., Sol.

from the

Sept., p. 50.

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 327.

«

Prol., p. 71.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

464 our 9

O

Blass- notes that in most of the N. T. examples

has done.^

expresses emotion, as

it :

w

19),

7rXi7p?7s

(Ac. 13

co :

But

as in Ro. 2:3; 9:20.

Greeks always used

cD

yhvaL (Mt. 15

10), etc. it is

:

28),

co

yevea ainaTos

The tone may be one

(Mk.

of censure

a mistake to think that the ancient

in formal address.

Simcox^ notes that

Demosthenes often said av8pes 'Adrjvaioc just as Paul did in Ac. But the addresses 17: 22. Paul says & avSpes once (Ac. 27: 21). in the N. T. are usually without w (cf. Ac. 7:3). (d) Adjectives Used with the Vocative naturally have the same form. Thus w avdpoiire Keve (Jas. 2 20), 5oDXe irovt^pk (Mt. :

In showing that Tarrjp was regarded as a true vocative form. In Lu. 9 41 w yepea ainaTos the substantive has the same form in nominative and vocative and the adjective here follows suit. Cf. also Ac. 13 10; Lu. 12 20 where the adjective alone in the vocative has nominative form. (e) Apposition to the Vocative. The nominative forms and distinctive vocative forms are freely used side by side, in apposition, etc., when the case is vocative.^ In Mt. 1 20 we have 22 W. H. read in the text KvpLe vids 'lcc(Tri(f) vlos Aaveld, and in 15 Aaveid. Cf. also Mt. 20 30. So Kvpie, 6 deos, 6 iravTOKpaTcop (Rev. 15 3), and w avOpoiire, iras 6 Kplvwv (Ro. 2:1). In the last instance the participle and article naturally are unchanged. See again 18:32), Trarep

Jo. 17

:

ix'yLe

(Jo. 17:11),

we read

25

irarrip dkaie,

Kpariare Ge60tXe (Lu. 1:3).

clearly

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ovpave Kal ol

etc.

ayioi,,

(Rev. 18

:

Cf. also Trdrep

20).

rjfxuiP

6

h

rots

So Kupte^toi; 7raT97p, B.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). But two vocative forms are put together also. So 'Irjaov vU rod v\piaTov

ovpapols (M.t. 6: 9).

(Lu. 8

:

28), Trarep Kvpie rod ovpapov (10

In Ac. 13 forms,

CO

:

10 the nominative form

T\ripr]s iraPTOS

8o\ov kt\.,

vie

:

21), 'Ir]aod vie Aaveid (18 is

:

38).

followed by two vocative

8La^6\ov, ex9p^ iraarjs diKaLoavpris.

But ir\rjpr}s may be here indeclinable. There among the less educated writers in the papyri

is

a distinct tendency

to use the nominative

a convenient indeclinable (Moulton, CI. Rev., April, 1904). So N. P. 38 (iii/A.D.). The vocative is rarely found in (/) Vocative in Predicate. the predicate, though not grammatical predicate. This was ocas

TTJs e'7rLTr]pr]ats,

1

Cf. J. A. Scott,

Am.

Jour, of Philol., xxvi, pp. 32-43, cited

by Moulton,

Prol., p. 71. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 86. Cf. also W.-Sch., p. 257 f.; Johannessohn, Der Gebr. d. Kasus u. d. Prap. in d. LXX, 1910, pp. 8-13. ' Lang, of the N. T., p. 76. Cf. Bnig., Griech. Gr., p. 378. *

K.-G.,

C. and

I,

p. 50; Giles,

S., Sel.

from the

Man.,

p. 302;

Sept., p. 55.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 116.

Cf. also

THE CASES casionally the case in the older

Greek by a

But

1

38,

:

6 Xeyerai,

'Pa/3/3et,

sort of attraction to

a

N. T. we only have a quotation or translation. So in Jo.

real vocative in the sentence.^

few examples in the nature of

465

(llTflSEIs)

in the

fj.e6epiJ.r]i>ev6fjLepov

20

AtSdcrKaXe;

:

16 "Pa/S-

is

frequent

^ovvei, o XeyeraL AidaaKoXe.

The Article with the Vocative.

(g)

N. T., some 60 examples.^

in the

infrequent.^ Delbriick^ finds

This idiom

a good Greek idiom and not in harmony with the Indo-Germanic

it

It is

Moulton^ denies that the coincident Hebrew and Aramaic use of the article in address had any influence on the N. T. But one must admit that the LXX translators would be tempted to use this Greek idiom very frequently, since the Hebrew had the article in address.*^ Of. 3 Ki. 17:20, 21, etc. In Mk. 5:41 the Aramaic TaXetda is translated to Kopaaiov. One is therefore bound to allow some influence to the Hebrew and AraCf. also 'A/SjSd 6 xar^jp in Mk. 14 36, Gal. 4 6, and Ro. maic. 8:15. It is doubtless true that Trats lyeLpe (Lu. 8 54) has a touch of tenderness, and that to iiupov TOLfxuiov (Lu. 12 32) means 'you little flock.' But one can hardly see such familiarity in languages.

'^

:

:

17

:

:

6 Trariyp

(Mt. 11

26).

:

But

in

insistence in the article, like

aXakov Kal kox^ov

Tuevfia).

Mk.

9

:

25 there

may

be a sort of

'Thou dumb and deaf

Even

here the Aramaic,

if

spirit' (to

Jesus used

it, had the article. Moulton^ considers that ISacnXeu in Ac. 26 7 admits the royal prerogative in a way that would be inappropriate :

mockery of Jesus in Jo. 19 3 (xatpe, 6 ^aaiXevs toju 'lovdalwv). But Mk. 15 18 does have fiaaiXev tcov 'lovdalcop, due, according to Moulton, to "the writer's imperfect sensibility to the more delicate shades of Greek idiom." Possibly so, but may not the grammarian be guilty of slight overrefinement just here? In Mt. 27 29 the in the

:

:

:

text of

W. H.

has

/Jao-tXeD

while the margin reads 6

Rev. 15: 3 we have 6 jSaacXevs certain whether (6 dpopos aov 6

But

6 SeairoTrjs 6 ayLos Kal

examples of participles 1

p.

Giles,

397

Man.,

p.

In Heb.

aio}p<joi>.

deos) 6 Beds is

a\r]0Lv6s

take

:

10)

is

8

it

In not

is

As

vocative.

6 KaToXvcov

2

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 70.

*

Vergl. Synt., p. 398

'

C. and

^

Moulton

Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 46

(Mt. 27 40) :

b

f.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 70.

ff.

Prol., p. 70.

S., Sel., etc., p. 54.

in a note (p. 235) does concede eome Aram, influence. In Heonly occurs, as he notes, in O. T. citations. Cf. also Dalnian, Gr.,

p. 118. 8

:

302; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 377. Cf. Dolbrtick, Vcrgl. Synt.,

f.

it

1

vocative or nominative.

(Rev. 6

in the vocative

»

brews

tcov

/3ao-tXei>s.

Prol., p. 70.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 327.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

466 and

In Rev. 4 11 we have also In Jo. 20 28 Thomas ad-

(Lu. 6: 25).

01 e/xTreTrXr/a/xevoi vvif

the vocative case in 6

:

kvplos Kal 6 debs.

dresses Jesus as 6 Kvpibs

:

ixov Kal 6 debs

the vocative Hke those

/jlov,

Yet, strange to say, Winer ^ calls this exclamation rather than address, apparently to avoid the conclusion that Thomas

above.

was

by his appearance to him Dr. E. A. Abbott^ follows suit also in an

satisfied as to the deity of Jesus

after the resurrection.

extended argument to show that Kvpue 6 Oebs is the LXX way of addressing God, not 6 Kvpios Kal 6 Oebs. But after he had written he appends a note to p. 95 to the effect that "this is not quite satisfactory. For xiii. 13, cjicouelTe iie 6 bibaaKokos Kal 6 Kvpios, and Rev. 4 11 a^ios el, 6 Kvpios Kal 6 deds rnxccv, ought to have been mentioned above." This is a manly retraction, and he adds: "John may have used it here exceptionally." Leave out "excep:

tionally"

and the conclusion

certainly used the article.

It

is just. is

If

Thomas used Aramaic he

no more exceptional

in Jo.

20

28

:

than in Rev. 4:11. VII. (a)

The Accusative

The Name.

(r\

aiTiaTiKT] irxwo-is).

It signifies little that

it

accusandei casus from

it

as Kar' aiTiav ('cause'), a

p. 76)

lated

that

Varro

pertinent.

calls

Glycas

idea.

calls it also

Gildersleeve ("A Syn-

causativus.

among the Psychologists," Am. Jour. PhiloL, Jan., 1910, "The Romans took the bad end of atria, and trans-

remarks:

aiTLaTiKr],

grammar The

it

is

while Dionysius Thrax explains

more hkely

So Priscian terms

TO aiTLov.

tactician

alTi.aop.aL,

accusativus

did not emerge

alTiaTLKfi

-KTwcTLs

—

till

hopeless

1836,

mcaus casus

from which

stupidity,

when Trendelenburg showed effectivus,

now

object affected appears in Greek

or causativus

as an accusative,

.

.

.

now

now as a genitive. The object effected refuses to give glory to another, and the object affected can be subsumed under the object effected." With this I agree. Cf. Farrar, Greek Sijntax, as a dative,

its

Old Enghsh "accuse" could mean 'betray' or 'show,' but mark it off from the rest. Originally, however, it was the only case and thus did show the relations of nouns with other words. On the small value of the case-names see p. 81.

the "showing" case does not

Brugmann,

Griech. Gr., p. 379.

false translation of alTLaTiaKr]. (6)

But

at

any

rate accusativus

is

a

Steinthal, Geschichte d. Spr., p. 295.

Age and History. A more

pertinent point

history of the accusative, the oldest of

all

the cases.

is

the age and

Farrar (Greek

Syntax, p. 81) calls attention to the fact that eywv (old form of eyu), Sanskrit 1

aham, tvdm, Boeotian

W.-Th.,

p. 183.

tovv, 2

Latin idem,

joh, Gr., pp. 93

all ff.

have the

THE CASES (nxnsEis)

467

accusative ending though in the nominative. the accusative

is

we

the oldest case, perhaps

If it is true

that

are to think of the

it. In other words the acwas the normal oblique case for a noun (especially with verbs) unless there was some special reason for it to be in another The other oblique cases were developed apparently to excase. press more exactly than the accusative the various word-relations. Indeed in the vernacular Greek the accusative retained its old frequency as the normal case with verbs that in the literary style used other cases.^ In the old Greek poets the same thing is no-

other obhque cases as variations from cusative

Pindar,^ for example, has

ticeable.

"a multiplicity of accusatives."

In the modern Greek vernacular the accusative has regained

its

original frequency to the corresponding disuse of the other oblique

Thumb, Handb.,

Cf.

cases.

guage

is failing, it is

"When

p. 35.

a fine sense for lan-

natural to use the direct accusative to ex-

press any object which verbal action affects,

between

difference

was

and

'transitive'

and so

to efface the

There

'intransitive' verbs." ^

therefore first a decrease in the use of the accusative as the

literary

language grew, then an increase in the Greek,^ and

the later

especially the

vernacular,*

kolvt]

modern Greek

vernacular.®

This gain or rather persistence of the accusative in the vernacular is

But the

manifest in the N. T. in various ways.

shows

The

(c)

literary

Kotvri

Krebs' has carefully worked out with many verbs, Meaning of the Accusative. It is not so easy to

also, as

it

determine this in the view of

many

Delbriick * despairs

scholars.

of finding a single unifying idea, but only special types of the ac-

Brugmann^

cusative.

also admits that the real ground-idea of the

unknown, though the relation between noun and verb is expressed by it. The categories are not always sharply defined in the soul of the speaker.^" Hiibschmann" treats the expansion case

is

»

Mullach, Gr. dcr gricch. Vulgarspr., pp. 328-333.

2

Giles,

«

Jcbb, Vincent and Dickson's Handb. to

<

Volkcr, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, p. 5

6

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 328.

^

Zur Rect. der Casus in der spat.

Man.,

63 ff. 8 Die Grundl. Ill, pp. 360-393.

p. 306.

Mod. Gk.,

p. 307.

f. «

hist.

Hatz., Einl., p. 221.

Grac. (1887-90)

.

Cf

.

also

Moulton,

Prol., pp.

» Kurze vergl. " Zur Casusl.,

etc., p.

K.-G.,

40 I,

f.

d. griech. Synt.,

p. 133.

For

p. 29; Vergl. Synt.,

»o

Gr., p. 441.

Rieni.

p. 291.

Bd. IV,

list

of

books on the

and Goclzcr, Synt.,

p. 44, agree

I,

p. 1S7.

Cf.

Griech. Gr., p. 379. ace. see Iliibnor,

Grundr.

with Hiibschni.

Cf. also

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

4G8

NEW TESTAMENT

of the verb as the ground-idea of the accusative.

"The

relation

of the accusative to its governing verb resembles the relation of

the genitive to it

its

The usage

La Roche ^ considers and that the inner meaning came later.

governing substantive."^

originally a local case

of the accusative

can indeed, for convenience, be

vided into the outer (okiav, Mt. 7 4>b^ov fxeyav,

Mk. 4:41)

discussed on this

:

24)

and the inner

But the whole

usage.

artificial principle,

as

Monro ^

di-

{t^yo^-qd-qaav

case cannot be

rightly sees.

He

hope only in the direction of the wide adverbial use of. the accusative. In the Sanskrit certainly "a host of adverbs are accusative cases in form."^ Green^ calls it ''thehmitativejjase,'' and he is not far out of the way. Farrar^ thinks that "motion towards" explains it all. Giles,'' while recognising all the difficulties, defines the accusative as the answer to the question "How far?" The word extension comes as near as any to expressing the broad general idea of the accusative as applied to its use with verbs, substantives, adjectives, prepositions. It is far more commonly used with verbs, to be sure, but at bottom the other uses have this same general idea. Being the first case If you ask a child (in it is naturally the most general in idea. English) "Who is it?" he will reply "It's me." This is, however, not a German idiom. The accusative measures an idea as to But the accusative was used in its content, scope, direction. sees

many

so

special applications of this principle that various sub-

became necessary for intelligent study. It is natural to begin with verbs {d) With Verbs of Motion. of motion, whether we know that this was the earliest use or not, a matter impossible to decide. We still in English say "go home," and the Latin used domum in exactly that way. Extension over space is, of course, the idea here. One goes all the way to his home. It is found in Homer and occasionally in Greek writers.^ Modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 37, has a local accusative) Moulton {ProL, p. 61) notes that 7rd/ie o-TTtrt, 'we are going home.' divisions

it is

just the local cases that first lost their distinctive forms (abla-

tive, locative, associative-instrumental;

tive" like ire

Logeman and Wheeler,

*

Strong,

'^

Der Accus.

» * 8

mon

Romam

and the "terminal accusa"The surviving Greek

disappeared also.

in Horn., p. 1.

Hist, of Lang., p. 128. *

Notes on Gk. and Lat. Synt.,

p. 10.

« Gk. Synt., p. 81 f. Horn. Gr., p. 92. ^ Man., p. 303. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 90. See K.-G., I, p. 311 f. for exx.; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 96. Extremely com-

in Sanskrit.

THE CASES (nxnsEis)

469

cases thus represent purely grammatical relations, those of subject,

and instrument."

object, possession, remoter object

The

place-

adverb does supply the place of the terminal accusative, but not entirely of the locative, ablative

Some MSS.

and instrumental.

27 2 read irXdv tovs Kara Trjv 'Aalav roirovs, but the best (W. H.) have eis after TrXttp. In vireTrXevaa/jiev Tr}v KvTTpov and TO ireXayos StaTrXeiicaj'Tes (cf. English " sail the sea"), verses 4 f., the prepositions in composition help to explain the case. In Mt. 4 15 oddv daXaaa-qs has no verb of motion and comes in the midst of vocatives in a way quite startling. Green ^ refers to in Ac.

:

:

LXX

for the explanation and quotes " Christ and But the LXX gives little relief, for, while B does not have it, several MSS. do and without a verb. B however reads ol ttjv irapoKiav, which presents the same difficulty as to case. Winer^ suggests oiKovvTts with oi, possibly correct. But even in Matthew the writer may have had in mind the general

the

Him

(Is.

9

1)

:

Crucified."

way

accusative notion of extension, 'along the (e)

.space

ordinary accusative for extent of does not differ materially from that of motion above. Here

the root-idea of the case

The point

of the verb.

of the accusative,

The

of the sea.'

Extent of Space. The

but

is

easily perceived apart

is is

that this

is

from the force

not a special development

the normal idea of the case, extension.

The Greek continues all The adverb a good example. Take Jo. 6 19 kX-qXaKores

application to space

is

natural.

along to have this idiom as the Latin and English. txaKpav (Ac.

22

:

21)

is

(TTadlovs e'UoaL irevTe

cbs

:

rj

TpiaKOvra,

Lu. 22

:

4:1

aireairaadri air' avTcov

The accusative tells "how far." Observe in Lu. 44 ^Xdov riij.epas bbbv. UpoaeXduu jxiKpov (Mt. 26 39) is a good example of this use of the accusative. In Ac. 1 12 aa/S/Sdroi; exov coaelXidov ^oXrjv.

2

:

:

:

bhov varies the construction

we have

similarly

The use

of

clto,

as

by the

cos

In Lu. 24

insertion of ixov.

airkxovaav araSiovs

e^rjKovra.

Cf.

airo o-TaSicov deKairepre (Jo. 11

:

Mt. 14

18;

cf.

21

13

:

:

24. :

8;

Rev. 14 20), Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95) calls a Latinism (cf. a millibus passuum duohus), but Moulton (ProL, p. 101 f.) cites :

Doric and paiivrH parallels for irpo and makes a mere Latinism unlikely. So O.P. 492 (ii/A.D.) /xer' euiavrop eva. Diodorus and Plutarch use the same idiom. It is clearly not a direct Latinism. In modern Greek the accusative is common for locality or place affected (Thuml), Ilandh., p. 35

f.).

I^xTENT OF Time. It answers the question "how far?" in time, or "how long?" In the N. T. the examples of time are far (/)

1

Handb.,

etc., p.

234.

«

W.-Th., p. 231.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

470

more frequent than those of mere space. The locative, instrumental and genitive are also used to express time, but they bring out a different idea, as will be shown. The accusative is thus used for duration or extension in the

Indo-Germanic languages generapjoi (Mt. 20 6); Toaavra err] dovXevco <jol (Lu. 15 29). A good example is tiu.eLvai' TTjv rifxepav kKeivnv (Jo. 1 Cf. Jo. 2 12; 11 6. 39). In Lu. 1 75 W. H. (text) read Trdo-ats rats r)ixkpaLs (instr.). Another good illustration is aTredrjiJL-rjaev xpovovs Uavohs (Lu. 20 Cf. tK drjvapiov ttjv riixepav 9). (Mt. 20 2) where the accusative well brings out the agreement between the landlord and the labourers. In vmra Kal r}p.tpav (Mk. 4 27) the sleeping and rising go on continually from day to day. Cf. Tjnepau e^ rjnepas (2 Pet. 2:8). The papyri examples are numerous, like TOKOVS didpaxiJi-ovs rrjs p-vcis top pr]va eKaarop, A. P. 50 (ii/B.c). Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901. The plural is likeCf. TL

ally.

<S5e eaTTjKare 6\t]u ri]v r](j.epav

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

wise so used, as ras

Perhaps

-qpepas

— rds vvKTas

little difficulty is felt

(Lu. 21

:

37).

in the accusative in Ac. 24

So also as to to \oLTrbv (or XoLTTOp) Cor. 14: 27), and even kveKowTOix-qv to.

:

25, to

Mk. 14:41,

vvv 'ixov TTopevov.

in

TO irXelaTou (1

vroXXd (Ro. 15:

But

22).

there are uses of the accusative in expressions of time

that do furnish trouble at

first

In some of these the accu-

blush.

sative seems to be merely adverbial (Blass, Gr. of

with

on duration.

little stress

dicated.

Cf.

(Mt. 5

jrpoJTOP

TO :

general reference

Note the

time. tive.

(Jo. 8

irpoTepov

24).

It

came

is

(Jo.

N. T. Gk., p. 94) Indeed a point of time may be in6

:

62),

25).

how

But a more

difficult

Lu. 19

Pet. 3

example

:

:

8)

is

10

32),

:

the accusative of

to be used here, although

article {to Kad' -qpepav,

We can now go on to to reXos (1 :

(Heb.

irpoTepov

not hard to sec

it is

a point of

47) in the accusa-

and even

found

ttju

in Jo.

apx-qv

4

:

52,

where a point of time is indicated. See also TToiav copav in Rev. 3 One may 3; iraaav copap (1 Cor. 15:30). conjecture that this use of &pav was not regarded as essentially Either the action was redifferent from the idea of extension. garded as going over the hour or the hour was looked at more Cf. also T-qp 17/xeas an adverbial accusative like to Xolttop above. ex^^s <^po-v ej3o6pr]v,

:

16). In BlassTTJs TrePTtjKoaTrjs yepeaOai eis 'lepoaoXv^a (Ac. 20 Debrunner, p. 98, examples are given from ^Eschylus, Euripides, Cf. Moulton, Aristotle, Demosthenes, where wpap = els copap.

pap

:

Prol., p. 63, for to -wkpTTOP eros (O.P. 477, ii/A.D.) 'in the fifth year.'

B.U. 22 (ii/A.D.) means 'at present' (Moulton, CI. Rev., In the modern Greek vernacular the accusative is used freely to designate a point of time as well as extent of time T(i Trapop

1901, p. 437).

3

THE CASES (Thumb, Handh., ing

its

So

p. 37).

N. T. the accusative

in the

In Ac. 10

scope again.

30

:

471

(nxiiZEis)

is

widen-

a-wo TtrapT-qs rinkpas fxkxpt- ravTrjs

rfjs o>pas riixr]v Trju hdrrju Trpoaevxofjiepos we can see an interesting example where ttiv tvdrrjv is explanatory of the previous note of time, a point of time, and yet a whole hour is meant. In Ac. 10 (Trept ibpav kvarrtv) observe Tvepl, though some MSS. do not have the :

preposition. irpo^i

Cf. also jxeaovvKTiov (ace.)

a point of time in the locative as

TTota

r)

aKeKTopo4)OiVLas (gen.)

fj

The papyri have examples of accusative,^ as already seen. But the

for points of time.^

(loc.)

still

is

more frequent

(Lu. 12

ibpa

:

39).

in the

It is

not

N. T.

for a point of time,

difficult to

see the appro-

priateness of the accusative in TeaaapeaKatdeKarriv irpoadoKcoPTes aairoi SiareXetre (Ac.

27

It

33).

:

is

r]p.kpav

(rrjiJLepov

good Greek with

the ordinal. (g)

With Transitive Verbs. The most common

when

is

accusative the object of a transitive verb. One cannot hope the uses of the accusative in the order of historical

it is

to pursue

all

For instance, no one knows whether cognate accusative (of inner content or objective result) preceded the ordinary objective use of the case. Does the adverbial accusative (so development.

common

in adjectives) precede the accusative with verbs?

points have to be left unsettled.

with transitive verbs to a noun.

This idea

In English

prj

most attention. But the term "tranmeans a verb whose action passes over

calls for

sitive" needs a word.

for instance,

It

may

be intransitive in another language,

dfiuvere fxrjre t6v ovpavbv

6(j.vvco

is

transitive, as dp.1, for example.

now

ixTj-re

rendered by 'swear by.'

:

3).

(Jas. 5

Cf. epydi;ead€

:

as,

12).

nrj ttju

for.'

intransitively, as ep.evov

epepev Trap' avrols (Ac. 18

rrjv yrju

Not all Greek verbs are The same verb may be used now

^pdaiv (Jo. 6 :27), English 'work transitively,

These

In actual usage the accusative

So

6 /SXeTCov

Yificis

h

(Ac.

20 5) and (Mt. 6 4) :

rca KpvirTui

:

and t'l 81 (^UreLs to Kdp(f>os (Mt. 7:3). Cf. English word "see." As further illustration of the freedom of the Greek verb note j8Xe7reT€ t'l aKovtTt (Mk. 4 24), /SXerere tovs Kvvas (Ph. 3:2), /SXeTrcre Atto t^s ivfxrjs (Mk. 8 15).^ There is indeed a difference between the accusative and the use of a preposition as in ^ebytTe ttiv iropveiav (1 Cor. G 18) and c^evyeTe dro ttjs dduXoXarpeias (1 Cor. 10 14). :

:

:

:

N. T. Ck., p. 311. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1<)()4, p. 1.52. O.P. 477 (21) tTa is so uso(L Tho arc. ia used in the Ran.s. for a point of time. Cf. Whitney, tian.s. (Jr., p. Qg. For cxx. in the LXX see C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. .%. Cf. also Abbott, »

Blass, Gr. of

2

Job. Gr., p. 75.

»

Green, llandb.,

etc., p.

230.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

472

But dTTo

many Greek

for practical purposes

In the case of

erty.

0o/3eo/zat

and ablative (Mt. 10

:

28)

verbs were used with libwith accus. (Mt. 10 26, 28) or with :

we have a Hebraism. Moulton

(ProL,

admits that this use of airo is a "translation-Hebraism" (p). It occurs in both Mt. (10 28) and Lu. (12 4) and represents probably the Aramaic original. Cf. opdre Kal (pvXaaaeade airb p. 102)

:

(Lu. 12 11.

3,

and

15)

:

9)

:

opSre koI irpoaex^re awo (Mt. 16

uses dwo with

This matter

4>v\d(X(xco.

:

Xen. (Cyr.,

6).

will call for further

discussion directly.

But we have already observed that transitive verbs in Greek The transitiveness may be as clearly expressed by a dative as with dKoKovdeco, the genitive with eTLdvixeco, the ablative with dToarepkco, etc. The accusative is do not always have the accusative.

indeed the normal case with transitive verbs, but not the only one. Some verbs continued to use the accusative parallel with the other cases. Thus eTLXapddvoixaL has rd ixh oTrlaw in Ph. 3 13, :

but

(pLXo^evias in

Heb. 13

:

ference of case, as aKOVOVTes

22

ovK fjKovcav (Ac.

(})0)vriv

transitive

may

position.

Cf. Sirjpxero

Sometimes the point hes

2.

:

fxep Ti]s

9).

in the dif-

(Ac. 9:7), but

(jicovrjs

Then again verbs

8^

rriv

otherwise in-

be rendered transitive by the preposition in comTrjv 'lepeLxo) (Lu. 19 4. 1), but eKeiurjs in 19 So TrapawXevaai. ttju "E(l)eaov (Ac. 20 16), etc. Another introductory remark about transitive verbs is that it is not a question of :

:

:

the voice of the verb.

Many active verbs

are intransitive like

ei/jil;

middle verbs may be either transitive or intransitive; even passive verbs may be transitive. Thus tjkovou raOra (Lu. 16 14), eKTrjaaro :

xoopiov (Ac. 1

18),

:

and

/jltj

transitive constructions.

oivv 4>o0r]6rjTe

Cf.

Mk.

8

avTovs

(Mt. 10

38; Ro. 1

:

:

:

16; 2

26) are all

Tim.

1

:

8

for tTraiaxvvo/jLaL (passive) with accusative.

One

cannot, of course, mention

Here

that have the accusative.

is

all

a

the N. T. transitive verbs

list

of the most frequent verbs

but sometimes have the accusa'ASi/ceco indeed may be either transitive (Mt. 20 tive} 13) or intransitive (Ac. 25 11), in the one case meaning 'do wrong to,' in the other 'be guilty.' BXaTrro? (only twice in the N. T., Mk. 16 18; Lu. 4 35) is transitive both times. Bor/^eco has only dative (Mk. 9 22) and w^eXeo; only accusative (Mk. 8 36). In Lu. 17 2 we have Xuo-treXet avrQ. 'Awopeo/jLaL is always intransitive in the N. T. (Hke 5ta7r.) except in Ac. 25 20 (so ancient Greek sometimes). kivo(jTpkonaL as in Attic is found with the accusative in Tit. 1': 14 and Heb. 12 25. In 2 Tim. 1 15 the aorist passive that are not always

transitive,

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

'

:

»

See Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk., pp. 87-89.

:

Cf. also W.-Th., pp. 221

ff.

THE CASES For

SO used.

(aTre(TTpa(f)r]aav /le) is

473

(nTfiSEIs)

use of the aorist or future

like

passive with accusative see evrpair-qaovTat rbv

vlov fxov

(Mt. 21 37), :

where the earher writers generally had dative (ej/rpeTro/iat) kiraLax^^^V M€ (Mk. 8 38) from kiroLLaxovoixai, whereas alax^vofxai is intransitive (dxo and abl. in 1 Jo. 2 28). So also ohbev a-n-eKpidr] (Mk. 15 5) as oiidev aireplvaTo (Mt. 27: 12), but note aireKpldt] irpos ov8e ev p^p.a (Mt. 27 14). Cf. tI aTTOKpLdfi (Mk. 9:6). For (j)o^r]efJTe 26 and note tpojSyjdiJTe airo twv aTvoKTtivbvTwv aijTohs see Mt. 10 (10 28) which happens to be in imitation of the Hebrew idiom (Cf. above.) See Jer. 1 8. {•p) as of the English "be afraid of." In Mt. 10 31 (po^elade is intransitive. BacTKaivoj in Attic Greek was used with the dative in the sense of 'envy,' but in Gal. 3 1 the accusative in the sense of 'bewitch.' B\aa4>7]iJLeoo in the Attic had ets as in Lu. 12 10, but it ;

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

also occurs as transitive with accusative (Mt. 27:39).

2

12

:

tive,

has

we

find h, not

ets (cf.

Jude

10).

not dative as Attic, in Lu. 6

i/yuas

(some MSS.

For

:

'ETrTjpedfco

28;

1

Pet. 3

Attic) in Lu. 6

vp.7p.\ike

:

16.

:

28.

In 2 Pet.

has the accusa-

So

Cf.

/carapdoyuat

Mk.

11

:

21;

with accusative see Jo. 9 28; Ac. 23 4, and for XvfxaivojjLaL see Ac. 8 3. The MSS. vary in Heb. 8 8 between avTovs and avrols (as in Attic) with ixkix^op.ai, but W. H. read ahJas. 3

:

9.

XotSopeco

:

:

:

:

In Mt. 5 11 and 27:44 oveidL^co has the accusative, though Attic used the dative. The accusative alone occurs with vlSpi^oj (Lu. 11 45). So also both evXoyecc (Lu. 2 28) and KaKoXoyeco (Ac.

Tovs.

:

:

19

:

9)

:

have the accusative. In Jo. 8

compare

:

older Greek.

A

we have

27

ovs eXeyov

(Ph. 3

:

18),

(Mk. 14

:

7)

and

1

found H. give 6v W. eXeyev, with which

epeZs Kanais is :

a construction

15

common

in

the

found in Attic Greek with In the N. T., however, note av-

similar construction

The remaining

5 ovk

t6v irarepa avrols

ev (/caXcos) Troteoj, /ca/cws Troteco, etc.

TOis ev TTOLetv

:

In the margin of Jo.

with the accusative. d-wov.

In Ac. 23

is

/caXoJs iroLelre rots fxiaovaLV

(Lu. 6

:

27).

verbs' that call for discussion in this connection

cannot be grouped very well. They will be treated simply in In the LXX yehonai is fairly common with the accusative, and some examples occur in other later writers instead of the usual genitive.^ In the N. T. the genitive is still the usual case {Oavarov, Lu. 9 27; Jo. 8 52; Heb. 2:9; belirvov, Lu. alphabetical order.

:

14

:

'

24; dupeas, Heb.

6:4;

:

(xr)bev6s,

Ac. 23

:

14),

but the accusative

Volker, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, pp. 0-S, j^ivos the following verbs as having

the ace. in the pap.: aWaaaw,

SovXtOco,

i^ipxofiai, tvdoKiCi}, KaTTjyopiu), Kpartu, Kvpitvw,

inrafTaw, xpaoyuat, etc.

kinOvukcis, XvTrecii, *

tTri.Tvyx6.voi,

iinXavOdi'oijLaL,

TrapiaTanai, Tropevofiai, TrXi/pou",

Cf. Abbott, Joli. dr., p. 77.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

474

found in Jo. 2 9 {t6 vSoip) and Heb. 6 5 (koXou deov pwo). In Rev. 17 3 we even have ye/uovTa ovbuara instead of bvonaTcov. The accusative appears with yopvirereo) (Mk. 10 17), but absolutely in Mk. 1:40, and with luirpoadev in Mt. 27 29. In Rev. 2 14 5t5do-/cco has the dative {t(^ ^oXclk), a construction which might a priori seem natural with this verb, but not so used in Greek (cf. Latin and English) .1 Ati/'dw and Tretmoj are intransitive in the N. T. save in Mt. 5 6 where the accusative is used, not the usual genitive. Apdo-o-o/xat appears only once (1 Cor. 3 19) in a quotation from the LXX and has the accusative. 'EXeeco is transitive (Mt. 9 27, etc.) as is okretpco (Ro. 9 'Efiwopevo15, quotation from LXX). nai occurs only twice, once intransitive (Jas. 4 13), once with accusative (2 Pet. 2:3). 'Evedpevco likewise occurs only twice (Lu. 11 54; Ac. 23 21) and with accusative both times. Cf. O.P. 484 (ii/A.D.) in sense of 'defraud' with accusative. (Moulton, CI. 'EwL9vjj.eoi} is found with the genitive (Ac. 20 Rev., Apr., 1904). 33) or with the accusative (Mt. 5 28) according to W. H. (BD, etc.). 'Epyd^onaL is often transitive, but Trjv OaXaacrav epya^ovraL (Rev. 18 17) is somewhat unusual, to say the least. Ei;a77eXii'ojuai (active in Rev. 10 7; 14 6; passive Gal. 1:11; Heb. 4 6, etc.) has the Attic idiom of accusative of the thing and dative of the person (Lu. 4 43; Ac. 8 35, etc.), but examples occur of the is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

accusative of the person and of the thing (Lu. 3

:

18; Ac. 8

:

25).

90 note) denies two e7ra77eXtaj' with 6tl ravr-qv 6 accusatives to evayy., construing ttjv This is rather forced, but even so the on clause Beds eKireirX-qpcoKev. would be in the accus. EuSoKew is trans, in the LXX and so appears in the N. T. twice (Mt. 12: 18, quotation from the LXX; Heb. 10: In Ac. 13

:

32 Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p.

—

6, 8,

LXX

Euxapto-rea) in 2 Cor.

also).

1:11 occurs

in the passive

shows that the active would have had an accusative of the thing and a dative of the Cf., for instance, T'KeoveKT7]9u>iJ.ev in 2 Cor. 2:11 with person. 17 f.), only eux- did not go so far as to kirXeoveKT-qaa vfias (2 Cor. 12 have the accusative. On the other hand in the N. T. dapp'eoi is not transitive (2 Cor. 10 2 instr.), though in the older Greek it was sometimes. It occurs absolutely (2 Cor. 5:6), with kv (2 (to xcipto-^ia €vxo.pLaTr]9fi) in a construction that

:

:

Cor. 7

Lu. 7

:

16),

9,

:

with

ets

(2 Cor. 10

Ac. 7 31 and Ju. 16. :

:

1).

has the accusative in has the accusative in 2

Gay/xdfco

epta/i/Seuco

Cor 2 14 and Col. 2 15, though the verb has a different sense in each passage. 'Iepoi;p7eaj occurs only once (Ro. 15 16) and with In Heb. 2 17 l\a.(jKop.aL has accusative of the the accusative. :

:

:

:

»

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

p. 80.

THE CASES (nTQSEIs) thing as in

LXX,

475

Philo and inscriptions (Blass, Gr. of N. T., p.

has accusative in 2 Cor. 9 2 and 11 30. KXatcj has accusative in Mt. 2 18 (O. T. quotation unlike LXX), but kirl omits kirl. KXrjpovoneoo has only the However, in Lu. 23 28. 'Kavxo-oixai

88).

:

:

:

D

:

has accusative in Lu. 8 52 (ctti Rev. 1:7). Kpareco out of forty-six instances in the N. T. has the genitive in only eight, rest accusative. (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 65). ^ Ma-

accusative.

KoTrro^tat

:

a late word and has the accusative in Mt. 28 19 and The other examples (Mt. 13 52; 27 57) are passive, but in Mt. 27 57 the active (intr.) is the marginal reading of W. H. Cf. old English verb "disciple." Me/x^oyuat has the accu-

67}Tev(a is

Ac. 14

:

21.

:

:

:

:

Heb. 8

sative, not dative, in

but the text

8,

:

10),

15

:

2

(Ac.

Trepi/jikvco

NtKaco

dure.'

uses

it

is

doubtful.

1

:

(Heb. 10

4), virofxeuco

Mcj/co

the accusative occurs

5, 23,

avankvoo (1

Th.

32) in sense of 'en-

:

transitive with accusative usually, but in Rev.

is

k

:

Cf. also accusative with

(sense of 'wait for')1

:

usually intransitive, but in Ac. 20

is

with ablative.

cusative in Heb. 13

:

2.

So

"OAtz^u/xt

^ei/tfo/xai is

usually has

transitive with ac-

h

(Mt. 23

:

16, etc.,

13), or occurs absolutely cf. Hebrew |), sometimes Kara (Heb. 6 (sense of 'swear by,' common in accusative the (Mt. 5 34), but appears only in Jas. 5 15 for LXX) cf. 4 Hos. ancient Greek, :

:

:

:

The 73), a cognate accusative. 12, except opKov ov cbfxoaev (Lu. 1 papyri show it with the accusative, B.U. 543 (i/B.c). Moulton, :

Dec,

CI. Rev.,

1901.

'Ovecdi^o:

has the accusative, not the dative,

has the accusative in both instances that occur in the N. T. (Mk. 5 7; Ac. 19 13), while e^opKifw (Mt. 26 63) has the accusative and Kara also (ere Kara rod Oeov). 'Oijlo-

N. T.

in the

"Op/ctfoj

:

:

:

common

with the accusative or absolutely, but in Mt. 8 (two examples) ev is used as the translation of the Aramaic 3. Moulton ^ is unable to find any justification for this idiom in Greek and calls attention to the fact that both Matthew and Luke have it in a parallel passage as

Xoyeoo is

10

:

32 (two examples) and Lu. 12

:

proof of the Aramaic original as the language of Jesus.

note

TreptjSaXeTrat

(Ac. 15

:

7) is

h

lixarlois

(Rcv. 3:5).

The

Use of

h

y]iJ.lv

One may e^eXe^aro

not parallel as Winer^ observes. Here ev y]p.'tv means In Ac. 27 22 irapaivkLo (like irapaKaXeco, Blass, Gr. of

'among us.' N. T., p. 90) has the accusative instead of the dative of the person. In 2 Cor. 12 21 ivtvdko) has the accusative, but iirl in Rev. 18 11. :

:

:

Moulton ^

(Prol., p.

Moulton

(ib., p.

uniformly ace. with 2

Prol., p. 104.

07

235)

f.)

has a very heli)ful discussion of

comments on Wellhiiuscn'a remark

imovoi, Karriyopiu

and

tliat

D

Kparkw. =•

Trtareiicu

W.-Th., p. 226.

prefers

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

476

when not

absolute and not meaning 'entrust.' Under the dative UtaTevu is often absolute (Jo. 1 50) will be pertinent.

remarks

his

:

and often means 'entrust' when it has the accusative (Jo. 2 UpoaKvveo) in the ancient Greek uses the accusative regularly.

:

24).

In

the Ptolemaic inscriptions the accusative is still the more. usual case/ but the N.T.uses the dative twice as often as the accusative.^

In Jo. 4: 23 the accusative and the dative occur with httle difference in result.^ Cf. also Rev. 13 4, 8. Abbott" observes that the :

dative

is

the regular usage in the

LXX. As

to varepew

we

find

used absolutely (Mt. 19 20), with the ablative (Ro. 3 23) once with the accusative (ev ere varepeL, Mk. 10 21) as in Ps. 22 :

:

:

:

Some

of the

MSS.

Mark have crot,

in

as the

LXX usually.^

it

and 1.

^evyo3

occurs absolutely (Mt. 2 13), with airo (Mt. 23 33), with k (Ac. 27 30) or with the accusative (Mk. 5 14; 1 Tim. 6:11). So 36) with accusative while d7ro0cu7co kK4>evyo: is transitive (Lu. 21 :

:

:

:

:

has accusative in 2 Pet. 2 20. ^uXaaau has, of course, the accusative, but in Ac. 21 25 two accusatives occur with the sense of In Lu. 12 15 the middle is used with awo and in 1 Jo. 'shun.' 5 21 (f)v\d^aT€ eavTo. diro. XpdofjLai still uses the instrumental (cf. :

:

:

:

uior in Latin), as Ac. 27: 3, 17, etc., but in

cusative

is

found

Cf. Karaxpi^i^evoL in the

accusative tendency. accusative with

1

Cor. 7: 31 the ac-

(xpcoMf^'ot Tou kogixov) in response to the general

xpo-op.ai

appears

same

verse.

The

in later writers."

remains in this connection to call special attention to the intransitive verbs which have the accus. by reason of a preposition in composition. This applies to intrans. verbs and trans, verbs also which in simplex used some other case. 'Am furnishes one example in dva-ddWco (Ph. 4 10) if to (ppovetu there is the object It

:

of the verb after the transitive use in the

But most probably 'AireKivi^w (Lu. 6 is eXTTifoj

some ovTO

TOLS

TTju

:

1

2 3

*

:

is

LXX

(Ezek. 17: 24).

the accusative of general reference. indeed transitive with accusative, but so is

7; 2 Cor. 1

13, etc.)

:

Here are

sometimes.

examples of 5ia: rdireKayos dLairXevaavres (Ac. 27: 5), dieropev(Ac. 16 :4), 8ie\6oov

TToXets

1

:

daXaaaav

genitive (with

12

35)

:

(1 Cor. 13

ace. in Lu. 19

aav

this

6, 11.

and gen.

(hs

19

:

4).

In Heb. 11

:

:

29

21;

cf.

(Ste/ST?-

notes both accusative and has the accusative in 1 Cor. observe KaTe^aprjaa vp-ds (2 Cor. 12

did ^rjpds yfjs) Blass^

6td).

Even

As examples

kpepyeco

of /card

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Moulton, Prol., p. 64. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 80. Joh. Gr., p. 78.

MaKedoviav (Ac. 19

TTju

eKdfrjs in

:

^ «

'

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 89. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 78. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 89.

THE CASES 16),

11

:

KaTa!3pa(3evkTco (Col.

vfJ.as

Note

33).

XpoifxevoL in 1

irapa note

:

18), KaT-qyoivldavTO ^aaiXelas

Cor. 7:31, but instrumental in kvTo\r]v (Mt. 15 rriv

irapa^alveTe :

42;

cf.

15

29 and

:

Mk.

6

:

Cor. 9

1 :

3)

:

and

48).

(Heb.

Cf. /cara-

also KaracrocpLadiJLevos to yevos (Ac. 7: 19).

(Lu. 11

Trjv KplcxLv

2

477

(riTSiZEIi:)

18.

For

irapepx^ffde

Hepi furnishes

ywoLKa Tepiayetv (1 Cor. 9:5; cf. Mt. 9 35, etc.), but intransitive in Mt. 4 23. This verb, a7w, however, is both transitive (Mt. 21 7) and intransitive (Mk. 1 lleptepxoAtemt has the accusative in 1 38) in the simple form.

several examples like

o.bi\(l>r]v

:

:

:

:

13, but elsewhere intransitive. So irepteaTrjcrap avrop in Ac. but intransitive (Trepteo-rwra) in Jo. 11 42. In Mk. 6 55 we find TTdpikbpaixov oK-qv ttjp x^p^^- With irpb one notes irpoayu (Mt. 14 22, irpodyeLV avrov), irporjpxeTO avTOVS (Lu. 22 47), with

Tim. 5 25

:

:

7,

:

:

:

:

which compare TrpoeKevaeraL hoowLOV avrov (Lu. 1 17). In Ac. 12 10 both 6tepxo/xat and wpoepxoiJ.ai, are used with the accusative.

:

:

Ilpoo-^coj'eco,

has either the accusative (Lu. 6 13) If 6 deos be accepted in Ro. 8 28

like irpoaKweo),

or the dative (Mt. 11

:

:

16).

:

more than doubtful, then avvepyei would be transitive (cf. instr. in Jas. 2 :22). For virep observe 14) and v virepexovaa irdpTa povp virep€KTeipojjiev eavrovs (2 Cor. 10 (Ph. 4:7). With viro we can mention virofxho} (1 Cor. 13 7, but see fxepo) itself), vireirXevaafxep ttjp Kpr]Tr]P (Ac. 27: 7) and prjaiop 5e tl Thus it will be seen that in the N. T. 16). virodpanopTes (Ac. 27 the accusative with transitive verbs, both simple and compound, {wavTa avvepytl 6

6e6s)

,

which

is

:

:

:

follows the increase in the use of the accusative in line with the

current vernacular.

Sometimes indeed the object of the verb is not expressed, but and the verb is transitive. Thus irpoaexeTe eavToZs

really implied,

(Lu. 17

:

3)

Tuv (Mt. 7

implies top povp. :

15)

and

Cf. also Tpoaex^Te diro tu)P \pevboTrpo^t]~

kirkxoiP ttws

(Lu. 14

:

7)

;

/card Ke(j)a\rjs exo^P (1

must be supplied, and with duTpt^op (Ac. 15 35) xpopop is needed. It may be either that of in(h) The Cognate Accusative. ner content, exdpwap xo-pd-p (Mt. 2 10), objective result duapTkpopTa dp-apTiap (1 Jo. 5 16), 4)v\d.aaoPTi^ (})v\aKds (Lu. 2 8), or even Cor. 11:4).

In

eTLdrjaeTai aoi (Ac.

18

:

10) xetpoLs

:

:

:

:

a kindred word in idea but a different root, as dap-qaeraL oXlyas Considcral)le freedom must thus be given {irXr^yds, Lu. 12 :48). the term "cognate" as to both form and idea. The real cognate a form of the Figura Etymologica as a])plicd to cither internal or external object. The quasi-cognate is due to analogy where the idea, not the form, is cognate.^ The cognate is not very

accusative

is

1

Giles,

Man.

of Conip. Pliilol., p. 304.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

478

common

in the papyri/

quent.^

It is perfectly

but in the Hebrew the idiom is very fregood Greek to have^ this "playing with paronymous terms," as a passage from Plato's Protagoras 326 D illustrates, uiroypaxl/avTes

y pan/xas

Tts

Cor. 9:7).

TTOLfxaiveL

(1

KoliJ.i'yiv

(TTelpwv Tov aireipai top airbpov. xxxiii,

So

oDrco to ypanixaritov.

also in Lu. 8

:

Cf.

5, k^viKdiv 6

Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of Philol.,

488) objects properly to Cauer's crediting, in his

p.

4,

rfj ypacjjiSi

Grammatica Militans, "the division of the accusative into the object affected and the object effected" to Kern, since Gildersleeve himself was using it as far back as 1867. In modern English this repetition of the same root is condemned, but it was not so in Greek. Conybeare and Stock ^ observe that the Hebrew and the Greek coincide on this point, and hence the excess of such accusatives in the LXX in various applications. And the N. T., here unlike the. papyri, shows an abundance of the cognate accusatives.

The accusative

of the inner content

may

be illustrated

SiKalav KpiaLV Kpivere (Jo. 7: 24), tov 4>ol3ov avToov

3

:

14), av^tL Tr}u av^rjaiv tov deov (Col.

(XTpaTelav (1

Tim.

1

:

2

p.r}

l)y ttjv

Pet.

(po^yjdrjTe (1

19), iVa aTparevrj ttjv KoXifV

:

aywva

18), ayojvi^ov tov koKov

(1

Tim. 6

:

12),

dj/xoX67T?cras Tr}v KaXijv bp.o\oylav {lb.), edaufxaaa l8o:v avT-qv dau/jia fieya

(Rev. 17:

Cf. Rev. 16

6).

:

In

9.

Mk.

10

:

38, t6 ^airTiaixa 6 kyd)

and Jo. 17: 26, ayairr] fjv riyaTrjaas p.e (cf. Eph. 2 4), the relative shows this use of the accusative. In Jo. 17 26 and Eph. 2 4 {rjv -qyairrjaev rinds) the Cognate accusative of the inner PaTTTL^oixai,

i]

:

:

:

content

is used along with the accusative of the person also.^ Indeed in Eph. 4:1, Trjs KXrjaews ^s eK\7]6r]Te, the relative has been attracted from the cognate accusative. The modern Greek keeps

this use of the accusative.

Some

neuter adjectives are used to express this accusative, but

far less frequently

than

in the ancient Greek.''

avTO TOVTO (Ph. 1:6), iravTa Icrxvw (Ph. 4

5

33), iravra eyKpareueTaL (1 Cor. 9

:

epxofJLat

(2 Cor. 13

P7]aa (2

Cor. 12:11).

1

1),

fx-qSev

C. and

>S.,

to

Scl.

:

25),

Thus,

Tewoidois

13), vrjarevovaLV irvKva (Lu.

perhaps even

dLaKpLVOfievos

1:6),

(Jas.

tp'ltov

TOVTO

oi'dev

vare-

Cf. the interrogative tI mrepoo (Mt. 19:20),

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

(ii/iii), irpocrKVPelv 2

:

:

p. 436.

irpocTKvi'rjfxa

But note

^-qfidav

ki-nfju.waa/iTji',

B.U. 146

Letr. 70, 79, 92 (i/s.c.).

from the Sept.,

p. 56.

3

lb., p. 57.

^

Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 76, finds no instance of such a construction with

dyairu) in anc. 6

*

Gk. N. T. Gk.,

Blass, Gr. of

p. 91.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

lb., p. 56.

Gk.

Gr., p. 329.

THE CASES the relative o yap airkdavev and (Gal. 2

fco kv crapKL

which

20)

:

In 2 Cor. 12

accusative.^

nominative interrogative

:

479

(nTfiSEIs)

f^ (Ro. G

o 5e

may

:

10).

Cf. also o

j^Dj'

be equal to 'in that,' adverbial

13 the accusative relative follows the

tL kartv 6 riacrudrjTe.

This neuter accusa-

tive of the adjective easily glides into the purely adverbial accusative, like iravTa iraaiv

dpecr/cco

Cor. 10

(1

:

33), iravra fxou fxefxvrjade

2). (1 Cor. 11 As a further example of the more objective result one :

(Eph. 4

jjxiJ-a\6:Teuaev alxiJLaXuaiav

may

LXX), but Winer^

8,

:

note

rightly

shows that this type is chiefly represented in the N. T. by the relative. So fxaprvpla rju ixaprvpel (Jo. 5 32), bLadrjKT] rjv Siadrjao/jLat (Heb. 8 10), ^\a(x4>riiJ.iaL oaa kav ^\acr4>r]p.i](J(j:aLV (Mk. 3 28), €7ra77eXta rfV :

:

:

kirrjyydXaTo (1 Jo. 2

The cognate

:

accusative of the outward object (result also) calls

for little discussion.

serve

have

fxri

(f)o^ovfxevaL

4:2),

TTTorjaLV (1

19),

is

ob-

8) :

30,

seen in such constructions

Pet. 3:6),

and the

ttju 0861'

jStcoaat

12:47

iroWas (oXiyas) in Lu.

b8bv (Lu. 2 :44), eiropevero :

:

(Mt. 13

24), drjaare 5e
cognate accusative

iJ.rj8efj.Lav

Saprjaerai.

(Col. 2

(Mt. 7:

els).

The analogous as

Besides ({)v\daaoPTes ^uXa/cas (Lu. 2

6}Ko86fxr]aei> Tr]v oiKiav

NBC

but

25).

avTOV (Ac. 8

xP^vov (1 Pet.

(48), :

rjXdop

rjijepas

39), av^eL av^rjaLV

relative also as in opKov 6p &p.oaev (Lu. 1

Cf. the instrumental opKco cbfjoaev (Ac. 2

:

:

73)

30), etc.

Some verbs may have two accuone count space and time, three accusatives are possible.^ In Mk. 10 18 (rt /xe Xe7ets ayaOov;) we have three accusatives, one (rt) being adverbial. In the Sanskrit it is very common to have two accusatives with one verb.'* When one recalls that the accusative is the old and normal case with transi{i)

Double Accusative. Indeed,

satives.

if

:

tive verbs,

just as

not surprising that some verbs use two accusatives, have an accusative and a dative,

it is

many

transitive verbs

an accusative and an ablative, an accusative and an intrumental, an accusative and a genitive. This double accusative is common in Homer ^ and a "multiplicity of accusatives is a characteristic of Pindar's style." ^

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

W.-Th.,

^

Monro, Hoin.

8

Giles,

7

He

It is

N. T. Gk.,

a

common

p. 91.

p. 225.

Man.

idiom

in the papj^ri also.''

»

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 82.

*

Whitnoy, Sans. Gr.,

It

p. 90.

Gr., p. 97.

of Coinp. Philol., p. .306.

Volkcr, Paj). Gr. Synt. Sikm-., p. i:if.; Moulton, CI. Rov., 1901, p. 430. citos Hi irdaaTo viipLv rijn ai'coT&Trjv, B.H. 212 (ii/A.u.). For the Attic in.s('r.

see Mcistcrh., p. 204.

unknown

not

is

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

480

very

common

and English modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

in Latin (cf, doceo)

in

{teach).

It is

p. 36),

going

beyond the ancient idiom. cusative is due to analogy,

Middleton^ holds that the double acsince, in a number of examples, alternative constructions occur like accusative and ablative with atreco (Ac. 3 2) and d0atpeo/xat (Lu. 16 3). Cf. two accusatives with (hveiSL^op in Mt. 27 44. Perhaps the simplest kind of a double accusative is what is called :

:

:

Thus omeTi

the predicate accusative, really a sort of apposition.

This appositional feature is seen also in the passive of those verbs where a double nominative occurs. For other examples with verbs of saying see Xe'/w (Mk. 10 vficis

\kyco SovXovs (Jo. 15

15).

:

:

18)

and

Jo. 10

elirov in

is KaXeco

(KoXkaeLS to

:

35

6voiJ.a

avrov

— Zaxaplav,

31; eKoXovv auTo

1

Lu.

'Iwavrju,

59).

:

We

sive of this very construction in Lu. 2

Mt. 22

Cf. further

'Irjaovs).

UeTpov (Lu. 6

:

'OixoXoyeco

14).

:

Similar to this

(eKeivovs dire deovs), etc. 1

:

13;

happen 21

:

cf. 'Irjaovv

verse

to have the pas-

avTov

(kXij^r; to ovofxa

Observe also 6v nal wvofxacxev appears with the double accusative 43.

and curiously nowhere else outside two accusatives as in TttDra ruvfjLat ^wIolv (Ph. 3:7). See 2 Pet. 3 15; Heb. 11 26. Blass^ observes that wMtfoj and uFoXaAt/Sai^co do not have the double accusative in the N. T. UoLov/j-aL in the same sense does occur, as iroLovfxaL Trjv \}/vxhv TL/xiav (Ac. 20 24), and very frequently in the in Jo. 9

22;

:

1

Jo. 4

:

of John's writings.

2; 2 Jo. 7

'Hyeo^at likewise has

:

:

:

active, as xotets aeavTov Qeov (Jo. 10 :33).

Mt. 4

19; Lu. 19

:

Rev. 21 virr]peT7]v,

Tr]p.kvov

Ac. 13

(Lu. 14

—

5)

:

2:7).

10;

Tov avuLffTavo:. irpoopl^oj in

to

9;

:

is

Ph. 2

also.

:

Heb. 7 '

tIs

:

29.

:

14;

fie irapr]-

:

:

:

KaTeo-Ti^aev kplttjv

In Gal. 2

28.

"Exe

:

'lojavtjv

may

:

18

shows

KadlaTiqixi

(Lu. 12

we have

:

14).

Cf.

Trapa^aT-qv kjxav-

shows an example in 1 Cor. 4 9 and For further verbs with two accusatives, not

AToSe'iKPVfjLL

Ro. 8 29.

exw {elxou

used in Jas. 5 10, virb^eiyp-a be exemplified by vfxds to (Ac. 20 28). Cf. Heb, 1 2 {edr]-

TidrjfXL

ixe

Troteco

Eph. 2

7;

:

Cf. also aeavTov wapexo-

25, 6v wpoedeTO 6 6eds iXaaTtipcov.

:

several examples like :

Cf. further for

15; 19

:

Kajx^avoo is SO

tovs irpocprjTas.

and Ro. 3

also Ac. 7

11; 6

be observed

Kvevna TO aytov WeTO einaKOTrovs Ktv)

:

and note Heb. 12

18) is to

:

ixevos TVTTov (Tit.

"Ka^eTe

46; Jo. 5

Closely allied to this use of xotew

5.

:

:

:

weary one, see

irepLayo: (1 Cor. 9:5), Uavbo: (2 Cor. 3:6), UXkyo2:5), v\pbo: (Ac. 5 31). This second accusative may be either substantive, adjective or 'participle. As specimens of the adjective take 6 Toc7]aas jue 117177

/xat

(Jas.

1

Anal, in Synt., p. 25.

:

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 92.

9

THE CASES (Jo.

5

:

481

(nTiiZEIs)

11), Tovs TOLovTovs evTlfjLovs excre (Ph.

2

In

29).

:

Beds

riij,ds

tovs aToaroXovs eaxo-Tovs aireSa^ev

As an example 7

Tim. 2

Cf. 2

10).

:

In 2 Th. 3 In

(t)6v.

Cor. 4

1

:

Xoyt^o/jieuovs ri/xds cos

avrbv elxov (Mt. 14

2

ijjuas

we have

elvai is

Xoyi^eadco dvdpcjiros

26.

virr]-

cos

cos

cos

would 36 (LXX).

SiaKopovs :

is

:

Cf.

be.

not greatly altered by

of fact with ehau

course with the accusative and infinitive. (Lu. 20

:

a8e\-

cos

cos

with

used as the copula before such a predicate

As a matter

diKaiovs elpaL

Cf. 21

5).

:

not exactly what

accusative where the sense presence.

:

with the participle, tovs Kara adpKa irepLTarovvTas. In 2 Cor. 6 4 cos :

the predicate nominative in Ro. 8

Sometimes

H.).

(Ac.

kxdpdv riyelade, dXXd vovdeTelre

observe also

1

In 2 Cor. 10

peras XpiaTov.

6eov didKovoL is

cos

jui)

W.

rjyovfjLeuop

Sometimes ws occurs with the second

8.

cbs irpo(f)r]Tr]v

15 note

:

:

:

four, 6

cbs

eTidavaTiovs (so

cos

of the participle see Karkariqaiv avrdu

accusative, as in

Cor. 4

1

indeed the adjective makes three accusatives and with

20),

eaT-qaaTe eavrovs dypovs elpai (2

6:11), but

D

where

we have

its

absence or

indirect dis-

So vwoKptpophovs

does not have etmi.

iauTovs

Cf. avp-

Cor. 7: 11), Xoyl^eode eavTOvs

elvat

ADEFG

do not have etmt. In Ph. 3 7 we do not have elpaL, while in verse 8 we do after riyovixaL. The predicate accusative with els used to be explained as an undoubted Hebraism.^ But Moulton^ is only willing to admit it is a secondary Hebraism since the papyri show a few examples like eaxop Trap' vjj.ojp els 8d(peL0p) aTepp-ara, K.P. 46 (ii/A.D.), "a recurrent peKpovs (Ro.

:

formula," a probable vernacular "extension of

ets

expressing des-

Moulton pertinently remarks that *'as a loan" (cos or just the accusative in apposition) and "for a loan" (els) "do not differ except in grammar." But certainly the great frequency of ets in the LXX as compared with even the vernacular kolpt] is due tination."

Hebrew

to the

jralda ravTif}p

"7

which

it

so 'often translates.^

eh yvpalKa (Gen. 34

:

12).

Cf. dooaere poL

Cf. the similar use of

the accusative instead of the predicate nominative

Ro. 2 sative;

:

ets

ttip

and

(Xo7ts'o/xat els

Winer^ shows parallels for this predicate accufrom the late Greek writers. The N. T. exhibits this ac26, etc.).

cusative in

ets

Trpo4>r]Tr]P

avTOP elxop (Mt. 21

:

46), dpedpe\l/aTO avTov

Gk. Gr., pp. 332, 378, who says that it is ab.sent in mod. But mod. Gk. docs use yia. instoud of pred. ace, as ?xw tovs fipdxovs -ytd Kpipffari (Thumb, Ilandb., p. 3G). Cf. also W.-Th., p. 22S; Bhiss, Gr. of N. T. ^

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Gk.

Gk., p. 93. » C. and *

lb.

2

Prol., p. 72.

from the Sept., p. 81 f. Cf. also W.-Th., p. 22S. In the mod. Gk. the ace. of the thing to some extent takes the place S., Sol.

of the dat. or abl.

(Thumb, llandb.,

p. 37).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

482

iavrfj eis viov

7

:

(Ac. 7

21), eXa^ere top

:

53), ^yeipev top Aauet5 avTols

NEW TESTAMENT

vo/jlop

as SiaTayas ayykXwv (Ac.

^aaCKka (Ac. 13

els

When

22), Tc^eiKo, ae

:

one must admit some Hebrew influence here because of its frequency. Ph. 4 16 is not a case in point. See further under ets. But there is another kind of double accusative besides the predets


e^i'coi'

(Ac. 13

:

47,

LXX).

all is said,

:

It is usually described as the accusative of the

icate accusative.

person and of the thing. This in a general way is true of this group of double accusatives. Some of these were also cognate accusatives, as in KaTaKKlpare avrovs KXtaias (Lu. 9 14) and, accord:

ing to

some MSS.,

b-qaare

avra deafxas (Mt. 13

:

30),

fjp

ijyairrjaas jue

Eph. 2:4), both of the outer and the inner obCf. the passive 6 eyib /SaTrrtfo/iat (Mk. 10 38) which really ject. implies two accusatives in the active. Further examples of this cognate accusative of the inner object with the negative pronoun (Jo. 17

26;

:

cf.

also

:

may

be seen in ovSh fxe rjdLKr^craTe (Gal. 4 12; cf. 5 2), ij.ri8ep /3XdIn Mt. 27 44 the second 35). See also Ac. 25 10. accusative is likewise a pronoun, to avTo wveldL^op avrop, while in :

:

(Lu. 4

rPap

:

:

:

6 34 it is an adjective, diSaaKeip avrovs woWd. Indeed SMcxkoo is just one of the verbs that can easily have two

Mk.

:

Cf. also vnds otSa^et wdpTa (Jo.

accusatives (asking and teaching).

14

:

In Ac. 21

26.

Saa/cets

:

21

we have a normal example,

dTro Mcouaecos tovs — 'lovbalovs.

In Heb. 5

:

12

d-n-oaTaalap 5t-

we note

three

the accusative of general reference with Cf. Mt. 15 9 the infinitive, tov diddaKeLP vfxds TLPd to. crrotxeta. t<2 BakdidacrKep where one accusative is predicate. In Rev. 2 14 accusatives, but one

is

:

:

XdK

we have the

dative, a construction entirely possible in the ab-

but elsewhere absent in the concrete. The number of verbs like hbdoKOi which may have two accusatives is not considerable. They include verbs hke atreco in Mt. 7:9, op air-naeL 6 vlos avTov apTOP, but not Mt. 6 8 where vfids is merely accusative of general reference with the infinitive. But we do meet it with

stract,^

:

15. But instead of an 1 Pet. 3 with dx6 as in ablative the have accusative of the person we may in 1 Jo. 5 avrov, and tl dx' airoOcrd xapd), Mt. 20 20 BD (against aireXs, and iretp e/xoD Trap' 4 in xapd as Jo. 9, 15, or the ablative with has two acculikewise 'Epcordo; 2. 9 in Ac. the middle fiTrjaaTo Mk. epo); 4 10; \6yop Kayd {kpoiT-qaoi 24 vtxds 21 satives in Mt. only is used middle and active in both 23. 'ApanLfxpridKoi Jo. 16

Mk.

alTeo) in

6

:

22

f.;

Jo. 16

23;

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

with the accusative in the N. T. tive save adverbial accusative in 1

{p.ipiPi)<jKoiiaL

1

Cor. 11

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

:

only with the geni2),

p. 80.

and two accusa-

9

THE CASES (nTnsEis) tives occur in 1 Cor.

17, 6s vfxds avaixv-qaeL

:

bbohs

rots

and

{J.OV,

in 2

both in the accusative). With vTOfufxpr]the genitive occurs once in the passive (Lu. 22 61), the accu-

Tim. aKOi

4

483

1

:

G

dm^'coTrupctf,

((Tt

:

sative elsewhere,

and

iravTa,

serve

and two accusatives

in Tit. 3

In 2 Pet.

than a second accusative.

and dative

But

1

:

12

26,

:

In

1 (avrovs viroraaaeadaL).

:

TL vfids (^(peXrjaco.

of the thing

in Jo. 14

virofiv-qaeL vixds

Cor. 14

1

:

6 ob-

occurs rather

irepl tovtcov

EvayyeXi^ofxaL usually has accusative

Eph. 2

of the person, as in

17; 3

:

:

8, etc.

32 the accusative of person^ and thing is found, and the same thing is true in Ac. 14 15 (vnds kTrLaTpk4)Hv), taking in Ac. 13

:

—

:

Indeed

object-sentence as "thing." yeXi^eTai,

6 xapeXd^ere)

Trap'

antecedent of Trapd TOVTO

6

would be

in Gal. 1

:

9

(et

ns

u/xas

€ua7-

the same thing exists, for while the

n

implied also,

irapd tovto, ti is really

6.

Another group of verbs

Greek with two accusaHere indeed the ablative may take the place of one accusative, as in 1 Tim. 6 5 with the passive of cLToaTepeoo the ablative is retained (r^s aKrjOeias). But in the N. T. neither airoaTeptw, nor d^atpeco, nor kpvttto: has two accusatives. tives

in the ancient

that of depriving, etc.

is

:

Either the ablative alone occurs or with dx6 (Lu. 16 42; Rev. 6

With (pvMaaeaOaL

16).

:

(Ac. 21

:

:

3; Lu. 19

25) avTovs

is

:

the ac-

cusative of general reference (so-called "subject") of the infinitive.

But verbs of clothing or unclothing, anointing, etc., do have two accusatives, though not always. Thus k^khvaav avTov ttjv (Mt. 27

xXafxhda Tov

TO.

lp.6.TLa

:

31;

cf.

Mk.

avTov (Mt. 27

:

15

31;

17; Lu. 15

:

cf.

Mk.

does not have two accusatives nor

Lu. 23:11

but

NBLT

some MSS. omit

IfxcLTLOV Trop(f)vpovv

avTov.

15

:

:

22), hkSvaap av-

But

22).

diu
(Mt. 27:28). In give two accusatives with wepLlSaXcov, In Jo. 19 2 the text is beyond dispute irepLTidrjui

:

TTepufSoKou avTOU.

Cf. Trept/SaXetrai ev (Rev.

Moreover xptw has two accusatives in Heb. 1 9 eXaiov), a quotation from the LXX. In Rev. 3 :

{expi.<jeu :

3:5).

ae 6 Oeds

18 KoXXovpLov

is

not the object of kyxp'^crai, but of ayopaaai. 'AXei(/)co is not used with two accusatives, but has the thing in the instrumenlal case (Mk. 6 13). IlXTypoco does not indeed have two accusatives in the :

N.

T.,

but the passive with accusative in Ph. 1:11 and Col.

1

:

really involves the idiom.

The

following causative verbs have

ae TOP dtbv *

(Mk. 5

:

7) is

Sirncox, Laii^. of the

N.

a case in point T., p. 7S

that tvayyeXl^onai has two acCB.

f .,

two accusatives. (cf. e^opKecj in

'Op/cl^'co

Herod.).

See

aryuca uiisucccssfull}' against the idea

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

484

also Ac.

The

19

idea

13 and one example of evopd^oi in

:

"cause to swear by."

really to

is

Th. 5

1

In Jas. 5

:

12

27.

:

{byLvhtre

fj.r]Te r-qv yrjv yriTe aWov tlvo. opKov) we have two conone "swear by," the other the cognate accusative. So biaixaprhpop-ai in 2 Tim. 4:1 f. Cf. P.O. 79 (ii/A.D.) 6p.pv(ji3 AvroKparopa

TOP ovpavbv

fxijTe

structions,

—

Kalaapa Map[Ko]v Avpr]\Lov aXrjdyj €rj'[at] to. irpo-. Ilortfo; is a good example of the causative sense. Thus 6s av Toriay vfids ttottiplov In Ro. 12 20 SSaros (Mk. 9 41). Cf. Mt. 10 42; 1 Cor. 3:2. :

:

i/'co/xtfo)

:

has the accusative of the person, in

cusative of the thing

both these verbs).

Cor. 13

:

3 the ac-

15 for double accusative with 46 we have (f)opTi^eT€ tovs avdpdoCf. r]\a.TTuaas avTOV /Spaxt' rt in Heb. 2 7

23

(cf. Jer.

In Lu. 11

Sva^aaraKTa.

Trov% (jioprla

1

:

:

:

(LXX).

some words

Finally

Thus

fjLrjSep

cognate accusative, as Cf. Ac. 25

2).

tI ovv

TOLT](TCt)

4

:

35)

the case with

is

10 'lovbalovs ohUv

:

Mk.

Cf. also

'Irjaovu.

ill have two accusatives. where the pronoun is really a

of doing good or

^Xaxpav avrov (Lu.

u^uas ovbtv co^tXiyo-et

15

12,

:

(Gal. 5

:

In Mt. 27: 22 we read though D has tco jSaaiXei

rjblK-qKa.

Elsewhere in the N. T. we meet the dative of the person as in Mt. 21 40; Ac. 9 13. See Tepl Sjv (Blass, Gr.

ofN.

T. Gk., p. 91).

:

:

avTTjv TTtiroL-qKadLv, P.

Grenf.

ii,

73 (late iii/A.c), where

from a='of what they have done to KaKov (Ac. 16

:

In

28).

Mk.

vfjLas

in Jo. 15

:

S}v is

p.ir]btv

attracted

Trpd^Tjs aeavTca

7: 12 the dative of the person

In Mt. 17

keeping with ancient Greek usage.

be more exactly

Cf.

her.'

(ND do

'in his case'

12

:

kv avrca

is

not have h), but note

21 and the likeness of this to the

in

may els

modern Greek

Blass {ib., p. 92) €is with accusative as the usual dative. compares also the use of h kp-oi (Mk. 14 6) and eh epk (Mt. 26 10) with epya^opaL and observes that epya^opac in Attic had sometimes two accusatives. One may compare again the expression H apa 6 Uerpos e-yevero (Ac. 12 18). Xeytji and elirov indeed have two accusatives in the N. T., but in Jo. 1 15 the margin (W. H., use of

:

:

:

:

Cf. also Ac. 23

R. V.) really has this idiom. (j)

With Passive Verbs.

Indeed

found with verbs in the passive voice.

:

5.

the accusative

Draeger^

calls

tive with passive verbs in Latin "ein Gracismus." tive

may

be

10, exaprjaav x°-P^^-

:

note

12)

and

aTeKpidrj

awecTTpcKpTjaav

be

This accusa-

See cognate accusative in Mt. 2 It occurs with the so-called passive deponents Cf. ohbev aTreKpivaro (Mt. a-KeKpldt), Mk. 15 5).

of several kinds.

like aireKplOr^v (ov8ep

27

may

the accusa-

p.e

:

:

\6yov (Mt. 15 (2

Tim. 1

1

:

:

23).

As

further instances

15), evrpaT-qaovTai rbv vlbv p-ov

Hist. Synt., p. 3G2.

(Mt.

THE CASES

(nTfiZEIs)

485

.

37), eirataxwdfj fxe (Mk. 8 38),
21

:

:

Cf.

:

:

the passive

But the

This

thing.

common

is

in the

Cf. Volker, Sy^it. Spec, p. 15. verbs retains the accusative of the true of verbs that have two accusatives in the ac-

true passive of is

kolvt].

many

So rjv KaTrjxniihos ttjv d5dv tov Kvpiov (Ac. 18 25), as edidax6r]T€ (2 Th. 2 15), ovk ep8e8vfj.hov tvdvfxa yaiJLov (Mt. 22 11 and cf. Mk. 1 13; 15 6; Rev. 1 6; 19 14), heSiSvaKeTo Trop^iipav tive.

:

:

:

:

(Lu. 16

:

19), kKavnariadrjaau Kavfxa fxeya

:

Xds (TXrjyas, Lu. 12

(Mk. 10

TiadrivaL

12

:

:

:

:

(Ph. 1

two examples),

38,

Treireiafxeda

13),

(Rev. 16

:

9), SapriaeraL ttoX-

47, oXiyas, 48), to jSaTTLfffxa 6 ^awTLi'ofxaL

:

Kpelaaova (Heb. 6

to.

11; Col.

9 iVa

(Sair-

Iv Tvevfxa eiroTiadrjfxeu (1 :

ireTrXrjpoofxevoL

9),

Cor.

Kapirov

and and compare 2 Tim. 1 5 for genitive (I'm x^pSs irXrjpcx^doo), ^rjfjuwdijvaL rrju ^VXW olvtov (Mk. 8 36). Cf. also Mt. 16 26; Ph. 3 8; Heb. 10:22. See 6 kav e^ e/iov StKaLOcrvvris of.

Ex. 31

:

3,

:

hewX-qaa

1

:

TXrjpcodijre

eTriyvo^aLv

ttjv

aiirdv iwevp-a ao4>ias)

:

:

:

(Mt. 15

0}
:

:

2

:

Once more observe

7.

The

(Mt. 16 26); ^paxv TL Tap' with active (two aces.) in Heb.

5); tL w^eXTj^ijo-erat

ayyeXovs riXaTTwixkvov (Heb. 2

predicate accusative,

:

9)

:

aSiKov/jcevoL ixiadbv

ahda^

(2 Pet. 2

:

13).

should be said, becomes the nominative in the passive, as in amol viol deov KX-qdyjaovTai (Mt. 5:9). Cf. Heb. 5 10; 2 Tim. 1:11. it

:

Some verbs which have

only one accusative in the active or

middle yet retain the accusative of the thing in the passive with the person in the nominative. This is a freedom not possessed by the Latin. The person in the active was generally in the dative. Thus Paul a number of times uses TnaTtboixai (TnarevdrjuaL to evayykXtov 1 Th. 2 :4; kTLdTtvOr} to /xapTvpLov 2 Th. 1 10; cf. also 1 :

Cor. 9

/3dXXo/xat is

Ro. 3 2; 1 Tim. 1:11). Then again irepi. frequently so employed, as Trepi^e^Xy]p.'evos avbova (Mk.

14

:

16

12

:

51;

:

17; Gal. 2

cf.

17

:

:

7;

and

5;

:

especially in Rev., as 7

:

9, 13;

10

:

1; 11

:

3;

This is not the middle as Blassi has it, though the future middle does occur in Rev. 3 5 with tv, and the aorist middle with the accusative in Rev. 19 8. In Rev. 4:4 we have TrepL(3el3Xrifj.evovs inaTioLs (loc), and margin (W. H.) ev 1;

:

4; 18

:

16; 19

:

13).

:

:

Once more vrepket/xat is used as the passive of irepLTl6r]fxL with the accusative of the thing, though the verb itself means to 'he around' instead of 'be cnconi])assed with.' So ttiv iiXvaip irepiill.

Ktifxat

irepi

(Ac. 28

:

20).

Cf. also

Heb. 5

:

2,

but in Lu. 17

repeated. 1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

9:3.

:

2

we have

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

486

NEW TESTAMENT

There are once more still looser accusatives with passive verbs, by analogy and partly merely an extension of the principle

partly

Thus

illustrated already.

not

differ radically

from

5as Kal Tas x«ipas (Jo. 11

(1

TO

:

Note active

fxhos above.

Tim. 6:5),

\6yov (Gal. 6

KaT-qxoviievos t6v

as edLddxdrjTe

we

44) in

6) does In Men'evos tovs tto-

above.

:

see a close parallel to irepL^e^Xr]-

Mt. 22

:

In

13.

8L€4)dapiJLep(x)u

pepavTLafihoL rds KapSias (Heb. 10

:

top vovv

22), XeXovafxhoi

seems to be rather remote and reference, but not quite, for the force of the verb is still felt. This is still true of o-co/xa

(10

come

to

:

23) the accusative

close to the accusative of general

T-qp avTTjp

eUopa ixiTanop^ovixeda (2 Cor. 3

Tr]p avT-qp

aPTLULadlap ir\aTvvdy]Te (2 Cor. 6

not

acpapaPTes,

apacfiapepTes, is

The impersonal verbal (Lu. 5

:

38)

and as

cusative, OLPOP pkop

18)

and perhaps even of

In Ac. 21 :3 apthe correct text, as Blass^ observes. :

13).

in -t€op occurs only once in the

in the ancient els

:

aaKovs Katpovs

Greek

N. T. used with the acThis verbal is more

it is

l3\r]Teop.

usually transitive than the personal form in ~t€os, which found in the N. T.

is

not

(A:) The Adverbial Accusative. It is not very common in the N. T. except in the case of pure adverbs. The adverbial accusative is really nothing more than a loose use of the accusative with intransitive verbs, with substantives or adjectives. It is rare in

Homer 2 and increases steadily till it becomes very common, though perhaps never quite so abundant as in the Sanskrit, where a veritable host of such accusatives occur.^ It is a perfectly normal development of the case, for extension is its root-idea. This accusative

sometimes called the accusative of general reference. of such an accusative with an intransitive verb note KadLaTaTaL to. xpos top 6e6v (Heb. 5:1). See also apeweaav oi is

As an example

dpSpes TOP apLd/jLOP cos wePTaKLaxiXLOi (Jo. 6 10),^ top Tpoirop eKiroppevaaaai (Jude 7), op Tpbirop opPLs tTnavpaya (Mt. 23 37) and 2 :

:

Tim. 3 Ro. 15

:

:

8

(w

tpotop).

Cf. apeixeade

17 the whole verbal phrase

but see Ro. 12

:

18, to e^

vjjlu>p

luov p.LKpbp tl is

(2 Cor. 11:1).

concerned with

/xerd iraPTOiP apdpwT^oip

to.

In

wpds 6e6p,

elpr]pevoPTes,

where to e^ v/xup is ace. In Ro. 1 15 t6 KaT' kfxe may be nom. In Heb. 2 17 this adv. ace. occurs with the adj. as in tticttos apxLepevs to. Trpos top deop. So also with a subst. as in 6 Xptaris to /card o-dpra (Ro. 9:5). The Text. Recept. in Ac. 18 3 had aK-qpoKOLos Tijp Tkxvqp, but W. H. read aK^vowoiol ttj TkxvrjIndeed the :

:

:

1

'

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 93. Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp.

=

Giles,

91, 93.

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 75.

So 2 Maco. 8

:

16.

Man.,

etc., p.

309.

.

THE CASES instrumental

yevH (Ac. 4

usual in the N. T. in such instances/ as

is

KapSia (Lu. 24 :

25), ZvpocjjOLvlKLaaa tc? yeveL

:

487

(nTQSEIs)

36),

(Ph.

rpoirco

Traj/rt

1

:

(Mk. 7 rats

18),

/SpaSets

ttj

26), KvirpLOS to)

:

eKXvofxevoL

i^uxats

But, on the other hand, observe Tovvona 'Icocttj^ (Mt. 27: 57), but elsewhere in the N. T. we have dvofxan (Ac. 18 2). In Ro. 16 19 some MSS. have to €0' vij.7v. The phrase to Ka9' eh

(Heb. 12

3).

:

:

:

nominative in thus is Perhaps form. In 1 Cor. 11 18 see also fxepos tl inaTevoj. in Rev. 8 13 to be explained the accusative with the interjection in Is. vocative) (or Cf. oval and nominative ovai Tovs KaTOiKovPTas. an adverb with There is only one instance of an accusative 4. 1 (Ro. 12

:

accusative, even though eh itself

5) is

is

:

:

:

of swearing in the

N. T. and that

In Mk. 6

Tepap KavxVf^i-V'

is

in 1 Cor. 15 :3l, pv

39 avfXToaLa

:

avfjLiroaLa

may

T-qp v/xe-

be looked

(cf. Lu. 9 nominative Brugmann^ considers /cat tovto (1 Cor. 6 6, 8) 14). rather than accusative, but that seems hardly possible with avTd TOVTO (2 Pet. 1:5), and Kal tovto may be accusative also (Ph. 1 tovto 8e (Heb. 10 33). In Ac. 15 29, etc.). Cf. also tovto fxep

at as nominative

in verse 40) or accusative

(cf. Trpao-tai

:

:

:

—

:

:

In Ph. 4

10 {apedaXeTe to virep 11; 27 25 we have Ka9' 6p tpotop. of general accusative the enov (ppopelp) the infinitive is probably :

Cf. top irdSap

reference.

iropets

B.U. 380

(ni/A.D.).

come more

closely to

Kad' rip.epap

(Lu. 11:3;

aird aKoXairov,

There are indeed other expressions that the pure adverb.

:

Such, for instance, are to

apxvv (Jo. 8:25), to \olt6p

(Mk. 14:41;

19:47; Ac. 17:11), tyip Ph. 3: 1; Heb. 10: 13, etc.), to wpoTepop (Jo. 6:62, etc.), to irpcoTOP 16); to wXelaTOP (1 Cor. 14:27), Ta TroXXa (Ro. (Jo. 10 :40; 12 15: 22, MSS. TroXXd/cts), rd pvp (Ac. 17 30), t6 pvp exop (Ac. 24 25), :

:

TO TeXos (1 Pet. 3

:

:

In the case of to

8).

Xolttop

(1

Cor. 7

In 2 Cor. 6 it may be either accusative or nominative. by some, as accusative adverbial aPTiixiadlav is considered with

dpecTKco

Cor. 10

(1

also TO avTo (Ph. 2

3

17),

:

:

:

18;

33) and with Mt. 27 :44).

and the common use

is

common

used for adverbs, but

;37(),

An-hiv

2

Gricch. Gr., p. 378.

4

Giles,

Man.,

'why' as

in

it

is

etc., p.

a very

fiir lat. »

309.

of adverbial accusatives is

The accusative

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 117. p.

Observe

Mt.

in the papyri.^

in the advor})s themselves.

»

T-qp

iraPTa

This phase of the adverbial accusa-

But the most numerous group

nach Adj.,

(11:2).

is

29)

Cf. ovdep xpelap ex(^ (Rev.

of ti in the sense of

17: 10 (5td Tt in verse 19). tive

ixkixp-qaBe

:

13

:

common

Cf. Landgraf,

found

not the only case one. In Homer-* inis

Dor Accus. dcr Beziehung

Lox. und Gr., vol. X. Volkcr, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, pp. 10-13.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

488

deed adverbial accusatives of substantives are almost absent. But the N. T. shows a few in harmony with the development of the language. Thus dK/xTjv (Mt, 15 16), Sojpeav (Alt. 10 8), x^^pi-v as a preposition (Eph. 3 1, etc.). But adjectives in the accusative were numerous in Horner^ both in the singular and the plural. They occur in the positive, comparative and occasionally the superlative. As examples of the positive singular may be taken ttoXu (2 Cor. 8 22), dXiyov (Mk. 6 31), fxeaou (Ph. 2 15), raxv (Alt. 5:25), XoLTTou (1 Cor. 1: 16, etc. Cf. B.U., iv, 1079, 6). Indeed the participle Tvxof (1 Cor. 16:6) is used as an adv. ace. (see Ace. Absolute). As an example of the plural positive note TroXXd in Ro. 16 6, though this may be construed as cognate ace. with kKOT'ia\6s tv4>\6i' eau odrjyfj. In the case of p-r] riva ^v :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

aireaToXKa irpos vpds,

8l'

ai'TOv ewXeoveKT-qaa v/xSs; (2

Cor. 12

:

17) the

one side and anacoluthon takes place and the senconcluded by 8l' avTov.

TLva is left to

tence (m)

is

The Accusative by Inverse Attraction.

Kov 6v copoaeu (Lu. 1

73), top aprov ov KXcofxev (1 Cor. 10

:

TO iroTTjpLov (1 Cor. 10

:

and the accusative 1

Monro, Horn.

In Alk. 3

15).

(\at kiredrjKev opo/jLa Zt/iwi't)

Uerpop

:

:

Thus

6p'

16).

Cf.

16 but for the parenthesis

we should Seem

to

have the dative

in apposition.

Gr., p. 93.

Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 625

Cf. Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 34S

f.

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 331.

'

Faxrar, Gk. Synt., p. So.

f.;

Dclbriick,

THE CASES (n)

489

(nxsjsEiz)

The Accusative with the

The grammars

Infinitive.

generally speak of the accusative as the subject of the infinitive.

me

seems a grammatical misnomer. The indoes correspond to a finite clause in English, and a clause with on and the indicative may often be used as well as the infinitive clause. But it is not technically scientific to read back into the Greek infinitive clause the syntax of English nor even of the on clause in Greek. Besides, not only is the infinitive a verbal substantive^ and in a case like the verbal adjective (the participle), but being non-finite (in-finitive) like the participle (partaking of both verb and noun), it can have no subject in the grammatical sense. No one thinks of calling the accusative the "subject" of the participle. Take ecos av 'idcocTLP TOP viov Tod avdpcjOTTov kpxoixevov (Mt. 16 Here the ac28). I confess that to

this

finitive clause in indirect discourse

:

cusative

is

the object of IbwaLv and the participle

Now with

vibv.

the infinitive, not the substantive, that

No

is

the infinitive in indirect discourse

further case

needed with the

is

is

descriptive of as a rule

it is

the object of the verb.

infinitive,

if

the pronoun or

substantive be the same as the subject of the principal verb.

Thus

et TLs

used,

it

—

If such a word is voixl^ei (1 Cor. 7 36). be in the nominative in apposition with the subject

aaxn^LoviZv

may

:

of the verb, as 4>a.aKovTes dvac aoipoi (Ro. 1

may

be used.

two accusatives, as 3

may

This accusative in

k'y(j>

:

22), or the accusative

be with a verb that can have

kixavtop ov \oyl^oiJ,aL KaT€tXri4>epaL

(Ph.

13) or the accusative of general reference as in ireiroLdas re aeav-

:

Top odrjyop elpac

TV(f)\icp

(Ro. 2

:

19).

This latter usage

is

the ex-

planation of the accusative with the infinitive in the instances

where the word used with the of the principal verb.

avTOP XofxaL

^rjp

(Lu. 24

:

infinitive is other

at \kyovaLv

23), po/di^opres avrop TedprjKhat (Ac. 14

TpoaevxeadaL tovs apSpas (1 Tim. 2:8).

infinitive is the object of the

far forth as the

than the subject

Typical examples are seen in

word

verb and the affirmation

in the accusative.

:

19), (Sou-

In these examples the

They

is

made

as

affirm living as to

him; considering having died or death as to him; and wish praying as to the men. This is the psychology of this accusative with the infinitive.

The

fact that later

grammarians

call it

the "sub-

ject" of the infinitive cuts no figure in the matter of the origin of

the usage.

Clyde ^ has interpreted the matter

correctly.

He

sees

that "grammarians framed this rule in ignorance of the etymology For inf. as subjoct and as ()l)joct. sec ch. on Verbal Nouna. Gk. Synt., p. 139 f. Cf. also Donaldson's Gk. Gr., § 5S4, and Green's Handb. to N. T. Gk. Gr., p. 232. '^

"^

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

490

of infinitives,"

and that "since the

was

infinitive

the accusative could not originally have been

originally a case,

its

This

subject."

descriptive accusative or accusative of definition (general refer-

and

ence) has a very wide range in Greek, as seen above,

is

the

true historical explanation of the accusative with the infinitive

may

(other than the accusative which tive itself).

When

the accusative

since the infinitive can

to do with the action by the accusative, have no subject in the technical sense.

This use of the accusative with the is

:

to;

when

also

tQ eiaayayelp tovs

cannot be slurred over

becomes imperative to explain one

of the accusatives as

The context makes

it

clear that to

the object of eiaayayelv, while tovs yovels

is

the accusative of

that of general reference. blov is

h

Here the matter becomes

27).

clearer for the reason that the article it

common

infinitive is

in a prepositional clause like

yovels TO iraLblov 'l-quovv (Lu. 2

and

infini-

infinitive, it in-

who has

dicates the agent

the infinitive

be the object of the

used with the

is

Trat-

Many examples of this sort occur. Cf. Mt. In Mt. 26 32, /nerd to kyepdrjpai fie, note the accusative /xe rather than nothing or avTos or kiuavTov. Cf. also Ac. 23 15. The article may be so used without a preposition, and either the nomi-

general reference. 13

:

4.

:

:

native appear, as accusative, as

accusative

rcS

may

as KoKbv kuTLv

5eojuat to

/u?)

tvpelv

fxij

/ze

irapwv dapprjaai (2 Cor. 10

be used with the

rijias a)5e

Cor. 2

'YItov (2

:

13).

such constructions

infinitive in

etmt (Mt. 17:4).

or the

2),

:

Then again the

Note here the

infinitive

There infinitive in Heb. 5 12 (ttclXlv xpetaJ' ^xere tov dLdaa-KHV 6/ias Tiva to. crTOLX^la). Here we have a verb that is used with two accusatives, and tlvo. is the as subject, as the infinitive as object occurs in 2 Cor. 10

:

2.

one example of three accusatives with the

is

:

Cf. the three accusatives in Lu.

accusative of general reference. 11

:

This subject

11.

will call for further discussion in the

chap-

on Indirect Discourse and Verbal Nouns. There was a constant tendency in the later Greek to exchange this use of the infinitive and accusative for the 6tl clause.^ (o) The Accusative Absolute. The absolute use of the accusative is rare in the N. T. as compared with the earlier Greek.2 Usually the genitive occurs with the participle and subters

stantive

when used

In

absolutely.

1

Cor. 16

:

accusative absolute though used as an adverb.

example 2

:

in the

N. T.

is

6 TO ixapTvpiov Katpols

in Ac. 26 idioLs

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 484 It is rare also in the pap.

3

yv6:(7Tr)v

is

really the

The most 6vTa ae.

In

certain 1

in the accusative without

is

*

:

6 tvxou

Tim. any

f.

Volker, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, p. 18.

THE CASES immediate connection unless clause

(Elhcott in

"^

or

loco)

abvvaTov rov vofiov (Ro. 8

:

with the preceding

in apposition

it is

loosely united with 8ovs.

is

3)

491

(nTfiSEIs)

we have

As

to t6

either the nominativus pen-

dens, the accusative in apposition with the object of the sentence,

the accusative of general reference or an instance of anacoluthon.^

47 the Text. Recept. reads ap^anevov which would be W. H. rightly have ~voi. Twice k^ov occurs in the N. T., once with riv (Mt. 12 4) and once alone, a ok k^bv (2 Cor. 12 4), but in both instances in the nominative. In Ph. 1 7 A vixas ovras the vjids is repeated and is not accusative absolute. subordinate sentence may also be in the accusative of general reference. Thus TO d bbvji (Mk. 9 23), to tLs av fxei^o^p avTcov (Lu. 9 46) See further chapter on Verbal Nouns. Only a general (p) The Accusative with Prepositions. remark is needed here, since each preposition will be discussed later in detail. In general one may note that the accusative is the most frequent case with prepositions.^ Indeed in modern Greek these all have the accusative. IIpos in the N. T. has geniIn Lu. 24

:

,

anacoluthon, but

:

:

:

e'irj

:

:

.

tive

Here the preposition,

locative 6, accusative 679 times.'*

1,

merely an adverb that

like all prepositions, is

more exactly the idea

The

of the case.

The

nically govern a case.

is

used to express

preposition does not tech-

accusative with the preposition has,

of course, its usual force, extension.

The

following prepositions

occur in the N. T. with the accusative, one example being given in each instance. 'Ava fj.eaov (Mk. 7:31), 5id t6u 4>bfiov (Jo. 7 13), :

CIS Ti]v

toXlv (Mt. 26

(Lu. 2

:

kirl Tr]i>

22), /^erd 17/xepas rptts (Lu. 2

avTbv (Mt. 8

Trept

18),

:

16), vTTo TOV

fjibSiou

:

18),

Trpos

(Mt. 5

:

yrjv :

(Mt. 15

46), irapa

avTov (Mt. 3

15).

Of these

:

:

35), KaTCL tov vbixov bbbv

T-qv

5),

ets

virtp

is,

(Mt. 20

of course,

the most frequent and has only the accusative.

30),

:

bovKov (Phil.

by

Atd, perd,

far

irepi,

have the genitive-ablative more than the accusative, KaTCL, wpbs have the accusative more often. For exact figures see Moulton, ProL, pp. 105-107. In the chapter on Prepovirep,

while

virb

eirl,

sitions there will be further discussion of the matter.

The Genitive

VIII.

(True) Case

(r\

•ytviKti tttwctls).

Two Cases with One

Form. It is now generally accepted by the comparative grammars that in Greek two cases appear under the form of tiie genitive: the genitive proper and the (a)

*

For

ace. in apposition

p. 152, t6

At))

6y,

T.P.

^

Green, Handb.,

»

Giles,

Man.,

with sentence in pap. see Moulton, CI. Rov., 1904,

1 (ii/B.c).

etc., p.

etc., p.

234.

311.

*

Moulton,

Prul., p. 100.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

492

ablative.^ It is a syncretistic form. The matter has already had some discussion in this grammar under Declensions and calls for little remark here. Moulton is not too hard on Winer when he calls it "an utterly obsolete procedure" to speak of the genitive as "unquestionably the whence-case."^ Winer is followed by

Green.^

Now

a different

the ablative

is

the whence-case, but the genitive

is

Delbriick^ gives an interesting sketch of the fate

case.

of the ablative case in the Indo-Germanic languages. In the Sanskrit singular the two cases (gen. and abl.) have the same form, except I.-G. -o (Sans, -a) stems (Sans. gen. -asya, abl. -ad).

In the Balto-Slavic tongues ablative and genitive have the same In the Italic languages, ablative, locative, instrumental

endings.

(and partly dative) have the same form. Indeed in the Thessalian dialect as in the Latin some forms of the genitive and locative coincide (like domi). Dionysius Thrax^ had the idea that both cases flourished under one form in Greek, for he describes this case

as

17

ytvLKrj KTifiTLKri Kal iraTpLKr].

Thompson^ indeed

recognises the

two cases, but thinks it is not possible to group the uses of the form under these two divisions because some suit either case. There is a "debatable land" as Giles^ observes, but this applies to only a very small part of the examples and is very natural indeed. As a matter of fact it is not possible to give a really scientific explanation of the usage in Greek from any other standpoint. The ablative will therefore be treated as a separate case and the true genitive discussed now. The genitive case has the wrong name. (6) Name Incorrect.

The Latin

genitivus

lative in idea).

yevos (genus), 'kind,'

cian^ so calls to call 1

it

it

is

a translation of

and corresponds

(generalis casus).

yevpijTLKr]

The name

ItisriyeviKriTTToJaLs.

(more 7ei/tKT7

the ab-

comes from

to the Latin generalis.^

It is

a pity that one

Pris-

still

has

p. 319.

Cf.

"genitive."

Delbriick, Grundl. der gricoh. Synt., IV, p. 37; Giles,

Hadley, Ess. 2 W.-Th.,

make

like

Philol., etc., p. p. 184;

4G

Moulton,

Man.,

f.

Prol., p. 72.

But W.-Sch.,

p. 259,

does not

this error.

^ Vergl. Synt., I, Handb., etc., p. 207. p. 200. Bekker, Anec. Graeca, ISIG, Vol. II, p. 636. 6 Gk. Synt., 1883, p. 59. ^ Man., p. 313. 8 Cf. Max Muller, Lect., I, pp. 103-105; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 70. ' Lib. V, de Casu. See Meister, Der synt. Gebrauch des Genit. in den Indoger. Forsch., XVIII, pp. 133-204. kretischen Dial.-Inschr. Cf. also Ruttgers, De accus., gen., dat. usu in inscr. archaicis cretensibus. Diss. Bonn, 47 p.

3

B

THE CASES

493

(nTf2ZEIs)

The Specifying Case.

(c)

of the genitive case bialptaLv

or kind.

It is this and no other. The idea bottom simple. The genitive shows

at

is

and something elStKov. It is the case of genus (yevos) For a very full discussion of the genitive see Del-

briick, Vergl. Synt., Ill, pp.

resemble

the

adjective,

The

307-360.

but

it

is

genitive does indeed

not adjectival

in

origin,^

though the source of the genitive ending is unknown. The adjectival possessive pronoun (like kfxos) is a mere variation of the genitive case (k/jLov) and the two may be in apposition with one another, as ttj e/x^ x^'P^ ITauXou (2 Th. 3 17). But the function :

of the case

is

largely adjectival as in

rjpLkpa

TapaaKevrjs (Lu. 23

:

though the adjective and the genitive are not exactly parallel, for with two substantives each idea, stands out with more sharpness, as in h KaivoT-qTL fco^s (Ro. 6 4) and ert ttXovtov a8r]\6Tr]TL (1 Tim. 6 17).^ It is the specifying case, then, the case of appurte54),

:

:

In the Sanskrit Whitney'' finds the genitive adjectival in

nance.^

idea and defining the

who

find

it

noun more

nearly.

So also Kiihner-Gerth^

qualitative with nouns or verbs.

But

Delbriick,^

followed by Brugmann,'' makes the verb the starting-point for ex-

One

plaining the genitive.

hesitates to part

company with Del-

and Brugmann, but the older view that it was first used with nouns seems here to have the best of it.^ It may be remarked that the genitive is the most persistent of all the cases in retaining its forms, as is seen in the English s. Indeed in the modern Greek the form shares with the accusative the result of the loss of the dative, so that we often meet a construction hke avTov to dira ('I told him so').^ One other remark is called for concerning the meaning of the genitive in Greek. It is that the case does not of briick

itself

mean

all

that one finds in translation.

The

technical root-idea.

its

The

case adheres to

resultant idea will naturally vary

greatly according as the root-conception of the case

is

applied to

words and different contexts. But the varying clement is not the case, but the words and the context. The error must not be made of mistaking the translation of the resultant whole different

Man.,

1

Giles,

2

Cf. W.-Th., p. 236.

s

Tl.

«

Vergl. Synt.,

^

Griech. Gr., p. 385.

8

Giles,

'

I,

p. 331.

etc., p.

Cf. I,

311.

Monro,

pp. 185

f.,

»

Hadley, Ess. Philol. and

*

Sans. Gr., p. 98

Ciit., p. 48.

f.

Iloin. Gr., p. 102.

307-380.

Man., etc., p. 315. Cf. Donaldson, Gk. Gr., pp. 464 ff. In late Gk. the true gen. survives while the abl. fades further away.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 333.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

494

for the case itself. It

vos.

is

Thus

Mt.

in

1

:

12

we have

mean

iieTOLKeaiav Ba^v\co-

Now

translated 'removal to Babylon.'

the genitive

but that is the correct translation of the total idea obtained by knowledge of the O. T. What the genitive says is that it is a 'Babylon-removal.' That is all. So in does not

Mt. 12

From

:

31,

-fj

'to,'

Tov TTvevtiaTo^

the context

the 'Spirit-blasphemy.'

^Xacrcji-qixia, it is

we know

that

it

blasphemy against the

is

though the genitive does not mean 'against.' When a many possible combinations in detail it is difficult to

Spirit,

case has so

satisfactory grouping of the various resultant usages. A very simple and obvious one is here followed. But one must always bear in mind that these divisions are merely our modern conveniences and were not needed by the Greeks themselves. At every stage one needs to recall the root-idea of the case (genus

make a

or kind)

and

find in that

and the environment and history the

explanation. {d) The Local Use. This is normally the first to begin with. In Greek literature it appears mainly in poetry ^ and in adverbs of

place like avTOv,

ov,

rod, owov,

o/jlou,

But

wapraxov.

it is

these are locatives like aWodi in a shortened form.^

other hand in

Homer

But on the

the genitive undoubtedly^ appears in local

relations with the archaic genitive in -olo,

the examples are chiefly stereotyped ones.

only these examples in Luke and Acts. TTolas

possible that

eiaevkyKwaiv avTov

and 19 4 :

though even in Homer There are in the N. T.

In Lu. 5

:

19

/x?)

^fxeXXeu Siepxe^crdaL

eKelvrjs

evobvTes

we have

two undoubted examples. Blass^ indeed calls these "incorrect" on the ground that "classical Greek" would not have used the genitive thus. But it is sufficient reply to say that Luke was not writing classical Greek. Certainly Xenophon might have used TTotct, eKeivj] (as D has in Lu. 19 Moulton^ finds often in the 4). papyri votov, Xt/36s, though in Rev. 21 13 we have the ablative^ uTTo poTov. In Ac. 19 26 we have a very striking example that the commentaries have failed to notice as Moulton^ observes. It :

:

:

IS ov

nopop 'E0eo"ou dXXd ax^Sop waaris

ttjs

'Aaias 6 ITaDXos welaas iiere-

Moulton on the whole agrees with Hackett that the genitive here is dependent on ox^op. In Homer one has a parallel like ovk "Apyeos rjep, but Moulton finds none in the vernacular KOLPT]. Still, since Luke did use eKelp-qs and Trotas, it does arrjaep

kapop ox^op.

>

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 73.

=

Delbriick, Vergl. Gr.,

I,

Cf. K.-G., p. 359.

*

Monro, Horn.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 109.

Gr., p. 104.

p.

I, ^

384

f.

ci. Rev., 1901, p. 437.

»

Moulton,

^

ib.

Prol., p. 73.

THE CASES not seem

difficult to believe

495

(nTftSEIz)

that he was ready to employ the geni-

tive of place in Acts.

There

another passage in Luke also (Lu. 16

is

ha

genitive of place occurs,

Here

:

24)

where the

^a\pn to olkpov too daKTvXov aiirov vdaros.

emphasizes the kind of material which the speaker ^{ has vdarL. One may note in this connection the Homeric idiom XoveadaL TroTanoXo, 'to bathe in the river.' vdaros

clearly has in mind.

Cf. also the classic ttoO T(hv 'E\\r]vo3v (Jo.

7

:

Somewhat

yris.

35)

and

656s

similar also

Wvwv (Mt. 10

:

5),

is

17

biaairopa

which are ob-

jective genitives but of place also.

22 3) which

is

:

Cf. kv Tapo-oJ t^s KtXt/cias (Acts described by Blass-Debrunner, p. 101, as parti-

tive genitive. (e) The Temporal Use. It is common enough. This is a very old use of the genitive.^ This is the true genitive.^ The accusative when used of time expresses duration over the period,

the locative regards the period as a point even ble length

Jo. 2

(cf. e^ eTeaiv,

ing^ as to duration.

:

if it is

of considera-

imphes nothdistinction can be seen

20), while the genitive

In Mt. 24

:

20 this

aa^^arw, one the case of genus, the other a point of time. Brugmann"* indeed regards the genitive of time as a development of the partitive genitive, but this seems hardly necessary. in xetMfSws

/cat

Moulton,^ on the other hand, connects it with the genitive of posand finds it very frequently in the papyri, like erous B,

session

'in the

second year.'

So tov

ovtos

F.P. 124

fxr]u6s,

On

(ii/A.D.).

the difference between the genitive and the accusative of time see ijfxepas Kal vvktos (Lu. 18 7) and vmra Kal rju'epav (Lu. 2 37), :

:

the genitive the time within which (kind of time), the accusative the time during which (all through). Cf. also vvkt6% to wpuiTov

See also tov \oltov (Gal. 6 17) and to Xolttov (Heb. Once more observe fxeaovvKTcov aXeKTopocpuivias (Mk. 13 35) where some MSS. have p.eaovvKTLov. The accusative here is more like the adverb oxj/k just preceding. Further examples of (Jo. 19

10

:

39).

:

13).

:

r/

(Lu. 24 (/)

may

be seen in fxearjs vvktos (Mt. 25 6), 6pdpov fiaOkos For adverbs in expressions of time, see viii, (/?,). With Substantives. This is the chief use of the case.

the genitive

The

:

:

:

1).

accusative indeed

is chiefly connected with the verb, while mainly related to substantives.^ The Possessive'' Genitive. In simple point of fact it is not

the genitive 1.

is

»

Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

2

Dolbriick, Gnindl., etc., IV, p. 45.

^

3

Monro, Horn.

«

Giles,

4

Griech. Gr., p. 389.

^

Delbruck, Vcrgl. Synt.,

I,

Gr., p. 105.

p. 356.

C-f.

Sans.,

Whitney's Sans. Gr.,

p. 100.

Prol., p. 73.

Man.,

etc., p.

311. I,

p. 344.

A GRAIVIMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

496

necessary to see any particular inner connection between the many uses of the genitive with substantives other than the com-

mon

For convenience

root-idea of the case.

it

suits us to

group

these usages, but one must think that the Greeks themselves looked at the whole matter much more simply. After all it is the

context that varies rather than the genitive.^ is

•

The

resultant idea

any particular

therefore a matter of exegesis rather than due to

The most obvious

label to be attached.^ Tov bovXov Tov

apxi-^P^<j^s a.4>el\ev ai'TOV

illustrations like Trard^as

to wtIov

(Mt. 26

:

51) call for

not another's, and The possessive pronouns, it is the servant's ear, not another's. especially kfxos in John's Gospel, were used to some extent in the little

remark.

It is the high-priest's servant,

T., but usually the genitive of the personal pronoun is found. In Jo. 7 16 they occur side by side. Of. tt? e/irj x^ipi liavKov (1 Cor. 16:21). Like an adjective the genitive may 2. Attributive Genitive. be either attributive or predicate. This is sometimes called the

N.

:

But the name helps

genitive of quality.

Thus observe the

1:1).

(and

TaTreti'cocrews

ttjs So^rys,

22), (3airTi(Tp.a jitTavolas fxos

16

adiKias (Lu.

TTJs

6 to

:

Ph. 3

:

8).

(Ro.

Mt. 18 9

els

:

t^s

acoixa Trjs ap.apTlas, to awjJLa

rjijepas

And even

shown by the

genitives

Xpiarov

'I-qaov

21), to acopa

:

(Mk. 1:4),

all

indeed the usual

is

descriptive genitive in

yeevpav tov Tvpos, Ro. 6

rr]v

as

little,

have this idea. The sense of attribute one with the genitive, as IlaOXos 8ov\os

ttjs

aapKos (Col.

686v (Lu. 2

:

1

:

44), 6 OLKOvo-

expressions like

viol (t>wT6s

and coins (Deissmann, Bib. Stud., p. 165) to be not mere Hebraisms, though far more frequent in the LXX than in the N. T. because of the Hebrew. Th. 5

(1

5)

:

are

Other examples are \6yoLs (Ac. 9 iradrj

:

15), aKevT] opyrjs

drt^itas

(Ro.

1

:

26),

and

(Heb.

3), Kapbia dTrtcrrtas

q

:

ir\7jyrj

aKpoaTrjs

x^ptros (Lu. 4

Tfjs

(Ro. 9

eKevdepias 1

inscriptions

vlos

:

22), KpLT-qs

ttjs

e7nXr]aiJ.oi>rjs

tov davaTov (Rev. 13

:

3),

22), aKevos eKKoyijs aSiKias

ayaT7]s (Col.

(Jas. 1

(Heb. 3

:

ttjs

:

:

1

:

(Lu. 18

13),

25), aTavya(riJ.a

12), pl^a TTLKpias

vo/jlov

:

6), tt]s

ttjs 86^r]S

(Heb. 12

:

15),

w^here the descriptive attribu-

tive genitive expresses quahty like an adjective indeed, but Avith more sharpness and distinctness. Cf. again kv KaivoTrjTL fcoTjs (Ro. 6 4) and eirl tXovtov adyjXoT-qTL (1 Tim. 6 17). In Heb. 1 3, tc3 :

:

:

piifxaTL

TTjs

Sufdjuecos

avTov, the

second genitive

is

technically de-

Man., etc., p. 312. Moulton, Prol., p. 72. Blass, also (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95) thinks that the exact shade of the gen. idea is often a matter of theological, not gram1

Giles,

2

matical interpretation.

THE CASES pendent on Swanecos. Winer (Winer-Thayer, 5

TavTt}% (Ac.

1:7,

Cf. 2 Th. p. 237) in

497

(nTfiZEIz)

doubt the wisdom of

I

saying that in rd

prjfxara rrjs fco^s

20) the demonstrative goes in sense with prjiiara.

:

The same

objection apphes to 6 X670S rris acoTrjplas ravTrjs (Ac. 13 rod o-co/xaros rod davarov tovtov (Ro. 7 24), Besides viol and e/c 26) 4)0)70$ above observe a similar idiom in rkKva (jjcotos (Eph. 5:8), :

:

(Eph. 2

TeKPa opjfjs (2 Pet, 2

2:3).

Cf. also

avTov (Col. 1

One may

:

rod

ol viol

Pet, 2

(Eph. 2

:

(Lu.

1

:

Th, 2

Th.

3),

:

(Ro, 2:5),

opyrjs

17/zepa

rip.kpa kTn.aKOTrrjs (1

LXX may

where the

80)

(2

15); 6 vlos rrjs aya-n-qs

:

avonias (2

14), t^kvu Karapas

:

rrjs aircoXeias

i^tos

2 quot, from O. T.),

12), rifxepa apadel^ecjos

:

Trjs

2), 6

(Mt. 9

PVfxcfjoovos

13), 6 dudpcoTTOs

:

instance further the use of

awr-qplas (2 Cor. 6

rifxepa

Pet. 1

3), reKva viraKorjs (1

:

aireLdlas

14), viol

:

be

appealed to for abundant illustration.

The

genitive of place or country

karlu

irpoiTT] ixepiSos rrjs

descriptive also.

is

^aper t^s TaKtXaias (M,k, 1:9), TaptrcS

Trjs

MaKedovias ttoKls (Ac, 16

tive of quality or descriptive genitive

LXX

by reason

:

12), etc.

:

Thus Na22 3), rfrts This geni-

largely extended in the

is

of translation (Thackeray, p. 23).

While having the copula elvai, yibe explained as a genitive with subnot the copula that affects the case of the genitive

The Predicate

3.

KtXtictas (Ac.

Genitive.

veadai, etc., in reality^ it is to

stantives.

at

It

It

all.

is

is

just the possessive genitive in the predicate instead

of being an attriljute. Often the substantive or pronoun is repeated in sense before the predicate genitive. Thus ovk tanv d/caTacTTacrlas

dXXd 12

:

6 deos (1

So v^ yap

11).

also kav TLvas nr]s

(Ac, 20

much

Cor. 14 :33).

(Heb. 10

Tlarecjs

:

is

3)

:

5)

and

Cor,

1

the

(Ac, 1:7), tpa

ri/jLcop

viol 4>cot6s

(Mk. 12

:

15), I'm

17

karlp

W.-Th.,

2

Blass, Gr. of

(1

yeprjrat

ri

Cor, 6

:

:

rfys

KXrjpopofxla 17

:

Cf,

42,

rjjxkpas (1

and

6)

eyoi

eifXL

vfxcjp

(Lu. 20

:

Ilai-Xou

ypC^pai

14), tIpos avroop

Tpo4)i]

(Ileb, 5

7), SiP karlp ^^vyeKos koI 'Ep,uo7tj'7js (2

8vpanea)$ y rod (2

(Ac,

elfxl

karip

Th, opres

fip.epa$

19), tov deov ov

anpea

Is no distinct type, N, T, Gk., p. i)G.

p. 195.

:

Cor, 3:21), ovx

23), reXeioop karlp

vwep^oXii

»

eare Kal viol

Th. 5

continue the illustrations like

XpiaToO dpai (2 Cor. 10 :

have

12), ovk ka-Ti eavruip (1 v/jLcop

IdTai yvpTj

So Lu, 2

42).

predicate genitive as in the attributive

We

We may :

:

—

(Heb.

x^ipds etvat

So/cet

and indeed kykvero yvdcto be explained the same way. There is as

27:23), iraPTa

1

(Mk. 5

ovk kafxh vvktos ov8e ctkotovs (1

(verse 8),^ (1

ovk kafxev vttocttoXtjs

^j/xeTs

oSov ovras (Ac, 9:2),

possessive genitive.

5

Cf.

39), irdaa Tacdela ov

krC^v 86}8eKa

€vp-[i rrjs

latitude in

:

:

14),

Tim.

Cor, 4:7), and finally,

Giles,

Man.,

p. 317.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

498

though by no means

These passages not only

Pet. 3:3).

Koaixos (1

that can be adduced, uv

all

riety of the predicate genitive, but

substantival genitive cate take aKCLvdaXou

—

illustrate the va-

this is essentially

a

predicate nominative) and not a verbal

(cf.

As an example

genitive.

show that

earco ovx 6

of the objective genitive in the predi-

(Mt. 16

el kjuov

the predicate genitive has been

:

In the modern Greek

23).

further extended

still

(Thumb,

Handb., p. 35). 4. Apposition or Definition. This is a very simple use of the case, but is not an extremely common idiom in the N. T., since the

two substantives can easily be put in the same case. In the modern Greek mere apposition rules (Thumb, Handb., p. 33). But some interesting examples occur. It is a well-known idiom in Homer and certainly needs no appeal to the Hebrew for justi^

examples. Pet. 2

6)

:

may also be consulted for other poetical In the N. T. we note ttoXcis Zodofxcov Kal Toiioppas (2 which Blass compares with 'IXtou ttoXlv of Homer and

Kiihner-Gerth^

fication.2

observes"* that iroXeoos QvaTelpcov (Ac. 16

tive of TToXis Qvareipa

:

TroXet 'Iottxjj in

(cf.

merely the geniIn 2 Cor.

14) is

Ac. 11:5).

11 32 the adjective is used as ttjv toXiv AanaaKrjuwv, while in Rev. 18 10 we have true apposition. One may note further tov :

:

vaov TOV

croj/iaTOS

5:5),

ar]iJ.elov

iaaeojs

(Ac. 4

Kal T(Jo

6.yairr\%

Xbycd

:

(1

avrov (Jo. 2

22),

Th. 5:8), to epyov

KXrjpovonias (Col. 3

:

IxeaoTOLxov tov (jipay/dov

2

:

:

h

Cor.

1

(Eph. 2

ffTecpapos (2

(Ro. 8

:

10), 6 aTk4>avos

Tim. 4

1),

:

:

17

:

:

Th. 1:3),

(1

avTairoSoaLS

17

Cor. 5:8),

(1

daidij

17

Wvwv (Ro. 15

'!rpoa4>opa tQiv

:

— Koafxos 7775 bo^-qs

8), iopT-q Toov a^vixwv

Cor. 5

otVta TOV aKr]vovs (2

3

Pet. 5

:

(Lu. 22 :

1),

17

23), tyjv eirayyeXiav tov TvevpiaTOs (Ac.

:

ttjs

(Eph.

3), 6 aTe(f)avos ttJs

4), 6 Trjs SiKaLoavvrjs 1), eopT-q

:

airapxv tov

2

ev ttjs

tov davarov (2

airoKpiixa

(1 Pet. (1

Tr]S

16), to

14), 6 deixeXios Tchv airoaToXcov

(Heb. 6:1), to

9), 6 e/zTrXo/c^s Tpix^^v

:

(Rev. 2

(Jo. 13

17

to a-qjittov

,

13), OojpaKa iriaTeccs

:

Trtcrrews

ttjs

Kadas

^vpiji

14),

20), de/ieXLOS jj-eTauoias

^ooTJs

TrepLTOfxriu)

evayy eXiov (Col. 1:5),

24),

yposaeus avTov (2 Cor. 2

AC

tov vttvov (Jo. 11

Kol/drjais

17

oKrjdeias tov

TTJS

21), tov appa^uiva tov TrveviJ.aTos (2 Cor.

:

(Ro. 4:11,

TepiTO/jirjs

:

tov iraax'^ TrpeviJ,aTOS

33), popos xiarecjs

These are by no means all, but they illustrate at freedom of the N. T. in the use of the genitive of defini-

(Ro. 3 :27). least the

tion or of apposition.

It

is,

p. 74) suggests, that the »

2 *

Moulton (ProL,

of course, possible, as

vernacular has preserved the poetical

Gk. Gr., p. 335. Moulton, Pro!., p. 73 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 98. Cf also W.-Sch., Cf. Jann., Hist.

.

3

p.

2G6

u^ f.

p_ 2G4.

499

THE CASES (ninsEis)

idiom in this as in so many other matters. Poetry often expresses better than prose the language of the people. In Eph. 4 9 eis to. KaTWTtpa nepTj t^s yrjs we probably have not this usage, but the ablative after the comparative. Cf. Elhcott in loco. In Jo. 21 8 TO 8lktvov tcov IxOvwv the genitive merely gives the content (cf. :

:

material and quantity as opposed to quality). Cf. also bXa^aarpov 13), d7eX7? xo'i-pfj^v 3) and Kepafxtov vdaros (Mk. 14 fivpov (Mk. 14 :

:

(Mt. 8

30)

:

and

tKarop jSarovs kXaiov (Lu. 16

The Subjective

5.

This genitive

clear.

It

Genitive.

by the

objective use only

can be distinguished from the Sometimes the matter is not

context.

common

the

is

6).

:

possessive genitive looked at

from another angle. In itself the genitive is neither subjective nor objective, but lends itself readily to either point of view. The subjective genitive can indeed be applied to the merely possessive genitive noted above.^ Take Ro. 1 17 where hKaiOGvvrj deov means the righteousness which God has and wishes to bestow on us. A yap ayairr] rod Xpiarov typical example is found in 2 Cor. 5 14, :

:

avvkx^L

Here

riixas.

sinners

and

In Ro. 8

it is

so for Paul that

39 the matter

:

17

unquestionably the love that Christ has for

is

is

the constraining influence in his

explained indeed by the phrase

life.

airo ttjs

ayawrfs rod deov ttjs h Xpto-roj 'IrjaoD. Abbott ^ is apparently right in finding only a couple of passages in the N. T. where aycnrr] is used

with the objective genitive (2 Th. 2 11

:

42, irapepx^o^de

Kpiaiv Kal

tyju

h

T-qv

10,

:

17

017.

Lu.

a\r]deias;

ttjs

Jo. 5

ayainiv tov deov).

:

42

ttiv

might be either subjective or obIn Ph. 4 7 elprjpr] tov deov is probably jective, but see Ro. 5:5. subjective and so 'the peace that God has and gives,' but the meaning is richer than any phrase, as Simcox^ well observes. Cf. Col. 3 15. In Ro. 15 8, vvep aXrideias deov, we seem to have the subNote also StKatoavvq iricrTeois (Ro. 4 13), which is jective genitive.

aya-n-qv tov Oeov ovk exere

eauroTs

17

:

:

:

:

explained as subjective (Ro. 10

:

6).

In

1

by Paul

Tim. 4:1,

the subjective genitive.

phrase

in the

17

bLKaioavvq

didaaKaXiais baipiovlwv,

Some passages

eua77€Xtoj' r^s x^piros tov deov (Ac.

20

:

h iricrTeuis

we have again

are open to doubt, as

24), evayyeXiov

tt]s

(SaaiXetas

(Mt. 4 :23). 6.

The

especially

Objective Genitive.

when

it is

genitive preservers a

vanishing in the later

remnant

»

Jann., Hist. C.k. Cr., p.

2

Joh. Or.,

3

Lang, of the N. T., p. 87. Green, Handb., etc., p. 219.

*

PI).

84

ff.

N. T.,^ adnominal Greek.^ The

It is quite frequent in the

of the old objective genitive in

mod-

.333.

Abbott gives a very just discussion of the matter. ^

Jann., Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 334.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

500

ern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 34). Here again we must appeal to the root-idea of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The resultant idea

is

due to the context and one must not suppose

means

that the Greek genitive

the different English preposi-

all

Thus

tions used to translate the resultant idea. ex€T€

deov

iricFTLi'

we

Mk. 11 22 God/ though

in

rightly translate 'have faith in

:

mean 'in/ but only the God kind of faith. 8e tov Tvev/jLaros ^'KacrcfyrjiJ.ia, Take Mt. 12 31, where the context makes it clear that it is blasphemy 'against' the Holy Spirit. Another striking example is Ac. 4 9, eirl evepthe genitive does not Cf. Ro. 3

:

22.

77

:

:

yeaia avd pcoirov aadevovs, where the good deed

man.

In Jo. 7:

is

done

'to'

13, 5td t6v (})b^ov toov 'lovbalwv, it is fear

or 'in reference to' the Jews, while Jo. 17:

a sick

'towards'

2, k^ovala -jraarjs aapKos,

means authority 'over' all flesh (cf. e^ouaiav TrvevfxaTuv aKadaprcou, Mt. 10: 1, and rrjs vfxuv k^ovaias, 1 Cor. 9: 12). In 1 Cor. 10:6, In Jo. 18 29 we have accuTVTTOL r]nS)u, we have types 'for' us. sation 'against' this man, KaTrjyoplav rod avOpdoirov, etc. Each example calls for separate treatment. So to <jrip,€iov 'Iwm (Lu. 11 :

:

may

be the sign showTi in Jonah, while vbpo^ tov avbpbs (Ro. 7:2) is the law 'about' the husband (cf. 6 vojios tov Xeirpov, Lev. 14: 2). In 1 Pet. 2: 19, Stct awd^cnv deov, it is a good conscience 'toward' God, while kv ttj irpoaevxfj tov deov (Lu. 6 12) we have

29)

:

God. '0 i'rJXos tov oIkov aov (Jo. 2 17) is zeal 'concerning' thy house. See Ro. 10: 2; cf. also Heb. 11 26, top duethiGjiov TOV XpL(TTod. lu Col. 2 18, dprjaKeia tccv ayyeXwv, it is worship prayer

'to'

:

:

:

'paid to' angels, while

eis Trjv viraKovijv

But

obedience 'to' Christ.

tov XpLaTov (2 Cor. 10: 5)

see per contra

viraKorj rtcrrecos

(Ro.

1

:

is

5)

which is subjective genitive. In 1 Cor. 1 6, ixapTvpiov tov XpiaTov, we have again witness 'concerning' Christ. Cf. also 6 X670S 6 TOV (TTavpov (1 Cor. 1 18) and d/coai TvdXkp.wv (Mt. 24 6). So in :

:

1

Cor. 8

idol,

:

7

not the

17

idol's consciousness.

Th. 2

of ayawq tov Oeov (2 Jo. 5

:

:

aweiSTjaLs tov eldooKov is

42; 2 Th. 3

:

:

5; 1 Jo. 2

:

:

objective.

See also

good work, and (TLv

See also the two objective uses

10; Lu. 11

deov

els hiKal(j:<jLv fcoTjs :

29).

and possibly

42) :

(Ro. 3

(f)6l3ov

Kad' viropovrjv

fw^s — Kplaews (Jo. 5

:

In Ro. 5

5.

good sense. The phrase (l)6(3os and note also 2 Cor. 5 11 (t6v is

consciousness 'about' the

5 either will :

tov Kvplov).

(Ro. 5

:

18), 'to' life.

Indeed one

may

are really just the objective genitive.

(Mt. 10:

5),

way

'to'

objective,

is

Eph. 5

:

21

epyov ayadov (Ro. 2:7), 'in' a

those genitives of "looser relation" usually set

They

18)

also

make

Cf. dmcrra-

go on and include off

to themselves.

So as to

the Gentiles; d86p dakaaarjs (Mt. 4

656s :

15),

Wvup

way

THE CASES 'by' the sea;

diaqiropav tCju 'EXKrivccv (Jo. 7

ttju

'among' the Greeks; slaughter; dhpa

(Mt.

aecov

(Heb. 9

But

PawTLafxcop

rpoTTTJs

:

1

though

15),

11

:

this last

aTroaKLaafjLa (Jas. 1

iriaTH aXvd^ias (2

Th. 2

Trapo^va/iov ayairr]s

:

Cor. 11

:

13),

In Jo. 19

26).

to' /xe-

may

2) is

:

cnroKvTpcoaLS tojv xapa/3d-

be regarded as an ablative.

objective genitive.

Note

also

a shadow 'cast by' turning, and faith in the truth. In Heb. 10 24,

17),

:

The same remark

ment.

'doomed

:

koXuv epycov there

/cat

35), dispersion

10:7), door 'to' the sheep;

and even

f.),

btbaxw (Heb. 6

:

a^aYrys (llo. 8:36),

Trpb^ara

tcov irpoPaTccv (Jo.

TOLKeaia BajQuXcoj'os

501

(nTi2i:EI2)

is

applies to klv^vvol

14

:

cause for com-

little

iroraiicov,

Xycrroov (2

probably

wapaaKevr} tov iraaxo.

97

al-

ready means the day 'before' the Sabbath (Friday).^ Cf. irapaCf. also the genitive of price, 18). l3o\ri TOV aireipovTos (Mt. 13 XolvL^ a'lTov b-qvapLOv (Rev. 6:6), 'for' a penny; avTaXkayiia. rijs Cf. Lu. 10: i^vx'ys avTov (Mt. 16 26), exchange 'for' his soul. 36. Enough has been said to show how carefully the genitive must be interpreted and what great latitude Avas used in connection with it. Deissmann {St. Paul, pp. 140 f.) thinks that Paul's use of the genitive is "very pecuhar" and transcends all rules about subjective and objective. He even suggests "mystic geni17

:

:

tive" for Paul.

For lack of a better name this membership" ^ or "of remerely the possessive genitive of a

Genitive of Relationship.

7.

use of the genitive

is

called "genitive of

In reality

lationship." ^

it is

The substantive is not used because the conThus Mapla 'laKco/Soi; ('Lu. 24 10) is James' text makes it clear. Mary; whether mother, wife, daughter or sister, the context must decide. In this instance it is James' mother. Mk. 16 1 and Mk. 15 47 give us Mapta 'luarJTos, while in 15 40 we have both James and Joses. In Mt. 27 56 as in Mk. 15 40 we have the full construction with /jltittip. But in Jo. 19 25 Mapia rod

special application.

17

:

:

77

:

:

:

:

77

:

meant. So in Mt. 1 6 k t^s tov Ovpiov. In Lu. 6 16 and Ac. 1 13 we have 'lovdas 'Ia/cw/3ou, which probably means the brother (dSeX^os) of Jude in view of Jude 1 (d5eX06s 'laKco^ov) rather than son. But i;t6s is the word usually to be supphed, as in 'Iclkco^ov tov tov Ze^eSalov (Mt. 4: 21), tov 'lov-

KXwTra

it is

the wife

that

(yvvri)

is :

:

8av

'EliJLwvos

(Jo. 6

:

dee'

(Mk. 10

:

vl6s is

35).

'Icoavov (Jo.

71), 2t/xcof

TOV 'leaaai (Ac. 13: 22).

Lu. 3: 2 where

:

See also Ac. 20:4,

used, as

In Jo. 21

1

Abbott, Joh.

C.r., p.

2

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

vloi :

2

21

generally

we have

:

15

ff.),

2ico7rarpos is

AavelS tov

Uvppov.

for 'sons of

tov ZejSedaLov so used.

ol

92. p. 95.

Cf.

Zebe-

=>

W.-Th.,

p. 190.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

502

But sometimes the

Mk.

In

5

:

Cf.

ol

Tepl ahrov (Lu.

35, a-Ko tov apxt-frvvayuyov,

it

is

have vary

In Ac. 2: 27, 31,

is

a8ov (cf.

els

also' in Ps.

more

:

11).

man W. H.

to be supplied, since the

come.^

the family in general as

refers to

article

in vTo Tcov XXoTjs (1 Cor. 1

read

:

h

:

27)

and

P.O. 523

l\.\av8(iov),

rd

ets

and the MSS.

t^ ady in Lu. 16 23. It we have the :

49, ev rots tov Trarpos,

:

and

Ibia

(ii/A.D.), for

Cf.

mony

ets

'house'

It is

of.

:

remark so much as the

article

22)

in har-

all

like to

not the genitive that

it is

eu rots

a classic idiom.

rd rod dSeX^oO.

oKrjdovs irapoLnlas (2 Pet. 2

Ibta

to.

ets

See

Ulol in Jo. 1:11.

ol

These constructions are with the ancient Greek idiom.^ In an example

Cf. Lysias

MSS.

while some

adrju,

els

Gr., p. 395)

idea of 'house' rather than that of 'business.' (Jo. 19

is

himself (verse 22) has already

Brugmann, Griech. 16 10 (LXX). Cf.

likely that in Lu. 2

22 :49).

possible that oIkos

ttjs

calls for

The

without any substantive.

discussion belongs to the chapter on the Article.

Here a part of the whole

8. Partitive Genitive.

TovToov

€v

ijixlcFOvs

(Mt. 6

TTJs

jSacrtXetas

^7^ltotd iJLov Tojv

(Mt. 15 fieXuiv

:

29), TO

:

(Mk. 6

37), TO TpiTov

aov (Mt. 5

29), Tipa twu

:

p-vpiabes (jLVpLaSciov Kal

ol

xt^XtdSes

:

the ablative and

(Rev. 8

:

9.

rd

K\aap.aTwv tcov

ev

52), tovs tttojxovs

tuv avOpo^wuv

(Lu.

(Rev. 5:11), rd

18:11), ixov

r}p.[(TLa.

e/c

:

and

for further discussion see ix, is

fiaOrjToiv,

the

Genitive.

In the

Cf. Ac. 21

where the partitive genitive

The Position of

(c).

more sharply defined by

usually

prepositions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 102).

Twv

14),

:

See further

7).

eojs

13),

:

(Rev. 12

(Acts 7

Trpo(f)riTQiv

Xotxot

:

See

given.

8), to Trepicraevov to>v

xtXtdScoi'

N. T. the partitive relation (TvvrjXOov

is

(Rev. 11

8) and the curious rd avTo. tQv iraOrjiJLaTwv For the blending of the partitive genitive with

Tuv vTrapxoPTuv (Lu. 19

5:9).

yfjs

TTJs

TToXeojs

ttJs

23), ^/XLav Kacpov

:

vwapxovTo^v (Lu. 19

Twv ayiuv (Rom. 15:26),

(1 Pet.

b'tKaTov

is

general one

In

:

16,

subject.

may

note

that the genitive usually comes after the limiting substantive, as ykevvav tov irvpbs (Mt. 5 22), but the genitive comes first if it emphatic hke 'EXXi7i'coi' tvo\v 7r\rjdos (Ac. 14 1) or if there is sharp contrast like tov avaTpaTidoT-rjv nov, vnojp 8^ awoaToXov (Ph. 2 25). In Eph. 6 9 both genitives precede, /cat avTwv Kal v/jloov 6 If the article is used with both words we may have the Kvpios. usual order, as Trjv Travoir\lav tov deov (Eph. 6 11), or less often the Sometimes classic idiom, as top ttjs xtorecos apxvyov (Heb. 12: 2).

TYjv

:

is

:

:

:

:

indeed the article

may

be repeated, as

1

Green, Handb.,

2

Blass, Gr. of

etc., p.

6

X670S 6 tov aTavpov (1 Cor.

213.

N. T. Gk.,

p.

*

95

f.

THE CASES

503

(nTfiZEIs)

AvTov usually comes after the noun in the Synoptics, as aXupa avTov (Lu. 3 17), but John sometimes puts avTov first^ Sometimes a word 10, aov ol dcjidaXfiol) (1 27; 9:8; cf. aov in 9 and the genitive as in ijneda substantive intervenes between the 1

18).^

:

Tfjv

:

.

:

:

T'tKva 4>va€L hpyrjs

But note

els

(Eph. 2:3).

Cf. also Ph. 2

aXevpov aara rpia (Mt. 13

10; Ro. 9

:

21, etc.

:

33).

Two

Concatenation of Genitives.

10.

:

more

or

may

genitives

be used together. This is, of course, common in the earlier Greek. Paul in particular is fond of piling up genitives. Take 1 Th. 3 as a typical example, ixvrnxovehovres v/jlcov tov epyov rrjs Trtcrreajs 1 :

Kal TOV KOTTOV TTjs ayaTrrjs kol ttjs VTOiJ.ovfjs rrjs eXirlSos tov Kvpiov

r]fxu)V

Here we have practically all the points, viz., two simple genitives, two in apposition, three together, one of the person and the other of the thing. A very simple case is found in Ro. 8 21, TTjv eXevOepiav ttjs 86^r]s to)v TeKvoov tov 6eov, and in verse 23 XptaroO.

'Itjo-ou

:

Ttjv

cnroXvTpuatv tov

Eph.

1

:

6;

4

:

Cf. also Jo. 6

(Tco/xaTos rjfxccv.

13; Col. 1

:

13, etc.

In Rev. 16

genitives, to TOT-qpLov tov divov tov dvp.ov

occur in Rev. 19 TOV dvfxov

TYJs

:

15,

opyrjs tov deov tov iravTOKpaTopos .

clear enough. pendent genitive is

smooth order stood:

is

:

1;

19

2 Cor. 4:4;

we have

6p7^s avTov,

tijs

counting the appositives,

four

and

five

tov divov

Ti}v X-qvov

Blass^ calls this

"a

but surely the sense The governing genitive comes before the de-

burdensome accumulation

really

:

of words,"

in regular order here.

not observed, yet

But

all five

in 2 Pet. 3

:

2 this

can be readily under-

irpoip-qTUV Kai ttjs t€>v airocrToXcjv vptup ePToXrjs

viro TU)P ayio)v

30 also. In 2 Cor. 3 18, aird KvpLov iTPevp.aTos, it is not clear whether Kvplov is genitive or is the ablative in apposition with TpevnaTos. In Jas. 2 1 it is difficult to put into brief compass the Greek idiom, ttjp irlcrTip tov KvpLov r]p.wp 'l-qaov XptcrTou Here 'I??. Xp. is in apposition with Kvpiov. Kvplov has T?7s 56^7?s. TiiJLcJp and is itself the objective genitive with ttIotlv, while t^s So^tjs is probably in apposition with 'It?. Xp. (see Mayor in loco). (g) The Genitive WITH Adjectives. Giles* observes how natuTOV Kvplov.

Cf. Ph. 2

:

:

:

take the genitive, since many of them are developed from substantives in apposition. Adjectives of fulness can logically take either the genitive or the instrumental. Giles"^ explains how with the Latin plenus, by analogy to vacuvs, the al)lative is used and also because the ablative and instrumental forms ral it is for adjectives to

»

Cf. Green, Ilaiulb., etc., p. 215.

2

» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 99. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 90. Man., etc., p. 31G.* Cf. Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 353 f.

4 ^

lb.

:

504

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

are the

same

we have an

in Latin.

the genitive

Indeed even in the case of the participle participle is regarded no longer as

when the

adjective, but as a substantive, as Cf. Lu. 12

3).

TO virepexov

10 33, TO

yvwaeuis.

tt^s

to.

The

adjective itself

Cf

8,

:

Cor.

1

But different is avjj.Here we have the

:

:

and Ph. 3

so used in

is

Cor. 7 35.

1

.

ekovos tov viov avTov (Ro. 8

Trjs

virapxovTa nov (1 Cor. 13

27, to ddtaixhov tov vbixov;

:

k/jLavTov avn(i>opov.

:

IJLopcjiovs

33; Lu. 2

:

29).

is due to the principle just stated. In crvvepyos, Ro. 16: 21, we have the substantive also. The case with verbals in -ros may be considered genitive, but see the ab-

true adjective, but the genitive

Thus

lative also.

7

:

28), kXe/cTot deov (Ro. 8

6

Tol deov (Jo.

2

:

one

13)

:

/cXrjrot 'It](jov

33),

(Ro.

1

oi'K kv 8i.8aKTols avOpcoir'tpris ao
45),

:

may

(Ro. 1:7), yewrjTol yvpaLKcou (Lu.

ol ayairrjTol deov

question

if

we do not have

:

In

6).

StSa/c-

\6yoLS (1 Cor.

the ablative.

But

in

hkely the case.

tov Trarpos (Mt. 25 only one adjective in -lk6s in the N. T. which has the genitive, kpltlkos evdvp-iiaewv (Heb. 4 12). "A^ios is very common with the genitive in the N. T., as ix^iov Trjs neTavolas (Mt. 3:8). So

evXoytfiJLevoL

There

:

34) the genitive

is

is

:

also ava^Los (unless abl. because of a- privative), as ava^Lol eoTe kpltt]pLcov e\ax'i.<7Twv (1

Cor. 6:

Delbriick^ confesses his inability to

2).

though Blass^ considers it genitive of price. weighing or scales seems to be involved in the word. figure of The In 1 Cor. 9 21 (ewoixos XptcrroO) we have a very "bold use" of the explain this genitive,

:

genitive^ due to the substantive idea involved

ably in Heb. 3

on Kap8la, not 26

:

:

12, KapSla irov-qpa aTLaTias,

vlov

aiJ.apTr]fjLaTos.

and

still

In

Cor. 11

1

more

3

Mk.

3

:

acxifxaTos,

MSS. in Mk. 3 we have the usage of

:

29 and not the idiom in Mt. 26

usual construction appears also as in epoxos eaTai

5: 21

and even

f.)

epoxos

of KOLvwvbs the construction

have

Mt.

in

:

euoxos Kpiaeus in Sj^rian class of

27, epoxos eaTat TOV

:

dependent

29 (correct text) evoxos eaTiv aicoMoulton^ considers this genitive "aberrant"

pre-Syrian classes in

The

Mk.

is

up an unusual genitive

"Epoxos brings

TTovrjpd.

66 epoxos davaTov, and

But prob-

(vo/jlos).

the genitive

KOLPupoi tore tuv

els

is

tw

yeeppap

but

iradij/jLaTOiv,

it is

Kpiaei

:

66.

(Mt.

In the instance

(i'6.).

also interesting.

Tfj

29.

the

In 2 Cor.

debatable

if

1

:

7

we

the adjec-

become a substantive as with kolvcj}v6s e/xos (2 Cor. Koti'coj'os has also the dative, as 23 cf avpepybs in same verse) Sce avPKOLPO)pds avTov (1 Cor. 9 23) KOLPwvol TOO '^LfjLCjoPL (Lu. 5 10).

tive has not here

8

:

;

.

.

:

:

and

two 9 we have

in Ph. 1

Rev.

1

:

:

7

genitives, awKoiPcavovs ep

with locative.

p. 254.

1

Vergl. Synt.,

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 106.

I,

ixov Trjs

Note

x«pt™5.

But

m

also p-ecTol vwoKplaeus

^

ib.

*

01. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 152.

THE CASES (Mt. 23

:

and

28) :

(Jo. 1

ifK-qp-qs x^-pi-tos

:

The

14).^

1 (KK-qaecos eTrovpaviov ixeToxoi) is

In Jo. 8

26).

:

55

W. H.

read

case of /xeroxos

similar to that of kolvu-

above, though more decidedly adjectival.

vos 1

:

Heb. 3

in

505

(lITfiSEIs)

opoLO's vplp,

Cf.

vp-dv (Jo.

fiecros

though J
a construction sometimes found in ancient Greek,^ One 1 Pet. 5 9, rd aurd tuv iradripdToov, which is perhaps to be understood as the same "kinds" of sufferings, rather than the same sufferings. (h) The Genitive with Adverbs and Prepositions. At bottom there is little difference between the adverb and the genivpcov,

may

note also in

:

tive and the preposition and the genitive. The preposition is an adverb that is used with a case for clearer expression. The adverb is still an adverb when used with a case and called a preposition. Some adverbs indeed are only used as prepositions, but this is in the later stages of the language. 'A^Lcos, hke the adjective d^tos, occurs with the genitive, as d^tcos rod eva-yytklov (Ph. 1:27; cf. Ro. 16 2). The genitive is not persistent with some of the adverbs and prepositions in late Greek.' It is more especially with adverbs of time that the genitive is found.^ Thus aira^ tov hiav:

Tov (Heb. 9

7),

:

rod cra(3^aT0v (Lu. 18

8ls

of place that uses prepositions.

discussion can be given.

Thus

12), eirraKLS ttjs ripepas

:

Giles^ indeed observes that

(Lu. 17 :4).

it is

avTiKpvs Xtoy (Ac. 20: 15), airkvavTi

TOV Ta4>ov (Mt. 27 :61), aprl xdptros (Jo. 1

4

13),

:

Slcl

8

Trapa^oXrjs (Lu.

:

only the genitive

Here only specimens without :

16), axpt- Kaipov (Lu.

4), eyyvs eov (Ro. 10

:

6eov (Lu. 1:8), kvavTiov tov B^ov (Lu. 1:6), evfKeu epov kPTds vpOiV (Lu. 17: 21), kvonnov Kvpiov (Lu. 1

5

14),

:

eiri

ttjs

yrjs

(Rev. 6

:

10), eaco

:

(Mt. 5

15), eiravo) opovs

avXijs

ttjs

8), IvavTi tov

(Mk. 15

:

11),

:

(Mt.

16), ccos

(Mt. 26: 59), KaThavTi vpwv (IVIk. 11:2), KaTivdoTTLov TTjs So^Tjs (Ju. 24), kvkXcc TOV dpovov (Rcv. 4 6), peaop 7e^eas cr/coXtSs (Ph. 2 15), peO' rjpcov (Mt. 1 23), peTa^v aov (Mt. 18 15), pexpi- TTJs arjpepov (Mt. 11 23), TapaTrXrjaLOv davaTOV

ripu)u

(Ac. 9

:

38), /card tov 'Irjaov

:

:

:

:

(Ph. 2

:

:

27), tXtjc'lov tov x^p'i-ov (Jo,

TOVTOV xdpiJ' (Eph. 3

:

1).

4

:

5), -wepl

tov

cf)o)T6s

(Jo.

1

:

8),

"EpirpoaOev, oTTLaOtv, irpo, irpos, virep, etc.,

have the ablative. Cf. to 'lawOev hpCiv (Lu. 11 39) where eawdev be looked at more as a noun. 'Ev pkaw has almost the force of a preposition with the genitive {hpwv, for instance, 1 Th. 2:7). As already remarked, Dcl{%) The Genitive with Verbs. all

:

may

1

Jann. (Hist. CJk. Gr., p. 338), after the aiialofjiy of (he I.at. and the Gk. considers it the al)l. that \vc have with irXTifirjs. " Giles, Man., Hhiss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. lOG. p. 318.

Ktvbs, hSeris, etc., 2

»

Jann., Hist. Gk, Gr., p. 337.

b

Jb., p. 319.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

506

NEW TESTAMENT

briick^ begins his discussion of the genitive with the verb.

5:19,

TToias elaeveyKcx)(TLv,

the genitive

is

In Lu.

not due to the verb and

is

a

rather loose almost adverbial phrase.

Very Common. In Greek the genitive with verbs cuts a than in Latin.^ Broadus used to say that the genitive with verbs means 'this and no other,' while the accusative with verbs means 'this and no more.' Probably therefore the genitive with verbs is a variation from the accusative with verbs, the 1.

larger figure

and normal case with verbs. by OLKOveTe avrov (Mk. 9 7) and

original

trated 41).

:

Some

This point

now

be

illus-

verbs yield themselves naturally to the idea of the

The

the other.

now

Others again use

genitive, while others use the accusative.

one,

may

^Kovaev tov aairaaixbv (Lu. 1

predicate genitive

is

passed by here,

having been discussed under Substantives.

Fading Distinction from Accusative. But it must not be it is wholly a matter of indifference whether the accusative or the genitive is used with a verb, though the accusative in the later Greek constantly made inroads on the genitive. Even in the old Greek much freedom existed. In the modern Greek the genitive with verbs occurs only in some dialects (Thumb, Handb., Cf. (jLV7]noveveTe ttjs yvpaiKos Acot (Lu. 17:32), but nvrjuop. 35). In Tavra nov neiJ-vqade (1 Cor. vevere tovs whre aprovs (Mt. 16 9). 11:2) both cases occur. This is all in accord with classical usage. So also kTiKaOeaOai tov epyov vijlQiv (Heb. 6 10), but rd fxev birlaoi 2.

assumed that

:

:

tTviKavdavbuevos (Ph.

3

:

13); yevaerai ixov tov bdirvov (Lu. 14

2

but eyevaaTo to v8up

(Jo.

even

^Xacrcfit] n'las

yejxovTa opbuaTa

:

9)

;

ykp.ovaiv baTecov

(Rev. 17:3).

(Mt. 23

But

it is

:

:

24),

27),

but

perfectly

proper to appeal to the distinction in the cases in the apparent contradiction between aKovovTes p.ev ttjs (l)o:vrjs (Ac. 9 7) and ttjp 8^ The accusative (case of extent) accents (poivriv ovK i]Kovaav (22 9) :

:

.

the intellectual apprehension of the sound, while the genitive (spe-

sound of the voice without accenting the sense. The word olkovo) itself has two senses which fall in well with this case-distinction, one 'to hear,' the other 'to understand.' Cf. ou ovk T]Kovaav (Ro. 10 14) and /xi) ow riKovaau (Ro. 10 18). And yet the genitive can be used where the sense is meant, though not stressed, as ^Kovaa (puvrjs (Ac. 22 7), but under 3. further 14).^ see and 26 But ^Kovaev 4>b}vr]p (Ac. 9:4; cifying case) calls attention to the

:

:

:

:

^ Giles, Man., p. 315. Vergl. Synt., I, p. 308. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., pp. 87 ff., has an extensive discussion of the gen. and ace. with &kovco, but seems to miss the point after all. They heard the sound but not the words. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 103, admits this classic distinction sometimes in the N. T. 1

'

. :

THE CASES One

Verbs of Sensation.

3.

may

of the chief classes of verbs that

be used with the genitive

compelled to

make some

507

(nTflZEIz)

verbs of sensation.

is

One seems

division in the verbs used with the gen-

Yet as a matter of and each verb indeed relates itself to the root-idea of the genitive. That is the thing to keep in mind and not a mere artificial grouping of the verbs. Analogy was at work, of course, but the verbs after all were separate units and had independent development. These groupings of the grammarians are mere itive for the

sake of intelligible discussion.

fact each class

And

matters of convenience.

a deUcate matter that varies

it is

somewhat with the

writer, this use of the genitive.

refer to verbs that

mean

By sensation we

to hear, smell, taste, touch, though verbs

have the accusative. The most common verb of hearing about which some remarks have already been made. It is not necessary to give an exhaustive list of the instances of d/couw. A tjrpical one is iJKovcrev au^t^coj'tas Kal xopcov (Lu. 15 25). The genitive is used either with things, as in this illustration, or with perof seeing is cLKovoi),

:

For accusative with persons 35). Eph. 4 21. Besides the use of the accusative with this verb, both with the classic distinction as above and without, there may also be the accusative and the ablative as in Ac. 1 4 r^i* riKovaare sons, as in avTov uKovere (Lu. 9

see

:

:

:

Then again

the verb

used in the sense of hear, to understand, and even to obey (hearken). The sense of hearken is often in John's Gospel with the genitive, as ok ^Kovaav avrcjp to. fjLov.

irpb^ara (Jo. 10

:

itself is

Cf. Rev. 3

8).

genitive in the last passage r^s

the verb, for

:

The apparent double not to be attributed to Cf. Ac. 22 1. Blass^ makes

20, etc.

^co^tjs t^ov is

merely possessive. between the usages in the various N. T. writers, but that is not to be pushed too far. In 2 Cor. 6 2 (LXX, Is. 49 8) we have kiriiKovca aov, but vraKovco uses the dative (Mt. 8 27) But we have kirriKpoGiVTo avrHbv ol Sea/jnoL (Ac. 16 25) in the sense of ixov is

:

careful distinction

:

:

:

hearken.

No

N.

efXTTPecov aTretXTjs Kai 4>6vov

T.,

but

vcrl) of smelling is

as Blass^ observes,

who

used with the genitive in the

(Ac. 9

refers to the

1) is

certainly analogous,

LXX

for parallels (Josh.

:

10:40, irav tixTTvtov fcojjs), for both genitive and accusative. Cf. Johannessohn, Der Gebr., p. 36. Thus ov fir/ ytm-qraL davarov (Jo. 8 52), but in Heb. 6 4 f we have the genitive and accusative :

:

.

right together, a matter hardly accidental, ^ yevaanhovs yevaaixevous deov prjua.

as in Jo. 2

:

9,

But

Trjs

Swpeas,

Blass'' consitlers the accusative here,

merely a colloquialism

in

harmony with the general

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 103.

^

Moiilton, Prol., p. 6G.

»

lb.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 101.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

508

tendency to retain the accusative tasting are Kopeadhres

(Mk.

8:4).

The verbs

(Matt. 5:6).

Thus

i]\j/aTo

An/'dw

Twv

l/jLaTLOJv

38)

:

:

30)

Kav dripiov diyri tov opovs (Heb. 12

can be

and often but

20),

:

tovtovs xopraaat aproip

and TpoaeXa^ovro

use only the accusative

ireLvao)

of touching

(Mk. 5

and

(Ac. 2:46)

Tpocjirjs

and

Other verbs of

(see 2 above).

(Ac. 27

Cf. also fxeTeXafxISavov

(Ac. 27:36).

Tpo4)rjs

rpoclirjs

briefly disposed of.

So

in the Gospels.

\pri\a<pa.bi

has only the

Perhaps the other verbs of taking hold and seizing may as well be mentioned, for it is less than a step from the idea of touch. Thus hbs aude^eraL (Lu. 16 13) rd hxdneva accusative (Ac. 17: 27). of

;

:

TTjs acoTrjpias

and

(Heb. 6:9); avreKa^ero

'laparjX TacSos avTov (Lu. 1

54)

:

Tim. 6:2); kTeka^eTO avTOV x^i-pos rod tv(J)\ov (Mk. 8:23),

ol rrjs evepyeaLas avTCkajj-^avoiievoL (1

(Mt. 14:31), and kirCKa^biievos rijs where the part taken hold of is indicated; eKpaTr}aev rrjs x^i-po^ avTTJs (Mt. 9 25), where the part is again in genitive, but the whole is in the accusative in Kpar-qaas tov 'Iwaptjv (Mt. 14 3) Tnaaas av~ TOP TT]s x^i-pbs (Ac. 3:7), where the whole is in the accusative and :

;

:

the part in the genitive.

"vulgar" word. the vernacular.

Blass^ notes that this last (Trtdfw)

well as aPTLkaix^apojxai. So txbixevbs

Mk.

8

:

is

a

But here, as usual, the N. T. is in harmony with The papyri ^ show exo/xat with the genitive as p.ovj'P.

Par. 51 (b.c. 160). Besides

23 (above) the double genitive (whole and part)

seen in Lu. 20: 20, I'm

eTriXd/Scoj'Tat

avTov \6yov

(cf.

may

be

also verse 26),

probably dependent on Xoyov. These naturally have the genitive, such as to desire, care for, neglect, have compassion, spare, bear with, aim after, obtain, remember, forget, enjoy, etc. 'EindviJLkco has the genitive in Ac. 20:33, apyvplov lp.aTi,afxov ovdepos, xp^^^'i-ov but the accusative probably in Mt. 5 28 (text uncertain, but LXX has accusative, Ex. 20 17). 'Opeyo/jLai also has the genitive,

though here avTov 4.

is

Verbs of Emotion.

tj

r)

:

:

as in Heb. 11 opkyeTat

and

:

16, KpdTTovos bpkyopTai.

kTrtOviiei

Cf.

1

Tim. 3

are used with the genitive.

The verbs

:

1,

where both

Cf. also bixapb-

numerous N. T. as in the older Greek. So firi afxeXec tov h aol xapt^Mciros (1 Tim. 4 14), pij) bXiycopei TratSetas Kvpiov (Heb. 12 5). But these three verbs may have the ablative. 'Apexoixat here is hold oneself back from.' Like the earlier Greek also is eTreixeXrjdr] avTov (Lu. 10 34) and nil Twv (3ocop fxeXet rw Oeci; (1 Cor. 9:9). Blass^ considers ov8ep fxepoL vfxoip (1

Th. 2:8).

and uniform.

Thus

of concern are fairly

apexbp.epoi. aXX-qXcop

(Col. 3

:

:

13) in the

:

'

:

TovTOjp Tc3 TaXXioopL efieXep (Ac. »

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 101.

2

Moulton,

CI. Rev.,

Dec,

18

:

17) the personal construction,

1901, p. 437.

»

Gr. of N. T, Gk., p. 104.

(IITOZEIS)

509

But already

in the Attic inscrip-

THE CASES as often in the classical Greek.

we have

tions (Meisterhans, p. 211)

So, too,

further

appears with the genitive in Jo. 10

Trept

with the dative. Consider

13, etc.

:

Tim. 5 8) and 'Iva 3:8). In Mt. 6 34 we have nepLthough some MSS. read rd eavTTJs. Once again take

Iblwv koL t-MXtara oiKeiccu ov wpovoel (1

rcDt'

Ka\cov epyo^v (Tit.

4>poi'T'i^(joaLu

pvriaet avTrjs,

Tov Idiov ovK ecf)€iaaTo (Ro. 8

In Mt. 18

kinntkkotxai.

:

27 tov 8ou\ov

is

:

:

:

These

32).

all

are in regular order.

more hkely dependent on

6 Kuptos

rather

Verbs of obtaining are illustrated by eXaxe tov dv/jLLaaau (Lu. 1 9), not mere " appearance," ^ though the accusative is elsewhere found in the N. T. as in Ac. 1 17 (cf.

than on

cT'Kayxvt-'ydeis.

:

:

frequency of the accusative). On the other hand Tvyxo-vo) always has the genitive in the N.T., as tov alQivos eKelvov ruxtti' (Lu. 20 35). But with eirtTvyxo-^^ we have eireTvxov eirayyekLuv (Heb. classic

:

and tovto ovk eveTvx^v (Ro. 11 7). Moulton {CI. Rev., p. 437, Dec, 1901) notes genitive and accusative with kTLTvxovTts In general TTJs 'Fiofxaiwu TToXtretas Kal tTnyaixiav, B.U. 113 (ii/A.D.). rememof Verbs the papyri confirm the N. T. use of these verbs. 8Ladr]Kr]s Thus fxvrjadrjuaL bering and forgetting call for little remark. 11 :33)

(Lu.

1

:

:

72), p.vr]ixovtveTt tov \6yov (Jo. 15

—

20).

:

M.LiJLvriaKOfj.ai

But

always

has the genitive and Cf. mid. and pass.) always has the accusative in the N. T. usually had ancient Greek whereas ave/jLvrjadr] to prjpa (Mk. 14 72), the genitive. With viropLiJLvrjaK'x} the usage is divided again, as the p.vr]nopevu usually.

avaixinvqaKoi (act.,

:

accusative

alone used in the active (Jo. 14

is

in the passive (deponent), as

Mk.

cf.

14

:

72 above).

itive, as <})L\o^€vias

once (Ph. 3

Cf Oxy. .

:

p.r)

P. IV, 744, 11

{^ in

classic idiom.

We once also have (KXeXrjade

(I/a.d.).

5).

:

:

Heb. 13:2 according to

and 12

(Heb. 12

TTJs TrapaK\r]
but the genitive

again has usually the gen2), but the accusative

einXavdaveade (Heb. 13

and

13)

'EwLXavdai'oiJ.aL

26),

:

tov prjuaTos (Lu. 22 :61;

vwep-vqadr]

Of verbs

of enjoying

we have only

N. T., used with the genitive, but only absolutely, with the instrumental, or with prepositions, kiadavonai appears only once (Lu. 9 45) and with accusative. Indeed, verbs of 5. Verbs of Sharing, Partaking and Filling. 'AiroXauw does not occur in the

kyu) (TOV ovaipriv (Phil. 20).

and neither

d7aXXtdco nor xaipco

is

:

sharing can be looked at as taking the partitive genitive.

with

ixtTtx^LV

we have

rpaTrefrjs

(verse 17, clearly ablative)

strumental by analogy of aapKos (Heb. 2

:

14), 1

(1

and

Cor. 10

xo-P'-ri-

(rvvKotvuveoi)

.

:

Thus

21), tK tov evos apTOV

(verse 30, associative^ inCf.

KeKoi.v6}vr}K€v

aluaros Kal

though elsewhere in the N. T. the associative Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 102.

::

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

510

instrumental occurs with persons.

As

cusative and instrumental. it

is

more doubtful

it

if

MeraSiSto/it

to

has only the ac-

and

/zeraXa/x/Jdi'co

Trpo(j\aiifiavoi

not ablative rather than genitive.

is

Cf. IX, (/), 7, for discussion.

The

partitive idea

divided be-

is

tween the genitive and the ablative.^ In the N. T. prepositions are chiefly used and with the ablative. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 102) finds in the partitive idea the explanation of the local and temporal use of the genitive, but not rightly. The true genitive is found with verbs of filling like kirXijady} ttoXls ttjs avyxv(^^ojs (Ac. 19 i]

29), irewXripooKaTe

rrjv 'lepovadXrjfj. ttJs 8t.daxvs vnchv

Tas vSpias vdaros (Jo. 2 aev a-yadup (Lu. 1

:

7),

(Ac. 5

:

wepLaaevovTaL dprwv (Lu. 15

In Latin words of

28), yeniaare 17), evkirXn]-

:

use the ablative or instrumental, as the Greek has the ablative with words of lacking (vcxTepovuTaL rrjs d6^r]s (Ro. 3 23). By analogy :

53).

filling {plenus, etc.)

:

therefore

we

rrjs oaiJLrjs

(Jo. 12

find :

k 3)

and the aljlative with Tr\r)p6w, as and yeixi^oo, as eykpiaev avTov tK tou

twXrjpudT]

e/c

(Rev.

irvpos

8:5). For the instrumental with the passive see Ro. 1 29, etc. Indeed the accusative is seen in Ph. 1 11 and Rev. 17 3 and some MSS. in Ac. 2 28. :

:

:

:

Verbs of Ruling. These probably have the true genitive, though verbs of excelling use the ablative. Thus in Mk. 10 42 6.

:

we have

three such verbs in one sentence,

Wpojv KaraKvpLevovaiv avrwv kol

Other examples are :

2

22 XB; elsewhere

:

eTrt),

pLeuo/Jiep vjslhp rrjs Trtcrrecos

2:6), TeTpaapxovpTo^

(2

:

12), ^actXeuei

-qye/jLovevoPTos rrjs

Cor.

1

:

r?js

MSS.

:

KvpLevoo

and

These verbs

3:1).

e^ovaLa^co,

Mt. 16 18 :

Verbs of Buying, Selling, Being Worthy fectly clear what the origin of this usage 7.

brivoLplov

with

avp,(f}copriaas

(Mt.

(Mt.

2uptas (Lu. 2 :2), kv-

distinct substantive-affinity like 'be ruler of,' etc.

ther Lu. 22 25 for

in Ac.

'louSatas

24), KaTadvpaarevovaLP hpoiP (Jas.

'Irovpaias (Lu.

ttjs

apxeiv tojv

KaTe^ovaia^ovcLV avToiV.

according to some

Tim. 2

12, aWePTelp apbpos (1

have a

ol fxeyaXoL avrCiv

avOviraTevoPTos

18

ol doKovvres

20

:

2)

may

all

See fur-

for Kanaxi'w.

of.

It is

is.

The

not peruse of

be noted, but

eK

in

Cf. also rjyopacrap k^ avTojp (Mt. b-qpaplov avpe4)copr](Tas. 27:7) with TpadrjpaL iroWov (Mt. 26:9). 'Ayopa^oj is used also with €P (Rev. 5:9). So again one may note eKTrjaaro x^pi-ov tK 18. Cf. Lu. 16 9, e/c tov pap.wpo) with IxLddov rrys abiKlas (Ac. 1 Cf. 5td with irepLTroieofxaL (Ac. 20:28). /jLLadov e^exvdrjaav (Ju. 11). These examples show that it was easy to go from the genitive to €^ and the ablative. Consider also oop-qaaTo Tcixrjs dpyvpiov (Ac. 7 16), dacraplov TrajXetrat (Mt. 10 29), roaobrov direSoade (Ac. 5:8), ^70-

verse 13

:

:

:

1

Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p. 340.

THE CASES pacrdr}T€

Tt/JiTJs

Cor.

oi4>dr] eTravo)

k

the use of

Mk.

In

20).

TrevTaKocriois

14: 5,

irpadrjvai k-Kavw drjvapicov

d5eX0ots (1 Cor. 15

in the Attic inscriptions

(Homeric Grammar, certainly possible.

with

6."

the adverb kwavo: has no effect on the case as

TpiaKoalojv,

by

(1

511

(lITi2:2EI2:)

with

p. 109) considers this

6).

:

is

shown

Blass^ compares

And Monro

TpadijuaL.

the ablative, which

But on the other hand the undoubted

is

genitive

suggests the idea of exchange or barter as the true ori-

a^Looj

gin and thus a real genitive. buying and selling easily fall

is not so used itself, but with the notion of worth. Thus iva vfids d^icbcTT/ rfjs KKrjaeoJS (2 Th. 1 11), KaTa^Lo^drjpac rrjs iSaaiXelas Tim. Th. Cf. also 1 5 1:5). 17; Heb. 3:3; 10 29. On the (2 whole one is inclined to this explanation of the usage and to treat

'AXXaaaoj

in

:

:

:

Cf Rev. 6 6 for the genitive of price without it as a true genitive. a verb. But the use of a-iro with verbs of buying and selling goes back in single instances to the Attic time (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 91). So (TTect)avoi' didovTes awo irevT-qKovra xp^'^^v, Inscr. of Magn., 16, 29. 8. Verbs of Accusing and Condemning. Blass^ observes that the old Greek usage of the genitive of the thing has well-nigh vanished in the N. T. We do have eyKaXeladai araaeojs (Ac. 19 40), but irepl with the genitive is the usual construction in the N. T. both with e7mXeco (Ac. 23 29), Kpivw (Ac. 23 6), and even Karrjyopkw (Ac. 24 13). However, in the case of KaTT^yopeco we do find oov in Lu. 23 14 and Ac. 25 11, but in each instance the genitive seems to be due to attraction to the case of the suppressed antecedent TovTOiv. Cf. Ac. 24 13 for irepl. Still the point is not absolutely certain and Siv could be due to Kar-qyopkoi. At any rate KaTrjyopeoo is also used with the genitive of the person as in ha Karrjyopifaoiaiv avTov (Mt. 12 Cf. also Mk. 15 3 where we have 10). :

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

and accusative,

genitive p. 235) CLKovoi,

9.

notes that

D

:

Karrjyopovu avrov iroWa.

Moulton

(Prol.,

often has accusative with Karriyopeoo as with

Kpareoo.

Genitive

Due

to

Prepositions in Composition.

Some verbs

have the genitive because of the preposition in composition which gives a distinct change in idea to the verb. The preposition is often repeated with the noun. As a matter of fact the only^ preposition that seems to figure thus in the N. T. is /card which is used with a number of verbs with the genitive.'* Not all the Kara com1

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

^

lb., p. 104.

*

Jann.

(Hi.st.

p. 105.

Uv

cites Moistorh., Att. Inschr., p. 173. ^

Gk. Gr.,

tween prep, and verb

i).

Bliiss,

341) coiinnciits

in the later

Gk.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. lOG.

on the blending

of

meaning be-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

512

pounds use the

and note as

Cf. the accusative case

genitive.

N. T.

trations of the accusative in the

illus-

Karayuivi^oiJLaL, Kara^pa^evca,

It may be that some of the verbs already instanced as using the genitive may owe it to Kara in composition, like KaTiryopeco (Mt. 12: 10). But the point seems to be reasonably plain as to KaTeyeXwp avTov (Mt. 9 24), eav KaraKaraSiKa^oj, KaraKpipo), KaTacro4>'L^oiJ.aL.

:

yivoocrKTu

rjfxcov

KaraXaXetre

Tim. 5

(Jas.

and note verse

20,

though

21),

(Mk. 14

:

3)

(Mt. 27

11), aov KaranaprvpovaLV

:

12

:

KaTacrTprjULaacoaiv

13),

:

13),

:

13),

Xpiarov

tov

(Heb. 12 2), Karex^ev avTOV but in Mt. 26 7 the text of W. H. has

11), aiaxvvn^ KaTa4)povr]aas

:

TTJs Ke4>aXris

4

Cor.

(2

rip,o)v

:

Kapbla), KaraKavxaTai eXeos Kplaeojs (Jas. 2

ak'K'q'Koov

KaTevapKr](ja

exi

Kapbla (1 Jo. 3

might go with

rinGiv

(1

ij

;

with genitive as some

:

:

MSS.

in

Mk.

A

10. Attraction of the Relative.

word only

is

needed about

the attraction of the relative, a matter treated properly in the

chapter on Pronouns, which see. Here it may only be noted that the genitive (as of other oblique cases) of the relative sometimes

appears with a verb when the case is due, not to the verb, but to the antecedent. Thus we note Tepl tclvtcop cjv eirolrjaev (Lu. 3: 19),

an idiom common

in Luke,

but rare elsewhere, as aarepoov

ovs

eUes (Rev. 1:20). (j)

The Genitive of the

an instance

This

Infinitive.

of the genitive of substantives as

aspect of the infinitive that

is

The

in the case.

is

more properly

the substantival

it is

full

the matter belongs to the chapter on Verbal Nouns.

simply be remarked that the

infinitive

with tov

ancient Greek, though nothing hke so as the translation of the

Hebrew

infinitive is

Hebrew

is

common

discussion of

Here

it

LXX

as in the

infinitive construct.

not an exact analogy as

may

it

not unknown to

But the

does not have the

But Thucydidcs had already sho^^^l a fondness for this idiom which is thoroughly Greek. As an example from the LXX article.^

take TOV k^ekkaOaL (Dan. 6

(Mt. 13

aTeipojp TOV airelpeLv

infinitive

with tov

is

14).

:

:

3).

For the N. T. note

The

e^rjXdev 6

substantival nature of this

well sho'^\^l in Kaipos tov dp^aaOaL (1 Pet. 4

:

17).

But in general tov with the infinitive has as wide an extension of meaning in the vernacular kolpt] as the genitive absolute.^ The details come later. (k) The Genitive Absolute. It may indeed be ablative absolute as Farrar^ holds, following the analogy of the Latin.

But, as Giles

**

1

C. and

2

Moulton,

observes, the Latin absolute

S., Sel.

from

tlie

Prol., p. 216.

LXX,

p. 59.

» *

is

very likely instru-

Gk. Synt., Man., etc.,

p. 76. p.

339

f.

THE CASES

513

(nTfiZEIs)

mental or locative. The various languages

however, having a turn in one Cf. dative in Anglo-Saxon. Since the Sandiffer greatly,

in the use of the absolute cases, nearly all

language or another.

and locative (usual Greek genitive absolute a true

skrit uses genitive as well as instrumental

construction), Giles considers the

In this he

genitive.

is

perhaps correct.

Gr., p. 523) discusses the genitive

genitive and ablative.

But Brugmann

{Griech.

absolute separately from both

Cf.Moulton,C^.72e?;., 1901, p. 437. Mullach^

observes that the genitive absolute

a mark of the higher style

is

and was not much used in the vernacular. Jebb ^ remarks that in the modern Greek the genitive absolute is more commonly paraphrased in harmony with the general disuse of the participle. However, in the vernacular kolvt) "the rapid extension of the genitive absolute is a very obvious feature,"^ and the N. T. is in line with the papyri on this point also as in most other matters of grammar. Moulton observes further that "in the papyri it may often be seen forming a string of statements, without a finite verb for several lines," which is rather more than can be said of the

N. T.

It naturally occurs in

the N. T. chiefly in the historical Abbott 4 has felt that Mark uses the genitive absolute "somewhat monotonously to introduce the circumstances of a new narrative," and he finds it common in Matthew in temporal books.

John, he observes, has the construction nowhere in recording Christ's words, though he elsewhere'^ "employs it with clauses.

more elasticity of meaning than is found in the Triple Tradition." The LXX shows many examples of the genitive absolute and with abundant freedom also.*^ The normal usage in the older Greek is to have a genitive absolute when a participle occurs with a noun that

disconnected from the rest of the sentence as in avaxo^pwav(Mt. 2 13). Cf. 2 Cor. 2 12. But the older Greek did not always conform to this norm, and variations appear is

Tcov avTciv

:

:

also in the N. T. Thus sometimes the participle is found alone as in tkdbvTwv (Mt. 17: 14) and dirovros (17: 26), a very frequent idiom in the papyri.' Cf. avayvc^adhruv B.U. 925 (iii/A.D.?),

8r]\wehTos B.U. 970 (ii/A.D.). of the old e^ov.^

genitive absolute occurs

pronoun

is

The papyri

show e^ovros instead Then again the a matter of fact the noun or also

Cf. ovK e^ouTos P.O. 275 (a.d. 66).

when

as

not absolute and the participle might have merely

1

Gr., p. 357.

2

V. and D., Handb.,

3

Moulton,

*

Joh. Gr., p. 83.

p.

Prol., p. 74.

334.

6

lb., p. 84.

«

C. and

'

Moulton,

s

ib.

S., p.

.'58;

Thack., p. 24.

Trol., p. 74.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

514

The

agreed in case with the word in question.

simplest example

the repetition of the pronoun in the same case as elaeXOoPTos

is

avTov

eis

oIkov

an example 18

:

o'l

(Mk. 9

avrov

idadrjTai

like

:

25), or radra 5e avrov epdv/jLTjOevTos

usage more

But note

common

—

where

/xe is

solute

when the nominative

implied with

—

is

(Mt.

aurcS

e4>a.pr]

1

20),

:

a

apparently in the N. T. than in the papyri.

KipSvPvaavTOS ds daXaaa-ap

txov

But more noticeable

28).

exopros de auroO airodovpai kKeXevcrev avTov (Mt.

firi

ecroiaep,

present as in

is

B.U. 423

One even notes the

eaitxrep.

(ii/A.D.),

genitive ab-

iiprjarevdeia-qs rrjs iJ.t]Tp6s

Moulton^ notes "a violent use" of the genitive absolute in Heb. 8 9 from the LXX, where we have h rjiJLepa kTn\a^op.kpov p.ov. Here the participle is treated almost hke the infinitive (as a substantive). Moulton regards it as due to the original Hebrew, and Westcott {in loco) cites h r]p.kpa kvTeikaixepov aov avru) (Baruch 2 28). See further under PartiavTov MapLas

evpedr]

(Mt.

1

:

18).

:

:

ciples.

The Ablative ("Ablatival Genitive") Case (-n d<j)aip€TiKf| TTTwo-is). The treatment of this case will be briefer, for it never had IX.

the manifold development of the Greek genitive.

In the original

speech the genitive and ablative had no distinctive endings save in the o

stems in the singular.^

See chapter VII,

ii, (a),

for discus-

sion of form. (a)

The Name. But

Ca?sar.^

the

Besides cKpaLpenKr]

name

it is

ablativus

also called

is

credited to Juhus

The name

TraTpLKrj.

is

quite appropriate. (6)

The Meaning.

The

ablative

then the whence '

is

Some

the case of origin, source, separation or departure.

grammars use the expression "ablatival that the case

is

That

case,

of the

That imphes

genitive."

after all a kind of genitive.

'

is

only true as

and causes some confusion. In Greek the ablative is not a live case in form, but in sense it is. (c) Rare with Substantives. It is possible (though not to form, not as to sense,

probably correct) to regard

dLKatoavpr] deov

(Ro.

6eov being the source of the righteousness.

following examples:

rrjp

'lovdaiov re Kal "EXXtjpos

5

14).

:

eK^aaiP

rrys apaaTpo
(Ro. 10

:

1

:

17) as ablative,

More

likely are the

(Heb. 13

:

7), diaaroXi]

12), StaKptats koXov kul KaKov

See Monro, Homeric Grammar,

p. 146.

In 2 Pet.

1

:

(Heb.

20 we

have a clear case of the ablative in the predicate after the copula ylperai. Here extXuo-ecos ('disclosure') is in the ablative. Cf. also Tov deov in 2 Cor. 4 1

Prol., p. 74.

2

Delbnick, Vergl.

:

7.

One may note

S>Tit., I, p. 193.

also eyepero

^

ypoiixris

(Ac. 20

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 71.

:

:

THE CASES 3) as

probably

In Heb. 12

parallel.

515

(nTftSEIs)

\vTrrjs may be Doubtful also are But we have a clear abla-

11 x^pSs

:

and

considered either true genitives or ablatives.

and

vTTOffToKrjs

Heb. 10

Trto-rews in

tive in Ac. 20

:

37 kapos

the obvious fact that

39.

:

de KXavdfxds eyevero TvavTWV.

airo

and

t/c

Moulton^ notes

(with abl.) are freely used for the

Delbriick^ thinks the genitive of material

old "partitive genitive."

tive sense.

Cf. viii, (/), 8, for the true genitives in the partiThis partitive gen. may be illustrated by tv tovtuv

(Mt. 6

which

originally abl.

29)

:

In Jo. 3

k

is

to be compared with

25 the use of

:

makes

avrwv (Mt. 10

ev k^

clear the ablative, eykv^To

:

29).

^-qTr^aLs

by

Blass^ rather needlessly explains this usage

TuiP iJLadr{Tibp.

appeal to the

e/c

Hebrew

The matter may be

Note

"p.

also

further illustrated

ttSs

by

musv (Lu. 14

e^

tLs avrcov

:

33).

(Lu. 7 42)

and

:

Indeed with ris, as Blass* observes, the N. T. nearly always uses e^ in such examples. He finds the oppoThus TLPes tcop ypannarecop (Mt. 12 site true of TLS save in John. Tis e^

vijloop

(Mt. 6

27).

:

:

but TLPes e| avTUP (Lu. 11 15. Cf. Jo. 6 64). But awo is also found with ris (Mt. 27: 21). One may note also tIs h vjxiv (Jas. 5 13). A classical but curious use of this idiom, like the parti38),

:

:

:

tive genitive (already noted),

explanation

(Ac. 21

fiaOrjTiCP

(Jo. 16

17),

:

as the subject or object.

:

16)

may

be compared with

as

:

aov irepLTraTovpTas (2 Jo. 4).

aWovs

elirav :

The

avvrjKdop koL twp

U

33).

tup

fxadr^rup

Cf. Rev. 11

an example of the use as object, In Ac. 15

e^ avTcop.

t^

Cf. especially €k toop r'eKPWP

avTcop aTOKTepe^re, e^ avTOiP ixaartyijiaeTe.

pression Tims

Thus

Tov 6x\ov avpe^l^aaap (Ac. 19

e/c

Take Mt. 23 34

9.

is

of course, in the ellipsis.

lies,

:

we have

2

Brugmann

the

full ex-

{Griech. Gr., p. 397)

notes the syncretism between the ablative and the genitive with Horn. Gr., p.

See a like confusion in the predicate (Monro, 148). W. Havers (Indog. Forsch., XXXI, Bd. 1,

Heft

"on the sphtting

the superlative. 1912)

3,

gests that the partitive genitive

of the genitive in

was

Greek" sugand

originally independent

adverbial. (d)

large

The Ablative with (cf.

instance,

a

eiriaTrjtirjs Kepos,

full list in

aird rod ai/jLaTos

Cf. also k\tvdepa awo tov »

Prol., p. 72.

2

VtTKl. Synt.,

''

I, p.

401.

Cf. also I,

The

MO.

In Plato

Kuhner-Gerth^ for N. T. we find with 26), a clear ablative.

eXevdepos alSovs, l)ut sec

the ancient writers.

preposition Kadapds

The number is not we have, for

Adjectives.

the Genitive with Adjectives).

pofiov

Thus

in the

(Ac. 20

:

(Ro. 7: 3) and eXeWepos

Monro, Horn.

e/c

iraPTcop (I

Gr., p. 109.

• lb. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97. adjs. with a- privativo aro ivf^anliMl as usually with abl.

p.

'

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

516 Cor. 9

But the

19).

:

ablative occurs without prepositions.

So

probably best to regard the verbal adjectives as having the ablative in these examples: aya-n-qroi deov (Ro. 1 7), yepvriTo7s yvpaiKoov (Mt. 11 11), didaKTol deov (Jo. Twv

^epoL

(Eph. 2

dLadrjKcov

It is

12).

:

:

:

6 :45), didaKTols

One may

1:6).

25

34),

:

The

Cor. 2

TTvevfjLaTos (1

:

13), 'KXrjToi 'Irjaov XpLCTTOV

but on the whole

to be regarded as a true genitive.

it is

ablative with adjectives with a- privative have "plentiful

illustrations

from papyri."

For instance aKluowos waPTos klp8vpov ajSorjd-qTos B.U. 970

^

Tb. P. 105

(iii/B.c),

(ii/A.D.).

In Mt. 27:24 we find

airaPTas euepyealas

rrjs els

—

a9S)6s dp.L

Cf. also aaTiXop awo tov Koa/dou (Jas.

airo.

1

tov aliiaros with

cltto

Thus we

27).

:

see the ablative in dK-araTrdo-rous d/xaprtas (2 Pet. 2 TTjplcop (1

5

Cor. 6

:

Cor. 9

2), avojxos deov (1

13), airelpaaTos KaKWP (Jas. 1

:

(Ro.

also suggest here evXoyrjfxhoL rod irarpos (Mt.

:

easily

14), dra^tos KpL-

:

21), HireLpos \6yov

(Heh.

13).

:

Moreover, the ablative after the comparative is very common N. T., apparently more so than in the papyri. Let a few examples suffice: laxvporepos p.ov (Mt. 3 11), piKporepop bv ttclptciiv Tccv (TTrepiJLaTCjOP (Mk. 4:31), TrXetofas tojp irpo^TWP (Mt. 21:36), in the

:

jr\e7op

Trjs

rpocprjs

/lelfcov

TOV

Kvplov

1 is

Tim. 5

:

x'7P
napTvpiap

A"?

12 13

:

23),

The Latin eXaTTOp eTojp

fxel^co

tov 'Icoapov,

(Mt. 12

TOprjpoTepa eavrov

Cf. Jo. 21

16).

:

Here the ablative idea

8.

very plain.

Cf.

(Lu. (Jo.

:

15;

Cor. 10

1

45),

:

:

22;

of difference or distinction

also uses the ablative in this sense. e^r]K0PTa it is

Tim. 5:9).

(1

not clear whether

In Jo. 5

it is

:

36,

the witness

borne by John or to him. In Ac. 4 19 deov after is genitive, not ablative, due to aKoveip. The superlative may likewise have the ablative as in TvpOnos p.ov (Jo. 1 15), a usage found in the papyri.2 Abbott^ rather needlessly endeavours to explain irpcoTos as a substantive meaning 'chief,' hke roS TrpdoToi ttjs prjaov (Ac. 28: Note also Tola earlp epToXi] TpdcTr] iraPTWP (Mk. 12 28) where 7). i]

:

:

:

ttolptcop is

TTOLPTccp (1

neuter plural (a possible partitive genitive). Cor. 15:

8).

The

positive irepiaabs

ablative, as to irepiaaop TovTUP (Mt. 5

verb

TepLaaevca

and the ablative

:

wXe'top

37). tcop

may

— ^apcaalup

In Eph. 3:8, epol tQ e\axi-
The Ablative with N. T.

Thus

»

Moulton,

*

lb.,

»

Joh. Gr., p. 90.

Prepositions.

aptv \6yov (1 Pet.

Prol., pp. 74, 235; CI.

1901, p. 437,

It

aylcop,

is

very

3:1), aTepapTL

Rev., 1904, p. 152 f. L.P. W (11/111 A.D.).

(TOV TTpUITOS dlML,

even have the

Cf. irXeXop with the

20).

in the

Cf. eaxaTOP

(Mt. 5

the com-

common

ttclptoop

(Ac.

THE CASES 3

:

16), a7r6

Uaros (Mk.

wpas (Mt. 9

rrjs

1

:

oktas (Mt. 10

(Lu. 23: 26),

(Mt. 19 :

:

19),

irapeKTOS

1),

cf.

:

6),

k

rod

hros in same verse), :

43), e^co

rrj?

(Rcv. 14 20), oTViaBev rov 'Ir/croO possibly o^/^e aa^^aruv (Mt. 28: :

\6yov

-iroppeias

(Mt. 5:32),

tov ttXoIov (Ac. 27

ttXtiv

55), Trpos r^s

(2 Cor. 5

Trdi'Tcoi'

:

26;

:

70), tTre/cetm Ba/SuXcof^os (Ac. 7

(Mt. 4:

(Mt. 2:4),

U

Trao-xa (Jo.

:

14), i^o^dev rijs TroXecos

ottio-co ixov

1), Trap' avToov

ToO 'lopdavov

(Mt. 26

6xkov (Lu. 22

'6.Ttp

10), kros avrov (Mt. 23

•inirpoadev iravTO^v :

22),

:

517

(nTflSEIs)

vfJierepas

15, true genitive

:

Trepai'

22), irpo rod

aoiTrjpias (Ac. 27 34), vrep according to some), vwepavu :

(Heb. 9:5), virepeKeiva vp.(hv (2 Cor. 10 16), vwepeKTepLaaov uv (Eph. 3 :20), vwd Kvpiov (Mt. 1:22), i/TroKdrco Tu>v iro8ccv (Mk. aa^^aTwv 6:11), xwpis TrapajSoXrjs (Mt. 13 34). In the case of o^j/e (Mt. 28 1) oi^e means 'late from' (Moulton, Prol, p. 72). Cf. dxpirepou ti]s copas Tb. P. 230 o4/^ TTjs copas. Par. P. 35, 37 (ii/B.c), :

avTTjs

:

:

T. Gk., oi/'e toutwv in Philostratus (Blass, Gr. of N. Cf. Blass-Debrunner, p. 101, for still other examples in See also ner oKl-yov tovtuv in Xen., Hellen., I, 1, 2. late Greek. The list of such adverbs was growing constantly. This is a con-

(ii/B.c.)

and

p. 312).

patent in all with the noAn interesting example of the ablative is ttjv tion of separation. 21). In virep, irpo, Trpos it is the comcLTTo aov eirayye\lav (Ac. 23 parative idea that is involved and that implies separation. Hence it seems Ukely that viro is to be construed also with the

siderable

list,

but the ablative idea

is

:

ablative rather than the genitive, though this point is debatable. "In both Greek and Latin the ablative expresses the agent as the source of the action, almost invariably with prepositions"

(Buckland Green, Notes on Greek and Latin Syntax, p. 32). There For the ablative with prepositions in Cypriis some truth here. See chapter on Prepositions. A otic see Meister, Bd. II, p. 295. number of adverbs are themselves in the ablative case, like KaXcos, ovTOis (all

(/)

adverbs in

-cos),

avo^, etc.

The Ablative with Verbs. The

ablative

is

not used so

frequently with verbs as the accusative, genitive or dative, yet it is by no means uncommon. Of course, wherever airo

Ac. 5

:

2),

k

(cf.

Mk.

1

:

10)

and

irapa

(Mt. 2

:

and (cf.

4) are used with the

ablative after a verb, these examples ^ are not considered, but they throw light on the use of the same case without the preposition. The ablative is so conunon 'Atto and €K have only the ablative.

with compound verbs like ix^io-ttjm^ dTroa-repeco, etc., that no effort verbs. There is made to separate the simple from the compound 1

Indeed, as Winer (W.-Th.,

employed.

p. 197)

remarks, the prep,

is

most frequently

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

518

NEW TESTAMENT

are examples where the ablative seems to be due purely to the preposition, as

ttjs xo-Pi-tos

2 Pet. 3

:

But

the verb

is

17).

in

due to the

e^eireaare (Gal. 5

many

with verbs.

4)

cf

;

same word

.

in

effect of the preposition.

Verbs of Departure mid Removal.

1.

:

other instances the ablative idea in

Take, for instance,

This

is

the simplest ablative

ovk d4)laTa.To rod iepov (Lu. 2

:

37)

where the ablative idea is perfectly plain. So also cnroaTriaovTai TLves TTJs 7ri(7T€cos (1 Tim. 4:1). The predicate ablative of source in 2 Pet. 1 20 {eirLXvcrews) was noticed under the discussion of substantives. As a rule dro, k or irapa will be found with the mere idea of departure. So x<^ptfco awo (1 Cor. 7 10). In Lu. 7 6 airexoi has awo, but J>{D have merely the ablative. Naturally verbs meaning to free from, to separate, to deprive of, to hinder from, etc., use the ablative. 'EXevdepooo always has airo :

:

:

(Ro. 6 18), as Kadapl^co :

(Ac. 16

16

4.

:

(Eph. 4 (Ac.

:

18), aTTicTTepr^nkvLov

13

:

rrjs

aXrjdelas (1

12), Kadaipe7a9at.

19:27),^ e/cparoOiro Tov

ewiyuciouaL

p.rf

avTovs TOV jSouXij/xaros (Ac. 27 :43).

(Lu. 13

:

16), Xouco

(Mt. 6

Moulton^

ancient Greek.

a0€Xe L.Pb. (ii/B.c),

note here again

2 Pet. 3

:

17.

Cf.

finds

:

13),

CLTTO

a63^(t)

5), airoKeKvaaL

Cf. Lu. 10:42,

to

avTrjs.

This

good prose

in the

Thus

tovtc^v

UwKav O.P. 237

:

avr'qs

(Lu. 24:16), eKcoXvaev

One

(ii/A.D.).

with the ablative in Gal. 5

(Lu. 6

/ccoXvco airo

:

ixeyakeioT-qTos

also in the papyri.

it

a
Tim. 6 ttjs

unknown

use of the mere ablative was not

may

a-n-d

14), pboixai airo

:

aadepeias aov (Lu.

TTJs

:

Cf. also iiedlaTr}p.L k in Lu. 9) and k (Ro. 7 :24). But we have the ablative alone in a.TrriWoTpLuifj.evoL ttjs f coiJs

(Ro. 5

airo

airo (1 Jo. 1:7), Xuco

33), XvTpooj airo (Tit. 2

:

:

4 and

29).

So one may interpret oh ^pabvvei Kvptos TTjj e7ra77eXias (2 Pet. 3:9), the marginal reading in W. H. 1) irkiravTaL dyuaprtas, and cnrkx^adaL elScdXoOvTcov (Ac. 15 (1 Pet. 4 28; cf. also 15 20; 1 Tim. 4 3; 1 Pet. 2:11), though dro also is used with kvkxopai (1 Th. 4 3; 5 22). One can only repeat that these divisions are purely arbitrary and merely for convenience. For airb with ava-Kahoixai and KaTairavoo see Rev. 14 13; Heb. 4:4, 10. 2.

Verbs of Ceasing, Abstaining.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

3.

TLves

Tai

Verbs of Missing, Lacking, Despairing. Thus we note uv aaTOxwavTes (1 Tim. 1:6), XetTrerat cro0tas (Jas. 1:5), vcTepovv(Ro. 3

Trjs do^rjs

(Ac. 17:25),

avajKaloov vcJTepetv

ton,

CI

:

23), oacov XPV^^'- (Lu. 11:8),

k^airoprjdfjuaL rjpas Kal

L.Pb. (ii/B.c),

Rev., p. 437,

Dec,

tov

^fjv

ir poadeo/jievos

(2 Cor. 1:8).

tC^v deovTCxiP eyXiirelv {ib.).

1901.

1

An

*

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 437.

"impossible" reading to Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

tlvos

Cf. twu

p. 106.

Moul-

THE CASES 4.

519

(nTfiSEIs)

Verbs of Differing, Excelling. Here the comparative idea is We observe ttoWojv oTpovdluiv 8La4>ep(Te vfiels (Mt. 10 31),

dominant.

:

vweplSaWovaav

TTiv

iavrCbv

(Ph. 2 :3),

ypuaeo^s ayairrfv

rrjs

(Eph. 3

v(JTepr]KkvaL tcou virepXiav

:

VTrepexopras

19),

airoaToKwv (2 Cor. 11:5;

use of varepeco in sense of lack above.

Here the comparative uppermost. 5. Verbs of Asking and Hearing. These may also use the ablative. This is the usual construction with 6eo^tai, especially in Luke, as bkoiial aov (Lu. 8 28). The person is in the ablative, but the thing will be in the accusative, as bkoixai be to (xri -rrapwv dapprjaai (2 cf.

idea of varepos

is

:

Cor. 10

:

2).

So also note and wapa (Jo.

fju

riKovaare pov (Ac.

1:4), but both airo

and k (2 Cor. 12 6) occur. 6. Verbs with the Partitive Idea. Here a sharp difference exists between the accusative which presents the whole and the genitive or the ablative which accents a part. Thus in Rev. 2 17 we have 86}(Too avT<2 Tov jxavva where the point lies in the idea of "some" of the manna, but B reads to and K k tov. In the same verse note the accusative bcoau avTcg \f/r]4)ov \evKT]i>. When the whole is expressed in the N. T. the accusative is used. Thus 4>ayei:u dboAbOvTo. (Rev. 2 14), but kaditL airo twv i^txtw (Mt. 15 27) and k tov apTov iadteTco (1 Cor. 11 28). Thus also irivcou olvov (Lu. 7 33), but (Lu. 22

:

71)

1

:

40),

:

:

:

:

:

Trfere e^

:

avTov (Mt. 26

:

27), 6s av

also kvejKaTe airo twv oxJ/apLou (Jo. 21 OLVOV 'AttlkoL, olvov "EXXrjj/es

Cf.

CLTTO

k

irlxi :

— eipayov

TOV Kapwov bco(TOvaLV (Lu. 20

tov vbaTos (Jo. 4

14).

Cf.

Phrynichus says:

einov

10).

:

'

Kpecos :

Attlko'l, Kpeas

"EWrjves.

10), tVa Xa/Sjj dTro tcov Kapircbv

(Mk. 12 2). Cf. also 1 Jo. 4 13. Cf. Mt. 28 1; Ac. 21 16. See Moulton, Introduction to the Study of N. T. Gk., p. 172, where the "partitive gen." is shown to be often ablative in idea. In modern Greek aro is the regular construction for the partitive sense, as 5aj(re pov airo tovto, 'give me some of that' (Moulton, Prol., p. 245). Prepositions airo and k are thus uniformly used in the N. T. with this construction of the part (clearly ablative therefore) save in Rev. 2 17 above and in irpoaeXafSovTo Tpo4>r]s (Ac. 27:36). In this last example the MSS. vary a good deal. :

:

:

:

:

MeToXafi^dvo} (see

(Ac. 2 :46). of

3)

(i),

may be

abl. or gen. in ptTtkap^avov

Tpo
Blass^ notes that only Luke, Paul and the author

Hebrews, the more literary writers

ablative (gen.) with neTaXap^avoo

Ro. 9

:

16;

Hob. 12

:

11

may

in the N. T., use the and rpoaXap^avco. Examples like

be regarded as either ablative or

genitive. 7.

Attraction of the Relative. >

Thus

k

tov vbaros ov eyoj

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 100.

bdoau)

avTi^ (Jo.

4

26:22).

Cf. Pronouns.

(a)

and

:

wv

14), ov8ep e/cros Xeyajv

The Locative

X.

re ol irpoiprJTaL tXaXriaav (Ac.

("Locatival Dative") Case (tjtottikti irTwais).

The Name Locative.

It is derived

from the Latin

locus^

a ''grammatical neologism," but is modelled after vocative. Delbriick^ prefers "local" to locative and uses it. It is indeed

is

Still

a

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

520

local case.

It is

worth noticing that

in the Thessalian dialect

the old genitive had this locative ending^ as did the Arkadian''

though this -ot may have come from -oto. The Latin grammarians took this I for the dative.^ We have remnants of the ending in English here, there, where. The modern grammars genalso,

erally recognise the distinction in the three cases (locative, instru-

mental and dative), which have usually identical endings, though Blass^ is correct in saying that it is not always possible to decide the case. However that uncertainty exists but seldom. Jannaris'' makes four cases, counting the associative as a separate case.

Compare (6)

the blending in the Latin.

The Significance of the Locative.

simplest of cases in

Whitney^

finds

sense,

etymological idea.

It

indeed the

is

It is the in case as

in the Sanskrit. It is location, a point within determined by the context, not by the case itself. is the main determining factor in the resultant

it

limits, the limits

The word

its

itself

and each example has

its

own atmosphere. There is indeed in, we come to the

variation in the resultant idea. Hence, besides ideas of on,

This development was not

amid, among, by, with.

at,

only in the early Greek ^ but in the of the locative without in the later Greek.

h

still

earUer Sanskrit.

much more common

is

and the accusative.

case that

it is

As

to kv

Thus we may compare :

vbari

13),

adds so

it

not surprising to find

as the locative, instrumental

(Mt. 14

The use

Homer than

In the modern Greek vernacular indeed the

locative disappears along with the instrumental ets

in

it

^aTTTL^u)

all

used the same endings. 21 8) with kv TrXotco

rfkdov (Jo.

(Lu. 3

to the locative

so frequently used, especially

and dative

tc3 irXoLaplco

and dative before

little

:

with

16)

:

/SaTrrifco

ev

v5aTL

6:40) with h rfj ecrx^TV Vf^^PVThe tendency in the older Greek w^as constantly (Jo. 6 44). towards the use of h, though the mere locative survived, es(Mt. 3

:

11),

TTj

eaxo-Trj

ruikpa (Jo.

:

Riem.

et Goelzer, Synt., p. 196.

1

Cf.

2

Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p.

182

f .,

following Gaedicke.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 109. Hist, of Gk. Gr., p. 342.

«

3

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., p. 307.

»

Sans. Gr., p. 101.

*

Hoffmann, Gr. Dial., Bd. I, p. 303. Riem. et Goelzer, Synt., p. 197.

»

Giles,

^

Man.,

etc., p.

329

f.

THE CASES (nTBSEIs)

521

some constructions. In Mt. 13 52 MSS. vary between the mere locative rfj ^aaCKda. and kv with locative and ets with accusative. This was probably the original locative. Place of (c) Place. rest was put in the locative without a preposition. As already indicated, this usage abounds in Horner.^ Some of these distinctively locative forms persisted in the Greek as in the Latin. Thus pecially in

o'Lkol,

'laOjj.o'i,

:

MapaOcopi,

Brugmann

(ai).

'

kdrjvxjcn,

QvpaaL,

hunii,

(Griech. Gr., p. 226) thinks that

Corinthi,

Romae

xo-l^o-l is

dative.

Indeed the locative forms and the dative forms used as locative, after the blending of the three case-forms into one,

Pindar side by

The

side.^

orators

up

and

.

oIkco)

But the

.

rule in Attic literary prose

ev oIkcc (1

(Jo. 11

:

20).

h

Thus

preposition with the locative of place.

3:1),

still

But observe

irepi is

/xkcrc^

to use a

Th.

h

oIkui

too

30), where used with the verb in

XyaTOLs irepureaev (Lu. 10

"among" and

is

is

'Ad-qpais (1

Cor. 11 :34)='at home' and usually

the resultant idea

occur in

Demosthenes n€aoL = kv

The ^olic^ has

use the mere locative frequently.^ (cf oUoL

to the time of

:

composition, but none the less it is the locative. Blass^ indeed remarks that the "local dative" does not occur in the N. T. He means the pure locative of place without a preposition, not considering the adverb kvkXco (Mk. 3 :34), and possibly xo-P-ai (Jo. 18 6). We have indeed erepa 68co eKJSoKovaa (Jas. 2 25), possibly instrumental. Cf. the figurative usage in 2 Pet. 2 15, etc. It is indeed a very short step to the figurative usage, iropeveadai rats :

:

:

65oTs avTcbv (Ac.

14

16), pride rots WecrLV TrepiTarelv (Ac.

:

aroLxovaiv rots 'ixvecnv (Ro. 4

:

12).

think that

I

(Jo. 21

locative also in

tc3

irXoiaplcci rjXdov

3

Tea

XovTpco tov vdaTos

16), Kadapiaas

:

irape8pevovTes (1

19 it

:

Cor. 9

:

13).

:

we have

8), vbaTi

(Eph. 5

:

:

Hence

8).

:

21),

^aTri^oj (Lu.

26), toj OvaLaaTrjplco

Cf. also eTeOrjKav avTOV

12), advvaTos tols Tcoalv (Ac. 14

21

the pure

Trj

it is

Ke^aXfj (Jo.

overstating

to assert that the locative of place without prepositions has

entirely disappeared

from the N. T.

comparison with guistic development.

Homer

in

1

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 100.

3

Man., etc., Main, Loc. Expr.

«

Mcister, Dialcc, Bd.

«

CI. Rev., 1904, p. 153.

Giles,

(iv/A.D.).

The scarcity of this usage harmony with the lin-

in perfect

Moulton^ indeed

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 403; K.-G., 2

is

finds the locative of place

Cf. also Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt., I,

I,

p. 221;

p. 441.

p. 330.

in the Attic Orators (1892), p. 231. II, p. 193.

Cf. also

<*

ib.,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 119.

1901, p. 438, for 'E^fvcrlvt, Letr. 220

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

522

in inscriptions as late as the sixth century a.d., B.C.H., 1903, p. 335, T(3

mere

Tu/Soj.

Time.

(d)

It

expressed

is

much more

persistently with the

has outlived the usage as to place and is "fairly frequent"^ in the N. T. Cf. Sanskrit, Latin, older Greek, Anglolocative.

It

Here, of course, time is regarded from the point of view of a point, not of duration (accusative). But the accusative is making inroads on the locative and is already used occasionally for a point of time. See Accusative. For papyri examples take toTj TraXatots xpovoLS B.U. 903 (ii/A.D.) and yepecrioLS, ya/jLOts B.U. 1 (iii/A.D.), Moulton, CI. Rev., April, 1904, and Dec, 1901. See also Observe the difference between the rfj avajSaaei, O.P. 742 (ii/B.c).

Saxon.

accusative {to aa^j3aTov

rjCFvxo.(ra.v)

and the genitive

(ja^^oLTwv rjXdav)

and the (opdpov

locative (t^ 6e

jSa^ecos)

all

twv

/xi^

same

in the

The accusative is easily differentiated from 1). both the locative and the genitive. As between the locative and the genitive the matter is not quite so clear. Brugmann^ indeed

sentence (Lu. 24

:

thinks that originally there was lies in

The difference The locative is a Thus in Mt. 24 20

little difference.

the essential meaning of the two cases.

point and the genitive

we have

Iva

/x?)

yev-qrac

is

the case of genus.

:

4>vyr] vixoov xetM<2"^os /xTjSe aa(3j3aTco.

r]

It

not

is

mere hair-splitting to note that winter is here set over against summer (time within which) and that Sabbath is the point of time. In practical result the difference

is

very

but

slight,

regard the two usages as without difference.

(Mk. 14

vmra (Ac. 26

it is

hardly just to

Cf. wktos (Mt. 25

:

20 10) for 'in due time' may be illustrated by to) 8eouTL KaLpQ, O.P. IV, 729, 5, and TU) TTJs oirwpas KaLpQi, lb., 11. As further examples of the mere locative we may note the various instances of rjiikpa. So rfj tp'it-q VHepa (Mt. 20 19), rfj pta aa^(3aTuiv (Jo. 20 1), rfj -KpwTiK "qpepa 6), pvktL

:

30),

:

Katpc? (Lu.

7).

:

Tcov

:

a^vpwv (Mk. 14

ripepa (Jo. TaKTTJ

6

"fjpepa

fjpepa (Ac.

:

(Ac. 12

Cor. 4

€in4)W(jKovar}

(Mt. 28

TTJ

vvkt'l

:

21),

rfj

:

rfj

-qpepa ry oydoy (Ac.

(Mt. 24 r]pepa

:

eKelvj)

20

(Jo.

The substantive

16). :

1)

(Mk. 14

:

30)

where the adverb

,

(Ac. 21

With some

:

:

19),

eax^TV

rfj

(Lu. 17

29

:

ttj

1).' is

f.),

eTrtoixr^

and even

r]pepq.

not expressed in

rf?

the substantive locative. N. T. Gk.,

is

and

e'^Tjs

7:8),

m^a

42), ^

exophj] rjpepa (Ac. 21:26),

rfj

Kai r)pkpa (2

TavTj]

12),

:

40), irola rjpkpa

7:26),

:

rfj

Cf. also ariptpov

accusative, but

of these phrases kv

is

also

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Griech. Gr., p. 405. Cf. also Delbnick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 223. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 120, for careful discussion. Cf. Abbott,

»

Job. Gr., pp. 77

ff.

p. 119.

THE CASES

523

(nTfiSEIs)

found as with ravr'a (Lu. 19 42), eKeby (Lu. 6 23), 6y86ji (Lu. 1 44), with fjfj.epa and aa^^aruiv 1), eaxary (Jo. G 59), iiLq. (Lu. 20 (Lu. 4 16), rifjiepa and genitive (Lu. 4 25), with e^^s (Lu. 7 11), where W. H. read in text ev tu> rather than h rfj. The MSS., especially D, vary a good deah NvktL occurs without h (Lu. 12 20) and with h (Mt. 26 31). So also we find aa^fiaroo (Mt. 24 20), aa^^aaiv (Mk. 2 24), but also h with each (Mt. 12 2; Mk. 2 23). With cipa we have both (hpa (Lu. 2 38) and kv (Lu. 12 12). Once more (pv^aKij occurs without ev (Mt. 14 25) and with kv (Lu. 12 :38). With eros we have ev once (as Lu. 3 1) and without h twice (Jo. 2 20; Ac. 13 20), but these two examples {erecnv reaaepaKOpra, cos ereatv TerpaKoaloLS Kal irevTT]KovTo) are probably associative-instrumental. Cf. irpolSe^-qKOTas ^8rj ToTs erecTLv, Tb.P. i (ii/A.D.) with Lu. 1 7 ei'. Moulton observes that it is hard sometimes to draw the line between the locative and the :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

>

:

instrumental

{CI. Rev.,

Dec,

1901).

With

eopriy

again

we note

the

mere locative (Lu. 2 41) or usually h (Jo. 2 23). See also /caipoTs iSioLs (1 Tim. 6 Xpovos 15), but usually ev KaipQ (Mt. 11 25, etc.). :

:

:

has only like

iKav<2

:

Ac.

ev (as

1

:

xpovco (Ac.

save the associative-instrumental usage

6)

8

:

Observe also

11).

rois

avTov

yevealois

(Eph. 3:5), but ev in Mk. 8 38, Nvvi (chiefly in Paul, as Ro. 3 21) is a locative form (cf. Other locative adverbs of time are dei (2 Cor. 6 10), ket oi>xO-

(Mk. 6

:

21).

So again

erepais yeveals

:

:

:

(Mt. 6 21), :

(e)

:

:

10), Trpcoi

Locative with Adjectives.

TTvev/jiaTL

14

(2 Cor. 8

TvkpvffL

(Mt. 5:3), Kadapol

8), (XTepeol rf) irldTeL (1

jrepLTOjjLfj

TaTei.v6s

ayla Kal

OKTaripepos (Ph. tj}

Kapdla

rfj

:

2).

Thus we note

ol

KapSla (5: 8), aduvaros rots

tttcjoxoI

(Mt. 11:29), (1

rrj

BLKaioavvrj

airep'LTp7]T0L

Cor. 7:34).

Kapdiats

(Ro. 6

tCo

(Ac.

irocriv

Pet. 5:9), voodpoi rats aKoats (Heb. 5

3:5), eXeWepoi

crw/xart Kal Trvebp.aTL

In Blass-Dcbrunner,

(Mk. 16

:

11),

:

20),

(Ac. 7:51),

Cf. Ro. 12

:

10—13.

these examples are treated as instru-

p. 118,

mental. (/)

Locative with Verbs.

Cf. 8e8ep.evos rw Trvevixan (Ac. 20

22), irepi^e^Xrjfjievovs Ifxarlois XevKoXs (Rcv.

4

:

4,

marg.

ev).

In Ro. 12

:

:

10-13 note the various examples of the locative with participles, though Tats xpciais Koiva^vovvres is probably instrumental. Cf. also e(TKOT03fj.evoL Tj}

Siavoia

(Eph. 4

:

18), ^cjjowofqdeh TrvevfxaTL (1 Pet.

We

seem

3

:

18),

have the locative in KaTeipyaaaro vpXv (2 Cor. 7:11), but usually ev appears in such examples as ev enol (Gal. 1 24). Further examples with verbs are axvfxaTL

evpeOels

(Ph. 2:8).

to

:

1

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 405; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., p. 225;

Pro!., p. 75.

Moulton,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

524

Weaiv

Tots

(Lu. 10

:

16:5), 14 rfj

cf.

30), earepeovvTO

Kapr]Te

rats

eireplaaevov

irlaTei Kai

rfj

:

tw

cra5

31),

:

rfj

aptdp-Q (Ac. xto-ret

(Ac.

cf. 22), evKevrpLadrjaovTai

bvbp.aTL eTrpo4>r]TemaiJL€v

TvevparL (Ac. 18

tui

tco

efx/jLeveiv

:

24),

(Ac. 9

<}>6^co

1:2), XjiaTots irepUTrtatv

(Heb. 12:3), cnnaTla (Ro. 11 23;

e^e^aXopev also), fecov

and Mk. 5

(Jas.

rj/vxcus

rrj

(Ro. 11

idla eXala

21), iropevonkvr) tco

:

ttolklXois

Trepnr'ear)Ti

22), eirifxho^aLV

:

(Ac. 21

TrepLiraTelv

orav ireLpaaixols

25;

:

cf.

(Mt. 7 22; Lu. 10 21 :

:

12), and perhaps even ^a-rrTiaei. u^tas irvehpaTL ay ice (Mk. 1:8). See Ac. 16 5. For the so-called instrumental use of kv (like ep fiaxoLlpn, Mt. 26 52) see the chapter on Prepositions (cf. also Instrumental Case). As a matter of fact h always has the locative, and this use of kv

29),

:

rfj

dXiyj/ei

(Ro. 12

invopkvovTes

:

:

:

has the locative

also.

The

activit}^ of

the verb

finding expression in the object mentioned.

is

conceived as

not a mere Hebraism, for the papyri have it as indeed the earlier Greek occasionally. But as a practical matter this use of h with the It is

was nearly equivalent to the instrumental case. The kv (Mt. 10 32; Lu. 12 8) Moulton {Prol., p. considers a Semiticism due to the common Aramaic original.

locative

use of opoXoyeoo 104)

:

Cf. the usual dative (Heb. 13

:

:

15).

The Locative with

Substantives. Cf. Heb. 11 12, /Calebs TO. OLdTpa tov ovpavov tQi wXrjdeL. So in Col. 2 14, to Kad' rjpcbv Xti-pbypa(j)ov Toh bbypautv, the adjective is used as a substantive. In 1 Cor. 14 20 we have the locative with substantive, verb and adjective, pi] Traibla yiveade rats (j)p€aiv, dXXd ttj KaKia vqiria^tTe, rats {g)

:

:

:

be 4>p(.(jlv TtXeLOL yiveade.

The Locative with

(h)

Prepositions.

Just

because

the

prepositions that were used with the locative were only "adverbial

elements strengthening and directing its meaning"^ they were very numerous. Originally nearly all the prepositions occurred with the locative. Thus in Homer and epic and lyric poetry generally we meet with the locative with ap(j)l, dm, ets (dialects, inscriptions), peTa,

with

and when the

so-called dative

kv, kwl, irapa, irepi, irpbs, inrb, it is

may

with a compound verb the case instance irpoKtlpevov riplv (Heb. 12 tions like

:

is

found

in

Greek

really the locative case.^

1).

dyu0t, clvtI, kv (kvi), kwi, Trepi,

But

not always be locative, as

A number xpos

(ttpotl)

of the preposi-

are themselves

Cf. the locative adverbs of time already mentioned and 'E/3/Datcrri (Jo. 5 2), 'EXXrjvtaTi (Jo. 9 20), kvkXco (Mk. 3 34), the conjunction Kai, etc. There are only four prepositions in the N. T. that use the locative. As examples note kv tQ

in the locative case.

:

:

:

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 103.

^

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 101.

THE CASES (Mt. 3:6),

'lop8av[i

(Jo. 19

'Irjaov

dvpaLS

eTTt

Trpos

25),

:

(]\It.

has the locative only 6 times,

Tcpos

times.^

24

rapa

33),

:

yLvrmelu) (Jo.

ra3

525

(nTiiSEIs)

20

One may note

here

hv

irpoiiTois

(1

Cor.

15

kirl

of these

has

it

176

very common.

is

almost

3)

:

aravpco rod

But

while

irapa 50,

of course, having only the locative,

'Ei/,

to;

11).

:

like

an

adverb. (i) The Pregnant Construction of the Locative. common in the N. T. with h, as the accusative with els after

It

is

verbs

This matter comes up for discussion again of motion or rest. under the head of Prepositions, but a few words are perhaps needed here. The identity of h and els in origin and early usage must be borne in mind when one approaches these two prepositions. Cf. 6

Tov dypbv in

els

ixer

epiov r-qv

has

els

13

k^aTTTL^ovTO ev

"jump

tQ

kfi^axpas

:

was no difference, modern Greek. Each writer own way. Cf. English vernacular, " come the river," etc. So also Mt. (3 6) has

in

els

Cf. ev

in

:

'lopbavri Trora/zw,

TOV 'Iop8avr]v.

OLKov kaTLv.

the other hand note 6

Prol., p. 245). Originally there

finally ev vanishes before

in the house,"

On

16.

tc3 rpv^Xlui

looks at the matter in his

eis

:

(Mt. 26 23). Here Mark (14 :.20) This interchange of ev and els is a feature of the

to Tpv^\lov.

LXX (Moulton, and

Mk.

x«tpa ^v

o'lkcx)

ecTTiv,

while text

Mk. (1 of Mk.

9)

:

2

:

reads

e^airTLadr]

and marg.

1

This same pregnant idiom appears with

ets

Trapa as crrSo-a

oTTtcrw wapa tovs "TroSas avTov (Lu. 7:38). See also Mk. 4 1. Cf. again en^avTi els to tXo7ov (Mt. 8 23). But observe the locative with ev in composition (Ro. 11 24). With ovo/xa we have the mere :

:

:

locative (Mt. 7 tive (Mt. 18

Mt. 12 XI.

:

:

5), els

h

and the locative (Mt. 21 9), kirl and locaand accusative (Mt. 10 41; 28 19).^ Cf. also

22),

:

:

:

:41.

The

Instrumental

("

Instrumental

Dative ")

Case

{r[

XpT|(rTlKTl TTTWO-IS). (a)

The Term Instrumental. As

ern and the adjective

itself

appears

The Hindu grammarians, however, are not wanting signs indeed that

arate case-form.

He

still

ples are

locative,

o'Ikoo

recognised this case*

later

1

Moulton,

2

Blass, Gr. of

*

Riem. and Goclzcr, Synt.,

Cyprian dialect

Kuhner-Gerth" we Other examGreek, not to mention the ninny ad-

Prol., p. 106.

N. T. Gk.,

There

a separate case-form (a "living" case).

instrumental, and

dfia, Sixa, tolxcl in

mod-

survived in the Greek as a sep-

cites dpS, evx^Xa, besides avv tvxo., o'Ikol

it is

the fourteenth century.^

Meister'^ concludes that in the

the instrumental was find

it

applied to case

first in

and

o'Ikco

"

p. 12:} j).

f.

207.

<>

"

in

dative.

Whitney, Sans. Cr., p. 89. Ck. Dial., II, p. 205. I, j).

405.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

526

NEW TESTAMENT

verbs in -a and

-77 (-a, -77) like Kpvcjifj, \adpa, atyy, ^la, etc. This corresponds with the Sanskrit singular ending, and the plural bhis may be compared with the Homeric 0t (0ti'), as deocj^L, deocjjLv. But in 1

Homer one must note that these endings for singular and plural are used for the locative, ablative, and possibly for the dative also. 2

It is

not always easy to draw the line of distinction between

the locative and instrumental in Greek after the forms blended.^ Sometimes indeed a word will make good sense, though not the

same

sense, either as locative, dative or instrumental, as

Tov deov v\pudeis (Ac. 2

no Greek term

:

33;

cf.

also 5

:

31).

for the instrumental case,

call it xPV'^Ti-KV TTTcoaLs.

The

rfj

Se^tq.

The grammars have

but

I

have ventured to

increasing use of prepositions

(kv, 8ia,

makes the mere instrumental a disappearing case in the N. .T. as compared with the earher Greek,-* but still it is far from /jLeTo.)

dead.

Syncretistic? It is a matter of dispute as to whether this is not itself a mixed case combining an old associative or comitative case with the later instrumental. Both of (b)

instrumental case

these ideas are present in the Sanskrit case (Whitney, Sanskrit

Grammar, p. 93). On the whole, however, one is constrained to doubt the existence of this so-called comitative case. Most of the difference is due to the distinction between persons (association, accompaniment) and things (means, implement, instrument). Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Syntax, I, p. 231. Hence neither term covers exactly the whole situation. We have a similar combination in our EngHsh "with" which is used in both senses. So also the Greek avv (cf. Latin cmn) and even ixera (e^rjXdare ixera fxaxatpSiu

—

^vXuv, Mk. 14 48). In Mk. 14 43, /JLer avrov /xerd /j-axaLpcov, both senses occur together. But we may agree that the associative was the original usage out of which the instrumental idea /cat

:

was

easily

and

:

logically developed.^

The comitative

usage, for

very common in Homer ^ and Herodotus.'^ There is no example of this usage in the N. T. (c) Place. except TravTaxrJ (W. H. text, Ac. 21 28). In Jas. 2 25, erkpa 68(2

instance,

is

:

Cf.

Moulton,

*

the 6 « '

p.

Monro, Horn.

1

»

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 239.

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of instr.

Gr., p. 99.

:

case at

all,

N. T. Gk., p. 116. The mod. Gk., of course, does not use but only ni {ixera). Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 103.

Man., p. 334. Cf. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 428. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 99. Helbing, Uber den Gebrauch des echten und sociativen Dativs bei Herod., Giles,

58

f.

THE CASES €K^a\ovaa,

we probably have

527

(oTOZEIi;)

the locative, though the instr.

is

possil)le. (d) Time. But we do find examples of the associative-instrumental used with expressions of time. This is indeed a very old use of the instrumental, as Brugmann^ and Dell^riick^ show. The Sanskrit had it also as the time "by the lapse of which anything The singular, like xpoi^V ^Kav^ (Lu. 8:27; is brought about. "^

Ac. 8

:

11), finds parallel in

the papyri,^ as

seen also in Pindar,

is

Euripides, Aristophanes, Thucydides.^ For the papyri note ttoXXoTs XpovoLs

N.P. 50

(iii/A.D.),

xpovo;)

A. P. 77

(ii/A.o.).

Cf. Polybius

(Moulton, Prol., p. 76). There is no doubt about the plural instrumental in Ro. 16 25, xpovois alwploLs, a parallel to which Moulton'' finds in the epistolary formula in xxxii,

12,

TToXXots xpovois

:

the papyri, eppwadai ae

He

euxofxai. ttoXXoTs xpovois.

the necessity of appealing to the Latin as

W.

rightly doubts

Schulze'^ does for the

explanation of the use of the plural, since the classical

roi

xpovco

could easily give the impulse.

In Jo. 2

:

strumental

20, TeaaepaKovra Kal e^ ereaiv oiKooonijOrf also,

though, of course, this might

,

we have

])e

the in-

looked at as a

locative, the whole period regarded as a point of time. In an example like TToXXoIs xpofots avvrjp-KaKtL avrov (Lu. 8 29) we probably have the instrumental also, though here the locative would give a good idea, 'on many occasions' ('oftentimes' Rev. V.), whereas the marg. (' of a long time ') gives the instrumental idea. For the instrumental idea Moulton^ cites from Letromie (p. 220, fourth :

century A.D.)

but marg. of

See also

ttoXXois varepov jxpovois.

Kal TrevTYjKOVTa (Ac. 13

W. H.

:

20).

Cf. also

cos

tTeai TerpaKoaioLs

Trao-ats rats rj/jLepais

(Lu.

1

:

75),

has accusative. As Moulton'-' observes, only the

context can decide which is locative and which instrumental in such examples and he suggests that this uncertainty had something to do with the increasing use of h to make the locative clear

from instrumental or dative. " Si)eakers of Greek were certainly beginning to feel that they could not trust the dative out alone, and we can understand the occasional emplo.ymcnt of nursemaid h in places where she would have been better left at

and

distinct

1

Grioch. Gr., p. 410.

»

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 94. Moulton, Q:\. Rev., 1901, p. 438; 1904,

< ^

Dclhriiek, Vorfrl. Synt.,

7

Gr. Lat., p. 14.

2

I,

8

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438.

«

N. T. Gk.,

time" "unclassical," but incorrectly as

is

I,

p. 246.

p. 153; Prol., p. 75.

p. 246.

Blass, Gr. of

Vcrgl. Synt.,

Prol., p. 75.

p. 121, calls this

already shown. »

lb.

"duration of

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

528

home, or replaced by

Blass^

avv.'^

comments on the frequency

of

the instrumental with expressions of time in Josephus with no it and the accusative. One can hardly agree to Blass'^ explanation of the instrumental of time that it is due to the disinclination of the writer to put another

perceptible difference between

accusative beside the direct object of the verb. accusative

is

Certainly the

the most frequent idiom in the N. T. for the idea of

Mk. 2: 19; Lu. 13:8; Ac. Rev. 20: 3, etc. In Jo. 14 9 W. H. have roaovTov xpopov in the text and put Toaovrco xpovco in the marg. In Lu. 8 27 some MSS. have instead of the instrumental xpoi^V t^aJ^w the ablative e/c extension of time, as can be seen in 13

18;

:

:

:

xP^vj^v LKavwv.

(aTTo)

The Associative Idea. The idea of association alone is many examples, chiefly with verbs, though

(e)

responsible for a good

Substantives cut no figure at

adjectives are not wanting.

according to Blass,^ for

tIs Koivwvia
ckotos (2 Cor. 6

:

all

14)

an example of the pure dative (cf. also Lu. 5 10; 2 Cor. 6 16), and in Ro. 15 26 we have els tovs tttooxovs and in 1 Jo. 1 3, 6, 7 But another example in 2 Cor. 6 14, tIs ixeroxv dLKawcrvpri fxed' rifioov. Kal avoyLia, comes much closer to the substantive use of the associative-instrumental. But an undoubted example of a substantive followed by the associative-instrumental appears in ets hiravT-quiv is

:

:

:

:

:

Tw

'l-qaov

Jo. 12

(Mt. 8

13

:

:

{avT<2)

So ets awaPTrjaiv Mace. 3:11

34).

and

1

r]ijup

els

(Ac. 28

Cf. also

15).

:

awavT-qaiv aurw.

There

nothing in this construction out of harmony with the Greek idiom. The verb has the associative-instrumental. The genitive with this substantive occurs in Mt. 27 32 (5 text) and 1 Th. is

:

4

:

17 (but

Prol., p. 14.

and

text has associative-instrumental).

5

There

is

Thus

(jvfx4)VTOs.

Cf.

Moulton,

no doubt as to the adjectives

to auixa

avfj,fiop4>ou raJ aclofxaTL

(Ph. 3

avfjLuopcjyos :

21)

and

(Ro. 6:5), but avfjfxopcpos has the genitive ttjs eiKovos in Ro. 8 29 like a substantive. The other compounds in avv are treated as substantives* with the genitive, like cywaixm-

(xvfx(j>vTOL Tt2 6iJ.oLcoiJ.aTi :

XcoTos, cvyyevrjs, avvepyos, uvvTpo4>os, /leToxos

evavTLos avTols

(Mk. 6

:

48), hirevavTlov

the associative-instrumental the older Gk. illustration.

(Mk.

1

:

18).

is

-qf/lv

common

very

1

:

'A/coXou0eco is

a

Cf. also awaK.

14).

in the

The most important examples

will

But note With verbs

N. T. as in be given in

common

instance, as ijKoXovOriaap avToo

(Mk. 5

37).

:

not so used, but once we find awenreTo ^

(Heb. 1:9).

(Col. 2

Rather oddly avToo (Ac.

eTroAtai is

20:4).

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 121. Cf. Schmidt, de Jos. elocut., p. 382 f. 3 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 115. " lb.

lb.

So

THE CASES

529

(nTS2SEIs)

34) also is used. 7), though rpos (Mk. 9 Other compounds of 5ia with this case are diaXXayrjdL tw doeX^oi (Mt. 5:24), bLe^\y]Qy] avrQ (Lu. 16:1), Tw 5ta/36Xa3 StaKpLVOfxevos

SieXhero avroh (Ac. 20

But

18:28).

8taKaTt]\eyxeTo (Ac.

'lovdaioLs

(Ju. 9), Tots

:

:

closely

tQ dew (Ro. 5 10), crot KpLdrjvaL (Mt. 5 40), ufilXei avru (Ac. 24 26), which last may have Then again note irepo^vyovyTes 14). irpos and accusative (Lu. 24

words are

to these

allied

KaTrjWayrjiJLev

:

:

:

:

(2 Cor. 6

:

14), rots wpevfiaTLKOLS €KOLV(jivr](jav

avTols (Ac. 5

8e8eTaL (Ro. 7

we may

2)

with

Sodrjaop-evco

27), KoKXaaOaL

:

Cf. further avdpi

:

In Rev. 8 4 2). have the associative-instrumental^ rais :

Moulton

ave^t].

B.U. 69

d\}/(joviu,

Dec,

Rev.,

:

(R. V. dative)

TTpoaevxcus

(Ro. 15

rw de^ (Ro. 11 2). and fxep-iy pikvnv irvpi (Rev. 15

13), evTvyxavet

:

Cf.

1901).

cites

(ii/A.D.)

:

aoi

cnrodcoaco

evyidTO.

too

'with your next wages' {CI.

the old Greek auroTs avbpaaiv and the

''military dative" (Moulton, Prol., p. 61).

The compounds with

Thus

avWajSeadat (Lu. 5:7),

chv that use this case are

numerous.

avp-^ovXevaas rots 'lovdaloLS (Jo. 18

dative

15

(cf.

avixjSalvo:

and

(xvfxipepeL)

15),2 p.La xl^vxv avvadXovvTes

:

:

,

Tw

(Mk. 14

first

avairavaojixai vplv

:

10),

(Ac. 5

:

27,

of manner), avvr]K6Xovda

(Mk. 15

:41), avpavUecvTO

32), avvrjvTrjCTev avTu> (Lu.

Ro. 8

avTiXa^rjTaL (Lu. 10 :40; cf.

:

9; cf.

:

two examples

avvavap-iyvvadai. avTU (2 Th. 3

fxrj

(Ro. 15

:

might be a

this

vp.lv

(Tvve4>o)vridri

:51), at avvava^aaai ai'Tw

(Mt. 9

'1-qaov

though

TrlaTu (Ph. 1

rfj

probalily of the instrumental, the avToo

14),

9

:

:

14), crvv-

37), poL avv-

26), awairodave'LV col

(Mk. 14

:

arrw 31), oh avvaToiXero rots aweLdrjaaaLV (Heb. 11:31), avve^aXXov tu> avvr]ykpdr]Te Cor. 4:8), (Ac. 17:18), vplu avv^aaiXevaojpep (1 aurw avpelTero 18 'Ir^aoD (Jo. 15), Xpl(TtQ (Col. 3 1), avveia^Xdev tw (Ac. 20 4), (Tvvr]pyei rots epyois (Jas. 2 22), (xvvrjXdev avroh (Ac. 9 :

:

:

39), (TvveaOieL avToh (Lu. 15

:

2), (TwevdoKelTe rots epyoLs (Lu. 11

cvvevioxovpepoL vplv (2 Pet. 2:13),

6:8), (Eph. 2:5),

avv^rjaopep aura) (Ro. TTolrjaep

tw

Xpicrra)

Ta4)ePT6s avTco (Col.

avTots

2

(Ac. 26:30),

:

51),

jui)

awdx^ro

avp^r]T€LP

:

avTcp

avprjoopai tco

to)

(Heb. 11

(TVPKeKepaapepovs

rfj

:

rep

\by(^ (Ac.

(Mk. 8:11), :

48),

18:5), (Tvpe^uio-

32), avyKadrjpepoL

evayyeXlcp

Tim. 1:8),

(2

25), avPKaTaTedetpkvos

^ovXrj

rfi

(Lu.

(Heb. 4 2, two epyoLs (Kph. 5

irlaTH rots ciKovcraaLP

examples of the instrumental),

:

vopw (Ro. 7: 22), avv-

12), avveaTCjTas avTw (Lu. 9

avPKaKOTradrjcrov

(TvvKaKOVxeLaOaL roi Xa<2

23

:

:

:

avvKOLPcopelre toTs

:

eavToh (2 Cor. 10 12), avp'XaXovvTes t(2 11), avPKpipovTes 16), (rui'o5e6oj'res tc? irpevpaTL (Ro. 8 (TvvpapTvptl 9 'lr](T0v (Mk. :4), (Ac. 18 7), avvTradrjcai avpaywyfj avpopopovaa rfj auTW (Ac. 9:7), iavrovs

:

:

:

»

»

Moulton, Prol., p. 75. Considered peculiar by Blass, Cr. of N. T. Ok., Cf.

p.

lU.

,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

530

(Heb. 4

aadepelaLS

rais

:

15),

avpirapopres

:

22),

ovvaTavpwdkvros avTw (Jo. 19

:

32), avvaTOLXf^t

4

25),

:

avTots (2

HT]

:

11),

:

vvv 'lepovadKrjij. (Gal.

ttj

19), cvvvTeKpidrjaav aurw (Gal. 2

avv-

24),

:

avrQ (Lu. 7

crvveTopevovTO

tw aluvL tovtw (Ro. 12

(7vv(Tx>llJ-o-'''''-^^(^Se

avrQ (Lu. 8

25

(Ac.

rj/jLlv

Cor. 8

eTreiJL\pafJL€V

:

cwtux^'lv

2),

:

13), avvexo-f-pov avrfj

(Lu. 1 58), avvxpoivTai ^ajiapuTais (Jo. 4:9), though xpo-oyiaL uses the strict instrumental usually; a rather long list surely, but one :

not in vain,

one gets a just idea of the N. T. usage. Some of some have xpos or /xera. Words of Likeness and Identity. We find this if

these verbs occur frequently and (/)

With

Thus o^uotos avdpdoTOi (Lu. 6 48) and always, save the accusative in Rev. 14 14 and in 1 13 (true text). In Jo. 8 55 some MSS. actually have o/iotos vpiCiv

usage with several adjectives.

:

:

:

:

(Mt. 20

:

"the

Cf. our vulgar

instead of vplv. ripXv

and

12)

iaoTifiov

So also

you."

likes of

'iaovs

'0 auros

Pet. 1:1).

iriaTLv (2

rij/iv

with the instrumental is found once only, ej' koL to avro rfj k^vpTjuhij In 1 Th. 2 14 we find to. avra Kadws, and in Ph. (1 Cor. 11 5). 1 30 Tov avTov aywva olov. Several verbs are used the same way. :

:

:

So

eoLKev av8pi (Jas.

Trapo/j.oia^€T€ rd^ots

1

:

23), rots

(Mt. 23

(Heb. 2

bp.oLwdrivaL

6.86X4)01$

27), eirpeTev

:

avrQ (Heb. 2

MSS. have dfxoiccs avrrj in Mt. 22 39. In Rev. 4 3 we have two instrumental examples. Manner. It is expressed by the instrumental (g) :

:

17),

:

10).

Some

oixolos

opaaeL

:

Xidu)

like the other uses of the case in the

ancient usage,^ not to say that of the illustrate this

usage well,

15

Cor. 12

:

2), Ibla (1

16

iravoLKd (Ac.

(Mk. 6

Trefg

:

34),

:

N.

T.,

Some N.

kolvy].

like b-qnoala (Ac.

11), Kpv4>fi

(Epk

5

(Lu. 23

wavTrX-qOei

:

:

16:37), 12),

18),

T. adverbs Cor.

(1

et/cf)

\adpa (Mt. 2

:

7),

(Ac. 24

:

3),

TvavTri

But the usage

:33), rdxa (Ro. 5:7).

This,

case.

harmony with

in

is

is

abundant

outside of adverbs, chiefly with verbs, but also with adjectives

and even with substantives. Thus we find TeKva (l}vaeL dpyrjs (Eph. 2 3) and KuTrptos t<2 yhet (Ac. 4 36; cf. also 18 2, ovdfxaTt. '\KvXav, :

:

:

HovTLKop

TU)

See also the participle

yhei).

also 4>vaeL in Gal. 2

some

:

15 and

Tpoauiro) in Gal.

tc3

of the chief examples with verbs:

aKaTaKaKvTTUi

Wei (Ac. 15

1), rfi Tpodecrei TvpoapikveLV

fire

:

Trpocf)a.cret

e'lre

three examples),

3

:

aX-qdeia,

xo-P'-t'-

Xptaros

avaKeKaXvpLjikvixi

(Ac. 11

:

:

2.3),

K.-G.,

I,

p. 435.

2

Cor. 10

Blass, Gr. of

30)

:

Trept.TiJLr]6rJTe

on

iravrl

(Ph. 1

(Mk. 14

vulgarism which finds a parallel in a papyrus ^ of the 1

Here are

KaTOTTTpL'^bnivoi

eXal3ov

Cf.

23).

:

22.

m^^^X'*^ (1

KaTayyeXXeraL

Trpoo-oiwco

Blass notes also paTlaj-iaaLv avTov

18).

(Ro. 7 1

Ke0aX?7 (1 Cor. 11:5),

TrpoaevxofJ.€vr)

rfj

tco ovtl

N. T. Gk.,

:

18,

(2 :

first

t(2

Tpoiro),

all

Cor.

65) as a

century

p. 118.

THE CASES A.D., KovSvKois eXa^ev.

and the genitive Lu. 14

XtXtdaij^,

Cf.

Ac. 5

the mere accusative (Mt. 23

mental.

There

trouble.

It is called^

The

is

common

26),

But often fierA and the locative (h 8eKa

(IH/a.d.).

h

(Ac. 15

:

11) or

37) occur rather than the instru-

:

one usage in the N. T. that has caused some "Hebraic" by some of the grammarians.

numerous

instances are rather

like so

:

and the accusative

31), Kara

:

B.U. 45

^ia,

rfj

(/xerd ^ias,

531

(nTfiZEIs)

in the

N.

T.,

though nothing

LXX.^ Conybeare and Stock quote Plato

as in the

show that it is, however, an idiom in accordance with the genius Greek language. Thus Xoyu 'Kkyeiv, (t>evycov 4>vyfj, 0i)aet 'Kt4)VKv'iav, etc. They call it the "cognate dative." That will do if instrumental is inserted in the place of dative. Moulton^ admits that this idiom, like the participle /SXevrovres /3Xei/'ere, is an example to

of the

of "translation Greek," but thinks that a phrase like e^oXedpevaa ovK k^ccXedpevaav (Josh. 17 finitive absolute

participle.

much more

13) is

:

the

like

Hebrew

in-

reproduced by this Greek instrumental or

is

that the classical parallels yanco

Blass'* insists

yaixelv,

are not true illustrations, but merely accidentally

(pevyeLv

cpvyfj

which

an overrefinement

grammarian, I conceive. Here are some of the important N. T. instances: aKofj aKovaere (Mt. 13 14), similar,

The Latin has

in the great

the idiom also, like curro curriculo.

:

avade/JLari

(jovTai

(Ac. 2

(Mt. 15 5

:

a.vtdeixaTi(rap.tv

:

4),

:

eTTLdv/jila

17),

opKw

(Ac. 23

0)fjLO(Tev

:

14),

(Lu. 22

eTedvfx-qaa

(Ac. 2

:

(Jas. 5

TTotw

:

17),

TToicp

x^pS

xo-tpet (Jo.

3

:

29;

cf.

davaru So^aaet tov Oebv (Jo. 21 Blass'^

verb in so far as

it

Moulton, C. and

'

Prol., p.

davarw reXeurarco

:

(Mk.

28), irpoaivxri wpoa-qv^aTO

:

Pet. 1:8).

1

32)

:

Cf. also

and

ai]-

crr]fxaivo}V

where the idiom seems

19),

observes that this usage "intensifies the

indicates that the action

as taking place in the fullest sense."

2

15),

davaroi rnjieXKev airoOvrjaKeiv (Jo. 18

more normal.

»

:

30), k^kaTrjaav kKaTaaec fxeyaXj]

42), TapayyeyLO. wap-qyydXap.ev (Ac. 5

fxaipoiv

hvirvloLS evvirvtaaOr]-

eirLdvfiia

to be understood

is

In Ro. 8

24 we more likely

:

Prol., p. 75.

60 f. 75 f. Cf. davov 6avaTU) in Homer. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 119. 5 lb. Thack. (.Jour, of Theol. Stu., July, 1908, p. 598 f.) shows that in the Pentateuch the Hebrew infinitive absokite was more frequently rendered S., p.

by the instr. case, while in the Books of Samuel and Kinfj.s the participle In the LXX as a whole the two methods are about et]ual. is the more usual.

On

p. 601 he obscTves that the N. T. has no ex. of the part, so used exeejit in O. T. quotations, while several instances of the instr. occur apart from quota-

tions, as in

Lu. 22

:

15; Jo. 3

also Thack., Gr., p. 48.

:

29; Ac. 4

:

17; 5

:

28; 23

:

12; Jas. 5

:

17.

Sec

i

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

532

have the means than the manner. Lu. 3

:

Cf. apKelade rots

6\}/uvIols

in

14.

Measure. Closely allied to the idea of manner is that of The accusative is sometimes used here also with the comparative, as iroXv fxaXXov (Heb. 12:9). But in Lu. 18:39 we (h)

measure.

have TToXXw ixdWov In Ph.

(ii/B.c).

comparative

(cf.

1

:

23

Mt. 6

we

Cf. ttoXXw

30).

:

In particular observe

fxaWov Kptiaaov.

ttoXXoS

P. Par. 26

/jLaXXou,

find the instrumental with the double roaovTU)

which corresponds to the English idiom ''the more, the less" in "the more one learns, the humbler he grows." As a matter of fact the English "the" here is instrumental also, as is seen in the Anglo-Saxon Sy. Cf. also ToaovTO) /jlclKXov oacp /SXcTrere

(Heb. 10

:

25)

KpelTTuv (Heb. 1:4). (i)

The instrumental may be used

Cause.

also to express the

idea of cause, motive or occasion.

This notion of ground wavers between the idea of association and means. Here are some illus-

trations: €70) de XptcTToO 5e

T7J

rfj Trtcrrei

ri\er]d7]Te rfj

yap

(2 Cor. 2

:

fxr]

Cor. 8:7), oh

:

17),

:

^evi^eade

dvalaLs evapeaTetraL

bieKpldr]

'iva

(Ro. 11

(2

rfj d5t/cta

:

16), rcS

Th. 2

:

evpetv

fxr]

In

12).

:

1

20),

avrol

'Iva /cat

Pet.

kv vfuv irvpwati (1

rfj

dXXa

dxtcrrta

rfj

30), tc3 u/ierepa) eXeet

(Heb. 13

rod

(rravpu)

Cor. 2:7), nues

a-KLdTia e^eKKaadrjaav

rrj

(Ro. 11

13), e{j8oKi]
15

12), XuTTTj KaTawodfj (2

:

31),

:

:

(Ro. 4 20),

tovtojv aTrecdia

vvv eXerjdoJaLV (11 rotaurats

(Gal. 6

eadlovcnv (1

(Tvvrideia

kvebwapio^dri

dxoXXu/^at (Lu.

co5e

Xt)Ua5

SiooKoovTaL

fxri

4

:

12),

TItov

fxe

Cor. 9

:

we have tIs aTpareverai lS'lols bypcovlois Trore," cf. rf/ vTep^oXfj (2 Cor. 12 7). But some verbs in the N. T. prefer a preposition for this idea, but not with the instrumental case. Thus r]yaXKiaaev kirl 7

:

T
(Lu. 1 :47), k^eizKijaaovTo

^e(3

evSoKrjaa

(Mk.

davna^oo

we

5td

:

7),

Means.

that of means.

persons agent,

not to mention

is

no

hbaxv (Mt. 7:28),

(Lu. 4

kiri el

(1 Jo.

3

:

(cf.

it

1

3),

TroXXfj

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

1901, p. 438.

13), ort (Lu. 11

:

18), 38).

:

Donaldson (N'cw

the " implementive case."

an idiom found with verbs.

:

2

ah with the ablative in Latin).

Note

especially

Latin lUor with instrumental, not ablative), (Ac. 27

kv aol

With

7:41).

22), irepi (Lu.

:

essential difference in the root-idea.

Cratylus, p. 439) calls course,

ttj

But no usage of this case is more common than With things sometimes we call it means, with though more often the agent is expressed by

vTo with genitive-ablative

There

eTrt

11), ev4>paivovTO kv rots epyoLS (Ac.

find kv (Lu. 1: 21),

(Rev. 17:

(j)

1

N. T. Gk.,

p. 118.

is,

of (cf.

UavXco xp'jo'd/xews

to)

Tapp-qela XP^I^^^C- (2 Cor. 3

This

xpc^oiJ.ai.

:

12), kav Tts avTU)

Cf. for the pap. Moulton, CI. Rev.,

THE CASES Tim. 1:8),

xPVTo-i- (1

vonlfjLois

thing and person.^

Among

in 1 Cor. 7:31.

Thus

the most striking. k^e^aXev

(Mk. 5:4),

rw

i]\eL(f)ev

22

48),

rats

expto'tJ'

avTov TcvthjiarL

Kal

Haxo-ipv (Ac. 12

:

2

:

14),

:

29),

Pet.

(1

1

:

18

f.),

(Eph.

1

8vvafxeL

rats Opi^lv e^enaaaev

(Lu. 9:32),

10

(Ac.

:

ns

(fyCK-qjiaTL

ira-

avuXev 'laKOJ^ou

38),

3

7), avuairijxOr] avToJv

:

t)

(Eph. 2:5, a'ip.aTL (Rev. 19

8),

dXXd

xpvf^'-Vj eKvTpojQrjTe,

r/TTTjrai

Pet. 2

(2

:

fxedvcxKeade

/jltj

(Ro.

13), irvevfiarL

:

13), TnfkiKois vfuv

wovrjpia, kt\.

d5t/cta,

aeao:(riJ,evoL

apjvpico (2)

:

15),

:

imyiais e^earaKevai, avrovs (Ac. 8:11),

18), pepavna/jLevov

:

dapTois,

01*

TTveviiaTi

^o-T6

x^P'-'''''-

(Eph. 5

o'luco

8

1

6:1),

viruco

13), TreirXrjpojfxevovs irdafi

:

only select

(Mt. 13

16), ireSaLS Kal aXvaeaL deSeadat

2), 8e8aixa(7TaL ry cfyvaeL (Jas.

rfj viroKplaei (Gal.

(Ro.

:

{ib.),

iJLvp<xi

(Lu.

:

Trore Iboiatv toIs o^^aX/xots

ix-q

pa5t5cos

see accusative

many examples we can

rals x^P'^'-v (Lu.

xl/coxovres

(Lu. 7:38),

But

12, 15, etc.

:

\6yw (Mt. 8

Trvevnara

to.

the

which examples we have both

in

Cf. 1 Cor. 9

533

(nTfiSEIi;)

19),

rt^utw aip.aTi

ecr4>payiadr]Te

y pafxiiaaiv eypa\l/a

rfj

k^ifj

ro)

x^'-P'-

6:11, one dative and two instrumental cases). Cf. /caraKpLvovcnu avTov OavaTco (Mk. 10 33, but dauarov in D, and in Mt. 20 18 ^( has els davarov). See the frequent use of Trtaret in Heb. 11, which is more than mere manner, though in verse 13 we have (Gal.

:

:

Kara

irlaTLv.

Moulton

{CI. Rev.,

O.P. 112

e^epxet v

opco,

ixera

dpwfxaTo^v for

tojv

Dec,

1901) cites Cf. Jo.

(iii/iv A.D.).

proximity of

juerd

517X000-01'

19:39

fj

TrXotco

oGovIols

f.,

to the instrumental.

Moulton {ProL, p. 76) notes "the remarkable instrumental in Ep. Diogn. 7, w tovs ovpavovs eKTtaev." Besides some examples are open to doubt. Thus KaraKavaeL irvpl dajSeaTcc (Mt. 3 12) may be either locative or instrumental. The same might be true of tQ irXoLapM rjKBov (Jo. 21 8) and e^dirTiaeu v8aTL (Ac. 1 5), though the locative is pretty clearly right here. Then again in Ac. 22: :

:

25, TrpokreLvav tols

dative.

But

IfidcxLv,

in 2 Pet. 1

:

we have :

3

either the instrumental or the

I8la bb^xi

'^'<^^

are clearly instrumental, not dative. kawd-qnev,

we have

either the

dperfj

(marg. in

In Ro. 8

:

24,

W.

rfj

modal instrumental or the

H.)

tkirlbt

instru-

mental of means. Cf. also 1 Cor. 14 15. Blass^ perhaps overemphasizes the influence of the Heb. 3 on the N. T. Greek in what is called the instrumental use of kv (the case with tv is always This is a classic idiom and locative; historically considered). the papyri give numerous illustrations'* of it, though the Heb. :

•''

^

In Horod. w(! find a
mental

in riorocL,

"

K.-G.,

4

Moulton,

II,

1".)()0,

p. 8.

xpv<jOai. 2

Cf. Ilolbinf:;,

Dor Instru-

Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 117.

p.4r)4f. Prol., pp. 76, 104; CI. Rev., 1904, p. 153.

:

make

% did

h

of

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

534

and

more frequent

it

locative,

Hke

(Rev. 2

kv TTj poixcfyaia

:

LXX.

in the

h

16),

Some

(Mt. 26

ku fxaxaipm airoXovvTaL

:

iiaxaipiis (nrkdavov

4>6v(jo

of the uses 52), ivokeixr^aoi

(Heb. 11 37^ :

are fairly equivalent to the pure instrumental case, as avd\€v xo-'i-pv

(Ac. 12

:

2),7reffovPTaL aroiiaTL

naxalpv^ (Lu. 21

24).

:

jxa-

But others

ev in Blass' list are more debatable and may be construed merely locatives after all, as seen above. Besides the examas ples already mentioned, -rrvpl okLad-qaeTai (Mk. 9 49) may be compared with kv TLPL avTo aprvaere (9 50) and h tLvl oXiaO-qaeTaL (Mt. 5 13). See further Mt. 7:2 and h pdl38co eXdca (1 Cor. 4 21) which stands over against h ayairy wvev/jiaTi re wpavTrjTos. Some doubt remains as to whether the instrumental case is used for the agent. In the Sanskrit the instrumental is a common idiom with a perfect passive verb or participle. But the Latin uses the dative in such an example as is seen by mihi, not me. Most of the grammarians take the Greek passive perfect and verbal as the Latin with the dative.^ But Delbriick^ recognises the doubt in the matter. The one example in the N. T. is in Lu. 23 15,

without

:

:

:

:

^

:

ov8ev a^Lov Oavarov earlv TreTvpayp-kvov avrQ.

Blass* suggests that the right reading

Ac. 25

:

also Jas. 3

35),

:

of

ayyeXoLs (1

cbcfid-q

Mt.

2:22),

1

:

k

The

(Jo. 1: 13),

With

h

:

way

usual

and

ku aurco

without irewpaypevop as in St. V),

w ns T/rrTjrat, we not of what. Cf.

also as

a possible instru-

19,

:

avTols (Lu. 24 but these are most probably of expressing the agent in the N. T.

Tim. 3

But other

22.

and

:

20),

COS

kyvdiiaOrj

16),

5td for

the intermediate agent, as

prepositions are also used, like

(Col.

1

:

between vt6 and

real distinction (k)

(Am,

One may mention here

7.

vTo for the direct agent

in

whom

Kaj(h evpedo) hplv (2 Cor. 12

true datives. is

here reads

It is possible also that in 2 Pet. 2

5.

have person, not thing, mental

is

D

17), irapa (Jo. eu in

Ro. 12

The Greek

Prepositions.

:

clto

1:6), etc.

(Ac.

See a

21.

uses the instrumental

with only two prepositions ayua and avv, both with the comitative idea. In the Cypriot'C Greek we have avv tvxo., the distinctive instrumental ending. Cf. the Sanskrit sam with the instrumental and the Latin cum. There is only one instance of ap.a in the N. T. with the instrumental, apa avroTs (Mt. 13:29), but note a^a (tvv avTOLs (1 Th. 4 17; cf. also 5 '^vv appears chiefly in Luke's 10). :

:

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

2

K.-G.,

I, p.

(Attic); Jann., Hist.

true dative. *

p. 95.

422; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 400

Gk.

Gr., p. 344; ^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 112.

f.;

Monro, Horn.

Vergl. Synt.,

I,

Meisterh., p. 210, for inscr. Gr., p. 98

p. 300.

But

cf.

f.,

considers

it

pp. 184, 297.

a

THE CASES writings, as avv avrfj (Lu. 1

common, 2

5G).

:

But

in composition avv

So awxalpeTe

has already been shown.

as

535

(nTfiSEIs)

very

is

(Ph.

fiot.

18).

:

The Dative (True) Case (t| Sotikt] irTwo-is). Syncretism. That of the locative, instrumental and dative cases has not advanced so far in Greek as has that between the genitive and the ablative. Monro ^ thinks that ''distinct forms for these three cases survived down to a comparatively late period in Greek itself." He rightly conceives that it is not difficult, as a rule, to distinguish the three cases in usage. Brugmann^ gives various examples of how the three cases made contriXII. (a)

common endings for the final blending. The Decay of the Dative. But in modern Greek

bution to the (6)

this

Moul-

syncretistic combination has vanished in the vernacular.

ton^ can properly speak of the "decay of the dative," a decay that applies for the

modern Greek

and instrumental

to the locative

also.

In the Sanskrit (Lanman) the dative, after the ablative, was the

most infrequent

The modern Greek simply

case.

uses

accusative for the usual dative (and locative) ideas and

with accusative for the instrumental. use of rrfv

ets

in the

N.

T., eXerjfjLoavvas

^ovXijv rod Oeov -qOeTrjaav

els

to Wvo%

(ixeTo)

approach to this ijlov (Ac. 24 17),

eavTOvs (Lu. 7:30).

Winer (Winer-Thayer,

Pet, 1:4).

We see an

iroL-qaoov els

and

els Ate

:

So

els

v/JLois

(1

p. 213) is correct in refusing

(Mk. 13 10; Lu. 24 way. The pregnant idea is in Mk. 8 19 and Ro. 8 18. Ets is found also with evoxos (Mt. 5 11), but cb^eXi^os with 22), eWeros (Lu 14 35), evxpwTos (2 Tim. 4 Only in the most illiterate papyri is the decay TTpbs (1 Tim. 4:8). of the dative seen, as in tIvl \6yov, N.P. 47 (iii/A.D.), and in the Of. Moulton, CI. late inscrs. hke 6 ^or]9cov vp-wv, J. H. S., XIX, 14. to consider

47

;

1

els

Pet. 1

:

with

Krjpvaaco

or evayyeXi^ofxaL

:

:

25) as at all out of the

:

:

:

:

:

Per contra note eTTLpe\r]d[riT]L to) TratStcp, P. OxJ^ Leaving out ej/, the locative, instrumental and dative show a contraction in the N. T. as compared with the earlicMGreek.^ But even in the N. T. '^ev is considerably more than a match for cis," yet the vernacular revived and intensified the old identity of ev and ets seen in the early dialects.'' Hatzidakis" shows how this tendency increased in the later Greek till els triumphed over ev in the modern Greek. But even in the N. T. it is often impossible to insist on the idea of motion or extension in Rev., Apr., 1904.

744 (i/B.c).

97

»

Horn. Gr.,

2

Gricch. Gr., pp. 220

»

Prol., p. 62.

p.

*

f.

ff.

lb.

»

l^lass,

"

I'linl.,

Gr. p.

(.f

210

N. T. Gk., f.

p. 122.

.:

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

536 as 6

CIS,

03V

ds top koKttov (Jo.

1

18), 6 els tov

:

aypbv (Mk. 13

:

16).

Cf.

from D kv as equiva61). compare the disappear23. One may in Acts 7 8 els lent to 12; the accusative for both the of with vird and use locative of the ance motion and rest,^ whereas in Appian and Herodian (Atticists) the Tois eh TOV oLKov (Lu. 9

Moulton^

:

:

:

locative

is

cites

Cf. the disappearance of the dative forms

in the lead.^

pronouns him, whom, etc. Even Wyclif had "believe ye to the gospel" (Mk. 1 15). It is that of personal interest. (c) The Idea of the Dative. It is sometimes used of things, but of things personified.'* Apolin English save in the

:

lonios Dyscolos calls the dative the case of sative, genitive

and dative are

all

The

TrepiTvol-qcns.

accu-

cases of inner relations,^ but the

dative has a distinctive personal touch not true of the others. dative in

It

it.^

Even

is

epxoixal

epxeral

(Rev. 2

(xoL

(Mt. 21

(tol

But

(B.C. 160).

accusative in

It

is

rfj

:

5,

16) is

:

used of a person, not place.

from the

LXX) and

eX^e

Thus we

approaches the

find the dative of place in

opei koI iroKei deov

1.idiv

Aa^aaKui (Ac. 22

:

6).

^covtos (cf.

Cf. ijyyLaev

Trj

Cf.

P. Par. 51

fxot.,

in physical relations the dative

idea.''

22, TrpoaekrfKvdaTe kyyl^ovTi.

The

There was originally no idea of place thus a purely grammatical case {rein grammatisch)

not a local case.

is

Trv\r}

12

Heb. 12 18) and

:

(Lu. 7: 12).

not used for the notion of time.

I am not here insisting with substantives rather than with verbs, ^ but only that the dative has often a looser relation to the verb than the accusative or the genitive.^ It is more common to have the verb without the dative than without the accusative or (d)

The Dative with Substantives.

that the dative was used

genitive (Brug.,

ib.).

first

This

is

seen also in the

common

use of the

dative as the indirect object of verbs that have other cases and in the use of the dative with substantives somewhat after the manner

Not all substantives admit of this idiom, it is but only those that convey distinctly personal relations.

of the genitive. true,

But some dative.

7: 28),

of these substantives are allied to verbs that use the

So

evxa.pt
rw

deoo

(2 Cor. 9

avecFLV rc3 irvevfiaTi p.ov (2

»

Prol., p. 235.

3

Cf. Helbing,

* 6

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 98. Wundt, Volkerpsych., 1. Bd.,

6

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,

Hist. Assoc,

Cor. 2

:

:

12), 6\i\pLv

13), (7koKo\}/ 2

Die

Priip. bei Herod., p. 22. Cf.

XXXVII,

I,

pp. 87

7

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

8

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,

rfj

aapd

ttj

aapKL (2 Cor.

(1

Cor.

lb., p. G3.

JMouiton, Prol., pp. 63, 107.

Tl. II, p. 126.

p. 185.

But

see E.

W.

Hopkins, Trans.

Am.

ff.

p. 95. I,

p. 277.

»

Brug., Griech Gr., p. 399.

:

THE CASES 12:7), avaTavffLV (2 Cor. 2 jucopta

:

Cor.

(1

rals

15), eis 1

:

xpvxcus

(Mt. 27:7),

^kvoLS

Cf. Lu. 5

18).

(Mt. 11:29), evudia

vjjlcov

rots

Tacjjrjv

them

of

dXXd ye vfup

aTTocTToXos,

next verse

Ph.

1

:

So

28.

in

the dative

elfxl,

eavTo7s (Ro. 2

v6tio%

:

(2 Cor. 11

€irl(TTa<xis ixol

Cf. Ro.

28).

:

Cf. elfil

Cf. in

el/jLl.

Cf. also avrots in davaros (Ro. 7

:

13),

:

22),

k/jtol

1

14; 8

:

In

12.

:

Cor.

1

and accusative occur, but properl}^ so, e/iot be eis ekaxt-orbv kcTiv. Cf 1 Cor. 14 22 for the same thing. The dative due to attraction of the relative is seen in oh Lu. 9 43. (e) With Adjectives. This dative occurs naturally. These adjectives and verbals, like the substantives, have a distinctly personal flavour. Here are the most striking examples: d7ret0?)s rf) 4

:

3 both the dative and

5.

ovk

:

Kapirds epyov (Ph. 1

14),

and, not to multiply examples, tovto hol ri

not due to

is

(Ro. 7

6e(2

d aWois

Cor. 9:2,

1

these ex-

of

See Lu. 10

ei^xapicrrco.

aToXoyla roTs e^e avaKpivovaiv.

e/xi)

17

So

Cor. 8:9).

Tots aadtvkdLv (1

0eaj

not here due to the verb.

is

are in the predicate also, as xap« tw

with which compare marg.

25),

roS

roTj d7roXXu/iei/ois

With some

14.

:

amples verbs occur, but the dative

Some

537

(riTfiZEIi;)

ets

.

:

:

ovpavLcf}

26

OTTTaala (Ac.

Hadr]Trj

(Mt. 10

dcrretos

rw OeQ (Ac. 7:

:

aKadapaia (Ro. 6

Tr\

hKaioahvri (Ro. 6 8pio}

(Mt. 5

kavdv

16

20),

19), apeaTO. aura)

19), bvvaTO. kix4)avrt

—

(2 Cor.

r}p.tv

rrj

deco

Pet. 3

(2

18

(2 Cor. 10

4),

:

11),

w

7

:

13),

oPTes avTU> 0tXoi (Ac.

vTTjKOOL

19

tui

14),

15), 8ov\a

ekeWepoi

rfj

:

tw Kvpiw

(1

:

:

Cor. 7: 35), 8), novoyev-qs

11), TnaTrjv tc3 Kvpic^

(Jas.

:

:

:

(Ac. 10 40), 'hoxo% earac tw awe--

2:5), awTrjpLos (Ac. 7:39), (f>apepdp kyhero tui

:

.

29), apKtTOV

:

apxt-epel (Jo.

afxaprla (Ro. 6

Koafxui

2

.

tQ

rw

8

avToo

2:6), koXov aoi eatLV (Mt. 18 tQ

tttcjOxovs

15), .

(Jo.

api6ip.r]roL

20), yvooarbs

(Lu. 7: 12), veKpcvs :

Kal

22), to evaxvi^ov Kal evirapeSpov

TU) TOLOVTco

rrj fxrjTpi

(Ac.

:

:

:

:

aairiXot.

25),

(Tit.

iradLV

'^apaai (Ac.

31), cb^eXt/ia rots avOpccTrots (Tit.

3:8). Wellhausen (Einl, p. 33 f.) calls tpoxos rw "ungriechisch." But note epoxos earui rots taois erire[t]/iots, P. Oxy. 275 (a.D. 66). The participle in Lu. 4 16 (Ac. 17 2) almost deserves to be classed with the adjectives in this connection, to e'^Oos avT(2. :

:

(/)

With Adverbs and

a few times with adverbs. VfXLP

Prepositions.

Thus

rots TTLCTTf.vovaLP ky epr]9r] /jLep (1

cos

The dative

oatws Kal 5tKatcos Kal

Th. 2

:

is

found

d^uejuTrrcos

10), oi'at ro) Koafxcp

(Mt.

and so frequently (but accusative in Rev. 8 13; 12 12). Blass' compares Latin vne niihi and vae me. Brugmann- indeed 18

:

7)

:

considers KaTai,

while this

is

irapal, iraXai,

p. 112.

all to be dative forms. But, not used with prepositions in the

xaMat

true, the dative is

» Gr. of N. T. Gk., with dat. in pap,

:

Moulton,

CI. Rev., 1901. 2

j,.

1.53,

finds &ko\oWcos

Gricch. Gr., pp.

22(5,

228.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

538

The

Sanskrit^ and not certainly in the Greek.^

common with prepositions, and the

locative

is

very

instrumental appears with two,

but the dative is doubtful. In reality this statement must be modified a bit, for €77115 has the dative twice in the N. T. (Ac. 9:38), Ty 'loTTTTjj; w hy^s (Ac. 27 8), though the genitive is the usual case employed. Cf. eyy'i-^'^ with dative, Ac. 9:3; 10 9; Jas. 4 8. Brugmann^ admits the dative with avTiov, evav-iov, TrXrjaiov in the older Greek, though no N. T. examples occur. Delbriick (Grundl., p. 130) finds the dative with eirl. Here the dative finds its most extensive use. (g) With Verbs. Perhaps the earliest use. Certainly it re1. Indirect Object. mains the one most commonly met. Indeed there are few transitive verbs that may not use this dative of the indirect object. In :

:

:

the passive of these verbs the dative tive illustrations are here given. 40),

a.4>es rifxtv to. ocfyeLKrjiJLaTa rjidcov

ovpavol

ol

(Mt. 3

16),

:

(Mk. 14

rols TTTCoxots

:

(Mt. 6

:

:

5

21), irpoakcpepov ai'TU)

:

(Lu. 2

IxeyoK-qv

aoi

CLTrodcocrco

w8e Tpets

t]plv (1

Jo. 2

:

:

25).

TTj

7:6),

17), a 8e

(Mk.

15), kppkdri to2s dpxatots :

13), eL'a77eXti'o/xat

kyelpeiv

8r]papLa

(Mt. 18

:

27.

i'/xtv

:

4),

t)p

and

x^P^v

1

:

17),

ai'TOS eirrjyyeLkaTO

(Ac. 3

In 2 Cor. 12

aapKi, the pot is indirect object

(Mt.

28), iravTa

:

Toh BeapoXs pov (Ph.

piav ktX. (Mt. 17

.

26),

:

(Ac. 4:3), \eyeL avTo2s otl

:

avTw haTov

Cf Ac. 26

dodrjvaL

(Ac. 3

aTrecrretXez'

.

(Gal.

:

d'Kl\{/LV

.

An example like eTreTxei' auroTs

the indirect object. cKoKoxp

26),

(TKrjvas, <Jol

.

4

(Mk. 14 TratSta (Mk. 10

10), w4)eCKev

:

(Mt. 18

TTOL-qao)

x^'^PC-S

(marg.)

7pd(/)aj viilv

avdyaiov

27), vijup 8ei^eL

:

vijuv Trpo:TOV

20), e7re/3aXof avTols rds

14

(Mt. 5

12), avecoxdri'^'^v avT<2

Score to a-yiov rots Kva'iv (j\It.

5),

representa-

"A<^es avrco Kal to Iiioltlov

aTeL\r]a(jOfxe6a avTols nrjKeTL XaKeXv (Ac.

1

Some

retained.

is

(japd

:

:

5) is really

7,

may

eSo^r/

poi

be either

dative of advantage or locative.

The so-called dative of 2. Dativus Commodi vel Incommodi. advantage or disadvantage does not differ very greatly from the indirect object. A good example is epxopai aoL (Rev. 2 5, 16). :

Moulton (ProL,

Zr]vds aypvTvvov /SeXos.

at times

It is

and varies more

eavTols OTL

.Eschylus (P.V. 358), dXX' ^X^ej^ aura; indeed rather more loosely connected

p. 245) cites

(Mt. 23

:

31)

in the resultant idea.

we have

Thus

in papTvpeiTe

to translate 'against yourselves,'

mean 'against' any more means 'for' or 'in behalf of.' The personal relation is expressed by the case and it may be favourable or unfavourable. though, of course, the dative does not

than

it

2

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 96. Giles, Man., etc., p. 329, but see Prepositions

3

Griech. Gr., p. 455.

1

(ch.

XIII).

THE CASES

539

(nTfiSEIs)

Indeed, nowhere does the personal aspect of the dative come out clearly than in this usage. Thus -KOLVTa ra yeypafx/jLha rc3

—

more

Tov avdpoiirov (Lu.

vtu)

(Mt. 13

52),

:

vviJ.4>riv

(Mt. 13

avTols

18

KeKoaixrjfxhriv

14), dLKaicp

:

ypaufxarevs

31),

:

tu apSpi (Rev. 21

of datives), avadTavpovvTas eavrols tov vlov

3

TvprjKas (Jo.

:

rg

/SacrtXeto.

2), avairXripovTaL

:

Tim. 1:9; note long list (Heb. 6 6), w cri; fxefiap-

oh /cetrat (1

v6fj.os

/jLad-qrevdels

:

2

20), iKpiva kfiavTU) tovto (2 Cor.

:

yu?)

1),

fxepLfxvdre rrj

(Mt. 6: 25) aae^kaiv redeuws (2 Pet. 2 6), elVe e^e<XTr]iJ.eu, Oeu)' elVe (TUcppovou/jLeu, vpHv (2 Cor. 5 13), emxef aura) (Mk. 6 19). Blass^ notes how frequent this idiom is in Paul's Epistles, especially ypvxv

:

:

vehement passages. Thus

in the I'm ^eco

edapaTcodrjTe

(Ro. 7

IXOL

kaOieL

rfj

:

rw :

vo/jlco

10),

(Ro. 14

:

—

T(3

a/jLapTia

to yeveadaL

els

Iblw Kvpioo

6), eavTU) ffj

^dcnv (2 Cor. 5

^ly/cen iavTols

(Gal. 2 19), awedapofxeu

fi7(7co

:

eTepco

vfjias

aTr]KeL

— eavTW

(Ro. 6

TLTTTei

rj

cnrodvrjaKeL

:

2; cf. 6

:

:

15),

10

f.),

(Ro. 7:4), evpWr) (Ro. 14 4), KVpiu) :

(verse 7).

Cf.

kfjLoi

in

Ro. 7 21, vp.lp in 2 Cor. 12 20 and /iot with eyhero in Ac. 22 6. A good example is airoiJiaaabp.tBa vjxtv, Lu. 10 11. See ejuaurw in 2 :

:

:

:

Cor. 2

:

19

(Jo.

1 :

and

ro)

irveiifxaTL

In

Mk.

17).

10

the indirect object or Cf. also

Tracrt}'

nection

one

and toU

may

TL rinlv Kal aol

(2 :

:

:

Cf. ^aaTa^oov aura) tou aTavpov

33 note also the other datives, either

the direct object like Cor. 9

'lovSaioLs in 1

note also

(Lu. 4

13).

tL

The

34).

manifest in the examples in

1

to

/jlol

tfjnrai^ovaiv

19

:

64)e\os

f.

(1

Cor.

15:32),

intense personal relation

Cor.

1

23

:

Cf. also 1

f.

avTcp.

In this con-

:

is

also

18, 30.

Prof. Burkitt {Jour, of Theol. Stud., July, 1912) interprets

tL kfiol

2:4) to mean 'What is it to me and thee?' That is, 'What have we to do with that?' In a word, 'Never mind!' like the modern Egyptian 77ia 'alesh in colloquial language. The so-called ethical dative (cf. cot in Mt. 18 17) belongs here. A very simple example is au/x^epet yap aoL (Mt. 5 29). Moultoncites a papyrus example for epxofxal aoi (Rev. 2 5, 16), though from an illiterate document. For p.k\eL see Ac. 18 17; 1 Pet. 5 7. Kal aol (Jo.

:

:

:

:

3.

Direct Object.

Then again the

dative

:

is

often the direct

These verbs may be simple or compound, but they all emphasize the close personal relation like trust, distrust, envy, please, satisfy, serve, etc. Some of them vary object of transitive verl)s.

in construction, taking

»

2

The

the dative,

now

the accusative,

now

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 111. Prol., p. 75. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 113, calls (his (he Hhical dativo. so-callo(l dative of "majesty" Blass considers a ]Iel)raisin. He compares

Aareios tQ it is

now

OiCi

doubtful

with if

ttoXis /xeyaXr]

tQ OtQ (Jonah, 3

the N. T. follows the

LXX

here.

:

3), 'a

very great

city.'

But

But

a preposition. avTOLS (Lu. 24

5

:

(Ph.

(Gal. 5

1

:

rw

utcS

(Jo. 3

:

Thus

nal rjirlaTow

36), eirddovTO aura) (Ac.

(Mk. 1 27). Once we find the dative with but elsewhere prepositions, as h (2 Th. 3:4), In particular TCLaTtbtji calls for a ctti (Lu. 18 9). :

14),

10),

:

enough.

this is all natural

11), kiteLdihv

:

36), vwaKovovffLP avTw

ireiroida eis

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

540

:

Deissmann^ has made an exhaustive study of the subject, and Moulton^ has given a clear summary of results. This verb may be used absolutely (Jo. 20 31) or with an object clause {ih) Moreover, it often means entrust (Gal. in the sense of believe. 2:7). Leaving out these uses Moulton finds that Tnarevco occurs with the dative 39 times and always in the sense of believe or trust

word.

:

46, el yap that remarkable rather

(especially in John, as Jo. 5

av 1

:

kfjLol).

15,

It is

TLcxTevere kv tc3

ing 'in the sphere kv

:

eTLo-reveTe Mcouo-et eTrio-reuere

h

occurs only once (Mk. by Deissmann^ as meanwhich Moulton agrees. In Eph. 1 13

eua77eXtcj) explained

of,'

to

more properly belongs to

:

e(x<j)payla9rjTe.

The LXX uses h rarely But in the N. T. ets

and no other preposition. times 45 occurs (37 times in John's Gospel and 1 Jo.) while kiri appears 6 times with the locative and 7 with the accusative. Moulton objects to overrefining here between eh and eiri (at most like

with

TnaTtboi

believe in

with

Itti.

and

prepositions

So also as to accusative and locative he does properly accent is the use of these two

believe on).

What

by the Christian writers

to

show the

difference be-

with Tnarehw) and personal trust {els and This mystic union received a further development in Paul's cTTt). frequent ev Xpio-ra). The relation between ev rQi bvopLan and eirl

tween mere

belief (dative

T(3 ovo/jLaTL is parallel.'*

We must note other groups with the dative, like verbs of serving. Thus

avTUi (Mt. 4:11), tc3 vot dovXevco vo/jlco deov (Ro. both instrumental and dative here), XarpeveLv aura) (Lu. 1 But in Ph. 3 3 we have the 74), virrjpeTeXv avTU) (Ac. 24 23). instrumental with Xarpevw, and irpoaKwew uses either the dative (Mt. 2:2) or the accusative (Jo. 4 23), not to mention epcoTiop (Lu. 4:7). The dative with 8ov\6w in 1 Cor. 9 19 is merely the

7

:

bLrjKovovv

25,

:

:

:

:

:

indirect object.

Another convenient group envious, angry, etc.

Thus

is

6eu>

verbs to please, to

suffice, to

be

apeaac (Ro. 8:8), eve^piixCiVTo avrfj

' In Christo, p. 46 f. My friend, Prof. Walter Petersen, of Lindsborg, Kan., does not believe that the dative is ever the direct object of a verb, and Dr. W. O. Carver agrees with him. 3 2 Prol., p. 67 f. In Christo, p. 46 f. * Moulton, Prol., p. 68; Heitmiiller, Im Namen Jesu, I, ch. i.

THE CASES (Mk. 14 (Gal. 5

22), apKel gol (2 Cor. 12

:

:

9),

2), 6 opyL'^o/jLevos roj

aWrjXoLS

cf)6ouovvTts

margin of W. H.). note verbs meaning to thank, to blame, to

Once more, we may So euxapio-rco

(Ac. 19

aoL (Jo.

:

16), rots apefjLOLS eiTLTacraeL

(Mt.

Tpocrera^ev avrQ

So also

25).

11 :41), eyKoXelTcoaav aWrjXoLs

(Mt. 12

38), eTeTifxrjaep aiiTots

:

:

:

26, accusative,

:

enjoy, etc.

(Lu. 8

ayvoovaiv (Heb. 5

5), ixtTpioTvaOelv rots

:

(Mt. 5

adeXcpu)

541

(nTi2i:Eiz)

1

24), ^tecrreXXero avToZs

:

(Mk. 8 15), efxol xoXaTt (Jo. 7: 23). But /ceXei)co has accusative, though the dative occurs in the papyri. There remain verbs meaning to confess, to lie, to help, to shine, Thus we find ofxaXoyovPTcou tc3 bvoixari (Heb. 13 15)^ and etc. :

:

apdpooTOLS (Ac.

5:4), (Mt. 15 25, but w^eXeco has accusative), I'm <^alpoiaip In the later kolptj we find ^orjdkco with accusa23). avrfi (Rev. 21 (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 110). Cf. also rw genitive tive or (Lu. 2

avdo) iJ-oKoyelTO tui deco /3oT70et

fiOL

:

38), ovk

e\{/€V(7w

:

:

13), w aPTiaTrjTe (1 Pet. 5 two datives in Lu. 11 4. However, this 4. The Dative with Intransitive Verbs.

6ew irpoaevxeadaL (1 Cor. 11

:

:

Cf.

9).

:

is not a always easy to decide, for in apKeZ aot. (2 Cor. 12 See above. Cf. Lu. 3 14. 9) one is not sure where to place it. We are so prone to read the English into the Greek. The same remark applies in a way to ri vplp SoKel (Mt. 18 12), irpeireL ayioi^ (Eph. 5:3). But there is no doubt about ri eyevero avrui (Ac.

point that

it is

:

:

:

7

:

40),

like

(Mk. 10

avT(xi avfjL^aipeLP

aa^^aTLafios

dTToXetTrerat

Heb. 4:9),

avrQ (Mt.

ecpapTj

1

32),

:

Tip :

and the passive constructions (perhaps dativus commodi,

Xac3

(perhaps in-

20), eppr]dr] rots apxaiois

Mt. 5 21). The same thing is true of a number of the examples of "advantage or disadvantage" already given, like direct object,

:

jueXei rw ^ec3 (1 Cor. 9:9). See but eV ae mrepel (Mk. 10 21). The Greek, like the Latin, may use the dative 5. Possession. for the idea of possession. Thus ovk rjp avrols towos (Lu. 2:7), ovk

Ro. 6

10;

:

14

:

18

eaTLP aoL fxepis (Ac.

earai

(Mt. 18 eo-rat aot

8

22),

:

18

:

:

21), vfxlp kcFTiP rj/up

tovto (Mt. 10 :

38.

17

Ttcraapes

e7ra77eXta (Ac. 2

:

This

is

is

39), tIpl earip

apOpwirco iKarop irpo^aTa

extended even to cxami^lcs

22), earat x^-PO-

:

dpdpes (Ac. 21:23),

39), kap yeprjTai tlpl

The idiom

12).

:

43; Lu. 9

:

:

(Lu. 12:20), elalv

cvprjdeLa vplp (Jo.

2

Cf. also

4, etc.

aoL XctTrei (Lu.

'ip

ool (Lu. 1

:

like ov

14).

jui?

Cf. Ac.

a frequent idiom in the ancient Greek This i)redicative dative at bottom

and a perfectly natural one. is

just like the usual dative. 6. »

Infinitive as Final Dative.

So Mt.

10,: 32,

but note

dfxoXoyS}

Giles^ calls attention to the in-

h aOrv in Lu.

12

:

8.

«

Man.,

p. 327.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

542

This was the original use of the dative

a final dative.

finitive as

NEW TESTAMENT

So ijXOofxev irpoaKwijaaL avrc^ Here we have the dative form and the dative of purpose. Cf the old English " for to worship." This dative form continued, however, when the case of the infinitive was no longer in -at, the expression of purpose.

(Mt. 2:2). .

dative. It was discussed under the instru7. The Dative of the Agent. mental and there is nothing new to be said here. The one clear example is found in Lu. 23 15. But not very different is the idiom :

in

Mt. 6

(irpds to dtadrivai. ai'Tols)

1

:

and 23

Cf. also 2 Pet.

5.

:

3 :14. 8. The Dative because of the Preposition. We have already had examples of this. Compound verbs often have the dative where the simplex verb does not. The case is due to the total

idea of the

compound

in Ac. 25

defxaL

Pet. 5:9), avrtXeyeL

13

tu)

The dative occurs with

verb.

14; Gal.

:

2:2.

So^ with

Katcrapt (Jo. 19

17), TU) ayico avTiTLirTeTe (Ac. 7

:

:

kv, as evkirai^av avTUi (Mk. 15 Sometimes with avn- we have

of

ivpbs,

avTU (Lu.

goes

sometimes true avTots (Mk. 10 27).

20), e/x/^Xei^as

:

dj'art-

aPTlaTrjTe (1

'Atto in airoTaaaonat

The same thing

with the dative (Mk. 6 :46).

Jj

12), avTiKdixevoi

51).

:

as

avrl,

as with

is

:

we find h or irpbs 19) we must supply kv

With hetx^v avrQ (Mk. 6 some such word. Eis and ctti usually have a preposition after the compound verb, except that compounds of ert often have the indirect object in the dative (especially exirt^rj^i). But compare eTLraaaco and eTTLTLfjLao: above. Cf. eTearrj avTols (Lu. 2:9), but eiri repeated (Lu. 21 34). With Tapa we note Trapexco and after the verb.

:

or

dvfiop

:

with indirect object.

irapiaTr]/j.L

we can (1

either

see

Cor. 9

In 2 Pet.

13).

:

tive with wapeaTLv.

the (1

locative

Tim. 6

:

In

Trap€aTr]aav avrOi (Ac.

the dative or the locative.

With

and dative

1

:

in

the possessive da-

doubt as between

10

30).

:

the dative directly as with

opei

is

(Heb. 12 Ilpos

the indirect object in the dative (Mt. 6 xop-ai

39)

we may have

ireplKaixaL

10), TreptTrtTrrco (Lu.

:

again there

9

Trepl

9

Cf. TaptSpevecv

:

with

33),

:

1),

irepiirdpeiv

but with

(Heb. 12

:

has

irpoaTlOrjiJLL

irpoa'ep-

18, 22).

With

wpoaexere eavrols (Lu. 17: 3) the object vovv has to be supplied, but this is

not the case with

with

irpoaeKXidr]

(S

nor with

:

46.

Trpo<jKapTepovi>Tes :

36),

irpoaecfx^veL avrois

60) the dative

15

(Ac. 5

rfj

dLdaxv (Ac. 2

nor with irpoaereaeu

(Ac. 22

:

2).

With

avru)

:

TTpoaKvXiCjO

nor

42),

(Mk. 5

:

33)

(Mt. 27:

merely the indirect object, but note kiri in Mk. of viro likewise generally have the dative, as

is

Compounds »

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 116.

THE CASES (hTQSEIs) viraKOvw

(Mt. 8

:

27), uTrdpxw (Lu, 12

:

15), vwoTaaao:

543 (Lu. 10

:

17),

Tim. 4:6). Sometimes it is not easy to decide (/i) Ambiguous Examples. whether the case is locative, instrumental or dative. The example in Ac. 2 33, vrj/ovv rfj 8e^iq., has already been cited. This may mean 'to lift up to the right hand,' 'at the right hand' or 'by the right hand.' Cf. also Ro. 8 24; Jo. 21 8. But it is not often that there is any serious difficulty in the matter. In 2 Cor. 11:1, vTTOTiOeiiaL (1

:

:

aveix^ade

And,

/jlou

ixiKpop tl a(t)poavvr]s,

:

note ablative, accusative, genitive.

some cases remain, as with the genitive and ablative, that cannot be finally settled, the matter must simply remain in abeyance. It so happens that in Lu. 8 29 f we have all eight cases used if TToXXoTs xpovois be here locative and not instrumental. It may serve as a good exercise to discriminate in this passage each of the cases and explain the distinctive meaning and the result in this special context. The cases have kept us for a good while, but the subject is second to none in importance in Greek syntax. Nowhere has comparative philology shed more light than in the explanation according to historical science of the growth and meaning of the Greek cases. if

:

.

CHAPTER ADVERBS I.

XII

('EHIPPHMATA)

See chapter VII (Declensions) for dis-

Special Difficulties.

cussion of the origin, formation and history of adverbs.

matter

will

come up again

in chapter

XIII

Tlie

(Prepositions) where the

"improper" prepositions are treated. Brugmann^ has no handhng of the subject, though Delbriick^ gives an exhaustive presentation of the matter. But even Delbriick gives less than a page to the purely syntactical phases of the adverb (p. 643), whereas Winer ^ treats the adverb only under syntax. (a) Nature of the Adverb. The first difficulty is in deciding what is an adverb. As shown in chapter VII, the adverb not only has great variety in its origin, but also wide expansion in its so-called

syntactical

In simple truth a large portion of the "parts of speech" are

use.

adverbs.

Brugmann^ pointedly says that

it is

not possible to draw

between adverb, particle and preposition. The development of adverb into preposition, conjunction, intensive particle and even interjection was illustrated in chapter VII with perhaps sufficient fulness. To this list may be added the negative particles which are really adverbs. In particular in the Sanskrit is there a sharp

line

difficulty in the

treatment of preposition and conjunction as

from adverb, since the indeclinable words were less distinctly divided.^ But this vagueness apphes to other members of the Indo-Germanic group.'' In Greek and Latin no distinct line can be drawn between adverbs and prepositions.'^ of Adverb. These wider and (6) The Narrower Sense more specialized forms of the adverb must be dropped out of view distinct

»

2 *

Griech. Gr., pp. 250-257. Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 535-643.

Griech. Gr., p. 250.

On

final

^

s

W.-Th., pp. 462-473.

in adv. see Fraser, CI. Quarterly, 1908,

p. 265. 6

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

fl

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,

p. 403. I,

^

p. 536.

544

Giles,

Man.,

p. 341.

ADVERBS ('EHIPPHMATA) before

545

we can do anything with the mere adverb which is not prep-

osition, conjunction, particle

nor interjection.

There

a good mere adverb, for, in spite of its being a fixed case-form, it has a varied and interesting usage in the Greek sentence. The adverb has been treated by the grammars as a sort of printer's devil in the sentence. It has been given the bone that was left for the dog, if it was left. II. Adverbs with Verbs. (a) Commonest Use. This is indeed the etymology of the word and the most frequent use of the pure adverb. But one cannot say that this was the original use, as the name kiripprjiJLa might suggest. The truth is that the adverb has such a varied origin that it is difficult to make a general remark on the subject that will be true. Only this may be said, that some adverbs began to be used with verbs, some with adjectives, some absolutely, etc. At first they were not regarded as strictly adverbs, but were used progressively so (cf x^ptJ') until with most the earlier non-adverbial is

deal that needs to be said concerning the syntax of the

.

uses ceased. (b) N. T. Usage. Winer ^ suspects that the N. T. writers did not understand the finer shades of meaning in the Greek adverbs, but this is true only from the point of view of the Attic literar}'-

and applies to the vernacular kolptj in generaL But he is wholly right in insisting on the necessity of adverbs for precise style

definition in language.

adverbs of the

kolvt)

The grammarians

find offence ^ in the

Some

as in other portions of the vocabulary.

of the "poetic" adverbs in Winer's

list

are at

home

in the papyri

as in the N. T., like thapkarois. A few examples will suffice for the normal usage in the N. Tj See the majestic roll of the adverbs in Heb. 1:1, woKvp.epws /cat ttoXvtpottws TrdXai. Cf. (XTOvSaLorepus (Ph. 2 28), Tepiaaorepcos and rax^t-ov (Heb. 13 19), irepaLTepo: (Ac. 19 39) as examples of comparison, (c) Predicative Uses with yivofiaL and el/xL There is nothing out of the way in the adverb with 'ylvojxaL in 1 Th. 2 10, cos oaicos Kol SiKalus /cat aiikixirT(ji$ vplv rots TTLCTTevovcnv kyevrjOrj/jLev. Here the verb is not a more copula. Indeed tt/zt appears with the adverb also when it has verbal force. Thus Kadcjs a\r]6Qis eaTtv (1 Th. 2 13) :

:

:

:

:

is

not equivalent to

Tc3 Trjo-oD

(Eph. 4:21).

ovTus karlv

17

So also

atrta rod avdpdoirov

Cor. 7:7.

Cf.

from the adjective. Cf. W.-Th.,

ykvecns ourcos

p. 462.

rju

(Mt.

1

:

18),

10), rb ourcos elvai (1

:

The adverb

7:26).

1

17

(Mt. 19

different

1

Cf. Kadojs 'ianv aXrjdeia

Ka9
h d

Cor.

in all these instances is

rt /xe erotTjcras ourcos 2

lb., p. 463.

(Ro. 9

:

20) for

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

54G

a similar predicate use of the adverb.

h

ovTcos 6 Oeos

In Ph. 4

:

karlv (1 Cor. 14

v/jllv

5, 6 Kvpios

here the adverb

With

:

Mt. 14

a\r]da)s in

eyym, the copula earlp 32), naKpav

and

Cf. also ourcos weao^v

and

25)

(Mk. 12

:

34), IVa (Ph. 2

33.

:

and

to be supplied

is

not far from the adjective idea.

is

(Lu. 14

TToppco ouTos

:

Cf. also :

6).

has some idiomatic constructions with the adverb that are difficult from the English point of view. Thus (d)

TO us Ka/ccos exovras

in

Mk.

1

:

It

"E;^&).

(Mt. 14

Cf. Lu. 7:

34.

:

and with the instrumental case

35),

In Enghsh

1.

adjective with have (He has

it

prefer the predicate

So eo-xarws ex^i (Mk. 5 23) and in Jo. 4 52 comparative adverb. One must be willing for

adverb with ex".

:

Koix^oTtpov 'iax^v the

the Greek to have his standpoint. TToppoj aTrexet

we

bad), whereas the Greek likes the

(Mk. 7:6).

Ilcos

:

1 and no com-

Cf. ovtws exet in Ac. 7

exovcnv (Ac. 15

:

3G) needs

:

ment. It is a common enough Greek idiom. Cf. (Sapews exovaa, P.Br.M. 42 (B.C. 168). "Ajua e\irl^o:v (Ac. 24 (e) With Participles. 26) belongs to the discussion of participles. But one may note here i]8r] TedvrjKora (Jo. 19 33) and cos p-eWovTas (Ac. 23 Cf. also the use of 15). r)5?7 with TraprjKOev (Mt. 14 15), a matter that concerns the aorist tense. But note both vvv and j/St? with eaTiv in 1 Jo. 4 3. (/) Loose Relation to the Verb or any other part of the sentence. So aKpy]v (cf, ert) in Mt. 15 16 and r-qv apxw in Jo. :

:

:

:

:

:

8

:

25, for this accusative

is

really adverbial.

Cf. also to Xolttov

(Ph. 3:1), rovvavrlov (Gal. 2:7). III. Adverbs Used with Other Adverbs. There is, to be sure, nothing unusual about this either in Greek or any other tongue. So TToKv paWov (Heb. 12 9), pdWov Kpelaaov (Ph. 1 23), paXKov :

:

(Mk. 7 36) are merely normal uses barring the double comparative in the two examples which, however, have their own explanation. The compound adverbs, which are common in the N. T. (as vTepirepiaauis, Mk. 7:37; cf. ttoXutpottcos in Heb. 1 1), call for no more explanation than other compound words. Cf. KadoXov (Ac. 4 18). The Greek, like the German, easily makes compound words, and the tendency to long compound words grows with the history of language. See airepLaTrdaTccs in 1 Cor. 7: 35. For compound adverbs see chapter VII, ii, (c). For the comparison of adverbs see ib., ii, (e). IV. Adverbs with Adjectives. A typical illustration is found in 1 Tim. 3 16, opoXoyovpevcjos /xe7a. So ourco pkyas in Rev. 16 18. The instances are not very numerous in the N. T., since indeed, TreptaaoTepov

:

:

:

:

especially in the Gospels, the adjective

:

is

not excessively abundant.

ADVERBS ("EniPPHMATA) In Ac. 24

:

547 both verb and ad-

25, to vvv exov, the participle being

no

jective, causes

arepov irvvdaveadaL

In Ac. 23

difficulty.

irepl

we

ahrov,

20,

fxtWu^v tl aKpi^k-

cos

have the adverbial use of with

Cf. airepiaTCKTTU^

as cLKpL^eaTepov.

:

as well

tl

Cor. 7 35.

evirapedpov in 1

:

may

Here indeed one

recall V. Adverbs with Substantives. this gives basis for adjective a the well as that the substantive as example in the T. typical N. is NCv a River). idiom (cf. Jordan

Thus we

h

find

rw vvv

Kaipco

(Ro. 3

:

26),

Tfj

vvv 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (Gal.

Tim. 4:8), t6v vvv alusva (2 Tim. 4 10). 4 25), fco^s TTjs has virtually the force of the adjective, the adverb indeed Here just as the substantive in this descriptive sense gave rise to the adjective. The English can use the same idiom as "the now time," though this particular phrase is awkward. The Greek has so much elasticity in the matter because of the article which vvv (1

:

gives

it

xhpo-

(1

:

a great advantage over the Latin. ^ Cf. also fj 5e avm 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (Gal. 4 Tim. 5:5), 26), 17

(Ph. 3

K\r]are<j)s

:

Treated as Substantives.^ here appealed to. It

named above may be

Thus

words of place and time.

avw (Col. 3

(2 Cor. 1

:

(Mk. 13

19), a-Ko TOV vvv (Lu. 1

:

17),

to.

:

71), TO. w8e (Col.

and

48)

:

A

twv

x<^pts

Trape/cros (2

examples of the adverb with the 1

:

13),

k

Cor. 5

KOLTCO

(Jo.

8

:

23),

oirlau

els to.

and

rather adjectival in idea.

In

:

4).

In

23), to vai

N. T. save

in the

It usually

has the

nominative

in the

Cor. 11

28).

:

Other

article are axpt^ rod Sevpo (Ro.

(Mk. 13

(Lu. 11

12), to e^ooOev Kal to eawOev toTs (xaKpav

(Lu. 19 is

Tuv :

:

striking instance of the adverb treated as

substantive appears in

(1

8

38), ews tov vvv

:

Cf. toTs keT (Mt.

often.

:

:

case (Lu. 10 :29).

especially true of

rd vvv (Ac. 5

4 9). So TXrjaiov always once as preposition with genitive (Jo. 4:5). article (Mt. 5 43), but may be used without it 26

iivui

The very adverbs is

ck tojv avoo dn.1 (Jo.

1 f.),

:

tyjs

3:6).

14), 6 rore Koa/jLos (2 Pet.

VI. Adverbs

6vtw^

6e

:

toTs kyyvs

:

(Eph. 2

(Ac. 21

Tfj e^rjs

40),

:

1)

:

16), tovs e^co

ets

to efxirpoaOev

17) the

adverb

we have

to sup-

:

17/xepa, though the text of Lu. 7:11 reads ev tc3 e^^s. Here the adverb is treated rather as an adjective, but the point of distinction between the use as substantive and adjective is not

ply, of course,

always

clear.

But

19 :40).

that

it

is

Cf. also it is

avptov

17

not merely

as vTrepheLva (2 Cor. 10

:

Then

:

34), irepl

Trjs

the adverb has

ariixepov

th(^

(Ac.

article

Prepositions are used with

treated as a substantive.

adverbs without any article. we have two words or one. '

(Mt. 6

when

it is

not always dear whether

'I'hus editors print virkp eKelva as well

16), virep

Ricm. and Goolzcr, Synt.,

p. 798.

U

irepLcraod "

Cf.

as well as

K.-C,

I,

virepeK-

p. 551.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

548

irepL(T(xov

Cf.

(Eph. 3

20), virep \iav as well as virepKlav (2 Cor. 11

:

cTTttra, eirauoo, ecjiaira^,

and

aprt in 1 Cor. 15

ecos

:

6.

5).

:

Thus

d7r6

Cor. 9:2), aw' avcoOev ews kcltco (Mk. 15 38), aw' aprt (Mt. 23:39), dTro p.aKpbdev (Mt. 27:55), dTro Trpcol (Ac. 28:23), ajua xpcot (Mt. 20 1), €cos aprt (Mt. 11 12), ecos rpls (Lu. 22 34), eojs cTrrdKts (Mt. 18 21 f.), ^cos e^co (Ac. 21 5), ecos ecrco (Mk. 14 54), ecos TTore (Mt. 17 17), ecos co5e (Lu. 23 5), etc. For this doubling irepvaL (2

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

of adverbs see

:

:

e/cros ft

/ti?

(1

Cor. 14

:

5) in

the realm of conjunctions.

Moulton {Prol., p. 99) finds in the papyri e/c Tore, O.P. 486 (ii/A.D.), and note dTro wkpvaL (Deissmann, B. S., p. 221). Vn. The Pregnant Use of Adverbs. Just as the prepositions h and ets are used each with verbs of rest and motion (and Trapd with locative or accusative) so adverbs show the same absence of ,

minute uniformity. Hot, for instance, is absent from both the LXX and the N. T., as is 6tol. Instead we find xoO hwayei (Jo. 3 8) and owov kyoo vwayw (Jo. 13 33), but wbdev epxerai (Jo. 3 8) and odev k^ri\dov (Mt. 12 44). So also epxerat ket (Jo. 18 3) Hke :

:

:

:

our "come here."

:

But on the other hand in Ac. 22 5, 'a^wv Kal word would be e/cet. But e/ceto-e is reguWiner calls this an "abuse" of language, which :

Tovs eKetae ovras, the usual lar in Ac. 21 is

putting

:

3.

^

rather too strongly, since

it

It is largely a

it is found in the best Greek. matter of usage, for with w5e and hdaSe the ideas of

hie and hue had long coalesced, while 'i^cjodep, eawdev, koltcj mean both 'without' (Mt. 23 27) and 'from without '(Mk. 7 18), 'within' (Mt. 7: 15) and 'from within' (Mk. 7: 23), 'below' (Mt. 4 6) and 'from below' (Jo. 8 23). Cf. ^erd,3a hdev kei (Mt. 17 20) and :

:

:

:

evdev

— eKeWeu

ol airo TTJs

(Lu. 16

we have

diecrKopircaas,

'IraXtas

writer takes. rots

e/c

TepLTOfxrjs

:

:

e/c

(Ro. 4

:

(Mt. 24

24, 26, cwaycov odev oh 69ev

by

In

attraction.

we

uncertain what standpoint the have not only the normal idiom like

12)

and

:

With

:

merged into

(Heb. 13 24)

but the pregnant use where

k

In Mt. 25

26).

eKeldev ov

h

it is

ot

k

rrjs

Kaiaapos oUias (Ph. 4

could have occurred.

Thus

:

22),

dpat rd

17) with which compare 6 ets tov aypop (Mk. Mt. 24 18). Cf. 6 7rar?7p 6 e^ oi-pai^oD in Lu. 11 13, though some MSS.- do not have the second 6. The correlation of adverbs belongs to the chapter on Pronouns. Vin. Adverbs as Marks of Style. Thus dprt is not found in Mark, Luke, James, Jude nor Hebrews, though fairly often in Matthew, John and Paul. Nvi>, on the other hand, is frequent throughout the N. T. as a Avhole. Abbott ^ has an interesting dis-

13

r^s :

ot/ctas

16,

h

in

1

W.-Th., p. 472.

3

Joh. Gr., pp. 22

:

:

:

2 flf.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 258.

ADVERBS ('EniPPHMATA)

549

cussion of Kal vvv in John and Luke. Nuj^i is found only in Acts, Paul and Hebrews, the most literary portions of the N. T. Then again Mark has abundant use of eWvs, but not eWeos, while Matthew employs both. John uses each only three times. Abbott^ notes that wherever Matthew uses evdvs it is found in the parallel'

part of Mark.

EWkcos prevails in

on difference

insists

in idea in the

So

eWvs ('straightway')while in

1

Cor. eiruTa

is

in

Luke (Gospel and Acts) Abbott two words, eWews ('immediately'), .

Matthew

rore is exceedingly

common,

rather frequent, though the two words

have different ideas. Then again kyyvs is more common in John than all the Synoptists together.^ The context must often decide the exact idea of an adverb, as with eKade^ero ourcos (Jo. 4:6). Cf. cos rjv ev tc3 ttXoiw (Mk. 4 36). IX. The Adverb Distinguished from the Adjective. (a) Different Meaning. The adjective and the adverb often :

mean

radically different things.

fjLovov,

the adjective

Thus in Jo. 8 29, ovk 6.4>r\Kkv ixe means that 'he did not leave me alone.' As an adverb, if the position allowed it, it would be not only did he leave, but,' etc., just the opposite. In 2 Tim. 4:11 nSvos means that Luke is alone with Paul. So in Lu. 24 18 av ixbvo^ may be contrasted with ixbvov -Klarevaov (Lu. 8 50). The point is specially clear with irpoiros and rpcorov. Thus in Ac. 3 26 we have :

fxovov

'

:

:

:

v/jlIv

not vfuv

TpooTou avaarijcas,

but 'the thing

is

done

first for

irpdrov Kal "EWrjvos).

But

avTos TrpcoTos rjycnrriaev

ly^uSs.

It is

irpwTois.

So also Ro. 2

you.'

in 1 Jo.

'God

not 'you as

4

is

:

19 note

the

first

chief,'

:

9 {'lovbalov re

17^1615

kyairwiiev, otl

one

who

Cf.

loves.'

where John is the first one to come to the tomb. In Jo. 1 41 the MSS. vary between Trpcoros and TpoJTov (W. H.). One can but wonder here if after all irpuTos is not the correct text with the implication that John also found his brother James. The delicate implication may have been easily overlooked by a scribe. Cf. also the difference between IXdXet opdus (Mk. 7: 35) and avaar-qdi evrt tov$ irbbas gov opdos (Ac. 14 10). The English has a similar distinction in "feel bad" and "feel badly," "look bad" and "look badly." We use "well" in both also fjXdev wpcoTos

eis

to

fjLvr}/j,eiov

(Jo.

20

:

4)

:

:

senses. (6)

Cf. eSpatos in

Difference

in

1

Cor. 7 37. :

Greek and English

Idiom.

But the

Greek uses the adjective often where the English has the adverb. That is, the Greek prefers the personal connection of the adjective with the subject to the adverl)ial connection with the verb. So we have avTop.a.Tr} yrj KapTro(f>opel (Mk. 4 28) and ai'TO/iaTT] -qvolyr] ri

1

lb., p. 20.

:

2

lb., p. 19.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

550 (Ac. 12 €(j)ui8Los

In Lu. 21 34 the same construction

10).

:

found with

is

:

The ancient Greek idiom

rjnepa eKeivr].

r]

of the adjective

rather than the locative of time appears in Ac. 28

13, devrepaioL

:

So opdpLval (Lu. 24:22). The same use of the adjective rather than the adverb meets us in 1 Cor. 9 17, d yap huv tovto irpaaau} ei 8e aKwv, just as we see it in the ancient Greek. Cf. the Latin nolens volens. See Ro. 8 20. In /xecos the Greek has an adjective that we have to use a phrase for. Thus /xtaos hjioiv aTTjKeL (Jo. 1 26), 'there stands in the midst of you.' Cf. a verydifferent idea in -qfiepas fiearjs (Ac. 26 13), 'middle of the day.' X. Adverbial Phrases. (a) Incipient Adverbs. Some of these are practically adverbs, though they retain the case-inflection and may even have rjXdoiJLev.

:

—

:

:

:

the

Thus

article.

(Jo-

8 12

T-qv

2

TO

Cor. 14

ir'Ke'laTov

(1

:

apxw

7), TO irpwTov (Jo.

ToiivavTLov (Gal.

:

\oit6v (Ph. 3:1),

to

25),

:

6 62),

16), to irpoTepov (Jo.

:

27), to Ka6' qp.kpav (Lu. 19

:

:

47), ToD XotxoO

These expressions are not technically adverbs, 10), etc. though adverbial in force. Cf. also the cognate instrumental like (Eph. 6

:

29). So O.P. 1162, 5 (iv./A.D.). Prepositional Phrases. These adjuncts have the substantial force of adverbs. Indeed there is little practical difference in structure between dTro -wkpvai (2 Cor. 9 2) and virepXiav (2 Cor. 11 5), vTepdvo: (Eph. 4 10) and eccs kcltco (Mk. 15 38). Since the uncial MSS. had no division between words, we have to depend on the judgment of the modern editor and on our own for the distinction between an adverb like Tapaxpwo- (Lu. 1 64) and an adverbial phrase like xapa tovto (1 Cor. 12 15). Cf. also kweXapq. xalpeL (Jo. 3

:

(b)

:

:

:

:

:

:

KHva (Ac. 7: 43),

Ro. 7

:

13 Kad'

virtpeKeiva (2

are KaT' i8iav (Mt. 14 (Phil. 14), KaT

(Col. 3

xl^vxvs

Kevbv (Ph. 2

:

:

(Mk. 14

(Mt. 22 eir'

k peaov

(Mt. 13

mTd

25),

fxeaov :

(1

16),

:

Th. 5

:

aird /xtds

ixeaco

h

2),

(Lu. 14 list,

(Mk. 6

:

to fxeaov (Lu. 5

(Ac. 27: 27), ixeaov (Ph. 2

and phrase occur together,

:

(Mk. 14 apxvs (2 Th. 2

h

tp6:tols (1

eKTevela :

27.

:

Cf.

7),

11

(Mt. 13

19), eis pkaov

In

Mk.

a-ljpepou TavTj] tt) pvktL.

:

:

3),

ripLepav

18), els to iravTeXes

47), 5td fxeaov (Lu. 4 :

:

fikpos Tt,

e/c

13), els

Kad'

(Ac. 26

like dj'd p-eaop

15).

72),

:

:

Cor. 15

(Lu. 22:59),

oKrjOeias

we have quite a els

64), dx'

nepovs (1 Cor. 12

49), eu

(Lu. 17: 11), ixkaov

k

(Heb. 9:5),

With

ixeaov

17:31),

wktI

hv :

7 25). :

:

KaTo. eKovffLOV

10),

ck SevTepov

1),

:

23), k^ apxvs (Jo. 6

:49),

KttTd fxepos

4: 18). In Other examples

16), Ka96\ov (Ac.

:

:

(Heb. 10

(Ac.

(Ro. 11

fiepovs

:

kviavTov

16), kv aXrjdeia

8LKaLoavvrf

ev

Cor. 10

used with an adjective. 13), KaTo. /xovas (Mk. 4

virepl3o\r]u is

:

dTro

18),

(Heb. :

25),

30), 5id

(Mk. 14: 60), 30 adverb This is not a

14

:

ADVERBS ('EnipPHMATA)

551

complete list by any means, but it will suffice to illustrate the A striking example is found in 1 Cor. point under discussion. 12: 31, Ka9' virep^oXrip 686v vixZv deiKw/jn, where the adverbial phrase has practically the force of an adjective with d86v. Clearly, then, many of the adverbs grew out of these prepositional phrases like irapavTiKa (2 Cor. 4: 17), e/cTraXai (2 Pet. 2

(Mk. 12

excos

is

(Mk. 11

24

:

11

come to be used adverbiall3\ made from participles, like optus

it

:

16), virep^aWovTcos (2

and verbals hke

6)

:

\f/ev86iJ.evoL

See also

(Mt. 5:11)

in point.

is

(Lu. 19

irpoadels elirev

compares with on Verbal Nouns. p. 258)

which Blass ertKtv (Gen. 38

Trpoadelaa

This

(j)ddvo),

:

case :

N. T.

not

of course,

old

Greek idiom

where the participle expressed the

chief

idea and the verb was subordinate, occurs twice in the N. T. eXadop TLPes ^epiaapres (Heb. 13

But

it

must be borne

:

2)

and

TpokcfiOaaep \eycjOP

mind that the Greek idiom

in

18.

Gk.,

See chapter

5).

is,

The

true technically, but only in the result.

with \apdavui and

{Gr. of

11)

:

adverbial

is

Then again a

Cf. deXcov in Col. 2

The Verb Used Adverbially.

(rf)

draT/caarws (1 Pet.

Besides, the intensive use of the participle

in effect like €v\oya>v evXoyrjau ae (Heb. 6:14). like

Cor.

also applies to rw ovtl (Ro. 7: 23), to vvv exov (Ac.

25), Tvxop (1 Cor. 16

5:2).

Tim. 3

32), d/jLoXoyovfxepus (1

:

but

Cf. even vovv-

3), etc.

participles

not merely true of adverbs

23),

:

Some

Participles.

(c)

This

:

:34).

(Mt. 17: is

So 25).

perfectly

consistent in this construction, as they escaped notice in entertain'

ing,' is

'

he got the start in saying.'

not necessary in Ac. 12

an adverb

in sense.

Cf. \adpq. elsewhere in

16, kirkp.€Ptp Kpovcap,

It is simply, 'he

may likewise

infinitive

:

N. T.

ixvplaai

(Mk. 14 8), irpoaWeTo TvepyPai (Lu. 20 11 f.), hke the Heb. nV^^. But in Mk. 12 4 we have the regular Greek idiom ^ :

:

airecTeLKep.

common

:

3 wpoaWeTO crvWajSeip.

This idiom

:^?i^n

iroKip is

ex-

LXX.^ In Lu. 6 48, eaKa\l/eu Kai el5advpep dug and went deep'), we have an idiom somewhat like our

ceedingly ('he

Cf. Ac. 12

The

continued knocking.'

present the chief idea as in TpoeXalSep

:

It

to take the verb as

in the

:

English vernacular "he went and dug," "he has gone and done Cf. Ro. 10: 20 airoToXpq. /cat XeyeL, Mt. 18: 3 eap p.ri arpa-

it," etc.

Kai yeprjade. But I doubt if deXoi with the infinitive is to be taken in the N. T. either adverbially or as the mere expletive for the future tense. In Jo. 7: 17 ^eX^; TOLtlp means 'is wiUing to (jjTJTe

do.'

So

in Jo. 8

:

44, etc.

1

W.-Th.,

2

C. and

The

text

is

obscure in Col. 2 18 and :

p. 4(iS. S., Scl.

from the

LXX,

p. 97.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

552

NEW TESTAMENT

deXcjov may have an adverbial force. Blass^ conceives that in Mt. 6 5,
there

:

.

.

.

praying'? »

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 258.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 467.

CHAPTER

XIII

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIS)

The Name.

I.

a

As is often the case, so here the name describes development, not the original, nor the essential, idea. Some Postpositive. Prepositions may indeed be post-

later (a)

mecum, the Greek tovtov xo-p<-v, tUvuv irkpi In the Turkish tongue^ they are all postpositive. Giles {Manual, p. 341) thinks that oju/xdrcoj/ ciTro is earlier than

positive like the Latin

(anastrophe)

And

.

dTTO o/x/xdrcoi'.

Not Originally Used with Verbs.

(6)

name

Moreover,

the

implies that they properly belong with verbs (prae-verbia,

TTpodeaeLs)

.

But we now know that the use with verbs was a much There are indeed in Greek no "inseparable"

development.

later

prepositions,

which are used only in composition with verbs.

In

the Attic, outside of Xenophon, avv was used mainly in composition.^

In the N. T.

d/x(/)tjSdXXc<;,

d/x0t is

aii4)ikvvviJLL.

found only with compound verbs

can be traced to adverbs with

fixes

like

In the Sanskrit most of the verbal precases.^

Explanation. Hence the name must be explained. The later grammarians used the term for those adverbs which were used in composition with verbs and in connection with the cases of nouns. Both things had to be true according to this definition. But it will be seen at once that this definition is arbitrary. The use with verbs in composition was the last step, not the first, in the development. Besides, what is to be said about those adverbs that are used, not with verbs, but with cases, and no longer appear as mere adverbs? Take avev, for instance, with the ablative. It is not found in composition with verbs nor by itself (c)

1

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 95.

"^

Monro, Horn.

Courtoz (Les Prefixes en Grec, en Lat. "Outre les dix-huit propositions que nous

Gr., pp. 123, 147.

et en Fran^ais, 1894, p. 51) says:

venons de passer en revue,

il

y a encore, en

grec, quelques p articulcs insi^pa-

mots composes. Ccs particules But these arc not the "prepositions" under

rables,qui s'eniploient coninic prC>fixes dans les

8ont

d, dpt

ou

(pi.,

bv
fa et

vr]."

discussion.

'

553

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 414.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

554

apart from a noun.

It

is,

of course, a preposition.

The grammars

an "improper" or adverbial preposition. It is only "improper" from the standpoint of the definition, not from that of the Greek language. The truth seems to be that by preposition one must mean a word used with cases of nouns and many of which came to be used in composition with verbs. The facts do call it

not square with the other definition. II.

The Origin

of Prepositions.

Originally Adverbs. This is now so well recognised that it seems strange to read in Winer ^ that "prepositions e.g. often assume the nature of adverbs, and vice versa," even though he adds "that the prepositions are adverbs originally." Giles^ puts the matter simply and clearly when he says: "Between adverbs and prepositions no distinct line can be drawn." Thus even (a)

in Homer dM
use as pre-verb or preposition.^ (6)

Reason for Use of Prepositions.

therefore, only

an adverb specialized to

"The

preposition

is,

define a case-usage."^

also. The case alone was enough between words, but, as language developed, the burden on the cases grew heavier. The analytic tendency in language is responsible for the growth of prepositions.^ The prepositions come in to help out the meaning of the case in a given context. The notion, therefore, that prepositions "govern" cases must be discarded definitely. Farrar^ clearly perceived this point. " It is the case which indicates the meaning of the preposition, and not the preposition which gives the meaning to the case." This conception explains the use and the non-use of a preposition like ev, for instance, with the locative, awo or wapa with the ablative, etc. In the Sanskrit the prepositions do not exist as a separate class of words, though a good many adverbs are coming to be used with the oblique cases (except the dative) to make clearer

This definition gives the reason at

first

to express the relation

the case-idea.'"

1

W.-Th., p. 356.

3

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

4

lb., p. 659.

6 6

Griech. Gr., p. 429. lb., p. 430.

7

Giles,

Man.,

I,

p. 659.

Cf.

2 Man., etc., p. 341. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 123.

Cf. Grundl., IV, p. 134.

etc., p.

341.

«

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 94.

9

lb.

" Whitney,

Sans. Gr., p. 414.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) (c)

555

Varying History. The adverbs that come to be used with Some cease to be used

the cases vary greatly in their history. as adverbs, as cvv, for instance.

Others continue (besides the

use with cases and with verbs) to be employed occasionally as

Rev. 21:21; Kara eh, Mk. 14:19; v-rrep kyu}, are used both with nouns, and in composition with verbs, like ev, irepL and the other seventeen "proper" Others 'A/i0t occurs only in composition. classical prepositions. are not used in composition with verbs, but are no longer mere adverbs like iivev. Others are employed both as adverb and with cases of nouns, like ana, e^co, etc. Some occur both as preposiadverbs

(d.j'd

2 Cor. 11

:

els,

23)

.

Some

and conjunction, like axph fJ^^xPh «'<^5, irXrjp. Some figure as and preposition with case, like x^pt*'III. Growth in the Use of Prepositions.

tion

substantive, adverb

(a)

Once No Prepositions. As

already noted, in the Sanskrit

no separate class of prepositions, though a number of adverbs are already coming to be used as prepositions, and verbs have some prefixes. Some adverbs in Greek are occasionally used with cases, hke a^icas and the genitive, but are not prepositions. Here we see the use of prepositions started, tentatively afany rate. We may suppose a time further back in the history of the IndoGermanic tongues when no adverbs were used with cases, when there

is

the cases stood

all

alone.

as Adverbs in Homer. Not only do the "adverbial" prepositions have their usual freedom, but a considerable number of adverbs are found in composition (6)

The Prepositions Still Used

Homer marks

with verbs.

a distinct advance over the Sanskrit There is in Homer a real class of

in the increase of prepositions.

But in Homer the limitation nouns and composition with verbs is

prepositions.

of the preposition to

far from being estab'on both sides,' adverbs, simply be lished. inside.' ^ So common is the separation of the preposition from the verb that the term tmesis is used for it, but no strict line can be drawn between this usage and the ordinary adverb.^ It is not (c) Decreasing Use as Adverbs after Homer.

cases of

'A^t^i,

h,

etc.,

may

'

common

thereafter for the eighteen classical prepositions, those

used in composition with verbs as well as with cases of nouns, to occur separately as adverbs. It is not common, but still posThis list comprises aixcpi, ava, avri, a-Ko, 5td, e'j, e^, kv, kiri, sible. Now these words Kara, ixeTO., irapa, irepl, irpb, rpos, avv, virep, vtto.

were used with steady increase so that one of the marks of later 1

Moiiro, Horn. Gr., p. 123.

"

lb., p. 121.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

556 Greek

the abundance of

NEW TESTAMENT

compound verbs

as well as the

more

extensive use of these prepositions with the various cases.

Not

is

but continually new adverbs joined the already large list of adverbial prepositions employed with cases. In a word, as Blass' remarks, the use of a preposition with nouns was "a practice which in the course of the history of the language became more and more adopted in opposition to the employment of the simple case." The Emperor Augustus was noted for his excessive use of prepositions in his effort to speak more clearly (quod quo facilius exprimeret, Suetonius) .^ Other Latin writers only

this true,

is

show the same tendency. (d) Semitic Influence in N. T.

The N. T. writers were once supposed to make such free use of prepositions because of the Hebrew and Aramaic. But the N. T. does not make abundant use of

all

the prepositions.

in composition,

and ava

and

dra

is

neaop, a sort of

'A/x0t

has dropped out entirely save

nearly confined to the distributive use

compound

:

21.

appears

'AvtL

22 times, but as Moulton'* explains, five of these are due to

But axo

is

very abundant in the N. T., as are

Kara, ixera, irpos.

But

only

It occurs

preposition.^

12 times, omitting the adverbial use in Rev. 21

5td, ets, ex,

avd' ojv.

h,

eirl,

irapa, irtpi, Tpo, avv, inrep, viro are, like ava,

Krebs has made a careful study Helbing has done for Herodotus^ and Johannessohn for the LXX.'' They show the same general tendency towards the increased use of some prepositions to the disuse of others. For the N. T., Moulton^ has made a 'Eu and ets far careful calculation which is worth reproducing. outnumber any of the other prepositions in the N. T.^ And h Moulton takes h as unity and leads ets by a good margin. finds the other N. T. prepositions ranging as follows: dm .0045, already going the

way

of d^u^t.

of the prepositions in Polybius,^ as

avTi .008, airo .24, 5td .24,

ets .64, eK

.34, ext .32, Kara .17,

fj-erd

.17,

Trapd .07, Trept .12, irpo .018, irpos .25, avv .048, VTrep .054, viro .08.

The eTTt,

1

three

commonest prepositions

in this order.

in Herodotus^" are

ets,

h

In Thucydides and Xenophon the order

and is kv,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 121.

Gk. Synt., p. 95; Egger, Gr. Comp., p. 195. ^ lb. Moulton, Prol., p. 100. s Die Prap. bei Polyb., 1882; cf. p. 3. " Die Priip. bei Herod, und andern Hist., 1904. ^ Johannessohn, Der Gebr. der Casus und der Priip. in der Sept., Tl. 1, 1910, Cf. also C. and S., p. 80 f. 2

Cf. Farrar,

>

8

Prol., p. 98.

" See

Helbing, Priip. bei Herod., p. 8

9 f.,

lb., p. 62.

for the facts here used.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) and

els

557

But Xenophon

ewl.

various books.

varies the order of frequency in his In Polybius the three chief prepositions are /card,

Trpoj, els; in Diodorus els, Kara, irpos; in Dionysius h, eirl, els; in Josephus {War) wpos, els, Kara, (A7it.) els, eirl, irpos; in Plutarch ev, irpbs, els; in Dio Cassius ev, els, ext. In the N. T. the three main ones, as seen above, are ev, els, eK, though ewi is not far behind e/c. In the hterary kolvt] it will be seen that the use of els is nearly double

that of

ev,

Hebrews.^

The

ing.

as in the

whereas in the N. T. els is ahead of ev only in Mark and In the vernacular kolvt], ev makes a rather better showlarge increase of the adverbial prepositions in the

kolvt],

here remarked that they

same word

still

nacular as well as avb

and

little later.

It

N. T.,

may

be

42, counting varjdng forms of the

like oinadev, b-wlaw.

prepositions goes

{k6.)

number

Modern Greek. The

In

(e)

treatment a

calls for special


Cf.

further.^

varjdng history of the eighteen

Thus

avTi{s)

survives in the ver-

(aire), Blo. {yLo), els {es, ere,

Thumb, Handb.,

pp. 100

's),

fj-era (fxe),

The bulk

ff.

Kara

of the

old prepositions drop out in the mediaeval period.

Their place is supplied largely by the later prepositional adverbs, as ava by iivo}, ^^

by

e^w,

in the

but partly also by a wider use of the remaining preposi-

for ev and Tpos, /xe for avv. Then again all prepositions modern Greek use the accusative case as do other adverbs,

tions, as

els

and sometimes even with the nominative (yia Go4)bs, 'as a sage'). In a sense then the Greek prepositions mark a cycle. They show the return of the accusative to its original frequency. They have lost the fine distinctions that the old Greek prepositions once pos-

when they were used to help out the ideas of the cases. They drop out before the rise of other prepositions which more clearly

sessed

The so-called improper prepositions are more sharply defined in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., pp. 107 ff.). But in the N. T. the prepositions have not gone so far in their history. exhibit the adverbial side of the preposition.

IV. Prepositions in Composition with Verbs.

Not the Main Function. As has already been showTi, was not the original use of what we call prepositions, though

(a)

this

this usage has given the

name

to this

group of

wortls.

l^esides

it

debars one technically from calling those numerous adverbs \)yc\)ositions which are used with cases, l)ut not used in composition with verbs. But no "inseparable" prepositions were developed 1

^

Moulton, Prol., p. 62. See Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,

and mod. Gk.

p.

365

f.,

Cf. Hatz., Einl., p. 151.

for careful

comparison between anc.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

558

NEW TESTAMENT

though in the N. T. afj.(j)l does not appear outside of In most dialects aix(t)i was obsolete (Buck, Gk. Dia102). In modern Greek dm-, xapd- and k- (^e) are used in composition (Thumb, Handb., p. 99), but 6% occurs

in Greek,^

composition. lects, p.

chiefly

with accusative.

Preposition Alone. Sometimes indeed the preposition is (ellipsis) and the verb has to be supplied, as in ovk 'ivi So virep eyco in 2 Cor. 11 23. Of. dXX' (Gal. 3 28) for ovk eveaTi. ava ('but up!') in Homer. This ellipsis does not differ greatly from the common use of tmesis in Homer, where the preposition is regarded more as an adverb. The use of prepositions in composition (c) Increasing Use. increased with the history of the Greek language. One character.^ istic of the later Greek is the number of compound verbs employed till impression and will remain so one This is a matter partly of " Xo-y
used alone

:

:

not indeed show as lavish a use of compound verbs as does Polybius,

the chief representative of the literary

kolvt]

of his time.

But

these 5t7rXd belonged to the language of the people in Aristotle's

time^ and the papyri show a

common

use of

As compared with Polybius the N. T. makes

compound less

verbs, but the matter varies with different verbs

verbs.^

use of certain

and

different

writers.^ 1

Monro, Horn.

The

LXX

Gr., p. 123.

shows a great variety of uses of the prep, with due to transl. from the Heb., partly to the koivti. Cf C. and S., p. 88, for list. Cf Johannessohn, Der Gebr. d. Casus und der Priip. in der LXX. 3 Moulton, Prol., p. 118. Cf. W.-Th., p. 426. * Zur Rect. der Casus in der spateren hist. Grac, III. Heft, p. 3. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 115. ^ Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 486 ff. Kuhring (de praepositionum Graecarum in chartis Aegyptiis usu quaestiones selectae, 1906) and Rossberg (de praep. Graec. in chartis Aegypt. Ptol. aetatis usu, 1909) have both attacked the problems in the pap., as Geyer (Observationes epigrapliicae de praep. Graec. forma et usu, 1880) has done for the inscr. * Moulton, Prol., p. 116 f. The great work on prepositions is Tycho Mommsen's Beitr. zu der Lehre von den griech. Prap., 1895. 2

in particular

verbs, partly

.

.

559

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) (d)

Repetition after Verb.

Sometimes the preposition Greek. The

repeated after the verb, as in the older most frequently repeated are oltto, k^, els, h,

This

kirl.

is

prepositions

partly

is

the N. T. and

because these prepositions are so common partly because they emphasize the local notions of 'from,' 'in,' Perhaps also the preposition in or 'upon,' and 'to' or 'into.' The papyri and inscriptions down. composition is a bit worn though hardly so preposition, the show the same repetition of in

frequently,

if

may

one

avTov (Mk. 1 42). most part the preposition

air'

:

also airapdfi

oltt'

airrjXOev

indeed Winer ^ finds that for the repeated in the N. T. Thus we note arro

is

(Mt. 9

avrcov

See

judge by his impressions.

With

15), (K^taLpdrai

:

(Lu. 16

kfxov

air'

:

3,

but not so in 10 42), cnrrjWaxOaL dx' avTov (Lu. 12 58), aireOaveTe dro Tuv ffTOLxelo)v (Col. 2 20), air' avTOjf airo^aPTes (Lu. 5:2), cnreireaav :

:

:

a-KO TU)P 6(l)9a\fxQiv a4)0pl(TeL air'

(Ac. 9

aK\r]\o)v

aTro(xrpe\l/eL cltto 'laKco^

Likewise

k

(Ro. 11

(Lu. 13

17), el^eXe^afxrjv

:

k^eKOTTTjs

k

52),

:

32), aTreairaadr]

:

:

Th. 2

(1

17),

acj)'

vixoiv

air'

avTwv (Lu. 22 41), :

air" e/ioO

26), airoxoop^'LTe

:

(Mt. 7: 23),

but not 2 37). may be repeated as with e/c/3dXXet k rod drjaavpov eK aov e^eXeuo-erai (Mt. 2:6), e^aipoviJLePOS k tov XaoO

CLTToaT-qTe air' e/xoO

(Mt. 13 (Ac. 26

18), dTi:op
:

(Mt. 25

(Ro. 11

:

:

k

27,

:

rod Koafiov (Jo. 15

24), e^eireaav

TOV (XTop-aTos (Mt. 15: 11),

k

tGjv x^i-P^v

eK(t)vyeiv

k

:

k

19),

rrjs

Kara ^vaiv

(Ac. 12 7), eKiropevoixepov :

tov oIkov (Ac. 19

:

16).

Verbs compounded with ets "uniformly repeat eis" (WinerThayer, p. 430). So, for instance, eia'nyayov (Lu. 22 54), daikvai, (Ac. 3:3), darikdev (Mt. 2 21), dairopevov-ai (Mk. 1 21), eia
:

:

(Ac. 17:20).

With

k we observe the repetition in some verbs appears,

though

occurs instead both where motion is implied and where the idea is simply that of rest (pregnant construction). As is well known, k and eh are really the same word. Hence the rigid dis-

often

eis

two prepositions cannot be insisted on. There two extremes about eh and ev, one to blend them entirely because of alleged Hebraism, the other to insist on complete dis-

tinction between the

are

As a

tinction always.

rule they are distinct,

but eh frequently

encroached on ev where one has to admit the practical identity, like eh oUbv eaTLv (Mk. 2:1, marg. in W. H.), 6 oop eh top koKttov For the frequent LXX examples sec Tov Trarpos (Jo. 1 18), etc. :

Conybcare and Stock, only examples of

(Mt. 26

:

k

p. 81.

Still,

for the sake of uniformity,

are here given, like

k

23), efi^pLfxcofxepos 1

iavTij (Jo. 11

W.-Th.,

p. 427.

:

'ep.^a\pas

k

tw

Tpi'/3Xup

38), evyey paufxepr]

k

rais

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

560

Cor. 3:2),

KapSlais (2

(Ph. 2

kv Vfuv

viuv (Col. 3

(2 Cor. 5:6), evepyuv (Heb. 8:9), kvoiKtiTCj) ev rats (XTrdrats (2 Pet. 2 13).

evd7]ij.ovvTes kv tCo aoifxaTt.

13), heixetvav kv

:

16), hTpv(f)oovTes kv

:

A number

have

of verbs

dLadrjKy

ttj

:

such as eTrt/Se/SrjKcbs kiri with accusative (Mt. 21:5), eTL^aXkei evrt with accusative (Lu. 5 36), kirrjpev eir' epik (Jo. 13 18), ecpaXoixevos eir' avrovs (Ac. 19 16), :

kri repeated,

:

(Lu.

€Tre\ev(7eTaL eirl ae

avT^ (Jo. 11

ctt'

avTOV (Lu. 1

38),

:

12),

:

eir'

avTov (1 Pet. 5

€7r'

:

:

:

35),

ras kt\. (Ac. 4

€7rt5e eirl

kt\. (Lu. 1

eirej3\€\l/ev eirl ttjv

ovSevl

:

avruv eTLTeirrcoKos (Ac. 8

7), k-KLTLdkaaiv kirl rovs kt\.

Tov ktK. (1 Cor. 3

CTTt

liel

1

:

48), eweTreaev :

kirl

eir'

16), hwLplxf/avTes

(Mt. 23

12), kTtoLKobop.ridk.VTes

29), kireKetTO

:

4), ewoLKodo-

:

to)

ktX.

(Eph.

2:20).

As

many

to 5td not

verbs have

repeated, but note hairo-

it

peveadat avTOV bia CToplpwv (Lu.

6:1), biecdodrjaav bC vbaros (1 Pet. 3:20), Siepxerat bC avvbpwv (Mt. 12:43), bLrjpx^TO bia pkaov (Lu. 17:11).

A

similar rarity as to repetition exists in the case of Kara, but

we note

KaT-qyoptlTe Kar' avrov (Lu.

a\r]9eias (Jas.

3

:

14), KaraKauxoicrde

:

:

irapa

(Ac. 22

repeated as in

TrapeXd/Jere Trap' fjpcbu (1

:

6), -Kepie^wapkvoL irepl

to.

Thus

Treptaorpdi/'at

kt\. (Rev. 15

:

like /xerd, shows no example of repetition in the though some MSS. read irpoTopevar] irpb Tpoadoirov (for

IIpo,

in

Lu.

1

:

:

of Tpos repeated take TrpoaKoWrjOrjaeraL xpos

31), irpoakirecrev Tpos tovs kt\.

Tovs kt\. (Ac. 13

As a

critical kvuTTLov)

:

36).

It is

(Mk. 7:

ttjv

kt\.

25), irpoaeTkdr] rrpos

seldom repeated.

lonely example of avv repeated see crwe^o^oToiT^aev avv aura)

(Col. 2

We

6), irepi-

76.

As examples (Eph. 5

Th.

tov kt\. (Lu. 17: 2), TvepLecnraTO itepl iroXXriv (Lu. 10 :40).

/cctrat Trept

text,

rrjs

13; 2 Th. 3 :6).

repeated with more verbs than rapd.

Ilept is

Kara

14).

Very seldom is 4:1, cf. 1 Th. 2 jrepl kfik

23

:

13).

have no example of

some MSS.

inro

repeated and but one of vwkp in

(not the critical text) for Ro. 8

:

26 (virepevrvyxaveL

—

UTrep rjpCiv). (e)

Different Preposition after Verb.

ferent preposition

This

is,

may

Once more, a difbe used other than the one in composition.

where the meaning differs radically, as in even when the prepositions very greatly. Thus eis frequently follows compounds

of course, true

ovvaKo\ov6ov(Tai airo (Lu. 23 :49), Ijut

do not of

12

kv, :

differ

as

k/jL^avTi els TrXotoi'

(Mt. 8

5), kn^aTTOfitvos eis t6 ktX.

:

23), kpj3aXe1v

(Mk. 14

:

eis Trjv

ykevvav (Lu.

20), kix^\k\paTe

eis

to.

kt\.

:

PREPOSITIONS (npoeESEis)

561

(Mt. 6 26), ejjLTreaoi'TOS els tovs kt\. (Lu. 10 3G), heiTTVcrav els to ktX. (Mt. 26:67), kveKevTpladrjs els KoWieXaLov (Ro. 11:24). There is :

:

comment

cause for

little

here.

is pertinent and is to Here wapa calls attention beside the place or person whence he starts;

In general the varying of the preposition

be noted.

So, for instance,

to the fact that one

is

airo, kK, irapa.

merely notes the point of departure, while k- distinctly asserts that one had been within the place or circle before departing. Cf.

airo

therefore

Mt. 3 16 Thus :

^avw in

Mt. 5 as

1

Cor. 11

23, Trapa^epco in

:

in 1 Pet. 3

IkkXij'co

1

Mk.

k

14

:

:

and

36,

(besides

10

avajSaipoiv

25, TrapaXafi-

in

irapepxofjLaL

may have

e/c)

Lu. 2

11, or irapa as e^epxo/xat in

:

:

follows TrapajSaivu in Ac. 1

airo

Verbs compounded with

18.

:

and Mk.

ave^-q airo rod vSaros

€K Tov vdaros.

:

olto

while

1,

shows either e/c (Mt. 15 18), dro (Mt. 20 29) or irapa (Jo. 15 26). So compounds of /card use either airo as Kara^aivo} (Lu. 9 54) or k as ib. (Jo. 6: 41). See further discussion under

kKiroptvoixai

:

:

:

:

separate prepositions.

Compounds

of ava likewise are followed

(Mt. 5:1), avayoi (Lu. 2

(Mk. 16

vofjLai

:

(Mt.

(Lu. 14

19), dmTrtxrco

avepxop.ai (Gal. 1

18)

:

or

;

by

els

as with ava^aivco

22), ava^Xewoi (Lu. 9

:

by

eirl

dmXaM/3a-

16),

:

10), avacpepoi (Lu.

:

as ava^alvco (Lu. 5

:

24

:

51),

19), ava^i^a^o)

13:48), avaKafxiTTCO (Lu. 10:6), avaKKlpofiaL (Mt. 14:19), with accusative (Mt. 15 35) or genitive (Mk. 8 6),

avairiiTTO}

dm^epco

:

(1 Pet.

2

24)

:

or

;

by

irpos

:

as ava^aivw (Jo. 20

:

17), avaKaynrTbi

23 7). As a rule irpbs refers to perand eirl differ in that evl more distinctly marks the terminus. But the line cannot be drawn hard and fast between these prepositions, because eirl and irpos show a variation. Thus verbs compounded with eivl may be followed by els as in kiTLlSaWco (Mk. 4 37), ein^alvco (Ac. 20 18), eiralpo} (Lu. 18 13), 'E7ri7pd(/)aj is even followed by ev in e(f)LKveop.aL (2 Cor. 10 14).

(Mt. 2

:

12), dm-Tre/xTco (Lu.

sonal relations while

:

els

:

:

:

:

On

Ac. 17 23. :

the other hand,

in irpoaTldr)p.L (Mt. 6

even

elaeiin

has

irpos in

Atd in composition 9), irpos

(Lu. 16

:

k

both

and

IJ.eTairep.iroiJ.at

(1

Cor. 4

/cifco

1

:

:

els),

dj^d (1

:

have h.

Cor. 6

:

usually have

iJLeraXXaaao)

But

be followed

(Ro.

1

:

eirl

as

And :

11).

as in Sia^alvu) (Ac. 16

els

5), etc.

like nera^alvu (Lu. 10

els,

26), nerapoeco

22), ijeTaaTpe(f>o} (x\c.

2

:

20),

(Mt. 12

(Ro. 12

:

8)

and

:

:

7

41),

iJeTa(JXf]P-a.TL^<ji

(Ac. 7: 16), jjeTaTpeiro} (Jas.

juera5i5cojut

bj'-

Tim. 1:3).

has ewl (Lu. 12

elacfyepco

:

)uerd

(Ac. 10

may

be followed by

6), neTaTlOr]p.L

(Ac. 7 :4).

25)

Ac. 21 18 and

may

26) or

Compounds with

irpos

27) or ev as in irpoaixevu (1

:

4

:

9), jueroi-

jueraXXdcro-co

(Ro.

followed

TlepLaycx) is

we have

TrpoeXeuo-erat

h

by

Mt. 4

in

of

by fxera

(Tvv

23.

may have

modern Greek)

in

:

As

to

Lu.

irp6 in

1

:

17

followed by hwinov.

Verbs compounded with avp

•

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

562

ixera (cf

.

the displacing

as in awalpcc (Mt. 25

:

19) o-uXXaXco

(Mt. 17:3), aviiirknTTw (2 Cor. 8:18), auM^wvco (Mt. 20:2) and even avvKaTe\pr](j)ladr] jieTa twv evdeKa cnroaToKcov (Ac. 1 26). But :

note

avva-yoi

cvpepxofjiaL Trpos

For 9

:

(Mt. 3 (Ac. 28

els

:

12),

:

With

vrepaipojjiaL ext in

vTTo

we

find a

and

27)

:

Cor. 11

17), exl (1

vwep(j)povelv irapa see

14 and

(27

kirl

:

(Mk.

Trpos

and

20)

ets

Ro. 12 3. Cf. virep^aWo) 2 Th. 2 4. :

(11

7:

33

:

1), f.).

in 2 Cor.

eiri

:

number

of prepositions especially with inrayoi,

as utTo. (Mt. 5 :41), eh (9 :6), airb (13 :44), Trpos (Jo. 13 3), iv (Jas. 2 16), with which compare ottIgw (Mt. 16 23) and fxera^u Cf. also iiTroo-rpec^co with ets (Lu. 1 56) and ctti (Ac. (18 15). :

:

:

:

8

:

:

Delicate shades of meaning will be found in

28).

prepositions without

all

these

undue refinement. See Conybeare and Stock,

p. 88, for different prepositions

with verbs in the

LXX.

But it is not (/) Second Preposition not Necessary. always necessary for any preposition to follow the compound verb. Often the preposition with the verb may be followed by the case usual with the preposition without

that

is

verb

itself.

tantamount

That

is

much

regard to the

to say, the preposition in composition

in result to the simple verb followed

may be

by that preposi-

sometimes happens so. It list. As examples we may note the following: 'EirLTriirTeLv avTQi (Mk. 3 10) with the dative may be compared with r^s x^^pi-Tos k^eTeaare (Gal. 5 4) with the ablative. Here the two prepositions and the cases correspond tion. is

This

is

not always true, but

it

not necessary to give an exhaustive

:

:

exactly.

15

:

6).

The instrumental

case

is

illustrated

Cf. also the ablative in Lu. 10

:

by

42 with

(Tvvxa.pr]re

/jlol

(Lu.

As

a(j)aLpedT]aeTaL.

an example of the locative take kixp.'tv€Lv rfj iriaTeL (Ac. 14 22). An example of the genitive is seen in aov KaraixapTvpovaLv (Mt. 26 62. Cf. also Mt. 16 18) and of the accusative .in Trjp aXvaiv ravTyjv irepiK€i,uaL (Ac. 28 20) where a change of standpoint takes place, since the chain is around Paul. Cf. Heb. 12 1. In a case like SieTopevovTo Tois TToXets (Ac. 16 4) one may either regard the accusative :

:

:

:

:

:

as loosely associated with the preposition 11) or consider that the preposition

transitive (see next point).

See ch.

has

XI

(cf. 5ta,

made an

peaov in Lu. 17

:

intransitive verb

for further exx.

Effect of Preposition on Meaning of the Verb. Sometimes there is no effect at all. The preposition is merely local as in k^epxofxai, 'go out.' The preposition may be "perfective" and (g)

^

563

PREPOSITIONS (npoeESEis)

merely intensify the meaning of the verb, as in KareaOiui ('eat up'), The preposition is sometimes weakened KaraStco/cco ('hunt clowTi'). Prepositions in composition in idea as in airodexofxaL, airoKpipofxaL. sometimes change the meaning of the verb and blend with it. A

meaning

resultant 6id

The use of Thus take dia^alvu} 19 1). The use of

with a new construction.

arises

alluded to above

may

be a case in point.

with accusative (Heb. 11 29), Mpxami- (Lu. 5 is probably the result of StttTrXeco with the accusative in Ac. 27 also ivpoa^m u/xSs in sense composition. See the preposition :

:

:

m

of 'go before' (Mt. 26

:

Cf. further airobeKaTovv,

32).

These examples

(TvyKXeieLv.

will

neradldo^iJLi,

though they could be

suffice,

multiplied easily.

Dropping the Preposition with Second Verb. Winer we have in the N.T. an instance of the old Greek idiom of using the preposition with the first verb and dropping it with the repeated verb though really retained in sense. But Moulton^ seems to show that the N. T. does offer some examples of this (h)

denies that

construction, like the Kar^qyov,

rjyov, rjyov,

of Euripides' Bacchides,

He

1065 (English 'pulled down, down, down,' Moulton).^ TapeKa^ov,

eXa^ov (Jo.

1

:llf.);

k^-qpavvqaav, epavvljiVTis (1 Pet. 1

Cor.

5:3);

avTL<jT7JuaL,

Tpoeypa(j)r],

10

:

f .)

;

(Ro.

cites

15:4);

ewepSmaaOaL, hdvaanevoi. (2

(Eph. 6

aTTJvaL

eypacfir]

:

13)

KaT€4>ayop,

;

'i^yayov

These are certainly possible illustrations, though In Eph. 13. I have doubts about 2 Cor. 5 3 and Eph. 6 6 13 especially arrjvaL is stronger alone than with avrl. I do not agree that in 1 Cor. 12 2 we have an illustration in ijyeaOe (Rev. 10

:

10).

:

:

:

:

aTrayofxevot. (i)

There

Intensive or Perfective.

common

is

another very

still

It is that of

use of the preposition in composition.

a

mere adverb and intensifies or completes the idea of the verb. Sometimes the frequent use of the compound form tends to obscure this adverbial idea. largely faded off'

was the

other.

and

Thus

in airodvrjaKco

in airoKplvoixaL the force of dTro has

it is

quite obscure.

Doubtless

'

die

original idea for the one, as 'answer back' for the

The appeal

of the preposition.

as in avvKoXel rovs

to the original usage will explain the force

But 0tXoi;s

in

most instances the idea

(Lu. 15

:

6), 'calls his

is

very

clear,

friends together.'

This common function of the preposition in all the Indo-Germanic tongues was probably the original use with verbs. At any rate it is common enough in English, though we usually separate wovh and preposition. We say "up-set" as well as "setup," but they 1

W.-Th.,

p. 433.

2

Prol., p. 115.

»

lb.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

564

mean

We

different things.

all

"come

see the adverbial force in

home," "come back," "come away,"

etc.,

but

it is

the adverb just

as truly in "fore-close," "pre-clude,"etc. Indeed, prepositions when

compounded are etymologically pure adverbs. The English may be compared with the Homeric Greek in the separateness of the adverb from the verb.^ In German the compound use of the preposition is very extensive, but later Greek and Latin illustrate it abundantly.detachable.

The German prepositions are either inseparable or As applied to the meaning of the verb the term "per-

used for the force of the preposition, but it is not a very happy designation, since one is at once reminded of the perfect tense with which it has nothing to clo.^ Moulton gives a number

fective"

is

of luminous examples such as dvyaKco 'to be dying,' cncodavtlv 'to die (off)';
'to escape (flee clean through)';

'to pursue,' KaTabidoKw 'to hunt down';

Stco/coj

'to watch,' awr-q-

rripelv

keep safe'; epya^eadaL 'to work,' KaTepya^eadat 'to work out (down to the end),' etc. The preposition in this "perfective" sense does have a bearing on the present and aorist tenses of any

peiv 'to

given verb, but that phase of the matter belongs to the discussion Indeed, not

of the tenses.

examples of

all

of the

N. T. verbs by any means show Moulton*

this "perfective" use of the preposition.

notes this absence, as compared with Polyl^ius, in the case of apxofiai, deaoiJLaL, deoip'em,

Xoyi^oixai, KLvdvvevo:, fieWo:, opyi^ofiai, Tvpaa<j(ji.

He

finds that the papyri support this "perfective" use of the preposi-

tion as between simplex interesting. his

Thus

sword (note

and compound.

awaofiaL (]\Ik. 14

but

voice),

:

47)

is

N. T. illustrations are used of Peter's drawing

BLaaTaadfj (Ac. 23

:

10) expresses

the

So kpya^oixai is a common verb for doing work (as Mk. 14 6), but /carep7dj'o/iat accents the carrying of the work through as in Ph. 2 12, and in verse 13 kvepyetv is used for the idea of in-working as contrasted with the out-working or development taught by Karepya^eadaL. Cf. also firjSev kpya^ofievovs dXXd Tvepupya^o}j.evovs (2 Th. 3:11) where the whole idea turns on Trept, 'doing nothing but doing about' is a The same distinction is seen between kadioi 'to free rendering. fear that Paul

may

be drawn in two. :

:

eat' (Mt. 15

Cf. also

:

2)

e(})ayov

and

up (down)'

KaTeaOiw 'to eat

(Mt. 6

:

25)

and

Karecfjayov

further illustration note aprt yLvdoaKo:

h

in Lu. 20

(Mt. 13

jikpovs (1

:4).

Cor. 13

:

:

47.

As one 12) and

In general, on the whole subject, of prepositions in composition see Delbriick, VerTore be kinyvo}(ToiJiaL Kadws Kal kweyvuadrjp {ih.).

» *

Moulton, Prol., p. 112. Riem. and Goelzer, Synt.,

p. 815.

^

Moulton,

*

Prol., p. 116.

Prol., p. 111.

PREPOSITIONS (npoeESEis) gleichende Syntax,

I,

pp. 660

Cf. also

ff.

565

Brugmann,

Griech. Gr.,

XVIII for further remarks. It is always interesting to note the (j) Double Compounds. As noted in chapter V, Word significance of both prepositions. Formation, iv, (c), these double compounds are frequent in the The point to emphasize here is that each KOLv-Q and so in the N. T. 431

p.

See also ch.

f.

preposition as a rule adds something to the picture. pictures in prepositions

note

:

known

First

26.

(Ac. 15

:

31

:

f.),

avv-avTi-ka^rjTaL (10

:

40.

Cf.

LXX,

but now found in papyrus and Cf. Deissmann, Light., p. 83),

(Ro. 8 26), avT-ava-irXrjpu (Col. :

37), Trpoa-ava-w'KripoJ (2 Cor. 9

Tim. 2:25),

(2

in

century b.c.

inscriptions third virep-ev-Tvyx^^^'-

^elv

(Lu. 10

avTL-irap-rjXdev

Ro. 8

There are For instance,

one has eyes to see them.

if

:

1

:

24), cri;i/-7rapa-Xa-

12),

avTi-ha-rldtixai

etc.

V. Repetition and Variation of Prepositions. are needed in general on this subject before

A

few words

we take up

the prep-

ositions in detail.

Same Preposition with Different Cases.

(a)

the same preposition

is

ferent resultant idea.

have 6ta

ovK eKTladr] avrjp

T77S

Slo. rrjv

In Heb. 2

yvvaLKos.

ference in case,

5t'

the verb with

5td

dv

to.

yvvoLKa, while in verse 12 :

is

avrip

iravTa Kai

5t'

ov to. ivavTa.

In Heb. 11

:

29

in composition has the accusative while 5id

Cf. 5td ixeaov (Lu. 4

resultant idea

we read

10 the whole point turns on the dif-

alone has the genitive, bik^riaav 7^s.

Sometimes

used with different cases and so with a difTake 5id, for instance. In 1 Cor. 11:9 we

:

30)

ttjv

and

here the same.

'Epvdpav QaKaaaav

cos

dia ^rjpas

But the a pertinent illustration.

5td fxeaou (Lu. 17: 11). 'Etti is

In Rev. 5 1 we find kirl T-qv Se^tdi/ and kirl rod dpovov, while in Rev. 11 10 observe eirl rrjs yrjs and ew' avrols. Cf. also Rev. 14: 6. So again in Mt. 19 28 note eirl dpovov and eirl dpovovs and in Mt. 24 2 kirl ytdov, but Xi^os ext Xldu) in Lu. 21:6. Cf. kirl tou and €7rt T-qv in Rev. 14 9. So eXTrifco kwi with dative in 1 Tim. 4 10 and accusative in 5 5. This is all in harmony with the ancient Greek idiom. For an interesting comparison between the Synoptic and the Johannine use of prepositions and the varying cases see Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, pp. 357-361. The variation is especially noticeable in 5td, Itti and xapd. The LXX shows abundant use of the preposition after verbs. Cf Conybearc and Stock, Selections from the LXX, p. 87 f., and Johannessohn, Der Gcbrauch etc. In some stereotyped formulae one notes aird KapSlas, ixtra ^las, Kardt, :

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

5ta/36Xoi;

(Thumb,

Ilaiidb., pp.

103

ff.).

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

566

Repetition with Several Nouns. When several nouns same preposition the preposition is repeated rather more frequently than in the earlier Greek.^ Winer ^ thinks that the repetition occurs only when the two or more substantives do not come easily under the same category. AVithin limits this is true (cf. repetition of the article), but there is rather more freedom in the later Greek on this point. In Jo. 4 23 we do have a (6)

are used with the

:

h

similar idea in the phrase

Lu. 21

irpoadoKLas in

but in verse

observe

1

Cf. also hv AvarpoLs Kal

26.

:

irvevfiaTL Kai a\r]9eiq.

/cat els

Aep^r]v Kal

els

the doulile conjunction plays some part. re — Kai

or

the preposition

oKlycj: Kal ev fxeyaXco

With

(Ph. 1:7).

(Ac. 26

also verse 4)

when he ivpo(j)i]TU}v

2), kv

airo rpijSoXcoj'

fj

the rule, as

is

commonly

ev ao(})ia

^ui)

dXX'

considers a case like a-wb

(Lu. 24

bwap-u Kal

:

06/3oi; Kal

(Ac. 16

Indeed with

27), irpos ^ip-aiva

h

Kal kv

With

bvvap.tL (1

insist

rfj

Kal kv

aTroXoylq. is

usual

antithesis the

Cor. 2

Cf.

5.

:

on any ironclad rule Kal

Mcoi^o-ecos

Herpou

2),

— Kal

Kal

Thus

repeated.

16).

:

:

Avarpav, where perhaps

Secr/JLols fiov

(Mt. 7

But one cannot properly

.

'Ikoplco

disjunctive conjunctions the repetition

also, as aTTo aKavOCiv

repetition

is

29), ev re rots

:

as in dTro

airb

Kal irpos tov

kv 7rvevp.aTL aylu) Kal kv 7rX7]po4>op'La (1

ivavTwv

aWov

to:v

(Jo.

Th. 1:5).

20

:

In a

—

comparison again the preposition is repeated, as kw' aureus o^awep disjunctive conjunctions the (Ac. 11: But even with -fji^as 15). preposition is not always repeated, as kirl dvorlv tplglv (Heb. 10 28). In Ac. 20 18 airb is not repeated, though eis occurs in one member of the sentence and kvl in the other. In Jo. 16 8 Trept is repeated Kal €0'

rj

:

:

:

for rhetorical reasons,

Cf.

o-eojs.

junction,

Eph. 6 Trpos Tcis

:

12 where the repetition occurs without a con-

dpxds, Trpos rds e^oucrtas, Trpos tovs KoapoKparopas,

Cf. also Jo. 17

etc.

Trept ap-aprlas Kal Trept 8i.KaLoavvT}s Kal Trept Kpi-

:

9.

Repetition with the Relative. The preposition is not always repeated with the relative. Usually the classic authors (c)

did not repeat the preposition with the relative when the antecedent had it.^ So the N. T. shows similar examples, as kv -qpepais als eireidev

(Lu.

Tcov (hv

(Ac. 13

amples as ^s (Ac. 20

1

:

25), :

ets

rb epyov 6 TpoaKeK\r]paL (Ac. 13

But the

39), etc.

ets Tr]V yrjv ravrrjv, :

18).

In Jo. 4

:

ets i]v

repetition

is

:

2), airb

Trd.P'-

seen in such ex-

(Ac. 7:4); aTro Tpcorrjs ripepas,

53, kKelvn

rf}

wpa, kv

fi,

a(f)'

the preposition oc-

However, between the mere locative case and kv Especially noticeable^ is a case where the antecedent is

curs with the relative, but not with the antecedent. there

is

added. 1

2

very

little

difference

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 158. W.-Th., p. 420.

»

W.-Th.,

«

Blass, Gr. of

p. 422.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 174.

5G7

PREPOSITIONS (npoeE2Eis)

not expressed and the relative has the preposition of the anteceSo Trepi 5iv in Jo. 17:9 is equal to ivepl tovtcov ovs SeSo^Kas dent.

a.

fiOL.

els

ou (Jo.

6:29).

Condensation by Variation.

(d)

of the preposition

a

is

preposition adding a

Thus

idiom. XpLffTov

in

els iravras.

is e^

avTOv Kal

Col.

1

:

Ro. 3

16

ej'

5t'

:

skilful

way

Once more, the variation

of condensing thouglit, each

new idea. Paul is especially fond of this 22 we note SiKatoavvr] 8e deov 8i.a Triareus 'Irjaov

Cf. verses 25

avrov

/cat eis

aiiTOJ eKTiadr} to.

A

f.

avTOV

—

iravra

particularly striking example iravra (Ro. 11

to.

avrov

5t'

/cat

:

ets

Cf. also

36).

avrov tKriaraL.

Eph. 4:6. In Gal. 1 1 Paul covers source and man's control of his apostleship by the use of a-wb and 5ta. See Winer-Thayer, p. 418 f. Cf. alsof v-k6 Kvpiov 6ta ToO Tpo(f)r]rov (Mt. 1 22) for mediate and intermediate agent. One should not make the prepositions mere synonjuis. Cf. vTrep (Ro. 5:6), avrl (Mt. 20 28), and irepl (Mt. 26 28) all used in connection with the death of Christ. They approach the subject Cf. ert,

5td, ev

agency in

in

:

his denial of

:

:

:

from

different angles.

VI.

The Functions

(a)

The Case before

first in

tive

order.

of Prepositions with Cases.

Prepositions.

'^

was followed by the preposition ^ as

eveKev, xo-pi-^, etc.

The Greek, however,

is still

Notion of Dimension.

The

express the idea of dimension and

all

in time first

and at

the sul^stan-

seen in the Greek

came to put the compound verbs.

generally

preposition before the substantive as with (6)

Both

In the Indo-Germanic tongues at

prepositions especially help

the relations growing out of

but they come to be used in various abstract relations also. Indeed it was just the purely "local" cases (ablative, locative and instrumental) that came to lose their independent forms (Moulton,

that,^

60 f.), due partly to the increase in the use of prepositions. Original Force of the Case. The case retains its original force with the preposition and this fundamental case-idea must be observed. The same preposition will be used with different cases where the one difference lies in the variation in case

Prol., p. (c)

as already noted.

Take

irapa, for

The

locative or the accusative.

instance, with the ablative, the

preposition

case varies and the resultant idea

is

the same, but the

differs radically.^

"La proposition no fait quo confirmor, qnc invcisor uno I, p. 44S. exprimce par un cas cuiploy6 aclverbialcinent." Ricin. ami CiU'U(>l, Syiit. Grcc, 1888, p. 2i;i. '

K.-G.,

icld^c

2

Dclbriick, Verj^l. Rynt.,

»

K.-G.,

I,

p. 451.

I,

p.

()r)3.

CT. Brup;., Grirdi. Gr., p.

Cf. Delbnick, Grundl. etc., p. 134.

*

4!^:? f.

K.-G.,

I, p. 4r)0.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

568

(d) The Ground-Meaning of the Preposition. This must always be taken into consideration.^ It is quite erroneous to say

that

Trapa,

*to.'

This

case

for instance,

means now

to confuse the resultant

is

'from,'

now

meaning

and context with the preposition

itself.

'beside,'

It

is

the

common

vice in the study of the prepositions to

make

The

Greek preposition

method

of studying the

now

of the preposition,

this crucial error. is

to

begin with the case-idea, add the meaning of the preposition

it-

scientific

then consider the context. The result of this combination be what one translates into English, for instance, but he translates the total idea, not the mere preposition. It is puerile to explain the Greek prepositions merely by the English or German rendering of the whole. Unfortunately the Greeks did not have the benefit of our English and German. Kiihner-Gerth^ self,

will

well observe that

that at

all

it is

make any

often impossible to

translation

corresponds to the Greek idiom.

The Oblique Cases Alone with

Prepositions. See XI. The vocative was obviously out of the question, and the nominative only appeared with pure adverbs like aua els (Rev. 21 21). Of. Mk. 14 19; Ro. 12 5, Ka9' eh. But not all the six oblique cases were used with equal freedom with prepositions. Certainly in the original Indo-Germanic tongues the dative was not used with prepositions.''' The dative is not originally a "local" case and expresses purely personal relations. Delbriick thinks that the Greek dative did come to be used sometimes with kwl as in Homer, kirl Tpcoeaai ixaxecfdai^ Indeed some N. T. examples of eiri may naturally be datives like hairXayXVicrOr] evr' avTols (Mt. 14 14), iiaKpodbii7](JOV ctt' kp.o[ (Mt. 18:26). But usually even with kirl the case is locative, not dative. We do have two examples of 6771)5 with the dative, as Ac. 9 38; 27: 8. Originally again the genitive was not used with prepositions,^ but the Greek undoubtedly uses the genitive, though not a "local" case, with some prepositions like avrl, ha, kirl. (e)

also ch.

:

:

:

:

:

(f)

Original Freedom.

That

to say,

is

most

of the preposi-

and some But the three just mentioned called upon most of the prepo-

tions could be used with ablative, locative, accusative

with the genitive or instrumental. ('whence,' 'where,' 'whither' cases) sitions.

Thus

The

airo

and

dialect inscriptions give e^

»

K.-G.,

»

Delbriick, Grundl. etc., pp. 130, 134.

4

lb., p. 130.

I,

many

proofs of this matter.

both appear in the Arcadian and Cyprian dialects

p. 451.

2

lb.

Cf. also ^

Monro, Horn., Gr.

lb., p. 134.

p. 125.

PREPOSITIONS (nPGGESEIs)

569

with the locative as well as the ablative.^ 'A/x(/)t originally occurred with locative, accusative and genitive. The same thing eTrl, fieTo. irepi and vtto (possibly with ablative, not Indeed Trepi once used the ablative also. Uapa and were used with locative, accusative or ablative. It is posindeed that Trpos may have been used with five cases, adding

was true

of

genitive). Trpos

sible

true dative and true genitive to the above.^ four cases occur (Delbriick) since

In the case of

kirl

apparently used the dative

it

Other prepositions once were used with two cases, as with locative and accusative and the same thing was true of els and dm, whereas Kara seems to use accusative, genitive, ablaalso.

eu

tive.

had locative as well as ablative, while vwep and accusative and 5td accusative and

IIpo originally

had ablative

(genitive ?)

genitive. 'AvtL has only genitive, while avv has only instrumental. 'Afx(j)i is

no longer a

free preposition in the

N.

T.,

but occasionally

occurs in the papyri. (g)

No Adequate Division by Cases.

fore, to

make any adequate There were indeed

cases.

eight with two,

observe turies

is

and

and

It is

very

difficult,

division of the prepositions

in early

there-

by the

Greek two with only one

eight with three cases.

case,

But the point

to

that the usage varies greatly in the course of the cenin different regions, not to say in the vernacular

the literary style.

and every writer

Besides, each preposition

own

had

its

own

and in history

For the detailed compaand for the history of the cases with the prepositions see Krebs.* But in the Ptolemaic times prepositions are more and more used with the accusative to his

idiosyncrasies.

rison of the prepositions see Helbing,^

the corresponding disappearance of the other oblique cases.^

In

must note (cf. ch. XI) the disappearance of the locative, instrumental and dative before the accusative and the genitive, until in the modern Greek els and the accusative have superseded h and the locative and the dative proper also. Even (Tvv and the instrumental disappear in the modern Greek vernacular before ne (fxeTo) and the accusative.^ (h) Situation in the N. T. But in the N. T. the matter has not developed that far and the cases are not so much blurred, particular one

J

Delbriick, Grundl., p. 129.

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449

3

Die

Priip. hoi

and

Cf. lladley

-Alloii, i)]).

252-2G0.

f.

Ilorod., p. S

f.

Voc, etc., pp. 357 ff., Die Priip. bci Polyb., p. G f. Pap. Grace. Syiit., p. 30.

Cf. Abbott, Joli.

for prep, in the Gospels.

*

6

Mullach, Gr. VoIk.,

«

Cf. Geldart, (Juide to

pj).

37Gff.; V6lk(«r,

mod. Gk.,

p. 247;

Thumb,

Ilandb., pp. 100

ff.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

570

though the range of the prepositions in the matter of cases is The seventeen "proper" prepositions (d/x^i drops out) in the N. T. use the cases as will be now shown. 1. Those with One Case. kva, aurl, cltto, ds, eK, h, irpb, avv use only one case, eight as opposed to two in the early Greek (avH and avv). The cases used are not the same (accusative with dm and ets; genitive with olvtI; ablative with airo, Ik and irpo; locative with h; instrumental with avv), but nearly half of the prepositions have come to one case in the N. T. In the modern Greek all the prepositions occur usually with the accusative (or even the nom.)The use of the genitive (abl.) is due to literary influence. The common proper prepositions in modern Greek are eh, aivo, pe, yta, and less commonly Kara, irapa, avrls, and in dialects Tpos (Thumb, Handh., p. 98). This tendency towards case simplification is well illustrated by the so-called improper prepositions which use only one case (abl., gen. or dat.), though they do not feel the movement towards the accusative. 2. Those with Two Cases. Five (as opposed to eight) use two cases: 5td, juerd, irepi, virep, virb. The cases used are genitive and accusative each with 5td, pera, irepi; ablative and accusative with virkp and v-ko. In the case of irepi some of the examples can be greatly hmited.

'

explained as ablative (from around), while virb seems, like vpkp, to use the ablative (cf. Latin svb) and possibly the genitive also.

Those with Three Cases.

3.

eight) retain three cases:

Only four prepositions

(as against

and have both ablative and genitive. Kara in Mt. 8 32, o^pprjaev Kara rod Kprjpvov, is used with the ablative. IIpos indeed only has the genitive once (Ac. 27 34) and that is due to the literary influence on the N. T.^ If irpbs drops out, only three prepositions eiri,

Kara, wapa, irpbs, unless

virb

irepi, virkp :

:

still

use three cases, barring

not very

common

irepi,

virep

and

(gen. 78, ace. 60, loc. 50),

virb.

still

Of these

irapa is

less Kara,

while

ewi is still frequent (ace. 464, gen. 216, loc. 176). 4. Possibly Four with eiri. In the case of eiri indeed we may have to admit four cases, if there are examples of the pure dative like Mt. 18 26, paKpodvpriaov kir' e/xoi. But at any rate eiri and Trapd alone show the old freedom in the use of the cases. Like other adverbs the (0 Each Preposition in a Case. prepositions are fixed case-forms, some of which are still apparent. :

Thus

avri

is

in the locative case, like

ep{i), eiri, irepi.

Trapai

Cf. also irpori

TheformsSiatandijTrat occur also (datives). The old dative occurs, while irapa is instrumental. So dm, 5td, /card, fxera are

(wpbi).

1

Moulton,

Prol., p. lOG.

PEEPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

571

What virb is wc do not know. But the may be itself has no necessary bear-

in the instrumental case.

case in which the preposition ing on the case with which

used. It is just a part of the word's always worth observing. VII. Proper Prepositions in the N. T. The case of avd is not clear. Originally it was am (a) 'Avct. and may be the same as the Lesbian, Thessalian and Cyprian 6v. Cf. Enghsh "on." It may be compared with the Old Persian and Gothic ana, the Latin and German an. One may compare the Greek av and Sanskrit ana} The fundamental idea seems to be "on," "upon," "along," hke German auf, and this grows easily to "up" like avoi in contrast with Kara, (kcitco). Homer uses the adverb ara as an ellipsis to mean "up." The locative was once used with dm, but in the N. T. only the accusative occurs. The distributive use may be up and down a line or series, and

own

history, but

MSS.

it is

still it is

common

give Kara in several of these instances (a

dm

use of

very common in composition with verbs in the N. T. (over ten pages of examples in Moulton and Geden's Concordance), only thirteen examples of the preposition alone occur in the N. T. One of these (Lu. 9 3) is absent from W. H. Kara also)

.

While

is

:

(Nestle retains

merely adverb

it),

while in Rev. 21:21 (aua eh) the word

is

Homer), not preposition.- Of the remaining eleven instances, four are examples of d^^d fxeaov with the genitive, a sort of compound prepositional phrase with the idea of "between" (like Mt. 13 25), similar to the modern Greek ava/xeaa, and found in the LXX, Polybius, etc. One (1 Cor. 14 27, apo. (cf.

:

:

means

fxepos,

'in turn,'^ while the

of the distributive use, like

use

is

in

Xenophon.

see Radermacher, p. (T/cets

remaining (Lu. 10

di^d 8vo

For examples

:

1).

in papyri

Cf. our "analogy."

1.5.

The

distributive

and

inscriptions

In Ac. 8

a avayLvwaKets, the point turns on dm-, l^ut

how dm- turns "know"

to "read."

examples

six are all

it is

:

30, yiuu-

not clear

20 dmords /cardAbbott, Johnnnine Cr., pp. 222 fT., argues at length to show that the one example in John (2 6) is distributive. 'Am does not survive in modern Greek vernacular (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366). In the papyri aua shows Prjdi

for contrast

between

dm and

See Ac. 10

:

Kara.

:

some new compounds not 1

also ^

in the

N.

T., like avairoptvoyLaL

RriiR., Gricch. Gr., p. 43G; K.-G., I, p. 473.

Tycho Moiiunscn,

Bcitr. zu d.

Lchrc von

3 Blass,

the N. T. prep, see

d. {jriccli. Priip. (1S05).

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178, cites .sonic late Gk.

not a Hebraism.

On

(Mayser,

Deiss., B. S., p. 139.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122, cites Polyb.

c.\x.

of

6.v6.

as adv.

Clearly

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

572

Gr. d. Griech.Pap.,]). 486). Delbriick, Vergl Syntax,

734, con-

1, p.

one of the "proethnic" prepositions. It is rare in the papyri and the inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 115). But avaaTaTol lie, 'he upsets me' (P.Oxy. 119, ii/iii a.d.), siders dra, like avH,

is

strangely like Ac. 17 (b)

:

6

oi Tr]v oIk.

This preposition

AvTi.

is

apaaraTcoaavTes.

in the locative case of apra.

Sanskrit dnti, Latin ante, Lithuanian ant, Gothic

Cf.

German The root-

a7ul,

ant (-ent), Anglo-Saxon andlang, and-swerian ('answer'). idea is really the very word "end." Brugmann {Griech. Gr., p. 437) thinks it may mean "front." If so, "in front of" would be the idea of the

word

VTT-), euaPTLos,'

in the locative.

Cf. arite-room,

log facing each other.

The

That

clptLos,

avraw

{air-,

two men at each end

at the end' {aPTi). Suppose

of a

gives the etymological picture, "face

it was originally the genitive and namodern Greek the accusative has displaced it.^ It is obviously the real adnominal genitive and not ablative (cf. Sanskrit adverb dnti) that we have with apri and is hke the genitive with the adverbs ixpra, clptLop, apria, and the adjective aPTLos, etc.2 In Homer indeed apri has just begun to be used in

to face."

turally so,

case used with

though

in

composition with verbs so that

it

barely escapes the

list

of the

"improper" prepositions.^ Blass* calls it "one of the prepositions that are dying out," but as a matter of fact it survives in modern Greek. In the N. T. it is used in composition with twentytwo verbs (single compounds) and occurs twenty-two times also with nouns and pronouns. It is not therefore very flourishing in the N. T. It does not occur often in the indices to the papyri volumes, and Mayser^ gives papyri support for some of the N. T.

compounds

like apdoiuoKoyecc, aPTLKeLfxaL, aPTLXa/ji^apofxai.

It

is

absent

from the inscriptions of Magnesia and Pergamon (Radermacher,

N.

T. Gr., p. 115).

of the preposition dj^e/icp

the

(Ac. 27: 15)

bQakii6s.

In some of the compounds the original idea comes out finely. Thus in aPT-o(i)da\^eLP t<3 the preposition merely carries on the idea of

The boat could not This root-idea

look at ('eye, face to face') or

always present in apri and is the basis from which to discuss every example. It is equally plain in a word like avTL-irap-rj\dep (Lu..lO: 31 f.). The priest and Levite passed along on the other side of the road, facing {clpt'l) the wounded traveller. Note apTL-PaXXere in Lu. 24 17, where the two disface the wind.

is

:

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 368.

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437; Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 126, 149

^

Monro, Horn.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 124.

Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p. 740. f.

Gr., p. 150. ^

Qr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487.

573

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs) ciples

were exchanging words (casting them from one to the other

as they faced each other, aPTi) with one another, an intimate vivid picture of conversation. Cf. also the contrast between

and

and olptI

Kara in evds avde^eraL ('cleave to,' 'cUrig to,' 'hold one's self face

to face with') Kal tov erepov

KaracjipourjaeL

(Mt. 6

In the double

24).

:

(Rom. 8: 26; cf. Lu. The Holy Spirit 10 40) the fundamental meaning is olndous. lays hold of our weakness along with {avv) us and carries his part of the burden facing us {avTi) as if two men were carrying a log,

compound

cvv-avTi-Xafi^aveTaL

aadevda

rfj

rjixoiv

:

Cf. avTL-\aix^6.veadaL in Ac. 20

one at each end.

:

The English

35.

Note KaTr]VTr](Tanep avnKpvs Xlov (Ac. 20 15) where in both verb and preposition the idea of face-to-face appears. So aiv-avTr}CH (Mk. 14:13), aPTi-irepa (Lu. 8 26), kv-avTi-ov (20 26). Now the various resultant ideas grow out of this root-idea because of different contexts. Take the notion of opposition (against). The word does not mean that in itself. The two disciples were talking in a friendly mood (aj/Tt-/3dXXcT€), but 12) if a man makes himself king he dj^rt-Xe7et tw Katcrapt (Jo. 19

word "antithesis" preserves the idea

also.

:

:

:

:

atmosphere of rivalry that gives the

It is the

in a hostile sense.

colour of hostility.

We

2:18), avTL-TTiicTeTe tw

see

it

also in the

-KvevixarL

instances occur: avTL-arrjpai, avT-enreiv,

(Mt. 5

:

25).

avrl-xpi-crTos (1 Jo.

In Lu. 21:15 three Cf. avri-SiKos

aPTL-KelfxevoL.

no instance of the uncompounded preposiThe idea of "in the place of " or " instead " comes

There

tion in this sense.

word

(Ac. 7:51).

is

where two substantives placed opposite to each other are equivalent and so may be exchanged. The majority of the N. T. examples belong here. In b^BoKixbv LptI b4>Qa.\ixov (Mt. 5 38; cf. also 6.PTL oBoPTos) there is exact equivalence like "tit for tat." So also KaKov aPTL KaKov (Ro. 12 17; 1 Th. 5 15; 1 Pet. 3:9), \oL8oplap None the less does the idea of exchange aPTL XotSoptas (1 Pet. 3:9). (cf. aPT-aX\ayiJ.a, Mk. 8 37) result when a fish and a snake are :

:

:

:

placed opposite each other, birthright

and a mess

clptI

IxOvos

(Lu. 11: 11) or one's

6ip

of pottage (Heb. 12

16).

:

In Mt. 17 27, :

a compression of statement where the stater strictly corresponds to the tax due by Christ and Peter rather than to Christ and Peter themselves. But in Xvrpop aprl avTL

efjLov

Kal

aov, there is

foWup (Mt. 20

28;

:

Mk.

10

:

45) the parallel

is

more

exact.

These

important doctrinal passages teach the substitutionary conception of Christ's death, not because apri of itself means " instead," which is

not true, but l)ecause the context renders any other resultant

idea out of the question.

Paul

(1

Tim. 2

:

6)

Compare

where both

clptL

by combine with \vTpov

also clptlKvtpop virip tclptcop

and

virep

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

574

Cf

in expressing this idea.

In Mt. 2 22 24) form of succession as Cf. avd-vTraros (Ac. 13 7). In (Heb. 9

clvtI-tvitos

.

:

.

:

tov Tarpos the substitution takes the

clvtI

son succeeds father on the throne. 15 apH tov yeyetv the result

Jas. 4

:

also substitution, the points

is

:

In Heb. 12

of view being contrasted.

2 the cross and the joy

:

mind of Jesus and he takes both, the cross the joy. The idea of exchange appears also

face each other in the in order

in

to get

Cor. 11

1

:

15

avA

Kbix-q

17

avrl xaptros (Jo. 1

veas avTL iraKaioTepwv eTL8i8oo(XLv as clearly

able" passage.

x^ptj'

but Winer^ rightly sees the Simcox^ cites from Philo x^piras

import of the preposition.

original

Blass^ considers

irepLjSoXalov.

16) as "peculiar,"

:

But

explaining this "remark-

much difficulty been made new supply takes the place of

really has not too

As the days come and go a wave follows wave upon the shore. Grace answers {ciptl) to grace. The remaining examples are five of au6' UP in the sense of 'because' ('therefore'), when two clauses of it?

the grace already bestowed as

or sentences correspond to each other, one the reason for the other.

This

is

indeed classical enough

(Eph. 5

:

31)

LXX

where the

quote, has epeKep tovtov

(cf.

(LXX

Mk.

10

:

Similar is apH tovtov which Paul does not Mt. 19 4). There is yet

also).

(Gen. 2 7;

:

24),

:

another idea that comes out in composition like (Lu. 14

:

14)

where

'in return' (cf.

oltto

"in turn").

apd-ofj.o\oyew (Lu. 2

:

aPT-aTTo-blbwp.L

has the meaning of 'back' and dpTi of

38).

Cf. aPT-airo-Kplpopiai. (Lu. 14

In Col.

1

:

24, aPT-apa-K\y]pbio,

:

6)

and

Paul uses

As One may remark show their original

avTL in the sense of 'in his turn' (answering over to Christ).

Christ, so Paul

fills

up the measure

of suffering.

that prepositions in composition often best

import. 'Airo.

(c)

We

The etymology

of this preposition

note the Sanskrit dpa, Latin ah, Gothic

Some

a/,

very simple.

is

English

of,

off.

used the form airv (Arcad., Cypr., Thess.) and the Epic dTrai is to be noted.* We may compare ai/' (oltt-s) with Latin ays {ah; cf. k, e^). The case of airb cannot be determined, but observe dTrat above. In the Arcadian and Cyprian dirh is found with the locative, but in the literary Greek only the ablative is used with cnrb, a case in perfect harmony with the meaning of the word. The nominative oltto 6 ihp in Rev. 1 4 is, of the older dialects

:

»

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 124. Lang, of the N. T., p. 137.

word

avTiXrifi^pLs (1

Cor. 12

:

28)

is

2

W.-Th.,

p. 364.

Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 225

f.

The vague

frequent in petitions to the Ptolemies (pap.).

Cf. P. Par. 26 (b.c. 163-2). *

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437.

Cf Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., .

I,

pp. 666

ff.

575

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs)

of course, for a theological purpose, to accent the unchangeableness of God. It is one of the most tenacious of the prepositions,

being extremely frequent in the N. T. both with nouns and in composition with verbs. Jannaris' gives an interesting sketch of the history of ciTro in the later Greek. In the modern Greek it is used with the accusative (the ablative only in set phrases). 'Ek finally is found as early as Hermas.^ vanished before airo (cf. h before els), but in the modern Greek The explaairo also supplants to some extent avd, trpos and vtvo. nation of aitb is somewhat complicated therefore ^ since the increase of its use is due partly to the general tendency regarding prepo-

This accusative usage

with ablative instead of the "partitive genitive") supplanting other prepositions like e/c, irapa, vwo. Original Significance. It can be easily perceived in the N. T.

sitions (cf. airb

and partly to 1.

It

is

enough

clear

Uerpos TO 'unveil'

So

(x>TLov

(cf.

in airo-KOTrTco, for instance, 'to cut

(Jo.

18

Mt. 10: 26

air-edrjixricrev

dx-koi/'fj'

(Mt. 21:33) for

off,'

and dxo/caX.). putting things away' (Mt. 3 12). 'a man off from home.' So dx-

for contrast

Heb. 11:26 and

k^Xeirev in

as

off,'

Cf. dTro-KaXuTrrw, 'to take the veil

26).

:

'a treasure-house for

airo-e-qKr],

Cf.

its

between

koXvittcjo

:

acp-opuvres in

12:2.

It

needless to

is

multiply examples from the compound words ^ like dTro-xcopew. Moulton^ seems right against Blass^ in considering cos airo aTahiwv btKa-KkvTe (Jo. 11:18) not a real Latinism, but a mere accidental parallel to a millibus

passuum duobus.

The same idiom

occurs in

indeed rather late Greek (Strabo, Diodorus and Plutarch), but it is not such a manifest Latinism as Jannaris'' supposes. It is not the meaning of awo that is unusual here, but merely the position. We say ten miles Cf. dTro copas 6', 'at 9 o'clock,' P. Oxy. 523 off, not off ten miles.

Jo. 11

:

18; 21

(ii/A.D.).

The

:

8 and Rev. 14 20.

idea of "off "or

bulk of the N. T. passages. this simple idea. vdaros (3

:

irovripov (6

16), airo :

Thus

3

* «

Hist.

dTro

ttjs

TaXtXaias (Mt. 3 /3dXe dTro

13), dTro rod pvripdov (Lu.

dTrd Toov apapTLoJv

»

"away from" is enough to explain the The context as a rule does not alter

avaroXup (2:1),

KaTtiravaev airo TtavTWV

avadepa

It is

:

(Mt.

(Heb. 4:4), 1

:

airo tov Xptaroi)

Gk. Gr., pp. 369

:

tov

29), dTro

rod

epov (Mt. 7: 23),

(Mt. 9

dTro ttjs copas eKelurjs

21), a<j)avT0S eyevero air' avToJv

(Rom. 9:3).

ff.

24:2),

dTr'

dTro

13),

:

aov (5

:

22),

(Lu. 24 31), :

Here the ablative case and '

lb., p. 373.

Simoox, Lanfr. of the N. T., j). 137. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 'M9. * Prol., p. 102. Cf. Maysor, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227, also sees Lat. inlluoncc

liere.

^

Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 371.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

576

make

the root-idea of the preposition

The question

all clear.

place, time, person or abstract relations cuts very

of

little figure

Wherever the ablative case is natural in Greek, appear to make clearer the case-idea of source or separation. Conybeare and Stock (p. 84) consider the idiom The construction dTTo 'A^paan ecos Aavel8 (Mt. 1 17) a Hebraism. For is in the LXX, but there is nothing un-Greek about it. awo in expressions of time take a(j)' rjs rifxepas (Col. 1:9). In Mt. in the matter.

there

may

a-irb

:

7

:

16,

(XTTo

Tcov KapTTciv

kinyvwaeade, the notion of source

Cf. SteXe^aro avTois airo tcov

idea.

'Ypa<})uiv

(Ac. 17: 2).

is

the real

In Ac. 16:

ir^-nyoou, it seems at first as if the stripes were washed from Paul and Silas and not, as here, Paul and Silas washed from the stripes. Winer suggests the addition in thought of "and cleansed." Cf. Kadaplaoofxev eavroiis airo iravTOS /xoXucr/zoO (2 Cor. 7: 1), which idiom Deissmann {Bible Studies, p. 216) illustrates from the inscriptions, and on p. 227 he further cites from the

33, eXovaev olto tup

^

inscriptions three examples of

16

Cf.

33.

:

6.T-evlx{yaTo

diro(TTavTa aw' avTu)u

Xovofiat, airo

rds x^tpas (Mt. 27

:

in illustration of Ac.

24).

In Ac. 15 38, rdv :

awo HaM^fXtas, no difficulty should be found in

the threefold use of awd, since the Greek, unlike the English, loves to repeat words in varjang relations.

Here we have

airo in

com-

position, with persons, with place.

'A9coos airo tov al/xaTos

(Mt.

27 24) :

TOV

oLTTo

See

Certainly there was never any reason for thinking Kadapds

.

ai/jLaros

(Ac. 20

:

26) a

Hebraism, since

it is

the pure abla-

and the usage is continuous from Demosthenes to late Greek writers and papyri.^ We even find TrXarus dx6 tQiv o:ixwv, Pap. Par. 10, 20 (Radermacher, p. 116). The Pastor Hermae shows ttTTo after eyKpaTevop-ai, KaOapl^onai, Travop-ai, 4>v\aa(70jxaL (Rative idea,

dermacher,

p. 113).

Many

occur in the N. T.

dTTo

2 :37)

and then with

a-wb

20), fxeTavo-qaov airo (Ac. 8

may occur with adverbs,

similar examples of this simple use of

Cf. the

:

(4

:

mere ablative with 13).

22), etc.

like dTro rore

d^ta-raro (Lu.

Cf. aTredavere airo (Col. 2

:

Like other prepositions awo (Mt. 4

:

17).

We see it clearly in d7ro-5t5a;/it, 'give Back J back' (Mt. 16 27). But even here the point of view is simply changed. The giver gives from himself to the recipient. In the case of a debt or reward from the recipient's point of view he is getting back what was his due. This idea appears in awoXan^avu} A particularly good example is found in dTras in Lu. 6 34. Meaning

2.

^

:

:

»

W.-Th.,

2

Deiss.,

Kuhring,

p. 372.

B.

De

S.,

p.

196, for

Praep. in Usu,

numerous

p. 54.

exx.;

Moulton,

Prol., p.

102.

Cf.

577

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) TOP

kxovaLV

ijll(x96p

(Mt. 6

avToov

:

Cf. aTr-ex^L

2).

(Mk, 14

:

41).

This notion of receipt in full is common ("in countless instances," Deissmann) for awexoi in the ostraca, papyri and inscriptions. Cf. Deissmann, Light Jr. the Anc. East, pp. llOff. Cf. Tav Tei/iav airexoi raaav (i/A.D., Delphi Inscr., Bull, de Corr. Hell., 22, p. 58), 'I have received the whole price' for the slave's manumission.

Oxy. 37 (a.D. 49). Cf. k^tbbii-qv Trjv airoSoxw, P. Oxy. 1133, 16 (a.d. 396). This idiom seems to be confined to composition (cf. awo-Kpina, 2 Cor. 1 9) and air-apxri (Ro. 8: 23). Cf. Lu. 12 4.^ 3. " Translation-Hebraism" in (i)o^dadai arcb. have the usual accusative, and 8vp., we top In Mt. 10 28, (f)o^e'Lade but again shows cjio^rjdrjTe avrovs verse 28 even see 26 we in verse Cf. aireXa^ev

to.

rpo^eia, P.

:

:

:

;

^o^etade

In Lu. 12

airo.

1,

:

Tpoaex^re eavTots airb r^s

the usual ablative as above.

Cf.

in

/SXcttco airb

we have

^VfJ-ils,

Mk.

8

:

'Ax6

15.

LXX was used to translate the Hebrew y?,^ but not all the examples in the LXX are necessarily pure Hebraisms, as Conyin the

beare and Stock imply .^

Besides, the papyri

B.G.U. 1079

'lovSaloop,

Tcip

Some

Jews as money-lenders.

the

(a.d. 41),

of the

Tov

(Lu. 6

TrpeviJ.aTOS

:

13), tpkyKare

(Ac. 2

airb TOV yepr]ixaTOS

:

drb

Thus

:

aarop airb

eKKe^afxepos air' avTcop

toop b^papiwp (Jo.

21

:

10),

kKx^(J!} oltto

xpLxlo^v

(Mt. 15

:

27),

18), Tlpa airb tcop 8vo

(Mt. 27

:

21), etc.

17), eadiei airb

(Lu. 22

;8Xe7re

reference to the

N. T. examples are merely

for the so-called "partitive genitive." 86)8eKa

show

first

twp

ttico

The

point is not that all these phrases occur in the older Greek, but that they are in perfect harmony with the Greek genius in the use of the ablative and in the use of tive.

Moulton

(Prol., p. 246) cites

o)

airb

to help the abla-

airb tojp XpiaTLavoop,

—

Pclagia

dTro tojv aKapSaXoop (Usener, p. 28) as fairly parallel with oval (Mt. 18 :7). The partitive use of the ablative with airb does

to the realm of the genitive (cf English of and the but the ablative idea is still present. One may note rbp 6.irb KekTu^p ipb^op in Polybius XVII, 11, 2 (Radcrmacher, Cf. evdvfia airb Tpixo^p (Mt. 3 4) with the old A^. T. Gr., p. 116).

come nearer

.

genitive),

:

genitive of material.

Comparison with Ik. But airb needs to be compared more h which it finally dis})laced save'' in the Epirot Ax or ox- But the two are never exactly equivalent. 'E/c means 'from within' while airb is merely the general starting-point. 'A7r6 docs not deny the "within-ness"; it simply does not assert it as 4.

particularly with

U

does.

Thus

1

Moulton,

2

Blass, Gr. of

in

Mk.

1

:

10

we read

Prol., p. 102.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 126.

apajSalvcop eK tov v5aTos

when

otc, p. S3.

»

Sol.,

"

Moulton,

Prol., p. 102.

— A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

678

the assertion Kara —

read the

is

avk^t] airo

k

of

made by

8

rod vSaros, a

Mark.

that Jesus had been in the water

e/c

— k in Ac.

ava

els,

The two

NEW TESTAMENT

:

38

f.)-

But

in

Mt. 3

:

16

we

(cf.

merely-

form of expression that does not deny

prepositions are sometimes combined, as

and

k

(Mt. 13:49). behind k in the N. T.^ Both ctTTo and k are used of domicile or birthplace, but not in exactly the same sense.^ Thus in Jo. 1 44 see ^v 8e 6 (^lXlttttos OTTO Bi]d(xaL8a, k tt]s ToXeoos 'AvSpeov, where airo corresponds closely k^eKdelv

air' avrrjs

Even with

(Ac. 16

:

18)

a4>opLOVcnv

the growth in the use of

oltto it still

ixeaou

falls

:

with the

von and French de which came to be marks

German

Na^aper, where (in 'Iu:ari4> rov airo effort is made to express the idea that they both verses) came from within Nazareth. That idea does appear in verse 46, k Naj'aper. In Lu. 2 4 both aird and k are used for one's home (airo TTJs TaXiXalas k xoXecos Naf aper) Indeed k in this sense Both appear again in Jo. in the N. T. seems confined to ttoXis.^ 11 1. Cf. also Jo. 7 41 f., k ttjs TaXtXaias, airo B-qOXee/j., where the two prepositions are reversed. The Latin versions render both Cf. dTro ApLfxadaias (Jo. 19 38). Abbott^ airo and k here by a.^ of nobility.

So no

in verse 45,

:

.

:

:

'

:

John does not mean to confuse the two prepositions, but uses each in its own sense, though airo is not found in the older writers for domicile. The sense of variety, as in English, may have led to the use of now one, now the other, since at bottom either answers. So Luke in Ac. 23 34 has k- iroias eTrapxetas, but aT6 KtXtKtas. Cf. Ac. 1 4. Blass^ notes that outside of John the N. T. writers use awo for one's country. So even Luke in Ac. 24 18, The MSS. indeed vary in some instances between cLTo TTJS 'Aalas. dx6 and k as in Ac. 16 39 with rrjs TroXecos. Cf MS. variation beoltto. tween airo and irapa in Mk. 16; 9. Cf. also Ac. 13 50 for k is

clear that

:

:

:

.

:

:

In a case

like ol airo

'IraXias

rrjs

(Heb. 13

:

24) the preposition does

not determine whether the persons are still in Italy or are outside of Italy. Cf. Moulton, Prol, p. 237. But Deissmann (Light, etc., p. 186) thinks that awo here means 'in,' like awo ^juaO in an ostracon from Thebes, a.d. 192. Cf. twv air' '0^vpvyx<^^ TroXecos, P. Oxy. 38, A.D. 49.

'At6

usage.

hke

is also,

bers of a party in Ac. 12

:

1,

k

(Ac. 10

rtms

:

45, etc.), used for

tcov airo ttjs eKKXijalas,

But on the whole the two prepositions can be

mem-

an un-Attic readily dis-

tinguished in the N. T.

Comparison with

5.

irapa.

As

1

Moulton,

'

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125.

8

Prol., p. 102.

to irapa,

it

suggests that one has p. 228.

*

Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

^

lb., p. 229.

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125,

579

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) been by the side of the one from

God we (16

:

find

k

whom 8

toO deou k^rjXdou (Jo.

27), airo deov k^rjXees (16

:

he comes. In relation to xapd rod irarpos k^rj^dov

42),

:

Cf. wpos top Oeov (Jo. 1

30).

It

1).

:

would be overrefinement to insist on a wide and radical difference here between awo, e/c and Trapa; and yet they are not exactly synIn the older Greek vrapa was the

onymous.

But

for the conscious personal departure.^

also with persons. vfiuip

So

aKrjKoafxev

air'

common in

preposition

N. T.

occurs

airo

avTOV (1 Jo. 1:5), ixadetv

(Gal- 3:2), irapeXalSop airo rod Kvplov (1 Cor.

11

:

a.4>'

One

23).

must not, however, read too much into airo, as in Gal. 2 12, where nvas dx6 'laKoi^ov does not mean 'with the authority of Cf. Mk. 15:45; 1 James,' though they doubtless claimed it. Th. 3 6. One doubts if we are justified in insisting on a radical distinction between wapa rod irarpos (Jo. 10 18) and airo rod Kvplov (1 Cor. 11 23) save as etymology throws light on the matter.^ The MSS. of ancient writers,^ as of the 6. Compared with h-irb. N. T., varied often between airo and hirb. As instances of this va:

:

:

:

riation in the

The MSS.

N. T. take Mk. 8

often vary where

:

31; Ac. 4

airb is

:

36; 10

Ro. 13

17;

:

the correct text.

:

The use

1.

of

with the agent is not precisely like virb, though one has only airb with Latin ah and English of to see how natural Observe KarevexOeU airo rod is for d-TTo to acquire this idiom.

dTTo

to it

compare

virvov

late

(Ac. 20: 9).

So in

'tempted of God.'

as coming from God.

we

Jas. 1:13, dTro 9eov TveLpa^onai,

The temptation,

to be sure,

Cf. also 6 fjnadbs 6

trans-

presented

is

a(f)vaTepr]ixevos

a.4>'

vndv

(Jas. 5:4), where the keeping back of the reward is conceived as coming from you. Cf. Ac. 4 36. In Mt. 16 21, Tra^eTv dTro :

:

rCiv TTpea^vTepojp, 'at the hands of,' is a free rendering of the idea of agency or source. In Lu. 16 18, airo\e\viJi.ep7}p airo avSpbs, note the repetition of airb. This idea of removal is present in LaOvvaL dTro, :

and epoxXovfiepoL airb presents no real trouble. There may be a zeugma in the last clause. In Lu. 9 22, a-woboKiixaaQrivaL airb tu}p TTpea^vTepuv, we have the same construction as in 16 18 above Cf. rtTOLfiaai^epop airb rev deov (Rev. 12 6) and Ac. 2 (cf. 17 25). :

:

:

:

:

The

use of

dTro after

sul)stantives

22 throws some light on this matter. Thus 7171^ dTro aov eirayyeyiau (Ac. 23 21), dTro aou ar]peiov (Mt. 12 38). Tiiis use of dTTo after passive verbs came to be the rule in the later writers. Cf. Wilhelm, aTrobtbuyp-kpop airb tov deov.

:

:

/.

G. XII.

But »

»

it is

5, 29.

not alone a form of agency that

d7r6

comes to express.

W.-Th., p. 370. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. V2r->. ' Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., Cf. W.-Th., p. 370.

p. 13S.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

580

may also be used for the idea of cause, an old usage For instance, take airb ttjs x^pas avTov virayeL (Mt. 13 44), It

:

eKpa^av (14

4)6^ov

KOLixufjLevovs airb

(Jo. 21

gives airo.

24

3;

:

:

tw

oval

26),

XuTrrjs

aro

41; Ac. 12

:

and

Koaiio)

(Lu. 22

6), ovK kv'e^XtTTov

:

Lu. 19

:

ttjs

:

rrjs

aKavdaXwv (18

roov

45), ovKen lax^ov

(Ac. 22

56^rjs

14; 20

:

Heb. 5

9;

:

of

:

7),

airb rov irXTjOovs

Cf. further

11).

:

virb.

dTro tov

The

7, etc.

LXX

abundant illustration of the same idiom, the causal use As a matter of sound see e^' 6v and d0' ^s in Heb. 7 13. ^

of

:

Aid.

(d)

"Of the

Delbriick^ says:

One

know nothing

origin of 5td I

remark by the master in syntax. Still we do know something of the history of the word both in the Greek and in other Indo-Germanic tongues. The form 5td may be in the instrumental case, but one must note Stal (dative) to say."

hesitates to proceed after that

in the lyric passages of ^Eschylus, not to say the Thessalian

But

there

dva, dvi

Greek

is

trmjas,

(cf.

h

8ls,

no doubt about

=v

twain (masc), .

1.

or

German

The Root-Idea.

It is

manifest in

(1

Tim. 3

(Mt. 17:

Thus

it will

2.

and

of the

(Heb. 4:

24), M-8VIX0S (Jo. 11

:

in

word

neut.),

'two,' 8vo, as

is

Mk.

Rec,

6

:

8vo

37; Rev. 18 ix.

Rev. 9

12), 8i-\l/vxos (Jas. 1

Cf.

16).

of

8is, 5t-7rX6aj, all

be seen how persistent

Cf.

(Text.

81$ iJ.vpLd8es

8), St-o-ro/ios

:

(fem.

dLa-KocnoL, Stcr-xtXtot, Si-dpaxfJ-a-,

words as well as

mological force in the word.

See also

Sanskrit dvis,

(cf.

Enghsh two

The etymology

in these three

occur in the N. T. 13.

zwei;

6te.^

Sanskrit

8vo, Sis.

twi-ce, twi-Ught, be-tween, two-fold, etc.

Sc-t'Kovs (cf. d-7rXoDs).

shown

being kin to

Latin duo, his

dvis;

tri),

v);

5td

:

:

8vo

4crxic70r? e^s

:

which

the ety-

is

Mk.

6;

5

:

16), 8'L-\oyos 8), 8L-8paxiJ-ov

(Mt. 27:

51).

But the preposition has advanced a than merely "two" to the idea of by-twain, be-tween,

'By Twos' or 'Between.'

step further

This

in two, in twain.

The word

is

the ground-meaning in actual usage.

St-daXaaaos originally

Euxine Sea, Strabo

2, 5, 22),

meant 'resembling two

parently means lying between two seas (Thayer). interval (be-tween)

is

seas'

but in the N. T. (Ac. 27: 41)

it

(cf.

ap-

The notion

of

frequent in the N. T. both in composition

and apart from composition. Thus in •qjxepwv 8La-ytvoixkvbiv tlvcov (Ac. 25 13), 'some days came in between' (5id). Cf. SLa-yvwao/jLaL to. Kad' vnas (Ac. 24 22) with Latin di-gnosco, dis-cerno and Greek-English Aia-dTjKr) is an arrangement or dia-gnosis (SLa-yvoocnv, Ac. 25:21). covenant between two (Gal. 3 17). See 8L-aLpovv (1 Cor. 12 11); :

:

:

:

5ta-5t5aj;nt

(Ac. 15

:

(Lu. 11:22) 'divide';

9)

where 1

'

oWh 8i.-'eKpivev txera^v -rjiiuv re

fxera^v explains 5td.

C. and K.-BL,

S., p. 8.3.

II, p.

250.

^

Cf.

Std-zcpio-ts

Vergl. Synt.,

Cf. Karal, irapai,

viral.

(Heb. 5

I,

p. 759.

/cat

avTccv

:14), 'dis-

;

581

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs) crimination';

5

:

36),

'

(Lu. 7 45), 'intervals of delay

5ta-Xet7rco

dis-solve

; '

:

5ta-)u€pif CO

(Ac. 2

:

45),

'

5ta-Xi;a)

';

dis-tribute

(Ac.

Sia-priyvvnL

;

'

(Lu. 8 :29), 'rend asunder'; bia-aKopiri^oi (Jo. 11 52), opposed to aw0170), 'di-sperse'; ha-a-Kaw (Mk. 5 :4), 'rend in two'; bia-airdpo) (Ac. :

8:1)=' scatter abroad

; '

(Heb.l2:20), 'divide'; Cor. 14:

8La-(TTo\r] (1

pose';

8La.-4>epo)

ha-aivopa (Jo. 7:35),' dispersion Sta-o-rTj/ia

(Ac.5:

7),

'

Sta-o-reXXo;

;

Mt. 6:26), 'bear

'

'

7), 'distinction'; 8ta-Tldep.aL

(Ac. 27:27,

'

distance or interval

'

(Lu. 22: 29), 'dis-

apart,' 'differ'; 5ta-


cient to

show what the

meaning

real

of the

word

particularly noticeable instance appears in Lu. 24

have

dL-eaTT]

oltt'

in itself :

51,

is.

A

where we

avTwv.

The N. T. preserves this notion of interval in expressions of time and so it is hardly "pecuhar only to literary style." ^ Thus 2 1 5t' iifiepwv means 'interval of days,' 'days between,' days,' though surely no one would think that 5td some 'after 'after.' Cf. Mt. 26 61, 5td rpicof rjfj.epcbv (cf. h, 27 means really irXeidvuv, Ac. 24 17; Gal. 2:1, 6td deKarecraapuv krwv. erojv 8l 40); in

Mk.

:

:

:

:

Cf. Ac. 5:7. In Ac. 1 3, hC ijiJLepoJv reaaepaKovra oTTavoiJLevos, the appearance of Jesus was at intervals within the forty days. But see opposition to this idea in Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 255 f. In the phrase 5id vvktos (Ac. 5 19; 16 9, etc.), 'by night/ It is the real adnominal Sia adds little to the genitive itself. :

:

:

The preposition is very common in the N. T., especially with the genitive (gen. 382, ace. 279), ^ though the accusative be-

genitive.

comes dominant 3.

later.

'Passing Between' or 'Through.'

The

idea of interval between

leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of 6td, but

a very common one. The case is usually the genitive, though Horner^ the accusative is common also, as we find it once in the N. T. (Lu. 17 11), 5td fieaou >:aMaptas (cf. 5td /jieaov, 4 30), and even

is

in

:

:

here note the genitive after 6td neaov.

Blass"*

wrongly

fxeaov.

calls

Some MSS.

in Jo. 8

:

59 read also

the accusative an "inadmissible

reading" in view of Homer and the growing use of the accusative in the vernacular with all prepositions (cf. modern Greek). This use of 'through' or 'thorough' is common in composition and

sometimes has a "perfective" idea ('clear through') as in Sia-Kadapid Cf. also dia-jSaivoj riiv a\wva (Mt. 3:12), 'will thoroughly cleanse,' 1

Jann., Hist. Gr. Gk., p. 374.

»

Moulton,

Prol., p. 105.

»

Monro,

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.

Iloni. Gr., p. 145.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

582

(Heb. 11:29), 5ta-/3X€7rw(Mt.7:5), 8i.-ayye\\co (Lu.9:60), Sia-yprjyopko} (Lu. 9 :32), di-aycj^ (1 Tim. 2 2), 5ia-5exoMat (Ac. 7:45), Sta-^are:

\eyxotxai (Ac. 18

23

28), ha-yLaxoiiai (Ac.

:

dia-vvKTipevw (Lu. 6

:

12), Si-avvu} (Ac.

(Lu, 1

9), dia-fxevo)

:

21:

8La-irapaTpL^r] (1

7),

22),

:

Tim.

6:5); 5ta-(7€taj (Lu. 3 14), 5ta-crcbfcj (Lu. 7: 3), 5ta-<^uXd(Tcrco (4 10). This sense of 5td is used with words of place, time, agent or abstract word. In all of these relations the root-idea of the preposi:

tion

:

Thus

easily perceived.

is

bia

TOTTOiv,

Tvpds (1 Cor. 3

2 Cor. 8

:

(Heb. 11

^r]pas

In Ro. 15

(Winer-Thayer, 'through your

Slo.

15), 8l' kaoirrpov (1

:

18.

Mt. 12

in

29),

:

takes

5t'

43, Stepxerai

Cor. 13

28, dTreXeuao^tat

:

p. 378)

:

vfxcov

vpLuv els STraj^tav,

8l'

was never very

transferred^ to oKrjs vvKTos

Winer

these

all

The use

common and

i.e.

examwith

of 5td

gradually was

But some examples occur in the N. T. like 8l' may be compared with 5td iravros rod and the common phrase 5td iravTos (Mk. 5:5).

els.

(Lu. 5:5), which

(Heb. 2

^yjv

5td

49;

:

to be 'through you,'

ples the idiom runs just as in the older Greek.

expressions of time

avvbpwv

Cf. Ac. 13

12).

:

'through the midst of you.' In

city,'

8l'

4:4),

2a/xaptas (Jo.

ttjs

:

Here the idea

15)

of

through

applied to time.

is

Rouffiac (Recherches,

from inscriptions of Priene 112, 98 and 99 (i/B.c). The agent may also be expressed by 5id. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, though, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed.' Atd is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainment and the attainment of the object in view. One may compare ypa^/avres 816. x^i-pos avruv (Ac. 15 23) with 8vo eTL(TTo\as, 5td Nr;5u/xou /xtav, 5td Kpovlou iJ.axo.i.po4>bpov jilav, B.U. 1079, A.D. 41 (Milligan, Greek Pay., p. 39). So oh d'ek^ Slo. p. 29) cites 5td rod

xf^i-IJ-^vos

oKov

:

HeKavos kol KoXa^ov

ypa4>eiv (3 Jo. 13), 5td YXwtrcrrjs (1 Cor. 14: 9),

ctol

ra 5td Tov acofiaTOS (2 Cor. 5

\6yov

TTPevfiaTOS fir)Te 5td

3

:

:

Cor. 6:7), fJ.r)Te Slo. In 2 Pet.

10), Std tcov oirXccv (2

fxrjTe 8l'

Th. 2:2).

eTiaroXrjs (2

5 note the difference between

e^ v8aTos

and

8l'

Abstract

v8aTos.

ideas are frequently so expressed, as aeac^apLevoc 5td TrlaTews (Eph.

2

:

8), 5td deXrifxaTos deov

Sea vofxov (Ro. 3

When

5td

:

27),

by

Cf. also 5td

vTTo. TTJs

So

:

1), 5td

tov evayyeXiov (1 Cor. 4 :

Cf.

12). is

1

uTTo

yvvaiKos

Kvplov 5id TOV

— k tov deov (1 distinguished.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.

(Mt.

Trpo4)r]Tov

Cor. 11

Cor. 6

15),

:

:

14.

regarded as the in-

Sometimes the immediate agent

and mediate agent are 1

1

aTOKakwPeois (Gal. 1

occurs with the personal agent, he

termediate agent. pressed

(Eph.

8l'

:

12),

In Gal. 1:1, «

is 1

:

also ex22, etc.).

where source

air'

avOpoiTruv

lb., p. 375.

—

583

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

Paul takes pains to deny both ideas. In 1 Cor. 8 6, the first refers to God the Father as the source of all things and the second refers to Jesus as the mediate agent by whom all things come into existence. Cf. Col. 1 16. Indeed avdpuTTov,

8l'

^^

ol,

_

:

5t' ou,

:

be regarded as source, mediate agent, and ultimate object or end, as Paul does in his noble doxology in Ro. 11:3G, on eg avrov Kal 8l' aiirov Kal els avrov to. irauTa. There are

God

himself

may

looked upon as the intervening cause or agent. So 8l' ou (Heb. 2 10; 1 Cor. 1:9). But 5id is often used with Christ in regard to our relation to God (cf. Paul's use of h). Thus Ro. 1 8; 5 1, etc. Cf. 5t' kfxov in Jo. 14 6, The Slo. TroX\u>p napTvpcov (2 Tim. 2:2), 8l' ayjeXwv (Heb. 2:2). 8l' uv 8i,aKovoL Cor. in 1 3 well 5 appears intermediate idea of 5ta

other instances also where

God

is

:

:

:

:

:

kinaTevcraTe,

Heb. 3

16 5ta

:

Mojucrecos,

Ro.

5:5

vpXv

8ia.

In

5ta irvevnaTOS.

tov Kvpiov

the

'Irjaov,

1 Th. 4 matter seems turned round, but, as Paul was the speaker, he conceives Jesus as also making the commands. Abbott, Johannine :

2, TLvas -Kapayyekias

Grammar,

p. 236, rightly

in Jo. 1:7.

It is

k.86)Kaixev

argues in favour of 'through him (not it ') 5td 'Irjaov XptcrroO (Eph. 1:5), '

'

important to note

pregnant with meaning. Cf. Schettler, Die paulinische Formel "Durch Christus," pp. 28 ff. This use of 5td occurs in the papyri (Wenger, Die Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, 1906, p. 9 f.). Christ is conceived as our representative (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 340).

that of

It is

not far from the notion of means like 5td Triarecos to like 5td irapa^oXris (Lu. 8:4). Indeed the two shade

manner

off into

one another as

dydirvs (Gal. 5

13

:

22), 8l

:

6),

5t'

oKiyuv (1 Pet. 5

:

12),

Sid ypdnnaTOs Kal repLTOixyjs (Ro. 2 86^r]s (2

Cor. 3:11),

(2 Cor. 2 :4).

between

is

:

4.

virop.oviis :

always present.

tC}u oIktlphojv

12

8l'

Rom. 2

Cf.

tov Oeov (Ro. 12

3 with 5td 'Because

ttju xo-P'-^

in 15

8l'

the idea of 'because

of,' 'for

is still

:

Note

is

:

8l'

(Hcb. :

6),

20), 8id

also the notion of

true even in a case like 5td

Cf. also 5td

1).

also

5td ttoXXwj/ BaKpOcov

1),

But here

This

:

9).

v8aTos Kal aifxaTos (1 Jo. 5

(Heb. 12

27.

:

:

18), Bid ^paxeccv

:

27), 5td irpoaKOfxpaTos (14

Trjs xo-pi-TOs

in

Ro.

15.

With the accusative

of.'

notion of between

:

18

(Ac.

6pd/xaros

8l'

eTraTTeXias (Gal. 3

the sake

5td

of,'

comes to be used with 'on account

Take Mt. 27

present.

:

of.'

The

18, 5id
the reason that promi^tcxl the betrayal and so came in between and caused the act. The accusative (extension) is natural and helps also to distinguish this idiom from the

8(^Kau avrov.

others. irdvra,

Envy

is

For instance, in Ilel). 2 10, 8l ov rd irdvra Kal 8l' ov rd the two ideas are distinguished entirely by means of the :

584

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

cases.

One may note

Cor. 11:9, 12).

vary between

Note

ground

is

:

:

Mk.

Cf.

12).

rrjs :

yvvatKos (1

11 the

MSS.

Heb. 5

14;

:

(Mt. 10: 22), 5td

5td to opo/xa

\6yop (Jo. 15

rot-

Rev. 12

:

Cf. 1 Jo. 4

by

may

epeKo)

:

9

'g-qawixep

personal :

57),

8l'

The aim

bC avTou.

be set forth by

5td tov

3),

The

11.

:

also as in €70? fw 5td top iraTepa (Jo. 6

7), etc.

(usually expressed crd^jSaTOP

common

(Eph. 2:4), 6id

common

(Heb. 6

CVS

6td

In Ro. 8

and 5td tov hoLKovvTos (W. H., Nestle). between 5td irlaTecos and 5td t?71' irapeaLv

Cf. also the

aya.Trr]P

(Heb. 5

xpoj^oi/

above.

5id to hoiKovv

25.

:

TToWriP

and

yvpolKa

ry]v

riiu xo-piv

also the difference

in Ro. 3 Ti)j'

also 5ta

Cf. 5td

NEW TESTAMENT

So to

oia also.

top apOpoowop eyepeTO Kal ovx o apdpcoiros 5td to cra^^aTOP in

Slcl

5t' k(xk and 8l' i^xas in Jo. 12 30. Cf. Mk. Moulton (Prol, p. 105) cites I'm 5td ae /Sao-tXeO ToO dualov Ti;xco,M.P. 16 and 20 (iii/B.c), in illustration of Jo. 6 57. The Pauline phrase 5td 'Irjaovp (2 Cor. 4:5) is illustrated by 5td

13

2

:

27.

Cf. also

20; Ph. 3

:

:

:

7.

:

TOP KvpLOP in a Berlin

mann

Museum papyrus letter

(Light, pp. 176

ff.)

(ii/A. d.)

the Prodigal Son in Lu. 15.

In the modern Greek 7td

notion of aim or purpose with the accusative

A common

is

cally equivalent in the

In Jo. 2

:

24

f.

N. T. to

actually have 7td

"for that."

The

m (5id IVa)

use of 5td

tI

IVa.

this

is

It is practi-

and the indicative and

6tl

we have both

avTop ytpojdKeLP irdpTas, Kal otl ov

we

(8ia)

the usual one.^

idiom in the Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Greek ^

the use of 5td to and the infinitive in the sense of

quent.

which Deiss-

thinks curiously illumines the story of

is fre-

constructions parallel, 5td to

In the modern Greek elx^v. with the subjunctive. Cf. English

xp^'i-o-v

does not

differ practically

from

tI

alone.

'Ev.

(e) it

will

epL,

Inasmuch as ds

be treated after

and

in

Homer

eipi

kp.

or

eip

merely a later variation of h^ an older form hi (locative case),

(h-s) is

There

is

But some of the But compare

for metrical reasons.

dialects (Arcadian, Cretan) wrote

Ip

Latin en-do, Umbrian en, (Latin

like the

inter),

Latin

in.

German

in

(ein),

English

in (en-). 1. Old Use of ep with Accusative or Locative. Originally h was used with either locative or accusative, not to say genitive in a case like eip M8ao which Brugmann^ does not consider mere ellipsis.

He

cites also e/xxoSwi/ as

h ko8wp.

But there is no manThe inscripshow abundant illustrations of kv

being really

ner of doubt as to the accusative and the locative. tions of

many

of the dialects

1

Thumb, Handb.,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.

*

Griech. Gr., p. 439.

p. 104.

Cf. Drug.,

^

Kurze

K.-G.,

I,

p. 468.

vergl. Gr., II, p. 465.

585

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

with the accusative such as the Thessahan, Boeotian, Northwest epya,^ Greek, Arcadian, etc.i Cf. ev ray^a, h oTrXtras, etc.^ So Iv to. Indeed in Cypriote Greek h usually has the accusative.-J In etc. North Arcadian kv alone appears (not kv-s, eis) and with either have locative or accusative like Latin in.^ Besides in Homer we €/x-/3dXXaj, like verbs h-coira, not to mention the common compound

where one might look for ets. Cf. hix^avri els irXolov (Mt. 8 23), 6 ^/x^dM h rc2 rpv^Mv (Mt. 26 23). This so-called pregnant use of h seems very natural after all. It is only in comHke position that the old usage is preserved in the N. T. or a case first might at where ds motion h 7(3 Tpu/3Xiw above after a verb of seem more natural. Cf. Lu. 9 46; 1 Cor. 11 18; Ro. 1 25. In Ro. I :2A kv occurs with irapkboiKev, but ds in verse 26. Indeed and (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130) we find kv with StSco^i, tVrrjMt as T., the N. in survive usage Remnants of this early Tidrjfxc.

kn-^alvw,

:

:

:

8l86vtl ev

TTJ

Kap8la (2 Cor. 8

oLTT^deTo ev

(l)v\aKfi

KarelSaLvev

kv

ev 'Ake^avSpela;

(Mt. 14

:

3).

Epict.

e9\vaL kv 'Vayois.

(I,

Cf.

only by degrees that

11, 32) avepxv

(iii/A.D.) Tcb/ir/;

Conybeare and Stock, kv

In

35),

:

kvaKex<:opriKev

Tob. 5:5

The p. 83.

LXX But

Tropeu-

shows

was

it

to be associated exclusively with with the accusative as a result of the

came

the locative case and els triumph of the Ionic-Attic Greek.^ as an adverb.^

2 '^v

Cf. Blass-Debrunner, p. 131.

similar examples.

3

xeipt (Jo.

rrj

Cf. the spurious verse Jo. 5: 4

Par. P. 10,

Ko\vfi^i]epa;

rfj

16), SeSwKev ev

:

:

:

Homer indeed kv appears we are not to associate kv

In

origin therefore

more than in Latin, though ultiexamples of kv in composiOther true. be mately that came to are kn^arehoi (Col. 2 18), motion of verbs with tion in the N. T. followed by eis). The 10:36 (Lu. kp.Tr'nrToi kn^L^ii^oi (Ac. 27:6), of 'within,' whether idea the expresses evidently word therefore primarily with the locative any

:

vernaof rest or of motion depending on the context. Compare kv that in Ac. 20 26 Note house." the in "Come English, cular :

is not repeated with 'lepoaoXvuoLs. It seems certain that originally kv stood 2. 'Ei; Older than els. in the modern Greek vernacular kv whereas els, without alone

1

lb., p. 438.

2

Moistor, Die gricch. Dial., Bd.

I,

p. 284.

Solmscn, Inscr. Graecac, p. 4. * Mcister, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 283 f. 6 Hoffmann, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 591. Bcrotian also knows only tv with Dial. Inscr., p. 56 f. Pindar Boeotian Clanin, Synt. of Cf. ace. either loc. or '

shows 6

if

with ace.

Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 438.

'

Monro,

lloni. Gr., p. 147.

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

586

has entirely disappeared before els which uses only the accusative.^ There is once more unity, but not exactly on the same terms. In the Greek N. T. this process of absorption is going steadily on as in the

whereas

ev,

identity with h,

We may Mk. eis

13

:

h

compare

in

much doubt

rarely

Mt. 24

as to the

:

ever gave

it

18 with

old

its

up.^

it

top aypSu in

eis

'Aaiav (Ac. 19

eis rriv

22), TrjpelcrdaL

:

(some MSS. in Mk. 2:1).

oIkov e<jTLv

eis

:

:

aypQ

rc3

Cf. ewecrx^^ xpovov

16.

is

has already begun to resume

ets

indeed in the vernacular

if

KaLaapiav (25 4),

Jo. 1

There

generally.

kolvti

significance of

Cf.

18.

In the N. T.

so frequent (2698 instances) that

ev is

common

the most

it

is

still

Indeed Moulton^ thinks that

preposition.

its

due to the fact that it had become too vague as "a maid of all work." The simplest use is with expressions of place, like ev 3. Place. ultimate disappearance

TTJ

ayopq.

(Mt. 20

ev Tc3 TrXotco

(Mt. 3:6), k^r]\dev 6

3), ev 8e^La

:

(Mt. 4

21),

:

v8aTL (3

ev

\6yos ev

is

e;'

:

(Heb.

1

:

3), ev

r^ vroXet (Lu. 7

11),

ev

tQ

dpovic

37), ev

tco

(Jo.

afjLweXo}

rrj

and

'lovdala (Lu. 7:17)

rfj

:

15

(Rev. 3

21),

:

'lopdavn Trora/jcp :

4).

Cf. also

ev tc3 ya^ot^vKaKlco (Jo.

For the "pregnant" construction of ev after verbs of motion cf. chapter XI, x, (0- Cf. examples given under 1. In these and like examples ev indeed adds little to the idea of the locative case which it is used to explain. See also ev toIs (Lu. 2 49) in the sense of at the house of (cf ets to. Uia, Jo. 19 27) for which Moulton^ finds abundant illustration in the papyri. Cf. kv The preposition in itself Tols 'AttoWo^vIov, R.L. 38 2 (iii/B.c). merely states that the location is within the bounds marked by the word with which it occurs. It does not mean 'near,' but 8:20).

'

'in,'

that

'

own

itself retains its

davarw

(1 Jo.

idea.

ev in

3

:

the mere

in 6

eaxo-rxi rjixepa r]ix'epo.Ls

1

3

(Jo.

:

19)

nothing strange about the

14), ev bb^rj (Ph.

Cf. ev

'Ev rfj

is

may

eaxary

54, while in 6 it

is

:

4

ev jSaaavoLs :

(Lu. 16

:

19), ev iivar-qpli^ (1

23),

Cor.

appear rather oftener than 44, but rfj rifiepa in Jo. 6 :

40 the MSS. vary.

clear that Jesus

meant the

By ev

Tpiaiv

resurrection

^ Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 142. V. and D., Mod. Gk., p. 109 f. In the Ptol. papyri, Rossberg (Priip., p. 8) finds 2245 Prol., p. 103.

examples of *

2

:

There

expressions like

2:7), etc. 4. Expressions of Time. locative.

may

translation of the resultant idea

according to the context, but the preposition

in, on, at,

metaphorical use of ev T<2

The

is 'inside.'

be indeed

:

.

iv

it is the most common preposition. On the retreat of iv before ets see Jann.,

and

Prol., p. 103.

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 380.

,

587

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

take place within the period of three days. Cf. rfj tp'ltxi wkpg. h in the N. T.) in Mt. 16 21. ^ More common exkv pressions arc ev aa^^arw (Mt. 12 2), h rfi rjixkpa (Jo. 11:9), (Lu. 8 1), vvKTi (11 10), hv too devrepu) (Ac. 7: 13), h tQ Kade^^s

will

(never with

:

:

:

:

rf?

h

nera^v (Jo. 4

T<3

h

31),

:

rats

(Mt. 3

ketrats

i7jLtepais

ev

1),

:

rrj

Th. 2 19), h rfj avaaraaeL (Mk. 12 (Mt. 10 15), kv Tfi kaxo^Tji aaXinyyt (1 Cor. 15 52), etc. Cf. Lu. 1:7. Another temporal use of ev is kv w in the sense of 'while' (Mk. 2:19). Cf. also kv oh in Lu. 12 1. The frequent use, espewith the infincially in Luke (cf. kv tw vTrocrrpkipeLv, 8 40), of kv rc3 in the ancient occur idiom this itive calls for a word. Examples of ^ and the in Plato) 26 Thucydides, in Xenophon, 6 in

Trapovaia (1

:

:

23), ku i]p.kpq. Kpiaeuis :

:

:

:

Greek (16 papyri show

occasionally.^

it

LXX

Cf. kv

Par. P. 63

Xoyi^effOat,

tc3

a constant translation of a and it (ii/B.c). But in the T. as a result of the the N. is much more abundant in is

LXX

profusion.

With

'Among.'

5.

plural

nouns

kv

may have

idea of 'among,' though, of course, in itself

the resultant 'within.'

it is still 'in,'

Thus we note kv yewrjTois yvvaiKdv (Mt. 11 11), eariv kv qp.'iv (Ac. riyep-baiv 2 29), riv kv avToh (4 34), kv vpXv (1 Pet. 5:1), kv toIs :

:

:

'lovba

This

(Mt. 2:6).

Not very

different

in the ancient Greek.

this idea (cf. Latin apvd) is the use kv

w(hv (Mt. 21 42), like Latin coram. vplv in 1 Cor. 6 2. Cf. kv roTs Wvtaiv (Gal.

b4>do.\p.ol%

kv

common idiom

a

is

from :

:

One may note 1

:

also

See also 2

16).

Cor. 4:3; 8:1.

'In the Case of/ 'in the Person of or simply 'in.' A frequent use is where a single case is selected as a specimen or Here the resultant notion is 'in the case striking illustration. greatly from the metaphorical use of kv differ not does of,' which 24 38. Thus with dTroKaXuTrrco note Lu. Cf. etc. mind, soul, with 6.

^

:

kv kfiol

9

(Gal.

1

16), ciSojs kv eavrui (Jo. 6

:

15), kv tQ> ^T?pc3 Ti

:

6), kv Txi K\a
(Lu. 24

6.Trodvr}(TKOv(nv (1

nytaaiikvj]

kv

1),

:

own 1

cj/

35).

:

Cor. 15

:

XpL(TTU)

:

61), ykvrjTaL kv

31), kv

:

One may note

22), kv

tw

(llo.

15

irvtvp-aTt a.ylw

Trjo-oO

(Ro. 6

words, ixdvart

:

11, 23, etc.)

kv kpoi,

Kayw

kjxol (1

i)p.tv iiaQr]Te

also kv

tc3

(1

Cor.

Cor. 4

'ASAm

:

iravres

KarayyeWeLV (Ac. 4:2), rfj yvvaid (1

16), i]ylaaTaL kv

:

Paul's frequent mystical use of

Cor. 7: 14), etc.

9

ykvqraL (Lu. 23

may

kv Kvplco (1

Cor.

be compared with Jesus'

kv vjjuv^Jo.

15 :4).

Cf. also kv

rco

impossible Sec especially Field's valuable note on this verso showing how Cf. also Abbott, the resurrection to have occurred on the fourth ihiy.

it is for

Joh. 2

Cir., p. 255 f. Moulton, Proi.,

p. 215.

»

lb., p. 14.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 379.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

588

in Col. 3 3. The LXX usage is not quite on a par with this profound meaning in the mouth of Jesus and Paul, even if "extremely indefinite" to the non-Christian.^ But Moulton^ agrees with Sanday and Headlam (Ro. 6:11) that the mystic indwelling 5tc3

:

own

Christ's

is

the matter

The

by Paul.

idea adopted

classic discussion of

Deissmann's Die Neutestamentliche Formel "in Christo Jesu" (1892), in which by careful study of the LXX and the N. T. he shows the depth and originality of Paul's of course,

is,

kv Xpto-rw. Moulton^ doubts if even here the N.T. writers make an innovation, but the fulness of the Christian content would amply justify them if they did have to do so.

idea in the use of

See

ev avTca eKTladr} to. Travra (Col. 1

Ro. 9 1.

1

14

1;

:

As

14; Ph. 3

:

a Dative?

Cor. 14

:

11

6

,

:

9;

One may

\a\uv

As

16).

:

Eph. 4

:

further examples

cf.

21.

hesitate to say dogmatically that in

ev eixol ^ap^apos,

we have

used merely as

kv

modern Greek). But rep \a\ovvTL jSap^apos in the same verse looks that way,* and Moulton^ cites rots ev de<2 Trarpt ri'ya'!rr]ij.evoi.s (Ju. 1) and reminds US of the common ground between the locative and dative in Sanskrit where the locative the dative

eh in

(cf.

appears with verbs of speaking.

Note

Cf. also ev

kfioi

in Ph. 1

:

26.

LXX

books (Thackeray, Gr., p. 14). One may compare eTolrjaav ev aurco (Mt. 17 12). There seems no doubt that d/jLoXoyeco ev (Mt. 10 32; Lu. 12 8) is due^ to literal translation of the Aramaic. The use of ev with dfivvvai (Mt. 5 34) is similar to the Hebrew a. It is needless to multiply un8. Accompanying Circumstance. duly the various uses of ev, which are "innumerable" in the LXX^ where its chief extension is due to the imitation of the Hebrew s.^ But by no means all these uses are Hebraic. Thus ev for the idea of accompanying circumstance is classical enough (cf. ev ottXols elvai, Xen. Anab. 5. 9, like English "The people are up in arms"), though the LXX abounds with it. It occurs also in the papyri. Cf. Tb.P. 41 (119 B.C.). Here ev draws close to fiera and
e/xoi

Kvpie in late

:

:

:

:

»

2

N. T. Gk., p. 131. Simcox, Lang, an "extra-grammatical" point.

Blass, Gr. of

eiders this

Prol., p. 103.

paralleled in the (1

Chron. 28

:

With

LXX.

this cf. ttouo) eu (Mt. 17

Cf. k^tXe^aro kv

iixol (1

:

31),

an idiom

4), fipkriKa iv

*

Prol., p. 103.

^

lb.

Prol., p. 103.

Blass, Gr. of

^

Cf Thack., dr., S., Sel., etc., p. 82. accompanying circiunstance in the LXX. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.

8

:

T., p. 144, con-

avr^

6).

3

C. and

N.

12; Lu. 23

Cliron. 28

*

of ip of

:

of the

N. T. Gk.,

p. 131. .

p.'

47, for the frequent use

PREPOSITIONS Note, for instance,

usage.

kv aylaLS

^}\.6€v

6

Ska

(Lu. 14

viravTrjaai

x'-^'-^-'^i-^

:

31),

nvpiaaLU avrov (Ju. 14), ev iraaLV ai>a\a^6vTes (Eph.

crroXaTs

ev

16),

:

h

589

(np(X)E2Ei2;)

(Mk. 12

irepLiraTetv

(Mt. 7:15),

:

38),

Ipxovrai

hdv/jLaaiv

ev

20:12), fxereKa25),»kv ev \pvxous (Ac. 7: 14), elaepx^raL kv atnart (Heb. 9 XeaaTO Tc3 vdari. Kal ev tco ai/jLarL (1 Jo. 5 6), ev paj38co eXOco (1 Cor. 4 21), ev TrXrjpcljjuaTi (Ro. 15 29), ev KeXeva/JLaTt (1 Th. 4 16), TrepijSaXetrat TTpo^aroiv

—

Kade^op-kvovi (Jo.

kv \evKo2s

:

:

:

:

:

ev IfiaTLOLs

(Rev. 3 5; :

Mt. 11:8). Note

cf.

also ev

\aXoviJ.ev

iJivaTr]pl(X)

These examples (1 Cor. 2 7) where 'in the form of is the idea. show the freedom of the preposition in this direction. Somewhat :

more complicated is a passage like avOpwiros ev TvevpLaTL aKaOaprc^ (Mk. 1 23), which Blass^ properly compares with wvevixa aKadaprov ex€L (Mk. 3 30) and the double use in Ro. 8 9, vf^els 8e ovk hare :

by

:

,

:

ev (xapKL

dXXd

ev TrvevjiaTL, e'tVep

TTvevna XpiaTov ovk exet)-

idiom as

lied to this

ala (Col. 2

:

6 18 and Jo. 18 :

:

4

:

see

deov

The notion it

of

olKel ev v/juv

manner

in ev biKaLoavvf} (Ac. 17

(Lu. 18

:

8, cf.

Taxv and

is :

(followed

closely al-

31),

cj'

raxecos).

wapprj-

Cf.

Mt.

20.

'Amounting

9.

Mk.

we

15), ev rdxet

-Kvevp-a

'Occasion,'

to,'

'Sphere.'

Moulton- considers

8, ecf)epev eis rpiaKOvra Kal ev e^rjKOVTa Kal ev eKarov

(note sim-

and ev), as showing that ev sometimes is Cf. also Ac. 7: 14 (LXX). used in the sense of 'amounting to.' The idiom is present in the papyri. Moulton cites rpolKa ev 8paxjuats evvaKoalais, B.U. 970 (ii/A.D.), Trjv TpcoTrjv doaiv ev Spaxp^ous reaoapaKovTa, O.P. 724 (U/b.c). He {Prol, p. 76) quotes Hb. P. 42 ilarity here

between

eis

(hi/B.c), hwaopev ev

6(l)eL\r]p.aTt,

as "predicative" use of

He

ev.

compares Eph. 2 15, ev bbypacnv, consisting in decrees.' Certain 9 riyopacras ev t<2 alparl aov we have price ^ indiit is that in Rev. 5 cated by ev. Cf. Ro. 3 25; Ac. 20 28. In a few examples ev gives the occasion, as evyev ev tw Xoyco tovtw (Ac. 7 29), ev rfj iroKvKoyla Note also avTOiV elaaKOvadr]crovTaL (Mt. 6:7), ev tovtw (Jo. 16 30). \aTpevw ev tQ irvevpaTi pov ev tco evayyeXlco (Ro. 1 9) where the second ev suggests 'in the sphere of.' Cf. ev perpcp (Eph. 4 16), 12). In simple ev TovTOLs 'ladi (1 Tim. 4 15), ev vopco ^paprov (Ro. 2 truth the only way to know the resultant meaning of ev is to note '

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

carefully the context.

It is so simple in idea that it

appears in

every variety of conncHition. Instrumental

10.

Cases. »

* *

Use of ev. See previous discussion under due to Hebrew inflaence as does Jan-

Blass'' considers it

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131. Rare and possibly Hebraistic. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.

2

Prol., p. 103.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3S0.

The

naris.^

ancient Greek writers did use

as the N. T. TTvpi (1

7

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

590

Cor. 3

The

2).2

64)6a\iJ.o7s

h

Katco :

13),

:

construction in

FiSeadaL

with certain verbs,

ku

(Rev. 17: 16, some MSS.), dTroKaXuTrrco ku dXtfco h tIvl (Mt. 5 13), /jLerpeoi h ui fj.€Tpcx} (Mt. irvpl

(II.

h

587),

i.

as old as Homer.^

itself is

irvpl KaieLv (II.

Cf. ev

It is ab-

xxiv. 38).

normally frequent in the LXX under the influence of the Hebrew ^* but it is not so common in the N. T. Besides, the papyri show undoubted examples of it.^ Moulton finds Ptolemaic examples of h idLaxo-lpv, Tb.P. 16 al.; dLoXvofxevaL ku tc3 Xt/io; Par. P.

28

(ii/n.c), while

22 has

and note

StaXu^rjmt

to) Xlijlui

tovs kueaxv-

We

can only say, therefore, that the LXX accelerated the vernacular idiom in this matter. The Aramaic probably helped it on also. The blending fihovs tv TLffLv ayvorjiiaaLv, Par. P.

63

(ii/B.c.)

.

of the instrumental with the locative in form facilitated this usage beyond a doubt,^ and the tendency to use prepositions abundantly helped also.'' But even so one must observe that all

the N. T. examples of

The

of the locative.

why

was so used

kv

kv

can be explained from the point of view

possibility of this point of

in the beginning.

view

is

the reason

pass by examples like

I

^awTLaeL ku iruevfjiaTL ayico Kal irvpl (Mt. 3:11) as probably not being instances of the instrumental usage at all. But there are real instances enough. Take Lu. 22 49 d waHere the smiting can be regarded as loTCL^ofxeu ku iiaxalpri; cated in the sword. To be sure, in English, we translate the resultant idea by 'with,' but ku in itself does not mean 'with.' That resultant idea can only come in the proper context. So kv jSaTTTifco ku v5aTL,

:

Toj Beeft/SouX

casting out

apxovTL tQiu

8aLfj.ouiwv kKj3aX\eL

(Mt. 12

located in the prince of demons.

is

(Ac. 17:31), ku ^pax'iouL (Lu. 1:51), ku 56Xco /xaxatprjs

(Heb. 11 37). :

'Ko\ep.i](roi ku rfj pofxcpala

kv daucLTco

(6

Kpa^oiu

4)cou7J,

ku

:

8),

The Apocaly]3se has (2

:

Here the

24).

kp'luoj

(Mk. 14

:

1),

ku aubpl

ku

4>bv(jo

several examples, like

16), airoKTeLuai ku pofjLcpala Kal ku Xt/ic3 Kal

ku fxaxalprj aTTOKTevet

we do not

:

Cf.

(13

:

10).

In Rev.

necessarily have to explain

it

14

:

15,

in this

manner. Cf. Ro. 2 16; 2 28; IJo. 2 3; Jas. 3:9. On the whole there is little that is out of harmony with the vernacular KOiuri in the N. T. use of ku, though Abbott^ thinks that the ex:

:

Gk.

But

see Deiss., B. S., p. 119

»

Hist.

2

W.-Th., p. 388. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 144. C. and S., p. 82; Thack., p. 47. Moulton, Prol., pp. 12, 61, 104, 234

^ * 6

Gr., p. 379.

:

f.

f.

Gk. Gr.,

^

j^^nn., Hist.

8

Job. Gr., p. 256.

p. 379. ^

6

lb., p. 61.

591

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

amplcs of Deissmann and Moulton do not exactly parallel the N. T. instrumental use. For repetition of ku see 2 Cor. 6 4 ff. (/) Els. There is nothing to add to the etymology of ets as compared with that of kv save that els is known to be really kv-s as we find it in the inscriptions of Argos, Crete, etc. So kps 'Adavalav} This s seems to have been added to kv by analogy to e^.^ Usually with the disappearance of v the form was eis, but Thucydides, like the Ionic and Doric writers and the poets, preferred es which was current in the inscriptions before 334 b.c.^ So is appears in a Phrygian Christian inscription.^ But the iEolic eis gradually drove out all the other forms.^ Originally, therefore, kv alone existed with either locative or accusative, and els appears nowhere else save in the Greek. The classic use of els A'iSov (some MSS. in Ac. 2 27, 31 and reading in Is. 14 15) is the true genitive, according to :

:

:

Brugmami 1.

within.

lie

was

(Griech Gr., p. 439), 'in the sphere of Hades.'

early

Homer

ela-Keladat means merely to means the same thing as kv, it used only with the accusative, and gradually special-

In

Original Static Use.

But, though

els

really

ized thus one of the usages of

kv.

The

locative with

however,

kv,

continued to be used sometimes in the same sense as the accusative with ets. The accusative indeed normally suggests motion

and that did come to be the common usage of ets plus The resultant idea would often be 'into,' but Ets is not used much in this was by no means always true. composition in the N, T. and always where motion is involved (extension),

the accusative.

save in the case of eia-aKovu where there seems

little

difference

and kv (cf. 1 Cor. 14 :21; Mt. 6 7). In itself eis expresses the same dimension relation as kv, viz. tw." It does not of itself mean into, unto, or to. That is the resultant idea

between

ets

:

of the accusative case with verbs of motion.

It

is

true that in

the later Greek ets with the idea of rest (in) is far more common than in the earlier Greek. This was naturally so, since in the vernacular ets finally drove kv out entirely and did duty for both, just as originally kv did. The only difference is that ets used the one case (accusative), whereas kv used either acthis static use of

'

Solmsen, Inscr. Graecae, p. 46.

He

2

Brug., Grioch. Gr., p. 438.

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 370.

*

Ramsay,

Cities

and Bishoprics

treats iv

and tU together.

of Plirygia, II, p.

52.').

Cf. also Psiehari,

fitudcs dc Philol., 1892, p. v. 6

J.

Cf.

H. W. 8inyth,

p. 80,

Fraser (CI. Qnarterly, 1908,

(before vowel), but

«

Transactions of p.

Am.

Philol. Assoc, for 1887.

270) shows that in Cretan

t6v (before consonant).

"

wo

liave iu^ bp06v

K.-G.,

I,

p. 408.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

592

But^ then the accusative was once the only and must be allowed large liberty. And even in the classic writers there are not wanting examples. These are usually explained^ as instances of "pregnant" construction, but it is possible to think of them as survivals of the etymological idea of ets (h-s) cusative or locative. case

with only the general notion of the accusative case. Certainly the vernacular laid less stress on the distinction between els and h than the literary language did. Though eis falls behind kv in the

N. T.

in the proportion of 2 to 3,

and the

LXX/

as in the papyri^

still,

number

and the

examples of static els occur. Some of these were referred to under h, where the "pregnant" use of h for ets occurs. Hatzidakis gives abundant examples of h as ets and ets as h. Cf. ets 'AXe^avSpetav ecrrt, B.U. ii. 385; ets tvv^ov KelfxaL, Kaibel Epigr. 134; KLvSwemavTos ets daXaaaav, B.U, 423 (ii/ inscriptions

a

of

Deissmann (Light, p. 169) notes Paul's klv8vvoi.s h daXaaaij and that the Roman soldier in the last example writes " more vul-

A.D.).

In these examples

garly than St. Paul."

it is

not necessary nor

comments on the Matthew (but see below) has no such examples and John but few, while Luke has most of them. I cannot, however, follow Blass in citing Mk. 1 9 k^aTTTladr] els tov 'lop8avr]v as an example. The idea of motion in /JaTrrtfco suits ets as well as ev in Mk. 1 5. Cf. vl\paL els (Jo. 9:7). But in Mt. 28:19, /SaTrrtfoj/res ets TO pertinent to bring in the idea of 'into.'

Blass^

fact that

:

:

bvofxa,

and Ro. 6 3

of sphere

:

is

f.,

XpLcrrov

ets

and

ets

t6u davarou, the notion

The same thing may be

the true one.

true of

jSctt-

where only the context and the tenor of N. T. teaching can determine whether 'into,' 'unto' or merely 'in' or 'on' ('upon') is the right translation, a task for the interpreter, not for the grammarian. One does not need here to appeal to the Hebrew spa i?^ as Tholuck does (Beitrdge zur Spracherkldrung des N. T., p. 47 f.). Indeed the use of opojjLa for person is common in the papyri (Deissmann, Bible Deissmann gives examples of ets opona, eir' Studies, p. 196 f.). 6u6p.aros, and the mere locative ovbixaTi, from the papyri. The TL(xdr]Tw els acpecTLv tcov anapTLojv

static use of

rpiaKOVTa

ets is

/cat

seen in

its

(Ac. 2

'in,'

38),

distributive use like tv in

ev e^rjKovra koI ev eKarov.

examples where only

:

But

Mk. 4

'on' or 'at' can be the idea.

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 376.

2

lb., p. 377.

Cf. Mullach, Gr. d. griech. Vulgarsp., p. 380.

N. T. Gk., p. 123, calls it a "provincialism." Moulton, Prol., p. 234 f. 4 C. and S., Sel., p. 81.

:

8, ets

there are undoubted

Thus

Blass, Gr. of

Cf. further Hatz., Einl., p. 210 ^ ^

f.;

Moulton, Prol., p. 62 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122.

593

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) KTipvaffoiv els

(Mk.

ras avpayuyas

1

:

:

(Lu. 9

(Mk. 13

2

:

8

:

61),

:

27;

eirkax^v

xpovov

'lepovaaKrjn (Ac. 21

KaLffapiau (Ac.

els

TO ev elaiv (1 Jo. 5

20

necxov (Jo.

(Jo. 21

10

41

:

:

4) is eis

f.,

19, 26)

:

neTevorjaav

els

:

:

els

11), TrjpeZadai

18), ol rpeis eis

:

Nor

12).

found in Eph. 3

is

:

7;

Mk.

this quite

is

of rest.

and

eis

Jo. 17

where

See also

'to.'

But

it is

in

ecxTr]

els

to

els

eaTrj els tov

alyiaXov

normal.

In Mt.

one can see

little dif-

23

:

Certainly this

ev.

Krjpvypa 'loova,

16, KpaTaLwdrjvai

:

13 :9.

we have motion, though

an example

'unto' or even

22), awodavelv

:

:

6vop.a irpo^i^Tov {p.aQr]Tov, bualov)

ference between

(Ac.

ovTa (Ac.

Mk. 2 1 we have eis oUov eaTiv (NBDL the MSS. vary between eis and ev as in Mk.

Cf. Jo. 20

TOV eaoo avdpo^irov.

Pet. 5

aTrjre (1

in

:

10.

:

19

papTvprjaau (Ac. 23 tov koKttou (Jo. 1

els

c!:v

riv

xoXw —

eis

39),

:

els

16), rots els tov oIkov

:

7), eyKaToXei^peLS els a^Tju

(Ac.

'Aalav

Trjv

:4), 6

8), eis

:

:

naKpav (2

eis 'Pco/xtjj^

In Ac. 2 5 Another instance

ev oUcp).

10

25

eis

els

13),

:

MSS.

In some

all.

(Lu. 11

els rr}V kolttjv elaiv

verse 31), rots

cf.

23),

:

ay p6v (Mk. 13

yriv

eis

Cf. Kadrjuhov

:

:

TO opos

some excuse kXdchv KardoKT]-

rapcpKrjaep

:

3), 6 eis t6v

is

So

where there

39)

for the "pregnant" explanation because of riXOev. aev eis -koKlv (Mt. 2 23; 4 13), but note only (Heb. 11 9) and evpkdr] els "A^ojtov (Ac. 8 40).

is

true of Mt. 12

is

absurd to take

eis

:

41,

as into' or '

Gvvr\yp.evoi els to ep.6v 6vopa{},ii.

18 20). :

With Verbs of Motion. But the usual idiom with eis was undoubtedly with verbs of motion when the motion and the accusative case combined with eis ('in') to give the resultant meaning of 'into,' 'unto,' 'among,' 'to,' 'towards' or 'on,' 'upon,' according to the context. This is so common as to call for little illustration. As with ev so with eis, the noun itself gives the boundary or limit. So eis ttiv okiav (Mt. 2:11), eis to opos 2.

(5:1), eis TO TpaiTwpiov (27 27), eis OaKaaaav (17 27), eis tov ovpavbv (Rev. 10 5), eis 'iBvr] (Ac. 22 21), eis ireipaffp-bv (Mt. 6 13), eis to ixv-qp-elov (Jo. 11 38), eis Triv bbbv (Mk. 11:8), eis tous ixadrjras (Lu. 6 :20), eis toi^s Xr/<7Tas (Lu. 10 36), eis kVlvt^v (Rev. 2 22), eis :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

TO.

be^LO.

(Jo. 21 :6),

eis

ttiv Ke(f)a\r]v

(Mt. 27:30),

ayKoKas

tois

eis

(Lu. 2 28), eis oXoi^ tov Kbanov (Mk. 14 9), eis vpas (1 Th. 2:9). These examples fairly illustrate the variety in the use of eis with verbs of motion. For idea of 'among' see Jo. 21 23. It will be seen at once, if one consults the context in th(\se passages, that the preposition does not of itself mean 'into' even with verbs of motion. That is indeed one of the resultant meanings among :

:

:

many

others.

such as Trjv

^u>T]v

eaxlf^^V

The

(Mt. 18

m(>tai)horical uses

^^^

^'^ :

8),

(Mt. 27: eis

do not

51), avvayetv

KplaLv (Jo.

5

:

differ in principle,

els ev

24),

eis

(Jo. 11 viraKorjv

:

52),

eis

(2 Cor.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

594 10

:

(Mt. 17

5), els x^tpas

ples of

:

NEW TESTAMENT many

For

22), etc.

interesting

h and ets see Theimer, Die Prdpositionen els,

U im

h,

examN. T.,

Beitrdge zur Kenntnis des Sprachgebrauches

im N. T., 1896. Here eis marks either the limit or accents the duration expressed by the accusative. Thus in 2 Tim. 1 12 we find 4>v\a^aL els eKelvrjv TTjv Tjiiepau where 'until' suits as a translation (cf. 'against'). Cf. Ph. 1 10, els wepau With Expressions of Time.

3.

:

:

Not

XpLCTTov.

Cf.

1

quite so sharp a limit

There

Pet. 1:11.

is els Tijv

that

is little

is

(Mt. 21 (Heb. 7 3),

Tov aloiva

bi-qveKks

period

:

set in cases

ets

to n'eWov (Lu. 13

19), ets 7ej^eds Kal yeveas (Lu. 1

Cf. Lu. 12

etc.

:

is

hke

ets

.34).

tov Kaipbv (Lu. 1

20),

:

:

9),

50), ets ro

:

But a more

19.

:

:

added by the preposition

to the accusative in such examples as eis

avpiov (Mt. 6

definite

to p.eTa^v

ets

ca^l3aTov (Ac. 13 :42). 4.

Like a Dative.

It

not strange to see

ets used where Indeed already ets and the accusative occur where the dative alone would be sufficient. This is especially true in the LXX, but the papyri show examples also. Cf. ol els XpiaTov {Mart. Pauli, II). Moulton (Prol,

disposition or attitude of

Tb.P.

p. 246) cites

is

mind

set forth.

is

16, ov X-qyovTes

TTjt [ets]

Note

nacular.

\oyias

TTJs

(Ro. 10

ets

TrdvTas

els

TO Wvos (Ac. 24

ets

(Heb. 11

12),

:

:

TrXeomfw

ets

(Ph. 4

:

^

(Ac. 2

:

1),

tXoutw

17), e\erip.o(yvvas woLrjawv

17), XeLTOvpydv els to. Wvr] (Pv,o.

26), XeTet

ets

One must remember modern Greek ver-

to us dyiovs (1 Cor. 16

ttjs ets

"where

avTovs aWaSia,

actually stands for the possessive genitive." the complete disappearance of the dative in

15

:

16), d7ro/3Xe7rcj

34 f.), to (Mt. 18 6), xPWrbs els (Eph. 4 32), aydiriqv els (Ro. 5:8), etc. If one entertains hostile feeHngs the resultant idea with ets will be 'against,' though the word does not of itself mean that. So in Lu. 12 10 ets tov vlbv tov avTo

:

ets

dXXjjXous (Ro. 12

els

:

:

25), opvvo:

els

(Mt. 5

16), TnaTeveiv ets

:

:

:

:

dvdpwTTOv (cf. Kara in

HVaavTL, els

^\d(T(t)r]iJLa els

(Lu. 15

uates here

:

Mt. 12

:

32)

and

ets

(Ac. 6:11), eTL^ovXrj

els

to aytov irveviia

(Ac. 23

:

^Xaacjy-ri-

30), dp.apTaveLV

As a matter of fact all that ets really accentthe accusative case (with reference to) which happens

18), etc.

is

to be in a hostile atmosphere. But that is not true of such examples as ijOeTrjaav els eavTovs (Lu. 7:30), ets ttjv krayyeXlav tov deov (Ro. 4 :20), etc. For oxPovTat ets in Jo. 19 37 see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 245. In the modern Greek ets has dis:

placed the dative in the vernacular. 5. Aim or Purpose. Sometimes indeed ets appears in an atmosphere where aim or purpose is manifestly the resultant idea. 1

Moulton,

Prol., p. G3; C.

and

S., p.

82; W.-Th., p. 396

f.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs) Thus we may note kXOuu 2 12). Here the second :

Cf. also TOVTO xotetre

mean

does not

€15

So with

86^av deov in Ph.

to evayyeKLov (2 Cor.

ttjv eij.r]v avaixv-qaiv (1 Cor. 11:24), where though that is clearly the resultant idea. Take Ro. 11 36, for inavTols (Mt. 8:4). els

:

abrbv

els

TpwdSa ds

ttju

suggests the purpose of his coming.

'for,'

ixapTvpiov

els

where

stance,

els els

595

1:11,

set over against e^ aiiTov.

is

Ro. 8

in

(})6^ov

els

:

15,

Cf. again eudeL^LP in

els

els

Ro.

in Jo. 6 27. One may not doubt also that Mt. 26 28, to irepl toXXojp eKxvvv6p.evov els acpeaiv But it by no means follows that the same idea is exanapTtoJv. pressed by els a(t)eaLv in Mk. 1 4 and Ac. 2 38 (cf. Mt. 10 41),

3

:

25,

els t<^riv alcovLOP

:

this is the idea in

:

:

may

though that

remains a matter One must not omit here also the

for the interpreter to decide.

frequent use of

ets

to

Mt. 20

TO eixwal^aL in

:

and the 19,

:

:

be true.

in the abstract

It

infinitive to express design.

to aTavpa^drjvac in 26

els

Cf.

els

See chapter on

2.

:

Verbal Nouns for further discussion. Cf. also ets tovto (Mk. 1 38), cts avTO tovto (2 Cor. 5:5), ayopa^cx) els (Jo. 13 29), ets cnraVTTjaiv :

:

(Mt. 25

:

Light, etc., p. 157), B.C.), 'for (iV.

12

6), ets viravTriaiv aiiTU) (Jo.

my

nov (Fay. P., 50 a.d.), 'sticks for ets

lttttov evo-xXovixevov

uiKoddiJirjaev

—

eXaLcouas

els

olive-gardens' (Deissmann,

a sick horse' (Deissmann, B.

T. Gr., p. 112) cites

Cf. ^v\wv

13).^

:

(P. Fl.-Pet.,

S., p. 118).

ets

eavTou (83

ii.

XXV, 226

Radermacher N. Chr. Wadd.

Inscr., 2614). 6. Predicative Use. But there remains one more use of ets which, though good KOLvq, was greatly accelerated by the influence of the LXX.^ This is where ets occurs in the predicate with etyut or

ktX.

ylvofxat,

Radermacher (N. T.

Gr.,

14, Trjv -wripav els Kadedpav TOLrjaafxevr] ;

iEneas 114, 5 H, ywalKas

Gen. 2

cf.

Lu. 13

:

:

19.

:

24);

oTrXlaavTes

eWeias (Is.

ecrrat to. crKoXtd ets

Tepas (2 Cor. 6

p. 16

f.)

quotes

iVa /x^ ets

P. Fay. 119, 276 (100 A.D.); Heliod., yEthiop.Yl,

xPcofxlov y'evi)TaL,

LXX);

18, ri

Xvttj

40

:

4).

eaovTaL ol

v/jlcov els

and even the Attic author avdpas. Thus in Lu. 3 5, So eaeade jxol els vlovs Kai Ovya-

cos es

dm

:

els

crapKa ixlav

(Mt. 19

:

xapdi' yeprjaeTai (Jo. 16: 20).

As already remarked,

this predicate use of

5;

Cf.

ap-

ets

pears in the papyri^ and in the Apostolic Fathers,'* but not with '

This can no longer be called a Hebraism, since the pap. have it. Moulton, Cf. tUa.iravrrj(jLv, Tb. P. 43 (ii/B.c). Roufliac (llochorchcs, p. 28)

Prol., p. 14.

finds dvaL '

ets 4>v\aKiiv in

Moulton,

inscr. of

Prol., p. 71

awipfiaTa, 'for a loan.'

f.

Prione 50, 39 (ii/B.c).

^

C. and

Cf. K.P. 4G (ii/.\.D.) laxov vap'

Cf. our "to wife."

Moulton

(Prol.,

S., p.

djuwi'

p.

81

f.

5a (fetoc)

67) cites

M.

Aurelius, VI, 42. *

C. and

Theogn.

S., p. 81.

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

p. 143, cites

an

ex.

from

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

596

the frequency that

we find

credits

els eiprjvrjv

LXX

the 7

:

in i;7ra7e

eis

(cf.

where

53)

Sam.

1

els is

1

:

much

it

in the

LXX.

(Mk. 5

Cf. Lu. 13

19.

:

Blass^

Hebrew through

34) to the

:

els dLarayas ayyeKwv (Ac. In general therefore, as with ev

Cf. also

17).

like ev.

we must hark back to first principles and work out to by means of the context and the history. 7. Compared with ewi, wapd and irpos. The growth in the of els is shown by its appearance where eirl or irpbs would be so with

the

els

resultant idea

pected in the older Greek. the point

is

not

but

'into,'

D has dakaaaav, DHP have in 7:31 NBD have In 11 38

not

e-rrl,

:

'Ek

(g)

ex

(e),

'to.' els.

Cf.

eis.

€is,

Cf. epx^raL

not

So 11 31, So in Mk. 3

Old

vira.'yeL

2

13,

:

ex-

4:5), where to

els

nvrjixelov.

7, avexoip^aev irpos ttjv

:

X

has

els

for

irapa.

and

irpos.

The etymology

(€|).

Gallic ex,

:

Mk.

(Jo.

els ttoKlv

use

Irish ess,

of this

Cymric

word

eh.

is

simple.

Cf. Latin

In the Greek the form

varies thus

k

Latin

or eas like Old Irish (Arcadian, Boeotian, Thessalian).

The

e), es

original

(e^

before vowels), ey (assimilation),

form was

e^,

then

k

Latin

like

ex, e.

e

(Locrian,

Cf..

cf.

Brugmann,

Griech Gr., p. 147. 1.

like

The word means

Meaning. (XTTo

or vrapa.

'out

of,'

'from within,' not In the modern

It stands in contrast to ev {ev-s).^

Greek vernacular airb has displaced e/c except in the Epirot dx or But in the N. T. k is still ahead of a-Ko. The indifference 6x.^ of the scribes^ as to which they used is shown in the MS. variations between k- and oltto as in Mt. 7:4; 17 9; Mk. 16 3. The writings of John (Gospel, Epistles, Revelation) use k more frequently than any other N. T. books.^ In the late Greek (eighth century a.d.) we find the accusative with k, and this was the last usage to survive.^ Brugmann^ indeed thinks that k may even rarely use the genuine genitive besides the ablative, but I doubt this. But it is certain that k used the locative in Arcadian, Cypriotic and Pam:

:

phylian dialects after analogy of ev (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101 f.).^ 2. In Composition. It is very common and sometimes with

So we note

the "perfective" idea. a-Kopohiievoi in

1

2 Cor. 4

Gr. of N. T. Gk.

:

8.^

e^-aTopovfxevoL

contrasted with

Cf. also k-SaTraraco (2 Cor. 12

2

:

15),

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 440.

Moulton, ProL, p. 102. On p. 246 he cites Psichari as saj'ing that TOP is still "line forme vivante." * Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 145. « Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 381. 6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126. ^ Griech. Gr., p. 440. 8 Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 129; Meister, Griech. Dial., I, pp. 285, 307. 9 Moulton, Prol., p. 237. 3

k

597

PREPOSITIONS (IIPOGESEIS)

(Mk.

kK-8m€0fxai (Ac. 13 :41), eK-Oafx^koo (Mk. 9 15), kK-davixa^oi 12 17), eK-Kadaipw (2 Tim. 2 21), €^€paumco (1 Pet. 1 10). :

The

:

:

:

other uses in composition follow the root-idea of the word closely, meaning 'out of,' 'away,' etc., like k^kpxoiiaL, e/c/SdXXaj, etc. 'Ek has a causative force in composition sometimes as in e^anapravo},

(LXX), and eK4>ol3e1v (2 Cor. 10 9). The preposition naturally is common with expresThe strict idea of from within is common, as in place.

'cause to sin'

:

Place.

3.

sions of

€K T03V ovpavcov

<))u)vri

nvnueluu (Mt. 8 in eK

tv

tQ

TO

ets

k

17),

Often

28), etc.

:

rod o^^aX^oO (Lu. 6

it

So

in

:

42), ck tcov

:

appears in contrast with

4

:

47), rod

e/c

Vfj.ds

tls

as

KoXkaavTOS

where the metaphorical follows the

9),

42 k tov b4>da\p.ov is set in opposition to In Ac. 8 38 f we have both ets to uScop and k rod

In Lu. 6

6(t>da\ix(2.

iiSaros.

2

(1 Pet.


usage.

literal

:

'lovSaias els ttjv TaKiXaiav (Jo.

Trjs

oKOTovs

(Mt. 3

:

.

:

Mk.

1

:

U

10 ava^aivup

rod v5aTos a previous presence

In a case like Kara^aivbvTwv k tov bpovs (Mt. kp tQ vSari, is implied. and Lu. airo) we are not to suppose that Mk. parallels in 17: 9;

they had been in a cave, but merely up in the mountain (cf English idiom), the term "mountain" including more than the earth .

and rock. Cf. ets to opos in Mt. 5:1. But in Mt. 8 1 we merely have dTTo tov opovs. Note likewise dpl^ k ttjs K€cf)a\r]s (Lu. 21 18), :

:

(Ac. 12

€K tCiv x^i-p^v

k

:

7).

28

xeipbs avTOV (Ac.

TTJs

Thus we explain

k

4),

:

also Kpep-a/ievov to drjplov

(Mt. 20

be^tuv

:

21), e^ kvavTlas

(Mk. 15 39), etc. It is not necessary to record all the verbs with which k occurs. In Lu. 5 3 kbidaaKev k tov t'KoLov the teaching is represented as proceeding out of the boat (Jesus was in the boat). One may compare with this eyeipeTat k- tov belTrvov (Jo. 13 :

:

:

k

4), avaXvaji

(Mk. 16 4.

:

dLaawdevTa

3),

Xpbvoiv (Lu.

k

:

10),

k

23

3G),

k rrjs OaXaaarjs (Mk. 10

veoT-qTos :

:

d'Tro/cuXtetJ'

(Ac. 28

expressions of time

With

Time.

parture, hke

24

yap-wv (Lu. 12

tcov

k

8),

:

TovTov (Jo. 6

:

66). is

4).

gives the point of de-

k-

20), e^ apxrjs (Jo. 6

tov aiojvos (Jo. 9

the point of departure

:

tov \iQov tK t^s dvpas

:

32),

k

64), e^ kavCiv

:

xoXXcov hojv (Ac.

In cases where succession is involved Thus with k- bevTepov

really present.

44), ^fxkpav k^ wkpas (2 Pet. 2:8). 24), k tp'ltov (Mt. 26 Other advero'aiJ phrases have a similar origin as with k fxepovs 34), e^ apayKr]s (2 Cor. 9:7), k (1 Cor. 12 27), k pteTpov (Jo. 3 (Jo. 9

:

:

:

:

cvp.(j)6)Pov (1 C^or.

5.

Separation.

k TrdXat. The use of k for the

7

:

5).

Cf.

the fuller expansion of the ablative. (1

Cor. 9

Trjs 77JS

:

ulcn of separation

Thus with

19), avairarfaovTaL k' tojv KbiroiP

(Jo. 12

:

32), v-KoaTpk^^ai

k

ttjs

iXevdtpos

(Rev. 14

:

13),

kroXTjs (2 Pet. 2

:

is

merely

k

-n-avTuv

{flpoiOoii

21), dpjjs

k k

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

598

Abbott^ doubts

Cf. Jo. 17: 6.

Tov Kocrnov (Jo. 17: 15).

LXX

and John U always impHes previous existence from which one is delivered when used with acbf co and

k

tainly in Jo. 17

occurs rather frequently, but

may

in the

if

in the evils

Cer-

rrjpeco.

k

Tr]pr]aj}s

tov

imply that the evil one once had power irovrjpov (17: 15) for Peter). Certainly in Jo. 12 27, prayer (cf. Jesus' them over still

:

cuaov

fxe

Jesus had already entered into the hour.

€k tt]s copas Taurrjs,

where U may accentuate though he had not yet entered into In Rev. 3 10 T-qpriaoo eK tyjs copas tov Tveipaap-ov we seem to death. have the picture of general temptation with the preservation of the saints. Cf U^aai^ in 1 Cor. 10 13. So in Mt. 13 41 avKKk^ovcxLv tK Trjs jSacrtXetas the idea is 'out from among,' just as cheat or The two cockle grows in among the wheat in the same field.

Cf. bvvaixevov

k

aoi'^eLv

the power of

God

davdrov (Heb. 5:7)

{bwciixevov) , :

kingdoms

is

common

€K TOV

XaoD (Ac. 3

veKpunf

(Lu. 20: 35),

:

TOV

(Rev. 15

O-qpiov

k veKpcbv (Jo. 12 1), b.vdcfTaais k k tov kocthov (Jo. 15 19), etc. This Not quite so apparent is viKoiVTas k

clear.

17

:

:

Thayer and Blass both take

2).

of

like e^oXedpevdrjaeTai

k^e\e^dij,r]v

:

The notion

(the world).

with a number of verbs

23), rijeipeu

seems simple and

all

same sphere

coexist in the

separation

:

:

.

it

like T-qpkoi

k, 'victorious over' (by separation). Cf. neTevorjaau k tq^v tpywv (Rev. 16 11) and Jo. 3 25, fiyrrjo-ts k. 6. Origin or Source. Equally obvious seems the use of k for the :

:

Thus

idea of origin or source. etjut

k

3

:

9.

1

:

46

TOV KoapLOV (17: 14, 16),

f.),

k

TToXews (Jo. 1

€^ Wpccv (Gal. 2

:

:

15),

:

k

5),

k

k

44), Tijs

ttJs

(1

Cf

k

.

28), ovk

3

:

Th. 2

:

31), 3),

(Mt.

Nafaper (Jo.

4:7),

I,apapias (Jo.

yrjs (Jo.

TrXdi^T^s

:

TOiv XiBlov tovtoov eyetpac TeKva

Naturally this usage has a wide range.

k^ 'E^paloiv (Ph. 3

16

e^rjXdov k- tov iraTpos (Jo.

k

'E/3paTos

k deov (Ph. 3 9), k xoXX^s ^Xt^^ecos (2 :

dy citji (2 Cor. 8:7). Cf. Lu. 12 15. This Hst is by no means exhaustive, but it is at least sugOne may note here aTecjiavov e^ dKavdo:v (Mt. 27:29), gestive. Cor. 2:4),

ttj

e^

rjpLcbv

€u vp.lv

:

where the material is expressed by e^. Closely allied to the above is the notion 7. Cause or Occasion. which may also be conveyed by k. Thus of cause or occasion 12 18, kpacroivTo k tov irovoi. \i.lev. 16 10), note TO e^ vpoiv in Ro. :

:

(Ro. 5:1), e^ epyoju (Gal. 3 10), k tov SiKaioodevTas k evayyeklov ^riv (1 Cor. 9 14), e^ daQeveias (2 Cor. 13 4), k tov paCf. also diredavov k Tciu vbaTWV (Rev. 8 11). fioova (Lu. 16 :9). TriaTecos

:

:

:

:

Perhaps here belongs

k

in Jo. 6

:

kirXrjpcodr] k- ttjs dapfjs

(Jo. 12

13 (Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 253). 1

Joh. Gr., p. 251

f.

:

3).

Cf. yepl^o)

At any

rate a

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

number

of verbs use

7:11), (Rev. 18

599

in this general sense like w^eXeco

e/c

(Mk.

Cor. 7:9), adLKeladai (Rev. 2:11), irXovTeca xopra^eadai (Rev. 19 21), Koina^o) (Jo. 4 6), fdw (Ro.

^-qixLomdai (2

1

:

3),

:

Cf.

17), etc.

:

Indeed

Thus

this idiom.

Tayris,

(Ac.

1

-qyopaaap e^

18),

:

t^s irXrjyrjs

k

differ radically

Tov ay pop

auT<xii>

(TviJ.(j)u^pr](xas

(Rev. 16

(Mt. 27:

(Mt. 20

br}papLov

:

:

21).

from

7), eKTYjaaTO

'Ek 5ta-

2).

'by order,' was a regular formula in the papyri (Deissmann,

Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 248, finds the a.p(.p.wp (Mk. 13 27) in the papyri as well as

Light, etc., p. 87).

idiom

e/c

with the notion of price does not

ck

€K piiadov

:

top dtov

e^\aa(()r]jjLrjaav

k

twp reaaapup

:

in Zech. 11:6. 8. The Partitive Use of e/c. It is not infrequent, marking an increase over the earlier idiom. ^ Thus in Jo. 16 17 k tup ixaOrirchv :

even used as the subject of d-^ap. Cf. Ac. 21 16 without e/c. See also Jo. 7 40. John is specially fond of the partitive use of €K (Radermacher, A^". T. Gr., p. 115) and the inscriptions and papyri have it also. Cf aprip k twp rpcoTevoPToop, Petersen-Luschan, Reisen^ Further examples are apdpwTos e/c toop (^apLaaloop p. 113, xviii. A. 5. is

:

:

.

3:1),

(Jo.

fXT]

TLS

e/c

Tojp apxoPTCop (Jo.

(Jo. 7:40), dapaTCoaovcTLP e^

(Mt. 23

:

34), ^XeirovaLP

SeScjKep (1 Jo.

4

:

13), Tr'tpwp

The use

eaten.

is

of

e/c

37), ol

:

e/c

pofjLov

(Ac. 11:2),

To/xjjs

:

10

it is

rod oxkov aKouaapres

e/c

16), e^ avrojp airoKTipdre

6

:

what

9), SirjKOPOVP

:

50), :

e/c

e/c

Thus

13), ovSels e^ avTcop

on the

is

(Ro. 4

:

14), 6

OL €K epLdias

e/c

(Ro. 2

6 top

e/c

ttjs

TiaTecos (Ro. 3 :

4

:

:

The

8), etc.

Cf. Ph.

22

tcop

tov irpevfiaTOs

altar that

with a class or for a side or position

allied closely to the partitive.

oUias.

:

(t>dyp (Jo.

as well be mentioned here also.

18

48),

tov vdaros (Jo. 4

e/c

In Heb. 13

(Jo. 17: 12), etc.2

:

(Rev. 11

tcop Xacjp

e/c

VTapxoPTUP (Lu. 8:3), e^ avrov

7

(Lu. 21

v/jLcbp

26), ol

e/c

may (Jo. Trepi-

partisan use

k

ot

aXrjdelas

ttjs

is

Kaicapos

See further ch. XI, Cases.

and k.

A word k with

in conclusion is

needed about the soif this classic idiom appears in the N. T. The passages that seem to have it are mt KaTa/Sdroj Spat rd k ttjs oldas avTov (Mt. 24 17) where k might indeed have been employed, but k coincides in idea with dpat. Cf. Mk. 13 15, where k does not have to. before it. In Lu. 11 13 6 iraTTip 6 e^ ovpavov Scbcret itvevtxa ixyiop W. H. bracket 6 before e^, and with 6 the sending of the Holy Spirit by the Father has 9.

'E/c

called blending of

k.

Blass^ doubts

:

:

'

2

«

:

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ok., lb., p.

dbvafiLv.

258.

p. 145. j).

100.

Cf. also Field, Ot. Norv., Pars III,

Mk.

5

:

30,

on

riiv k^

avrov

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

600

h which would otherwise have been regular. some MSS. add 6 &v ev tQ ovpavui to 6 vtos rod avQpcoirov, thus making Jesus in heaven at that moment when he was speakcaused

e^ to displace

In Jo. 3

13

:

In Col. 4

ing to Nicodemus.

16, rriv

:

k

KaohKlas, the

assumes,

e/<

an Epistle had been sent to Laodicea, and suggests that the Colossians get it from (k) them. Cf. Ro. 3 25 f for examples of 5ta, ev, eis, irpos, e/c. See dx6 and Trapd. of course, that

:

(h)

See Sanskrit dpi (locative case), Zend aipi, Latin

'E-ni.

Lithuanian pi. 1. Ground-Meaning.

from

iiTep in

.

that

It

is

'upon' as opposed to

It differs

implies a real resting upon, not merely over.^

eiri

simplicity of this idea gives

But the very

vtto.

ob,

it

a manifoldness of re-

sultant uses true of no other preposition. Sometimes indeed in the causal and ethical usages the root-idea seems dim,^ but none

the less

ovpavQ) Kol

eiri 777s

(Mt. 6

In Composition in

taining the root-idea

the perfective idea yLvcoffKO)

in 1

Cor. 8

11.

3.

:

:

it

is

seen in

It

obs

h

10).

N. T.

the

It

is

very common, always re-

2 Cor. 5:2), though sometimes Thus with kr-aLTeco in Lu. 16 3, ewL-

(cf. kir-ev-dvo^,

is clear.

Cor. 13

:

12,^

:

e-rri-'yi'OJaLS

in Col.

In the N. T.

Frequency in N. T.

though

in each special context.

difference from h, as

delicate shade of

marks a

safety consists in holding on to the

and working out from that

root-idea

2.

The only

there.

it is

1

:

9, eTri-reXeco in

ext is still in

2

constant use,

ultimately dropped out of the vernacular* before kiravoi. P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22) like ava els, etc. evrt hLak[oy l(j]ix6s

Note eojs But in the N. T. it more than two cases

,

is

the one preposition

still

used freely with

and loc. 176).^ Most and grammars are lexicons in the dative called examples of the really locatives, but some of them are possibly true datives.^ So then €7ri really has four cases still in the N. T. In Homer ert often stands alone for

(ace. 464, gen. 216, dat.

Farrar,^ quoting Donaldson, finds in

eTr-eart.

the idea of absolute superposition, while the genitive expresses only partial superposition and the accusative implies motion with a view to superposition and the dative would

the locative with

hirl

be superposition for the interest of one. There is some truth in this distinction and the case-idea must always be observed. But *

p. 495.

lb.

^

Cf.

Moulton,

1

K.-G.,

4

Jann.' Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3S3; Mullach, Vulg., p. 381.

I,

6

Moulton,

e

K.-G.,

»

Greek Synt.,

I,

Prol., p. 113.

Prol., p. 107. p. 495;

Delbruck, Grundl., p. 130; Vergl. Synt.,

p. 102.

I,

p.

676

f.

601

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

the growi:h of the accusative in the later language at the expense of the other cases caused some confusion in the usage according to the standard of the earlier Greek. Simcox' considers it "almost a matter of indifference" whether in the N. T. one uses

This

locative, genitive or accusative.

is

somewhat

true,

but even

does not follow that there was no difference in the cases. The so locative accentuated mere location, the genitive brought out rather it

the kind or genus, while the accusative Avould present the general idea of extension modified by the fact that the accusative tended to absorb the other cases without insisting

on the

distinct case-

Thus sometimes either case with kiri would give substanFor tially the same idea, though technical differences did exist. instance, in Ac. 5 9 note eirl rfj dvpa, while in verse 23 we have eirl

idea.

:

eirl dvpacs (Mk. 13 29) with earrjKa Here the notion of rest exists ^nXh. all three cases, though in Rev. 3 20 koL Kpovco may have some effect on the presence of the accusative. Once more observe Kadlar} kirl dpSvov and Kadrjaeade eiri 86}8eKa dpovovs in Mt. 19 28. Rev. 4 2

So compare

TU)V dvpuv. kirl T-qv

dvpav (Rev. 3

kyyiis earLV

20)

:

:

.

:

:

:

gives us

Nestle) tTTL

Tov dpovov

eTTt

same

Tov dpovov, threc cases with the

refinement to insist on too

much

(cf.

Ac. 27

Xtdos

:

any

Lu. 21

and

\vinr]v ext Xvirrjv

TToXXwj' in

Mt. 25

:

:

6.

\vTrrjv

21.

But the

kirl

In Ph. 2

27 the

:

Xvirrj.

The use

:

ewl T-qv

fj

x^'^P°- o.vtov

Mt. 24

:

2 -^dth

MSS. vary between

Cf. also

of xtareuco

cases

In Rev. 14 9 the

\idov in

also Xi0os

eiri

would be over-

It

rate.

tov fxerdiTOV avrov

eTri

Compare

44).

Xi^co in

eirl

has

Xa/xjSdi'et

verb.

distinction here.

afford variety of construction at single verb

H., text of

while verse 10 has rod Kadrjpkvov

Bpovcc,

tu>

Tcj Kadrinepco cTrt

W.

verse 9 (marg. of

KadriiJ.evos,

kir'

oXiya

and

eirl

with locative or

eiri

accusative has already been discussed. The accusative suggests more the initial act of faith (intrust) while the locative implies

We find

that of state (trust). as dative (both

common

€ts

also used with this verb as well

in John).

Once we have

Trto-Tcvco

ku

(Mk. 1 15). See Moulton, Prol, p. 68. But, after all is said, the only practical way to study eiri is from the point of view of the cases which it supplements. :

4.

With

the Accusative.

of the other cases

As already noted,

combined.

It is

it

is

far in excess

hardly necessary to

make mi-

nute subdivision of the accusative usage, though the preposition with this case follows the familiar lines. With expressions of place So eXOelv eivl to. it is very common and very easy to understand. vSara (Mt. 14

:

28), irepiiiraT-qctv 1

kirl to.

Lang, of the N. T.,

vdara (14 p. 146.

:

29), dpaireaeip

kirl

Trjv yrjv

(Mt. 15

TTOpevov

eirl

(Mt. 26

:

35), ctkotos eyevero eTC irdaav

:

bbbv (Ac. 8

Tr)v

avaireacdv

50),

phorical use

:

XpLffTov (2 Cor. 12

:

:

eirl

25).

tou 'Irjaovv

The meta-


kirkireaev

ra epya (Heb. 2:7),

33), Iva tTnaKrivwarj :

:

eirl

Thus

this idiom.

Cf. 2 Cor. 1

9).

13

(Jo.

arrjdos

12), KareaTrjaas avrov

:

top oIkov (Lu. 1

(TiKevaei eirl

to

eirl

(Mt. 27: 45),

rrjv yrjp

26), eire^oKov rds x^tpas

harmony with

in

is

avTov (Lu. 1

kir'

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

602

evr' e/^e

17

/3a-

bvvap.LS

23, eTrtKaXoO^iat kwl

tov

ttjp kfiriv

But not all the accusative uses are so simple. In a case Mt. 7 24, (hKodoiirjaev km Trjv irerpap, some idea of motion may be seen. But that is not true of Mt. 13 2, xas 6 oxXos kirl top alyLoKov IcrTrjKeL. Cf. also KaQrip.epop eirl to TeXcoPiOP (Mt. 9 9) and others given above. So ewl to TpoaKecjjaXaiop KadevSoop (Mk. 4 38), \pvxr]v.

like

:

:

:

:

TPevfxa

rjp

tTrkcTiqaap

4

ayiop tirl

avTOP (Lu. 2

:

25), epeipep

top irvXccpa (Ac. 10

14), KciXvppa

:

tir'

CTTt TTjP

:

17),

ecp'

eir'

i;/xas

Kapdlap KeiTat (2 Cor. 3

avTOP (Jo. 1

32),

:

apawaveTaL (1 Pet.

15), iaoPTai aX-qdovaai

:

hard to think of any idea of 'whither.'^ Sometimes indeed kwi seems not to imply strictly 'upon,' but rather 'as far as.' So with epxoPTai eTvl to pprjpeLOP (Mk. 16

Here

TO avTo (Lu. 17: 35).

eirl

2), KaTe^r](xap

:

eirl

The aim

it is

daXaaaap (Jo. 6

ttjp

16), -^Xdop

:

eirl tl

(Ac.

v8o:p

sometimes expressed by eTri, as eirl 6 Trdpet (Mt. 26: 50). It may express TO ^aiTTiapa (Mt. 3:7), one's emotions as with Trtareuco ewl (Ro. 4 24), eXiri^o: ext (1 Pet, Cf. e' oaop xpovop (Ro. 7:1), or a more definite period may be indicated, as with 8

36).

:

or purpose

is

€
:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

eirl TTjv

It

is

(hpav ttjs Trpocreux^s (Ac.

common

with adverbs

3

:

1),^ kirl T-qp

like e0' awa^,

kirl

avpLOP (Lu. 10

:

35).

rpis, etc.

The genitive with kwi has likewise a 5. With the Genitive. wide range of usages. Usually the simple meaning 'upon' satN. T. Gk.,

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Joh. Gr., p. 259.

*

A

p. 136.

For

LXX ex. of rest see C. and S., p. 85.

postclassical usage, Simcox, Lang, of the

N.

T., p. 147.

603

PREPOSITIONS (IIFOGESEIS) requirements, as in

isfies all

(Lu. 4

29),

:

K-qpv^are

(Mt. 24

vt4>t\0iv

30), WriKev

:

Tov ^TinaTOS (Ac. 12

(Rev. 5

13),

:

:

21), erl

rrjs Ke(j)a\rjs

(Jo.

20

Mk.

In

30).

:

€0' ov coKo86fxr]To

27), kpxo/JLepov

:

tov aravpov (Jo. 19

eirl

^v\ov (Ac. 5

eirl

(Mt. 9:2),

eirl kKLvtjs

rdv bwixaTwv (Mt. 10

eirl

eirl

19), Kadiaas

:

eirl

7), eirl rrjs dakaaaris

:

12

26,

:

tov iSarov,

eirl

thought occurs in the passage about the bush. Sometimes, indeed, as with the accusative, so with the genitive, ewl has the idea of vicinity, where the word itself with which it is used has a wide meaning. Thus in Jo. 21:1 eirl rrjs daXaaarjs seems to mean 'on the sea-shore,' and so by the sea.' So with eirl ttjs 65oD (Mt. 21 19), the fig-tree being not on the path, but on the edge of the road. Abbott^ notes how Matthew (14 25 f.) has eirl r-qv

an

in

ellipsis

'

:

:

doKaaaav which Cf. Ac. 5

:

23

not ambiguous

is

tup

eirl

The

dvpojv.

it

TO -kKoIov

19.

eirl

is not so common in has not quite disappeared as Simcox^ thinks. Cf. ey'evero 11), eirl rrjs 777s (Jo. 6 21), Kadieixevov eirl ttjs yrjs (Ac. 10 :

:

^aXovaa to

(Mk. 14

:

and the the N. T.,

idiom with

classic

genitive in the sense of 'towards'

though

6

like the genitive in Jo.

35), yevbiievos

:

(Mt. 26

ixvpov evl tov acoAtaros eivl

:

12), eiriiTTev

tov toitov (Lu. 22

eirl

40), tov

:

yrjs

Tijs

avTrjs

eir'

(Heb. 6:7), Teaibv eirl t^s yrjs (Mk. 9 20). In these examples we see just the opposite tendency to the use of the accusative with verbs of rest. Cf. ireaelTat eirl Trjv yrjv (Mt. 10 29) with Mk. 9 20 above and ^aXelv eirl Trjv yrjv (Mt. 10 34) with Mk. 4 26. With persons eirl and the genitive may yield the resultant epxofievov

:

:

:

:

:

meaning (Mk. 13 8vo

6

:

fj

eirl (TOV

in Ac. 25

Cor. 6

9), Kplveadai eirl tcop adUc^v (1

Tim. 5

TpLwv napTvpoiv (1

13),

:

10

(Ac. 23

:

30),

19),

:

l3r]iJ.aTos).

Cf.

(1

eirl

is

:

simply by

eivL

(Mt. 1:11).

Keaias

since

eirl

1

:

There

no

Blass^ observes

With

eir'

(cf.

ecrxaroi;

eirl

'EXtaaiov (4

»

Joh. Gr., p. 261.

»

Lang, of the N. T.,

p. 147.

:

eirl

toju xp6vo:v

With

eirl

about

eirl

ttjs

ixeToi-

fuller exposition is required,

'in the

Claudius' or 'during the reign of Claudius.' Cf. also "Avva (Lu. 3:2),

how

'before,'

expressions of

Ju. 18).

tantamount to

is

is

period of prayer denoted

difficulty

With persons a

K\av8iov {Ac. 11:28)

eirl

(Magical papyrus, Deissmann,

eivl

is

p.i]

alone present (Kadlaas

occurs

we have

10)

Cf. eirevxotxai

Light, etc., p. 252).

is

Thus

the same.

erl naturally

(Ro.

tCsp irpocrevxcov P'Ov

9).

TLtov in 2 Cor. 7: 14.

much

Pet. 1:20) where

-qyeixovojv

eirl

1), eKTOs el

Kaiaapos the meaning

to-rws eirl tov ^TjfxaTos

time the result

:

HovTLOV HeiKaTOV (1 Tim.

eirl

(25

efiov

eir'

while in verse 17 the usual idea 'upon' TOV

Thus

of 'before' or 'in the presence of.' :

27),

»

eirl

'A^tadap

eirl

time of dpxiepecos

apxi-ipeojs

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.

(Mk.

2

Cf.

26).

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

004

Heb. 7:11. 4

avrrjs in

eir'

metaphor as

in ex' aXrjdelas (Lu.

The 25), a

idea of basis

is

a natural

aaQtvovvTwv

eiroieL ctti tcoj'

ToWciv (Gal. 3 16), kwl oTonaTos (Mt. 18 16). is with the resultant idea of over,'

(Jo.

6:2),

One

of the metaphorical uses

cbs

:

eTTt

:

:

'

growing naturally out of 'upon.' ^ Thus KaTaarrjaeL kirl rrjs Oepairelas (Lu. 12 42), though in Mt. 25 21, 23 both genitive and accusa:

:

Cf. also ^aaCkdav

tive occur. eTTt

irdvTuv (Ro.

With

6.

9:5),

kirl toov

jSaaiKeo^v

(Rev. 17:

18), 6 c^v

etc.

Here

the Locative.

kwi

more

is

though

simple,

still

Blass^ observes that with the

with a variety of resultant ideas.

purely local sense the genitive and accusative uses outnumber the

But still some occur like iwl irlvaKi (Mt. 14 8), 4:6), eirl l/JLaTLo: TraXato; (Mt. 9 16), kirl Tavry rrj Trerpa oLKoboixrjcxoi (Mt. 16 18; cf. some MSS. in Mk. 2 4, €0' w KareKeLTo), eirl rols /cpa/Sarrots (Mk. 6 55), evrt tw xoprco (Mk. 6 39), locative with ext. eTTt

:

(Jo.

7r?777)

77?

:

:

:

:

er'

aavldLv (Ac. avTui,

(Mk. 1:45),

tottols

epi]jiOLS

27 44;

also

cf.

:

the resultant idea

eTavoj

is

11:38),

avrco (Jo.

In Lu. 23

tivuv).

evrt

kiv'

:

eirl

38, ewLypacprj

kir'

rather that of 'over,' Mt. 27 37 having :

As with the accusative and

avrov.

rrjs KecjjoXrj^

:

eireKeLTO

genitive, so

with the locative the idea of contiguity sometimes appears, as in kirl dvpais (Mt. 24 33), eTrt rfj Tpo^aTLKrj (Jo. 5:2), eirl rfj aroq. :

(Ac. 3

:

Here the wider meaning

11).

Cf. also

this result possible.

of the substantive

eirl tc5 Trora^ioj

(Rev. 9

:

makes 'EtL

14).

is

used very sparingly with the locative in expressions of time. Cf. The use of kwl xd(rj7 tt) eirl crvvTeXeia tQiv aloivwv (Heb. 9 26). :

vficiv

p.vtlq. eirl

:

6)

(Heb. 9

eirl rfj irp6)Tr] biady]Krj

TvcTLu

(Heb. 10

veKpoLs

:

rots apTOLS (Mk. 6 52), depi^eLV wavers between occasion and time. Cf.

3), ou avvrjKav

:

euXoyiaLs (2 Cor. 9

also

eirl

(Ph. 1

28)

(Heb. 9

is

:

:

15).

The notion

of

eirl TpLfflv

rather 'before,' 'in the presence

17).

:

eirl

papCf.

of.'

All these developments admit of satis-

factory explanation from the root-idea of

eirl,

the locative case

and the context. There are still other metaphorical applications of eirl. Thus in Mt. 24:47, eirl iraaLP, 'over' is the resultant meaning.

notion of basis priparl aov in eir'

eXirlSL

c3,

involved in

Lu. 5

in Ac. 2

conveyed by ecf)'

So also in Lu. 12 is

:

:

5,

eXevaovTai

26, etc.

(Ph. 4

:

eirl

roZs

Ground

rc3

The

vivapxovaL.

bvoparl pov in

:

4,

or occasion likewise

tQ

eirl

Mt. 24

may

:

:

:

rov 'RvepykTov in Prol. to Sirach see Deiss., B. S., p. 339

^

For

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.

eTTt

44

:

5,

be

eTrt tovtco in Jo. 4 27 and in particular Ro. 5 12 and 2 Cor. 5 4. Cf. ecj)' (^ See 10) where 'whereon' is the simple idea.

like ext tovtco otl, in

i<^povelTe

eirl

Thus note

eirl.

:

apTw p6vw in Mt. 4

ex'

f.

PREPOSITIONS also

(Eph. 2 5

(Eph. 4

vjxwv

kirl Trapopyi(TixQ)

26), cf. 2 Cor. 9

:

aim or purpose seems to come

of

13,

:

10), €0'

:

Koi

a)

Tim. 2:14).

KaTaaTpo(t)fj (2

:

Many

14). kirl

Traai

eir'

:

17), dav/xa^ovTes

:

Delphi

tc3

€7rt

ii/B.c.

involved in o/xotw/xart (Ro. 5 is

:

with the locative, as exatpev (Lu. 2 33), etc. But some of be real datives, as is possibly

kivl

eirl

may

the examples with these verbs

and

also Gal.

(cf. ev ayiaafXiJo), tirl

model

of

idea

ayadois

'ipyois

Note

12).

:

aKadapala

The

15.

:

kirl

eXevOepiaL inscr. at

59)

verbs of emotion use

(Lu. 13

(Ph. 3

err'

The notion

(Lu. 1

bvbp.aTL

Tc3

7, ouk

Cf.

(Deissm., Light, p. 327). kKCiXovv kwl

in cases like

KaTe\rjfj.(f)9r]v

Th. 4

kXevdeplg.; 1

€7r'

605

(lII'OOEZiEIi:)

:

the case with the notion of addition to, like irpoaWrjKtv

tovto

/cat

kirl

Ta(n»'(Lu. 3 :20).

As we have seen, it was probably someThe N. T. examples do not seem to be very numerous, and yet some occur. So I would explain 5td riju virepThe True Dative.

7.

times used with

^aXXovaav

eirl.

xo-ptv rod Oeov €0' v/xlv (2

Cor. 9

be true of ras

€'

vij.lv

Th. 3

in 1

eavToh in Lu. 18

k(j)'

So Lu.

1

:

47

TpLCLP, vlos

Jo. 12

:

TovTOLs,

tQ

deQ.

Tarpi

(cf.

k-wl

eirl

also

Cf.

'against.' 16,

rjv eir'

the idea

T^s yevopevrjs

:

eirl

:

9 and

7

and Ro. 16

This seems a clear

The same thing may

it.

Cf. also

19.

:

fxaKpodv/jirjaov er' ep-ol

In Lu. 12 also

14).

:

case of the dative with kwi supplementing

:

52

f.,

rpets

in

kvl

\aols

in

Rev. 10

yey pap.fj.ha, and Ac. 5 35, eirl rather 'about' or 'in the case

avTi2 is

:

(Ac. 11

:

26

8valv, 8vo

kirl

f.

kirl

OvyaTepa), the resultant sense is

eirl

-n-po
'LTecf)av(jo

ireiroLdb-

Mt. 18

:

19).

11.

:

In

toIs avdponroLs

Cf. also

of.'

Here the personal

relation

than the locative. The notion of addition to may also be dative. Cf. Lu. 3 20 above and Col. 3: 14, eivl iraatv 8e TOVTOLS] Heb. 8: 1, eirl Tots 'KeyopevoLs. In Eph. 6 16 the best MSS. have ev. It is possible also toTegard the use of eirl for aim or purpose as having the true dative as in 1 Th. 4 7. (^) Kara. There is doubt about the etymology of this preposition. In tmesis it appears as Kara, and in Arcadian and Cypriote Greek it has the form KaTv. It is probably in the instrumental case,^ but an apparently dative form Karat survives a few times. Brugmann^ compares it with Old Irish cet, Cymric cant, Latin seems to

suit the dative conception better

:

:

:

co7n-, 1.

though

this

is

not absolutely certain.

Brugmann^ thinks that the root-meaning

Root-Meaning.

of the preposition

is

seems to be the idea. Comp.

not perfectly

The

though 'down' (cf. dm) arises from the fact that we

clear,

difficulty

Philol., p. 342.

»

Giles,

«

Griech. Gr., p. 443.

Cf. also Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p.

759

f.

»

lb.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

606

NEW TESTAMENT

sometimes find the ablative case used when the result is down from, then the genitive down upon, and the accusative down along. But down (cf KCLTU)) seems always to be the only idea of the preposition in itself. In the N. T. three cases occur with /card. Kara came to be used in the distribu2. Distributive Sense. tive sense with the nominative, like dm and avv, but chiefly as adverb and not as preposition.^ Hence this usage is not to be credited to the real prepositional idiom. Late Greek writers have it. So els Kara els in Mk. 14 19 (and the spurious Jo. 8:9), TO Kad' eh in Ro. 12 5. The modern Greek uses Ka^ets or Kadevas as a distributive pronoun. ^ Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 138 f., considers also els Kad' eaaaTos (A Lev. 25 10) merely the adverbial '

'

.

:

:

:

use of Kara.

But

see koB'

eva.

in 1 Cor. 14

:

31, /card be eoprrjv (Mt.

27:15).

Kara in Composition. It is true to the root-idea of 'down,' in Mt. 7 25, Karayayelv in Ro. 10 6. But the various metaphorical uses occur also in composition. Often Kara occurs 3.

like

/carejS?]

:

with "perfective" (1 Pet. 5

:

:

KaTadovKol (2 Cor. 11

6

:

28),

KLVOVTes

2

:

Karauorjaare

(Mt. 23

12), KaTe(f)ayep

tion vies with 5td 1

:

18

is

:

:

:

24),

:

:

33), KareSlo^^ep

(Mt. 3

:

by

:

36),

14

Kara-

18),

:

(Mk. 1:2), Karepya^eade (Ph. (Ro.

1

:

This preposi-

20).

6 Karexo^v rbv dvp.bv

Karexco in Ro.

from an ostracon

In the magical texts

'cripple' or to 'bind,' 'hold fast.'

1

(Mt.

KareTavaav (Ac.

4), Kadoparai

p. 308).

(Mk.

12), Kara^td^ere

avp in the perfective sense.

well illustrated

(Deissmann, Light,

12

Karaa-KevaaeL

(Mt. 13

and

(Heb. 11

20), KaraKavcreL

(Lu.

24),

observe mraprio-ei

instance,

So, for

force.^

10), KaTrjycouiaavTo

But

Mk.

in

14

:

means

it

45,

to

Kareciyikyjcre,

the preposition seems to be weakened, though the A. S.V. puts

"kissed him

much"

in

the margin.

Cf.

Moulton,

CI.

Rev.,

Nov., 1907, p. 220.

This construction is recognised by Brug4. With the Ablative. mann,* Monro,^ Kiihner-Gerth,^ Delbrlick.^ There are some examples of the ablative in the N. T., where 'down' and 'from' combine to make 'down from.' Thus, for instance, is to be explained ejSakev /car' avrrjs ave/xos tv^xj^viko^ (Ac. 27: 14), where ai^r^s refers to Kprirrju, and the meaning (cf. American Standard Revision) is manifestly 'down from' Crete. In 1 Cor. 11:4, irpo(})r]Tevcov Kara Kect)a\rjs ex^v, we have 'down from' again, the veil hanging 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178.

2

lb.;

3

Cf.

4

Moulton,

Prol., p. 105.

ib., pp. 115 ff. Griech. Gr., p. 443.

"

Horn. Gr.,

"

I,

^

Vergl. Synt.,

p. 145.

p. 475. I,

p. 760.

607

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

down from is

In

the head.

Tov Kprjuvov (cf.

Mt. 8

:

Mk.

5

32; Lu. 8

:

:

13 33)

we

find

ibpiirjaev

d7eXr7 Kara

17

where 'down from the

cUff'

again the idea. 5.

With

tive in the

the Genitive.

N. T. as

more usual with

It is

The

in the earlier Greck.^

Kara than the abla-

idea

is

'

down upon,'

the genitive merely accenting the person or thing affected. A good example of this sense in composition followed by the genitive

appears in KaraKvpLevaas afx(t)OTepo}v (Ac. 19 IG). Some MSS. in Mk. 14 3 have Kara with rrjs /ce^aXrJs, but without it Karexeev means 'pour down on' the head. In 2 Cor. 8 2, 17 /card ^aOovs But with the genitive the iTTwx^la, the idea is 'down to' depth. :

:

:

other examples in the N. T. have as resultant meanings either 'against/ 'throughout' or 'by.' These notions come from the

Luke alone uses 'throughout' with the geniand always with oXos. The earher Greek had Kad' 6\ov alone in Luke in the N. T., Ac. 4 18), though Polybius

original 'down.' tive (also

:

employed Kara xcopov;

in this sense.

Ac. 9 :31

Kad'

oXrjs

ttjs

Cf. in Lu. 4

:

14 Kad'

'lov8aias (so 9 :42;

oX-qs tyjs xepi-

10 :37).

The

But older Greek would have used the accusative in such cases. of notion The dLeairaprjaau. vrjaov Kara rijs cf. Polyb. iii, 19, 7, the modern in But kolvy]. the ^ in common 'against' is also more Greek vernacular /card (ko) is confined to the notions of 'toward' and 'according to,' having lost the old ideas of 'down' and 'against' (Thumb, Handb., p. 105 f.). Certainly the preposition does not mean 'against.' That comes out of the context when two hostile parties are brought together. Cf. English vernacular "do^vn on" one. This /card then is 'down upon' rather literally where the Attic usually had ewi and accusative.^ Among many examples note /card rod 'Irjaov fxapTvpiap (Mk. 14 55), vuiJ.(})r]v Kara :

(Mt. 10:35), Kara rod Tveufxaros (Mt. 12:32), /card tov Cf. Ro. 8 33. Sometimes /xerd and Kara JIav\ov (Ac. 24 1), etc. are contrasted (Mt. 12 30) or /card and virep (Lu. 9 50; 1 Cor. 4 G). The other use of Kard and the genitive is with verbs of swearing. The idea is perhaps that the hand is placed doAvn on the thing by which the oath is taken. But in the N. T. God him-

Trevdepds

:

:

:

:

:

self is deov.

deov 6.

used in the solemn oath. So Mt. 26 63, e^op/ctfco ae Kara tov Heb. G 13, 16. In 1 Cor. 15 15 knapTvpy]aap.ev KaTo. TOV :

Cf.

:

:

be taken in this sense or as meaning against.' With the Accusative. But the great majority of examples

may

'

»

DHl)nick,

2

J(l)b, in

»

ib., p. 761. V. .and D., Handb., etc., p. 313. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

608

N. T. use the accusative. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 116) notes the frequency of the accusative in the papyri where xept would appear in the older Greek, Farrar^ suggests that Kara with in the

the genitive (or ablative)

perpendicular ('clown on' or 'down it is horizontal ('down along').

is

from') while with the accusative

Curiously enough John has only some ten instances of Kara and several of them are doubtful.^ On the whole, the N. T. use of the

mrd corresponds

accusative with

With a

idiom.

But

metaphorical usages occur. sions like

Kara

tcLs

(Ac. 27

Xtj8a

2

:

9:6), Kara 14),

:

Kara

r-qv

686v (Lu. 10

(Lu, 8 :

KtXiKtav (Ac, 27

rrju

8

:

39), 8i.rjpxovTO

:

4), eyevero Xljios Kara

Cf,

TTiv

Ac,

13:1a

3:1), /card (jkottov (Ph. 3 14), The noconstruction as /car' oIkov (Ac, 2 46). :

:

Kar' OLKOV avTrjs eKKK-qalav (Col,

Wwv

4

:

example

this

(Ac, 26

may

3), ol Kad'

:

Cf, Ac, 11

15),

rather ambiguous usage occurs,

But

Trpo(f)rjTaL.

Kara

5), (3\eT0PTa

:

26), Kara irpoacowov (Gal.

may also have this

tion of rest

Salovs

work from a number of appears freely in local expres-

12), /card near]iJ.(3plav (Ac,

11), /car' 6(})daXixovs (Gal,

:

it

Ka6' 6\r]v rrjv toKlv K-qpvaaoov

OLTcriKQe

KUfxas (Lu.

x^po-v (Lu, 15

T-qp

pretty closely to the classic

general horizontal plane to

/card rriv ovaav kKKk-qalav

be compared with twv Kara iroL-qTai

v/jLcis

In

1.

:

'lov-

some MSS.

(Ac. 17: 28,

18 15). This idiom is common one of the marks of Luke's literary style.^ But this is merely a natural development, and /card with the accusative always expressed direction towards in the vernacular.^ Schmidt (de eloc. Joseph., p. 21 f.) calls /card a sort of Had' rjidds), vonou rod Kad' uyuas (Ac.

in the literary

and

kolpt]

:

is

periphrasis for the genitive in late Greek.

Cf. rd

(Ph.

/car' efxe

in

more than a mere circumlocution for the genitive^ the examples above and such as rriv Kad' vjiSis tIcttlv (Eph. 1 15),

TO

/car' e/xe

1

6

:

It

12).

is

:

:

21;

cf.

(Ro.

1

Ac. 25

excellence).

(Heb. 3

of distribution

:

is

:

:

1),

Kard to ixeaovvKTLOV (Ac. 16

13), /card irdv

comes

(iii/A.D.). 1 3

aa^^arov (Ac. 13

:

:

:

e/xe

23;

(Eph. cf.

par

like Kar' eKetvov

25), Kad' haarriv

:

The notion

27).

easily with Kard, as in Kard toXlv (Lu. 8:1), :

19), Kar' eros

46), Kad' eva Travres (1 Cor. 14

See Mt. 27

etc.

25

used with expressions of time

Kard rds avvayooyds (Ac. 22 (Ac. 2

aapKa (Ro. 9:5), rd KaT

14), avbpaaLv roTs Kar' e^oxvv (Ac.

:

Kara

Tov Kaipov (Ac. 12 fiixepav

15), ro /card

:

15 = Mk. 15

As a standard

:

6.

:

(Lu. 2

31), Kar'

:

41), Kad' rjpepav

ovo/JLa

(Jo.

10

:

3),

Oxy. 886 very coromon

Cf. Kard 8vo, P.

or rule of measure Kard

is

« Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 266. Gk. Synt., p. 100. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 149; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.

*

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 384.

6

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 133.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

609

and also simple. So Kara to evayyeXtop (Ro. 16 25) with which compare the headings^ to the Gospels like Kara MadOaiop, though with a different sense of evayyeXiov. Here the examples multiply :

like Kara vonov (Lu. 2

4

:

22), Kara 4>^(nv (Ro. 11

Kara deou (Ro. 8: 27), Kara

4),

:

(2 Cor. 8

:

21), Kara x^pt-v (Ro.

(Mt. 9

Trjv TriaTLv

29), Kara bbvanLV

:

(Ro. 7: 13), Kara avvypwii-qv (1 Cor. 7:6), etc. Various resultant ideas come out of different connecThere is no reason to call mrd -Kaaav alrlav (Mt. 19 3) tions. :

3), Kad' hirep^oK-qv

:

and Kara ayvoiav (Ac. 3 17) bad Greek. If there is the idea of cause here, so in 1 Tim. 6 3, Kar' tvak^nav, the notion of tendency or aim appears. We must not try to square every detail in the development of Kara or any Greek preposition with our :

:

translation of the context nor with classic usage, for the N. T.

written in the

This preposition

Koivi].

Acts and Hebrews.

common

specially

is

in

Kar' Iblav (Mt. 14 13) is adverbial. But not a mere Hebraism, since the papyri have it

/card TTpdacoTou is

:

(Deissmann, Bible Studies,

up

is

As a sample

p. 140).

of the doubling

of prepositions note aweirkcxTy] Kar' avrcov (Ac. 16

22).

:

Mcxd.

Most probably /lerd has the same root as /xeaos, Latin medius, German 7nit {mitSi), Gothic 7nip, English 77iid (cf. a-mid). Some scholars indeed connect it with djua and German samt. But the other view is reasonably certain. The modern Greek uses a shortened form ^le, which was indeed in early vernacular use.^ Some of the Greek dialects use TreSd. So the Lesbian, Boeotian, (j)

etc. Merd seems to be in the instrumental case.' The Root-Meaning. It is ('mid') 'midst.' This simple idea behind the later developments. Cf. fxera^u and avafxeca. We

Arcadian, 1.

lies

see the root-idea plainly in

In the N. T. intelligible

is

The

/zerecoptfco

now

root-idea

in the

day

of aeroplanes

manifest also in

is

29)

which

meanings predominate

"with"

is

:

dirigible balloons.

later resultant

The

10

(Lu. 12

and

(Rev. 7:3), 'the space

in composition such as

(Ac. 2

ixer-ewpos, in 'mid-air').

ixer-wirov

between the eyes.' 2. In Composition. iSdi/co

(from

we have a metaphorical example

in ixeTablboini (Ro. 12

46), mct^xw (1 Cor. 10

30)

"after" in

:

8), ixerakaii-

(Ac. usually the case, the notion of change or transfer the result as with fxtdiarr^ixL (1 Cor. 13 2), neTajSalpo) (Mt. 8 34), :

5)

;

:

:

;

/xeraxeMTro;

or, as is

:

Merajuop^oco

(Ro. 12:2),

fxeTaixeXoijiaL

(Mt. 27:3),

:

ixeravokoi

(Mt.

3:2). 3.

Compared with »

lb.

»

Giles,

2

avv.

IVIerd is less

j.„in., Hist. Cr.

Comp.

rhilol., p. 342.

frequent in composition than

Gk., p. 388; Hatz., Einl., p. 153.

^

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

610

though far more

avv,

common

as a preposition.

Simcox^ thinks

that it is useless to elaborate any distinction in meaning between The older grammars held that avv expressed a more /xerd and cvv.

intimate fellowship than

/xerd.

But

in the

N. T. nera has nearly

driven avv out.

Merd was originally used with the Homer, but even with him the genitive

Loss of the Locative Use.

4.

It is

locative.

common

has begun to displace

in

Homer

it.^

uses the locative with collective

and plurals.^ Mommsen^ indeed considers that in Hesiod aixa, fxera and avv all use the instrumental case and with about equal frequency, while ^erd with the genitive was rare. But in the N. T. fxerd, along with irepl and uxo, has been confined to the genitive and accusative, and the genitive use greatly predominates (361 to 100) .5 The idea with the locative was simply between.' With several persons the notion of 'among' was present also.' In Homer it occurs only five times and 5. With the Genitive. with the resultant idea of 'among.' So once (Iliad, 13. 700, fiera Botwrcoj' kfiaxovTo), where indeed the idea is that of alliance with the Boeotians. In Rev. 2 16, etc., tiera occurs with iroXeneco in a hostile sense, a usage not occurring in the older Greek, which Simcox s considers a Hebraism. But the papyri may give us examples of this usage any day. And Thumb {Hellenismus, p. 125; cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 106) has already called attention to the modern Greek use of ixk with TroXe/xeco. Deissmann {Light, p. 191) finds n€Ta aTpaTLWTov with ot/ceco in an ostracon (not in hostile In Jo. 6:43 sense) and possibly with avriXoykco, 'elsewhere.' probably so with and juerd occurs in a hostile sense with yoyyv^o: idea of allithe for argues 25, though Abbott^ fi7T)7(ns in Jo. 3 incite Jews to the and disciples ance here between the Baptist's f have we 6 In Cor. 1 6 Jesug. rivalry between the Baptist and singulars

'

:

:

:

.

the hostile sense also in legal trials, dSeX^os fxera aSeXcpov KplCf. Jo. 16 19. This notion gives no difficulty to English verai. :

students, since our "with"

is

so used.

in Lu.

1

Lang, of the N. T., p. 149.

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 444.

*

T.

Mommsen, Die

1879, p. 1

f.

Cf. also

:

But Moulton i" admits

58, kp.eya\vvev Kuptos to eXeos

a translation Hebraism avTOv juer' avrrjs. But what about 6aa 1

kroLTjaev 6 Beds

fj-er'

ahrdv

Cf. Thayer, under avv. ^

k.-G.,

I,

p. 505.

aw und nera bei den nachhomerischen Epikern, Mommsen, Beitr. zu der Lehre von der griech. Priip., Prap.

1895. 6

Moulton,

6

Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,

^

Monro, Horn.

Prol., p. 105. I,

Gr., p. 136.

p.

741

f.

«

Lang, of the N. T.,

»

Joh. Gr., p. 267.

"

Prol., p. 106.

p. 150.

:

611

PREPOSITIONS (nroeESEis) 14

(Ac.

and

27)

;

TereXetwrai

ordain)

17

ixtO'

(1

rifxuv

4

Jo.

17)?

:

Simcox^ again finds a Hebraism in "the religious sense" which appears in Mt. 1 23; Lu. 1 28; Jo. 3 2, etc. But the notion of fellowship is certainly not a Hebraism. Merd has plenty of ex:

:

:

amples of the simple meaning of the preposition. Thus t6v ^uivra 5), rjv /xera twj' d-qplwv (Mk. 1 13), txeTo. Ta:v ixera tup veKpoov (Lu. 24 Ttkwvihv (Lu. 5 30), ixera aponwu eXoyladr] (Lu. 22 37), an idiom not :

:

:

:

common

to avv

deov

Tuv avBpwiro^v (Rev. 21

ixtTo.

and found (Lu. 13

jxtTo. Tcov dvffLuiv

:

in the classical poets.^ 3), ixtTo. hiiiyiioiv

:

1), olvov jieTa xoXtjs

Cf. also

(Mk. 10

:

aKrjvi]

rod

30), eixi^tv

(Mt. 27 34).

It is

:

not

far from this idea to that of conversation as in /xerd yvvaiKos eXdXet (Jo. 4 27), and general fellowship as with elprjpevw (Ro. 12 18), :

:

1:3), avvalpi>} 'Koyov ex^ cviJL(f)ioveci} 2), frequent use of p-eTa is with most the Perhaps (Mt. 18 23), etc. (Lu. 9 49), XajuaKoXovdeoo with So accompaniment. of the idea (Mk. 1 29), ipxop.ai 12 (Mt. -KapaXap^kvoi 45), /3dvco (Mt. 25 3), 14), draxcoptco (Mk. 3:7), etc. Cf. Mt. 27 66. So with dpil (Mk. 3

(Mt. 20

(1 Jo.

KOLvuvlav

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

but sometimes the notion of help or aid is added as in Jo. 3:2; 8 29, etc. Cf. also 17 xapis tied' wccv (Ro. 16 20) and often. The notion of fellowship may develop into that of followers or :

:

partisans as in

Mt. 12

with the participle

(Jo.

:

9

30. :

Sometimes the phrase

40) or without (Mt. 12

:

4)

oi fier'

avrov

means

one's

attendants or followers (companions). The idea of accompaniment also occurs with things as in e^rjXdare pera /xaxatpwj' (Lu. 22 52), nera. raiv 'Kap.TaScov (Mt. 25 :4), peTo. aaXTnyyos (Mt. 24:31), ^paxlovos

jLi€Td

where the idea

is

:7), pera

(Mt. 14 cases

which approach the 14), (1 Tim. 4 rather 'simultaneous with,' but see pera. opKov (Ac. 13

v\l/r]\ov

instrumental idea.

Cf. pLera

(j^uvijs

accompaniment

cLTToKeXvadaL tcov

Certainly

it is

is

:

17),

some

of

ruv x^^P^v

kTTLdeaeojs

neyaXTis (Lu.

17: 15).

the dominant note.

:

Still in all

See also

these

pr]8ev{a)

pera airov ('in the corn service'), B.U. 27 (ii/A.D.).

not a Hebraism in Lu.

246) can cite A. P. 135 (ii/A.D.) tI 8e

1

:

58, for

Moulton (ProL,

p.

ripeiv awelSri p-tTo. TCOV apxdvToiv;

In later Greek the instrumental use comes to be common with In Lu. 10 37 6 Tronjo-as to eXeos p-tT avjuerd (cf. English "with").'' But see Tov Debrunner (Blass-Deb., p. 134) sees a Hebraism. :

Herm.

S.

V.

1, 1, kiroirjae

peT

idea of accompaniment occurs

24:30),

/xerd airovdrjs

»

Lang, of the N. T.,

'

Jann., Hist.

Joh. Gr., p. 2G8.

Gk.

also like /xerd

(Mk. 6:25), p. 150.

Gr., p. 387.

The metaphorical

epov.

juerd ^

For

dwapews

(Mt.

baKpvwv (Heb. 12: 17), ptTo.

N. T. Gk., p. 133 f. compared with Trapd sec Abbott,

Riass, Gr. of

ptrb.

use for the

Kai 56^???

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

612

4>b^ov KoX Tpbixov (2

24

Cor. 7: 15), Tapprjalas (Ac. 2

Deissmann

18), etc.

:

NEW TESTAMENT

papyri examples of

:

29), dopb^ov (Ac.

{Bible Studies, pp. 64, 265) finds in the

fxera Kai like

that in Ph. 4

:

3.

Cf. Schmid,

Der Attidsmus, III, p. 338. In the modern Greek vernacular /xe is confined to accompaniment, means or instrument and manner. Time has dropped out (Thumb, Handb., p. 103 f.). At first it seems to present more dif6. With the Accusative. ficulty. But the accusative-idea added to the root-idea ("midst") with verbs of motion would mean "into the midst" or "among." But this idiom does not appear in the N. T. In the late Greek verwith the accusative occurs in

nacular

juerd

and the

genitive,^

all

the senses of

juerd

but that is not true of the N. T. Indeed, with one exception (and that of place), /jLera to Sevrepov KaraTrerao-^a (Heb. 9 3), in the N. T. juerd with the accusative is used with expressions of time. This example in Hebrews is helpful, however. The resultant notion is that of behind or beyond the veil obtained by going through the midst of the veil. All the other examples have the resultant notion of "after" which has added to the rootmeaning, as applied to time, the notion of succession. You pass through the midst of this and that event and come to the point where you look back upon the whole. This idea is "after." Cf. In the historical books of the LXX txera 8vo rjfiepas (Mt. 26 2) /xerd raOra (cf. Lu. 5 27) is very common.^ Simcox^ treats ov ixera TToXXds rauras rjnepas (Ac. I 5) as a Latinism, but, if that is not :

:

.

:

:

true of Tp6, rip-kpas e'UoaL

it

is

hardly necessary to posit

Herm. Vis. IV,

1, 1.

comments on the frequency LXX and N. T. So /xerd t6

The

litotes is

it

of

Cf. fxera

fxera.

common. Jannaris*

of juerd to with the infinitive in the avaaTijuai (Acts

10

:

41).

Cf.

1

Cor.

This comes to be one of the common ways of expressing a temporal clause (cf, kivd or ore). Cf. iieTa Ppaxv (Lu. 22 58), ^terd puKpov (Mk. 14 70), adverbial phrases. 11

:

25; Heb. 10

:

26, etc.

:

:

Ilapd.

{k)

Delbriick^ does not find the etymology of xapd and thinks it probal^ly is not to be connected with pdrd (Sanskrit), which means 'distant.' Brugmann^ connects it with the old word pura like Latin 'por-, Gothic /awra, Anglo-Saxon /o?-e (cf. German vor). Giles thinks the same root furnishes irapos (gen.), 1.

Significance.

clear

'^

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 387.

^

2

Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

^

6

Vergl. Synt.,

6

Kurze

7

Comp.

I,

p. 266.

Lang, of the N. T., p. 151. Gk. Gr., p. 386.

Hist.

pp. 755, 761.

Vergl. Gr., II, p. 474; Griech. Gr., p. 446.

PhiloL, p. 342.

613

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs)

He

Trapa (instr.), irapal (dat.), Trepi (loc).

these to

Compared with

2.

also sees a kinship in

irkpav, irepa, Trpos.

In meaning^ rapa and

irpos.

Trpos

do not

save that irapa merely means 'beside,' 'along-

differ essentially

irpos rather suggests 'facing one an additional idea of contrast. This oldest meaning, explains all the later developments.^ Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 116) thinks that the N. T. shows confusion in the use of irapa {8L€\oyl^ouTo Trap' [marg. of W. H. and Nestle, h in text] eauroLs, Mt. 21 25) and hikoyl^ovTo irpos tavTovs (Mk. 11 31). But is

our "parallel"), while

side' (of.

another,'

:

:

it

not diversity the rather?

The

In Composition.

3.

preposition

is

exceedingly

common

in

behind some of the others a good deal. Ilapd does not survive in modern Greek vernacular save in composition (like apa and k) and some of its functions go to airo and eis.^ All the various developments of wapa appear in composition, and the simplest use is very common. Thus irapa/3oXi7 (Mk. 13 28) is a 'placing of one thing beside another.' So Cf. also Trapa-daXaaaLos (Mt. 4 13) is merely 'beside the sea.' composition, though with nouns

it falls

:

:

(2

Trapa-dTjKT]

Tim.

1

:

14),

irapa-Kadeadels (Lu.

10

:

39), irapa-KoKkoo

14:16), xapa-Xe7o/xat (Ac. 27:8), Trap-dXtos (Lu. 6 17), wapa-fxhoo (Heb. 7 23; cf. fxeuoj /cat wapa-nevcj Ph. 1 25), Trapa-rXew (Ac. 20 16), Trapa-ppeco (Heb. 2:1), rapa(Ac. 28:20), Tapa-KXrjros

(Jo.

:

:

:

:

TtdrjuL

(Mk. 6

word

is

10

31

:

:

41), Tvap-eiixL (Lu. 13

-Kap-oivos

f.

eL
(1

Sometimes Pet. 2

:

:

Tim. 3:3). xctpd suggests

1), 7rap-€tcr-6uco

1), etc.

A

specially noticeable

Cf. also avTL-Trap-rj\deu in Lu.

a notion of stealth as in

irap-

(Ju. 4), wap'^ela-aKTOS (Gal. 2

:

4),

20 this notion is not present. Cf. Mt. 14 15, 57 (hpa. T]8ri iraprjXdev, 'the hour is already far spent' ('gone by'). Note also the Scotch "far in" hke modern Greek irapapeaa (Moulton, ProL, p. 247). A few examples of the "perfective" use occur as in Trapo^vpw (Ac. 17 16), irapa-TLKpalvco (Heb. 3 16), napd1 the 10, but in Lu. 14 a-niios (Ac. 28 11), irapa-rrjpeo) (Gal. 4 idea of envious watching comes out). With Trapa-(j)poueoj the no-

but in

TTap-eLcr-kpxopai in

Ro. 5

:

:

:

:

tion

is

:

:

:

rather 'to be beside one's

self,'

'out of mind.'

Cf. also irapa-

found in the ostraca (AVilcken, i. 78 f.) as a 'to fall below par.' For ivapevo-xXeiv (Ac. 15 19) see TrapevoxKttv rjpas, P. Tb. 36 (ii/s.c). Ilapd occurs in the N. T. with three cases. The locative has 50 examples, the accusative 60,

Heb. 6 commercial word

TTtTTTco

in

:

6,

:

the ablative 78." p. 509.

»

K.-G.,

»

Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 130.

I,

»

Thumb., Handb.,

*

Moulton,

p. 102.

Prol., p. 106.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

614 4.

With

NEW TESTAMENT

Uapa with the locative Only one other example appears,

the Locative.

to persons.

nearly confined

is

tQ This confining of xapd to persons is hke the usual Greek idiom, though Homer ^ used it freely with both. Homer used it also as an adverb and in the shortened form The only instance in the N. T. of the locative with Tapa Trap. cravpui (Jo. 19

25).

:

motion

after a verb of

though here

D

is

in Lu. 9

The

reads kambv.

simplest usage.

:

47,

we

typical example of the use with persons which in Latin, 'at one's house' (Jo.

:

Cf. Ac. 21

16).

1

:

17).

is

Tim. 4

13;

:

to)

Cf. tI aTLCFTov Kplverai Tap' :

14

:

17), ^evl^o:

Mt. 28

15,

:

is

common. Cor.

Trap' efxol (2

(Ac. 26

:

8)

So

Tapa (Ac.

Tapa has the

deQ (Lu. 1 :30)

vfxtv

a

and

4>povipoi.

Ilapd with the locative does not occur

16).

Hebrews. 5. With the Ablative.

13) as

:

much hke apud

is

used in ethical relations,^ also like

Tap' eavroLs (Ro. 12 in

In Rev. 2

8.

eavTw,

1:40), 'in his society,' etc.

7), juevco irapa (Jo.

The phrase Tapa

idea of 'among.'

The word

:

:

Trap'

see the preposition in its

Cf. ov aireKeLwov irapa Kapirw (2

KaraXvaaL irapa (Lu. 19

avro

eaTrjcrev

locative with irapa leaves the

etymological idea unchanged so that

21

larriKeLcrav irapa

But

occurs only with persons (like the between Trapd and dvro and k has already been made. In Mk. 8:11 both Trapd and dTro occur, ^r]TOvvTes Tap' aiirov ar]p.eiov clto tov ovpavov (cf. 12 2), and in Jo. 1 40 we have both Trapd and e/c, els Ik twv bvo rcov aKovaavTOiV Tapa 'Iwavov. In a case like Jo. 8 38 the locative is followed by the ablative,^ ecopa/ca Trapd rtS Tarpi ^Kovaare Tapa rod Tarpos, though some MSS. have locative in the latter clause also. But the ablative here is in strict accordance with Greek usage as in a case like aKovaai Tapa aov (Ac. 10 22). On the other hand in Jo. 6 45 f we find the ablative in both instances, 6 aKovaas Tapa rod jrarpos —• older Greek).

The

it

distinction

:

:

:

—

:

:

6 oiv

Tapa TOV deov

But

this last Trapd implies the

(cf. 6

wp

els

tov koKtov tov TaTpbs in Jo. 1

coming

like Trapd tov Trarpos e^rjXdov (Jo. 16

:

of Christ

27).

:

18).

from the Father,

ITapd with the ablative

means 'from the side of as wdth the accusative it means 'to the side of.' The phrase ot Tap' avTov therefore describes one's family or kinsmen (Mk. 3 for one's agents, rjfjLibv

:

21).

In the papj^ri the phrase

is

very

and Moulton'* has found one or two

TavTts parallel to

ot Trap'

auroO in

Mk.

3

:

21.

common

like ot Trap*

Cf. also

to.

Tap'

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 134. » Abbott, Job. Gr., Simcox, Lang, of N. T., p. 151. p. 271. « Prol., p. 106. In G. H. 36 (ii/B.c), B. U. 998 (ii/B.c), P. Par. 36 (ii/B.c). Cf. Blasa, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138. *

»

:

615

PREPOSITIONS (npoeESEis) avrdv (Lu. 10

:

property.

7) for one's resources or

cherches, etc., p. 30)

Rouffiac {Re-

Mk.

cites kbarcavqaev Trap' eavTOV (cf.

5

:

26)

Trap' kixov from inscription from Priene (111, 117). Note also With passive dLaOr]Kr] (Ro. 11:27) with notion of authorship. verbs the agent is sometimes expressed by Trapd as in a-KeaToKixkvos 17

irapa deov (Jo. 1:6), tols 'KeXoKrjiJ.ePOLs Trapd Kvplov (Lu. 1:45).

Cf.

Text. Rec. in Ac. 22 30 with Kar-qyopelTai irapa Twv 'lovbalwv, where W. H. have virb. Ilapd occurs with the middle in Mt. 21 42, Trapd :

:

In the later Greek vernacular Trapd with the ablative helped supplant vt6 along with dTro, and both Trapd and viro (and €k) vanished 1 "before the victorious dTro." It is not found in John's writings at 6. With the Accusative. Kvplov kykvero.

alP as

is

it

accusative

is

also

wanting in the other Catholic Epistles. The in the local sense both with verbs of

common

motion and of rest. The increase in the use of the accusative with verbs of rest explains in part the disuse of the locative.^ One naturally compares the encroachments of els upon h. We see the idiom in the papyri as in ol irapa ak deol, P. Par. 47 (b.c. 153).

The

use of Trapd with the accusative with verbs of rest

was common in Northwest Greek (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101). Thus in Mt. 4 18 we find irepnraTciv xapd T-fiv doKaaaav logically enough, but in 13 1 we meet tKa9r]To irapa rrjv daXaaaav, and note :

:

KaOrifxevoL

5:1),

irapa rrjv d86v

k(XTLV

(Mt. 20

:

30),

oUla irapa daXaaaav (Ac. 10

earoos :

6),

irapa TrjV

(Lu.

Viixv-qv

dLdaaKHV irapa doKaaaav

(Mk. 4:1), amreOpapixevovs irapa rovs irodas (Ac. 22 3). Cf. Ac. 4 35. So no difficulty arises from epixj/av irapa tovs ir68as (Mt. 15 There is no example in the N. T. of Trapd in the sense of 30). 'beyond,' like Homer, but one where the idea is 'near to,' 'along:

:

irapa

side of,' as ^X0ej^

Trjv

daXaaaav (Mt. 15

tively Trapd does occur often in the sense of

'beyond.'

'

:

29).

Once* indeed we meet the notion of

in TeaaapaKOvra irapa

fxlav

(2 Cor.

11:24).

But figuramark or

beside the 'less

'

than,' as

Cf. Trapd raXavTov aoi

B.U. 1079 (a.d. 41), where Trapd means 'except.' modern Greek vernacular keeps Trapd rplxa, 'within a

The

ireirpaKa,

breadth' (Thumb, Handh., p. 98).

common enough

in classic writers

brews in the N. T. p<jOT€pov

1

(Heb. 1:4),

It occurs irXelovos

The notion and

is

of 'bej^ond'

most frequent

with comparative forms

(3

:

3),

hair's

in

is

He-

like 5ta0o-

KpelrToai (9 :23; cf.

12:24),

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 391.

» Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 270. W.-Th., p. 404. Bhiss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138, loss naturally explains Trapd here as meaning 'by virtue of,' but not Debrunner. 2 *

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

616

with implied comparison like rfharrwaas ^paxv tl (2 7), or with merely the positive like dAiaprcoXot (Lu. 13:2; of. 13:4). Indeed :

no adjective or

participle

at

tive with rapa

like the

is

appear,

13:2).

cf.

Aramaic

in

as

The use

oc^eCkkTai

of the posi-

Wellhausen, Einl., p. is simple enough.

(cf.

of 'beyond' or 'above'

Here the notion

28).

may

all

kyevovTo irapa iraPTas (Lu. 13:4;

3:11 and rnjLepav in Ro. 14 5; Heb. Greek was not without this natural use of In the later Greek -jrapa for comparison and the LXX is full of it.^ both retreat before irapa and the vernacular the ablative and accusative.^ In the modern Greek vernacular we find Trapd and the accusative and even with the nominative after comparison (Thumb, Handb., p. 75). The notion of comparison may glide Cf. irapa after dXXos in 1 Cor.

11:11.

The

:

older

r?

Thus in Ro. where 'rather than'

over into that of opposition very easily. kXarpevaav

rfj

KTiaeL irapa top KTiaavra,

1

:

is

25,

the

Cf. Ro. 4 18, Trap' ekirlba er' k\irih, where (cf. "instead of"). both prepositions answer over to each other, 'beyond,' 'upon.' So in 2 Cor. 8 3 Kara, bvvap.Lv and Trapd bvvap.Lv are in sharp contrast. 8 f Trap' 6 has the idea of 'beyond' and Cf. Ac. 23 3. In Gal. 1 To exceed in17. so 'contrary to.' Cf. Ro. 11 24; 12 3; 16 structions is often to go contrary to them. In a case like Trapd Cf. English vbpov (Ac. 18 13), to go beyond is to go against. Once more Trapd with the accusative trans-gression, xapd-xrco^a.

idea

:

:

:

:

.

:

:

:

:

may

strangely enough

So

in 1 Cor. 12

:

15

f.

actually

mean

Trapd tovto.

writers used Trapd thus, but

it

Cf.

'because

D

of,'

in Lu. 5

:

like propter. 7.

The

Attic

disappears in the later vernacular.'

The notion of cause grows out of the idea of nearness and the nature of the context. Farrar* suggests the Enghsh colloquial: "It's all along of his own neglect." some dispute about the etymology of Trept. it in etymology and meaning with virep. But the point is not yet clear, as Brugmann^ conWhatever may be true about the remote Indo-Germanic tends. root, Trept belongs to the same stem as xapd and is in the locative case like pari in the Sanskrit.'' Cf. also Old Persian pariy, Zend pairi, Latin per, Lithuanian per, Gothic fair-, Old High German far-, fer, German ver-. The Greek uses Trept as an adverb (Homer) (I)

Some

IIcpC.

There

is

scholars, like Sonne,^ connect

1

C. and

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 389.

5

K. Z., Kurze

^

7

S., p.

85

14, pp. 1

f.;

ff.

Thack., Gr.,

p. 23.

Cf. Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,

jb., p. 390.

»

*

Gk. Synt.,

I,

p. 104.

p. 700.

vergl. Gr., II, p. 475.

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 447; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p. 700.

^

:

PREPOSITIONS (nPGOEZEIz) and the

617

even uses wep instead of irepL The intensame word. 1. The Root-Meaning. It is 'round' ('around'), 'on all sides' (cf. dij.(f)i, 'on both sides'). Cf. Trept^ (Ac. 5 16), where the rootidea is manifest. Cf. Latin circum, circa. The preposition has indeed a manifold development,^ but after all the root-idea is plainer always than with some of the other prepositions. The N. T. examples chiefly (but cf. Ac. 28 7) concern persons and things, though even in the metaphorical uses the notion of ^Eolic dialect^

sive particle

this

irep is

:

:

'around'

is

present.

sense

is

abundant.

6), irepLecTTooTa (Jo.

6

:

21

idea of 'around' in the hteral local

Cf. irepLrjyev (Mt, 4

11

:

19

:

In Tepi-irarew (Mt. 9

33).

13), :

:

23), TrepiaaTpaxJ/ai. (Ac.

(Mk. 6

42), irepLibpaixov

(Ac.

irepL-epxofxaL

55), :

The

In Composition.

2.

4>pa'yiJ.6v

5) Trept

:

55), Trepi4>ep€Lv

aura)

(Mt.

Trepiedr]Kev

has nearly lost

its

22

(Mk.

special

force, while in Trepiepya^oiuhovs (2

Th. 3:11) the whole point lies Note in Mk. 3 34, Trept-iSXei/'a/xej/os tovs irepl KaOrjuhovs, where kvkXcx) explains Trept already t^vice ex-

in the preposition.

avTov kvkKcc

pressed.

idea of

10

:

Mk.

The

Cf. also TrepL-KVK\6)(Tovali' ae (Lu. 19:43). in composition

irepi

11), 'to

take

(Lu. 22

av\r]s

:

:

is

manifest in rept-eXeLv

away altogether.'

55),

Cf. Trepi-axpaPTOiv irvp

where note the addition of

14: 65 irepL-KaXvTrTco

means

perfective

a/jLapTias

TepL to kp

(Heb.

h jikaw

rijs

pikaoo.

In

'to cover all round,' 'to cover up,'

Lu. 1 24. This is the "perfective" sense. Cf. inMt. 26 38. Per contra note weplepyos (1 Tim. 5 13) for 'busybody,' busy about trifles and not about important matters. In 1 Tim. 6 10 note TrepieTapav in the sense of 'pierced through.' But in 2 Cor. 3 16, TreptatptiTat, 'the veil is removed from around the head.' These were the locative, ac3. Originally Four Cases Used. like irepL-KpvTTTco in Trept-XvTTos

:

:

:

:

:

cusative, genitive, ablative.

The

locative

was never common

in

prose and died out in the late Greek, not appearing in the N. T. Delbriick^

genitive

is

very positive about the ablative in some examples in Indeed he thinks that the true a later development after the ablative with Trept. I

is

Homer and

the earlier Greek.

probable that some of these ablative examples survive in the N. T., though I do not stress the point. think 4.

it

With

the Ablative.

There

is

some doubt as to how

p. 491.

»

K.-G.,

2

Brug., Grioch. Gr., p. 447.

»

Die Grundl.,

*

Cf. also Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 447.

I,

p. 131 f.; VorRl. Synt., I, p.

711

f.

to explain

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

618

the ablative with

In Horner^

wepl.

ablative of comparison.

Cf.

and

of 'beyond' or 'over,'

alUed to

is

usually explained as like

it is

Thus

virep.

Brugmann^

cording to the original sense.^

taken in the sense

irepl is

and

irepa (irkpav)

cites also

ac-

virep,

and

Treptetjut

where the notion of superiority comes in. With this compare Treptfcparets yeveadaL ttjs a/cd^rys (Ac. 27: 16), which would thus have the ablative in aKa4>r}s. But Monro* admits that the KepLylypoiJLaL

origin of this notion with wepi

not quite

is

On

clear.

the other

hand, the use of irepi in composition may throw light on the subject. In 2 Cor. 3 16, irepL-aipelTai to Ka.\vfxiJ.a, 'the veil is taken from around.' Cf also Ac. 27 20. The same notion :

.

:

occurs in irepi-Kadapua (1 Cor. 4 ing'

and

to.

(Ac. 16

ip-aria

40 this idea appears 'drawn away' or 'from Brit. M. 42 (b.c. 168) beyond in irepiepyos (1 10

:

weptixhco (Ac. 1 :4),

13)

The same

'off-scraping.'

in irepL-pr]^avT€s

:

:

and

TrepirJ/rjixa (ib.),

'off-scour-

idea of from around occurs

22;

cf.

2 Macc. 4

38).

:

In Lu.

in a metaphorical sense with irepieairaTo,

See

around,' 'distracted.' for

'occupy.'

Tim. 5

irepLovaios

:

2

:

14),

P.

TrepLairaL,

the notion of

also

xepiXetroj

13),

(Tit.

Cf.

(1

Trepto-o-euco

Th. 4

:

15),

(Jo. 6

:

12),

In the last example, to irtpiaabv tovtwv, note remains There a group of passages of a metaphorical the ablative. nature where the idea is that of taking something away. These may be explained as ablatives rather than genitives. So in Ro. 8 3, vrept aixapTLas, the idea is that we may be freed from sin, from around sin. Thayer (under xept) explains this usage as "purpose TrepLcraos

(Mt. 5

:

37).

:

removing something or taking it away." This, of course, is an ablative idea, but even so we get it rather indirectly with xept. See XpidTos aira^ Trepi aixapTiCiv airkdavev in 1 Pet. 3 18. It is worth observing that in Gal. 1 4 W. H. read virkp rather than Trepi, while in Heb. 5 3 W. H. have repl rather than hirkp. Cf. Mk. 14 24. In Eph. 6 18 f. we have Se-qaeu Trepi iravTWV tcov ayloov, Kal vivep ep.ov, where the two prepositions differ very little. But in 1 Pet. 3 18 for

:

:

:

:

:

:

Cf. Jo. 16

(see above), vTrep ablKo^v, the distinction is clearer.

:

26;

D

has virep with See Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 152 f kKxvvvbixevov in Mt. 26 28 rather than irepL Cf Blass, Gr. of N. T. 17

:

9.

.

.

:

with iXao-juos in 1 Jo. 2 2. The ablative with virep renders more probable this ablative use of Trepi. 5. With the Genitive. This is the common case with irepi in the Gk., p. 134.

Cf.

Trepi

:

1

Monro, Horn.

2

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

Gr., p. 133; Sterrett,

3

Griech. Gr., p. 448.

«

Horn. Gr., p. 133.

I,

Cf.

p. 714.

Kurze

The

Dial, of Horn, in Horn.

Cf. Trepairepo:, Ac. 19

vergl. Gr., II, p. 476.

:

39.

II.,

N 47.

619

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs) If the genitive

N. T.

and ablative examples are counted together

(the real ablatives are certainly few) they

number 291

as against

38 accusatives.! ^ut in the later Greek the accusative gradually drives out the genitive (with the help of 5id also).^ The genitive was always rare with irepl in the local or temporal sense. The N. T. shows no example of this usage outside of composition (Ac. 25 7), unless in Ac. 25 18 Tepl ov be taken with aTadhTes, which is doubtful.3 Curiously enough the Gospel of John has the genitive :

:

with

almost as often as all the Synoptic writers and the accu19 reading irpds r-qv all in the critical text, Jo. 11

irepl

sative not at

:

Mapdav.^ This frequency in John of napTvpeco, \eyco, XaXeco, Ilept

may

The

18), etc. ydvji'toixai,

list

:

16), eXeTxo/xei'os (Lu. 3

(Mt. 6

irepl :

Cf

.

TTjs

is

28).

:

eiJLavTov

"an

(Ac. 24

22; 7

:

13, 17, etc.

:

of 'about,'

36), -qyavaKTrjaav

19), edavfiaaav (Lu.

:

2

:

includes both persons, like

:

22),

:

:

to.

10).

irepl

:

24,

(18

'Irjaov

:

Blass^ considers

incorrect phrase," which

Xa7xdi^co Tepi in Jo. 19

irepl

7,

25), and things, like irepl kvdvuaTOS One neat Greek idiom is to. irepl. Of.

Th. 5

68ov (Ac. 24

irepl ttjs

(Lu. 2 27)

The usage

etc.

extfryreco,

tI fxeptpu'dTe

TO.

:

includes verbs like amvco, yLvcoaKw, 8ia\oyi^onaL,

irpocrevx^crde irepl rnxwv (1

ra

Of. Jo. 1

natural, like e(XT\ayxvi-(r6r] (Mt. 9

is

24), (leXeL (22

:

7pd
occur with almost any verb where the notion

'concerning' (20

due largely to the abundant use

is

hke

is

putting

classical ixaxopai

Mk.

25;

iroielv it

5

irepl

:

27),

avrov

too strongly.

irepl.

Sometimes

appears rather loosely at the beginning of the sentence,

irepl

Sometimes

Tepl

\oyias (1 Cor. 16

:

1), itepl

used with the relative when

'AiroWco (16 it

:

12).

would be repeated

if

the antece-

dent were expressed, as in irepl uv eypaxj/are (1 Cor. 7:1) or where SeSco/cds irepl properly belongs only with the antecedent, as in Tepl S:v In Lu. 19 37, irepl iraauv S:v elhov 8vva.p.euv, the tiOL (Jo. 17:9). preposition strictly belongs only to the antecedent which is in:

In a case like irepl iravTc^v evxop-aL (3 Jo. 2) the subjectmatter of the prayer is implied in irepl as cause is involved in in irepl Tov Kadapiafiov (Mk. 1 44) and as advantage is expressed But this is merely due to the context. 38). irepl avTTJs (Lu. 4 This construction in reality occurs with 6. With the Accusative. corporated.

:

:

much

the same sense as the genitive.

The

accusative, of course,

suggests a placing around. It is rare in the N. T., but in later Greek displaced the genitive as already remarked. But it does not survive in the modern Greek vernacular. With the accusative Prol., p. 105.

1

Moulton,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. W.-Th., p. 373.

»

Gr., p. 392.

«

^

Abbott, Job. Or., p. 272. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

620

used of place, as in o-Kdi/'co irepl avT-qv (Lu. 13 8), xepl tov So with expressions of Cf. Mk. 3:8. To-Kov eKetvov (Ac. 28 7). time, as in xept rplrvv wpav (Mt. 20 3). Note the use of vrept with the different parts of the body, as Tvepl rrjv 6(X(t)vv (Mt. 3:4), irepl tov rpaxv'^ov (18 6). Cf. Rev. 15 6. Ilept is used of persons as in Trept-

Kepi is

:

:

:

:

:

aarpayj/ai irepl

(Ac. 22

eixk

ancient Greek idiom irepl 'Zevo(i>o:vTa

6),

:

(Xen. Anab.

his companions.'

^

eUav

irepl

avrovs

(Mk. 9

occurs in ol irepl IlaDXoj^ (Ac. 13

But

7, 4, 16),

where the idea

in a case like ol

irepl

:

14).

An

hke ol 'Paul and

13),

:

is

avTov (Lu. 22

:

49) the

phrase has only its natural significance, 'those about him.' The still further development of this phrase for the person or persons

named

"you

alone, like the vernacular

all" in the

Southern States

for a single person, appears in some MSS. for Jo. 11 19, irpbs rds are meant,^ irepl Mapdav Kal Mapiav, where only Martha and Mary that only Blass^ notes Mapdav. Trjv xpos being the critical text :

with the Philippian Epistle (2 23, to. irepl ep.'e) did Paul begin the use of the accusative with irepl (cf. genitive) in the sense of 'concerning,' like Plato. Cf. in the Pastoral Epistles, irepl rriv iriarLv :

(1

40

Tim.

1: 19), irepl

has

f.)

in the

it

LXX,

as in the

eray, Gr., p. 25). irepl itself

rw

aXrjOeLav (2

Cf.

already.

irepl to.

kolvt], is

Tim.

also taking the place of

could not stand before

'Aju0t

The entrance

went down.

But Luke (10: But /ckXoj

2: 18).

roiaCra (Ac. 19:25).

irepl

irepl,

(Thack-

and

finally

of virep into the field of

irepl

will call for notice later.

(m) npo. Cf. the Sanskrit prd and the Zend fra, Gothic fra, Lithuanian pra, Latin pro, German /-ur, vor, English /or (/or-ward), occurs fore (/ore-front). The case of rpo is not known, though it a few times in Homer as an adverb.* Cf. aTo and vird. The

Latin prod is probably remodelled from an old *pro like an ablative, as prae is dative (or locative), It is It is therefore plain enough. 1. The Original Meaning.

simply

'fore,'

It is rather

'before.'

more general

avTi

and has a more varied development.^

12

6)

:

the simple idea

In

in idea

i:p6 t^s dvpas

than (Ac.

is clear.

In Composition. It is common also in composition, as in Other uses in composition 68), 'fore-court.' Trpo-a{)\Lov (Mk. 14 grow out of this idea of 'fore,' as irpo-l3alva3 (Mt. 4 21), 'to go on' 14), irpo-ayoj (Mk. 11:9; cf. aKo('for-wards'), tpo-kottc^ (Gal. 1 'openly manifest,' Xovdeo} in contrast), ttpo-StjXos (1 Tim. 5:24), 2.

:

:

:

p. 406.

1

W.-Th.,

2

Blass, Gr. of

B

K.-G.,

I,

N. T. Gk.,

p. 454.

p. 134.

'

lb.

"

Monro, Horn.

Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p. 716.

Gr., p. 149.

.

621

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs) 'before

all' (cf.

Gal. 3:

1, Tpo-eypacf>r]); Trpo-exw

pass'; irpo-auiapravu^ (2 Cor. 12 Kpo-opl^oi (Ro. 8:29), to 'pre-ordain.' :

(Ro. 3

:

9), 'to sur-

21), 'to sin before/ 'previously';

Tim. 5:

Cf. irpo-Kptm (1

the N. T. merely follows 21), 'pre-judgment.' In these respects may illustrate 7rp6 still One in the wake of the older Greek.^ the superlative Trpw-ros and further by the comparative Trpd-repos

Cf also irpo-ao}, Tvpo-irepvai. Doric Tpa-Tos) These call for little comment. It 3. The Cases Used with rpo. in Homer may be a remnant of icpb barely possible that obpavodi

(cf ,

is

.

.

seen in

true genitive a locative use.^ Brugmann^ thinks that a is probably the ablative the But certain. TTpb 68ov, but this is not accusative." the with appears even irpS In very late Greek case. is due ablative The vernacular. Greek It is not in the modern pro.^ Latin the with also found is and comparison to the idea of is almost confined and T. N. the in times 48 Up6 occurs only Luke's writings and Paul's to Matthew's and John's Gospels, is

Epistles (12 times). irpo ttjs dvpas it occurs only in four instances, tov rvXoivos (Ac. 12 14), Tp6 (Jas. 5:9), dvpuv Twv (Ac 12 Cf. enTpoadeu (Mt. 5 24), which is more 13). TTpd rrjs TToXecos (14 Ac. common in this sense in the N. T. Some MSS. have 7rp6 to-day Cyprus (borrowing from the literary language)

Thus

4. Place. :

:

6), TTpd

:

:

5-23.

we

still

In have Tpd

m

(Thumb,

of the table'

head

'at the

/ce^aXrjs,

Handb., p. 98). u at ti I\ the This is the more common idea with 7rp6 5. Time. ivpo (Mt. 5 12), Thus we find such expressions as tovs irpo hp-oiv p.ov (Mt. 24 :38), irpb tov aplarov KaraKXvc rov 7rp6 :29), Kaipov (8 Cor. irkaxa (Jo. 11:55), irpd rC^v ai6:vc^v (1

m •

.

:

7rp6

(Lu. 11:38),

rod

TTpo xetMSi'o. (2

2:7), need one stumble

Tim. 4

much

:

at the

This

21).

is all

compound

plain sailing.

Nor

preposition (translation

parallels). Cf. Ac. 13 Hebraism) irpd rpoai^irov aov (Mk. 1 2 and with the infinitive, as tov Nine times we have -rrpo 24- Lu. 9 52. neatly expresses phrase this in Lu. 2 21 22 15; Jo. 1 48. Here quam. A real ante Cf. (antecedent). a subordinate clause of time (Jo. 12 1), which iraaxo. ^oO in irpb :

:

:

:

;

:

:

appears U vi^^P^^ diem tertium Kalendas. does look like the Latin idiom in ante :

difficulty

1

Bruc., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

Grundl., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 149. Cf Dolbrik-k, Die 393. Gr., Gk. Hist. p. Jann., also. show the loc. 2

» 4 6

.

Griech. Gr., p. 449. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 393. 722. Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p.

.„^

p. 132.

r,,,

The

.

mscr.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

622

common idiom in Roman system of

Jannaris ^ attributes this to the prevalence of the

common

the

the late Greek writers

This has been

dating.

But Moulton^ throws doubt on

explanation.

this

Latinism" by showing that this idiom appears in a Doric inscription of the first century B.C. (Michel, 694), irpb afiepdv The idiom occurs also in the inscriptions, irpb 8kKa Tcjv nvffTfiplwv. le KaXavbchv AvyowTo^v, I.M.A. iii. 325 (ii/A.D.), and the papyri, So Moulton proves his point Trpoj 8vo T]p.epdv, F.P. 118 (ii/A.D.). ''plausible

that

a parallel growth like the Latin.

it is

by three

p. 29) re-enforces it

Cf. also Trpo

tions.

TToXXaJj' TovTCjip rjnepoov

Moulton thinks that

Rouffiac {Recherches,

from the Priene

citations

Ada

inscrip-

S. Theogn., p. 102.

a natural development from the abla-

it is

and refers to 6\f/e aajS^aro^v in Mt. 28 1 as parallel. May it not be genuine Greek and yet have responded somewhat to the Latin influence as to the frequency (cf. LXX and the N. T.)? Similarly irpo hri^v beKareaaapuiv tive case with rp6, 'starting from,' :

Abbott^ conbefore (ago).' but it is doubtful if the Greek came at it in that way. Simcox^ calls attention to the double genitive with irpb in Jo. 12 1, really an ablative and a genitive. Cor. 12

(2

siders

it

:

years

'fourteen

2),

a transposing of

irpb,

:

IIpo occurs in the sense of superiority also, as

6. Superiority.

in Tvpb iravTwv (Jas. 5

12; 1 Pet. 4

:

:

In Col.

8).

(Jo. 10

probably time, as in -wpb 12. TovToiv TravToiv in Lu. 21 etymology of The (w) Epos.

is

kjjLov

:

8;

1

:

17

Rom. 16

:

irpb iravriov

7).

Cf. irpb

:

seems to be

Homer as What the

itself

well as the form relation

Sanskrit yrdti

-wpos

(Arcad.

tvotI

between

is

ttotI

and

in the locative case.

is

is

not perfectly

a phonetic variation^ of

Trport

ttos, Ttbr

Trport is

The

which

It

clear.

is

found in

in Boeotian, etc.).

not certain.^

connection,

if

The

any, be-

tween Trpos and irpb is not made out, except that irpo-Ti and prd-ti both correspond to irpb and prd. Thayer considers -tL an adverbial suffix. 1.

idea

The Meaning.

mann^

It is the

"^

same as

Trport

and

Trort.

The

root-

though Brughas an adverbial

'near,' 'near by,' according to Delbriick,*

is

inclines to 'towards.'

Gk.

1

Hist.

"

Prol., pp.

Cf. Viereck,

Gr., p. 394.

100

ff .

He

Homer

In

Trpos

Sermo Graecus, p. 12 f. numerous ex. in W. Schulze, Graec.

refers also to the

Lat., pp. 14-19. »

Joh. Gr., p. 227.

*

Lang, of the N. T.,

p.

153

7

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

8

Die Grundl.,

p. 132.

I,

f.

p. 726.

^

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

«

lb.

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449. "

Griech. Gr., p. 449.

623

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

'Near,' rather than more satismeanings 'towards,' seems to explain the resultant Cf. gegen. German The idea seems to be 'facing,' factorily.

use, -Kpbs

8e,

with the notion of

In 6 X670S vu

7rp6aa;7rov.

Trpos

'

besides.'

^

rdp Btbv {io. 1

comes out well, 'face to face with God.' the 2 In Comvosition. Probably one sees 'to sit near'

7rpo(7-65p6t;co,

(cf.

Eurip.,

etc.).

:

1)

the

literal

idea

original notion

Some MSS. read

m

this

though the best MSS. have TrapeSpeOw. But (Mt. 15 32; we do have Trpoa-Kt4>k\aiov (Mk. 4 38) and irpoa-ixkvoi Trpoa-opfxi^o} and 21 (Jo. 5), Trpoa-<})ayLov Cf. also 1 Tim. 5 5). composition in appear meanings resultant (Mk. 6 53). the other 9:41),' to' in rpocr-KoXXaco (Eph. also as towards' in irpoa-ayc^ (Lu. verb in

Cor. 9

1

:

13,

:

:

:

:

:

'

m

irpda-Kaipos

'for' 5:31), 'besides' in Trpocr-o^eiXco (Phil. 19), composition and in common is preposition (Mt. 13 21). This in rpoa-zcaprepeco as "perfective," simply is sometimes the idea :

(Ac. 1

14), 7rp6o--7reij/os (Ac.

:

10

:

10).

3. Originalhj with Five Cases.

The

cases used with

7rp6s

were

according to Brugmann,^ viz. locative, probably The only doubt is as to accusative. genitive, dative, ablative, Delbriick^ also thinks that a the true dative and the true genitive. (cf. irpo, 3) speaks few genuine datives and genitives occur. Green^ only rarely true of irpos and of "the true genitive" with irpo; it is the The genitive with irpos is wanting in the papyri and originally five

iirkp.

Pergamon in the

N.

Lu. 19

with

:

inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 117). appears. T. no example of the genitive or dative

37

And In

might possibly be regarded as dative rfj Kara^aaec but it is better with the Revised Version to sup-

Trpos

kyYi^ovTos;

composition {rpoakx^Te ply "even" and regard it as a locative. In 2 Maccabees shows 1) the dative is common. iavTQls, Lu. 12 (Thackeray, Gr., numbers the Uterary use of ivpbs with dative of :

p. 188).

.

.

ablative in The Ablative. There is only one example of the vnerkpas ttjs irpds tovto the N. T. and this occurs in Ac. 27 34, 4.

:

ac^rnpias vrapx^i.

This metaphorical usage means 'from the point

view of your advantage.'

of

It

is

possible also to explain

1

UpSs, as well as ntT&, I, p. 728. Cf. Kaelker, Quest, dc Eloc. Polyb., p. 283.

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

adv. in Polyb. 2 Griech. Gr., p. 448 Vergl. Synt.,

*

Notes on Gk. and Lat. Synt.,

p.

still

f.

p. 163.

as

appears as

f.

729

3

I,

it

So then Moulton^ agrees

a classical idiom.

true genitive, 'on the side of.' This to two cases. TTpos in the N. T. is nearly confined is

"

Prol., p. 106.

A GRAMMAR OF

624

with Blass^ that this

Moulton

is

THE.

GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

a remnant of the hterary style in Luke.

finds the genitive (ablative) 23 times in the

true genitive appeared in examples like

irpbs

LXX. The

rod iroTaixov, 'by the

In the modern Greek vernacular is going in the N. T. It is rarely used of place and time, and even so the usage is due to the literary language (Thumb, Handbook, p. 106). 5. With the Locative. Upos indeed occurs in the N. T. with the locative only seven times, so that it is already pretty nearly a one-case preposition. These seven examples are all of place and river' or 'towards the river.'

xpos fades- before

and

els

clto

as the ablative use

(Mk. 5 11), Trpos rw p-vqixelo} with verbs of rest save the use with See under 3. The correct text gives 'eyyi^ovTos in Lu. 19 37. the locative in Mk. 5: 11 and Jo. 20: 11, else we should have reads the accusative in Lu. 19 :37. These seven only five, and call for little

20

(Jo.

:

Cf. irpos rw opet

remark.

They

11).

are

:

all

:

D

examples

illustrate

'near' or 'facing.'

dative (locative) in in John's writings. p. 106) notes

With

6.

"P.

well the etymological meaning of -wphs as Moulton counts 104 examples of Trpos and the the LXX. Four of these seven examples are Cf. especially Jo. 20 12. Moulton (ProL, :

Fi. 5 vrpos rc3 irvXcovL, as late as

the Accusative.

and always

It

in the literal local sense.^

N. T.

in the

TTpos

This was the

679.*

phorically.

is

seen

in

Homer

The metaphorical usage with

How common

the accusative developed later.

with

245 a.d."

was exceedingly common

when one notes

the accusative

is

number

is

that the

both literally and metanot necessary to say that Trpos with the accusative

It is

classic

idiom^ with

irpos

means towards.' The accusative

case implies extension and with verbs of motion xp6s ('near') naturally blends with the rest into the resultant idea of towards.' This is in truth a very natural '

'

use of Tpos with the accusative, as in auex'^pr]crev trpos

r-qv

Mk. 11:1 note both

and

(Mk. 3:7). opos)

wath is

doKaaaav Trpos (to

(ttpos)

Christ and the love exerted upon

distinction hardly^ applies in Ro. 3

:

25

f.;

(els) men. Eph. 4 12. :

In Mk. 9 17 W. H. and Nestle accent wpds ak. There seems to be something almost intimate, as well as personal, in some of the examples of Trpos. The examples of Trpos with persons are very numerous, as in e^ewopeveTo irpos avrov (Mt. 3 ;5), Cf.

Mk.

('lepoaoKvua)

In Phil. 5 (W. H.) the margin has both with Here Lightfoot (in loco) sees a propriety in the faith

towards

But that

eis

eyyi^o}.

persons.

which

In

5

:

19.

:

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 140. Jann., Gk. Gr., p. 366.

"

Moulton,

2

^

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 394.

»

Monro, Horn.

«

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

1

Gr., p. 142.

Prol., p. 106.

p. 155.

625

PREPOSITIONS (nP00E2EI2) Sevre wp6s

(Mt. 11

fie

notion of motion j^s

essential to the use o f Trpos

an d the accusative

gaXao-Q-av 1, ttSs 6 ox^^o^ -^po^ -ryv

:

v<^au,

and the obvious distinc(Mk. 14 54). It IS not

TTpos

depnaLVOi^evos Trpos to

Cf. also

tion.

But one_must_not think jhat the

28), etc.

Thus in^M k. 4 note both ^ttc and

(cf. els aruTei').

kTrirris

is

:

(/)cos

:

5 6), 7rp6s ci iroLuy strange, therefore, to find ^^^- 2 2. The T^jrr^osjnuLiimiLJJ^ also TO Trdaxa (26 18). Cf. locative would the what exactly indeed not accusative with irpds is

(Mt. 13

ir^pos T7Mcts elali'

:

=

:

'nmv

-^Pos

Jo. 1

:

h

vfJiCis

Tc3

6 XoTos

1,

rji'

lepv Trpos

Mk.

In

be, especially with persons.

rov Oeov

14

:

49 we find

Kad'

Abbott ^ properly

8L5a<xKo:p.

wkpav

illustrates

with this passage in Mk. and

It is the face-to-face with 2 Cor. 5 So John thus mind. in has Paul that Lord the converse with :

8, hb-qp-riaai Trpos rbv Kvpiov.

God. Cf. aropa conceives the fellowship between the Logos and 14 and TrpoawTroi' Trpos ypbaoiirov Trpos (JTopo. in 2 Jo. 12, 3 Jo. use of Trpos with words of rest this while But, 12. 13 1 Cor. the root-idea of the preposition itis in perfect harmony with older Greek writers nor in the self, it does not occur in the Certainly Jannaris^ is only able to find it in Malalas.

m

:

LXX.2

idiom would have been Trapd, while ixera rightly and Gvv might have been employed. Abbott,^ however, speaking of verbs Trpos with calls attention to the frequent use of So then etc., and Demosthenes has it with faco.

the more

Uke

common Greek

XeToj, XaX4co,

living relationship, a natural step to find Trp6s employed for of this personal examples intimate converse. Two very interesting and verse 17, aXK-qXovs, occur in Lu. 24 14, C:p.'CKovv Trpos

it is

intercourse

:

Cf. also Trpos with

6iVTL^a\\eTe Trp6s a\\i]\ovs.

Cor. 6

Koivoivia (2

X670S (Heb. 4

:

:

14), dtadiiKv (Ac. 3

(Col. 4:5),

Certainly nothing anomalous exists

13), etc.

Trp6s Tous Tr65as

TTtTTTet

:

TreptTraxfco

25 as in ancient Greek),

(Mk. 5

:

22)

and

TpoaKdxl^vs Trpos \idov

m

(Mt.

of time, and the 4:6). npos is not used often with expressions Cf. case. accusative the with notion of extension is in harmony wkpas Trp6s oXaas in Jo. 5 35, 13, Trp6s chpav Trpos Katpdu in Lu. 8 the resultant notion in Heb. 12 10. In xp6s eairkpav (Lu. 24 29) out that Trpos to points Blass^ is 'toward,' rather than 'for.' uses of Trpos metaphorical The 11) is classical. irapov (Heb. 12 is often exone towards Disposition naturally numerous. :

:

:

:

:

are

pressed by (1

Th. 5

:

Trpos,

whether

it

be friendly as in

14) or hostile as in

1

Joh.

2

lb

»

Hist.

Gr,

p.

273

f.

h

exBpa oures * 6

Gk.

Gr., p. 395.

ixaKpodvpeire irpos Kavras

Trpos ai;Toi>s

(Lu. 23

Joh. Gr., p. 275. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 139.

:

12).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

626 Cf.

aW-qXuv

Ater'

may

though that

6:1).

'Ej3paiovs (Ac.

and

lipos does not of itself mean 'against/ irpos roiis be the resultant idea as in yoyyvafxds

(ib.).

Cor. 5

Trpos Tovs kt\. (2

to the

—

Cf. also xpos

vague notion

Sometimes

12).

:

(Col. 2

irX-qa p.ovi)v t^s crapKos

23)

:

adds nothing

irpos

of extension in the accusative case

and the

Thus xpos tovs dyyeXovs simply 'with reference to.' lipbs in the KOLvi] shares Cf. also Lu. 20 19. \kytL (Heb. 1:7). with ds and irepl the task of supplanting the disappearing dative (Radermacher, A^. T. Gr., p. 112). In particular xpos ahrbv {-ohsj

idea

is

:

takes the place of aurcS

14,

:

tives

where MSS. vary between

may have

(Eph. 4 xpos

bwaTa (Jo. 4

depiffixov

and

avTots

Adjec-

xp6s avrovs.

xpos in this general sense of fitness, like ayadbs

:

10 :4), Uavos (2 Cor. 2

(2 Cor.

29),

:

aTOKplvofxaL, as

elirov,

parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels, as in Lu.

shown by 3

after \k.yw,

(-oTs)

:

16), \evKal

Cf. also rd xpos tov debv (Ro. 15

35), etc.

:

The phrase tI irpbs was; (Mt. 27:4) has ancient Greek 17). support.^ The notion of aim or end naturally develops also as in

irpos

kypa(f)ri

vovBeaiav

(1

r\jj.(hv

Cor.

10

13

:

28), 6 xpos rriv eXerjpLoavprjv Kadr]fxepos

14

:

26; 15

Some examples

34.

:

this connection, like xpos to

KaTaKavaai avTo. (13

18

1)

:

the notion

Infinitive.

:

:

rt

In xpos to

Then again cause may be Tijv

(Jo.

(Mt. 6:1), xpos to

betv

(Lu.

Trpoaevx^adaL

hardly so strong as 'purpose.'

texts as in MoJiKT^s xpos

direv

Cf. 1 Cor.

10).

of the infinitive occur also in

OeadrjvaL avTots

etc.

30),

is

11), xpos

:

(Ac. 3

But

see

the result in certain con-

crKkripoKapdlav

eireTpepev

vjj.wv

(Mt.

There is no difficulty about the notion of comparison. It may be merely general accord as in xpos to dtk-qixa avTov (Lu. 12 47), xpos T-qv aXridetav (Gal. 2 14), or more technical comparison as 19:8).

:

:

in ovK a^ia KoXvcpOrjvai

to. TradrjixaTa

(Ro. 8

:

tov vvv /catpoO xpos

With

18).

this

may

ttjv

jxeXKovaav 56^av dxo-

be compared xpos

4)6bvov

where the phrase has an adverliial force. The older form ^vv (old Attic) appears in some MSS. (o) Svv. in 1 Pet. 4 12 (Beza put it in his text here). This form ^vv is seen in ^wbs. In p.eTa-^v both /jteTa and ^v{v) are combined.^ Delbriick^ is indeed in doubt as to the origin of crvv, but see Mommsen,^ and some (Giles, Co?np. Pkilol., p. 343) consider ^vv and avv in Jas. 4

:

5,

:

different.

The Meaning. This

1.

N. T. Gk.,

is

It is

'

together with.' ^

p. 139.

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 454.

*

Entwick. einiger Gesetze

p, 444.

in little dispute.

flir

^

d.

Gebr.

Vergl. Synt.,

I,

p. 730.

d. griech. Priip. ixtTd, avv s

and

a/xa,

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 454.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs)

cum and English

Cf. Latin

strumental idea that

from

this

is

The

cow-comitant.

the case used with avv as with

was used to express originally. idea, for when the notion of help

It

^

The

associative in-

and

a/xa

it

naturally out of that of association.

627

is

it is just that never departed

present

it

grows

Attic, according to

Blass,2 confines ahv to the notion of 'including,' but the Ionic

kept

it

along with

^terd for 'with,'

In Homer it is sometimes made headway outside of poetry save in Xenophon, strange to say. The Attic prose writers use /xtrd rather than avv. Thus in 600 pages of Thucydides we find ixtTo. 400 times and ^hv 37, while Xenophon has cruj' more than 2. History.

an adverb

It is

not without interest.

(tmesis).

Indeed

it

never

In Demosthenes the figures run 346 of ^lerd and 15 of avv, while Aristotle has 300 and 8 respectively .^ Monro* thinks that ixfiTa.

displaced avv in the vernacular while avv held on in the poets as the result of Homer's 'influence and finally became a sort of inseparable preposition like dis- in Latin (cf. d/i0t-- in N. T.). In the neTo.

modern Greek vernacular avv is displaced by )ue (/xerd) and sometimes by aiia.^ The rarity of avv in the N. T. therefore is in har-

mony

with the history of the language.

largely confined to Luke's Gospel

Its use in the

and Acts and

is

N. T.

is

entirely absent

from John's Epistles and the Apocalypse as it is also from Hebrews and 1 Peter, not to mention 2 Thessalonians, Philemon and the Pastoral Epistles. It is scarce in the rest of Paul's writings and in Mark and Matthew,^ and John's Gospel has it only three times (12 2; 18 1; 21 3). It occurs in the N. T. about 130 times (over two-thirds in Luke and Acts), the MSS. varying in a few :

:

:

instances. 3.

In Composition.

Here avv

is

extremely common.

these verbs in chapter on Cases (Instrumental).

See

list

of

Cf. Thayer's

Lexicon under avv. The use in composition illustrates the associative idea mainly as in aw-dycjo (Mt. 2 4), aw-epxafxat (Mk. 3 20), though the notion of help is present also, as in aw-avrL-Xan^avonaL :

:

(Lu. 10 :40), avv-epyeco (1 Cor. 16 16). Cf. xatpw Kal o-u7xaipw (Ph. 2 17 f.). The "perfective" use of avv is seen in avv-Kakv-Kru) (Lu. 12:2), avv-K\d(ji (Ro. 11 32), aw-KvivTOi (Lu. 13:11). Cf. :

:

:

avvreXeco, avvrrjpeo:, etc.

In avvoida the knowing

another, as possibly Ac. 5 1

:

or with one's

2,

may

self,

be either with

as in 1 Cor. 4

:

4.

Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 133.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.

»

Cf. Moininscn,

8

Cf.

Entw.

etc., p.

*

4

f.

on the whole subject Mommscn,

Horn. Gr., p. 147.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366. Entw., p. 395. '

628

^

GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

The verb

avvexoi (Lu. 22 63; Ac. 18 5) is found in the papjTi (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 160. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, Expositor, 1911, p. 278). As already explained, the case used is the associative-instrumental. In the very late Greek the accusative begins to appear with avu (as indeed already in the LXX!) and both avv and a/xa show^ examples of the genitive like ^uerd. There is very little comment needed on the 4. N. T. Usage. N.T. usage of the preposition beyond what has already been given.^ The bulk of the passages have the notion of accompaniment, So it occurs with fieveLv (Lu. like cvv aol awodavetv (Mt. 26 35). :

:

:

1

56), KaOlaaL (Ac. 8 :31), etc.

:

15

22),

:

Cf. also avv

aw may

where the use of

eKKkrjala (Ac.

6\r] rfj

subordinate the church a bit

Cf. also Ac. 14 5; Lu. 23 11, where than avv might have occurred. As applied to Christ, avv, like h, may express the intimate mystic union, as in KkKpvwTaL avv Tw Xpicrrw ku ri2 6eco (Col. 3:3). The phrase oi avv is used much

to the Apostles (Thayer) .^

:

:

Kal rather

like 01 irapa, ol

Cf. Lu. 5

the idea

:

9

:

26.

:

dXXd ye

'besides,'

is

Cf. Neh. 5

Thus Jlerpos Kal ol aw ainoo (Lu. 9 32). Once avv occurs in a context where

irepi, ol ixera.

and Mk. 2

koL

aw

-Kaaiv tovtols (Lu.

24 :21).

So probably also Ph. 1:1. It appears in the papyri in this sense also. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, "Lexical Notes on the Papyri," The Expositor, 1911, p. 276. In Mt. 8 34 Text. Rec. reads eis awavT-qaiv rco Trjo-oO where critical text has :

18.

:

The case MSS.

vir-.

stance. 8w6.tJ.eL

of Ttjo-oO

give

is

aw-

Tov Kvplov (1 Cor. 5

associative-instrumental in either in-

in other passages. :

4)

The

use of

aw

rfj

has a technical sense ('together with')

seen in the magical papyri and in an Attic cursing tablet (iii/B.c). f. See also Deissmann's Die Formel "in Christo Jesu^' for discussion of aw Xptaro), the notion of fellowship in Ph. 1 23. He now cites a graffito with these words to a deceased person, evxoiJ.aL Kaych ev raxv aw aol elvai In 1 Th. 4:17 note ap.a aw {Light, p. 305). Cf. Col. 3:3. avTols and in 5 10 aij.a aw avT<2 like our "together with," which shows also the retreat of aw before aixa. For aw-eTL and Kara see

Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 304

neut.

:

:

Ac. 16 22. :

(p) 'Yire'p.

In Homer, by anastrophe, sometimes we have

virep.

Cf. Sanskrit updri (locative case of upar),

Zend wpam, Latin

super,

Gothic ufar, German

ofer,

English over.

The

ilber,

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 396

2

Cf. Westcott

on

Jo. 1

:

Anglo-Saxon f.;

Jour, of Hell. Stud.,

XIX,

fiera. 2

pp. 287-288.

2 for discussion of distinction between

Cf. the use of avv Kal in the pap.

Deiss., B. S., p.

265

f.

avi>

and

629

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs)

^ was without i. A longer comparative and a superlative uTrepraros shortened into Latin supcrus, summus, and English uy, upper, upper-

oldest Indo-Eur, locative

occurs in

vireprepos,

Cf.

viraros.

most.

The Meaning.

1.

It is therefore clear

enough.

It

the very-

is

English word 'over' or 'upper.' Chaucer uses 'over' in the sense of 'upper.' As an adverb it does not occur in Homer, though Euripides {Medea, 627) has

virep

Jannaris^ calls

ayav.

virep

(Blass

virep) kydo (2 Cor. 11:23) "the monstrous construction," which is rather overdoing the matter. The use of the preposition is not

remarkably abundant in the N. T. The N.T. has also the compound preposi2. In Composition. (Eph. 1:21), VTrepeKTrepLaaov (Eph. 3 20), virepeKHva tions virepavw :

(2 Cor. 10

in vTep-cLPo:

Ac.

1

16)

:

Cor. 11

TOis (2

VTvep-'exoi

The

23).

The notion :

Cor. 11:5), virep^aWov-

meaning

of virep ('over') appears

literal

of

'excess,'

Cor. 12

:

D), virep-Qov ('upper room,'

'more than' (comparison), Th. 3 10),

7), virep-eKirepLaaou (1

(Ro. 8

7), inrep-viKao:

'Beyond'

(Ro. 12 :3).

virkp-aKfXOS (1

viTep\iav (2

5), virep avT-f]v (ih.

:

virep-alpoo (2

(Ph. 4

vTep-<j)pove(x)

4:6),

:

(Heb. 9

13).

:

appears in

and the adverbs

is

:

:

37), virep-vxpow (Ph. 2

rather

common

:

9),

also, as in

Cor. 7 36), iiTep-av^avcj (2 Th. 1:3), virep-^aivo) (1 Th. 2 Cor. 10 14, virep-eKetva (10: 16), and this :

vTrep-eKTelvco in

:

grows into the "perfective" idea as mvirep-rjcpapos (Ro. 1 30), vvepvrpwaev (Ph. 2:9), v-rrep-oxv (1 Tim. 2:2), VTvep-TrXeova^co (1 Tim. :

1

:

Cf. English

14).

The

"over-zealous," "over-anxious," etc.

negative notion of 'overlook' appears in virep-elbov (Ac. 17 30). The idea of 'defence,' 'in behalf of,' 'bending over to protect,' occurs in virep-evTvyxo-voi (Ro. 8 26). In the late Greek vernacular :

:

and 5td and already in the N. T. the distinction between irepi and virep is not very marked in some Passages usages, partly due to the affinity in sound and sense.* where the MSS. vary between virep and irepi are Mk. 14 24; Jo.

virep

fades ^ before

virepavo)

:

1

:

30; Ac. 12

:

5;

Ro.

1

:

8; Gal. 1

:

4, etc.

With Genitive f A word is needed about the cases used with There is no trouble as to the accusative, but it is a mooted question whetk ««we have the true genitive or the ablative. Brugmann^ views the case as genitive without hesitation and 3.

VTrep.

cites the Sanskrit use of

upari in support of his position.

2

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 146; Brugmunn, Griech. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398.

»

Jann.,

6

Griech. Gr., p. 451; Kurzc vcrgl. Gr.,

»

ib., p.

366.

Gr., p. 228.

"

II, p.

464.

lb., p.

398.

But

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

630

NEW TESTAMENT

on the

side of the ablative we note Kiihner-Gerth^ and Monro,^ while Delbnick^ admits that either is possible, though leaning to the genitive. Where such doctors disagree, who shall decide?

The

Sanskrit can be quoted for both sides.

for the ablative

the comparative idea in

is

On

goes with the ablative.

the whole, therefore,

that the ablative has the best of

With

The main argument inrep

it

with

which naturally it seems to me

inrep.

Certainly as between the ablative and the accusative, the ablative is far in the lead. The figures^ are, abla4.

Ablative.

tive 126, accusative 19. along with virS. There

vrep in the

N.T. unless

On is

the whole, therefore, vwep drops back of the strictly local use of

no example

ol PairTL^onevoL virep

ruv

veKpo:v (1

Cor. 15

:

29)

be so understood, which is quite unhkely.^ This obscure passage still remains a puzzle to the interpreter, though no difficulty arises on the grammatical side to this or the other senses of v-n-kp. The N. T. examples are thus metaphorical. These uses fall into four divisions.

The most common

is the general notion of 'in behalf of,' 'for This grows easily out of the root-idea of 'over'

one's benefit.'

in the sense of protection or defence.

Thus in general with irpoa(Mt. 5:44), bkoixai (Ac. 8:24), aywvl^op.ai (Col. 4:12), KadiaranaL (Heb. 5 1), wpoacfiepoi (ib.), etc. The point comes out evxop.ai

:

with special force in instances where as in

Mk.

also

9

:

40; Ro. 8

:

31.

We

mistake of thinking that vwep of

means

It

It is

/card is

contrasted with vwep

vwep rod evos (pvaLovade Kara tov erepov (1 Cor. 4:6).

els

not, however,

itself literally

means

make

Cf.

the

'in behalf of.'

'over.'

sometimes said that

'in behalf

must

clptL

But Winer ^

means more

hterally 'instead'

when he

and

vwep

"In most cases one who acts in behalf of another takes his place." Whether he does or not depends on the nature of the action, not on avTL or vwep. In the Gorgias of Plato (515 C.) we have vwep gov of.'''

sees

clearly

says:

for thejnotion of 'instead.'

mean

itself

'instead.'

Neither does wp6 (nor Latin pro) in In the Alcestis of Euripides, where the

point turns on the substitutionary death of Alcestis for her hus^

p. 486.

1

I,

2

Horn. Gr.,

3

Vergl. Synt.,

6

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

same ^

p. 147. I,

p. 749. p. 156.

*

Moulton,

^

Cf. W.-Th., p. 382.

Prol., p. 105.

Winer (W.-Th.,

p. 38)

imphes the

thing.

lb.

Moulton, with avrl.

Blass, Gr. of Prol., p. 105,

N. T. Gk., p. 135, has nothing on this use of vwep. merely calls vwep "the more colourless" as compared

PREPOSITIONS (riPOOESEIs) band,

occurs seven times, more than dirt and

virkp

Cf Thucydides tutionary use of vTvep

TjiJLcbv

141 and

I,

.

\vTpov

631

ifwkp.

Xenophon Anab.

7

:

4,

In the Epistle to Diognetus

and a few

irp6

together.

9 for the substi(p. 84)

we note

lines further the expression is aPToKXayf].

1 Tim. 2 6 is worth noting, avTlXvrpou where the notion of substitution is manifest. There are a few other passages where vwep has the resultant notion of 'instead' and only violence to the context can get rid of it. One of these is Gal. 3 13. In verse 10 Paul has said that those under the law were under a curse {vt6 Karapav). In verse 13 he carries on the same image. Christ bought us "out from under" the curse (e/c TTJs Karapas tov vbjiov) of the law by becoming a curse "over" us (yevopevos vwep ripoov Karapa). In a word, we were under the curse; Christ took the curse on himself and thus over us (between the suspended curse and us) and thus rescued us out from under the curse. We went free while he was considered accursed (verse 13). It is not a point here as to whether one agrees with Paul's theology or not, but what is his meaning. In this passage vwep has the resultant meaning of 'instead.' The matter calls for this much of

Paul's combination in

:

virep iravTuv,

:

discussion because of the central nature of the teaching involved.

In Jo. 11

mcanmg

:

50

we

find another passage

substitution, iVa

where vwep

is

explained as

avdpojTOS airoQavri virep tov \aov koI

els

pi]

Indeed Abbott^ thinks that "in almost all the Johannine instances it refers to the death of one for the many." In Philemon 13, virep aov fxoi diaKovrj, the more obvious notion is 'mstead.' One may note eypaxpa virep avTov pij 186tos ypappaTa, P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66), where the meaning is obviously 'instead of him since he does not know letters.' Dcissmann (Light, p. 152 f.) finds it thus (eypaxpev virep avTov) in an ostracon from Thebes, as in many others, and takes virep to mean 'for' or 'as representative of,' and adds that it "is not without bearing on the question of virep in the N. T." Cf. eypaxpa v[irep aurJcoD aypappaTov, B.U. 664 (i/A.D.). In the papyri and the ostraca virep often bore the sense of 'instead of.' In 2 Cor. 5 15 the notion of substitution must be understood because of Paul's use of apa oi iraPTes airedavov as the conclusion^ from eh virep itclptuv airedavep. There remain a oKov TO Wvos aTo\r]TaL.

:

'

Joh. Gr., p. 270.

^

Cf. Thayer, p. 3, under

1889, p. 12)

virip

uirkp. In Pausanias (RiiRor, Die Priip. bei Paus., occurs about twice as often as avri. A. Thoiiner (Boitr.

zur Kenntn. des Hpracligeb. im N. T., 1901, p. 25), spoakinp; of Jo. 11:50, "Der Zusatz nii 6Xou t6 Wvos dTrAXTjrai die Bedeutung an Stelle anstatt." saya:

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

632

number

of passages

where the notion

of substitution

But

natural from the nature of the case.

perfectly

is

one he wishes. But there is no inherent objection in virep itself to its conveying the notion of 'instead' as a resultant idea. In fact it is per se as natural as with avri. In the light of the above one finds little difficulty with passages hke Ro. 5 6 f.; 8 32; Gal. 2 ; 20; Jo. 10 11, 15; Heb. 2 9; Tit. 2 14, etc. In Mk. 10 45 we have Urpov avrl TToWoJv and in 14 24 to alfxa /jlov to tKXvvvonevov virep iroWoJv. But one may argue from 1 Jo. 3 16 that vTrkp in case of death does not necessarily involve substitution. Surely the very object of such death is to save life. The two other uses of vwep may be briefly treated. Sometimes the resultant notion may be merely 'for the sake of,' as in iiwep

may

of

stop in translation with 'in behalf

:

:

in these passages if

:

:

:

:

—

:

:

Tov deov (Jo. 11

TTJs 86^71$

ovdfjLaTos

(Ac. 5

4), VTep aXridelas deov

:

41), virep Xpto-roD (Ph. 1

:

:

(Ro. 15

:

tov

8), VTrep

This

29), etc.

is

natural

in relations of intimate love.

A

more general idea

that of 'about' or 'concerning.'

is

VTep encroaches on the province of

Th. 2

Cf. 2 Cor. 8

vrept.

:

Here

23, virep

Perhaps 1 Cor. Moulton^ finds commercial accounts in the papyri, scores of them, with virep in the sense of 'to.' We see the free use ('concerning') with verbs like Kavxaop-ai (2 Cor. 7 14), <j)paveco (Ph. 1:7), /cpdfco (Ro. 9 27), epcordco (2 Th. 2:1), TLtov, 2

15

:

:

1, virep

29 comes in here

ti]s

Tapovalas tov Kvplov.

also.

:

:

The Latin super

etc.

In

30, virep ov €700 elTov.

Cor. 10

1

1

:

also.

Cf. Jo. 1

67 (a.d. 237), 'by

way

The Accusative with

4.

local use of virep occurs in alleled use," virepapco.

Goodspeed 4

virep calls

:

24).

irdPTa

The literal "an unparthe other MSS. having

for little remark.

D in Heb. 9

:

5, uTrep 8' avTrjv,

of 'above,'

accusative with vTep has the metaphorical sense of

'above' or 'over,' as in ovk laTiv 10

nadrjTi-js

virep top

8t8aaKa\ov (Mt.

Cf. also to opofxa to virep irap opoiia (Ph. 2:9),

(Eph.

1

Grenf

of earnest-money.'

in the sense

2

The

In

suggests the object at which one

uirep

(ii/B.c); virep ov \eyo)L,'P.Oxy.S7 (a.dA9); uTrep dpa/Swws, P. ii.

:

30, tI ^\aa4>r]p,oviJ.aL virep ov eyoj

Cf. virep wv r](3ovX6peda aireaTa\Kafieu, P.

aiming.

is

2:13

6 and Ph.

:

antecedent as well as relative.

evxapL(TTw, the preposition suits

2 Cor.

with this idiom

in line

is

:

22), ovKeTL

8ov\op dXXd virep

cos

Ke(t)a\fjv virep

8ov\op (Phil. 16).

This notion easily gets into that of 'beyond' in harmony with the accusative case.

Thus

adrjpai virep 6 8vpaade (1

Cor. 10

1

Prol., p. 105.

"

vir^p

d yeypawTox (1 Cor. 4:6), ireipa-

13).

:

2

Cf. virep 8vpaixip (2 Cor. 1

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 313.

:

8),

633

PREPOSITIONS (npooE:sEi2)

ToWovs (Gal. 1 14), vir^p rr^v XafxirpoTriTa (Ac. 26 13). ClasGreek only shows the beginning of the use of vwkp with comparatives/ but the N. T. has several instances. Thus the LXX often uses it with comparatives, partly because the Hebrew had no special form for the comparative degree.^ But the kolvt] shows the idiom. So we find 4>povip.6:TepoL hirep tovs vlovs (Lu. 16 8), ToixoiTepos In Jo. 12 43 W. H. read ^irep 12). virkp Tracrau naxaipav (Heb. 4 But virep has the comparamargin after iiaXXov. in and virkp text in

virip

:

:

sical

:

:

:

'more than' after verbs, as 6 4)i.\cop iraTepa ^ firjrepa In the LXX the positive adjective occurs 37). as 'ivbo^os virep tovs d5eX0o6s (1 Chron. 4:9). In Ro. 12 3,

tive sense of

(Mt. 10

virlp kp.k

with

virkp,

:

:

Tap' o oel

nil virepcfipove'tv

Moulton

Trapa.

note the conjunction of

cjipovelv,

{Prol., p. 237)

cites

properly regarded as compounds. virep \iav.

has disappeared in

Handb.,

possibly also

unknown virai

He would

separate

virep

as

an

But the modern editors are against him. It modern Greek vernacular before jlo. (Thumb,

Little

the positive of

also

T.P. 8

p. 105).

'Yird.

(q)

(fspovelv,

and

Blass^ doubts whether virepXlav, virepeKwepccraod can be

(ii/B.c).

adverb,

iavrov

I'Trep

virep

is

virep.

by way

called for

etymology since

of

viro is

Cf. the Sanskrit upa, Latin sub, Gothic uf,

auf, English up, ah-ove. The form viro is of but the Elean dialect* has vira-, and Horner^ has

German

case,

(dative.)

The Original Meaning.^ This was probably 'upwards' or 'from under.' Unlike Kara, viro never means 'downwards.' As a matter of fact, 'up' and 'under' are merely relative terms. The very English word up is probably viro. Cf. vxpL 'aloft,' vt-tlos The meaning of 'facing upwards,' vr-aros 'uppermost,' v\1/l(xtos. under or beneath is common in the N. T., as viro t6v fxoSiop (JNIt. 1.

5

15).

:

In Composition.

2.

of 'under' as ypafxfjLos

Here viro appears simply -with the notion (Mk. 7 28), vir-ooTLa^cjo (1 Cor. 9 27), v-rroviro-ivbhov (Mt. 5 35), uTro-Sew (Mk. 6:9).

in uTro-Kdrco

(1 Pet. 2

:

21),

Cf. also vTo-Seiypa (Jo. 13 KpioLs

(Mt. 23

:

:

:

:

:

15), viro-^vyioi>

28), viro-KpiTrjs

(Mt. 6

:

2)

(Mt. 21

:

5).

In

behind the resultant idea. The idea of with vwo-dexofxai (Lu. In Ro. 16 :4 vro-TidrjfXL has the 38), viro-\ap.l3apoo (3 Jo. 8). In of 'put under,' as viro-^chuwijn (Ac. 27: 17), 'undergird.'

under a mask

lies

pitality (under one's roof) is natural

>

lb., p. 108.

2

C. and

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.

S., Scl.

from

LXX,

p. 84.

viro-

the notion of an actor

•

Brug., Griccli.

«

Monro, Horn.

«

lb.

C.r., p.

hos10

vwo-

452.

Gr., p. 139.

Cf. Brug., ib.

:

idea

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

634

NEW TESTAMENT

(Lu. 10 30) the notion of interrupting or following a speech comes from the idea of 'up' in vtto, taking up the talk, etc. The "perfective" idea appears in i»7ro-Xet7rco (Ro. 11 3), 'leave behind or over.' So with viro-rpexc^ (Ac. 27 16), 'run under or past.'

Xa/Jcbi' elirev

:

:

:

But in vTro-irvko) (Ac. Cf. iixo-7rXeco (Ac. 27:4, 7), 'sail close by.' 27:13) the preposition minimizes the force of the verb, 'blow So with underCf. our suspicion, the French soupgon. softly.' estimate. In u7ro-/3dXXa; (Ac. 6:11) the notion of suggestion has an evil turn, but in viTo-iJ.Lixvr]<jK<jo (Jo. 14 26) there is no such colour. The idea of subjection (note how these ideas appear in English :

usage etc.

all

In

along) occurs in uTr-aKouw (Ph. 2

(Col. 2

:

:

(Heb. 13

12),L'7r-eL/cco

28) the special force of

(Mt. 8 Cf. our vulgar "meet up" with one.

vir-avTOLOi

disappeared.

:

vivo

So

:

17),

has rather vi^-evavTio^

14).

The Cases Once Used with vivb. The locative was originally very common with v-ko, as in Homer, even with verbs of motion.* As a matter of fact, however, in the historical writers the locative and accusative with vtto are very rare as compared with the ablative,2 though Appian and Herodian use the locative more than the 3.

accusative.^

But the

locative retreated* before the accusative

with vTo till in the N. T. and the modern Greek it has disappeared. In the N. T.^ the accusative shows 50 examples and the ablative 165, but in the vernacular of the Byzantine Greek the accusative with VTTO disappears before dTroKoirco and uxo/cdrco.^ In the modern

Greek vernacular aivb has displaced hirb (Thumb, Handb., p. 102). Brugmann^ even thinks that viro once occurred with the instrumental case, and he is clear that the ablative, as well as the geniDelbnick^ agrees to both ablative and tive, was found with it. viro occurred with five cases (loc, instr., we meet only the accusative and the N.T. In ace, ablative. No example of the pure genitive with viro occurs in the N. T. In Jo. 1 50 we find eUov ere viroKaTO) rrjs avKrjs, but not VTTO. So also in some other N.T. passages where a genitive with

genitive.

Thus

originally

abl., gen.).

:

iird

might have been used.

Cf.

accusative with vro, as in ovra 1

2 3

*

Mk.

7: 28; Lu. 8

viro ttjv cvktjv (Jo. 1

:

:

16, etc.

The

48), supplants

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 140. Helbing, Die Pnip. bei Herod, und and. Histor., p. 22. Moulton, Prol., p. 63. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 399. Cf. Jebb in V. and D., Handb. to Mod. Gk.,

p. 313. 6

Moulton,

8

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398

'

Prol., p. 105. f.

«

Griech. Gr., p. 452 f. Vergl. Synt., I, p. 698.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

G35

the genitive also in the N. T. The use of virb for agency and cause is ablative like the Latin usage with ah (a).

With

4.

original use of ux6.

Winer

to be the This indeed would accord with the notion of

the Accusative.

It

is

considered

But

'upwards,' 'up from under.'

in the

l)y

N.

T., as

Greek, the accusative occurs with the notion of rest

^

in the later

accusative in the N. T. takes the place of the local use of

and

locative Tov \ibhiov

Thus we

genitive.'

(Mt. 5

15),

:

but also

:

13),

:

i)Trb

(Ro. 6

vo/jlov

with

find (motion) TidkaaLv avrov vtto

:

(Ro. 3

vivo

(rest) ovra. h-wb ttju avKrjp (Jo. 1

Other examples with verbs of rest are vtto (Mk. 4 32), virb top ovpavbv (Ac. 4 12), with XCiXtj

The

(cf. et$).-

:

14

f.),

ttip (tkiolp €l^ll,

virb

:

48).

KaTacK-qvolv

we have

v-wb to.

iratdaycjoybv

(Gal.

These examples are as freely used as those like I'm The examples are both fjLov virb T-qv cTTeyrju elaeXdys (Mt. 8:8). local as with erLavpayco (Lu. 13 34) and figurative as -with TaireLvbo) Cf. Ac. 4:12 virb rbv ovpavbv with virb Ala Trjv "IlXtoi' (1 Pet. 5:6). kri \{jTpoLs P. Oxy. 48, 49, 722 (a.d. 86, 100, 91). Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 332. Only one instance of the use of virb with time appears in the N. T., virb tov opdpov (Ac. 5 21), where it has the notion of 'about' (or 'close upon') dawn. John uses virb with the accusative only once* (Jo. 1 48) and with the ablative only five times (Jo. 14 21; 3 Jo. 12 his; Rev. 6 8, 13), an incidental ar3

25), etc.

:

:

:

:

:

gument

:

for unity of authorship.

5. With the Ablative. In the sense of efficient cause or agent it was the commonest classical usage and it continues so in the N. T.^ The local and temporal uses do not occur, but only the metaphorical. These occur after passive or neuter verbs. Abbott^ thinks that John preferred to represent the agent as performing the act and so avoided virb. The ancient Greek indeed used vizb chiefly in

this sense of agent.

of airoKTelvet tls

is

The use

virb as the correlative In the N. T. once (Rev. 6 8) virb

of aTroOvrjaKca

well known.''

:

actually occurs with the active of Kal virb Toiv drjpiuv).

This

airoKTelvo} (airoKTetvaL kv pofx4)aig.

probably due to the desire to distin-

is

guish between the living agent and the

But the N. T. has neuter verbs with

causes preceding.^

lifeless virb,

like airbXKvfjLai (1 Cor.

Cor. 11 24), iraaxo} (Mk. 5 26), bironkvo) (Heb. In the case of passive verbs the usage follows the tradi-

10

:

9), Xa/x^Az/o) (2

12

:

3).

tional lines.

Cf.

:

:

Mt. 4

:

1

for

»

W.-Th.,

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398.

»

Bla-ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 278.

*

—

p. 407.

two examples,

avqxOr] virb tov irvtv-

5

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 157.

«

Joh. Gr., p. 279.

'

Moulton, Prol., p. 156. Simcox, Lang, of the N.T.,

«

p. 157.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

636

vro rod 8La(36Xov. It is to be noted that in Lu. 9 8 not repeated with aXXcoi'. The bulk of the N. T. instances of viro occur of personal agency like e^awTl^ovTo vtt' avrov (Mt. 3:6), SucnraaOaL vt avrov (Mk. 5:4), etc. Sometimes, when ha is added to v-Ko, a distinction is made between the intermediate and the

juaros, ireLpaadrjvai. i»7r6

:

is

mediate agent, as in to pr]6ep vro Kvpiov 5td tov Tpo(j)i]Tov (Mt. 1 22). Cf. 2 15. There is nothing peculiar about the use of vt6 in 2 Pet. :

:

1

17,

:

(l)oovT]s

viro

kvexdeiarjs

rrjs

ixeyaXoirpeTrovs

So^rjs.^

But

vto

IS

not the only way of expressing the agent. Besides 5ta for the indirect agent airo is the most common- substitute for vto, though k and irapa both are found for the notion of agency. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 116) speaks of airS as "die eigentUch pradestinierte Partikel."

The instrumental case and eu and the locative must But 5td with the accusative (motive or cause)

also be recalled.

must not be confounded with this idea. Cf. Lu. 21 17 for vtto with ablative and 5td with the accusative. The prepositions will richly repay one's study, and often the whole point of a sentence turns on the prepositions. In Lu. 5 19 eight prepositions occur, counting efxirpoadev, and many such passages are found as Gal. 2 :

:

:

1, 2.

On

Cf. Joy,

the

Syntax of Some Prepositions in

the

Greek

Dialects (1904).

The "Adverbial"

VIII.

Prepositions.

The

list

in the

N. T. of

those prepositions which do not occur in composition with verbs As already remarked in the beginning of this is considerable. chapter,

what are

called

"proper" prepositions were originally

adverbs, fixed case-forms which came to be used with nouns and in composition with verbs. We have followed the varied history

most interesting group of words.' Horner^ in particular used most of them at times merely adverbially. In Homer the "regular" prepositions often retain this adverbial force, as h 8e, Tapa 8e, and this separation from a verb is no longer considered a " surgical operation" (tmesis) Cf Seymour, Homeric Language and of this

.

Verse, 25, 78.

Some

.

of these prepositions gradually disappeared,

but the total use of prepositions greatly increased. This increase was due to the wider use of the remaining prepositions and the increasing use of so-called "improper" prepositions, adverbs with cases that never came to be used in composition with verbs. The Sanskrit^ had no proper class of prepositions, but a number of 1

W.-Th.,

2

Blass, Gr. of

W.-Th., 3

p. 369.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 126.

But

airo

occurs in this sense in Xen,

Cf.

p. 369.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 151.

*

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 414.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

637

.

adverbs which were sometimes used with cases.

These adverbial

Some

prepositions varied constantly in the history of the Greek.

on down from Homer. Others drop by the way while each age sees a new crop coming on.

come

of them, like awev, iyyvs, eW/ca,

rigiit

number of these prepositional adverbs by the preposition^ before the case, like dTro/cdrcj dTro. In the modern Greek the improper prepositions are used either with the genitive (only with enclitic pronoun) or by the addition of 's, airo, ne with the accusative. They are quite new formations, but made from ancient Greek material (Thumb, Handb., p. 107). From our point of view any adverb that occurs with a case may But

in the late vernacular a

are followed

be regarded as a prepositional adverb,^ like (Ph.

1

:

Some

27).

of these

a^lcos

tov evayyeKlov

prepositional adverbs, as already

shown, occur both as adverbs, as afxa Kal eXwi^uv (Ac. 24 26), and as prepositions, as a^a auroTs (Mt. 13 29), while others appear only as prepositions with cases, as avev rod irarpos (Mt. 10 29). But it is not necessary to make a separate list on this basis. Blass,^ who treats these words very scantily, is right in saying that no hard and fast line can be drawn between adverb and preposition here. The LXX shows some adverbial prepositions which do not occur in the N. T.^ Thus airavijidtv (Judges 16 20) may be compared with eTravudev (classical also), and viroKarcoOev (Deut. 9 14), which :

:

:

:

:

in ancient kvoi-KLov,

so

Greek

only an adverb.

is

common

in the

LXX,

Simcox'' carefully explains

as a translation

and imitation

of

but even Conybeare and Stock ^ surrender this word as not a Hebraism before Deissmann's proof.^ The N. T., like the kolvtj I?.*!?:?,

in general,

makes

given the

list

ment

free use of these prepositional adverbs.

in

my

(3 ed., 1912, p.

many as the

Short

116

f.),

Gramfnar of forty-two in

" regular" prepositions. ^

the

all,

Greek

I

New

have

Testa-

more than twice

as

above is not included. Cf. dxa^ TOV eviavTov (Heb. 9:7). Conybeare and Stock (p. 87) even count kxoixeva irerpas (Ps. 140 0), but surely that is 'A^tws noted

:

going too

There 1

is

far.

Cf.

to.

more excuse

Kpdaaova

Kal

kxojxeva cruTripias

for claiming eaoorepov

rrjs

(Heb. 6:9).

KoKviJLjSijdpas

(Is.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 36G.

^ L^ng. of the N. T., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 150. p. 159. « Sol., Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 122, 127 f. p. 87. * C. and S., Sd. from LXX, ^ b. S., p. 86 f. p. 213 f. « Krebs, Die Pri'ipositionsadvorbicn in der spjitoren hist. Griic, I. Tl., p. 4f., Rives a list of 61, and 31 of his list do not appear in the N. T., while 12 are in the N. T. that he does not mention, viz. ivavn, ivccTnof, Karkvavri, Kartvuinov, 2

»

KVK\60tv, nioop, dniaix), 6\pi, ivapaTtXiiat.ov, TroptKros, virtKuva, vntptKirtpiaaov. list

by Ivrebs shows the freedom

in the Koivq

development of adv. prep.

This

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

638

NEW TESTAMENT

pay us to take up briefly these adverbial prepothem use the genitive or the ablative case except sitions. (instrumental) and €7765 (dative). aij.a 22

It will

11).

:

All of

It is

"Ajua.

1.

mann^ connects a-7ra^, d-TrXoOs,

same.

probably in the instrumental case the word with the root of

Cretan

Cf. also

fiia,

itself.

ev

Brug-

as seen in

Latin semel, Sanskrit sama, English

afxaKLs,

It occurs in

^^iov, e-Karov.

tive-instrumental case.2

els,

Homer with

The word occurs

in the

the associa-

N. T. only ten

times and usually as adverb, either merely with the verb as in 13; Phil. 22). Cf. Kai 12, LXX, or with 8^ Kai (1 Tim. 5

Ro. 3

:

:

examples are with participles (Col. 4 3 above and Ac. 24: 26; 27: 40). Twice we find d/jia ahv with the instrumental, a sort of double preposition after the manner of the later Greek (1 Th. 4 17; 5 10) and once afxa Trpcot wiih. adverb in Col.

4

:

3.

Three

of the

:

:

:

(Mt. 20 1). The use of a/xa avv Thayer explains by taking aixa as an adverb with the verb. Only once does it occur as a simple For preposition with the instrumental, a/za avTols (Mt. 13:29). the later revival of a^ua and use like iiera see Jannaris.^ In 2 Esdr. 17 3 on is translated by ana. In the Acta Nerei ana is used only with the genitive (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 119). Homer has another 2. "Avev. It is of uncertain etymology."* :

:

aj'eu-s, the Epidaurian avev-v, the Megarian however, no doubt as to the meaning, 'without' or 'besides,' and the case used is the ablative. There are only three examples in the N.T., not counting Mk. 13 2, where W. H.

form,

avevdev,

There

avis.

the Eleatic is,

:

and Nestle

reject avev xtLpwv.

Two

of these (1 Pet. 3

:

1;

4

:

9)

occur with abstract words, and one (Mt. 10 29) mth tov xarpos. The word is rare in the late Greek, especially with a case.^ It is a compound form that 3. "KvTLKpvi {some editors avTiKpv). :

originally

meant

Greek occurs in the was common in the ancient preposition. In the N. T. we find

'straight on,' but in later

sense of 'opposite,' 'face to face.'

Greek as adverb it

of place or as

only once (Ac. 20

Xlov.

It occurs in

It

15) and the case used is the genitive, avTiKpvs modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handh., p. :

109). 4. 'Aj'TiTrepa (di^rt-Trepai^, Polybius, etc.).

It is just

dj^Tt

and

Trepav

Thucydides uses avTiirepas as adverbial preposition.

combined. Only one example occurs in the N. T. (Lu. 8

:

26), avTiirepa

3

Griech. Gr., pp. 85, 211, 230. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 151; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 456. " Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 456. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 397.

6

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 337.

1 2

In Eleatic

apevs occurs

with the ace.

rrjs

G39

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIi:)

open to dispute, since avTi comes with the 'Over against' would be Either will genitive, 'on the other side of would be ablative. make sense in Lu. 8 26. Probably genitive is the case here.

The

TaXiXatas.

genitive

and

case

irkpav

is

with the ablative.

:

a triple compound of airb, kv, avH. A number of adverbial prepositions were formed on avH as a base. In the N.T. we find also evavri, evaPTiou, KarkvavTi. These are late, except 5.

'k-KkvavTL.

It is

Homer on. Cf d^^ra, Iv-avTo). Poly bins uses airkvavTi genitive, and it is common with this case in the LXX^

(from

kvavTiov

.

with the 24). In the N. T. it occurs only six times, and in two (cf. Gen. 3 of these (Mt. 27: 24; Mk. 12 41) W. H. put KarkvavTi in the text and dirkvavTi in the marg. Of the remaining four examples two (Ac. 3 16; Ro. 3 18) have the sense merely of 'before,' 'in the sight or presence of.' One (Mt. 27 61) has the notion of 'opposite' or 'over against,' while the fourth (Ac. 17:7) takes on a :

:

:

:

:

hostile idea, 'against.' These resultant ideas all come naturally out of the threefold combination. The other compounds with avTi will be noted later. This word is of unknown origin, but compare Old 6. "Arep.

Saxon

sundir,

common But

it

in

Old High German suntar, Sanskrit sanutdr.

Homer and

the poets generally.

LXX

occurs only once in the

(2

It is

Later prose uses

Mace. 12

:

15)

it.

and twice

N. T. (Lu. 22 6, 35). The case is clearly the ablative, and the meaning is 'without.' One example, drep oxKov, is with persons and the other, arep .^aWavriov, is with a thing. in the

7.

:

It

"Axpi(s).

is

related to i^explis) whatever its origin.

Cf.

usque in Latin and dxpt ds like usque ad. As a mere adverb it no longer occurs in the N. T., but it is common both as a preposition

In the form

and as a conjunction.

axpi. ov

and

(Ac. 7: 18)

both preposition and conjunction (resultant temporal phrase). Leaving out these examples, axpi is found 30 times in the N. T. (W. H. text) and some MSS. read axpi. in Ac. 1 22 and 20 4, while in Mt. 13 30 the MSS. vary between axPh iJ^^Xpt- and eoos (W. H.). The meaning is 'up It occurs with place (Ac. to' and the case used is the genitive. axpi

h

r\mpa-^

(Mt. 24

:

38)

it

is

:

:

:

13 :6), persons (Ac. 11: 5), time (Ac. 13 11) and a])stract ideas (Ac. 22 :4, 22). It occurs mainly in Acts, Paul's writings and :

Revelation. 8.

'£7711$.

Cf. its use with the adverb dxpi rod vvv (Ro. 8 It

is

eyyiffTo) possibly related to iy-yvr}.

as adverb

and with the >

:

22).

a mere adverb (see comp. eyyvrepop, superl.

C. and

genitive. S., S(>1.

conunon in Homer both Greek added the true LXX, p. 8G.

It is

The

from tho

late

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

640

dative and

all

NEW TESTAMENT

three uses (adverb, gen., dat.) occur in the

N. T.

There are nineteen examples of the pure adverb in the N. T. (cf. Mt. 24 :32), one the comparative (Ro. 13 11) and the superlative in some MSS. in Mk. 6 36. There are eight examples Only four times does of the genitive with 6776$ (cf. Jo. 11 :54). 6771)5 have the dative (Ac. 9 38; 27:8), counting the indeclinable 'lepov(ra\r]iJL (Lu. 19 11; Ac. 1: 12), in which case Luke (4) would have the dative miiformly and Jolm (6) and Heb. (2) the :

:

:

:

Once (Heb. 6 8) it is postpositive. combination of k and the adverbial ending -Tos with which may be compared Latin coelitus} The case used with it is, of course, the ablative and it is just a fuller expression of e/c, meaning 'without.' In the N. T. we find it only genitive (H. Scott).

:

It is a

'Ektos.

9.

eight times, four of these with the ablative, as in 1 Cor. 6 18 (cf. with the relative in Ac. 26 22). Note position of kros Xe-yoiv wv in Ac. 26 22. Three times we have e/cros el /X17 (1 Cor. 14 5; 15:2; 1 Tim. 5 19), which is a pleonasm due first to the use of tKTos el. :

:

:

:

:

Deissmann

{Bible Studies, p. 118) cites

tia for "this

here

it

10.

of

e/cros el uri [e]dv

may

:

be regarded as a preposition.

This

"E/jLTTpoadep.

used the ablative ^ when

is it

merely

had a

and

ev

case.

irpbadev

In the N. T.

which adverb it is still

6, but it is preposition with the ablative. It occurs with words of in Mt. 5 24, with persons (Mt. 5 16), and sometimes notion of rank (Jo. 1: 15). As a preposition it appears

times a mere adverb of place, as in Rev. 4

:

:

:

in the

Mopsueswas

phrase," peculiarly apropos since Paul

Md7m /jlovt] de[\r]]arj. Once (Mt. 23 26) mere adverb used as a substantive, though even probably a

Cilician, €/ct6s is

jumbled

an inscription

four

usually a place, as

with the

44 times

N. T.

(Cf. tvavTa in Homer.) It is one of the avrl comfound with the genitive case when it has a case. It is very common in the LXX even after Swete^ has properly replaced it often by evavrlov. The old Greek did not use it. In the N. T., W. H. accept it in Lu. 1 8 and Ac. 8 21 (though some MSS. in both places read evavTiov) and reject it in Ac. 7 10. It is not found in the N. T. as a mere adverb. This is, of course, merely the neuter singular of 12. 'EvavTLov. evavrlos (cf. Mk. 6 48), and is common in the older Greek as in the LXX. For the papyri see evavrlov avBpojv rpLuiv P. Eleph. 1 11. "EvavTL.

pounds and

is

:

:

:

:

'

Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 198, 254.

3

C. and

transl. >:2b

S., Sel. .

from

LXX,

p. 87.

The

LXX

2 jb^ p. 455. used a number of prep, to

Cf. Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)

641

In the N. T. it does not occur as a mere adverb, but times as a preposition with the genitive (cf. Lu. 1 6), all with persons (cf. Latin coram). 13. "EveKa. It occurs in three forms in the N. T., either heKa (Lu. 6 22), eveKev (9 24) or dveKev (18 29), but always as a preposition ('for the sake of), never as mere adverb. These variations existed in the earlier Greek also. In the kolvt], 'iveKev is the more (B.C. 311).

we find

it

five

:

:

:

:

usual (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 35). Only twice, however, is it postpositive in the N. T., and this after the interrogative (Ac. 19: 32) or the relative (Lu. 4

The etymology and

is

18,

:

LXX). The

case used

quite uncertain, but the form

partially in the

kolvti

Once

used with rod and the

Cf. eveKev

infinitive.

(2 Cor. 7

and

the genitive.

The

supersedes the Attic. ^

occurs 26 times in the N. T.

is

e'lveKev

5td

:

12)

is

Ionic

preposition

we

Lu. 21

find

:

it

12, 17.

14. 'EvTos. It is like the Latin in-tus (opposite qf kros) and has the same ending -ros. It means 'within' and as a preposition is used with the genitive. The word occurs only twice in the N. T., once as an adverb with the article (Mt. 23 26), though :

even

may

be regarded as a preposition with the article and the genitive (cf. kros, Mt. 23 26), and once as a preposition (Lu. 17 21) with the genitive. Thayer cites two passages from Xenophon where hros may have the idea of 'among' and claims that this is the idea in Lu. 17 21, because of the context. But the this

:

:

:

meaning

in

Xenophon

is

disputed and Liddell and Scott give only

'within' for hros. Besides, in one of the new Logia^ of Jesus we have a similar saying in a context that makes 'within' necessary and would seem to settle the point about the passage in Luke: ri

PaaiXela rdv ovpavG>v hros 15.

'EvchiTLov.

This

is

hfj-oiv

earip.

the neuter singular of the adjective

is from the phrase ev ojiri (6 h uttI &v). but no example of the adverb or preposition kvuiinov occurs before the time of the LXX. Deissmann^ thinks it possible, but not probable, that it was first used in this sense as a

evwirios

which (Thayer)

Homer

uses

to.

evwirLa,

translation of the Hebrew "^ap^. A papyrus of the Thebaid from the second or third century B.C. has it also. As a preposition it is very common"* in the LXX and in the N. T. also. Curiously enough it does not occur in Matthew and Mark, though very '

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 457.

2

C. Taylor,

Polyb. €pt6%

is

The Oxj'rhyn. Sayings of Jesus, 1905, pp. 7, 11. Besides in always the opposite of Urbs. Cf. Thienuuui, Quest. Polyb., 1SS2,

p. 23. »

B.

S., p.

213.

*

C. and

S., p.

87.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

642

NEW TESTAMENT

in Luke's writings and Revelation. The Gospel of John has only one example and the Johannine Epistles two. Cf also In the N. T., kvc^inou is always a preposition with the KarevoiTLov. genitive and it occurs 92 times. It appears sometimes with place (Rev. 4 10), but usually with persons (Lu. 5 25; 12 9 his), and

common

.

:

:

:

especially of

ment, as in KaTeu6:mov

God

(BM.

16. "E|aj.

(1

:

Tim. 2

1

15). :

3.

Z., 1910,

It is

Sometimes the notion See Wikenhauser, pp. 263-270).

is

that of judg-

'Evoottlos

— kpuirtou —

e| (cf. eao), es) and is probably As adverb and preposition it is

an adverb from

in the ablative case like

ourco(s).

common in the N. T. (16 times) as in the older Greek. It is found as preposition only with the ablative and that 19 times. It means 'outside' or 'without' and is used in the N. T. only with Jolm's Gospel has it 13 14). places, hke e^co ttjs okias (Mt. 10 times, first Ep. 1, Rev. 2; Paul has it 5, and only as adverb. It is the same word plus the suffix -dev, 'from 17. "E^o)dev. :

and was common

without,'

used

is

the ablative.

in the poets

In the N. T.

(cf. eawdev).

much

it is

less

The

case

frequent (13

times) both as adverb and preposition than e^co. Indeed, if to 25; Lu. 11 39) be not considered the e^o^eev rod iroTTipiov (Mt. 23 :

:

would be only three left (Mk. 7:15; Rev. 11 2; 14 20). There is the same ambiguity in the two passages above that was noted about kros and hros (Mt. 23 26).

prepositional usage, there :

:

:

Cf. Lu. 11:40. just the preposition kirl and the adverb Greek both as adverl) and as preposition. As an adverb it is rare in the N. T. (19 times), once with the relative adverb ov (Mt. 2:9), once with a numeral with no effect on the case (1 Cor. 15 6; cf. Mk. 14 5 where the case may arise from TrpadrjvaL), once where a pronoun is really implied 18.

avo}.

This

'ETT-dj^co.

is

It occurs in Attic

:

:

As a preposition we find it fifteen times in the (Lu. 11:44). N. T. Cf. eTravo: opovs (Mt. 5 14) where it has the somewhat weakened^ sense of 'upon' rather than 'above.' The case used Modern Greek vernacular uses it as (d)7rdj^a> 's is the genitive. (Thumb, Handbook, p. 109). Thayer suggests the It is merely kwi and eKelva. 19. 'EireKeLPa. both as adverb and Greek Attic It occurs in the ellipsis of iJLepv. :

as preposition.

from Amos 5

:

In the N. T. it appears only once in a quotation 27 and as a preposition with the ablative in the

sense of 'beyond' (Ac. 7 43. Cf. 20. "Ecrw. It is the adverb of :

^

vitep'eKuva).

«

(cf. e^co)

and

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129.

is

in the ablative

643

PREPOSITIONS (IIPOGEZEIS)

The form eUu

case.

LXX.

and only one,

The

docs not occur in the N. T. nor in the found only nine times in the N. T.

(els)

Indeed the word

eaco is

(Mk. 15

ecrw rijs avXrjs

case used with

it

16), is

:

the prepositional use. is a gen-

This, however,

the genitive.

is

uine example, while eaoidev (12 times) is never a preposition in the N. T., for even Lu. 11 39, to eacodev vixCov, has the article. Cf. :

22 11). both demonstrative and relative adverb (from elos, ci'cos).^ Cf. &s and cos. The use of ecos as a prepIn osition appears in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius, etc. Northern England and Scotland "while" is used as "till" (Liddell and Scott) and illustrates how ecos as conjunction is used in TTjs KoKvjx^-qdpa'i (Is.

iadoTtpov

In

21. "Ews.

Homer

common

It is equally

the N. T.

conjunction,

if

:

it is

the phrases

N. T. as preposition and

in the

ecos oh, ecos

otov

be treated as conjunc-

indeed they are, though technically composed of the It is in the preposition ecos with the genitive of the relative.

tions, as

Greek mainly, therefore, that it appears as a preposition (cf. LXX and papyri). The case used with it is the genitive (but very late Greek shows accusative sometimes), and it is found 86 times in the N. T. and 51 of the examples are in the Synoptic later

The

Gospels.

11:23),

ecos

preposition

used with places, like

is

ohpavov (Lu. 10: 15),

abov (Mt.

ecos

'Ai^Tioxetas (Ac. 11

ecos

:

22); with

with expressions of time, like emr?js (27 45); with abstract ecos T7JS awepov (Mt. 27: 26 (Mt. davarov like ecos expressions, 38) with notion of measure, Hke ecos viilaovs (Mk. 6 23). See Rom. 3 12 ecos ej^os (LXX). Seventeen of the execos in Mt. 1:17; 20:8; 27:51. Cf. dTTo amples are uses of ecos with an adverb, hke ecos koltco (Mt. 27: 51),

persons, like

avTov (Lu. 4

ecos

42)

:

;

8), ecos copas

:

:

;

:

:

—

apTL (Jo. 2

ecos

Mt. 17

:

?cos TTpos

14

we

:

In

(Lu. 24

find

D

it

In

10),

while seven instances of

:

50),

ecos

ecos

ecos

irore

occur, like

occurs with another preposition, hke

kwl (Ac. 17

:

14),

e'cos

e^co

(21

:

5).

In

Mk.

Once (cf. Demosthenes, Aristotle, LXX) with the article and the infinitive ecos rod eXdeiv (Ac. 8

54 note

40).

:

Four times

17.

ecos

ecos eaco ets.

:

reXous (2 Cor. 1

(Ac. 19

LXX

:

26),

:

13),

ecos 'E<^co-ou,

the phrase

is

almost adverl)ial.

Blass^ finds the notion of 'within.'

20, ecos els iravTes, and 1 Chron. 5 Deissmann (B. S., p. 139) sees a Hebraism. 22. KarepavTi.. It is not found in the older Greek, but appears in the LXX and the N. T. It is especially frequent in the Book of Sirach.^ But in poetry we find Karkvavra and the word is merely

In the 10 A,

2 [Heb.] Esdr. 6

:

:

ecos iravTes,

»

2

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 151. Gr. of N. T. Gk., j). 127.

=•

C. and

S., p.

87.

.

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

644

the threefold preposition Kara, h,

The MSS.

avri.

in the

often vary ^ between KartvavTi and cnrevavTi as in Mt. 21

Ac. 3

In Mt. 27 24 and

16, etc.

:

:

in the margin.

Mk.

12

:

41

:

2;

W. H. put

N. T. 27 24; :

kirevavTi

found in Hesiod and Herodotus, does There are only nine examples of KareuavTi these (Lu. 19 30) is merely adverbial, while

KarevavTiov,

not occur in the N. T. in the

N. T.

One

of

:

The

the rest are prepositional.

idea

'before,' 'over against,'

is

and the case used with it is the genitive. It Cf. occurs with place (Mk. 13:3) and persons (Mt. 27: 24). KarkvavTi 6eov kv XptaTu (2 Cor. 2 17; 12 19) and the attraction 'in the presence of,'

:

:

of relative (u) in the dative to the genitive case of deov, the incor-

porated antecedent (Ro. 4:

17)'.

It is just hcoinov (see above)

23. KaTevcoTTLov.

uses KarkvciiTa with the genitive, but

The N. T. shows only

three examples

two with persons (Eph. 1:4;

The

(Ju. 24).

the presence

case used

Col. 1

Kara.

the frequency of

(cf.

:

and

22),

Homer

appears in the

LXX.

kvdoTLou),

one with abstract word

the genitive and the word means 'in

is

of.'

24. KvKXodev.

occurs in the

Karei^cbxioj'

It

is

an old adverb in Sep that occasionally 17 26) as a preposition. In the N. T. it

LXX (Jer.

:

appears as a preposition twice with the genitive 6p6vov (Rev. 4 3 f .) and once as an adverb (4 8) 25. Kvk\u) is, of course, merely an adverb in the instrumental :

:

case

and is common from Homer down. In the LXX it is extremely

frequent and occasionally as a preposition with the genitive

In the N. T.

6:2). (Rev. 4

6; 5

:

:

11; 7

it is :

11).

(Is.

merely an adverb except with rod Bpbvov Cf. k^kXo) ixkxpi (Ro. 15

As a preposition was not common. It appears

:

19).

occurs in Herodotus

7, 170, but Greek writers and the papyri.^ Many adverbial phrases were made from p.kaov which were used as prepositions, some of which survive in the N. T., like ava

26. Mkaov.

peaov {^ov),

fieaov, 5td

nkdu),

k

els

fxeaos

in the late

peaov (and

neaov, KaTo, fxkaov.

adjective

it

But

ets

to peaov),

h

fieaco

(and

ev tc3

The

these will be discussed later.

occurs with the genitive (Lu. 22

:

55; Jo. 1

:

26),

not strange to find the adverb with the genitive as in Ph. 2: 15, peaov 'Yeveas. In Mt. 14 24 W. H. put p.kaov in the margin and D reads p-kaov in Lu. 8:7; 10:3. See Hatzidakis, so that

it is

:

Einl., p. 214, for examples.

Cf.

ern Greek vernacular uses neaa

The mod(Thumb, Handbook, awo

Homeric

's,

jueo-'

iieaariyvs.

p. 108).

N. T. Gk.,

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.

p. 128.

645

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs) Like so

27. Mera^v.

compound

many

of the adverbial prepositions,

As a mere adverb, we meet

(juera, ^vv).

it

it is

a

only twice in

the N. T., once in the sense of 'meanwhile' (Jo. 4 31), once in the sense of 'afterwards' (Ac. 13 :42), as commonly in the later Greek.^ Cf. twofold use of neTo.. As a preposition it occurs seven :

times in the N. T., with places (Mt. 23 and in abstract relations (Ro. 2 15). :

Ac. 15

:

9 where both

28. Mexpi.

Like

5td

iixpi-

and and

fxera^v ecos,

:

35), persons

A

(Mt. 18

15)

:

good example occurs in

appear.

it is

both preposition and con-

No example

junction as well as originally adverb.

mere ad-

of the

found in the N. T., as it was rare in the older Greek. The form is akin to axpi and the sense is the same. If iikxpt-s ov be treated as a conjunction (cf. axpt ov, ecos ov), the preposition with the genitive appears fifteen times with another doubtful reading in Mt. 13 30. It is used with places (Ro. 15 19), persons (Lu. 16 16), time (Ac. 10 30), abstract expressions (Ph. 2:8). Like axPh the notion of 'measure' or 'degree' is sometimes present verb

is

:

:

:

:

(Heb. 12:4). etymology, perhaps related to adverb and as preposition. In It occurs in Homer both as eiri twice as preposition, and adverb the N. T. we find it five times as case used with it is 10. The Rev. 1 it in and some MSS. have It means 'from (Lu. 23 'Irjaov 26). owLadev tov the ablative. So 29. "OiTLadev.

It is of uncertain

:

:

behind' and so 'after' (Mt. 15 23). It is the opposite of enirpoadev. 30. 'OTTtcrco. It is the opposite of irpoao} (cf. iroppu) and is an ablative adverb from o-ms (as above). It is very common in the older Greek as an adverb, but it is extremely common in the as a preposition.2 In the N. T. oTlaw occurs alone as an adverb :

LXX

only twice (Mt. 24

:

though we meet

18; Lu. 7: 38),

els to. oiriavo

seven times as in Mk. 13 16. But as a preposition we find it 26 times, mostly with persons, as in the common oxto-co nov (Mt. 3 11). It is used with the ablative, 'behmd.' Cf. Sevre bmaoi :

:

in

Mt. 4 31.

:

19.

This word seems to be another variation of

'Oi/^e.

ottis

and

occurs in the ancient Greek, both as an adverb and as a preposition

with the genitive (Thuc. 4, 93) with the sense of late on.' But Philostratus shows examples where b\pk with the ablative has '

the sense of tratus uses

it

'after,' like b^/e tol;twv=' after

also in the sense of

'

late on.'

the sense of 'late on' with the genitive.* 1

Blass, Gr. of

«

C. and

N. T. Gk.,

S., p. 87.

p. 129.

Philos-

these things.'^

The papyri So b^k

»

Blass, Gr. of

*

Moulton,

ttJs

use

copas

N. T. Gk.,

Prol., p.

72

f.

it

in

P. Par. p. 312.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

646

Hence in Mt. 28 1, ox}/^ aa^^arov may be either late on the Sabbath or after the Sabbath. Either has good support. Moulton^ is uncertain, while Blass^ prefers 'after.' It is a point for exegesis, not for grammar, to decide. If Matthew has in mind just before sunset, 'late on' would be his idea; if he means after 37 (ii/B.c).

:

sunset, then 'after'

Cf.

correct.

is

It

32. Uapa-T^rjaiov.

rod aa^^arov (Lu. 18

5ts

:

12).

merely the neuter of the adjective

is

This adjective usually had the associative-instruBut the one example of the adverbial

irapair\r](no$.

mental, seldom the genitive.

preposition in the N. T. (Ph. 2

:

27), davarov,

has the genitive.

See

33. Uap-eKTos. It is a late compound for the earlier Trape/c. It appears in the N. T. only three times, save in the margin of Mt. Once it is a mere adverb (2 Cor. 11 28), 19 9 of W. H.'s text. :

:

and twice it is a preposition with the ablative (Mt. 5 32; Ac. 26 29) meaning 'without.' 34. Hepai'. It comes from the root Trep (cf. Trepaco, 'fare,' 'ferry,' It is an adverb (cf. adv. xepd), probably etc.). Ionic Trepr]v. accusative case. Both as adverb and as preposition with ablative (sometimes with accusative), it survives from Homer. In the N. T. it occurs ten times as an adverb in the phrase els to irkpav :

:

found 13 times as a preposition wnth the abla(Mt. 4 15). 35. nXi7J', Doric ifKav. It is probably from Tkkov, 'more,' and so In the N. T. it occurs only four times is used with the ablative. as a preposition with the ablative and in one of these we find TrXeoi' Twice it is a mere adverb, 7rXi7i' on Tr\r]v TovTwv (Ac. 15 28). (Mt. 8

It is

:18).

tive, chiefly in the expression ir'tpav tov 'lopdavov

—

:

:

(Ac. 20 :23; Ph. 1 ablative.

:

18), unless

indeed the

In

Cf. English "except that."

numerous instances

ttXtjj'

beginning of a clause usages come on

is

(cf.

down from

6rt clause all

is

in the

the other rather

an adversative conjunction at the These three be) as in Mt. 11:22.

the older Greek.

The word

is allied to reXas and is Greek the adverb occurs neuter adj. from ir\r]alos. In the older 'neighbour,' art. as in the N.T. 6 irXrialov, absolutely or with the

36. Ti\r]aiov, Doric ifKaTlov.

As a preposition it appears with the associative(Mt. 5 43) instrumental or with the genitive. But in the N. T., it is found only once and with the genitive in Jo. 4:5. In Lu. 10 29, 36, the genitive is also found ^vith Tr\r]aiov, but the word here has more of the substantive idea ('neighbour') than the prepositional usage. :

.

:

37. »

'T-Trep-di'a).

Moulton,

It

is

Prol., p.

a simple compound that in the late Greek 72

f.

"

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97.

PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs) gradually displaced^

It occurs in writers

virkp.

both as adverb and as preposition and In the N. T.

we find

from Aristotle on

common

in the

LXX.^

only three times and with the ablative each occurs literally of place (Heb. 9:5; Eph, 4 10) it

Twice it and once of rank (Eph. time.

Ac. 7

:

:

1

21).

:

is merely virep and the pronoun Ueiva (cf. which appears in the Byzantine Greek. It the N. T. (2 Cor. 10 16), eis to. uirepeKeLva vfxwv,

38. 'Tirep-eKHva. eir-eKeiva in

is

647

It

43)

occurs only once in

:

with the ablative in the sense of 'beyond,' 'into the (regions)

beyond you.' 39. 'Tirep-eK-repLaaov.

It

is

written separately in Liddell and

Scott and some N. T. editors print

it virep kKirepLaaov. It is found 22 (Aid., CompL). W. H. read it three times (Eph. 3 20; 1 Th. 3 10; 5 13), though in the last passage v-n-eptKTrepiaaojs is put in the margin by W. H, As a preposition with the ablative, we find it only in Eph. 3 20 (S^v attracted to case of omitted antecedent).

Dan. 3

in

:

:

:

:

:

40. cient

'T7ro-/cdrco. It is another compound word which in the anGreek was used both as adverl) and as preposition and es-

pecially in the

the late Greek

writers (Polyljius, Diodorus, Plutarch).

kocpyi it

gradually ^ displaced vto.

In the

In

LXX both virep-

and virepKarojOev occur as prepositions as well as KaToinadev.^ In the N. T. it is no longer adverb, but appears as preposition eleven times with the ablative, five of them with tQiv iroduv (as Mk. 6 11). The examples are all literal, not metaphorical. Cf.

avwdev

:

(Mk.

VTroKCLTCO TTJs TpaTr€^r]s

41. Xdpij'.

This word

still

common

The

ancients used

sive pronoun,

7: 28). is

just the accusative of x^pts

and

as the substantive in the accusative (Lu.

k/jiriv

1

it is

30).

:

with the genitive and with the possesThe idea of 'for the sake of (cf. Latin

it freely x^^pi-^-

may

be due to apposition originally. The usage continues in the late Greek. ^ Among the ancients it was generally postpositive, but in the LXX it is now one way, now the other. In the N. T. it occurs nine times, and is postpositive (as Gal. 3 19) always except 1 Jo. 3 12 with interrogative. It is only once in the Gospels (Lu. 7: 47).

gratia)

:

:

42. Xcopts.

it

It

is

of doubtful

etymology

(cf. xa<^,

XV po-),

Ijut

ap-

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 367, 397.

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366.

2

Cf. Dciss., B. S., p. 283

*

C. and

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 337.

appears

first in

prose.

the prep, in Attic inscr.

f.

Xdpiv as a prop,

Cf. Mcisterh., p. 222.

is

in

S., p.

86

poetry

lie gives

f.

till

50 n.c, when

an interesting

ex. of

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

648

freely as an adverb and in Pindar as a preposition. on steadily in both senses. In the N. T. we have only one pure adverbial use (Jo. 20 7), while as a preposition with the ablative we find it 40 times. The usage is chiefly with persons (Mt. 14: 21) or abstract relations (Mt. 13 34), though it may be used with place (Lu. 6 49). In Ro. 10 14 note x^P^s K-npvaaouTos

pears in

Homer

It holds

:

:

:

:

without the xojpts

el

article.

It is postpositive once, ov

x^p'i-s

(Heb. 12

:

14).

C. and B., II, 391 (No. 254), cites from the inscriptions

Ramsay,

idT]

(Moulton, Prol., p. 239). in the N. T. the following are only used as

TL wddrj

Of these 42 words

prepositions: avev, avTlirepa, a-wkvavri, arep, evavri, eveKa, huinov,

rest ixeaov

is

kirk-

Of the

vwepeKeiva, VTepavw, VTroKarco.

K€Lva, KaTtvoiTTLOV, TapaTr\r]aLOV,

also adjective; x^pi-s substantive; rXrjaiov substantive axpt, em, p-'exph t^^vv conjunctions;

and adjective;

and the

rest are

also adverbs.

IX.

Compound

Prepositions.

dvTl-irepa,

dir-'ev-avTi,

A

considerable

compound words.

adverbial prepositions are

en-irpoadev,

ev-avTL,

number

So are

of these

avTi-Kphis),

h-avTiou, hv-6}inov,

eir-dpit},

eir-eKeiva, fxera-^v, irapa-TrXrjaLOV, irap-eKTOS, i'lrep-avoo, VTrep-en-irepLaaov, vTro-KCLTcc.

aTOKCLTO}

The modern Greek vernacular shows similar forms in diroirlaco cltto, avrt^co oltto (Thumb, Handb., p. 110). CLTTO,

See chapter XII,

vi.

X. Prepositional Circumlocutions. Blass calls these Hebraisms and it is true that the frequency of these phrases in the

LXX

and the N. T.

is

the construction

Hebrew

due to the influence of the itself is

idiom.

But

good Greek, though not so common, as

the papyri show.^

This word furnishes a number, one of which, dj/d neaov, "has turned up abundantly in the papyri." ^ In the N. T. we find this compound preposition only four times. Moulton (a)

Meaov.

thinks that in

1

Cor. 6

5,

:

haKplvai avd fxeaov rod d6eX0oD, the text

corrupt, but probably the phrase

is

is

not to be taken too literally Aid (xeaov is read once (Lu.

and etymologically (cf. 5td here). 17: 11) and 5td fxeaov once in W. H. (Lu. 4

:

30).

Ets neaov

(Mk.

14 60) appears once, but eis to fxeaov (Lu. 4 35) six times. 'Ek neaov, like all the circumlocutions with, n'eaov, is followed by the :

:

genitive (Mt. 13

:

once (Ac. 27:27). locutions

49)

and

it

occurs 7 times.

The commonest

is ev fxeaco {ep-ixeaw

Kard

p.'eaov is

some MSS.) as

in

Mt. 10:

(Mt. 14 6; Ac. 4 7) is not a prepositional phrase. See also chapter XII, x, (&). 14). n'eaov (Col. 2 /xecroj

:

:

16.

Cf.

:

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129

f.

found

(27 times) of these circum-

^

Moulton,

Prol., p.

99

f.

'Ej^

tw

k

toO

649

PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs)

sometimes adduced as an example of a prepand as a pure Hebraism. Dcissmann^ has given abundant illustrations from the papyri to show that the use of ets TO ovofxa, ev tc2 ovofxaTi. is common enough in the vernacular It

"Ovoiia.

(6)

is

ositional circumlocution

where, as in the

KOLvi)

LXX

T., ofofxa represents the

and the N.

more than doubtful if we are justified in considering these phrases as mere prepositional circumlocutions with the genThe examples that come nc^arest to it are els 6vop.a Trpo(})r]Tov, itive. person.

It is

(Mt. 10 41 f.), but even here character 6vona brings out the notion that one has the name or has the ovofxa Mt. 28 In 19, of prophet, righteous man, disciple.

ds

ovoiia hiKalov, eis

Svofia /xa0r?roD

:

:

idea of 'the authority

of.'

This word also furnishes a number of such seem to be based on Hebrew originals phrases which in the .^ 19) aird Tpoad^irov rod Kvplov (Ac. 3 Thus (translation Hebraisms) Upoaa^TTov.

(c)

LXX

:

UeiXoLTov (Ac. 3

(1 Cor. 13

TT poaooTToi'

{d)

13) Blass^ finds

:

and

^.r?^,

Cf. irpoauTroi'

"^^QS.

like

/cara TpoaccTTOv irpds

12).

:

LXX

due to transThis again is a Hebraism in the 4 we have ha. aTOfxaTos deov, a quotation from

l^Toiia.

In Mt. 4

lation.

Hke

irp6 irpoawirov aov is

while

is like %'sf2,

:

Deut. 8:3. In Mt. 18 IG, evrt crTOfxaTos 5vo fiaprvpc^v is likewise from Deut. 19 15. So in Mt. 21 16, k arop-aTos vr]irlc^v is from :

:

:

Ps. 8

Cf. also aird rod aroparos avTOV (Lu. 22

3.

:

from Deut. 30

aov (Ro. 10 :8

:

14).

But

:

71), ev t(3 aToparl

this picturesque phrase-

all language as a matter of fact. shows several similar examples. Thus ha

ology belongs to (e)

It

y^dp.

avTUV (Ac. 15

24

:

h

ry

7), els TTju

:

23), 5td toov x^i-P^v avrojv (Ac. 14

xeZpa avrov (Lu. 15

^^"^ov (Jo.

x^t'Pi-

:

The

2 Sam. 15 See also veias in 1

B.

proof,

:

classical

iravTWV (Lu. 1

(Lu. :

71),

Here

particularity, but with

not without examples'* of note the English idiom also.^ See is

ava x^'^P^ ^^'^ ^bov rrjs TrvKrjs. e^ evavrlas avrov (Mk. 15 39) and rapeKTOs \6yov 2,

:

the margin (W. H.) of Mt. 19

S.,

x^i-pos

Hebrew

Greek

and one may

this use of x^^P

k

x^i-pos

3), eis xetpas

3 :35), avv x^^pt d77eXoi; (Ac. 7:35).

again the Greek idiom follows the perfect ease.

22),

:

pp. 146

Im Namen

f.,

197.

Moulton,

*

Blass, Gr. of

6

Cf. for the

N. T. Gk.,

LXX,

9.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 100.

Jesu, pp. 100

See also Heitmuller's

iT.

Prol., pp. 81, 99; Blass, Gr. of

2

:

irop-

N. T. Gk.,

p.

p. 130.

Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

129

f.

»

lb.

CHAPTER XIV ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA) Origin of Adjectives. This matter was touched upon in the chapter on Declensions, but calls for a further word here. There is no absolute hne of cleavage between substantive and adI.

jective either in

form or sense .^

The Alexandrian grammarians " The division line be-

special treatment of the adjective.

had no tween substantive and adjective, always an uncertain one in earlyIndo-European language, is even more wavering in Sanskrit than Indeed

elsewhere." 2

it is

not

difficult to

conceive the time

when

there was no distinct adjective. The substantive would be used in apposition as in English, brother man, church member. Cf.

common use of titles also hke doctor, president, governor, etc. This attributive use of the sul^stantive is not a peculiarity of any language, but belongs to Hebrew, Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, English, It is out of this use of the substantive that the adjective as etc. a separate part of speech developed.' The adjective is not therethe

mere variation of the genitive, though, hke the genitive, it The term noun {6poiJ.a) is used to cover both substantive and adjective, but many substantives continue to be used in a descriptive or adjectival sense and many adjectives in a substantival sense." The term adjective covers words of one, two or three genders, and indeed includes numerals and some of the pronouns also. But the pronouns require treatment in a separate

fore a is

descriptive.

chapter.

Participles are verbal adjectives.

relation

between adjective and substantive

8ov\a (Ro. 6 1

2 3

:

19).

See is

later.

The

close

well illustrated

by

Cf. dovXoi.

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 117. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 111. "It is this change from subst.

Delbruck etc., p.

is

in apposition to adj. which according to the explanation of the numerous Gk. adjectives in o." Giles, Man.,

239.

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 117. Cf. Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, 1862, p. 15, where he makes the quahty of the thing essential *

to the idea of noun.

650

651

ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA)

n. The Adjectival or Appositional Use of the Substantive. Examples have already been given in tlie cliapter on tlie Sentence. Let one suffice here: h tQ 'lopSavj] woTaixQ (Mt. 3 6).^ Cf. further Lu. 24 19; Ac. 1 16; 3 14. This idiom is common enough in the N. T. I must demur, however, at this point to Winer's idea (Winer-Thayer, p. 236) that "a notion which should naturally be expressed by an adjective as an epithet, is sometimes, by a change What I object of construction, brought out by a substantive." "the N. T. saying that right in is to is the word "should." He :

:

is

:

:

by no means poor^

in adjectives,"

but wrong in urging that the

N. T. ought to use more. As already observed, substantives continued to be used in a descriptive sense not only in apposition, but also in the genitive. This original use of the substantive

Hence

never ceased.

useless to talk of "this substitution of

it is

a substantive for an adjective" and to explain it as "a Hebraistic mode of expression" due to "the want of adjectives in Hebrew"

and to "the peculiar vividness

of the Oriental languages" (p. 237).

He admits,

however, that the matter is not arbitrary, but the principal word stands in the genitive. There is this difference between the adjective as an epithet and the genitive. The two substan-

do not merge into one idea quite so completely. Winer's examples illustrate this point W^ell /xTjSe ifKiriKevaL evri wXovtov dSrjXorrjrt 17), IW ijjueTs eu KaivoT-riTL fcoTjs TvepiiraT'^awixev (Ro. 6 4), (1 Tim. 6 ^Xerruv to ar^pecona rrjs Trto-rews (Col. 2:5), 'Kojols ttjs xotP'Tos (Lu. tives

:

:

:

4:22),

OLKOvojJLOV TTJS

drijutas

(Ro.

1

:

(16

dSiKttts

26), rep pi]p.aTi

just the shade of difference

and the adjective that

:

8), KpLT-qs

rrjs

TTJs

adiKias (18

:

bwap-ews (Heb. 1:3), etc.

6), iradr]

It

was

between the substantive in the genitive

led to the expressions above.

Phrases like

analogous to the use of the adjective as substantive to be discussed directly. The use of vlos or TeKuov with the genitive is exactly like the Hebrew idiom TO. TTvevp-aTLKa TTJS

with

1?

and

the N. T.

is

Tovrjpias

(Eph. 6

extremely

Thus

:

common

12) are

the

in

vloh aireieias (Eph. 2

:

LXX

and

2), tc/cto (I)0}t6s

fairly so in

(Eph. 5

:

8),

But this "Hebraistic circumlocution" turns up in inscriptions and on coins,^ so that it is clearly not un-Greek. Deissmann, however, since the idiom is so common and many of the N. T. etc.

Cf. Farrar, C.k. Rynt., p. 88; K.-G., I, p. 272 f.; Brufj., Grioch. Gr., p. 415. tho later distinction between adj. and subst. see Schroeder, Uber die formelle Untersch. der Redet., 1874, pp. 195 ff. ' But his notion of adjs. "formed by the apostles themselves" vanishes 1

On

sadly in the light of tho papyri. * Deiss., B. S., p. 105 f. So vlds

rijs

ytpouaias, vlos

TTJs tr6\iu)s,

etc.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

652'

examples are quotations from the LXX or translations from the Aramaic, admits that the majority in the N. T. are due to "trans-

Hebraisms" and the

lation

The Adjective as

ni.

rest to analogical formation.

Simcox^ thinks that the

Substantive.

N. T. shows a more frequent use of this idiom than the Greek. But the earlier Greek shows abundant evidence

earlier

of the

use of the adjective without the substantive as a practical sub-

but not always.^ may be of any gender, according to the gender of substantive. So 6 koKos, 17 eprj/xos, to This is no peculiarity of Greek alone, though it has its XPVCFTov. own development in the substantival use of the adjective. Indeed the participle was often used as a substantive. Thus 6 airdpoiv (Mt. 13 3), ijyovi^euos (Mt. 2:6). In Ph. 3 8 we have the participle used as a substantive with the genitive, to virepkxou rrjs yvooaeoos. Cf. Lu. 16 1, TO. virdpxovTa avTOv. So ro e/iauroO (JVjj.4>opov (1 Cor. 10 33) where the adjective, like a substantive, has the genitive. With masculine adjectives (&) With Masculine Adjectives. the substantives naturally suggest themselves out of the context or the nature of the case.^ Thus in Mt. 11:5, tv4>'Kol avastantive, usually with the article,

Any Gender.

(a)

Such adjectives

:

:

:

:

^\k'KOvaiv KoX x^^ot TrepiTaTOvaLV, ktX.

Tim.

afiapTcSKovs (1

deov (8

:

15), ScKalov

:

With Feminine

:

rriv

TTjv :

x^'-P,

^jjpav

bptLvr]v

(19

:

4).

(Ro. 8

:

For 34),

777s

note

x^tp observe

rf}

:

tpol/mw Kal

7,

These are usually exam-

IV, ywi], rmepa, y\cc(raa.

Thus

(Mt. 23

e/c

Se^iS (Ac.

eldelas 17

2

yrj is

Heb. 11:29),

15;

:

rf?

rrjs vtto

I

follow

responsible for the 17

irepi-

epwv (Mt. 3:2),

rbv ovpavov (Lu. 17

:

tijs

24)

and urges that we do not refine too 39; Tit. 2:8). As examples of

sharply over e^ epavrias (Mk. 15 656s

7), €k\€ktu)v

:

12).

:

(Lu. 1:39),

In

18), etc.

Blass prefers nepiSos to the influence of

In Jas. 5

13).

16; 1 Jo. 3

Blass^ mainly in these examples.

(Mt. 3:5), oiKovnevqs (Ro. 10

:

Adjectives.

ples of the ellipsis of d86s,

X(^pos

Cor. 6:2),

a7ioi (1

ol

Sometimes only the context can determine

verov.

feminine gender in

Cf.

rod ayaOov (Ro. 5

20), 6 ayLos rod deov (Jo. 6: 69)

:

rod Tovqpov (Mt. 6

supply

the gender, as in Eph. 6 (c)

and

33), top aXrjdLvov (1 Jo. 5

and probably 6\}/i.nov,

1

:

(Lu. 3:5), Tolas (5

:

33).

compared with eis to. Se^td /xepr] (Jo. 21 noticed by Blass in rfj exop-euy (Lu. 13

17

:

:

6).

:

33),

:

1

Lang, of the N.

2

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 414; K.-G.,

I,

3

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

*

The rfj

ellipsis of rmepa is

kinovaji (Ac.

T., p. 91.

p. 140.

19), eKelvrjs

:

and Se^td (Mt. 6 3), ev Se^iS. But k Se^coj^ (2 34) may be

apLarepa

p.

266

lb., p.

f.

140

f.

16

:

11),

ADJECTIVES rfi

hkpq. (20

:

15),

il3d6iJiT]S

(Twepop (Mt. 11

23),

:

(Mt. 27 62),

eiravpcov

rf}

(Heb. 4 :4), ry

HLq.

3

Blass rightly supplies upa with d^'

:

ttj

4),

:

rijs

:

TTJs

(J-expi-

1).

But

45, as with

oxj/ias

(Ac. 21

e^rjs

in Lu. 7

rjs

(Lu. 13 32),

(Ac. 20:7),

o-a/^/Sdrcoi/

vs (2 Pet.

a(f>'

rfj tp'ltxi

:

twv

653

('EIIIOETa)

:

(Mt. 8 16), Trpcotas (Mt. 27: 1). To conclude the list of feminine examples with rfj wueovajt (Ac. 27:40) supply avpq., with kv rg 'EX\r}viKfj (Rev. 9:11) supply yXcoaaji (but cf. rfj 'E/3pai5t 5taXe/crco, Ac. 22 2), with TroXXds and 6Xt7as (Lu. 12 47 f.) supply xXTjyds, with :

:

:

But

Kar' I8lav (Mk. 6 31) and though stereotyped, may refer to 65c3. Cf. also Kara novas (Mk. 4 10) as an instance of 6o6s. So drj/jLoalg. (Ac. 16 37). Words like aoorripLos (Tit. 2:11), aicoviov (Jo. 6 47), evwe-

aro utas (Lu. 14 i8ia (1 Cor. 12

18) insert

:

:

^coi^jjs.

:

11),

:

:

:

(Heb. 12

plcTTaTov

:

of course, feminine, not masculine.

1) are,

See

chapter on Declensions.

The neuter

With the Neuter.

(d)

interesting examples.

Thus

vdaros is referred to.

So vdwp

is

number

furnishes a

ttottjplov \pvxpov

meant by

(Mt. 10

:

of

where

42),

to yXvKv Kal to ttlkpov

3:11). With kv XevKols (Jo. 20 12), one must insert IfxaTtoLs Cf. Top4>vpovv in Rev. 18 16. as with kv idoKaKots (Mt. 11:8). With Tov SioTreroCs (Ac. 19 35) Blass ^ suggests ayaXixaTos, and with (Jas.

:

:

:

t7]s yfjs

Blass).

Cf.

(Rev. 8

Td tp'ltov

eis

TO lepbv

:

7)

we must supply juepos ("not

(Mt. 21 23). In Mt. 6 meant,^ not mere evil. :

:

classical,"

13, dTro tov irovrjpou,

In Mt. 19 17 we most likely Sid/SoXos is have Trept TOV ayadov explained by 6 ayados, though the American Standard Version gives it 'that which is good.' But cf. Ro. 5 7. :

:

The number N. T.

is

of these neuter adjectives used substantively in the

large

and

varied, but the older

Greek shows abundant

same With prepositions in particular we meet with this use of the neuter. Thus ets to ixkaov (Jo. 20 19), kv tc3 kpvtttQ (Mt. 6:4), eis thing, especially in philosophical discus-

illustrations^ of the sions.

:

4>av€pbv

(Mk. 4

:

22),

p-tTo.

piKpbv (Mt. 26

:

73), kv ixkaco

(Mt. 10

:

16),

^paxv (Lu. 22 58), kv is the adverbial common Very (Jer. ado. 24:6). ay ets etc. Cf. usage of this neuter hke I3paxv (Ac. 5 :34), nupov (Mt. 26 39), novov (Mt. 8:8), to ttpQitov (Jo. 12 16), but the adjective's relaoUyu} (Ac. 26

:

28), kv

peyaXu (26

:

29), fieTa

:

:

:

tion to the adverb will receive special treatment.

See xi.

Cf.

tCo

Sometimes the neuter singular was used in a collective sense for the sum total (cf. English "the all"). Thus in Jo. 6 37, 39, The neuter plural is irav 6, 17 24 6, where persons are meant. ovTi.

:

:

1

lb., p. 141.

«

So Rev. Vers, uniformly.

»

W.-Th., p. 235.

Cf. Green,

Handb. to Gk. N.

T., p. 268.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

654

common

in this sense like

thus described.

is

LXX

the

masc). 1

10

:

Cf.

Gad

and rd

is

where

16),

:

/jltj

16)

:

3

:

1

rav

:

10; 8

where the universe

ovra (1 Cor. 1 irdLV

23 V; Test,

:

xii,

28).

174

B

in

(ace. sing,

Pat. Reub.

common

See also the

vofxov.)

:

= iravra

LXX (Thackeray, Grammar, p.

the neuter plural

collec-

Usually

f.).

concrete, however, as in rd opaTa Kal aopara Travra is

24), apxaia (2 Cor. 5

:

iravra (Col. 1

(Cf. also Ps. of Sol. 3

tive neuter in the

2

to.

ovra

(Helbing, p. 51) frequently has

rrav aprov,

(Col. 1

to.

:

thus explained.

17).

In Ro.

1

:

Cf. rd l^adea (Rev.

20, as

Winer^ points

re dtStos 8vvafXLs Kal deibTr\%. out, TO. aopara makes more concrete that in Eph. must confess 3 But one 10, kv tols eTrovpavioLs, it is things or relations. is, whether places, the idea clear what not In Jo. 3 12 eirlyeLa and h-wovpavLa seem to refer to truths. In r;

:

:

13, TveufxaTLKoXs Trvevp-aTiKo. avvKplvovres, a like ambiguity but the presence of \bjoLs inclines one to the notion that Paul is here combining spiritual ideas with spiritual words. The neuter singular with the article is very common for the expression of an abstract idea. One does not have to say that the adjective is here used instead of the abstract substantive, but merely as an 1

Cor. 2

:

exists,

abstract substantive. Cf. English "the beautiful and the good" Cf. with "beauty and goodness." This is good ancient Greek. also in the papyri to b'lKaiov Tb.P. 40 (b.c. 117) and {ih) to. Winer ^ was troubled over to bodiiiov ttJs Trtorreajs (1 Pet. Kad-fjKovTa. and said that no such adjective existed and therefore this 1 7) was a mere substantive. There was none in the lexica, but :

Deissmann^ has found a number of instances of the adjective in the papyri. So xpv<^ov 8okl{jl'lov, P.E.R. xii. 6 f (93 a.d.), 'good gold.' One need not be troubled over to yvosardv (Ro. 1 19) any more than over the other neuter adjectives. Cf. to xprifrrov tov 6eov (Ro. 2 4), to fxcopdv tov deov and TO aadepes tov deov (1 Cor. 1 .

:

:

:

25), TO afxeradeTOV t^s jSouXrjs

(2 Cor. 22).

It

4

:

is

17), to ahvvaTOV tov vbixov

:

17), to e\a(f)pdv

(Ro. 8

thus frequent with the genitive.

dvfxov

(Ro.

kaTLv

Trjs Tpo(f)r}s,

is

(Heb. 6

1

:

15).

expressed.

(1 Cor. 7: 19),

See Heb. 7:8.

we have

This also '6

(1

irXelov is

Cor. 15

:

:

ttjs

^Xti/'ecos

bwarov avTOV (9

3), to

Cf. also to Kar'

:

e/xe Trpo-

In Lu. 12 23, r) ^vxv TrXeroi/ because the abstract idea of thing :

a frequent Greek idiom. 11). 10), ravra (1 Cor. 6

Cf. ovdev

:

IV. Agreem.ent of Adjectives with Substantives. (a)

In Number.

It is

not necessary to repeat what has been

1 W.-Th., p. 235. Cf. lateness of the forms in -lk6s (only two in Horn.). Hoffmann, tjber die Entw. des Begr. des Griech. bei den Alten, p. 2. In 1 » 3. S., p. 259 f. ^ lb. Tim. 5 17 note SnrXijs (from -60s). :

ADJECTIVES ('EHIOETA)

X, vii, (6), on concord between and substantive in number. The normal thing is for adjective and substantive to agree in number. But one must not get the idea that "construction according to sense" of the grammarians is an anomaly. "The term is unobjectionable, provided we remember that constructions according to the meaning are generally older than those in which meaning is overridden by idiom or grammatical analogy."^ Thus there is no cause for assaid

on

055

this subject in chapter

adjective

tonishment in seeing eKda/i^oi. with 6 Xaos in Ac. 3 11, nor ttXtjOos Kpa^ovTes in Ac. 21 36. For concord in gender see chapter X, viii. (6) In Gender. Here again the construction according to sense is normal like arpa:

:

(Lu. 2:13), but ovpaulov in the

TtSs ovpavlov ati'Dwro)?'

the feminine

is

Attic idiom with

rcbv aixapTLwv

though

(Ezck. 16

agreement with the gender of the gen-

of

i^fXLavs

itive substantive,

:

same phrase

The N. T. does not have the

etc.).

(cf. al6:vLos,

Instead see

51).

LXX.

in the

it is still

Cf. rds qp.laas

ecos finlaovs rrjs

^aaiXdas

But avTrj and davfiaaTrj in Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12 11) are probably due to the Hebrew TiisT, the Hebrew using the feminine for abstract ideas, since it had no neuter. But even here in Ps. 117 23 the context has Ke4)a\riv yoovias.^ One other remark is to be made which is that when an adjective occurs with more than fxov

(Mk. 6

23).

:

:

:

:

one substantive

may

it

agree with the gender of the nearest, as in 1), be repeated with each, as in iracra

Ttaaav t^oKlv kol tottov (Lu. 10 86aLs ayadrf Kal

ttSj'

do^prjixa

(Ac. 4

kv TTolcp ovbjxaTi,

:

7),

:

rekeiov (Jas. 1

17)

:

and

kv iroia

dvpajjiei.

rj

or agree with the masculine rather than

the feminine or neuter, as in yviivol (Jas. 2 15). With the same gender there may be repetition (Mt. 4 23; 9 35) or not (Mt. :

:

:

12 :31). (c)

In Case.

For concord

in case see chapter

X,

ix.

The main

instances of variation here belong to the participle as in Ac. 15

22

f.),

and

in particular the

tions (Rev. 3 (rf)

Two

:

OR

12, etc.), as

More

Book

already shown.

as in Latin.^

25

But

:

7)

When two

Adjectives.

occur together the conjunction alTLconara (Ac.

is

The

»

Monro,

more adjectives

be used as in TroXXd koI ^apka and even ttoXXA Kal aXXa (xrip.eta (Jo. 20 30), :

see erepuv ttoXXwi^ (Ac. 15

Attributive Adjective.

a word joined on to another '

or

may

of the adjective with the article (Rev. 2

V.

:

of Revelation furnishes illustra-

The

:

35) antl the repetition

12).

:

adjective (from adjacco)

The

{tirWtTov).

adjective

is

by no

Iloin. Or., p. 118.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 238; Moulton, Prol., p. 59.

»

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 87.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

656

means the only bute like

attribute used with substantives. Thus the attribe substantive in apposition with another substantive, avdpdoirco oLKobejiroTr, (Mt. 13 tov deov 52), or a genitive, like

may

:

/jLaKpodvu'ia (1

3

14),

:

Pet. 3

:

or an adjunct, like

pronoun,

17

an adverb,

20), or

ttjs

ai'co

KK-qaeo^s

Kar eKKoyrju Trpodeais (Ro. 9

17

(Mt. 18

like to enov ovofxa

like

before the adjective or participle

:

When

20).^

it is,

(Ph.

a used

11), or

:

the article

is

of course, attributive, as in

Pet. 1 12). But adand participles may be attributive when no article is used. Thus with o-rpartSs ovpavlov (Lu. 2 13), v8o:p ^ccu (Jo. 4 10. Cf. TO v8o)p TO ^b)v in verse 11), nouoyevrjs deos (Jo. 1 18). The un6 KoXos (Jo. 10

11), kv

:

rfj

irapovaif oK-qddq, (2

:

jectives

:

:

:

usual position of the attributive adjective, like 6 ox^os toXvs (Jo. idea" where the substantive and adjective form "a composite

12:9), (Jebb, Soph. 0. T., pp. 1199 the papyri, O.P. 99, ttjs inrapxovarjs

(Moulton,

CI.

a.va(jTpo4>y]s

-ko.t poTvapaboTov

TzapaboTov

Rev.,

may

auroj

be illustrated from

fJLrjTpLKrjs

Cf. also

1904, p. 154). Pet. 1

(1

may

ff.),

:

18),

k

oktas TpiaTeyov ttjs

p.aTalas v/xwv

where, however,

very well be predicate (see

ivaTpo-

La

Cf. French

vi).

Rcpuhlique Franqaise.

The Predicate

VI.

ticiple) is

common

Adjective.

The

as a predicate, as

is

adjective (including par-

Monro ^

the substantive.

considers the substantive in the predicate adjectival.

noun, adverb,

As examples note

etc.

ttoXXoi

Cf. pro-

(Mk. 5:9),

o/xota

(Mt. 13 31), (7coT77ptos (Tit. 2 11), tTotiia (Lu. 14 17), ^adb (Jo. 4 11), bibaaKwv (Mt. 7:29). But adjectives are predicate without a copula, as in Tt ixe Xeyets ayadbv (Mk. 10 18), 6 iroL-qaas fxe :

:

:

:

:

5:11;

vjirj

(Jo.

18),

fJ.eya\ri

ttj

cf.

7

(fxxivy

:

23), aoairavov drjaco to evayyekLOV (1 Cor. 9

(Ac. 26

:

6.Trapa(3aTOV

24),

ex€L

:

Upcoavvrjv

Ti]v

(Heb. 7: 24). Cf. Mt. 4 18 with Mk. 1 7; 1 Cor. 11:5. As examples of the verbal in -tos take iradrjTos (Ac. 26 23) and 71^0?cTov (Ac. 4 10) with which last compare the attributive use in Ac. 4 16 yvuffTov a-qiietov. Cf. Mk. 3:1. As further interesting examples of the predicate adjective, note 6X0% (Jo. 9:34), Sokl/jlol (i>avo:p.ev (2 Cor. 13 1.3), ttp^jtos (Jo. 20 7), i;7ti7s (Mt. 12 4), ebpalos (1 Cor. 7:37), bpdbs (Ac. 14 10), ixbvo^ (Lu. 24 18; cf. Mt. 14 Cf. oKov in Lu. 13 21. The distinction between the 23), etc. :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

attributive adjective

and the predicate adjective

lies in

that the predicate presents an additional statement,

main

point, while the attributive

is

is

just this,

indeed the

an incidental description of is made. Cf. Ac. 4 10

the substantive about which the statement

and 16 above 1

for

Cf. K.-G.,

both uses of yvwaTov. I,

pp. 268

ff.

2

:

Cf. TavTas in Ac. 1 Horn. Gr., p. 117.

:

5.

657

ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA)

This distinct predication* with the adjective in an obHque case is seen in tovto aXrjdis e'iprjKas (Jo. 4 18) and is a classical idiom.^ Note the use of irapra as predicate for 6 Beds in 1 Cor. 15 28 as :

:

with Xpiaros in Col. 3:11 for the totality of things. VII. Adjective Rather than Adverb. See ch. XII, ix, for disCf. irpuiTos cussion of this subject. A few items are added here. 10

Xeyet (Ro.

McoLio-Tjs

TcpuiTov 8i.aK\ayr]dL

:

'Moses

19),

tQ dSeX^o;

(tov

is

(Mt. 5

the :

who says,' with 'Be reconciled with

jfirst

24),

In Mt. 10 2 Trpcoros first thing that you do.' means that first in the list is Simon, whereas -KpOirov, in Jo. 1:41, means that Andrew finds his brother Simon as the first thing which he does. JlpCiTov ixOvv (Mt. 17 27) means the first Cf. h ei^ol wpcoTco (1 Tim. 1 IG), 'me as chief.' fish that came up. Tr/acbrjj in Lu. 2 2 is not certain, but most jorobThe exact idea of were two enrolments under Cyrenius. there ably Luke's idea is that With p.6vos and Born at Bethlehem? Christ Was Cf. Ramsay, be observed. Take is to apexo^priaev ttoXlv like distinction /jiopov a 15) and av p-bvos TapoLKets 'lepovffoKrjpL ets TO opos avTos p.6vos (Jo. 6 (Lu. 24 18). The difference is much hke that between the EngSo in Lu. 9 36, evpedrj 'Irjaovs pbvos, lish "alone" and "only." 'Jesus was found alone,' and in Mt. 17: 8 (cf. Mk. 9:8), ohh'tva

thy brother as the

:

llncov

:

:

:

:

:

:

dhov

ei

ixi]

ovK dpi

avrov 'Irjaovv pbvov,

fjibvos

(Jo. 16

:

adjective, not adverb.

is

it

32) with ov pbvov in Ac. 21

:

Cf.

Cf. 2 Jo.

13.

1. Contrast pbvov in Mt. 8 8 with pbvos in Mt. 14 23. There are some examples where either adverb or adjective would make good sense,^ as in Mk. 6 8, prjbh el p-q pa^bov pbvov, where D reads pbvr^v; Ac. 11 19, p-qbevL el pi) pbvov 'louSatots, where D has pbvots; and 1 Jo. 5 6, OVK ev tQ) vbarL pbvov, where B reads pbvw. But this is not all. The Greek often uses an adjective where other languages prefer adverbs or prepositional phrases. Latin and English have similar :

:

:

:

:

Naturally this idiom is common in For time note bevTepatoi rfKQopev (Ac. 28 13), 'we came second-day men' ('on the second day'). Cf. TeTapraios Jo. 11: 39. D has likewise irepivraXoi in Ac. 20 6. So yevbpevat dpdpival expressions for other ideas.^

Homer.^

:

:

eirl

TO pvripelov (Lu. 24:22), eiridr^

(2 Cor. 8

VIII.

:

17),

e4>vldL0s

(Lu. 21:34), avdalperos

durawepos (Ph. 3:5).

The Personal

Construction.

This matter belongs more

properly to indirect discourse and the participle, but Monro,

it calls

p. 119.

"

To.

N. T. Ck., p. 141. ' Seymour, Horn. Lan^. and Verse, and adv. sec Bru^., Gricch. Gr., ]>. 41G

"

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 89.

» *

ib.,

Blass, Gr. of

p. 79. f.;

On

for

the relation between adj.

Clyde, Gk. Synt.,

p.

40

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

658

The Greeks were more fond of the personal we Enghsh are. Farrar indeed doubts if Greek impersonal verb. But kyevero in a passage like Lu. 1 8

word

just a

here.

construction than

has a true

^

:

comes close to it. Cf. Lu. 1 23. We have fewer examples in the N. T. of the personal construction, none in truth with either drjXos :

(1 Cor. 15

27

:

we do have

impersonal construction) or with

is

eark

otl

4)avepovfievoL

Cf. XpLdTos K-qpvaaiTai otl in 1 Cor. 15

:

But

4>avep6'i.

Xpiarov (2Cor. 3:3).

ewLCTToKri

Note

12.

also a^tos

'iva

but the impersonal construction is found with diKaLou in Ph. 1 7. See also kavos 'iva in Mt. 8 8. Aumros occurs with the infinitive (2 Tim. 1 12). This personal construction Cf. SoKet is probably due to assimilation of gender by analogy .^ \v(Tco (Jo.

1

27),

:

:

:

:

o-o06s

eimt (1 Cor. 3

18), perfectly regular

:

See good example in 1 Cor. 15 9. IX. Adjectives Used with Cases.

predicate nominative.

:

Examples were given under

the various oblique cases of adjectives that were construed with

A mere mention of the matter is all that is reThus the genitive appears with ewxos davarov (Mt.

the several cases.

quired here.

26

:

66), the ablative

tive (Mt.

14

:

14),

20

the ace. with

tive with evoxos 8),

with

rfi

adjective

Kapblq, is,

Trpos iravTas

(Lu. 24

:

(Eph. 2

biad-qKu^v

Oyuotos vlbv

Trpos Tov Oebv

(Mt. 5

Kpiaei

rf?

ra

Trtcrros

the instrumental with laovs

ppaSels

tuv

^kvoi

and accusative with

1)

:

:

21)

rnjuv

(Heb. 2

and koKov

(Mt. 20

:

:

:

(Gal. 6

:

10), TTtcrros ev eXaxtcTTO) (Lu.

16

:

:

:

13

f.

The

10), /3pa5us els

X. Adjectives with the Infinitive and Clauses.

Thus

(Mt. 18

the locative with

Cf. locative in Col. 2

25).

(Rev.

the da-

19).

:

occur with adjectives,

a case.

17),

aoi lariv

12),

the da-

of course, used with various prepositions, as to ayadov

opyrjv (Jas. 1

known

12),

avdpcoirov

it

is

as the infinitive should

The

If cases

can

natural that the verbal substantive

come within that idiom and be

in

case of the infinitive will vary with the adjective.

in a^ios

Kkit]drivai

the genitive case.

KccXvaaL (Ac. 11: 17)

In the case of

(Lu. 15

:

19) the infinitive is

Cf. also a^tos I'm \v(xw (Jo. 1

we have

iKavds jSaaTaaai

:

27).

probably in

With hwaTos

the accusative of general reference.

(Mt. 3:11)

we may

see either the

accusative of general reference, as above, or the dative, according

form and the common case with iKavos. (Mt. 8:8). The instances of both infinitive and tva are numerous in the N. T. As specimens of the infinitive and preposition after the adjective, take raxi^s ds to Indeed the genitive &Kod(7aL, jSpaSus els to XaXrjaat, (Jas. 1 19). to the original idea of the

Cf. also IKavos

'iva

eiaeXdys

:

»

Gk. Synt.,

p. 89.

^

Middleton, Anal, in gynt.,

p. 15.

:

ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA) article tov

659

with the infinitive occurs with adjectives where

not naturally be looked Cf. eroLnos

for, as in eToiixol kafxeu rod apeXeiv (Ac.

iropeveadaL (Lu.

elfxi

22

:

33).

But

it

would

23

:

15),

see further ^padets rod

TnareveLv (Lu. 24:25).

XI.

The Adjective as Adverb.

This subject has been treated on the Cases as well as in the one on Adverbs. Hence a few words will suffice here. The border line between adjective in the nominative and adverb gets very dim sometimes. Thus in English we say "I am well," "He spoke well." Farrar^ even says that it is "more correct" to use an adverb than an adin the chapter

jective in a phrase like aaixevos

eUov. But that is going too far quotes Milton (Par. Lost, vii, 161), "Meanwhile inhabit lax," and Shakespeare (Taming of Shrew, I,

even i,

if

89),

tween

we

antimeria.

call it

"Thou

didst

avaoTiqdL

it

vfxds

He

excellent."

We

can see the difference be-

14

and

dpdais

opBos (Ac.

:

10)

tKpLvas (Lu,

But, as already observed, the difference between

7 :43).

and nbvco Hence it becomes p.bvov

grows faint in 1 Jo, 5 6 and similar examples. very easy for the adjective form in the accusative to be used indiscriminately as adverb where the adjective idea disappears. Thus only the context can tell whether p.bvov is adjective (Jo. 8 29) or adverb (Gal. 1 23). So as to p.iKp6v (Jo. 7 33 and 16 19), Tvo\i) (Lu. 12:48 and Ro. 3 2), oMyov (Mk. 1 19), etc. UpuTov, for instance, is very common as an adverb (cf Mt. 7 5, and even ro irpwrou is found, Jo. 10 :40), but xpcorws occurs only once (Ac. 11:26). It is needless to multiply here examples hke these. Other cases are used besides the accusative to make adverbs from adjectives, as the ablative in Trpcbrcos above, the geni:

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

tive as opov (Jo.

(Ac. 16 :37).

4 :36), the associative-instrumental as drjpoaia 5:9). All degrees of comparison

Cf. ttoXXw (Ro.

furnish adverbs, thus toXv (Ro. 3 15),

paXcara (Ac. 20

parative

is

:

the

:

38).

:

2; 2 Cor. 8: 22),

The accusative

common adverb

TrXeoi'

(Jo. 21

singular of the

com-

of that degree as irepicraoTepov

(Heb. 7: 15), but see TrepLaaorepcos (2 Cor, 1 12). In the superlative both the singular as irpdrov (Lu. 6 42) and the plural as poKiara (above). These examples sufficiently illustrate the prin:

:

ciples involved.

XII. (a) first

The

Positive Adjective.

Relative Contrast. In discussing the positive adjective one must not get the idea that the positive was originally

the absolute idea of the adjective as distinct from the comparative or superlative. This notion of absolute goodness or great1

Gk. Synt.,

p. 90.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

660

ness, etc., is itself later

Indeed

than the notion of comparison.^

has a relative sense and suggests the opposite, And then many of the oldest comas light implies darkness. parative forms have no positive at all and never did have, like More of this under the afxcporepos, apLcrrepos, jSeXrepos, Sevrepos, etc. the adjective

itself

comparative.

The

jective per se (like originally this

point to get hold of just here

many

is

that the ad-

other words) implies contrast, and that

what the comparative form meant. Thus in in -repos have no notion of greater or

is

Homer some comparatives less degree,

the idea of duality, but merely contrast, like dyikvrkpa

as opposed to male, dpearepos as opposed to valley, apLarepos op-

posed to

and

right, Se^lrepos

opposed to

in TO irepLaaov tovtwv (Mt. 5 (6)

left, ijntTepos

:

vnkrepos

37).

Used as Comparative or Superlative, With

tion of the relative contrast in the adjective

the comparative one

and the

In Lu.

1

:

this no-

used

still

42, tvKoyqixkvri av kv yv-

we do not have a mere Hebraism, though a very

one in this translation from the Aramaic Hebrew has no degrees of comparison at

use of

first

not surprised to find the positive

is

alongside of the comparative. vaL^iv,

opposed to

Cf. the comparative idea (and ablative case after)

vice versa."^

natural

The

talk of Elizabeth.

and has to resort to Greek writers show Homer and other early But

circumlocutions.^

all

a similar idiom, like 8la dedwv, bla yvvaiKwv (Eurip., Ale, 471).* Other examples occur in the N. T., Uke ayta aylwv (Heb. 9 2 f., frequent in the LXX), Trola evroKri ixeyaXr] kv rw vopc^} (Mt. 22 36). Cf. /SacrtXeus j3aaL\eccv (Rev. 19 16), KvpLOS twv KvpievbvTwv (1 Tim. :

:

:

6:15), ToD

aiuivos

The vernacular

Twp alwvcov (Eph. 3:21).

kolvt]

B.U. I, 229, {Herm. ayadojv, Inscription of Thera 1901, Kai ixeyakwv /xeYoiXcoi' T. IV, 61. Cf. Radermacher, N. Herondas depixa depua, p. 445), uses repetition of the adjective, as in

Gr.,

p. 57.

(Mt. 24

:

The

12).

the majority

Cf. is

ixeyciKot fxeyaXoL,

positive suggests contrast clearly in tuv ttoWuiu ol ttoXXoI

in

Ro. 5

:

15, 19; 1 Cor. 10

the idea, a comparative notion.

:

33.

Here

Cf. Paul's use of

and Matthew's 6 TrXeTo-ros oxXos (21 8). oxXos and Lu. 7:11 oxXos ttoXus, and in 2 Cor. 8 15 TO ttoXu and to oKlyov. Hence it is not surprising in Lu. 16 10 to see kv €\ax'i-(TTco and kv ttoXXco side by side (cf kv oKlyu) 19 also eXaxtfrros and Kal kv ixeybXco in Ac. 26 29), as in Mt. 5

Tovs T\eiovas (1 Cor. 9

See also

Mk.

12

:

37

:

19)

:

6 ttoXus

:

.

:

:

1

2 » *

:

Cf. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft i, 1893, p. 7 f. Seymour, Horn. Lang, and Verse, p. 60. Cf. K.-G., II, p. 21. C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 64. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft i, p. 9.

ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA)

661

Cf. also Mt. 22 38. In we have an impUed comparison.^ The positive may be used with prep(c) With Prepositions. ositions also where comparison is implied. Thus d/iaprcoXoi irapa Winer ^ properly compares this iravTas tovs VaKiXaiovs (Lu. 13 2).

are set over against each other.

fjLeyas

Ac. 26

:

:

24, ra TroXXd ypafifiara,

:

idiom with the use of

cos

Heb. 3

in

:

2, for in

the next verse the

author uses TrXetoj'os do^rjs as the sense of verse 2. But in the LXX this is a very common idiom ^ and it is found in the classical Greek. The correct text in Lu. 18 14 (NBL) has also dediKatufxepos Trap' :

eKtivov.

Cf. d^ia irpos in Ro. 8

:

Comparison Implied by

{(i)

18.

Once more the

V'

positive

may

not necessary, in view of the preceding discussion, to suggest the "omission" of fxdWov.* It is true that we have only one such example in the N. T., koXov (xol kcnv elceKOtiv

occur with

It is

rj.

(Mt. 18 8). Cf. Mk. 9 43, 45. But the LXX again many illustrations^ like Xeu/coi (Gen. 49 12). The ancient Greek also is not without parallels. And there are N. T. examples, as in LXX, of verbs so employed like SeXco (1 Cor. 14 19) and t)

^XrjdrjpaL

:

:

furnishes

t]

:

r}

:

and substantives as xapd earaL (Lu. 15 Older Greek waiters show this idiom with substantives and 7). verbs.^ In Mt. 18 8 we have the positive adjective both before and after as kvWov x^^ov. But cf. 2 Tim. 3 4 for comparative before and positive after. (Lu. 17

XucrtreXet ^

:

2)

t?

:

:

?;

fi

:

After the three grades of comparison (e) In Absolute Sense. were once established, analogy worked to form and use positive, comparative and superlative. And sometimes the positive occurs in the absolute sense. So we jBnd Christ discussing the absolute meaning of the positive ayaOos in Mt. 19 17 (Mk. 10 18). Thus it comes to pass that sometimes the positive is more absolute than comparative or superlative which are relative of neces:

:

God

sity.

and

alone ajaOos in this sense, while others are

is

Our God,

0k\TL(rToi.

6 ayaOos debs, is

/SeXrioj^es

higher in ideal and fact

than Jupiter Maximus or Zeus apiaTos -qSe p-tyLcrTos.'' Of koKos the opposite is oh koKos and this is not the positive attribute alaxpbs. In Mt. 17:4 we find Peter saying fervently Ka\6v koTiv rjixas code (xvai.

"The

positive represents the highest absolute idea of a

quality and cannot therefore be increased." Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

'

Blasfl,

2

W.-Th.,

*

Though Blasa

•»

C. and

•

W.-Th.,

p. 113.

p. 240.

S., p.

p.

^

3

C. and

S., p.

64.

docs, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 143.

04; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 143; W.-Th., p. 241.

240

f.

»

Schwab, Hist. Synt.

etc..

Heft

i,

p. 9.

»

jb.^ p. 19.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

662

The Comparative Adjective (o-iryKpiTiKov ovojia). or Duality. On the forms see chapter VII, n, Contrast (a) As already observed, the first use of the comparative form

XIII.

3.

was to express contrast or duahty.^ This is clear Se^td occurs in the same verse. (Mt. 6:3), though

in

uses de^LTepos as comparative.

dpto-repa

17

But Homer

17

Cf. also aix<^bTtpos, rineTepos,

pos, erepos, eKarepos, oTrorepos, TTorepos,

ujuere-

where the notion of two

is

Contrast between two or duality, therefore, is clear They will receive separate treatment later. in these pronouns. Here they are merely used to illustrate the origin of the compara"AXXos (Latin alius) is also comparative,^ *dX-tos. So tive form. accentuated.

is de^-Los^

which explains the disappearance

the comparative endings

the oldest comparative forms are not formed such, but from their

own

One

of de^irepos.

of

This leads one to remark that

is -los.

Thus

roots.

devrepos,

from positives as which is obviously

comparative and expresses duality, has no positive form. Cf. and the examples just mentioned.^ This original comparative need not be formed from an adjective at all, but from a substantive like iSaa-iXevTepos, Kvvrepos, etc., in Homer where the

aiJL
comparative expresses the possession of the quality "in contradistinction to objects which are without it" (Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 82). So Tporepos (from the adverb rpo) is not 'more forward,' but forward' in opposition to mrepos, backward.' Cf Brugmann, So e^corepos Cf. kXevdepos, 'free to come.' Griech. Gr., p. 415. These oldest forms represent is 'outside,' not 'more outside.' the original meaning which was not the comparison of greater '

'

or

less,

.

not a matter of degree, but a question of contrast or

So

duahty.^

jSeXrepos, aneivcov

There

have no positive forms.

is

indeed a distinct weakening of this original duality in adjectives as in pronouns.^ Cf. the dropping of the dual endings. Thus in the N.T. Trporepos as an adjective occurs only once, Kara rrjv Tporepav avaoTpo^ilv (Eph. 4: 22). It is rare in the papyri (Moulton, Prol., p. 79).

Elsewhere

-/rpcoros

holds the field

or persons are in view, like

dXXos (20

:

4), etc.

contemplated,

'first

Cf. our

Trpcoros

story'

'first

And

volume,' etc.

vives only ten times

(cf.

2 Cor.

p.ov

1

:

when only two (Jo.

1

:

15),

when only two

Moulton, lb.

*

Schwab, Hist. Synt.

B

lb., pp. 4ff.

6

Moulton,

Prol., p.

d. griech.

77

f.;

and

stories are

as an adverb Tporepov sur-

15), while wpoiTov

is

2 Brug., Grundr. vergl. Gr., II, Prol., pp. 77 ff. Transl. (Comp. Gr.), vol. II, p. 132.

»

»

objects

Trpcoros

Comp., Heft

i,

p. 5.

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1903, p. 154.

very comi,

p. 420.

ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA) Luke does not use

mon.

Trpwros in

663 adverb) so that

Trporepos (adjective or

Ac, 1:1 with X670S does not imply

finds Trporepos only once in the Grenfell-Hunt

Moulton^ volumes of papyri so Tpiros.

that this dual form vanishes before the superlative

(Winer-Thayer,

-rrpCjTos.

Winer

matter rightly and calls it a Latin point of view to insist on "former" and "latter" in Greek, a thing that the ancients did not do. (6)

Degree.

p. 244) sees this

The next

step

was

for the notion of degree to

The notion of "two-ness" remained, but it had the added idea of more in degree. They run along then parallel with each other. The comparative form, therefore, come

into the comparative.

has two ideas, that of contrast or duality (Gegensatz) and of the relative comparative {Steigerung) though the first was the original.2 Relative comparison is, of course, the dominant idea in ,

most of the N. T. examples, though, as already remarked, the notion of duality always earai

11

:

(Mt. 10:

lies in

17), (To4)
and

Thus

the background.

15), ^efSaiorepov (2 Pet. 1

:

av^Krorepov

19), els to Kpetaaop (1

IcrxvpoTepov (1 Cor. 1

:

Cor.

25).

(c) Without Suffixes. But the comparative did not always use the comparative suffixes, though this was usual. Sometimes liaWov was employed with the positive, though this idiom is not

very frequent in the N. T. Thus we find piaWov with koXos (Mk. 9 42), with fxaKapLov (Ac. 20 35), with apajKala (1 Cor. 12 22), with TToXXd (Gal. 4:27). Once indeed (2 Tim. 3 4) ^uSXXoi' occurs with one adjective before r; and not with the other after 7). :

:

:

:

The Greeks preferred to put both qualities in the comparative when two adjectives were compared.^ But here we have
ij

:

example occurs in the N. T. of two comparatives with rJ, but Ro. 9 12 we have 6 jxel^cov dovXevaet tc3 eXaaaovL and in Heb. 1 :

in :

4,

ToaovT(j^ Kpe'iTTOiv yevofxevos oaoi SiacfiopcoTepov.

Double Comparison.

Sometimes indeed fxaWov occurs This applies to adjectives and adverbs. Thus naWou irtpLcrabTipov (Mk. 7 36), irepiacroTepois fxaXKou

i

(d)

with the comparative form

itself.

:

(2 Cor. 7:13).

Cf. trt

naWov

Kal

ixaWov (Ph.

1

:

9), TrepLaaorepov

In KarabrfKov (Heb. 7:15). Recall also the double comparative form like vernacular English "lesser," iiti^orkpav (3 Jo. 4), and the comparative on the superlative eXaxtarorcpos (Eph. 3:8. It oc>

Prol., p. 79.

»

Schwab, Hiet. Syut.

etc., Ileft

i,

p. LM

f.

^

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 42.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

664

curs in Test,

Pat. Jos. 17

xii,

:

is due to the fading and the desire for em^schylus /ietfoi'cbrepos and virepre-

All this

8).

of the force of the comparative suffix

phasis.

Homer

purepos,

Xenophon

has

x^^poTepos, kaxO'T<^'''^pos,

Aristophanes

Cf.

irpoTepaiTepos.

Schwab, Hist. Syntax etc., Heft iii, p. 60. Modern Greek vernacular has TrXeiorepos and x^i-porepos. The papyri give illustrations (Moulton, Prol., p. 236). Cf. Latin double See list in Jannaris, Hist. This double comparative is due to analogy and

like irpec^vTepuiTepa

comparative

dex-ter-ior, sinis-ter-ior.

Gk. Gr., p. 147. weakened sense of the form (Middleton, Analogij in Syntax, p. 38). Other means of strengthening the comparative were the accusa-

adverb

tive

as in

ttoXu,

Heb. 12

:

9,

25

2 Cor. 8

(cf.

particular the instrumental ttoXXw, as in Lu. 18

12

:

we have

22

:

39.

:

22),

In

ttoXXw ixoKKov over against aadevearepa.

23 note xoXXw /iSXXov KpeTaaov where

and 1

in

Cor.

But

in

emphasis is due to Paul's struggling emotion. The ancient Greek used all these devices very often. Cf. Schwab, Hist. Syntax, etc.. Heft Blass {Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 143) rightly observes that iii, pp. 59 ff. in 2 Cor. 12 9 fj5to-Ta ixaWov are not to be taken together. The older Greek used also jueya and ixaKpco to strengthen the comparison. Ph.

1

:

all

this

:

Cf.

Mayer, Verstarkung, Umschreihung und Entwertung der Com-

parationsgrade in der dlteren Grdcitdt, 1891, p. 16 (e)

Without Object of Comparison.

f.

Sometimes the com-

used absolutely. It is beside the mark to say with Clyde ^ that this idiom occurs "through politeness for the positive." It is not used for the positive. It is true that no obparative form

is

comparison

ject of

is

is because the context In rapid familiar conversation also thinks that sometimes the

expressed, but that

makes this would often be true. Blass ^ comparative is no more than a positive. the point perfectly clear.

that the point of comparison the context."

The

Tol-qaov Taxet-ov (Jo.

point 13

:

is

27)

may

Winer ^ more

justly holds

"ordinarily be gathered from

Thus

always in the context.

may mean more

6 TroteZs

quickly than Judas

would have done but for the exposure. Note that this is a conversation and Judas would understand. In Heb. 13 19 irepLaaoTepcos and Tax^i-ov correspond easily, and in verse 23,€aj' Taxeiov epxriTo-h None of the examples perhaps it means if he come before I leave. of Blass are convincing, for irpeajSiiTepos, though used of an official, is one who is older (elder) as compared with vecorepos, and the bishop The point, of course, lies is not to be a neophyte (1 Tim. 3:6). :

'

1

2

Gk. Svnt., p. 41. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

'

p. 142.

'

W.-Th., p. 242.

ADJECTIVES ('EHIGETa) more 154

in length of experience

than of age.

finds in the papyri 6 wpea^vrepos 6

f.)

Pap. Lugd. A, 35

TL veiOTepov

Sainovearepovs is

an

{B. S,, p.

ofHcial title.

In Ac. 17: 21 Kaivorepop means, newer than what they had recently heard.

when he came in (Plato, Protagoras Then again, in Ac. 17: 22, Setcrt-

Socrates said to Hippocrates JUT?

Deissmann KufjLrjs,

(Ptol. Per.).

f.

of course, something

309 C):

665

more

ayyeWeis;

religious (or superstitious, as the case

a matter for exegesis.

I prefer religious)

may be,

than ordinary or than

I

had supposed. One does not need to deny the "elative" comparative sense of "very"^ here and elsewhere. The clative comparative is still comparative. But Blass^ denies even the elative comparative in a number of these examples.

This

is

to a certain

extent to surrender to translation the true interpretation of the Greek idiom. In Ac. 18 2G aKpi^kcnepov k^WevTo teaches that :

Apollos received more accurate information than he had previously had. Cf. k^eTaad-qaeraL wepl tovtou aKpL^karepov, B.U. 388 (ii/A.D.).

Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439. So in Ac. 24 22 aKpLJSeaTepov tl8w means that Felix more accurately than one would suppose, :

and in verse 26 TrvKvorepov shows that he sent for Paul more frequently than he had been doing before. Ac. 25 10 koWiov eTcyLvuaKeLs is an interesting example. Paul hints that Festus knows his innocence better than he is willing to admit. Cf. ^eknov av :

yLvu}(TKeLs (2

Tim.

1

:

18), 'better

than

BeXrtcov occurs in the papyri

I.'

as adjective, though not in the N. T.

Thus one could go through the rather numerous examples of elative comparative adjectives and adverbs in the N. T. and show that with proper attention all

to the context the point of comparison appears plainly enough.

The comparative even without

the expressed object of comparison So in Ac. 27 13 aaaov irapeKeyovTo clearly means 'nearer than they could do before' (cf. irapakeyonevoL in verse Again in Jo. 4: 52 Kop^/brepov eaxev (note the construction) is 8). 'better than before the word of Christ was spoken.' As further illustrations, not to overdo the point, note (jlolXXov in 2 Cor. 7: 71 is

not just the positive.

(cf.

Ph.

1

:

12), (TTrovdaidTepos in 2 Cor.

airovSaioTepojs in

Ph. 2

15), fxel^oves (2 Pet.

expression for

ol

one

Moulton,

in Ac. 4 »

:

28

(cf. 1

Th. 2

8 :

:

17

2 Tim.

(cf.

1

17), To\nr]poT€pcos

2:11), Karoorepa in Eph. 4

:

9.

:

and

17)

(Ro. 15:

The common

and tovs irXeiovas (1 Cor. 9 19) 'the majority' should occasion no difficulty. In free trans-

lation •

:

:

wXeiovs (Ac. 19:32),

may

sometimes use 'very' or

He

Prol., p. 236.

10 4>avtp6Tipov, 10

:

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 142.

28

:

'rather,'

but this

is

notes some "dative comparatives" in D,

pkXriop.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

666

merely the resultant idea. Cf. erkpoLs XoyoLs irXeioaLv (Ac. 2 40). The older Greek shows this idiom.^ This is merely the disjunctive conjunc(/) Followed by vtion. But is not common in the N. T. in this connection. Indeed Blass^ considers that it does not occur where any other construction would be perfectly clear. As is well known in the ancient Greek, r} is not common after Tr\eloov and eXarTcov with numerals. This use of the comparative as a mere parenthesis is in the papyri. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438. O.P. 274 (I/a.d.) TrXeio; TrjxeLs hvea. Cf. Schwab, Hist. Syntax, Heft ii, pp. 84 ff. Cf. also cTrdi'co in Mk. 14 5 and 1 Cor. 15 6, where it has no effect on the construction. In Mt. 5 20 there is an ellipsis (TrXelov twv ^ap.), 'than that of the Pharisees.' So in Mt. 26 53 TrXetco 86}8eKa XeyLcoms occurs with no change in the case of XejLcopas. In Ac. 4 22; 23 13; 24 11 likewise r? is absent without change of case. So in 5e/ca, for Ac. 25 6 ou TrXetous oktw here does not go with TrXetous. But in Lu. 9 13 we do find ovk elalu fjijuv TrXelov aproL Trevre. And in 1 Tim. 5 9 the ablative construction occurs. In justification of Blass' point ^ above, he points out that with two adjectives we have r? (2 Tim. 3:4); with a conjunction, as eyyvrepov rj ore (Ro. 13 11); with an infinitive, eu/coTrcorepoj' eiaeXdelv r/ (elaeXdelv to be repeated, Mt. 19:24. Cf. Ac. 20:35); with a genitive (same form as the ablative would be if r; were absent), like vpLuiv aKoveiv naWov rod Beov (Ac. 4 19); with a dative, like aueKrorepov 15). These are all pertinent yfj ^oSoiJLwv fj rfj ToXa eKeivrj (Mt. 10 and striking examples. There remain others (against Blass' view) which are not so justified, like irXelovas fxadrjras TOLel 'loiCLvqs :

r)

r?

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

r)

:

r/

fj

:

:

:

rj

:

:

rj

4:1), riyairricrav (xaXKov to ctkotos r) to
:

N. T. (g)

Followed by the Ablative.

common means we must take

The

ablative

is

the most

of expressing the standard of the comparison: so

the case, and not as genitive.

As remarked

in the

chapter on the cases, this ablative construction seems rather more in the N. T. than in the papyri. It is found in Homer .^ In the old Sanskrit the ablative was found with comparatives,^ though occasionally the locative or the instrumental appeared.

common

1

2

' * ^

Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft ii, p. 178; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 107 f. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 316, sustains him. Monro, Horn., Gr., p. 109. Ziemer, Vergl. Synt. der ludoger. Comp., 1884, pp. 29 ff.

p. 143.

ADJECTIVES ("EniGETA)

667

Indeed the various constructions after the comparative (particle r), case, preposition) occur in the other Indo-Germanic lan-

like

Schwab 2 estimates that

guages. ^

in Attic prose the ablative after

the comparative stands in relation to

18 to as

Blass^ thinks that in the

1.

common

in this

r/

kolvti

as 5.5 to

idiom as in Attic prose.

is

in

poetry

three times

So in the N. T.

the usual construction after the comparative.

is

and

1

the ablative

As

this

further ex-

amples observe nei^up tovtuv (Mk. 12 31), /letfwj/ rod Trarpos wcov (Jo. 4 12), TrXeov tovtcov (Jo. 21 15), co(f)coTepou tCjv apOpcoircov :

:

:

(1 Cor. 1

25), etc.

:

comparison (Tvvrj

is

a

Cf. 1 Jo. 3

little

20; Heb. 7

:

:

Sometimes the

26.

complicated, as in Mt. 5 20, :

irXelop tojv ypaixnarecov,

where righteousness' '

is

ri

5t/cato-

dropped

in the

v/jlCiv

second member.

Note TrXetoj' as a fixed or stereotyped form.* Cf. also Jo. 5 36. In Mt. 21 36, aWovs SouXovs 7r\eiovas rCiv irpdoTOiv, note the use of comparative and superlative side by side. {h) Followed by Prepositions. Prepositions occur not infrequently after the comparative. We have already seen the positive so used with irapa, and irpos. Wellhausen^ considers this positive use like the Aramaic. In the classical Greek we see beginnings of this usage.^ In the modern Greek, the normaF way of expressing comparison is to use airb with the accusative and occa:

:

sionally irapa with the nominative. The examples of the use of xapd are chiefly in Luke and Hebrews. Thus Lu. 3 13, ix-qUv irXeou :

irapa to dLaTeraypevov vplv]

Heb.

irXeiopos 86^r]s irapa Mo^varjv;

Heb. 11:4; 12 in Lu. 16

:

:

(i)

:

:

4, 8La4)op6)Tepov wap' avrovs; 3

23, KpdrTOcjL dvaiais irapa Tavras.

Examples

In the

of Trapd or

LXX^

:

3,

So

of vwep in this sense occur likewise

Heb. 4 12, TOjiwTepos vwep comparison was usually completed

8, 4>povLp.6:TepoL virep Tov^ vlovs;

Tvaaav p.a.xaipav.

by means

24.

9

1

:

hirkp.

The Comparative Displacing the Superlative.

This

increase of the comparative in contrast to the corresponding decrease of the superlative is one of the most striking peculiarities of kolpt]. Indeed one may broadly say with Blass,^ vernacular the comparative with the article takes

the adjective in the

that in the

kolptj

lb., p. 1.

2 Hist. Synt. etc., Heft ii, p. 92. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 329. Tlic abl. is sometimes used with personal pro* Blass, ib., nouns after the comp. in mod. Gk. (Thumb, p. 76). p. 108. '

'

*

Einl. in die drei erstcn Evanfj;., p. 28.

«

Blass, Gr. of

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 23(3. ^ Thumb, Ilandb., N. T. Gk., p. 108. p. 75 f. 8 C. and S., Sel., pp. 84 ff. For various prepositions so used in older Gk. see Schwab., Hist. Synt., Heft i, pp. 45 ff. ' Hermeneutik and Kritik, p. 199.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

668

over the peculiar functions of the superlative. In the modern Greek vernacular the comparative with the definite article is the only idiom employed for the true superlative.^ The form in -raros in modern Greek is rare and always elative. Moulton^ finds the papyri supporting this disappearance of the superlative form before the comparative to a certain extent. "It seems fair to conclude that (1) the superlative, apart from its elative use, was dying, though not dead; (2) the comparative had only sporadically begun to be used in its place." ^ He reminds us that the Uterary use had as much weight as the vulgar idiom. As a matter of fact the superlative form is not essentially necessary. The Armenian has no superlative and is like the vernacular modern Greek. The root-difference between the comparative and the superlative is that between "twoness" and "moreness." As the notion of duahty vanished or was no longer stressed, the need for a distinction between the comparative and superlative vanished also. Both are in reality comparative in relation to the positive."* In the N. T. therefore we see this ])lurring of distinction between comparative and superlative. Cf. 1 Cor. 13 13 fxei^cov 8e tovtwv ayairy] where 17

:

three things are compared. Sir

W. M. Ramsay

In Mt. 18

Mt. 11 avTov).

:

1

:

11

gives iravroov

we have

(cf.

Lu. 9

In Lu. 7 42 :

In English we say " greatest of these."

:

ris

apa

ixtV^ov in

a Christian inscription.^

ixel^wv, etc.

Cf.

Mk.

9

:

So in

34.

48) note 6 be fXLKpoTepot (but note also nel^cov

f.,

irXelop

and

two debtors (verse 41), though

to -KKetov

it is

do indeed

questionable

if

refer to the

that fine point

But in 1 Cor. 12 23 the comparatives have Moulton" cites from O.P. 716 (H/a.d.) Ti]v aixdWiner^ indeed finds vova a'ipeaLv hbbvTi, 'to the highest bidder.' Note the similar examples in Demosthenes and Athenagoras. adverb mrepov wavTuv (Mt. 22:27), obviously as superlative. So in 1 Tim. 4 1, ev mrepOLS Kaipdls. In Eph. 4 9, to, Karwrepa neprj is likewise in the superlative sense. The Epistle of Barnabas shows

is

here insisted on.

:

their usual force.

:

:

similar examples.

Blass^ reminds us that the Italian does not dis-

tinguish between the comparative and the superlative. The ern Greek to-day says 6 aocjiwrtpos aird oXous 'the wisest of 1

Thumb, Handb.,

2

Prol., p. 78; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1904, p. 154.

modall.'^

p. 73.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T.

Gk., p. 33. 3

lb., CI.

Rev., 1901, p. 439.

Cf.

Schwab, Hist. Synt. *

177.

and Bish.

lb.,

etc..

Hefti, pp. 17

Heft

ii,

pp. 172,

ff.

of Phrygia, II, p. 525.

B

Cities

6

Prol., p.

78

f.

»

»

W.-Th.,

p. 242.

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., p. 309.

ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA) Moulton^ notes the fact

6G9

and x«tpw« in the N. T. no superlative, but he notes

that, while KpdTTwv

are strictly comparative, they have

236) that the papyri show x^'-pi-cfTos, as Tb.P. 72 (ii/n.c). XIV. The Superlative Adjective (vircpScTiKov ovojia). For the forms see chapter VII, ii, 3, (c). As already set forth, the superlative is morcness rather than twoness. (a) The Superlative Vanishing. As already remarked, the superlative forms are vanishing in the N. T. as in the kolvt] gener(p.

Blass^ observes that eo-xaros and

ally.

irpcoTos

are the only excep-

Under the weakening of Usually eaxo-Tos refers to more than

tions to this disappearing tendency.

dualism wpoTepos goes down.

two, the last of a series or last of 24), 'iaxo-Tov^ iravTwv (1 Cor. 15

contrasted, like

kaxarr]

17

Note comparative

also.

:

all,

8).

TXavrj

Hke h edxaTjj rnxepa (Jo. 11 Sometimes first and last are :

TTJs

x'^'>-P<^v

Cf Mt. 19 .

:

30.

irpojTTjs

So

(Mt. 27:64).

6 irpoJTos

/cat

6 eaxo-Tos

about Jesus (Rev. 1 17). In the LXX co-xaros occurs as comparative (cf. in Deut. 24:3), and even as an adverb meaning 'after' in Deut. 31 29. Cf. Thackeray, p. 184. Even more common than eaxaros is Trpcoros. It is used in the usual sense often (Mk. 12 20), but is also common where only two are concerned (1 Cor. 15 :45; Jo. 20 :4) as already shown. Sometimes irpcoTos expresses mere rank as in A^. 17 4. In Mt. 22 38 note 17 neyaXt] :

:

:

:

Kal irpuTT] evToKi].

Cf.

irpcoTr]

:

These are true superlatives.

also).^

Nov., 1912) shows that

Mk. 12 28 (note gender Sir W. M. Ramsay {Expos-

iravTwv in

:

Lu. 2 2 is not in sense of enrolments as we now know. But this proves nothing as to Ac. 1:1. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 60) quotes I Gr. XII, 5, 590, ^Oaaas aXdxov Trpcoros, where two are compared.

itor,

It is first of

irporepos.

A Few True

(6)

a

irpwrrj in

:

series of

Superlatives in the N. T.

Thus But

true superlatives survive in the N. T.

15

9

:

is

a true superlative, 'the

least.'

But a few other Cor.

6 eXdxto-ros in 1 it

is

elative in Lu.

12:26. Cf. Mt. 2:6; 5:19. Moulton^ finds eXaxtcTos as a true superlative in a papyrus of second century B.C. Tb.P. 24. But there are very few true superlatives in the papyri.^ In Ac. 17

15

:

>

* *

T&xtaTa

is

a true superlative.

Prol., p. 78.

"Ti/'to-ros is

2

a true super-

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 141

f.

On this word cf. Gonnot, DegrSs de signif. en Grcc ct en Lat., 1S7G, p. 131. On irpwTos in older ( Jk. for not more thiin two see Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc.,

Ileft 8

cos

ii,

p. 175.

CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1904, p. 154.

105 (ii/B.c).

5

See

prol.^ p. 79.

ri/v kaoy.kirqi>

irXdaT-qv Tinr,v.

Tb.P.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

670

both when applied to God, rod inl/larov (Mk. 5:7), and the abode of God, h to7s xn^laTois (Mt. 21: 9). Some MSS. (D, etc., W. H. marg.) have lyyiaTa in Mk. 6 36, which is a true superIn Ac. 20 :38 fxaKiffra, 'most of all,' is probably a true lative. superlative. In 1 Cor. 14: 27 to irXelaTov, 'at the most,' is a true In Mt. 11 20 at TrXeTcrrat dvpafxeLs we probably have superlative. lative

:

:

Cf.

the true superlative.

ayiwraTrj vnuv

ttj

26

oLKpL^taTdT-qv a'lpecnv (Ac.

:

ir'uxTet

and

(Ju. 20)

5), true superlatives

ttjv

In

in -raros.

Rev. 18 12; 21 11 ri/itcbraros is probably elative, Cf. novdoTaros, 39. The Ust is indeed very small. 1 Ki. 8 In the sense of 'very' or 'ex(c) The Elative Superlative. ceedingly' it comprises the great majority of the superlative forms that survive in the N. T.^ In the papyri the immense majority Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, of superlative forms are elative. in the N. T. and is indeed always KpdTto-Tos is elative p. 439. :

:

:

merely a sort of

So rihara

So KparLare in Lu. 1:3.

title.^

is

only

elative (2 Cor. 12 9, 15). Mkyiaros occurs only once (2 Pet. 1 4) and is elative, rd rtjutct koI yueyicrra riplv kwayyeXixaTa {permagnus, Blass). In Lu. 12 26 k\axi-
:

:

6

:

2,

while

in

Eph. 3

repos is doubtful.3

so in is

Mk. 4

:

:

8 the comparative superlative

eXaxi-cTTo-

nXeto-Tos, generally elative in the papyri,"* is

MaXicrra occurs

1, 6x>^o^ TrXeTo-ros.

usually elative, as in Ph. 4

:

some 12 times and

22.

No Double

Superlatives. The scarcity of the superlaN. T. removes any ground for surprise that no double superlatives occur. In Eph. 3 8 e\axi(rTOTepco is indeed a super(d)

tive in the

:

by the comparative. In Gal. 6 10 the elative superlative /xdXto-ra occurs by way of repetition with to ayadov, as Schwab^ gives a considerable in Phil. 16 it does with a.yairr}Tbv. lative strengthened

:

hst of double or strengthened superlatives from classic writers, hke TrXeTarov 7?5t
Hippol),

fioiXiaTa (piXraTos (Eurip.,

Cf. Latin minimissimus

unkindest cut of

judXto-ra Setvoraros

and English "most

(Thuc),

straitest sect,"

etc.

"most

all," etc.

Followed by Ablative. The superlative, hke the comparative, may be followed by the ablative.^ Thus with vpuTov (e)

vfiojv

1

(Jo. 15:18), Trpwros p.ov (Jo. 1 :15),

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 33.

and possibly

Blass considers

ri?

in

kir'

eaxo-Tov

dTiwrdrn

(Ju. 20)

elative. *

Moulton,

»

lb., p. 236.

4 lb., p.

79.

Prol., p. 78.

Heft

6

Schwab, Hist. Synt.

«

Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 11

etc.,

ff.

iii,

pp. 70

ff.

ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA) Tuv

rifxepicv

671

may

tovtwv (Heb. 1:2), though this passage

be merely

the genitive. (/)

No "Hebraistic"

sider daretos

XV. Numerals.

:

20)

and

It is gratuitous to con-

similar passages superlatives.

For the general discussion

The

chapter VII, in.

Superlative.

(Ac. 7

tQi deu)

of the forms see

ordinals are indeed adjectives, as are the

and all after two hundred. The syntactical numerals are not many, (a) Eh AND n/3&jro9. The use of eh rather than Trpooros is one of the most striking points to observe. Before we can agree with Biass^ that this is "undoubtedly a Hebrew idiom," who follows

first

four cardinals

peculiarities of the

we must at least hear what Moulton^ has to say in reply. begin with, in modern Greek "the cardinals beyond 4 have ousted the ordinals entirely."^ Then we learn from the inscriptions that this usage of cardinals as ordinals is as old as the Byzantine Winer,^

To

Moulton^

Greek.^

centuries a.d.

also quotes

rfj ynq. koI

from papyri of the second and third

dKah, B.U. 623

(ii/iii a.d.),

a construction

The Germans, like the English, can say "page forty." ^ In the N. T. we only find this substitution of the cardinal in the case of els, while in the modern Greek the matter has gone much further. In the classic Greek no real analogy exists, though els stands in enumerations when Sevrepos or aXXos follows, and in compound numerals a closer parlike

ixiq. /cat

allel is

HKabi rov nrjvos in

found, like

els Kal

essentially different.^

Haggai

2:1.''

though even here the case is unus et vicesimus, "a case of the

TpiaKoarbs,

Cf. Latin

formation of the ordinal being imperfectly carried out."^ Certainly then it was possible for this development to have gone on

when one considers that Trpwros not derived from els, though Moulton^" admits that the Hebrew has the same peculiarity. Moulton^' further objects that if Semitic apart from the Hebrew, especially

is

had been at work we should have had tt} irkvTt in the modern Greek, since the Hebrew used the later days of the month influence

in cardinal numbers.^^

LXX (cf. Numb. is

expressed

with the

by

KOLVT]

1

p.[a,

:

Still,

and not by 1)

the striking fact remains that in the

in the Tpurrj.

N.T. the first day of the month This was obviously in harmony

of a later time, but the first evidence of its actual

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 144.

^

»

W.-Th.,

"

»

ProL, p. 95

*

lb.

»

Dieterich, Uiiters. etc., p. 187

•

Prol., p. 9G.

Cf.

p.

248

f.

»

f.

Thumb, Handb.,

etc., p. 82. f.

'«

C. and S., Sel., W.-Th., p. 249. Blass, Gr. of

p. 31.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 144.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 144.

Prol., p. 9G.

"

lb.

12

Blass, Gr. of

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

672

use so far

in the

is

LXX, and

it is

NEW TESTAMENT

in exact imitation of the

Hebrew

hard to resist the idea that the LXX at least is here influenced by the Hebrew. And, if so, then the N. T. naturally also. Later on we need not attribute the whole matter to the Hebrew influence. Li the N.T. indeed we once have TrpoiT-g o-a/S/Sdrou (Mk. 16 9), which belongs to the disputed close of the Gospel.^ Cf., on the other hand, els jutav aa^^aTwv (Mt. 28 1), 2), ttj hlo. to)U ca^^aruv (Lu. Trpcot [ttj] fXLq. rdv aalS^aToov (Mk. 16 idiom on the point.

It is

:

:

:

24:

Jo. 20

1;

There 18

(6)

1;

Ac. 20

:

7);

Kara niav aa^jSarov (1 Cor. 16

is

:

2).

nothing peculiar in the use of evLavrop Kal ^rjuas e^ (Ac. Cf. Rev. 12

11).

:

:

The

:

14.

Simplification of the "Teens."

This began in the

Hence from ordinals from find "simplified usually on we the third century B.C. ^ Tecro-apeo-/cat5e/caros, etc. Tpio-/cat5e/caros, have we 19th." So 13th to 8vo even Ska and 5ka e^, 5e/ca rpeis, usually have papyri^ So the rather more^ frequently than 86)8eKa. Cf. TeaaapeaKaiSeKaTrj in Ac. 27 27, 33. Hence Kal is not always inserted when the smaller number precedes and "omitted" when the larger comes first. It was never a uniform custom (Winer-Thayer, p. 250), least of all But three numerals may apCf. Gal. 3 17, etc. in the N. T. classical period as is

seen in the Attic inscriptions.^

:

:

pear without Kal, as in hardv irevTrjKOVTa TpiQiv (Jo. 21: 11). Cf. Rev. 7 4; 14 3; 21 17. See further chapter VII, in, 2, (6). Cf. ahrbs rplros, 'he and two (c) The Inclusive Ordinal. :

others.'

:

:

has one illustration in the N. T., 6y8oov Ntoe (2 Pet.

It

2:5), 'Noah and seven others' or 'Noah an eighth.' The idiom is classical enough, though the ancient writers usually had avTos Moulton^ finds one parallel in the papyri, rptros uv in also.^ P.P. iii. 28, though the Hterary kolvt] Avriters (Plutarch, Appian)

Moulton expresses no surprise at this idiom in 2 Peter it. where "we rather expect bookish phrases." He comments also on the "translation English" in the Authorized Version's rendering "Noah the eighth person," and uses it as an illustration of the way that the LXX often rendered the Hebrew, though unlike the misprint "strain at a gnat," it did not gain currency use

in English. 1

Blass, Gr. of

as Tp

N. T. Gk.,

p. 144,

remarks that Eusebius quotes the verse

niS..

2

Melsterh., Att. Inscr., p. 160.

*

lb.

reverse

Ae/ca is

occupies

first

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 96.

pkice from thirteen upwards, but with ordinals the

true.

s

Like the

LXX.

6

W.-Th.,

p. 249.

C. and

S., p.

30. '

Prol., pp. 98, 107.

ADJECTIVES ('EHIGETa)

The

673

There is no trouble over the classic (Mk. 6 40) in this sense. We have already (chapter XIII, ava and /card) discussed ava els (Rev. 21 21) and Kad' eh (Ro. 12 5). The point here that calls for comment 7 is a Hebraism. Cf. dj^d bho [bho] is whether 8vo oho in Mk. 6 Winer termed it "properly Hebraistic," while in Lu. 10 1. Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 145) more guardedly described it as "after the Semitic and more colloquial manner." The repetition of the numeral is a Hebrew way of expressing the distributive idea. Cf. in the N. T. also avuTroaia avixiroaLa (Mk. 6 39), Tpaaial Moulton^ cites also Sea/jLas Seafias, as the readirpaaial (verse 40). ing of Epiphanius for Mt. 13 30. But Winer ^ had himself cited ./Eschylus, Persae, 981, iJLvpla nvpla, and Blass ^ compares in Eris, the lost drama of Sophocles, ixiav ulav. The Atticists had censured this as "colloquial," but at any rate "it was not merely a creation of Jewish Greek." Deissmann^ besides quotes rpla rpia from the Oxy. Papyri. W. F. Moulton^had already called attention to the fact that modern Greek shows the same usage. Hence we must conclude, with Moulton' and Thumb,^ that the Koivfi development was independent of the Hebrew. Moulton^ comments also on the reading of B in Lu. 10 1, di^d 8vo 8vo, and notes how (d)

Distributives.

use of ava (Mt. 20

:

and

9)

/card

:

:

:

:

^

:

:

:

:

in the papyri neyaXov /xe7dXoi; = the elative superlative tieylarov.

See also

/card 8vo bho in

For the

Cf

classic -TrXdo-tos.

NCDX;

P. Oxy. 886 (iii/A.D.).

proportio7ials the

N. T. has only

iKaTovTa-wKaijLwv,

.

TToXXaTrXaatcoj/,

Lu. 18

Mk.

10

:

—rrXao-tcov, not the 30 and Mt. 19 29 :

30 and Mt. 19

:

:

29 BL.

Cf.

Blass-Debrunner, p. 38.

The Cardinal 'ETrra. With

(e)

rather than

eirraKLs

D

certainly possible in itself

The

e^bofxr^KovTaKLs eirTo.

(Mt. 18

22)

:

the rendering 'until seventy times seven'

and follows

literally

is

the Greek words.

identical expression {e^bonrjKovTaias iirTo) occurs in

Gen. 4

:

24

(where the Revised Version renders it 'seventy and seven fold') and in Test, xii, Pat. Ben. 7 4. The margin of the Revised :

Version for Mt. 18 1

W.-M.,

»

Prol., p. 97.

:

22 gives "seventy times and seven" which

p- 312. «

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 330.

» Thcol. Literaturzoit., 1898, p. 631. W.-Th., p. 249; W.-M., p. 312. » W.-M., p. 312 note. Cf. Jcbb in V. and D.'s llandb., p. 310. Raderand eWvs «W6s macher (N. T. Gr., p. 57) cites a4>6bpa a-ipoSpa from the from the Byz. Gk. ^ Prol., p. 97. 8 HeUen., p. 128.

»

LXX

»

Prol., p. 97.

dfd dOo

bi)o.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 330, cites

from Gosp. of Pet. 35,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

674

Winer^ interprets as "seventy-seven times."

Moulton^ considers

rightly that the passage in Genesis settles the usage in

Matthew

which an allusion may be made. He cites a possible parallel from the Iliad, xxii, 349, 8eKdKLs[Te] Kai feUoai. Sometimes with numerals (/) Substantive not Expressed. to

Thus apyvpiov juupidSas is not expressed. but in Mt. 26 16 note apyvpia. The use of Tpirov TovTo (2 Cor. 13 1) is merely an instance of the adjective used absolutely without a substantive. Cf. the neuter to devrepov

the substantive for TrePTe

(Ac. 19

:

money

19),

:

:

(2 Cor.

13:2).

Adverbs with Numerals. construction. Thus Tpadrjvat eirapo:

They have no

(gf)

eiravco

&ct)dr]

irevTaKocrioLS

on the (Mk. 14 5), StcrxtXtot (Mk. effect

TptaKocrloou di^vaploov

dSeX^oTs (1 Cor. 15

:

6),

cbs

:

19). 21), eKaTOVTaer-qs ttov (Ro. 4 13), cucret irevTaKLcrxl^LOL (Mt. 14 In the case of cbs and
5

:

:

:

:

CIS, kv,

(h)

wepl, virep, M^XP*"

Et? AS Indefinite Article.

The Greek,

as a rule,

had

no indefinite article. The older Greek did occasionally use rts with no more apparent force than an indefinite article, but usually nothing was used for that idea in Greek.

Still in

Aristophanes

as an example of the

(Av. 1292) Moulton^ rightly sees later kolvt] idiom. Aristophanes indeed preserves els KairrfKos,

much

of the

In the modern Greek has may be used.^ Els colloquial speech. became naturally more popular than rts since it has all three genders.^ Moulton^ finds numerous papyri illustrations. The modern languages have followed the Greek model here, for the English an (Scottish ane) is really one, like the German ein and

back on the though it here coincided with the KOLVT) idiom. Hence N. T. usage on this point is in full accord with the development of the Greek. Cf. els jpap.ixaitvs (Mt. 8 19), ix'ia TraLdlaKri (26:69), fxia xr]pa tttc^xV (Mk. 12:42), els In Jo. 6 9 some MSS. have eV with 6(/)etXeTrjs (Mt. 18 24), etc. Cf. TraiSapiov, but the sense is not materially altered either way. It is therefore hardly necessary to fall

the French un.

Hebrew precedent^

in the use of nn«,

:

:

:

(Rev. 8

riKovaa epos deroO

1

W.-Th.,

:

13), iduv avKrjv

p. 251.

Prol., p. 97.

«

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 170.

Prol., p. 97.

Cf. Wellhausen, Einl., p. 27.

8

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 144.

19), etc.

Thumb, Handb.,

»

Cf.

:

"

8

98.

(Mt. 21

«

W.-M., p. 314. Cf. Green, Handb., etc., p. 276.

2 Prol., p.

p,'iav

p. 81.

ADJECTIVES ('EDIGETa) Moulton^ properly

criticizes

Meyer on Mt. 8

:

675 19 for his "exegeti-

denying this idiom for els in the N. T. (i) Et9 = Tt9. Sometimes indeed els stands alone wth practically the same sense as rts, as in Mt. 19: 16; Mk. 10: 17, though cal subtleties" in

in the parallel passage (Lu. 18

18) tls apxcov occurs.

:

with genitive (or ablative), like T03V ijixepQiv

evl

The

rwv toXitwp (Lu. 15

(Lu, 8 22), or the ablative, hke

:

use of

els e^ vjjluv (Jo.

:

els

15), kv niq.

13

:

21),

merely the same idiom expanded. Cf. els tls, Lu. 22 50; Jo. 11 49. In Mk. 14 10, 6 ets roju ScoSeKa, the article at first looks incongruous, 'the one of the twelve,' but the early papyri give illustrations of this usage also.^ It is as a pronoun that els is to be construed here and in the rather frequent alternative expressions ets ets (Mt. 24 fxia (verse 41), t6v 'ha 40), ula Tov trepov (Mt. 6 24), evos rod erepov (ib.), ets rod evos (1 Cor. is,

of course,

:

:

:

—

—

4:6).

Cf.

5:11.

Cf.

—

:

—

:

—

(Mt. 27: 38) and the reciprocal use in e/caaros, Mt. 26 22.

ets Kal ets ets

1

Th.

:

(j) The Distributive Use of El?. and the "barbaric" (Winer-Schmiedel,

So

ev Kad' eV in

p. 247)

ets

Rev. 4 8 :

/card ets

(Mk.

14 19), TO Kad' ets (Ro. 12 5), ava ets erao-ros (Rev. 21 21). This "barbaric" idiom came to be very common in the later Greek. :

Cf.

:

modern Greek

Kade,

:

Kadhas

=

e/cao-ros.

of prepositions like ews, aud, wapa, Kara

Winer-Schmiedel,

For the use nouns.

p. 247,

from the

of ou5ets, ou^ets,

Cf. also there oh »

—

and

Prol., p. 95.

The

free adverbial use

copiously illustrated in

LXX and the late Greek writers.

p.r]bds, iir]dd^

ttSs

is

ttSs

see next chapter

—

oh.

2

Ib.

on Pro-

.

CHAPTER XV PRONOUNS

('ANTfiNTMIAI)

For the antiquity and history of pronouns see iv in chapter VII (Declensions). We are here concerned, not with the form, but with the use of pronouns."^ As a matter of fact all pronouns fall into two classes, Deictic (SeiKTiKal) and Anaphoric {ava^opLKa'C) They either "point out" or they "refer to" a substantive. So we get the modern terms, demonstrative and relative (cf. Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 168 f.). But some pronouns may be demon-

The demonstrative was the original usage. For practical purposes we have to follow a more minute division. I. Personal Pronouns (irpcoTOTUTroi r\ Trpoo-wiriKal dvTwvu|JLCai). The personal pronouns (first and second persons) are deictic (I, thou). The reason for the use of pronouns, as already explained, was to avoid the repetition of the substantive. In Jo. 11 22 note strative or relative according to the context.

or deictic

:

the repetition of (a)

debs.

Cf. also Lu. 6

The Nominative. As

:

45.

already explained, the verb uses the

personal pronoun as personal suffixes, so that as a rule no need

was

felt for

the separate expression of the pronoun in the

nom-

had the personal endings like el-fxl, ea-ai, ea-ri. The use of the personal pronoun in addition to the personal ending of the verb was due to desire for emphasis. Then the separate expression of the pronoun led to the gradual sloughing off of the personal ending. In modern English this process is nearly complete. In Greek this process was arrested, though in modern Greek all verbs save el/jLal are -co verbs. In most cases, therefore, in Greek the existence of the personal pronoun in the nominative implies some emphasis or contrast. But this is not quite true of all examples. "The emphasis of the first and second persons is not to be insisted on too much in poetry or in familiar prose. inative.

^

Cf.

All verbs

Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, p. 95 "Die die Dinge nach ihren Qualitaten, die Pronomina bezeichnen :

Nomina benennen sie

nach ihren Verhaltnissen." 676

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) Notice the frequency of

common

eyuiSa, eywuai.^'^

G77

In conversation

it

was

have the personal pronoun in the nominative. In the later Greek generally the personal pronouns show a weakening of force,^ but never to the actual ol^literation of emphasis, not even in the modern Gpeek.^ Moulton^ agrees with Ebeling^ that there was "no necessary emphasis in the Platonic ^v 8' eyo:, e^y-qv kyw, ws av 077S." Clearly then the frequency of the pronoun in the N. T. is not to be attributed to the Semitic influence. Even Conybeare and Stock ^ see that it is not necessary to appeal to the well-known Hebrew fondness for pronouns for this particularly

usage.

to

But Blass^ thinks that some

of the

MS.

may

variations

be due to Semitic influence. We are free therefore to approach the N. T. examples on their merits.^ 1. The First Person, kydo and ruiels. It numerous examples where eya: shows ix<Ji

VTTO

aov ^aTTLadrjvaL (Mt. 3

iSo^aaa (Jo. 17

:

Cf. eyco

4).

and

:

is

eyco

14),

easy to find in the N.T.

So eyw

contrast. de

av in Jo. 17

:

'Keyci:

(5

:

xp^'i-o-v

22), €700 ae

The amount

23.

of

emphasis will vary very greatly according to circumstances and may sometimes vanish entirely so far as we can determine. Different shades of meaning appear also as in virep ov €70) elirov (Jo. 1 30), *I, myself.' Cf. Kayoj ovk ffbeiv avrov (Jo. 1 33) and Kayu iwpaKa Kal ntnapTvp-qKa (verse 34) and note absence with second verb. Cf. Jo. 6 48; 16 33; 1 Cor. 2:1,3. Note absence of ky<:o in Mt. :

:

:

5

:

11

:

Cf. also rts aadevel Kal ovk aaOevco; (2 Cor.

18, 20, Xe7co vpXv. :

29) with tIs (TKav8a\l^eTaL Kal ovk kyoj Tcvpoviiai;

the point

must not be pressed too

(ib.)

as proof that

Further examples of 17a) may be seen in Ro. 7:17; Jo. 5 31, 34; 10:30; Eph. 5 32; Ph. 4 11, For the plural ly/xets see rnxeis irpoaKwovyav (Jo. 4 22) in opposition to vneis, but then follows mcrel}^ 6 o'lda/xev. So in Ac. 4 20 note ov bwapuda 17/ieTs a elSafxev and tL Kal "fnxets klvSvvehonev; (1 Cor. 15 30). Cf. Mt. 6 12. The "editorial" 'we' has already received discussion (cf The Sentence) and may be merely illustrated here. Blass^" considers it a "wide-spread tendency among Greek writers, when they speak of themselves to say 17/xets instead far in either direction.^ :

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

*

Gildersleeve, Synt. of CI. Gk., part

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 348.

^

Gildersleeve, Studies, p. 240.

»

Thumb, Handb.,

«

Sel.

*

Pro!., p. 85.

etc., p.

59

f.

i,

p. 35.

from the

LXX,

p. 65.

8

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 316. In general the N. T. follows the classic idiom. W.-Sch., p. 194.

«

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 194.

" Gr.

of N. T. Gk., matter to the exegete.

7

p. 166.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 86

f.,

who

leaves the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

678

of eyo)." This is not always true in Paul's Epistles (Ro. 1 5), for sometimes he associates others with him in the address at the beginning. There are undoubted examples in the N. T. like oloi :

Cor. 10: 11),

kafiev (2

But sometimes the

(Heb. 13

ireid6txe9a

18), ypa4>onev (1 Jo. 1

:

4).

:

plural merely associates the readers or hearers

with the writer or speaker. So e4>opkcrafxev (1 Cor. 15 49), ofioiwaconev (Mk. 4 30). Sometimes the first person singular is used in a representative manner as one of a class (cf. the representative :

:

Greek as

common

Blass^ does not find this idiom so

article like 6 ayadbi).

in

but it occurs in Demosthenes and en Kayw
in other languages,

So

certainly in Paul. Cf. in next verse

tI

See 1 Cor. 10 30; Gal. 2 18. In Ro. 7 7-25 special difficulties occur. 2. The Second Person, ah and vp.tts. Thus in Jo. 17: 5 note the contrast in /xe ub. Cf. Jo. 1 42 av el 1,lixwv av KXrjdrjar], 2 :10 av ^'\aa<})T]iJLoviJ.eda.

:

:

:

—

:

4

TeTrjpr]Kas,

Lu.

eKcjiev^jl,

9

:

ttcos (tv

:76

1

4

'IovSolos,

/cat aii he,

:

10

ci;

clp firrjaas,

Mt. 27:

Cf. also

etc.

av has a very emphatic position, as in

ci; tl% el

In

it

1

Cor. 15

36, a4)pwv, av 6

:

necessary, to take av with el

(Lu. 22

:

58) one

is

a-jrelpeLs,

Lu. 10 15; Ac. 23 3; rj Kai ait amples of the plural take eaeade :

:

(Mk. 6

(j)a'ye7v

vnels in verse

in particular

:

37).

:

In

Et

:

:

:

20; 14

For

48), Sore aurois

vfxets

See

As

10).

contrasted in Jo. 5

vnels

4).

av e^ avrdv Brute.

Cf. Ac. 4:7; Lu. 10

f.

:

though not

nal

tu,

(Ro. 14

(Mt. 5

ifxels

(Ro. 9

24).

tI k^ovdepels

(Mt. 27: 24).

o^peade

1

:

possible,^

is

of the Latin

See Uelvos and

39 and also in 44 v/jLets

Ac.

a0pcoi' (cf.

reminded

Ro. 2 3 on av Sometimes

11.

and

:

24,

rjiiels

ex-

VjJLels :

38;

and con-

In Jo. 4 35, ovx v/xeXs Xeyere, we have the same inclusive use of the second person that we noticed in the first. trasted see Jo. 4

In Ro. 2

:

3, 17,

:

22.

:

the second person singular occurs in the same repre-

sentative sense that the first has also. Cf. also Ro. 9 20; 11: 17, etc. :

In Jo. 3

:

10, av el 6 SLdaaKoXos,

Mt. 16

we have a

case of distributed

34; 2 Cor.

em-

examples of this sustained emphasis, where the emphasis of the pronoun passes on to the remainder of the sentence and contributes point and force to the whole.^ On the whole the Greek language has freedom in the construction of the pronouns.^ Moulton raises^ the question if in av elwas (Mt. 26 64), av Xeyeis (27: 11), v^ets Xeyere (Lu. 22 70), we do not have the equivalent of 'That is right,' phasis.

Cf. also

:

16; Jo. 9

:

1

:

23, as

:

:

*

2 w.-Sch., p. 195. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 316 f. Renaud, The Distributed Emphasis of the Pers. Pron., 1884. Bernhardy, Wissensch. Syiat. der griech. Spr., 1829, p. 45.

6

Prol., p. 86.

1

'

.

PRONOUNS but

ir\r]v

(Thayer)

against

is

more frequently than

it

679

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

Mt. 26

in

:

20 occurs in John put together (Abbott,

64.

in all the Synoptics

Johannine Gr., p. 297). 3. The Third Person. It has had a more radical development or lack of development. As a matter of fact the Greek had and has no definite third personal pronoun for the nominative like I7C0 and av. No nominative was used for ou, ol, etc., and this pro-

noun was though

originally reflexive.

literary

Besides

not used in the N. T.,

it is

writers like Aristides, Arrian, Lucian, Polyb-

kolvt]

Where another pronoun was desired for the third person besides that in the personal ending, various devices were ius use

The

used. 6

fxkv,

it.i

Attic writers usually employed a demonstrative

(6 8e,

The N. T. shows examples

ovTos, tKttvos, OS bk, 68e, etc.).

of

these constructions which will be illustrated in the discussion of the demonstrative pronouns. But the N. T. uses also avros as all

the subject, an idiom foreign to Attic writers, but foimd already in Homer 2 and common in the modern Greek, where indeed it has

come

to be itself a demonstrative.^

the main point to observe

Simcox'' rightly remarks that

not whether

it has emphasis, but its appearance at all as the mere subject. All the personal pronouns in the nominative have more or less emphasis. The use of avros in contrast with other persons is natural like avros /cat ol /xer'

avrov

(Mk. 2

:

25).

We

is

are not here considering the intensive use

of avros as 'self nor the use of 6 avros 'the same.'

There is "no dispute as to use of avros as emphatic he' in the N. T. like the Pythogorean^ (Doric) avros e^a. So Ac. 20 35 avros elwev, as much as to say 'The Master said.' Cf. the way in which some wives refer systematically to their husbands as "He." Other undoubted examples are avros yap auaei rov \abv (Mt. 1 21). Here the emphasis is so clear that the Revised Version renders: "For he it is that shall save." In Mt. 12 50 avros ixov d5eX
:

:

:

^airrlaei, referring to 6 epxoiJ.ei>os in

1 Jo.

3 24; ov av :

4>CKriaio

avros eanv,

Mt. 3

Mk.

11; 6

:

14 44. :

rrjpciv

— Kai avros,

Strong emphasis

also appears in examples like Kal avros eariv irpo iravrcov (Col. 1

:

17).

In Mt. 8 24 avros 8e and Mk. 4 38 Kal avros Jesus is the chief person in the story and the pronoun has emphasis. Cf. likewise Lu. 1 16, 17 24 21 Mt. 16 20. In Lu. 19 2 W. H. and Nestle :

:

:

;

:

;

1

W.-Sch., p. 191.

»

Thumb, Handb.,

*

Lang, of the N. T.,

6

Pro!., p. 86.

:

:

2

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 164.

p. 90.

p. 60.

Cf. C.

and

S., Scl.

from

LXX,

p. 29.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

680

B

follow

Some emphasis

in reading Kal avros twice.

In Ac. 7

both times.

:

21 (Rec.) the pronoun

present

is

avTov appears three

As regards Kai avri], the editors differ between this accent In and Kal avTT] in Lu.7:12; 8:42; 1 Cor. 7:12; Ro. 7:10. avri}. But H. in koL with agrees W. Nestle 16 Lu. 2 37; Ro. 2, There is in Lu. 2 37 avri] xhpo- may be a 'widow by herself.'^ no real reason for objecting to the feminine use of this idiom. The plural avTol appears in Mk. 7: 36; Lu. 2 50; 9 36. The times.

:

:

:

:

:

only remaining question is whether avros occurs in the nominative free from any emphasis just like the personal ending in a word. It is in Luke's Gospel and the Apocalypse^ that such instances occur. It is not a question whether avTos is so used in ancient

Winer ^ denies that any decisive passages have been Greek. adduced in the N. T. of such unemphatic use. Certainly the matter is one of tone and subjective impression to a large extent. And yet some examples do occur where emphasis is not easily discernible and even where emphasis would throw the sentence out of relation with the context. What emphasis exists

must be very

Cf. Lu.

slight.

1

:

22; 2

50; 6

:

8; 8

:

:

1,

22; 15

:

14;

24: 14, 25, 31; Rev. 14 10; 19 15. Thus we see all grades of emphasis. Abbott^ holds that in John auros never means 'he,' :

:

either emphatic or unemphatic, Jo. 2

:

12 (auros Kal

r]

ix-qrrip

the emphatic 'he' and 'himself.' sive idea

In the 15

is

clear in Jo.

LXX

we

4

:

Cf. also 18

But

'himself.'

is little :

difference 1.

in

between

But the

inten-

might be either way. sometimes unemphatic. Cf. Gen. 3

2, 12.

find auros

but always

avTov) there

In 4 53 :

it

:

Sam. 17:42; 18:16. The Oblique Cases of the Personal Pronouns.

f.; 1

(6)

In pre-Homeric times the pronominal

Originally Reflexive.

1.

stem was

sonal pronoun,

may

The

reflexive.^

be reflexive in

from the per-

The personal pronouns Hesiod, the Homeric Hymns, Pindar and the Indeed, the early Attic inscriptions^ show the

was a

other Lyric poets.^

reflexive form, as distinct

later

development.

same thing, not to mention the Dramatic poets and Herodotus.^ It was only gradually that the distinctively reflexive form came into common use in the Attic prose, first for the third person, and 1

^

3

W.-Sch., p. 195; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 164. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 61. " Joh. Gr., p. 279. W.-M., p. 187.

B

D>TofF, Gesch. des Pron. Reflex.,

«

lb.,

»

pp. 68, 75, 80 f. lb., 2. Abt., p. 1 f.

1.

Abt., p. 16.

8

lb., 1. Abt.,

pp. 90

f.,

126

f.

PRONOUNS then for the

pronoun

and second persons.

first

681

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

The use

^

of the personal

in -the reflexive sense survived longest in the vernacular.

It is not "abnormal" therefore to find in the N. T. (vernacular kolvt]) the personal pronouns where a reflexive form might have been used. The N. T. does not here exactly represent Attic Hterary prose.

Cf. dparco tov aravpov ainov (Lu. 9

23), juerd to e'YepdT]vai

:

fxe

Trpoa^co

Lu. 10:35), /3dXe aird aov (Mt. 5:29). See Ro. 15 16, 19. It is not necessary to split hairs here as to whether the reflexive idea is present. It is in perfect harmony with the Greek

(Mk. 14:28;

cf.

:

history.

Indeed English does not

differ

here from the Greek.

and acfycov is noticeable. had long been the main pronoun In archaic and poetic for the oblique cases of the third person. forms the early use of ov and o-^Sj^ survived.^ In the N. T. avrov is the only form found, as in avTcou, avToh, avrov (Mt. 17 22 f.), kt\.

The use

AvTov.

2.

As a matter

of avrov rather than ov

of fact, however, avrou

:

3. Genitive for Possession.

The

genitive of the personal pro-

is very common as a possessive rather than the possessive pronoun or the mere article. In Jo. 2 12 avrov occurs twice, but once (ot d5eX0oO we do not have it. These examples are so common as to call for mere mention, as 6 -n-arrjp ixov (Jo. 5 17), rov Kpa^arrbv

noun

:

:

aov (5:8), rbv KpajSarrov avrov (5:9).

The presence

not always emphatic.

of the personal

Thus no undue

pronoun in the genitive is emphasis is to be put upon avrov even in its unusual position in Jo. 9 6, nor upon cou in 9 11, nor upon fxov in 9 15. See chapter on :

:

:

The

See also krapas rovs

Sentence.

avrov (Lu. 6

:

h

20),

rfj virofxourj vp.oou

ocjidaXfJiOvs

avrov

els

See also position of pov in Mt. 8 8 and Jo. 11 matter of fact the genitive of personal pronouns, as is 19).

the

:

KOLPT]

pronoun

(Moulton, ProL,

The

out.

p.

40

f.),

rovs

fjLadrjras

Krrjaeade ras i^i^x^s vfxojv (Lu. 21: :

32.

As a

common

in

has nearly driven the possessive

use of the article with this genitive will be dis-

cussed in that chapter (The Article). Cf. t6v irarepa pov (Mt. 26 53) and (f>l\oi. pov (Jo. 15 14). Both vpS^v in Paul (1 Cor. 9 12)

:

:

:

and

avrov (Tit. 3

position of avrov 1

Cor. 9

ripcov

is

:

11

(2 Cor.

and 4

:

:

is

may be in the attributive position. The emphatic in Eph. 2 10 as is that of vpc!}v in

5)

:

ripciv

16)

in Jo. 11

:

48.

The

attributive position of

and avrov with other attributes (Mt. 27

not unusual. 4. Enclitic Forms.

:

60)

The first and second persons singular have and unenclitic forms which serve to mark distinctions of emphasis in a general way. We may be sure that when the long

enclitic

>

lb., 2. Abt.,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 152.

pp. 69, 89.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

682

.

NEW TESTAMENT

form efiov occurs some slight emphasis is meant, as in v/jluv re Kal kixov (Rom. 1:12). But we cannot feel sure that all emphasis is absent when the short form is used. Thus olKoboiiT)aw nov ttjp eKKXrjaiav (Mt. 16

With prep27). used as in ancient Greek except with irpbs, which uniformly has ne even where emphasis is obvious. 1 Thus bevTt wpos p.e (Mt. 11 28), koL av Ipxxi Trpos 18), iravra

:

rod Trarpos

fxoL ivaptbbdr] vird

ositions (the ."true"

iiov

form

ones) the long

(11

:

is

:

fie

(3

Some

14).

:

in Jo. 6

37

:

editors here

Trpos ink is

and

LXX print

in the

the true text.

Cf. Trpos

kixk

irpds

p.k.

But

also in P.Tb.

With aov the only difference is one of accent and depend on the judgment of the editor. It is difficult, if not impossible, to lay down any fundamental distinction on this point. On aov and oov see chapter VII, iv, 4, (a). Nestle has e^onoXoyovixai ooi (Mt. 11 25) and Kayd be
(iii/A.D.).

we have

to

:

:

:

when

except

there

is

But the trouble

emphasis.

that the en-

is

form seems to occur even where there is emphasis. The genitive of the third person can be used with emphasis. Cf. clitic

avTcou in (c)

Lu. 24

:

31.

See further chapter VI,

v, 4.

The Frequency of the Personal Pronouns.

bottom a

It is at

from the substantive, though the roots are independent of verb and substantive and antedate historical evidence.^ This pronoun came into play where the sense required it.

6

:

differentiation

Thus Kal 5.

noun

kTcdevres rds x^f^pas avTois aTre\v(Tav(AG. 13

There

is

no doubt

of the fact that the

in the oblique cases

Greek.3

What

nominal

suffixes at

is

:

3).

Cf.

Mk.

N. T. uses the pro-

more frequently than

the explanation of this fact?

is

true of the older

The Hebrew

pro-

once occur to one as the explanation of the situation and Blass accepts it."* The LXX shows a similar " lavish use of pronouns."^ But a glance at the modern Greek reveals the same fondness for pronouns, and the papyri abundantly prove that the usage belongs to the vernacular kolvt].^ Cf. apvyu tovs 6(l)da\p.ovs

O.P. 299

y.ov

Par.P. 51 (ii/B.c), KajXTruvi

(i/A.D.).

Thumb

^

N. T. Gk.,

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2

Wundt, Volkerpsych.,

'

Cf. W.-Th., p. 143; Blass, Gr. of

1.

p. 165.

Bd.,

2. Tl.,

*

Cf. also Simcox, Lang., etc., p.

6

C. and

S., Sel., etc., p. 65.

eduKa

pvodajpevTrj

ai'Tcc

suggests that this abundance of pro-

1904, p. 47.

N. T. Gk., p. 164. ^ Moulton, Prol., 53. ^

HeUen., p. 108

p. f

84

f

:

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

683

nouns is natural in the vernacular. Blass^ finds "a quite peculiar and tiresome frequency" of the pronoun in the N. T. This is only true in comparison with literary Attic. The N. T. is here a natural

Thus

expression of the vernacular.

twice in Lu. 21

vfxup

:

in Lu. 6

Mt. 6

19, aov in

:

:

20 note avrov twice,

17 as the reflexive twice

{aXtirpal aov T-qv Ke(f)a\riv Kal to irpoauirop aov vbpai). It is not necessary to go as far as Moulton does and deny that there is any Semitic influence in the N. T. on this point. It was here in harmony with the current Greek. Cf. Lu. 24 50 for three examples :

of avTov (-ovs).

In Lu.

20.

1

Cf. ae

— ae in Jo.

1

:

For 01^6= 'it' see Ro. 7

48.

62 abrb and avrov both refer to

:

waidiov.

Redundant. The pronoun was sometimes redundant. This was also a Hebrew idiom, but the vernacular kolvt] shows similar examples. The two streams flow together as above. With (d)

participles note tQ 6k\ovrL

6 rrjpQiv

—

18

:

17),

oh

like

—

.

— avTrjs

is

(Mk But

(Rev. 7:2).

Sophocles.

7

the indeclinable

"im>,

— avrovs

(Ac.

25), ovs

:

this

idiom appeared also

not merely Semitic.^ It occurs in Indeed in Rev. 17: 9, evrrd 6pr] oirov

avTwv, we have oirov in sense of relative pronoun modern Greek rod. For the redundant antecedent see

yvvri KadrjTat Itt

much

rjs

Greek and

Xenophon and

.

Hebrew idiom with

12),

:

— avTots

in the older

il

the

like

— avTov (Mt. 3

:

11)

:

other examples.2

15

(Mt. 5: 40), KarajSavTos

Cf also to ttottjplou 26) ov fxi] which does not differ radically from the Cf. also the redundant personal pronoun with

avT^ (Rev. 2

ddoaoj

(Jo.

ai'To

the relative ov

aurcS

a(^e%

avrQ (8:1), efi^avTi avrcp els irXolov rjKoXoWrjaau There are besides the anacolutha like 6 plkccv kuI

avTui (8 :23).

TTLu

—

— r}Ko\ovdr}aav

avTOV

'

further under Relative. (e)

According to Sense.

See also chapter X,

vii, viii, ix.

The

personal pronouns are sometimes used freely according to the sense. In Ac. 26 24, to. iroKXa ae ypdixnaTa els p-aviav irepLTpeireL, the position of ae is probably a matter of euphony and a case in point. :

Somcitimes there

pronoun. meaning. avTC:v

9),

But

The

So with avTov (Lu. (Mt. 11 1), a{)T6v at

'

I.

:

17), avTols

20

(Jo.

:

15),

(Mt. 8

:

4),

times.

In Jo. 8

\}/ev8os

:

44,

xl/evar-qs

kolvt].

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 165. W.-Th., p. 148. Cf. C. and

:

:

14).

It

is

xJ/evaT-qs. In 2 Cor. 5:19 20 avrov has in mind aKp6l3varos 2

S., p.

:

earlv Kal 6 iraTrip aiiTov,

suggested by

to Kbanov, as in Ro. 2

(12

aiJrcoj^

avTC>v (1 Pet. 3

no peculiarity of N. T. Greek or of the all

the avTov refers to aiiTots refers

»

1

:

this is

common

no immediate reference in the context for the is compressed and one must supply the

is

narrative

G5

f.

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 281.

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

684

suggested by aKpo^varla.

Mk.

5

:

41

So

in Ac. 8

the grammatical. But in Jo. 6 with the abstract collective tEv

much

We

5 auroTs refers to

:

Traidiov

ttoXlv.

In

rather than

39 avro agrees grammatically

In Lu. 6

6.

:

6

we

find a usage

the original Homeric absence of the pure relative.^

like

have

:

follows the natural gender of

avTjj

much

avrov used with avdpcowos

/cat

Mk.

as ov was.

In Mt.

46 avrols points to oxXoi'. (/) Repetition of the Substantive. Sometimes indeed the substantive is merely repeated instead of using the pronoun. 6 deos. This is usually due Thus in Jo. 11 22 we have t6v deSv would be ambiguous as in the to the fact that the mere pronoun it may be for the sake of Sometimes use of 'Irjcrovs in Jo. 4:1. avdpioirov (Lu. 12 rod emphasis as in 6 vl6s 8) rather than kyoi. sustained by the repetition of better is antithesis Sometimes Kocyjxov (Jo. KoayLw with Thus 9:5), d/xaprta the substantive. peculiarity of Greek. But this is no 5 (Ro. 12). anapTias dvT(ov\)|JiiaL). (KT-qriKal Pronouns Possessive The n. It is not merely the possessive relation (a) Just the Article. that is here under discussion, but the possessive pronoun. Often the article alone is sufficient for that relation. Thus in kreims 28

19 avTovs refers to

:

In

Wvr].

6

:

—

:

:

—

—

:

Trjv

x^'i^P"-

Cf. also

(Mt. 8

(2 Cor. 12

pronoun

is

3)

:

xetpas

rets :

18).

the article alone

(Mk. 14

:

46),

The common

makes the

rrjv jiaxo-ipa-v

(14

:

relation clear. 47), rov a8e\(l)6u

use of the genitive of the personal

not under consideration nor the real reflexive pronoun

like eavTov.

There is in the (b) Only for First and Second Persons. N. T. no possessive form for the third person. The other expedients mentioned above (usually the genitive avrov, avrCiv) are used.

The

personal pronouns are substantival, while the posses-

sive forms are adjectival.

In modern Greek no adjectival pos-

Just the genitive occurs (Thumb, Handbook, p. 89). possessive kp.bs and abs are disappearing in the papyri (Rader-

sessive exists.

The

macher, N. T. Gk., p. 61). Originally the accent^ of ends was *e/ios. The forms rnxe-repos and v^e-Tepos are both comparative and imply emphasis and contrast, the original meaning of the comparative.^ When these possessive forms oc(c) Emphasis, When Used. cur in the N. T. there is emphasis. But it is not true, as Blass* 1

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 35.

» Seymour, The Horn. Dial., p. 60. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 250. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 168.' Brugmann (Vergl. Gr., ii. 283) derives the poss. from the gen., while Delbriick (V, i. 213) obtains the gen. from the

2 *

poss.

Who

can teU?

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) affirms, that there

See

used.

no emphasis when the genitive forms are possessives do not occur often in the

The

For details see chapter VII, iv, 4, (d). Article. The possessives in the N. T. usually

N. T.

With the

(d)

have the kurjs

is

(6), 4.

I,

685

the article wavTa aa

1),

:

is

when

save

article

(Ro. 10

t6

kfiSv

predicate.^

(Mt. 18

20), to)

:

absent the possessive

eariv, Kal

ra ad

rj

(Ph. 3

9)

:

(Jo. 5

enrj

aw (Mt. 7:3),

30),

:

:

In

31).

the possessive

rrjs

When

etc.

usually predicate as in

17: 10; Lu. 15

e^ud (Jo.

kuriv bLKaiochvriv T-qv eK vojjlov

is

Thus

to. e/xd

ex(^v

/x?)

attributive,

is

my

own, though the article comes later. In earLv Iva where the attributive use also occurs. But see Mt. 20 23. One may note vixC^v in predicate (1 Cor. 3:21). (e) Possessive and Genitive Together. Paul's free use of a righteousness of

4

Jo.

:

34 we have

e/jLov

/SpcoAid :

the possessive and genitive together as attributives

by

trated

TO

k/jLov

Kal to v/jluv (1

TTvev/jLa

Cor. 16

:

is

well illus-

In

18).

Cor.

1

MSS. vary between to v/jlcov mrkpyjixa and to vnerepov (BCD) mT. So in 1 Jo. 2 2 we have both Trept toou aixapTLwu i}nC:v 16

:

17 the

:

and

also

Trept

twv

may

Indeed the genitive

rjneTepcov.

be in apposi-

Thus

tion with the genitive idea in the possessive pronoun. xetpl

kiJifi

14

:

UahXov

(1

Cor. 16

:

21).

Cf. 2 Th. 3

:

17; Col.

4

:

ttj

18; Jo.

24.

(/)

Objective Use. The possessive pronoun

just like the genitive.

So

idiom.

Tiiu kp-r^v

This

is

may

avapLvqaiv (Lu.

22: 19;

1

Cor. 11

:

Tepap Kavxr](nv (15:31), tQ vpeTepw eXeet (Ro. 11:31), bibacFKoXlav (15

:

4).

Cf.

ttjs

be objective

in full accord with the ancient

vpoov TTapai<\r]aeois (2

24),

Tr]v

vpe-

rriv rip.eTkpav

Cor. 1:6).

The possessive, like the personal (g) Instead of Reflexive. pronoun, occurs where a reflexive might have been used. Thus TU) aw with KaTavoels in Mt. 7 3, aKOvoi to. epa TeKva (3 Jo. 4), eypa\}/a TV kpfi x^i-p'i- (Phil. 19). The pronoun i'Stos is possessive, but is best :

treated as a reflexive.

The Intensive and Identical Pronoun ((t-uvtovos cLvtcoThe use of auros was originally "purely anaphoric."- As third personal pronoun it was, of course, anaphoric. The in-

III.

vi)|JLCa).

the

tensive use (a)

is

more emphatic.

The Nominative Use of

Auto'?.

As already remarked,

it is

not always clear whether we have the emphatic 'he' or the intensive 'self with

ai^Tos

in the nominative.

Cf. aiiTos Kal

-fj

n-nTrjp

Simcox, Lang., etc., p. 54. Monro, Horn, dr., p. 170. Jann., Hist. Ok. Gr., p. 351, calls this the "determinative" pronoun. On the whole subject of aitT6s seeK.-G., I, pp. 051 IT. *

2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

686

avTov (Jo. 2

12).

:

and numbers.

ders

The intensive avros appears in all persons, genThus avros kyC-j (Ro. 7: 25; cf. kyui avros, Ac.

10:26), avrol CLKT^Koanev (Jo. 4:42), bvvaaai Th. 4 9; cf. Ac. 18 15), avros

avrol vnels (1

:

:

avrol Trpo^rjrai (Ac. 15 kirovpavta (9

ways

:

5

(Ac. 15

11), avrol

Tpo(f)rjraL

(a.d. 22).

In 2 Cor. 10

1

:

:

The

36).

:

Cf. avros Aaveid (Lu. 20

:

(Lu. 6:42),

(Mt. 3

6 'Iwavrjs

(Heb. 9

32), avro to I3l^\Iov

23), avra ra epya (Jo.

:

used.

— avros

42), avrri

:

4),

19), avra to.

:

article is not alSdppa (Heb. 11 :

Cf. eyu 8e avros, P.Oxy. 294

32).

There

note avros kyu UavXos.

is

particularly essential in the order whether avros eyo: or

nothing

'ey
avros

not in the N. T. Varying Degrees of Emphasis.

(see above).

"E7co7€

is

For a list of the vari(6) ous shades of meaning possible wtth avros see Thompson, Syntax of Attic Greek, p. 59 f. In Ro. 15 14 avros occurs with the first :

person and avrol with the second in sharp contrast. In Shakespeare we have "myself" as subject: ''Myself have letters" (Julius Caesar, iv. 3).^ Cf. Latin ipse. In Jo. 2 24, avros 8k 'Irjaovs, we have Jesus himself in distinction from those who believed on :

In

him.

Cor. 11

1

Th. 3

avrol diSare (1 avrol,

we

find 'ye

:

14

:

3),

by

:

47).

not

On avrol fxev

avrrj

(f)vaLs

'nature of

is

Each instance

yourselves.'

Cf. avrol (Ac. 16

ovv see

Ac. 13

:

:

will

Note

itself.'

In Ac. 18

'ye for yourselves.'

owing to the context. 6

17

:

15, 6\l/eade

vary slightly

37); avros

(Mk.

ixbvos

See d0' tavrdv (Lu. 12

4.

:

57),

avrol.

(c)

with Outo?. In Ac. 24

Avt6<;

Cf.

occurs.

ovroi.

(Ph. 1:6), avro rovro (2 Pet. Cf. 2 Cor. 7: 11.

:

15, 20,

avro rovro (Ro. 9

els

The

1

:

5,

other order

:

the classical idiom avrol 17),

TrewoLdojs

avro rovro

accusative of gen. reference). is

found in

eypaxf/a rovro avro (2

Cor. 2:3). (d)

The sense Thus avrfj rifxepa

In Luke avros

Ayro? ALMOST Demonstrative.

times almost a pure demonstrative as of 'very' rfi

copa

'self

or

(Lu. 2

:

is

it

comes to be

strengthened

The modern Greek freely employs Cf. Thumb, p. 90. Moulton (ProL,

(23: 12).

tive sense.

to

38), kv avrco rco /caipw (13

6 is

some-

in later Greek.

:

'that very.' 1), ev avrfj rfj

this

demonstra-

p. 91) finds this

demonstrative use of avros 6 in the papyri. So avrdv rbv 'kvrav, O.P. 745 (i/A.D.). Moulton thinks that avros is demonstrative also in Mt. 3 4. See vi, (/i), for further discussion. It is not so common as the nom(e) In the Oblique Cases, :

inative.

15

:

27

So (cf.

avrols rots KKr^rots (1 Cor. 1

:

24).

Cf.

But examples occur even

15 :32). 1

Farrar, Gk, Synt., p. 35.

/cat

avrovs in Ac.

in the first

and

.

PRONOUNS

687

('ANTflNTMIAl)

second persons. Thus ejuoD avTov (Ro. 16 2), o-oD avrrjs (Lu. 2 35), avTovs riiias (2 Th. 1 4), e^ vficou avTcov (Ac. 20 30, probable text). Here the use is intensive, not reflexive. The same thing is possible with vnCov avToov in 1 Cor. 7 35 (cf. 11 13). But I think this This intensive use of avros with l/zoO and aov is found in reflexive. Attic. In avToJv iiixwv and vjxwv only the context can decide which :

:

:

:

:

is

intensive

and which

themselves,' P. Grenf.

The

:

.

73

ii,

pronouns

the personal pronouns and The N. T. does not have avTOTaros avros.

N. T. compounds

(Mk. 4

The use

'O AuT09.

(g)

very')

is

:

:

They

is

avros iavri^ :

9; 10

12.

of

be treated directly.

will

Latin ipsissimus)

(cf.

:

compounded

are, of course,

4

Some

.

11), auroKard/cptros

:

28), avrorrrrjs (Lu. 1

:

2).

of 6 auros for identity ('the same,' 'the

close kin to the original 'self idea.

The idiom

So

Cf. 2 Cor. 1

23).

of avros are avrdpKTjs (Ph.

11), avToixaros

:

Syntax of Attic

(iii/A.D.).

27), avrol kv iavTo7s (Ro. 8

distinctively reflexive

(Tit. 3

A

by Side with the Reflexive.

Avt6<; Side

(Eph. 5

Cf Thompson,

reflexive.

Cf. e^ ahrdv tuv veKpoTa4>wv, 'from the grave-diggers

Greek, p. 64.

(j)

:

Thus 6 avros

frequent in the N. T.

Cf. ipse Kvptos

and idem.

(Ro. 10

:

12),

39), ras avras dvalas (Heb. 10 11), and with t) avrri aap^ (1 Cor. 15 ro ahrb (Mt. 5 47), rCiv avrdv (Heb. 2 understood substantive :

:

:

:

14), ra avra (Lu. 6

:

In

23).

tive instrumental case with

5

:

9

we

1

Cor. 11

ro avrb

it,

rfj

we have the associaBut in 1 Pet. k^vprnikv-Q. :

actually have the genitive ('the

5

same

sort of), ra avra

rljiv Tradr]iJ,aro:v.

TV.

The Reflexive Pronoun

(avTavaKXao-TiKT] dvT
Distinctive Use. As already explained in this chapter under Personal Pronouns, the originals of the personal pronouns in oblique cases were also reflexive.^ Only gradually the distinction between personal and reflexive arose. But even so the personal pronouns continued to be used as reflexive. Hence I cannot agree with Blass^ that efxavrov, aeavrov, eavrov "have in the N. T. been to some extent displaced by the simple personal pronoun." It (a)

is

rather a survival of the original (particularly colloquial) usage. 19 f. dr^aavpl^ere Vfxlv drjaavpovs, 5 29 f in Mt. 6

Thus we have and 18

:

8

f.

apare rbv ^vybv €\ey^op

.

.

.

fxov

iJiera^i}

(Ro.

1

kef)'

:

Q :2

VfJ.as,

17

/j-rj

:

aov Kal avrov.

But

these survivals. -Kpbdvixos

:

:

/3dXe dTro aov,

15).

see d0t5co ra

For

this

(xaXirla-iis

27

efxirpoadh aov, 11

Matthew has irepi

k^k (Ph.

2

rather :

:

29

:

15

more

of

8bs b.prl kfiov Kal crov,

18

23), rb Kar' tnk

idiom in Attic see Thompson, Sijn-

J

Cf. DyrofT, Gcsch. d. Pron. Reflex.,

2

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p.

IGG

f.

1.

Abt., p. 16.

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

688

This

tax of Attic Greek, p. 64,

not indeed the

is

idiom, but the vernacular Attic (as in the

classic Attic

not so free from In particular the third person presents peculiar problems, since

it.

the ancient

MSS. had no

reflexive avrov

the editors.

2

:

See chapter VI,

rrjp ^pvx'fjv

A

son,

In Lu. 9

24).

:

just alike.

:

but ovk

23),

24 we have

ri}v

Sijntax of Attic Greek, p. 64.

a matter with

It is

Thus W. H. give

iv, (/), for details.

For avrov as indirect

eavrov.

The abbreviated

accents or breathings.

and avTov would look

dparo) Tov aravpov avrov (Lu. 9 (Jo.

KOLurj) is

ewicTTevev avrov avrots

^vxw

avrov,

but in 14: 26

reflexive in Attic see

Thomp-

Cf. avrw, Ac. 4: 32.

In the is not

pronouns the point

light of the history of the personal

very material, since avrov can be reflexive also. The Attic Greek used to have So/coi ^jloi. But Luke in Ac. 26 9 has c5o^a enavrQi as Paul in 1 Cor. 4 4 says eiiavrcc ahvoiba. Old English likewise used the personal pronouns as reflexive. Thus " I will lay me down :

:

and

sleep,"

19

21,

:

{h)

It

lit

"He

sat

him down

at a pillar's base," etc.^

See also chapter VII,

twice.

The Absence of the Reflexive from the Nominative. The inThe Enghsh

impossible to have a reflexive in the nominative.

is

tensive pronoun does occur as avros eyo: (2 Cor. 10

shown, early

likewise, as already

lost the old

"himself" as mere nominatives.^ avrbs could

The

(c)

:

1).

idiom of "myself,"

Cf. d0' lavrov, Jo. 11

have been employed. Indirect Reflexive.

It is less

common

It docs indeed occur, as in the ancient Greek. avdpCiirovs tlvai

iavTov dXXd

kyw

Cf. Ac.

iv, 4, (c).

ev

rc3

cos

rr]u

koI efiavrov (1

rod erepov (10

eiravepxtcrdal

avvayojviaaadal

jxoi

{xe

(Ro. 15

:

51,

in the

So dekw

where

N. T. rravras

Cor. 7:7),

avpeid-qaLV 8e \kyco oiixl ttjv

But

on, the other hand, note

29).

axo86:aco :

:

30).

<jol

(Lu.

10:35),

Cf. 2 Cor. 2

:

13.

Trapa/caXaJ

—

This on the

whole is far commoner and it is not surprising since the personal pronoun occurs in the direct reflexive sense. Cf. r]v riKovaare fxov (Ac. 1:4). In Thucydides the reflexive form is generally used for the indirect reflexive idea.^ (d)

In the Singular.

Here the three persons kept their sepHence we find regularly efxavrov (Jo. 14

arate forms very well.

Indeed eavrov never For aeavrov or aeavrov some MSS. read eavrov in Mk. 12 31; Jo. 18 34; Gal. 5 14; Ro. 13 9. In 1 Cor. 10: 29 eauroO=' one's own' (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 441; Prol, p. 87). There was some tendency towards this usage in the an21), aeavrui (Ac. 16

stands for

:

28), eavrc^ (Lu. 18 :4).

ejj.avrov.'^ :

:

1

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 33.

2

lb.

:

:

» «

Dyroff, Gesch.

etc.,

W.-Soh., p. 205.

Bd.

I,

1892, p. 19.

PRONOUNS

689

('ANTflNTMIAl)

though the explanation is not perfectly clear.^ But the usage is clearly found in the Atticists, Dio Chrys., Lucian and Philost. 11.^ In Rev. 18 24 h aurf? is a sudden change from h aol of the preceding verses, but is hardly to be printed avrp, for it is not strictly reflexive. The same" use of avT-qv rather than ae appears in Mt. 23 37 and parallel Lu. 13 34. Cf. also cient Greek,!

:

:

:

But Moulton

Lu. 1:45.

Dec,

{CI. Rev.,

1901, p. 441, April,

1904, p. 154) finds in the papyri several examples of this "uneducated use of eavTov' for first and second persons singular, avyxcopw (A^.

ixtTo.

TTiv

T. Gr.,p.Gl)

etc.,. p. 26,

B.U. 86

eavTov T€\evTr]v, cites tir'eypaxpa

n. 32).

Radermacher

Thucydides has a few possible examples and

certainly the Latin is

Lat. Spr., p. 84).

(U/a.d.).

eavrQ (Petersen-Luschan, Reisen

is

in point (Draeger, Historische Synt. d.

In early Greek Delbriick finds the reflexive

referring indifferently to either person.

Cf.

Thompson,

Sijnt. of

In the modern Greek the singular iavrov occurs and second persons and even rod eavrov nov, first for constantly Cf. "myself," "thyself," "herself" emphasis. for aov Tov eavTov

Attic Greek, p. 64.

"hisself." See Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 63. In translation from Semitic originals we sometimes find ^^vxhv rather than eavrbv as in Lu. 9 24 (cf. Mk. 8 36). Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 87; Robinson, Study of the Gospels, p. 114. The form avTov (Jo. 2 24), avrco (Lu. 12 21) is preserved in some 20 pas-

and vulgar

:

:

:

:

sages (e)

is

by W. H. and Nestle. In the Plural. Here the matter

rather too

much

to say with

is

Simcox that

not in any doubt. It the only form

eaurcoj/ is

indeed true for the first and third 23 14). In 2 Th. 1 4 avTovs In the third rinds is intensive, as already shown (chapter VII). person also only eavTo:v occurs as in Mt. 18 31. In the second person plural a few examples of the reflexive vijlcov avTwv apparently

for the reflexive plural.

persons as

This

is

avedefxaTlaafxev eavrovs (Ac.

:

:

:

30; 1 Cor. 5 13 and probably so in 1 Cor. 7:35; vntv auroTs in 1 Cor. 11 13. But the common idiom for the second person plural is undoubtedly lavrwv, as irpoaexeTe eavrois There Cf. Mt. 25 9; Ro. 6 13; 1 Jo. 5 21, etc. (Lu. 17: 3). are some seventy examples of eavTcbv for first and second persons plural in the N. T. (Moulton, Prol, p. 87), as is the custom in the papyri, chiefly in illiterate documents. Cf. iVa yeivdoneda irpos Tols Kad' eavTovs, Tb.P. 6 (ii/B.c); I'm KOfxiac^neda to. eavTcjv, Tb.P. 47.

survive, as in Ac. 20

:

:

:

N. T. Gk.,

:

:

:

p. 1G7.

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

Brut?., Griocli. Gr., p. 421.

»

W.-Sch., p. 205.

Cf. Moistorh., Att. Insclir., p. 104. "

lb.

690

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

The

LXX (Conybeare and Stock, Sel.,

for first

and second persons

personal together like

viitv

NEW TESTAMENT has this use of lavTwv even find reflexive and

p. 30)

We

plural.

eavroh (Ex. 20: 23).

The reflexive is used with or without the (/) Article with. article and in any position with the article. But curiously enough atavTov is never so found and e/iauroD only once in sharp contrast, t6

^rjTCOV

/zi)

dXXd to

kfjiavTod
iroWcbv (1 Cor. 10:33).

tcov

we have

Instead of this reflexive genitive (possessive) of the personal pronoun. TO bdpbv

(Mt. 5

(Tov

abundant as

in

But note (Ac. 21

TroSas

Toiis

:

the genitive

t6v irarkpa nov (Jo. 8

The examples

24).

:

ri^tco

eavrov avXrjv (Lu. 11

r-qv

the older Greek. iavTOV

Cf.

:

:

49), a^es

of eavrod are, of course,

common

21), the

idiom in

also the order to epyov eavrov (Gal. 6:4), 11),

eavrov (Lu.

8ov\ovs

19

13), Krjirov

:

These are all attributive, but the sense is not quite the same in the two last. The use of avrov in such examples has already been noted as in Mt. 16 24. Sometimes the MSS. vary between eavrov and avrov as in Lu. 4 24. The plural eavroav is likewise found thus, rov'i eavroov veKpovs (Mt. 8 22), rw Kvplco eavruu (Mt. 18:31), eavrCiv ra ifxarta (Mt. 21:8). See further chapter eavrov (Lu. 13

19).

:

:

:

:

XVI, The Article. (g) Reflexive in the Reciprocal Sense. does not really

This use of iavrdv in harmony with The papyri show this same blending

idea from aX\r]\cov.

differ in

the ancient Greek idiom.

C.P.R. 11

(ii/A.D.) twice.

€X€T€ ned' eavTcov (1 Cor. 6

3

T€s eavrovs (Col.

aWrjXcov as

:

by way 3

Sometimes

retains its

:

Cf. also aXKriXuv

13).

paraphrase of

:

(Tit.

LXX)

2:7).

is

1

:

3).

Moulton,

:

24,

each word

it is

really superflu-

LXX), where^ Mt.

practically lost, as in

9

Anglo-Saxon see Penny, the English Language, 14

xo-P*-"

in Lu.

27:

So also aeavrdv But usually such examples occur where

Pronoun in hfiavrbv (Jo.

and avrom

has only duixeplaavro.

2), apvriaaadco eavrov (Lu.

flexive in

side with

Sometimes indeed the

with the middle voice where

the force of the middle (Ac. 26

by

ijyovnevoL virepexovras eavroju

ous, as in 8L€fxeplaavro eavrols (Jo. 19

irapexop-evos

Kplfiara

19), vovOerovv-

occurs side

Reflexive with Middle Voice.

(free

:

idea.

reflexive occurs

35

it

(Eph.5

of variety, as in avexop.evoi aWrjXuv nal

:

own

Thus we may note on

7) ,\a\ovvres eavrots

In Ph. 2 3 aWrjXovs

12.

(h)

:

16), etc.

lavTols (Col.

^bjievoi

23

if

:

is

Cf. P.P. 8 (ii/s.c.) three times, O.P. 260

of eavrojv with aWr^Xoiv.^ (i/A.D.),

This

Moulton Prol., p. 87.

:

23).

A

On

History

p. 8.

{Prol., p. 87) ^

Cf.

r]yrip.aL

kp.avr6v

the use of the reof

the

Reflexive

-KapaXrjjj.ipop.ai

xpos

admits that sometimes W.-Th., p. 257.

PRONOUNS

691

('ANTflNTMIAl)

eavTov occurs without great emphasis. This use of the reflexive with the middle may be compared with the reflexive and the

LXX. So

personal pronoun in the (Ex. 6

:

iroL-qaere

oil

7),

"you yourselves." chapter XVII, Voice. {%) The Use of "ISto?. self,"

It

is

we

In the N. T.

find

So English

23).

:

p.

This adjective

frequent in the N. T,

is

So

9: 10), in the sense of 'private.'

See further

191.

especially (17 times) in

it,

"me my-

Cf. Thackeray,

a possessive, opposed* to

usually' treated as

vnas 'Xaov enoi

\i\yLypoixaL efxavTU)

vfuv iavTols (20

or

KOLvhs /car'

biqixbaios.

lUav

Lu.

(cf.

this sense occurs also in Ac.

32 and Heb. 7 27. Cf. iStwrat in Ac. 4 13 (1 Cor. 14 16). Sometimes also the word implies what is peculiar to one, his particularity or idiosyncrasy, as 1 Cor. 3:8; 7:7 (cf. the classic

4

:

:

:

:

But in general 6 tSios or tStos without means simply 'one's own,' a strong possessive, a real reflexive. To all intents and purposes it is interchangeable in sense with eavrov. The examples of this reflexive idea are many. Thus in Mt. 9 1; Lu. 6 41; 10 34; Jo. 1 41; 4 44, etc. The use of ol Ulol for 'one's own people' (cf. also ol Cf. our "idiot."

idiom).

the article

(cf. lavrov)

:

:

:

:

:

oimoi, 1 Tim. 5

13

:

:

440) cites rd

the

not strange.

So xpos

(ii/A.D.),

tovs l81ovs,

183

B.U. 341

SeairoTaLs

1

:

11;

term of

home' (Jo. 1 11 19 27; Moulton (CI. Rev., 1901, p.

idioLs

;

:

(I/a.d.),

also illustrate Jo. 1

are

article

Cf. Jo.

for 'one's

to. t5ta

B.U. 86

'i5ta,

The papyri

relations.'

out

is

seen also in the papyri.

6) is

bis, etc.

idiom)

finds the singular in the papyri as a

The use of

endearment. Ac. 21

8, classic

:

Moulton^

1, etc.

:

(ii/iii

a.d.)

11, ol Ulol, for 'one's

(ii/A.D.).

(Tit.

168

:

Examples with-

2:9),

KaLpols

lS'lols

B.U. 16 (U/a.d.). Moulton, CI. In Jo. 1 41 Moulton^ rightly agrees with Rev., 1901, p. 440. Westcott in seeing in top Ulov an implication that some one else (1

Tim. 6

15).

:

Cf.

ISlos

X670S, :

went after his brother also. The only othsr point that here calls for remark is the question whether 6 Ulos is used in an " exhausted" or unemphatic sense. Blass"* finds it so in ets tov 'idiov aypov (Mt. 22

:

5).

Meisterhans

inscriptions literary

(p.

235) finds a few examples in the Attic

and Dcissmann

sense

may

LXX

(Job 24

finds the

weakened use

of

i5tos

in the

Deissmann'' argues further that this exhausted

kolpt].

be assumed in the N. T. because some examples in the Moulton® 12; Prov. 27: 15), etc., seem to occur. :

N. T. Gk.,

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

Prol., p. 90.

*

»

lb.

5

6

CI. Rev.,

Dec,

p. 1G9.

1901, p. 440

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 169. B. S., p. 123 f.

f.;

ProL, p. 90.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

692

NEW TESTAMENT

do not support this contention. Emphasis most of the N. T. instances hke Mt. 9:1; 41; Ac. 1 25; Gal. 6 5, etc. Moulton {ProL,

finds that the papyri

beyond dispute

is

Lu. 6

:

41; Jo.

p. 89) refers

1

in

:

:

:

with point to Ro. 14

5, kv rcD Ibiw vot,

:

as showing

t5tos

The N. T. passages may be assumed

the equivalent of eavrov.

to

show emphasis in spite of the later Byzantine Ibios nov (cf. iavrov nov in modern Greek). Moulton^ agrees with the Revisers in using 'own' in Mt. 22 5 as a "counter-attraction." The only difficult passage is Ac. 24 24 where B may be wrong. But is it not :

:

possible that

iSla

may have

a covert hint at the character of

For the present she was with Felix. In Tit. 1 12 note Ulos avTcbv 7rpo
:

of the reflexive in the reciprocal sense has just been discussed

personal pronouns as

From one

reflexive).

point of view

seem hardly necessary to give a separate discussion

it

(cf.

might

of reciprocal

not exactly that of the mere 'AXXrjXop is, of course, reduplicated from aWos, one of reflexive. the alternative pronouns. Cf the Latin alius and alter alteri. The Latin idiom is common in the classic Greek and is found in Ac. pronouns.

But, after

the idea

all,

is

.

2 12, aXXos Trpos aWov 'Keyovres; 19 32, aXXot aWo tl tKpa^oV, 21: 34, aWoi ak\o TL eTe4>covovv. Cf. in the papyri aX\o kyo), aWo Tavres, B.U. 1079 (a.d. 41). But the true reciprocal dXXijXcoj' has no nominative and is necessarily plural or dual (in older Greek). It occurs 100 times in the N. T. (W. H.) and is fairly well distributed. We have examples 'of the genitive (Ro. 12 5 dXXiyXcov m^Xj?), the :

:

:

ablative (Col. 3

:

13

avexo/xeuot. aX\T]\cou),

20 aairaaaade aWrjXovs, (Ro. 15

:

5

ei'

dXXijXots),

1 Jo.

4

:

7

the accusative

the dative (Gal. 5

(1

Cor. 16

:

oWtjXovs), the locative

ayairoJiJLev

:

13 dovKevere aXXr]\oLs).

This pronoun In 1 Th. 5:11, TapaKoXeLTe dXKrjXovs kal oiKodofxeLTe els rbv eva, note the distributive explaining the reciprocal. Moulton (Prol., p. 246) compares the modern Greek 6 ^as t6v aWov. In Ph. 2 3 note both dXXi^Xous

The

prepositions are used 48 times with aWrjXcov.

brings out the mutual relations involved.

:

and

In

eavTuv. 1

1

Th. 5

Prol., p. 90.

:

15

we have

Cf. Jann., Hist.

ets

a\\i]\ovs Kal

Gk. Gr.,

p. 613.

ets

iravTas.

693

PRONOUNS ('ANTKNTMIAl) In 2 Th.

1

3 note

:

not, like the

euos eKaaTou

LXX

The middle

(Ex. 10

noun.

voice

is

and

els

a\\r]\ovs.

23), use dSeX^os as

:

The N. T. does a reciprocal pro-

also used in a reciprocal sense as in

Cf. chapter XVII, Voice. Pronouns (StiKTiKal dvTcovujJLLai). ('uriously enough the demonstrative pronoun, (a) Nature, like all pronouns, has given the grammarians a deal of trouble to For a discussion of the various theories during the ages define. see Riemann and Goelzer.^ Originally all pronouns were " deictic," "pointing." The "anaphoric" use came gradually .^ Indeed the

avve^ovXevaaPTo (Mt. 26:4).

VI. Demonstrative

same pronoun often continued to be now

deictic,

now

anaphoric,

but later usually Indeed the anaphoric use blends with the relative. relative. Monro ^ marks out three uses of pronouns, not three kinds of pronouns. The "deictic" "marks an object by its position in respect to the speaker." Thus eyw, ah, 65e, oSros, e/cctTOs all fall under this

as

for instance, originally demonstrative,

OS,

head. The "anaphoric" pronoun "is one that denotes an object already mentioned or otherwise known." Thus the resumptive use of 65e, ovTos, eKeluos, 6s, oarts. The "relative" in the modern

As a matter of fact, and "ana"deictic" terms for practical purposes the two Greek and "demonstrative" Latin phoric" may be placed beside the (e). VII, iv, "relative." See further chapter 4, The demonstrative pro(6) Different Shades of Meaning. shade of meaning. the same have nouns do not indeed always

sense would be only

They may point

6s,

oans,

olos, oaos, etc.

out, as far or near {ode, ovtos, keti/os), as in ap-

known (eKeTvos), as already mentioned uses belong to the various deThese (resumptive ovtos, 68e)^ in the context. I do not care to will come out and monstratives pronouns (first, second, third personal the parallel with press the

position

(e/cetws),

as well

person demonstratives) as applied to 68e, ovtos, eKelvos. The pronouns had best be treated separately, not according to the special uses.

The gramword apdpov irpoTaKTiKov as distinct from 6s which to is the same word As a matter of fact 6, is apdpov viroTaKTLKou. as the Sanskrit sd {sds), sa, tad J The Lithuanian nominative sing(c)

'0,

marians^

77,

TO.

This was the simplest demonstrative.^

call this

17,

1

Synt., p. 763

»

Monro,

»

lb.

1

Blass, Gr. of

->

f.

Iloni. Gr., p. 1G8

f.

*

Riom. and Goclzcr, Synt.,

s

K.-Bl.,

I,

i,

p. 779.

p. 603.

N. T. Gk., p. 145. See Gildersleeve, Synt., pp. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 189.

ii,

216-226.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

694

was

ular

stead of

td-s, td, Tol,

and the Greek nominative plural oi, at came "in(Brugmann, Comp. Gr., vol. Ill, p. 327). This German and this in English, was used either as

rat"

form, like der in

demonstrative, article or relative.

One der

NEW TESTAMENT

See Kiihner-Gerth,

p. 575.

I,

not to trace actual historical connection between

is

Brugmann,

(cf.

personal demonstrative

(cf. aii 8e

and

:

in Lu. 1

and uv

was a

Its old use

Griech. Gr., p. 559).

:

Cf. also

76).^

6

and

sort of o-u 8e rl

Brugmann, This substantival use is the main one in Griech. Gr., p. 428. Homer.2 Indeed, as a demonstrative it means rather contrast rj

(Ro. 14

Kal (TV ri

10)

Cf.

(14 :4).

t'ls

than far or near like obe, ovtos, Uetvos, but after all 68e is nothing but 6 wdth the ending -8e. The demonstrative use of 6 is seen in Tous 6(701 in Agathias^ and tCjv 6aa in Maximus of Tyre.'* This demonstrative as antecedent to the relative (tous ot) appears in Justin Martyr^ and Tatian's Oration to the Greeks.^ Plato shows a good many examples^ (like t6v 6s, t6v 6(jos). We meet in Xenophon

and Demosthenes ^ Kal TO,

TO.

forms of

Kal

koI tov as

is

uses tov, t^s, tup,

and Jebb^ pertinently asks

avTov, etc.,

return to the earliest use of tive 6

demonstrative, especially t6v

The modern Greek

TOL.

6,

r),

to as a

kuI t6v, to

etc.,

as short

"a The demonstraFuller, De Articuli if

this is not

pronoun."

frequent in the comic writers.

Cf.

in Antiquis Graecis Comoediis Usu, p. 9. Volker ( Syntax, p. 5) gives papyri illustrations of demonstrative 6 (6 8e, tov 8e, -wpos tov,

rpd

The oblique cases have only two exone a quotation from Aratus, tov Kal (Ac. the other tovs fxkv, tovs 8k (Eph. 4 11), where contrast 11 is demonstraIt is possible indeed that tov in Ph. 1

TOV, TO.

fxkv, TO. 8e, etc.).^''

amples in the N. 17: 28), exists. tive.

T.,

:

:

Cf. also TOV

air'

apxrj^ in

1

Jo. 2

:

13 and

ttjv

in 1 Cor.

In Mt. 14 2 (Mk. 6 14) at is nearly equivalent to 'these.' In Mk. 12 :5 the correct text is oi)s ixkv, etc. But in the nominative the examples of this demonstrative in the N. T. are quite numerous. There are three uses of the nominative in the N. T. (1) One is the demonstrative pure and simple without any expressed contrast. So ot 8^ kpairiaav (Mt. 26 67), ot 5e k8l10

:

29.

:

:

:

cTaaav (Mt. 28

:

17).

In Mt. 26

:

57

ot Se KpaTr]aavTes

Thompson, Synt.

*

Reffel, tJber

'^

*

Diirr, Sprachl. Unters., 1899, p. 27.

^

Cf. Gildersleeve's ed. of First Apol., ch. 5

6

Otto's ed., pp. 24, 90. Cf. Gildersleeve, Justin Martyr, p. 116, for others.

^

we may have

Monro, Horn. Gr., of Att. Gk., p. 67. den Sprachgebr. des Agathias, 1894, p. 5.

1

8

Hadley and

9

V. and D.'s Handb.,

Allen,

Gk.

and note

p. 176.

to p. 116.

Gr., p. 216.

etc., p.

297.

i"

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 81.

PRONOUNS

695

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

usage or merely the article. In Acts we often have oi ixh ovv in But this sense, usually with the participle (Ac. 1 :6; 8 :4, 40). even in these two examples there is apparently an implied conthis

14 and Lu. 9 19 the use of ol be merely refers mentioned in an oblique case. (2) The use of This is no longer very frequent in the N. T.^ So

In Mt. 16

trast.

:

:

to those already 6 5e, etc.

6

iikv,

6

fxev ovTccs,

6 5e oCrcos (1 Cor.

(Ac. 14 :4);

oi fxh, OL Se

In Mt. 13

:

we most

23

7:7);

have

likely

ol fxev, 6 8e

aXKoi

oi fxh,

6

be,

yikv,

18 note nves,

(Heb. 7 20, 23); (Mt. 16 14 f.). :

erepoi be

6 be,

:

not onev,

and

Cf.

6 be.

Ro. 14 2 os fxev, 6 be. (3) The most common use of the demonstrative is where 6 be, i] be, oi be refer to persons already mentioned in an oblique Thus in Mt. 2 5 ot 5e refers to Trap' avTup. So in oi be (Lu. case. 6

fjiev

In Ac. 17

(Lu. 8:5).

:

oi be,

in

:

:

23

21) the reference

:

Mk.

14

to avTov.

In

to

avTrjv.

In Lu. 22

is

implied in the {(l)

come

ydd has

to avrols, while 6 be in the next verse points

61 6

:

:

70

elirav iravTes

to

'l-qaovv,

ij

be it

Homer = both

call it apdpov viroTaKTiKov

demonstrative

Homer

6s,

like

or relative.^

But

force.^

in the Lithu-

Gr., Ill, p. 332) finds proof that the

This original demonstrative sense con-

originally demonstrative.^

tinues in Attic prose, as in the Platonic

However,

it is

b' 6s) is

ri

15,

was demonstrative as well as relative. Cf. also 'there' and 'where' and then 'that.' In cis (ws), is now demonstrative, now relative, and was

t-va in

{koI 6s,

:

before.

Brugmann {Comp.

pro-ethnic i-o

etc.^

as in Ac. 12

has no antecedent expressed, but

to be chiefly relative, as already the Sanskrit yds, ya,

lost its original

anian jA-s

be refers

6 be

The grammarians

"O?.

It did

is

rj

b' 6s; /cat 6s

;

ov

jiev,

ov be,

not certain that the demonstrative use of

the same

word

6s

Brugmann^ inSanskrit sd-s. The

as the relative.

deed finds it from an original root, *so-s like examples of this demonstrative in the nominative are few in the N.T. Thus note in Jo. 5 11 (correct text) 6s 5^ aireKpidr], and also 23. Indeed 6s bi] in Mt. 13 23 is close OS be ovK 'eka^ev in Mk. 15 But this verse furnishes a good example of this idea. to the same :

:

:

demonstrative in contrast, 6 nkv eKarbv 6 be e^riKovra 6 bi TpLaKovra. This example happens to be in the accusative case (cf. Ro. 9 21), but the nominative appears also as in a fxev eweaev (Mt. 13: 4), 6s Hev els TOP Ibiov aypou, 6s be eirl Trjv eniropiau (Mt. 22 5), 6s fiiv Tnarevei :

:

(Ro. 14

:

2), OS ixtv

yap

Kplvei

N. T. Gk.,

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

K.-Bl.,

»

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

«

Cf. Griech. Gr., p. 241;

I,

i,

— 6s

be KplveL

(14

:

5).

So

1

Cor. 11

:

21.

p. 145.

p. 608.

"

p. 195.

Comp.

»

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 185. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,

Gr., Ill, p. 335.

p. 68.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

696

Instances of other cases occur also. refusing to consider ov

fxev ideipav,

no adequate reason

I see

for

ov 8^ cnreKTeLuav, op 8^ eXLOojSoXrjcrav

(Mt. 21 35) examples of the demonstrative 6s.^ Cf. Lu. 23 In the accusative plural note oi)s fxh, ovs 5e, Mk. 12 5; Ac. 27 Ju. 22 f. For the dative singular, w fih, u> 8k, note Mt. 25 15. 1 Cor. 12 8 we have w iikv, aXXco 8k, kt\. For the dative plural oh fjikv, oh 8e, 2 Cor, 2 16. In 1 Cor. 12 28 we have ovs as demonstrative without any corresponding ovs 8k. Cf. at :

:

:

:

33.

44;

In

:

:

:

ovv in

Ac. 8

above

in

:

4, 25;

The

(c).

graphs, like

oh

kv

11 19; 15 :

:

3, 30,

Mt.

6 nev ovv in

1 (cf. avd'

:

11

:

uv verse

3),

of the old demonstrative.

The demonstrative

English usage.

and

ixkv

fxh

Ac. 23 18 as :

relative at the beginning of sentences or para-

in Lu, 12

bottom be a reminiscence tences, as in

:

see

25; 12

1;

:

indeed at

Cf Latin and .

often used to connect sen-

is

Mk.

may

8

:

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

1, etc.

In Mt, 26 50, k4>' 6 irapei, we may also have an instance of the demonstrative. But we do not have in the N, T.

N.

T. Gk., p. 276.

:

Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 62) an inscription in Heberdey-Wilhelm,

Kal OS, Kal TOP, rbv Koi top, irpo rod.

finds demonstrative ocrSe in

N.

Reisen, (e)

"OSe.

in 8e-vpo,

170.

Brugmann^

8r],

finds the encHtic -8e the

same that we have

Latin quan-de. It corresponds to the Latin der hier, English this here. It refers to what is

l-8k (?),

Mc, German "immediately near" in space or time,^ and is of relatively more importance than ovros. As a matter of fact 68e occurs only ten times in the N. T. In the LXX " 68e is much commoner than in the N.

T.'.'

(Thackeray, Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., vol.

especially in the

more

literary parts.

For

its rarity in

inscriptions see Mayser, Gr., etc., p. 308.

I,

p. 191),

papyri and

It is already failing in

century B.C. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 62). For Ta8e see chapter VII, iv, 4, (e). In Lu. 16:25 &8e is the correct text. In the

first

Ac. 15 right.

:

23 rL8e

is

not well supported and in 2 Cor. 12

In one of the remaining examples,

39), Blass^ bluntly calls it

:

19

rfySe r)v a8eK
to,

8k is

(Lu. 10

:

"not even used correctly," a rather curt

judgment. But he cites the LXX (Gen. 25 24; 38 27). In Winer-Schmiedel^ this example is not considered as 68e used for ovTos, but rather like the classic 68e e7dj, ol'5e rifiels (cf. Ex. 8 25; Gen. 50 18). In Jas. 4 13, Topevaofxeda eh Tr]p8e ri}v tvoKlv, it is hardly necessary to take r-qvbe as like the classical rriv 8elva or Ty}v Cf. Kal rT]v (cf. Plato), though that is a possible construction. :

:

:

:

:

1

So Thompson, Synt.

2

Griech. Gr., p. 242.

"

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 170.

8

Thompson, Synt.

^

P. 216.

of Att. Gk., p. 68, n. 3.

of Att. Gk., p. 65.

PRONOUNS TToiriaoiiev

tovto

eKeivo in

fj

697

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

verse 15.

Plutarch^ seems to use

r-qvoe

in

merely means 'this' city which the enterprising Jew exploits for a year before he passes on

More

this sense.

likely in

James

rriude

to the next.

Of doubtful etymology, possibly an original root combine 6, 17, t6=ov, av, tov. Then add ro-s, Ta.{ri),

Oi5to9.

(/)

With

this

In reality, therefore, ovtos

is

uJ^ to.

a doul)lcd demonstrative (combination It is like the Latin is-te (double also).

and to, Giles, p. 296). more often anaphoric than deictic.^ In Homer* it (deictic) expresses an object present to the speaker, but not near him. The word is limited in use in Homer and usually refers to what is previously mentioned (anaphoric).^ It is very common in the N. T. and on the whole the usage accords with that of the older of so

Ovtos

is

Greek.

Naturally there

is

much

diversity in the context.

This use is not wanting. Thus in Mt. 3 17, OVTOS ea-TLv 6 mos fiov, the demonstrative identifies the one present as the Son of God. For further examples of the purely

The Purely

1.

Deictic.

:

deictic use see illustration)

8

25, etc.

:

;

Mt. 12

21

:

:

38; 27

But a

still

:

23; 17: 5; 21 37, 47, 54;

:

10

Mk.

6

plainer example

f. :

is

good

(a particularly 3; 15

:

39; Lu. 4

in Jo. 21

:

21,

:

22;

when

to John as ovros 8e tL. The Contemptuous Use of ovtos. It is merely one variation of the purely deictic idiom due to the relation of the persons in question. It is rather common in the N. T. So in Mt. 26 61 ovtos i
Simon pointed 2.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Ac. 5

:

28.

The Anaphoric Use. The pronoun here refers to one previously mentioned, as in Mt. 27 58 where ovtos alludes to 'Icoar]4> in verse 57, where note the anacoluthon. So in Hel). 7: 1 ovtos points to the mention of Melchizedek in the preceding verse. There are many variations in the anaphoric idiom. The simplest is the one already mentioned, where the subject of discussion is merely continued by oCtos, as in Mt. 3 :3 (cf. the Baptist in verse 1). In particular observe Kal ovtos, as in Lu. 8 41; 16 1. In Lu. 22 59 3.

:

:

:

*

Quest, conviv.

'

lirtiK., r.riccli.

'

Thoinpaon, Synt. of Att. Gk.,

1.

(>.

Gr.,

:

1, TiyfSe ttjc r)txtpav. i»i).

242, 428. p. 65.

*

Monro, Horn.

''

lb.

Gr., p. 170.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

698

A

rather deictic.

Kai ovTos is

tive ovTOi occurs in Ac. 7

striking

NEW TESTAMENT example

of the continua-

Here the prorepeated as often as is desired. So Jo. 6 42. Cf. the use of the pronoun because of prolepsis (Ac. 9 20). The more frequent use is the resumptive or epexegetical use which is rather

noun

35, 36, 37, 38, 40.

:

is

:

:

more abundant

in the N.-T.^ Here ovtos is really in apposition. In Ro. 7 10, 17 evToK-q rj els ^carjv avrr] eis davarov, we seem to have the resumptive use with a substantive. But a clear example (different :

number and gender)^ occurs in Mt. 13 38, to 8e koXov o-xep/ia, One may note a similar use of eKeluos (Jo. 12 48; 16 13) and of avTos (Jo, 12 49). Another plain instance is in Ac. 2: 23, in

:

ovToi eiaiv.

:

:

:

where tovtop Ac.

refers to

(verse 22).

'It]<xovv

In Ac. 4 10

7: 35.

tovtco is

ei'

:

Cf. also tovtop (2d) in

resumptive referring to the pre-

ceding substantive followed by two relative clauses, while ovtos is In verse 11 again ovtos is continuative. In Ro. 9 6, ot e^ 'lo-paijX, ovTOL (cf. Gal. 3:7), the resumptive use is plain. The participle before ovtos is a very common idiom, as 6 de vwoneivas els reXos deictic.

:

(Mt. 10

OVTOS

22; 24

:

13)

:

;

6 kfi^aiPas fxeT' kfxov

— ovtos (26

Cf.

23).

:

Cor. 6 4; Lu. 9 48; Jo. 7 18, etc. The participle, of course, often follows ovtos, not resumptive, as in Jo. 11 37. The relative is followed by resumptive ovtos as in 6s 8' av awoXeaii 1

:

:

:

:

~

OVTOS (Lu. 9

19;

Mk.

plural

is

— TavTa Ph. 4 ravTa

6

:

24), o deXu tovto

seen in Jo. :

wpaaaw (Ro. 7 15

20). So Mt. 5 Tim. 2 2. The 8 26, a raOra; also in Ph. 4:9. For ixTLva ovtol Ro. 8 7, and oaot 14; Gal. 6 12;

16; Ac. 3

see Ph. 3

8.

:

:

:

:

6; Gal.

:

5

:

—

17; 6

:

f.,

:

7; 2

:

—

:

Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 218.

See oTav

:

— TOTe,

—

Kad6is

In Ph. 1 22 tovto resumes to ^77;^. In 2 Th. 3 14 tovtov is resumptive with ei tls as in Jas. 1 23; 3 2. Cf. also 1 Cor. 8:3; Ro. 8:9; Jas. 3 2.3 For eau tls see Jo. 9:31. Sometimes only the context can clear up the exact 8

(Jo.

:

28).

:

:

:

:

:

reference of the anaphoric ovtos. 17

So

in Ac. 8

:

26

avTrj

points to

656s.

4. In Apposition. See also chapter X, ix. Ovtos itself may be expanded or explained by apposition. The simplest form of this construction is where a substantive^ is in apposition as in 2 Cor.

13 9, TOVTO Kai evxofjLeda, ttju v/jlwp KardpTiaLv, where agreement in gender does not occur, Cf, the nominative 17 xto-rts in 1 Jo. 5 4. Cf 1 Th. 4 3. Ovtos is, of course, the antecedent of the rela:

:

:

.

tive

OS,

as in

Mt. 11

:

10;

Jo. 7: 25; tovto 6 in Jo. 16

1

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

2

lb.

*

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

3

p.

65

f.

lb., p. 66.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 171.

:

17.

In

699

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

—

5 /cat. Sometimes a clause is in apposition Ph. 2 5 note tovto with ovTos which may be either nominative or in an obHcjue case. Thus with OTL we have the nominative (with feminine predicate :

noun), as in to ware.

6

14; 10

Kplas

i\

on

(Jo. 3

7,

:

:

11; Ac.

24

Th. 3

11; 2

14;

:

1:6

10; Ph.

:

Cor.

1

Cf.

19).

:

1

Jo. 1

is

5; 5

:

15

:

9,

almost equal

2:3;

in tovto 6tl (Ro.

12;

:

1

the on

:

Lu. 10

6;

:

avrt] karlv

Mk. 4 41, Tis apa ovtos kanv otl, The accusative with 6ti we have

In

11, 14.

50; 2 Cor. 5

:

{avTb tovto), 25;

Tim.

1

1

:

:

Tim. 3 1; 2 Pet. 1 20; 3 3, 8. Cf. also 5td tovto otl in Jo. In Gal. 3 17, after tovto Xkyo), we have the direct discourse without recitative on, but the quotation is really in the

9; 2

12

:

:

:

39.^

:

:

Cf. also Lu. 12

accusative in apposition with tovto. KadeXco fxov Tas airodriKas,

TTotTjo-cj-

appears in wepl tovtov

otl

h 3

and

Jo. 4

TOVTO) OTL, 1

:

otl (Jo.

16

Jo. 4

:

But

:

where

18, tovto

genitive with

locative appears in

Cf. ev TovTco OTL (Jo. 16

9, 10, 13.

19, 24) in a sUghtly different sense

sative.

The

19).

:

The

17.

:

:

otl is really

in general these substantive clauses

30; 1 Jo.

the accu-

have the same

case as tovto.

Closely alhed to this use of otl inative, -KoQev avTT] bk kcTLv

iioL

7]

ha

tovto

eX0]7,

alcovLos fw?) Lua,

2 Jo.

ha

in TOVTO TpoaevxoiJLaL

15

11, 17; 1 Jo. 5

:

:

13.

The

21.

:

ToDro, ha,

3:8.

Jo.

accusative

Ac. 9

Ph.

in

:

1

3,

.

:

11, 23; 5

also TavTa

T-qv kvTo\i]V exotiev air'

:

9; 2 Cor. 2

:

:

3,

feminine because of :

3;

seen

is

— ha,

Jo.

in the

avTOv, ha, 1 Jo.

So

found also with prepositions.

is

21; Ro. 14

9; 1 Pet. 3

:

9;

4

:

eis

6; 1

22 we have ds avTo tovto ha. Cf. Col. 4 8. ha in 2 Cor. 13 10; 1 Tim. 1 16; Phil. 15. eypa\pa tovto avTo ha, we probably have the direct

In Eph. 6

:

In Jo. 17

43.

12; 1 Jo. 3

Cf

9.

:

:

:

Likewise note ha tovto,

In 2 Cor. 2

:

The feminine substantive occurs

accusative also, as in TavT-qv

4

:

is

1

accusative as the direct object of the verb

The

6.

the pronoun

Cf. Jo. 15

the predicate substantive.

Thus the nom-

that of ha.

is

occurs in Lu.

:

:

accusative, though tovto avTo could be adverbial accusative, 'for

very reason.' The locative appears in ku tovtco edo^aaOr) ha, Jo. Cf. 1 Jo. 4 17. The ablative case appears in Jo. 15 13, nd^ova TavTr\s ayaiv-qv ovSels exet, ha. In 3 Jo. 4 the ablative plural ha. The apposition in these various is found, iieL^oTepav tovtwv this

15

:

8.

:

:

—

constructions varies in degree of directness.

with 9

avTo TOVTO occurs in Ro. 9

€ts

Cf. also cTeWo/xevoL tovto

16).

:

In '

1

Pet. 2

:

what goes

where

before.

it is

An example

17 quoted from the

ixTj

in

19 note also the use of

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 217,

points to

:

2 Cor. 8 el

:

of

ottcos

LXX (Ex.

20.

with tovto (though

observed that elsewhere often

x^^pi-^

5tA tovto

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

700 is

el. Here the ei clause is in the same So in Jo. 2 3 we have eav in apposition

predicate), touto yap x^P's

case as tovto, nominative.

with In

h

5

1 Jo.

:

2 the correct text has orav in similar apposition with

The

ev TovTui.

Heb. 9

:

TovTui (locative).

infinitive also occurs in apposition

with

In

tovto.

8 the perfect infinitive in indirect discourse with the accusative is in apposition to tovto which is itself accusative, tovto :

Tov TcvebtxaTOS tov aylov,

8r]\ovvTos

Eph. 4

:

\eyu)),

17 likewise

TecftavepoJadaL

But

ttjp

In

ktX.

in apposition to tovto (after

though here

in indirect discourse,

is

/jltjtco

ixtjKeTL -jrepLTraTetv,

it

indirect

com-

Trjpeli^ ttjv

iavTou

is

mand, not

indirect assertion.

Trapdevov is

merely explanatory of tovto KeKptKev. The same thing 1, where the article is added to the infinitive

is

true in 2 Cor. 2

which

is

:

:

Cf. ovTws,

27 2

:

1

Pet. 2

So

:

Cf. Ro. 1

:

deKr][j.a

12 where tovto

tir]

— kXOeiv.

in the accusative like

avTr] (dprjaKeia

also note oOrcos eaTlv to

15.^

is

The nominative

15.

with

in apposition

is

(TKeiTTeadaL).

1 Pet.

:

16 the infinitive irpoxeLpiaaadaL

TOVTO.

Jas. 1

37

:

also in the accusative, eKpiva e/xaurw tovto, to

In Ac. 26 els

in 1 Cor. 7

infinitive in

— tov Oeov — Kadapa

avTtj,

ein-

(i)LiJ.o1v

— avvirapaKkyidrivaL

in

are

merely subject and predicate. In 2 Cor. 7:11 the nominative infinitive, to Xvwqdrjmi, occurs with aiiTo tovto. Indeed in Mk. 12 24 the causal participle is really explanatory of tovto (Slo. tovto irXapaade, jut) eiSores). It is possible to see a similar example^ in Lu. 8:21, d5eX(/)ot fxov ovToi elaiv ol ciKovovTes. Here in truth ovTOL seems unnecessary. 5. Use of the Article. The article commonly occurs with the noun when the noun is used with ovtos. The noun is by no means always necessary with ovtos. See 6. Indeed the demonstrative alone is often sufficient, as in Jo. 1 2, 7, etc. So avTol ovtol (Ac. 24 15, 20). In a sense a double demonstrative thus occurs, since the arThis is in exact accord with ticle was originally demonstrative. classic usage and calls for no special comment, except that it is an idiom foreign to Latin and English. The modern Greek preserves this idiom -with the demonstrative. So tovtt] tj yvvalKa, avTos 6 avbpas (Thumb, Handb., p. 92). It is immaterial whether

—

:

:

OVTOS Tvos

comes

first,

ovtos (Lu.

23

as ovtos 6 :

47). Cf.

reXooprjs

wnth the substantive, then the adjective, as

17

xhpo-

(^vT-q

17

(Lu. 18

11),

:

or

ttooxv

:

For exx.

2

W.-Sch., p. 218.

in earlier

Gk. and

as 6 avdpoi-

24.

(Mk. 12

:

43), or ovtos

the adjective, be brought \vithin the rule of the *

last,

When an adjective is used article may be repeated with the

Jo. 9

literary

kolvt]

article.

may, like So tIs

see W.-Sch., p. 217.

17

PRONOUNS Kaivrj avTT]

[77]

701

('ANTflNTMIAl)

Even

aov XaXovuhrj StSaxi? (Ac. 17: 19).'

viro

second article be admitted here, the point

made

still

if

applies.

the

The

position of ovtos with the article, oSros 6 rather than 6 outos, does

not

mean simply But not

cate.

the predicate idea, though the position

so

T-fju

the real predicate notion the explanation

it is

:

In Kiihner-Gerth

ajipc^ars.

given that

is

Lu. 4

e^ovaiau Tavrrjv diraaau in

is

6.

(I,

predi-

Here p. 628)

either apposition (ovtos 6 avi]p =

'this, the man') or predicative sense (6 avi]p ouros= 'the man here'). Probably so, but in actual usage tlie connection is much closer than that. See Lu. 15 24, ovtos 6 vlos /jlov. Cf. the French idiom :

La Republique

Gildersleeve {Syntax, p. 324) takes the See also chapter XVI, The Article.

Franqaise.

predicate explanation.

Absent. The article does not always occur with subwhen ovtos is used. When ovtos occurs with proper names

6. Article

stantives in the

19

:

N.

26

'Ir](Tovv,

So Ac.

T., the article is present.

HaOXos

6

Heb. 7

:

ovtos, 1 ovtos

7 40 6 yap :

yap

1

:

11 ovtos 6

ovtos,

Mcoucrrjs

2

:

except in Ac. 6

6 MeXxtcreSe/c,

'Iriaovs,

32 tovtov top :

14

TtjctoCs

where the article is used with the adjective, not with 'Irjaovs. So uniform indeed in the Greek is the presence of the article with the noun and ovtos, that the absence of the article causes something of a jolt. In Ro. 9 8 the conjunction of the words TavTa Tknva must not deceive us. The copula koTiv must be supplied between. The American Revision indeed calls in the English relative to render the idiom oh to. TtKva ttjs aapKos TavTa TtKva

6

Nafwpatos

ovtos,

:

Cf. the simple predicate use in

ToO deov.

In Lu.

rjTe.

1

:

36, ovtos

The same thing hykveTo.

but

TO,

p.riv e'/cros

haTiv,

clearly true of Lu.

is

Cf. also tovto

1

Cor. 6

2:2,

v/juv (nr]p.eiov

in Lu. 2

copula

supplied.

in either case the

is

:

11, Kat raOrd Tivts

the substantive

:

avT-r]

is

predicate.

aTroypa4>r} ttpcott;

Some MSS. have The remaining exam-

12.

ples are not so simple, but ultimately resolve themselves into the

predicate usage unless one has to except Ac. 24

Lu. 7 44, :

TavTtjp T-qv yvvalKa,

Winer^ considers the reading without the able," since the

woman was

:

21 (see below). In

the article does not occur in present.

L AV.

article ''unexception-

In Lu. 24 21 the predicate :

rn^iepav ay a d0' ov raPra a common Greek idiom difficult to put into English. not 'this third day,' but 'this a third day.' Cf. also 2 Pet.

accusative really

is

found,

Tp'iT-qv

TavTrjv

kyeveTo,

It

is

3:1,

TavT-qp devTepap ypacjio: eiriaTo'Xrjp.

In this instance the English

translation resorts to the relative 'that' to bring out the predi-

cate relation, 'this '

*

is

the second epistle that

I write.'

In Jo. 2:11,

See Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 331, for thia "pseudo-attributive position." W.-Th., p. 110.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

702

NEW TESTAMENT

tojv cr-qfxeloiv, even the American Revision has a wrong translation, 'this beginning of miracles.' It is rather

ravT-qv eirolrjaev apxrjv

a beginning of miracles.' But }«{ and Chrys. In Jo. 4 18, tovto dXrj0es eipr}Kas, the English rela-

'this Jesus did as

here have tive

is

ttjv.

:

again necessary, 'this

is

a true thing that thou didst say'

The

or 'thou didst speak this as a true thing.'

In Ac.

rather obscures the idea. several difficulties appear.

have the usual order.^

The

Cf. Ac. 27

1

:

5,

oi)

litotes, :

14 for

/lerd oii

translation 'truly'

xoXXds ravras wepas,

fieTo.

xoXXds, does not

There

/xer' oh iroXv.

is

be-

somewhat akin to that of 7rp6 in 7rp6 e^ rj/jLepCiv rod 1)} The order would more naturally be oh TroXXds

sides a use of ixera Tvaaxo- (Jo.

12

rifxepas jitTO.

ravras or oh ttoXKoop ijfiepwv ixera ravras.

:

However, the

predicate use of ravras without the article permits the condensation.

The

rect.

It is literally 'after

many days hence' is essentially cormany days these' as a starting-point

free translation 'not

not

(from these). In Jo. 21: 14, rovro i]8r] rplrov e4>avep6}dr] 'Irjaovs, the matter is very simple, 'this already a third time,' or to use the English relative, 'this is now the third time that.' So also in 2 Cor. 12 14 and 13 1, rpirov rovro. The most difficult instance to understand is in Ac. 24: 21, irepl /xtds rahr-qs 4)wvris ris kkpa^a. Here 'concerning this one voice which I cried' makes perfectly obvious sense. The trouble is that it is the only N. T. example of such an attributive usage without the article. Blass^ takes it to be equivalent to 17 ^coj':) ^ kyevero rjv nia avr-q. This is, of course, the normal Greek idiom and is possibly correct. But one wonders if a lapse from the uniform idiom may not occur here. :

:

Radermacher {N T. Gr., p. 92) cites rovrov -wpayixaros, ravra abiKi]KrfjiJLa from inscriptions in Magnesia (Petersen-Luschan, Reisen in Lykien, p. 35, n. 54) and ear-qaap rode uprjiia from a Bi.

fxara, rovro

thynian inscription (Perrot, Exploration arch, de la Galatie, p. 24, N, 34). Hence one had best not be too dogmatic as to Luke's idiom in Ac. 24 21. After all, the predicate use may be the original use, as with eKeXvos. Cf. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 426 f.; Thompson, Syntax oj Attic Greek, p. 67. See also chapter XVI. :

7.

OvTos in Contrast with eKeXvos.

what

and

The

distinction between 68e

what precedes* (not strictly observed in the ancient Greek) amounts to little in the N. T., since ode is so rare. But ovros does, as a rule, refer to what is near or last mentioned and eKelvos to what is, remote. See avrr] and ovros in for

follows

ovros for

1

W.-Sch., p. 221.

2

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

3

lb., p. 172.

N. T. Gk., pp. 126, 133. « Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,

p. 66.

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) 2 Jo. 6

and

f.

tovto in 2 Cor. 13

plain in Ac. 7

is

{eu

T(2

In

19.

and SO no

avrov)

ut'a)

:

1

:

This idiomatic use of

9.

Jo. 5

:

703 oSros

20 oSros really refers to avTov In Ac.

difficulty exists.

4:11

ovtos is

resumptive and takes up the main thread of the story again (cf. OVTOS in verse 9). In Ac. 8 26 avTij may refer to Ta^av, but more probably (see 3, end) refers to 656s, a more remote substantive, indeed. In Lu. 16 1 again only the sense^ makes it clear {avOpui:

:

7r6s Tts riv

-kKovglos 6s etx^i' OLKOPOfjiov,

In Lu. 18

oIkouo/jlov.

/cat

ovtos)

that ovtos refers to

14, KaTej3r] ovtos dedtKaiccfxepos els top oIkop avTov

:

the two pronouns occur in sharp contrast, one point-

Trap' eK€LPov,

In such contrasts

ing out the publican, the other the Pharisee. euros refers to the last

(besides 2 Jo. 6 {Gr.

of

N. T.

in the

f.)

Gk.,

one example which curiously enough Blass This

mentioned.

p.

N,

T.,

is

clearly

does not recognise.

171)

Cf.

also

Jo.

13 24; eKelpos 38, and TavTa eKelvoLs in 1 Cor. and enelpos are used of John f both ovtos 11. In Jo. 1 7 10 of e/cetj'os we might have had idiom.^ Instead in proper and euros properly enough because of avTov, but Uetpos calls us back pointedly to Tcodi'T^s. Cf. Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 236. Note oSros 6 X670S 6 /xa^r/rrjs eKelpos in Jo. 21:23. In 1 Cor. in Jo. 5

rovTio

:

:

:

:

.

—

we find euros used The number and gender make it clear. In 1 Cor. 9 3 aur?? points to what follows. In a case like h tovtco xatpco (Ph. 1 18), the main thought is meant by the demonstrative. So with kp tovtco 5t5a)/xr tovto yap vplv 6

raOra KaTapyrjaet,

13, 6 5e deds Kal TavT-qp koI

:

and the remote.

for both the near

:

:


(2 Cor. 8

:

Cf. tovto Ac. 24

10).

As Antecedent

8.

:

14, etc,

of the Relative Pronoun.

The absence

of the

demonstrative pronoun before the relative pronoun will be disis in the case of a possible pronoun and after it also. The resumptive use of the demonstrative pronoun after the relative sentence has been alSo ready treated. But^ it is "the normal correlative" euros 6s.

This absence

cussed later.

before the relative

—

euros Trept ov

tovto

—6

(Mt. 11

(Ph. 2:5).

:

10), cures 6v (Jo. 7

:

the relative

and

17. is

25), euros 6s (Ac. 7

:

40),

See interrogative demonstrative and rela-

tive in rts iaTLv ovtos 6s (Lu. 5

Cf. Lu. 24

:

:

21

;

7 49) :

On the whole, however, not common in the N. T.

;

tL tovto 6 (Jo.

16

:

17

f.).

the demonstrative before

In Gal. 2

:

10 both avTo

TOVTO are incorporated into the relative clause, 6 Kal kairovdaaa

aVTd TOVTO

TTOLrjaaL.

»

Blass, Gr. of

*

Blass,

ib.,

John to Jesus.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 171.

p. 172, explains eKtlvos as showinp; that tlio disoourso passes

But

iKtlfos refers to

John.

'

Thonip., Synt. of Att. Gk.,

from p. GG.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

704

Gender and Number of

9.

NEW TESTAMENT

See chapter X.

ovtos.

like other adjectives, euros agrees

with

and number, whether predicate or

attributive.

1

Cor. 6

:

13, Kal ravr-qv

raCra, note the

/cat

In general,

substantive in gender

its

Cf. Jo.

But sometimes the construction according

earLv

:

Cf. also Ju. 12, ovtol

—

ve4>k\ai,

rj

Avva-

and

15), OVTOL

I

2:14).

In

to sense prevails.

So the masculine, not feminine, in Ac. 8 10, ovtos So (TKeVOS 6/1X07775 kcTTLV IJLOL OVTOS (Ac. 9 IJLIS TOV deOV. WvT] (Ro.

2:11.

number and gender.

8h8pa,

/cu/xara,

—

eXatai (Rev. 11 17, oSrot elaiv Tn^yal, and oSrot In these examples assimilation to the gender of the predicate does not occur. Cf. raOra rt, Jo. 6 9. In Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12: 11),

aaTtpes; 2 Pet. 2 4)

:

:

.

:

irapa Kvplov kyeveTo avTr],

:

the feminine occurs where the neuter would

be natural in Greek. This is a piece of "translation" Greek (Ps. 118 23). In Hebrew the feminine is the case for abstract words, the Hebrew having no neuter gender. In Eph. 2 -.8, ttj yap xaptrt :

tovto ovk e^ vfiQiv, there is no reference but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. But in 1 Pet. 2 19 f we have two examples of the neuter (tovto) on purpose to present a more separate and abstract notion than avTT] would have done, an ancient Greek idiom, toDto yap TOVTO x^-p'-^ irapa deQ. In 1 Cor. 10 6 the same prinxapts el k(TTe (Teecoa/jihoL dia TrlaTeoos' Kal

to

xio-recos in tovto,

:

.

—

:

ciple applies, TavTa 8e tvttol is

found in

1

Cor. 6:11, Kal xaDrd

—

TLves rjTe.

but more definite 12 34. In Ph. 3 7, artva rjp p.oL Kepdr], Tama ^r]fiiav, assimilation to the gender of the predicate is also

like TOLovTOL,

oSros see also Jo. riyqpM.1

A

striking example Here raOra is much and emphatic. For this use of eyeprjdrjcrav.

rificov

:

:

absent.

Sometimes the plural raOra occurs where a in mind.

The

adverbial phrase

more

either to one or

/lerd

incidents.

It is :

:

4)

is

really

can refer

not necessary to consider

ravTa as singular in idea in Jo. 19 36 and

usage does appear in 3 Jo.

single object

raDra (Lu. 12

1

Cor. 9

4, ixei^oTepav tovtcov ovk

:

15.

exw

But the xo-pt-v

(or

and the adverbial accusative Kal raOra in Heb. 11 12. Some MSS. have /cat TavTa instead of /cat roDro in 1 Cor. 6 8. But assimilation to the predicate both in gender and number occurs. ireabv, ovtoI elaiv OL CLKOvaavTes. So in Lu. 8: 14f., to The same thing appears in Gal. 4:24, drtra €(ttlv aWrjyopoviJLepaaSrat yap elaiv 8vo 5ta0r//cat. Note the assimilation of avTr] in Lu. 2:2; 8 11; 22 53; Jo. 1 19; Ro. 11:27; 1 Cor. 9:3; 1 Jo. 2 25; 5 3, 4, 9, 11, etc., and ouros in Mt. 7 12. See chapter XII. 10. The Adverbial Uses of tovto and Tama. xapav),

:

:

.

.

.

^

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

W.-Sch., p. 219.

'

PRONOUNS Here we have

705

('ANTiiNTMIAl)

tovto (adverbial accusative or nominative ab-

/cat

'and that too') in 1 Cor. 6 6 11; Eph. 2 8 (this last could be otherwise explained). Kat ravra, the usual classical idiom/ appears in Hoi). 11: 12 with a concessive participle. In tovto fxeu,. TOVTO 8k (Heb. 10 33) Blass^ sees a literary usage. In 2 Cor. 2: 3 Paul has tovto avTo in the adverbial sense, while Peter (2 Pet. Cf. the adverbial 1 5) turns the phrase around /cat avrb tovto 8k. use of Ke({)a\aLov in Heb. 8:1. The case of ovtos in Jo. 21 21 is solute) like Latin idque (English

:

(CD'' ravra), 8 (L Tavra); Ro. 13

:

:

:

:

:

noteworthy.

The Phrase

11.

See also chapter X,

tovt' eaTLv.

It is

viii, (c).

used without any regard to the number, gender or case of the word in apposition

with

exactly like the Latin id

it,

eighteen examples of

There are

est.

given in Moulton and Geden's Concord-

it

them from the Acts, Romans, Philemon and Hebrews. It is a mark of the more formal literary style. In Mt. 27 46 the case explained is the vocative, in Mk. 7 2 the instrumental, in Ro. 7 18 the locative, in Heb. 2 14 the accusative, in Heb. 9:11 the genitive, in Heb. 7 5 the plural, in 1 Pet. 3 20 the plural. In Ro. 1 12 the uncontracted form occurs with 8e. In 1 Mace, 4:52 ovtos 6 fj.rjv XaaeXev is in apposition with the genitive.^ Here ovtos performs the function of ance, all but three of

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

tovt'

Cf. the case-irregularities in the Apocalypse.

'iffTLv.

In Combination with Other Pronouns. Mention may be made of kv tovtco ovtos (Ac. 4 10) and other instances of the double 12.

:

use of ovtos. ovToos

Cf.

Mk.

6

:

2.

Cf. ovtos ovtco in

Examples

Mk.

and

(Ac. 24:9), ovtus tovto (1 Cor. 5 :3),

2

:

7,

raOra

in 2 Pet. 3

common

:

11

Paul (Ro. 9 17; 13 6; 2 Cor. 7 11 Ph. 1 6. Cf. 2 Pet. 1:5). For tovto avTo see 2 Cor. 2 3, avro tovto Ro. 13 6. For avTol ovtol see Ac. 24 15, 20. For tovto 6\ov cf. Mt. 1 22; 26 56. There is TovTwv ovTws iravTwv. :

:

:

of avTo tovto are

;

:

:

:

:

:

no 12

(lou])t :

30; 16

some :

14)

ir^vra ravra

(Mt. 6

:

32).

4:9; Lu.

"In the

first

ex-

a closer specification of ravra; in the second, pointed out demonstratively by means of raDra."*

pression, TravTa iravra is

:

difference betw(Hni ravra iravra (Mt.

and

in

is

13. Ellipsis of OVTOS.

The demonstrative

used before the relative.

is

object of the principal verb, as in 6 X€7aj

(Mt. 10:27).

by no means always

Often the relative clause l'^Tj'

h

rjj

is

simply the

aKoriq. eXrare

Sometimes the implied demonstrative must be The simplest form of this

expressed in the English translation. »

Blass, Gr. of

»

lb.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 171.

'

W.-Sdi., p. 219.

*

W.-Th., p. 548.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

706 idiom

would have been

of the demonstrative

where the case

is

the same as that of the relative. Thus avyyevris wv ov cnreKoxJ/ev Eerpos TO cjtIov (Jo. 18 26). Cf. 6v in Ac. 1 24. In Ac. 8 24 wj' :

:

:

by attraction. But the ellipsis occurs also when a different case would have been found. ^ So in Mt. 19 11 oh bkboTai would have been ovtol oh 8e8. In Jo. 13 29 wv would have been preceded by ravra. Cf. also Ac. 8 19; 13 37, etc. In Ro. 10 14, is

for rovTOiv d

:

:

:

TTws iriaTevacaaLv ov

TovTU) (or

When

tive clause, as in cf.

Jo. 19

eh ov

:

more probably eh

a preposition ttojs

:

:

the antecedent of

T]Kovaav,

or

toutco)

kirl

dropped).

om

is

used,

ov

would be either

tovtov (preposition also

it

may

belong to the rela-

eTLKoXkacovTaL eh ov ovk ewiaTevaav (Ro. 10: 14;

37), or to the implied demonstrative, as in Iva Tiareva-qTe

In Ro. 14 21

6 29).

a-K'e(XTeCkev (Jo.

:

:

ei/ c^

illustrates the prep-

osition with the relative, while in the next verse

it

illustrates the

In Jo. 11 6 ej' ^ tottw is an example where ev would have been used with both antecedent and relative. So as to d
preposition with the antecedent.

:

:

of suppressed antecedent applies to relative adverbs, as in riKdev oTTov

rjv

11:32), strictly

(Jo.

ev T(3 iepQ rca

Xaw

eK Tov o-cojuaTos

:

20, XaXeTre

a slight change in

to. p-qfiara ttjs ^o^rjs rahr-qs,

Travra

sense has occurred,

k-eto-a oirov.

It is possible that in Ac. 5

14. Shift in Reference.

more naturally going with prj/jLara. Cf. 24). But the point is not

raiiTTjs

rod Qavarov tovtov (Ro. 7

:

very material. Cf. Latin

{g) 'EK€ivo
poets)

was

connects

adverb

Kelvo^

or

ktjvos

ille.

The

old form (Epic, Pindar, Tragic

(Doric and Lesbian).^

Brugmann'* indeed

with the old Indo-Germanic root

it

e-KeZ (cf.

Ket-di,

Kel-dev,

The

/co.

Doric, Lesbian)

is

locative

the immediate

source of the pronoun Kel-vos, e-Kel-vos. Cf. English hi-ther. The original usage was therefore predicate.^ Thus in Thuc. i, 52. 2, vrjes

yonder are keimt (' those

eKelvai eiTLTXeovcn ('ships

not confuse

it

with

bial" use of ovTos.

al vrjes

By

sailing ahead'), ships').

we must

Cf. the "adver-

a strange coincidence, while at work on

this paragraph (Nov., 1908), I received a letter from Rev. R. H. Graves, D.D., of Canton, China, concerning Chinese pronouns,

suggested by the chapter on Pronouns in my Short Grammar of He says: "The ordinary pronoun for the third the Greek N.T.

In Canton we also use k'ni. Compare eKetvos." is Wei. mentions other accidental similarities, but I dare not venture into Chinese etymology.

person

He 1

W.-Th.,

8

Cf.

ib.,

p. 158.

p. 169.

»

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 242

*

lb.

f.

^

lb., p.

426

f.

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

707

We have a few examples in the N. T. 1. The Purely Deictic. So in Jo. 13 26, e/ceTws ecmt' ^ €7cb /Sdi/'co to i/'coyutoj' Kal Scocrco avTU). for Judas was present at the table. In Mt. 26 23 we have oSros. A gesture may also have accompanied the remark of the Pharisees :

:

in Jo. 9 28, av :

Jo. 19

:

Cf. also Jo. 19

tKelpov.

/jLadtjTris el

God

35 be taken as an appeal to

:

If eKeipo^ in

21.

as a witness to the truth

what the writer is saying (possible, though by no means cerusage would be deictic. Blass^ considers that "everything is doubtful'" as to this verse, a doubt shared by Abbott.^ For myself I think that eKetvos is here anaphoric and refers to of

tain), the

avTov

the similar reference of ovtos to avTov in

(cf.

1

Jo. 5

20;

:

but see Remote Object). Another possible deictic example is in Jo. 7: 11. Jesus was not present, but in the minds of the people a subject of discussion. Cf. also 9 12. It appears unmistakably 2. The Contemptuous Use {d. ovtos). :

(see 1) in Jo. 9

:

28,

a

ai; jua^Tjri)?

may

It

eKeivov.

also exist^ in Jo.

with

6 avOpoiiros in solemn repetition of eKetvos in verse 23. from ovtos Mt. 26 24, as well as the change this profrequent use of more This is the 3. The Anaphoric.

19

Cf. the

21.

:

:

Thus

noun.

:

:

25

ovtos of verse 7 {'lo)dvr]s of

resumes the story of aXXos

takes

eKe7vos

Cf. Jo. 4

:

articular participle

6 Tk^J.^Pas

in Jo. 1

fxe :

19 the reference

:

'EKetvos 8e (Jo.

25.

—

and

Cf. ciXXos

may

eKelvos Jo. 1

eKelvos in Jo.

indeed to the preceding

eKeXvos refers

In Jo. 5

kKelvos ovTcos).

So So

up

6 8e fiaOriTris eKelvos

8

immediately preceding.

In Jo. 13

The

:

In Jo. 18 15

verse 6). fiadr]Tr]s

in Jo. 1

2

:

is

5

:

tovtui

43. (cf.

to raTepa just before.

21) is continuative like ovtos.

be followed by the resumptive eKelvos. Cf. Jo. 5 11; 2 Cor. 10 18. 33). :

:

:

by 6 cjv. Cf. between eKelvos

18 the pronoun refers to deos followed

See Jo. 14 21. For distinction 7 20 eKelvo. and avTov see 2 Tim. 2 26; 3 9. 4. The Remote Object (Contrast). This is not always true, as is shown by Jo. 18 15. Cf. Tit. 3:7. It is common thus to refer So in Jo. 3 28 (cf. Jo. 7 11) John to persons who are absent.

Mk.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

speaks of Christ in contrast to himself, aireaToXiievos elfxl enwpoadev ejxe. In 1 Cor. 9 25 note eKeXvoi eKeivov. So in verse 30, eKetvov 11 etre eyu} e'iTe i7M<S«', 15 So in 10 11 eKeivoLS fiev riiiels 8e.

—

—

:

—

:

:

— —

eKeivov, In Ac. 3 13 the contrast is sharp between vfxels vijlC>v in eKelvo^v (cf eKeivojv and in 2 Cor. 8 14 between iifiOiv In Jo. 5 39 emvai 11. eKelvois in Mt. 13 same verse). Cf vfuv eKetvoL.

:

:

—

—

:

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 172.

•

Abbott,

bad sense

of

ib., p.

508.

tKeij-os.

He

.

^

cites

Cf. Lat.

illc.

Mt. 27

:

19,

:

Joh. Gr., pp. 2S5, 507.

03 aa exx. of the good and the

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

708

in opposition to

is

v/jLels,

as keTi/os to

NEW TESTAMENT

vjiels

in the preceding verse.

8:9.

For a contrast between those present in the same narrative see oSros and ktTi'os in Lu, 18 14. Cf. e/cetws and auros in 1 Jo. 2: 6 and tovto eKetvo in Jas. 4:15. It is common in expressions of place, Uke 5td Tri% 68ov kKdv-qs (Mt. 8 28), eh oK-qv Cf. 2 Cor.

:

i)

:

rrjv yrjv kKtlvriv

(9

26;

:

cf.

9

ei^

general phrases of time, like

Mk. 8:1; Lu. 2:1.

:

kv

31), etc.

rah mepais

It is frequent also

with

(Mt. 3:1).

Cf.

e/cetmts

It usually occurs at

a transition in the narrative and refers to something previously mentioned. Blass^ notes that Lu. (1 39) uses also raurais in this phrase and that in 6 12 D has ketmts rather than Tavrats. In particular observe the phrase eKelvr] rj vfxepa for the Last Day (Mt. 7: 22; Mk. 14 25; Lu. 21 :

:

:

34; 17

:

31; Jo. 16

:

Cf. Jo. 6

23, etc.

:

40, etc.).

5. Emphasis. Sometimes eKelvos is quite emphatic. Abbott ^ notes that in John's Gospel, outside of dialogue, bcelpos usually has considerable emphasis. Instance Jo. 1 8,> 18, 33; 2 21; 3 30; :

4

:

25; 5

:

19, 38;

6

:

29; 8

42; 14

:

:

:

26; 15

:

In the First occurs only seven times and :

26, etc.

John he observes that it but one refer to Christ. He is the important one in John's mind. Cf. avros in Ac. 20 35. But kelfos is not always so emphatic even in John. Cf. Jo. 9 11, 25; 10 6; 14 21; 18 17; Mk. 16 lOff; 2 Tim. 3 9. 6. With Apposition. It is not common with words in apposition. But note Jo. 16 13, eKeluos, to Tuev/xa rrjs aXrjdeias (cf. Jo. 14 26). Epistle of

all

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Note

also

with

ovTos 1

keTw

43) after the fashion of

Cf. also the resumptive uses with participles (Jo.

OTL.

used with

when is

:

18, etc.).

:

7. Article tvith is

:

on (Mt. 24

yLvc^aKere,

Nouns

except when Predicate. Wlien the noun the N. T., the article always appears, except In Jo. 10 1, ketws KXeTrrjs kaTtv, the substantive

eKeXvos in

predicate.

:

predicate, as in 10

:

35, Ueivovs elirev Oeovs.

With

may

adjectives

we

note the repetition of the article in Jo. 20 19 and the ambiguous position of eKelur] in Heb. 8 7 due to the absence of diadriKr}. :

:

With oXos we find this order, and Tras the same, irdaap ttjp 8.

As

Antecedent

kKeivov vwep ov

o(f)€LKr]v eKeivriv

Relative.

to

(Ro. 14

(Mt. 9 26, (Mt. 18 32, etc.).

ets oXrjv T-qv yrjv eKelurjv

etc.)

:

:

So Uetvos

kaTiv

c5

(Jo. 13

:

26),

(Heb. 6:7). Note also eKe^pos koTLP 6 ayairCiv (Jo. 14 21) where the articular participle is the practical equivalent of a relative clause. :

15) kKelvoLs 8l' ovs :

9.

Gender and Number.

tions in gender 1

Little remains to be said

and number.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 171.

Two

about varia-

passages in John ^

call for re-

Joh. Gr., p. 283.

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

709

mark, inasmuch as they bear on the personahty of the Holy In 14

:

26, 6 5^ irapaKk-qTOS, to TPevfxa t6 ayiov 6

Tre/ii/'et

Spirit.

6 irarrip

h

roJ

grammatical ovSfjLaTi fxov, and reverts skips however, over irvevna 'E/ceTras, gender of irvevna. striking example more In 16 13 a irapaKXrjTos. to the gender of has tO aX-qdelas. Here one ttjs rd TrvevfJLa keiws, occurs, orav 8i e\6ji It is seven TapaKXrjTos. and to again e/ceTws six lines back to go eKetvos vfias 5t5d^ei,the relative 6 follows the

:

more evident therefore in this passage that John is insisting on the personality of the Holy Spirit, when the grammatical gender so easily called for kKetvo. Cf 6 in Jo. 14 17, 26 and avro in 14 17. .

The feminine

:

in Lu. 19

kKeivrjs

:

:

4 evidently refers to 68ov unex-

pressed.

Independent Use. The frequency of e/cetvos in John's Gospel be noticed, but the Synoptics and Acts are not far behind. More curious, however, is the fact that in the Synoptics hnelvos is nearly always used with a substantive (adjectival) while the independent pronominal use of the singular is almost confined to 10.

may

the Gospel of John (and First Epistle). ^ All the uses in the First Epistle and nearly all in the Gospel are independent. As exceptions note Jo. 4

:

39, 53; 11

:

51, 53; 16

:

23, 26, etc.

hand only two instances appear in the Apocalypse and both with substantives.

On (9

:

the other 6; 11

:

13)

koivt] a demonand as is plain in the modern Greek. Moulton^ quotes plain examples from the papyri (see above). In the N. T. it is practically confined to Luke (and Mt. 3 4 perhaps), where it is fairly common, especially in the Gospel. So h avry rfj oLKla (Lu. 10 7), 'in that house.' Moulton^ notes that in Mt. 11:25 (parallel to Lu. 10 21) we have h eKeivco to) KatpcS and in Mk. 13 11 h eKdvri rfj wpa (parallel to Lu. 12 12 b> avrfj The tendency was not foreign to the ancient Greek and rfj o)pa). it is common enough in the modern vernacular* to find avrds 6= (/i)

Auto?.

It

has undoubtedly developed in the

strative force as already

shown

in 3, (d),

:

:

:

:

:

'this.' {i)

The Correlative Demonstratives. One

the N. T.
of

Only four occur in them appears only once and without the article, roiaade (2 Pet. 1

ej'cx^etdijs aurcS

nacular (Radcrmacher, Toababt. *

Ttj'Klkovtos

Abbott,

ib.

A^.

:

17).

It

appears once as predicate,

For the Joh. use

Prol., p. 91.

'

Ib.

"

6be,

Cf. Jann., Hist.

rriKiKoabe

and

TTjXt^aOra opra (Jas.

of tKilvo^ Bee Steitz

Stud, in Krit. (1859, p. 497; 1860, p. 505; 1861, p. 267). Gk., p. 172. 2

has died in the ver-

T. Gr., p. 63) hke

and A. Buttmann,

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N.T.

Gk. Gr., pp. 320, 351.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

710

NEW TESTAMENT

3:4), elsewhere attributive. The article is not used. This correlative of age always refers to size in the N. T. (2 Cor. 1 10; :

Once indeed it is and so redundant.

Hcb. 2:3). (Rev. 16

:

and

18)

ToLovTos

ToaovTos.

in connection with ovto:s fikyas

The other two are tolovtos and the demonstrative of quality (Latin talis)

is

used with a good deal of freedom. It is, of course, merely and ovtos combined. The compound form alone occurs in the N. T. and became more frequent generally.^ TotoOros without a substantive is used either without the article (Lu. 9 9) or more it is

Toios

:

usually with

the article in the attributive position (Mt. 19: 14; Ac. 19: 25; Ro. 1 32; 1 Cor. 7: 28; 2 Cor. 10 11, etc.). In :

Jo.

4

:

23, TOLovTovs ^rjTet tovs irpoaKwovvTas, the

:

When

ciple is in the predicate accusative.

used with substan-

may

be anarthrous, as in Mt. 9 33; Heb. 7 26; 8:1; Jas. 4 16, etc., but the (Mk. 6 2; 9 37; 2 Cor. 12 3). In Mk. 6 2 tives TotovTos :

:

:

al SvvafxeLs rota Drat (cf. ovtos, kKetvos).

tive (Jo. 9

dent of

:

16) or after (Ac. 16

(Mk. 13

olos

But note

olos.

Heb. 7 26 :

:

p. 3, 1.

:

(Latin tantus), both

:

— tolovtos

ttoTos

It occurs

33).

:

in

:

11) following

29, tolovtos

1 TOLavrr) ^tls.

size, ToaavT-qv TriaTLv :

:

used as the antece-

It is

48; 2 Cor. 10

TocrovTos {tooos, ovtos) is the

apTOL ToaovTOL (Mt. 15

Mk. 4

we have the order comes before the substan-

24).

in 1 Cor. 5

Cf.

5;

:

article occurs also

also tolovtovs ottoTos in Ac. 26

tolovtos us in Phil. 9.

P.Oxy. IV,

:

It

19; 1 Cor. 15

8:1, and

f.;

8; 18

:

:

:

:

articular parti-

6s

in

We even have

a Logion of Jesus, pronoun of degree

(Mt. 8 10), and quantity, with the article only once, :

Sometimes it appears without a 16). 5:8; Gal. 3:4; Heb. 1 4, etc. It is the correlative with ocros in Heb. 1 4 ToaovTw 20-22 Kad' 6aco, 7 oaov Kara, toctovto, and in 10 25 ToaovTc^ oaco. It is worth

6 ToaovTos tXovtos (Rev. 18

:

substantive, as in Ac.

:

— —

:

—

:

:

while at this point to note the correlative adverbs, (Ac. 14

wore

—

:

1), ouTcos cos (1

Cor. 4

:

1), ovtojs

— owcos (Mt.

ourcos

5

:

16).

w(tt6

Cf.

(Ro. 15:20).

ovTcos 8e

VII. Relative

Pronouns

List in the N. T. counting adverbs) are 6s, (a)

(dvacjiopiKal dvTci)V\)|xCai).

The only

relatives in the

ocrrts, olos, otto'los,

N. T. (not and 6 in

oaos, rjXlKos,

The others have fallen by the way. Some MSS. Mk. 15 6, while 6a8r]irep in Jo. 5 4 is not in the The LXX has owep (airep) five times,- but lyXkos not

the Apocalypse.

read ovrep in

:

critical text.

:

at all. These relative pronouns do not occur with uniform quency as will be seen. "Os is the only one very common. 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 162.

2

Thack., Gr. of O. T. in Gk., vol.

I,

p. 192.

fre-

PRONOUNS

The Name "Relative."

(6)

711

('ANTfiNTMIAl) It

is

not very distinctive .^

idea of relation (anaphoric use) belongs to the demonstrative

The and

The anaphoric demonstrative use to the personal pronouns The transition from demonrelative.^ the is indeed the origin of also.

strative to relative

is

apparent in

Homer in the case of both Homer to tell the demonCf. English that, German der.

Sometimes and the relative apart.^ Homer often used re and tls with 6 and 6s to distinguish the relative from the demonstrative." Gradually the relative use, as distinct from the anaphoric demonstrative, won its way. The relative becomes then the (c) A Bond between Clauses. Indeed many of the chief bond of connection between clauses.

6

and

it is

6s.

difficult in

strative

conjunctions are merely relative adverbs, such as cos, ore, ottcos, The relative plays a very important part in the structure etc.

That matter will receive due treatment in chapter XIX, Mode. The agreement of the relative with antecedent in person, number, gender, and some-

of the subordinate sentence in Greek.

times case,

is

just the natural effort to relate

more exactly the

These points will receive discussion under 6s which best exemplifies them. The assimilation is at bottom the same that we see in other adjectives (cf. demonclauses with each other.

two

The assimilation of the relative in person, gender, number, and even case of the antecedent may be compared to assimilation in the adjective and even verbs (comstrative pronouns).

pound verbs

especially)

and

prepositions.

Cf. Josef Liljeblad,

Assimilatione Syntadica apud Thuc. Questiones, 1900, p.

De

(d)

1).

"O?.

See discussion of the demonstrative 6s for origin.^ 1. In Homer. But already in Homer the relative sense, iipdpov viroTaKTiKov, is the main one, and the demonstrative is on the decline.^ Though 6s in the N. T. 2. Comparison with Other Relatives. far

outnumbers

the other relatives, yet the distinction between

Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 81. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 556; Baron, Le Pron. Rel. et la Conj., 1891, p. 25.

1 2

He

all

Ss went from dem. to rel. before 6 did. Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 186 ff. * Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 35. 'Oare survives in Pindar, Bacch., Ion. and Trag. choruses. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 68 f. " Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 195. Baron, Le Pron. Rel. et la Conj. en Grec, p.

notes that

»

35. «

Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 295

Monro, Horn.

demonstr. 241.

6s cf.

Gr., p. 186.

So

5s

yhp

f.;

is

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 243. On the anaphoric

ambiguous.

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 310;

Brug., Griech. Gr., p.

05

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

712

and the other

relatives

is

breaking down.

Indeed in the ver-

be questioned if it was ever .preserved. One may compare the unchangeable Hebrew ^^?'5<. Moulton ^ observes that in Poly bins the distinction between 6s and oarts has "worn rather

may

nacular

it

thin."

In the

LXX

6s is

frequent,^ but in the

modern Greek

6s

wholly absent in the modern Greek vernacular uses ttoD or 6tov. In The

"is used rarely even in writing."^

vernacular.

It is

the oblique cases the conjunctive pronoun rod, rrjs is added to ttov See Thumb, Handb., p. 93. Jebb (Vin(cf. the Hebrew idiom). etc., p. 303) calls it "a curious exDickson's Handb., cent and

ample

analogy" and finds an instance in Aristophanes Here orrov^h oh. The vernacular carottov.

of false

{Birds, 1300), neXr)

ried

it

He

further.

cites

modern English vernacular, "The men

Indeed in Rev. 2 13 birov really points to an unexpressed Trap' vp-lv. In Col. 3 11 oTov is almost personal. The occasional apparent confusion between 6s and interrogative pronouns will be discussed directly. On the whole, 6s in the N. T., as in the kolvt} generally, is still used in accord with the classic

as he met."

:

:

idiom.

With Any Person.

3.

In

itself,

of course,

like all relatives,

6s,

has no person. So the first person in 1 Cor. 15 10, the second person in Ro. 2 23, the third person in Mt. 5 19; Lu. 6 48 f.; :

:

:

1

Cor. 4

17.

:

Gender.

4.

These examples may This is not so simple.

:

suffice.

The normal

thing

is

for the

relative to agree with the antecedent in gender, as in 1 Cor. Tinodeov,

OS eariv

avTOV, 6 kcTTLV

Eph. 4

:

:

eKKK-qcrla',

15); Col. 2

fxeKKbvTOiV,

Rev. 21

ri

rkKvov.

fJLOU

Rev. 5

:

6

:

So

Col. 2

:

in Col.

10

ei'

1

:

24

avTU), 6s kaTLV

17 aa^^aroov, a (some

MSS.

6(j)daKiJ.ovs eTrra, o'L eiaiv to.

4

:

17,

tov acofiaros

virep 7}

Ke^aXiy (cf.

eanu aKta

tcop

[eTrrd] irveufxara.

In

6)

8, TO nepos avrOiu kv rfj \lp.v(i ttj KaLou'evrj irvpl Kai deico 6 kariv

agreement is regular, but the idea of 6 may be more inclusive than merely'' fxepos. Cf. 1 Pet. 3 4. On the other hand the relative is assimilated in gender to the predicate substantive. This is also a perfectly natural agreement.

6 davaTos 6 Sevrepos, the

:

Winer ^ considers that this is true particularly when the predicate presents the main idea. See Mk. 15 16, tyjs avXrjs, 6 kariv Trpaircbpiov; Gal. 3: 16, tw a-wkpixaTl aov, 6s karw Xpto-ros; Eph. 6: 17, rr]v iJ.6.xo.ipa.v :

2 Thack., Gr., vol. I, p. 192. V. and D., Handb., etc., p. 56. "The disuse of 6s in common speech is characteristic; so simple a form ceased to satisfy the desire of emphasis." 1

Prol., p. 92.

'

Jebb 4

in V.

and D.,

p. 302.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 231

f.

"

W.-M.,

p. 207.

. :

.

PRONOUNS Tov TvevfxaTOS, 6 kaTiv

(but

irvevixara

deov;

pr^/xa

713

('ANTflNTMIAl)

Rev. 4

:

— a eiaiv

5, Xa^tTraSes

to.

iirra

The MSS. vary between agreement with antecedent and

some MSS.

Cf. 2 Th. 3

a'i).

:

17.

a number of instances So Col. 1:27, rod nvaTrjplov tovtov 6s (or 6) kariv Cf. also 1 Tim. 3 16, where the true text 6s is changed XpLcrrds. in the Western class of documents to 6 to agree with iivarqpLov.

in

—

predicate.

:

—

6 (MSS. 6s) kariv appa^uv. See also Eph. 1 13 f ., tQ -n-j^eu/xart So at or a in Rev. 5:8. In Mt. 13 31 f. kokkco is followed first by :

:

and then by 6 (cf. airepixaToov) In another group of passages the change is made according to the real gender rather than the grammatical. Thus in Ac. 15:17 17), Jo. 6 9 iraibapLov os exet, Ro. 9 23 f TO. WvT] e
:

:

—

:

:

:

:

In 2 Jo. 1, eKXeKTjj KVpla /cat rots reKvois avrrjs, ovs, the grammatical gender (feminine and neuter followed by masculine) is ignored entirely. Cf. Ph. 2 15. TtKvla.

:

In a passage like 1 Cor. 15 10, et^it 6 et^it, there is no mistake. See OS above in verse 9. It is not 'who I am,' but 'what I am,' not exactly olos either, but a more abstract idea than that. Cf. 6 in :

Jo. 4 1

1

:

:

22, used twice for the object of worship,

observe

One may (Jo.

6

:

(Jo. 17

orjv — 6

God.

So in

1 Jo.

verse 3) for Jesus.

recall here that the collective abstract neuter, irav 6

37, 39; 17 :

aK-qKoanev, o ecopd/ca/xez^ (cf .

2),

:

is

used for the disciples.

Cf.

'6

—

Ka.KiivoL

24).

Sometimes

also the relative agrees neither with the antece-

dent nor with a predicate substantive, but gathers the general notion of 'thing.' A good example occurs in 1 Jo. 2 8, k.vToKi}v :

KaLv-qv 7pd0co vplv, 6 kdTLv aXirjOes,

5

:

5, ir'KeoveKT-qs, 6

example

is

masculine,

Col. 3

is

true.'^

(Western and Syrian classes read

'which thing

XoXdrpTjs,

'which thing

is

being an idolater.'

A

6s)

So Eph. eanv

etSw-

particularly good

14 where 6 comes in between a feminine and a

:

ttju ayairrjv, 6 ecrrtf

avvSeanos.

In

Mk.

12

:

42 we have a

similar example, XeTrrd 8vo, 6 kariv Kodpavrrjs.

Indeed 6 kartv comes to be used as a set expression, like tovt' without any regard to the antecedent or the predicate, as Three phrases go together in this ecTLv viol ^povTT]s, Mk. 3 17.

e<jTtv,

6

matter, 6

:

ka-Tcv,

o

Ipfji-qveveraL,

6 Xe-erat.

The two

latter occur in

the periphrastic form also. Indeed the examples jusfc noted above may very well be explained from this point of view. So Mt. 1 23, 'EfJLuavovqX 6 taTiv nedepfirjvevoiJLevov 1

fied' rjixcov

Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 302.

6 deds,

where ob-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

714

serve the neuter participle like

ToXyoda

Cf. Ac, 4

6.

Mk.

like TOTTOS (cf.

15

:

In Jo.

22).

36.

:

In Mt. 27 33, is masculine :

the participle

6 kariv Kpavlov tottos Xeyo/j-evos, 1

39

:

Xeyerai iiedepurjvevo-

6

two vocatives. Cf 20 16. In Jo. 1 41 note the accusative and nominative connected with neuter participle, Mecrcriav 6 ecmv /j.eOepiJ.rjvevdiJ.evoi' XpLaros. So 6 ecmu occurs between verb-forms, as in Mk. 5 41; 7 34; or genitives as in Heb. 7 2; Rev. 20 12; 21 17; or whole clauses, as in Mk. 15 34. But see Jo. 9:7; Rev. 20 2. In Ac. 9 36, however, the personal connevov connects

:

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

struction occurs, Taf^add,

chapter X,

viii,

Once more,

(c).

o is

used to refer to a verbal idea or to the whole

Instance Mt. 12

sentence.

See also

\eytTaL Aop/cas.

bLepix-qvevoixkvri

rj

4, rous aprovs rrjs irpodeaeoos e4)ayov 5

:

Here probably to ^ayetv is the idea referred to,^ though in Mk. 2 26 and Lu. 6 4 we have ous. The neuter gender is only natural here. In Ac. 2 32 ov is most Hkely 'whereof,' though 'of whom,' referring to 'Itjo-oDj/, is possible. So as to 3 15. But there is no doubt as to Ac. 11 30, 8 koI kirol-qcrav; ovK h^dv

rjv

avrui (payetv.

:

:

:

:

26

:

:

10, o Kai eTTOiTjaa; Gal.

2

10, 6

:

kaTovdacra avTO tovto

/cat

iroLrjffaL

(note here the use of avrd tovto in the relative clause); Col.

ds

6 Kal

6 in

KOTTLcio (cf. ets

2 Th.

1

:

11; 2

:

14; 1 Pet. 2:8).

passing o 6 in Lu. 2

Number.

5.

antecedent in

The

:

hke

15, like

6 after j?

re

77

6

:

17

:

:

:

f.),

Kara ttoKlv iraaav kv

could have occurred because of

ah

v/juv ypd(f)0)

kTn<jTo\i]v, ev

if),

ah

not infrequent, as in

is

:

:

4,

Yevaas

(2 Pet.

—

xXtj^os

(Ac. 15 36, note distributive

idea), ixwpoXoyla ^ evTpaTreXia a (Eph. 5

rkpav

29

Here again, as a rule, the relative concurs with the number, as in dcmyp 6v (Mt. 2 9), deov 6$ (Ro. 2:6).

construction according to sense

01 (Lu.

:

3 21). Per contra analogy of tolovto{v)} Note in in Heb. 9 2.

Kal vfias dvTLTVTrov vvu o-cbfet fidirTiana (1 Pet.

see in the papyri 6v used

1

Cf. also

where feminine singular

— ev oh 3:1,

(Ph. 2

:

15), 8ev-

referring to both,

Cf. 6 \eyovTas (Rev. 5 13). On the other hand note the change from the plural to the singular in riiJ.epaL 5a)5eKa d0' rjs

probably). (Ac. 24

:

11),

and

:

kv ohpavols

plural in the relative see

26

o)v :

in 1

12),

6.

k(f>'

(cf.

— k^

ov (Ph.

For the neuter vague general idea oh Lu. 12 1 (cf. Ac.

3 20). :

TavTo) to cover a

Tim. 1 6, df^' wj' Lu. 1 20, h oh Ro. 6 21, etc. Cf. Col. 2 22. :

:

:

:

:

Case.

Absence of attraction normal. The obvious way is for the case of the relative to be due to the construction in which it is used or to follow the same law as other nouns and pronouns (so (a)

1

W.-Sch.,

p. 233.

2

Mayser, Gr.,

p. 310.

715

PRONOUNS (antantmiai) with prepositions). That is to say, assimilation of case It was indeed in a sense an after-refinement. cessity.

is

not a ne-

One must Thucybe.

not get the notion that assimilation of case had to dides/ for instance, did not use it so extensively in his rather complicated sentences, where the relative clauses stand to themselves.

Indeed the absence of it is common enough in the N. T., outside of Luke. Cf Mt. 13 44 d7pc3 6v, Mk. 13 19 Krto-ecos rjv, Jo. 2 22 50), Jo. 4:5 x^p'i-ov 6 (CD o5). Tit. 3 5 epywv a, \6'Y<xi 6v (cf. 4 Mt. 27 60 ixvrineioo 6, Ac. 8 32 7pa0^s r]v- Not to be exhaustive, one may refer to the rather long list in Winer-SchmiedeP (Mt. 13 44, 48; 23 35; Lu. 13 19, 21; Ac. 1 4; 4 10; 1 Tim. 6 21; Heb. 6 19; 8 2; 9 7; 1 Pet. 1 8; Rev. 1 20, etc.). The absence of assimilation in case is not only common in the old Greek, but also in the LXX, the Apocrypha and the papyri. In Aristotle :

:

:

.

:

:

:

:

attraction ler,

De

((3)

6

fij,

is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

nearly confined to the more recondite essays (Schind-

Attradionis

Pronominum Rel. Usu Aristotelico, p. 94). The accusative in Ro. 6 10, 6 airkdavev,

Cognate accusative.

and Gal. 2

:

:

may

20, 5 fw,

be called adverbial.

In reality

Mk.

10 38 f. very common in the N. T., especially in the writings of Luke. The papyri, even "the most illiterate of them,"^ show numerous examples of attraction, "a construction at least as popular in late

it

reproduces the idea of the verb (cognate ace). (7) Attraction to the case of the antecedent.

Cf.

This

:

is

This applies to the LXX also. The MSS. some having attraction, others not. Indeed Blass^ finds this "always" in the passages in W. H. without attraction save in Heb. 8 2. Cf. vv (rjs) in Mk. 13 19, 6v (w) in Jo. 2: 22; 4: 50, etc. On the whole attraction seems the more common. But this "idiomatic attraction of the relative" "occurs

as in classical Greek."

naturally vary sometimes,

:

:

only twice in

whereas

it

Matthew

"is very

(18

:

24 50) and once in Mark (7 13)," in Luke" (Plummer, Comm., p. li).

19;

common

:

:

pecuHar construction" was to give "a sentence more internal unity and a certain periodic compactness."^ No instance of attraction of a nominative to an oblique case occurs in the N. T., though this idiom is found in the ancient Greek.^

The

effect of "this

« P. 226. N. T. Gk., p. 173. Moulton, Prol., p. 93. Attraction of the relative to the case of the antecedent is not unknown in Lat. Cf Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 507. Horn. shows only one instance. Middleton (Analogies in Synt., p. 19) considera 1

Blass, Gr. of

3

.

analogy the explanation of the origin of attraction. ' W.-Th., p. 163. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173. « Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 71; W.-Sch., p. 227.

It

is

usually the accusative case that

(Mt. 18

itive, as Tpajfj-aros ov

1:1; 3

(Ac.

:

:

21; 22

:

(7:17), Wvojv

Ac. 9

36; 22

:

2:5.

(Ac. 3

rjs

19; 2 Cor. 10

:

ravruv wv

eyraiTeXtas ^s

2.5),

:

Eph.

8, 13;

:

In several instances

it

Cf. also 1

:

Heb.

8;

the accusa-

is

Eph.

Cf.

attracted.

is

into the gen-

20),

:

ayiov ov (Tit. 3:6).

irvevfjiaTos

10; 1 Cor. 6

tive of the inner object that

1

:

19

So

f.

TrapaKoKovneda (2 Cor. 1:4), x^Pi-TOS ^s kxcplTcccrev

rjs

(Eph. 1:6),

assimilated into another

X670U ov (Jo. 15

19),

10), SiadTjKrjs

:

(7:45),

OOP :

10; 9 :20; Jas.

Trapa/cXiyo-fcos

is

Thus the accusative may be attracted

oblique case.

6

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

716

K\r]aecos

rjs

(4:1),

eKXi'jdrjTe

4>o)Prjs -qs e/ce/cpa^a

(Ac. 24

21),

:

There are examples also of the accusative attracted to the ablative. So k twi' KepaTiwv wv (Lu. 15 16), e/c rod vdaros ov (Jo. 4 14), oLTTo tcop oxpaplcov Siv (21 10), epyuv

do-e/Setas ojv rjae^yjaav

(Ju. 15).^

:

:

€K Tov TTveviJLaTos ov (1 Jo.

3

:

Then again

Cf. Jo. 7: 31.

24).

:

the

assimilation of the accusative to the pure dative might have been

expected, but curiously enough I find so far no example of

it

in

an instance of the relative attracted from the accusative to the dative of an omitted antecethe N. T.

In

1

Cor. 7 39 there

dent, eXevdepa earlv

when ^

BeXei yaixrjdrjvai, milcss jajjirjdrjvaL

u)

where the accusative

be repeated,

However, several examples occur

the necessary case.

is

is

:

attracted to the locative or the instru-

is

Instances of the locative are found in

ev rjiJiepa fi^kv (Mt. 24 50. This is not an instance of one preposition for antecedent and relative), kirl iraaLv oh (Lu. 2 20; 9 43; 24 25),

mental. iapq.

rj

:

:

w

kv T(3 ovo/jLaTi aov

avSpl

12

:

0}

(17

:

31),

(Jo. 17

Xoyco

eiri rcS

21), ert epyoLS ayadols

11

:

oj

(20

:

ev tc3 ixvyjixari

f.), :

38),

oh (Eph. 2

:

eTrt

rfj

10),^ ev

w

aKadapalq,

—

:

(Ac. 7

d\i\J/e(nv

fi

:

16), ev

(2 Cor.

ah

(2

Th.

probably true also 6). eKXrjdr], where ijv would have been the of 1 Cor. 7 20, h rfj KXrjaeL cognate accusative.^ For attraction to the instrumental see -jrapaSoaei fi (Mk. 7 13), 86^ri 7/ (Jo. 17 5, but W. H. have ^v in margin), (Trjfieiots oh (Ac. 2 22), dvalais ah (Heb. 10 1, but W. H. as). In a few instances it is an open question whether we have attraction Tw

1 :4), ev

TOTrjpico

(Rev. 18

c3

:

This

:

is

fi

:

:

:

:

or not.

Thus

strumental 9 17, :

ev

03

rfj 65a)

in Jo. 13

fi

iipxov,

the locative originally X0-P9-

V

xo-i-pofJ'ii',

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

But

W.-Sch.

attraction in ^

But

5,

rw

XevTlco

ui rjv

(cf.

dcei^o^anhos, either

Jo. 21

:

the cognate accusative is

more

likely.

In

1

7) is correct. 7]v is

possible,

Th. 3

a cognate accusative was possible

2

in

:

or the accusative 6

N. T. Gk.,

(p.

225)

p. 174;

ols is

Moulton,

:

the in-

In Ac.

though

9, eirl iraaj) rfj (ijv)

attracted

Prol., p. 93.

held to be essential to the structure.

John see Abbott, Joh.

Gr., p. 298.

see per contra W.-Sch., p. 223.

For

PRONOUNS an

to the locative or

717

('ANTflNTMIAl)

original instrumental.

In Col.

1

23, rod eu-

:

ayyeXlov ov riKovaare, either the accusative or the genitivie might

occur with

But

&kovo).

in 2

Tim.

1

:

13, 'KSycov o:v Trap' e/xoO ijKovaas,

the accusative was almost certainly the original form.^ 1

:

4:

fjp

rjKovaare

Luke

attraction in

3

:

19; 9

:

(TvveXa^ov,

Plummer (On Luke,

fxov.

is

li)

Cf. Ac.

notes that this

particularly frequent after was (Lu. 2

In Lu. 5

43, etc.).

p.

9, kirl

:

MSS.

the attraction in some

ay pa tuv

rf}

20;

:

ixOvoov cou

(rj)

to the locative, in others

is

to the genitive.

A few instances are found in the N. T. where the attraction is from some other case than the accusative. A clear case of a locative assimilated to a genitive appears in Ac. 1 22, ecos ttjs wepas rjs This is in accord with the ancient Greek idiom. The ave\rifx4)dr). very same construction appears in the LXX (Lev. 23 15. Cf. Bar. 1 19). In 1 Tim. 4 6 A reads StSao-zcaXtas TraprjKoXoWrjKas, but the rest have ^s. A dative has been attracted into the genitive along with incorporation and the preposition in Ro. 4 17, KaTtvavTL ov kiricFTtvcFev deov = Karevavrt, rod deov u) eiriaTevaev. So the phrase d^' ^s (Lu. 7:45; Ac. 24 11; 2 Pet. 3 4) is really an ab:

:

:

:

fj

:

:

breviation of

Ac. 20

:

18

d'

we

17/xepas

fj

:

(locative attracted

actually have

to ablative).

dTro irpcoTrjs riiJ.epas d0'

rjs

eirejSrju,

In but

as a point of departure (ablative) rather than a point of location 6, 9) where the incorpoSo likewise axpi- v^ viJiepas (Mt. 24 38; Lu. 1 20; 17 27; Ac. 1 2) really comes from Ulxp'rjiJLkpas fi (locative to genitive) In Heb. 3 9 ou can be regarded as adverb 'where' or as relative 'wherewith' (marg. of the Ameriican Revision). If it is relative, cS was probably the unattracted form (instrumental to genitive like weipaaij.ov). In Mk. 10 38 f.,

Cf. also d0' ^s

(locative).

17/xepas

ration resolves itself into d0' :

:

(Col. 1

rifxepas

:

•§.

:

:

.

:

:

TO PaTTLo-fxa 6 /3a7rrifo/xai, the relative is in the cognate accusative

retained with the passive verb.^ (5)

to the

Inverse attraction.

same tendency

assimilation

See further chapter on Cases. is

called inverse attraction

to identify antecedent

and

relative,

that of the antecedent to the relative.

is

phenomenon

What

In

is

due

only the

itself this

no more peculiar than the other. Plato, who uses the ordinary attraction very often, seldom has inverse attraction (Cleef,

is

De

Attradionis in Enuntionihus Rel. Vsv Platonico,

pp. 44-46).

No

(Compernass,

De Serm.

numerous '

in the

inverse attraction

N.

T.,

Gr., p. 13).

is

found

in Pisidian

The examples

Greek

are not very

but the ancient Greek amply supports the

W.-Sch., p. 225. Hort in note to text says: "up probably a primitive

error for 6^."

2

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 22G

f.

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

718

One example,

idiom. ^

Mk.

12

10; Lu. 20

:

2

I Pet.

W. H.

7

:

read

16, Tov apTOV ov

:

verse 15.

have

If 6p is

from the

It is

LXX

Cf. also Lu.

Xidos.

which might have been 10

Mt. 21:42;

XlOov 6u aireSoKlnaaav, occurs in

17.

:

1

:

(Ps. 118

Hence

In

22).

See also

opKov ov after ixvrjadrivai?

KXcoiJiev,

:

73, opKov ov wnoaev, 1

Cor.

also to ttottjplov 6 evXoyovfJLev of

a part of the text (not

W.

H.) in Ac. 10

:

36,

we

Sometimes anacoluthon occurs also as in rav Trept avTOV, Mt. 12 d^e^ijcrerat aurcS, 36; ttSs 6s kpel ^rjTrjdrjaeTai Tap' avTov, 12 Travrl & edodi] 48; Trat" o

TOV \6yov 6v.^

—

prjua apyov 6

Lu. 12 dkSoiKev

:

10;

— e^

—

:

—

avrov, Jo. 6

39;

:

:

irav 6 8e8coKas avT(Jo

bwaei avTols, 17

:

2.

—

5t' avTod, we have anacoluthon, but In 2 Cor. 12 17, juiy Tuva wv not attraction. In Mt. 25 24, crwayeLs odev ov bieaKopiriaas, we have eKtWev otov shortened to 69ev. There is not inverse attrac:

:

tion in ov8eh

6s (1

Cor. 6

5) since

:

precedes

evt,

ovoels.

But the most striking instance of this close unity between antecedent and relative is the incorporation of the (e)

Incorporation.

antecedent into the relative clause with identity of case. I count 54 such examples in Moulton and Geden.^ They are fairly well

New Testament. where no change of

distributed through the different portions of the 1)

case

6

:

The is

simplest form of such incorporation

Thus Lu. 24

required.

14, idovTes a eToirjaev arjfxela

KplveTe KpiQ-qaeade,

24; Lu. 6

24

:

co

Mt. 24

38;

:

(W. H.); Mt. 7:2,

:

37=Lu.

13

:

TpoTov), so also Ac. 1

kv

^ yap

KpifxaTi

Mk. 4

fieTpeire /xeTprid-qaeTaL vplv,

[JLerpui

this simple incorporation see

34 (the set phrase, adverbial accusative, :

:

44, y oh bonetTe wpa (but see per contra

For further examples of

50).

Mt. 23

:

kv

icai

(pepovaai a riToinaaav apdofxaTa; Jo.

1,

:

is

11; 7: 28; 15

:

11; 27: 25;

Mk.

2

:

6v

19 {6aov

40 (but note 12 46); 17 29 f.; Jo. 6 14; 9 14; 20; 25 18; probably 26 7; Ro. 2 16; 7 19; 9 24 (ous was note); 16 2; Ph. 3 18 (but probably only predicate accusative like Mk. 15 12); 2 Tim. 1:6 (5t' riv). In 1 Jo. 2 25 there is not exactly incorporation, but apposition to the relative. In Lu. 8 47; Ac. 22 24 and Heb. 2 11 the case is the same also, but the preposition would have been needed only with the relative. Cf. Phil. 10; 2 Tim. 1 12; Heb. 13: 11. See Siv Trov7]pccv, Ac. 25 18, where there is incorporation and XPovov); Lu. 12

II

:

6; 17

:

:

3; Ac. 7

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

—

:

attraction to the case of the antecedent.

Thompson, Synt.

of Att. Gk., p.

The same

thing

is

true

7L

1

Cf.

2

N. T. Gk., p. 175. Cf. Blass, ib., and Comm. on Acts in loco. This is more than "occasional," as Blass says (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 174).

'

*

He

Blass, Gr. of

rightly notes the absence of the article.

— PRONOUNS Rev. 17

of cov

cbcoj'

f strative

:

where

8,

719

('ANTflNTMIAl) agrees with &V.

^'K€Tr6vT0)v

— TovToov, the substantive

is

In Heb, 13

incorporated, but the

:

11,

demon-

avro tovto (Gal. 2:10). repeated afterwards. Cf also 6 It is possible that Ro. 4: 17 belongs here, the preposition KarkvavTi being understood twice. The same thing may be true of Lu. 1 4, is

.

:

wv KaTTjxvdv^ \6yoov ttjv da4>a\eLau (either \6'Ywv [or irepl \6yo)v] wepl S)v or Trept Xoywv ovs). 2) But sometimes besides incorporation there has resulted a Trept

change of case

also.

of the relative (cf

.

The antecedent may be drawn into the inverse attraction) as in Mk. 6 16, ov eycb :

case aire-

Here the demonstrative pronoun is Ke(f)a\Laa 'Icodi'rjj/ euros r]yepdr]. resumptive. The change is made from nominative to accusative. true of the spurious passage in Jo. 5 4, w KarelxeTo voar]iJ.aTL (change from genitive to instrumental).

The same 8r]iroTe

This

may

it

:

The

KuTrptw.

rivL

but

is

probably true of Ac. 21:

is

croivi

thing

16, ayovres Trap'

be ayovres Mmo-com

But

to locative).^

Trpos

<S

resolution of this passage Trap'

may

Mmo-a?m

In Ro. 6:17, VTr-qKOvaare form would probably be

els

^evLaQu^ixev is

Mw-

not certain,

cS (change from accusative be correct.

ov Tape86dr]Te tvttov didaxrjs, the resolved

tuttco

5i5ax^s

els

6v -Kapebbd-qTe.

In Heb.

7 14, els Tjv 4>vKi]v, the substantive would have been in apposition with e^ 'lovSa (the ablative). In Heb. 10 10 et- w de^wart. the accusative TO OeKrjfxa is present in the preceding sentence. The same :

:

thing

is

true of 1 Pet.

In 2 Cor. 10

13

:

1

:

we have

10, vrept

in the

tjs

aojT-qplas {cnoTTjpiav

just before).

same sentence the substantive

re-

peated (once incorporated and attracted to the case of the relative, but the relative itself attracted to the case of Kavbvos), /card to ^eTpov ep-kpLCfev tjijuv 6 Qebs jxeTpou.

Tov Kavbvos ov

3) In a few instances the attraction has been that of the relative to the case of the antecedent, transferred to the relative clause. See Ac. 25 18, wv eydi virevbow irov-qpciv. For examples with prepo:

sitions (see chapter

(Lu. 3

irovqpobv

:

on Prepositions) note

:

Trept to-vtoiv o)v eiroirjaev

19), Trepl Taacbv oav el8ov bwap-ewv (19

the incorporation

is

only partial.

*.

37),

where

It is clear therefore that in

the great majority of instances there is no change of case reVery many also are set phrases Hke by Tpbirov, fj upa, fj

quired. rjixepa,

16

17

:

7.

5i'

?]v

atrtai^,

etc.

For presence

of the antecedent see Jo.

f.

Absence of Antecedent. It so often happens that the relano antecedent that it calls for special consideration.

tive has 1

But

Thompson

(Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 71

this is not Attic.

f.)

finds this

change only in the ace.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

720

The

NEW TESTAMENT

clause indeed often becomes a substantive rather than an "Os thus occurs in general statements as in Mt.

adjective clause.

10

23

16, 18 (cf. also Tras 6s,

Lu. 12 48; 14 33; Ac. 2 21; Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173) gives a large number of such instances of the general or indefinite use of os. So os ex" 14;

:

Gal. 3

:

(Mk. 4:

S}Ta cLKoveLv cLKoveTO)

ject of

This

d/couerco.

Here the

case (nominative).

37),

:

Jo.

:

:

46; 6

Cf. 1 Cor. 15

Lu. 9

6 dixt;

elfil

:

Uyei (Lu. 9

6

29; 19

Mk.

Cf.

33).

:

But the

15

:

50, etc.

(Mk.

12; Lu. 11

:

25.

same

expressed) are in the

(if

10,

:

the sub-

is

Mk. 4

Cf.

in the accusative as in 6 8e vulv Xe7co -Kaaiv \kyw

el8(hs

ixii

where the relative clause

9),

the indefinite relative.

is

and the antecedent

relative

Both may be 13

:

10).

:

:

6;

may

be in the accusative when the antecedent would have been in the nominative. So 6 \a\el yiperaL (Mk. 11 23). Cf. Jo. 1 26; 4 18, etc. So both may be examples of the genitive, as avyyevris wv ov awk1

:

:

37, etc.

:

relative

:

18

Ko^^ep Ilerpos to wriop (Jo.

7

1 irepl S}p

:

(Rev. 2 a^ta

:

25)

xqpTai

Trept

Trept (tov

14; Ac. 8

26

:

wo

:

&p

pay holt wp)

have axpi

Kaipov

the resolution 5e5co«:as

= xept

ov8kp= toutcop

24; 22

it

15; 25

:

16, jxapTvpa o}p re eldks

:

:

where ov^tovtou

26)

:

TobroiP (or

reall}^

Siv eirpa^afxep,

Jo. 17: 9

Siv

= irepl

:

irepi

ov.

(gen.

'6.

and ace).

:

41,

So in

ous. In Ac. 21 24 S)p KaTrjExactly so ojv in Lu. 9 36; 23 11; Ro. 15 18; 2 Cor. 12 17. In Ac.

tovtwp

:

a, etc.

:

:

o3p re

fxe

:

:

6(pdr]aoiJ.at

ool, it

The antecedent would be

that gives trouble.

in 1 Cor. in axpi- ou

Li Lu. 23

(or kp w).

<^

is tovtoop

So

But

S)p.

the second

is

tovtup

and the

relative before attraction either a (ace. of general reference) or ols (locative

also

irepl

ourot.

7

:

Cf. also Ac. 13

:

cov

25.

has as its unexIn Mt. 6 8 (so :

the antecedent would be in the accusative. wp, Ac. 24 13. In Lu. 17 1 bC oh is resolved into toutoj

Jo. 13: 29), &p

So

In Ro. 4

or instrumental).

pressed antecedent

xp^'^o.v,

:

:

In Ro. 10

bC ov (dative).

:

14,

ttcDs

TnaTevacoaiP ov ovk iJKOvaap,

we

probably have o5 = et$ tovtov (or tovtcS) ov. The examples of the ablative are not many. See Jo. 7:31 where &p after TXelopa arjixela is to be resolved into tovtcop a (abl.

and ace). a4>'

So in Ac. 26 22 kros :

Siv=air6 TovToiv

a,

coj/=k'r6s tovtwp a.

while in 2 Cor. 2 3 :

d
Cf. Lu. 6 34, xap' up; 1 Cor. 10 30. In Ac. 13 39, the one preposition covers both ablatives. :

:

In Heb. 5

wp^a-wo tovtwp :

:

8

a(f>' cop.

dTro ttciptcop up,

For the dative I note ols SeSorat (Mt. 19 11), where the antecelike TTOLVTes would have been in the nominative. Cf Lu. 7 43, 47 ^; Ro. 15 21 ols and 2 Pet. 1 9 ^i. In 1 Cor. 7 39, Jj dkXei yaprjdrjpuL, the antecedent would have been in the dative also. So also 2 Cor. 2 10 w; Ro. 6 16 cS twice. In 2 Tim. 1 12, oUa ^ :

dent

:

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

PRONOUNS

the accusative rather followed

TeirlcTTevKa, it is

In Mt. 20

23 (Mk. 10

:

In Ro. 10

TovTcov.

721

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

by

40) the antecedent of

:

dative, avrdv

oh

14 the antecedent of ov would be

:

Some few examples

c3.

probably

is

tovtco.

appear also. Cf. i(f)' oh, Ro. 6 21, where the antecedent would have been kirl tovtols. So Ro. 2 1 and 14 22 ej/ c3 implies ev tovtco (cf. also 1 Pet. 2 12; 3 16), but not so verse 21 where kv oj refers to an involved tl or ij.r]bkv. In Ro. 7 6 ej' (? may involve tovtco kv
:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

The prepbe used twice ^ "in the case of a sharper division of the relative clause." So ds ttiv yriv TavTrjv, eh ^v, Ac. 7:4; oltto Prepositions with the Antecedent and Relative.

8.

may

osition

jrponTrjs rjixepas acj)' rjs, 20 18. Then again the preposition may occur with the antecedent, but not with the relative, though implied, :

h

as in

2

16

:

stand

On

wepa

1

:

vpxov, Ac. 9

fj

Ac. 13

Ac.

tlaifKdev,

Cf. Lu.

v-

kv rfj 65c3

TOiv Siv,

w

iravTl xpbvo^

ei'

may

the other hand the preposition

Thus

Trap' S}v

(Lu. 6

vTep ov (1 Cor. 10

(l.Cor. 7:

cov

:

:

:

34),

30), ev

1), etc.

(Heb. 5

S}V

0.4)'

ctTro

irav-

c5

e4>'

occur with the relative,

kKeLvri tj} chpa ev ^,

When the antecedent is absent, the common to both, as in d^' wv (2 Cor. 2 Cf.

clearly true of

it is

39.

:

but not with the antecedent.

one.

So the margin in Ro. under-

21.

:

But

17.

:

1

It is possible also so to

25.

preposition :

3),

4 53. be the one

Jo.

may

or which belongs to only

oh (Ro. 6

21), ev

:

oh (Ph. 4:11),

(Ro. 14: 22), eh 6v (Ro. 10

This "one"

8) =a.Trd tovtoov a,

:

maybe

:

14), irepl

the antecedent, as in

eh ov (Jo. 6

29)=ets tovtov

:

ov,

= xept tovtcov ovs, virep a (1 Cor. 4 6) = i»7rep raDra cov (Heb. a, a4>' 5 8) = d7r6 tovtuv a, eh ov (Jo. 19 37)=et$ tovtov ov, etc. Or the "one" may be the relative, as bC ov (Lu. 17:1)= TovTU) 8l' ov, 60' OV (Hcb. 7 13) = ovTos OV, ctc. The use of prepositions is common in the same way with the relative and its (Jo. 17: 9)

irepl oov

:

:

:

kcf)'

'.

incorporated antecedent. rifxepas

21

:

(Lu.

1

:

16), eh ov

20),

8l'

9.

:

Relative Phrases.

come

See

ev

w

alTiav (Lu. 8

— TVTov (Ro.

^s (To^TTipias (1 Pet. 1

clauses

rjv

6

:

10), etc.

Some

17),

Kplp.aTL :

d
—

^s fjfxepas (Col. 1

Cf. Ro. 16 of

(Mt. 7:2), axpt h w MvaawvL (Ac.

47), Trap'

:

:

9), Tepl

2.

the abbreviated prepositional

to be used at the beginning of principal sentences 1

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 174.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

722

and

like the free use of conjunctions

12

:

oh (12

kv

3),

Xapiv (Lu. 7 47),

:

hb (Heb. 3 7), Trepl alrlav (2 Tim. 1:6).

1),

5t'

:

:

^v

Indeed (Winer-Schmiedel, TOVTU) OTL, avO' 0}V Blotl (1

Th. 2

:

= aVTl

(Heb. 2

TOVTCOV OTL,

6tl, 10'

UI

may

cS

= €Trl

oh (Ro. G

:

:

26)

S)v

Cf. Latin use of

So

ap9'

Cf. Wev (Heb. 3:1).

be here equal to

:

Cf.

kv

Cor. 5:4),

The temcommon. Cf. kv

21), etc. is

(Ac. 2

is ra0' 6, KadoTL

airep.

wv (Lu.

(1 Cor. 7:1), ov

TOVTCC OTi (2

of the relative phrases

is Kad' oTi, KaOairep

Kad' oaov

kcf)'

Indeed naes (Ro. 8 (Ro. 4 6) is Kad'

18).

:

p. 228) kv

8)=5td tovto

and causal use

poral u>

relatives.

Cf. Draeger, Hist. Syntax, Bd. II, p. 512.

qui.

e
6<7ov

(Mt. 9

45)

:

:

15),

(Heb. 3:3).

Adverbs show the same phenomena as other relative forms. Thus in Ro. 5 20 ou has no antecedent. In 1 Cor. 16 6 o5= eKelae ov. So owov in Jo. 11 :32 = e/cer(Te otov and in Jo. 20 19 kvravda owov. In 2 Sam. 14 15 o = conjunction. 10. Pleonastic Antecedent. The redundant antecedent incorpo:

:

:

:

rated into the relative clause has attracted considerable attention.

—

In Herodotus 4, 44 os ovtos occurs,^ and Blass^ cites Hyper. TovTOiv. But in ancient Greek it was a very rare Eux. § 3, uv usage. In Winer-SchmiedeP examples of pleonastic ovros are cited from Xenophon, Diodorus Siculus, Pausanias, Sophocles. Pleonastic avTos appears in Aristophanes, Birds, 1237, oh dvreov avrols. Reference also is made to Sophocles and Lucian. In the LXX the idiom is extremely common, manifestly under the influence of the Hebrew i? ^t^ (cf. Aramaic i). It "is found in all parts of the LXX and undoubtedly owes its frequency to the Hebrew original. But the fact that it is found in an original Greek work, such as 2 Mace, (xii, 27 kv ... kv avrfj) and a paraphrase such as 1 Esdras (iii, 5, 9; iv, 54, 63; vi, 32), is sufficient to warrant its presence in the kolvt].^'^ For numerous examples of the idiom in the LXX see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 200, and Winer-Moulton, p. 185. Cf. also Conybeare and Stock, Selections, pp. 65 ff. As a matter It occurs of fact the examples are not very numerous in the N. T. avrrjv, 7:2 oh kSodrj avTo7s, 7:9 several times in Rev. (3:8 fiv

—

fj

—

ov — avTov,

13:8

ov — avTov,

20:8

S)v

—

Outside of the

ai'ToJv).

Apocalypse, which so strongly bears the influence of the

usage

is

very rare.

example hardly is

Mk.

1

:

See Mt. 3

parallel as a

7 (and Lu. 3

elx^ t6 dvydrpLOV

ai'Trjs.

:

12, ov to tttvov kv

matter of

K.-G.,

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

433.

LXX,

the

x^tpt avrov,

an

But a clearer instance and still more so 7 25, ^s

— avrov, Cf. also ota — TOLavrrj

2

rfj

fact.

16), ou

1

II, p.

:

:

(IVIk.

13

:

W.-M.,

19), olos p. 185.

3

p. 201.

"

Thack., Gr. of 0. T. in Gk., p. 4G.

Cf. also

—

PRONOUNS (Rev. 16

TrjXt/coOros

12 Itt'

6, 14), oTTov

:

avTovs,

:

18), ota

— ew'

avTOJv

— ovTus

(Rev. 17

(Mk. 9:3), owov :

9).^

we have a quotation from the

N. T. examples are

all

723

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

In Ac. 15

—

:

LXX (Amos 9

:

(Rev.

eKel

17,

ous

€<^'

—

" The

12).

from places where Aramaic sources are

One almost wonders, seems so anxious to prove that the idiom in the N.. T. is not a Hebraism. By his own admission it seems a practical Hebraism there, though the idiom had an independent development in the Greek. The early sporadic examples in the ancient Greek ^ blossom out in the later Greek certain or suspected" (Moulton, Prol, p. 95). after this admission,

why Moulton,

p. 94,

again and in the modern Greek become very common. Psichari* considers it rather far-fetched in Moulton to appeal to the modem

Greek vernacular, sent

for,'

since the

6 yiarpos ttov top ecxTeCka, 'the

modern Greek vernacular

doctor

whom

I

just as readily uses

Psichari complains that Thumb* also has TToO without avTov. not explained clearly this idiom. But Psichari believes that the idiom existed in the vernacular kolvt] (and so fell in readily with the Hebrew usage) and has persisted to the present day. He considers^ the example from a papyrus of the third century a.d.

(P.Oxy.

1,

117, 15) decisive, e^

Siv

11, 26, oTvep (f)avep6v tovto kyeuero.

— e^ ahrwv.

See also P.

Amh.

II,

Moulton*' has given abundant ex-

amples from Old English. So in Chaucer {Knightes Tale, 1851

f .):

" Namely oon, That with a spere was thirled his brest-boon."

German der du hist. Simcox^ cites vernacuEvidently therefore which I don't like it." lar English "a tiling various languages in development independent the idiom has had {Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 353) Jannaris According to in the vernacular. connective." mere regarded as "a such cases is in the relative h hixiv, W. H. reject kv vixiv. In Gal. 2 10, o— In Gal. 3 1, oU intensive use of auro, but tovto is pleonastic. the have avTo TOVTO, we we have again intensive avTos. avTos, 2 6s In 1 Pet. 24, Winer ^ rightly remarks that it is a 11. The Repetition of 6s.

He compares

also the

—

:

:

—

:

misapprehension of the Greek genius to expect the relative rather than avTos or ovtos in a case like Jo. 1:6; Lu. 2 36; 19 2; Ac. :

:

N. T. Gk., p. 175; Simcox, Lanp. of the N. T., p. 59. N. T. Gk., p. 175, cites ov 17 tttoij avrod, from Clem. Cor. i. 21. 9. grec de la Sept., p. 182.

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2

Blass, Gr. of

*

Essai sur le

*

Hellen., p. 128.

6

Cf. also Jann., Hist.

^

Lans. of the N. T.,

8

W.-M.,

p. 186.

Gk. Gr., p. 59.

«

p. 353.

Cf. Farrar,

Gk. Synt.,

Prol., p. 94.

p. 113.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

724 10

The

36.

:

Greek could, and commonly did/ use

old

ovtos or

more usually avTos with /cat to continue the narrative. Blassrather curiously calls it "negligent usage." Cf. Lu. 13 4, k4>' ovs :

eireaev 6 Trvpyos Kal airkKTHvev avTOvs', 1 Cor.

and

ov — Kal

h'

avrov

8l

Heb. 11

(cf.

—

/cat Rev. 17:2, ntd' ^s 13 Cf. Jo. /cat avros. rather than

avTcJv;

4); 2 Pet. 2 In Lu. 17:31

In Jo.

24.

— Kal

6, e^ o5

:

:

aurrjs. :

8

1

:

:

els

3, ols /cat

33, e0' 6p

6

would have been impracticable. /cat 7:13 Paul might very well have written rjrts

in 1 Cor.

rather than

OS

also, to

So

Ibiov vlov ovK kcpdaaro,

Cf. Ph. 4

(Ro. 8:32).

auT6j'

—

ovtos (a sort of parenthesis).

/cat

It is conmion,^

have neither the relative repeated nor the demonstrative.

76 Tov

OS

occurs

— Kal ew'

avTov, the repetition of the relative

But

ahrbv

— Kal

:

dXXd vrep

rjuQiv TravTOiv irapiboiKev

9.

be repeated. A good many such examples may be used, as wv Kal Siu (Ro. 4:7). Cf. uv re— (Ac. 26 16). Cf. w Kal (Ac. 27 23) and
may

occur in the N. T.

Kat

But the

—

— —

:

—

:

—

:

:

— —

ou Trap' ov (Ac. 24 6). out any conjunction, as in 6s See 1 Cor. 4:17. Cf. 6aa oca, etc. (Ph. 4:8). This repetition of os is specially frequent in Paul. Cf. Col. 1 24, 28 f.; Eph. 3 11 f.; 1 Cor. 2 7 f., though it is not exactly "pecuhar" to him (WinerMoulton, p. 209). In 1 Jo. 1 1 6 is repeated without conjunction

—

:

:

:

:

:

is not repeated with the second 6-12 four sentences begin with a relative. In we have otrLves ojv S)v /cat e^ uv.

three times, while in verse 3 6

In

verb.

Ro. 9 4 :

The allel in

with

1 f.

Pet. 1

—

use of avd' the

luit);.

In Ro. 4

:

LXX,

oou

—

—

baa together (Lu. 12

:

easily falling in with the

Thus a double

3) finds

abundant par-

Hebrew

construction^

relative occurs.

21 the conjunction of ort o

is merely accidental; but Cf also oto^ ort in Ro. 9 6. 12. A Consecutive Idea. This may be implied in 6s. Thus in Lu. 7 5, a^tos kariv cS irape^y tovto. One is reminded of qui in

that

is

:

not true of

6

— ort in

1

Jo. 4

:

3.

.

:

:

Latin.^

A

Cf. also

rts kaTLv ovtos 6s Kat d^iaprtas a4>iriaiv;

particularly good example

Kvpiov, OS avp^L^aaei avTov;

13. Causal. 1

Bernhardy,

"Os

may

is

1

Cor. 2

See chapter also introduce

p. 304; Jann., Hist.

p. 432.

Gk.

2

*

Thack., Gr. of O. T. in Gk., p. 25. Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 369.

6

(Lu. 7:49).

7dp

lyvoi vovv

XIX, Mode. a causal sentence.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

"Normal"

Thompson,

16, rts

So

6s

Gr., p. 354; Jelf, 833.2; K.-G., II,

*

indeed.

:

Synt., p. 70.

725

PRONOUNS ('ANTSNTMIAl) 7e in Ro. 8

:

This

Cf. Latin quippe qui.

32.

Thompson, Syntax See also chapter XIX, Mode. In Direct Questions. The passage 14. in ancient Attic.

€(/»'

Cf.

is

perfectly regular

of Attic Greek, p. 374.

in

Mt. 26

:

50, iralpe,

is the only one in the N. T. where such a construction is There is no doubt as to the occasional use of oaris

S irapei,

possible.

(see (e), 9), bivbaos, oiroTepos,

ottcos

in direct questions in the ancient

For examples see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 473

Greek.

f.

See

further chapter XIX, Mode. This double use of relative pronouns is on a par with the double use of interrogative stems (cf. indefinite) so

and

common

Indo-Germanic tongues.^ The Latin qui

in the

and usage. Moulton^

quis are kin in root

rightly considers

it

"superfluous to say that this usage cannot possibly be extended to direct question." Winer explained the "misuse" as belonging to late Greek. A few examples^ of 6s in a direct question do occur. So '^

in Euseb., P. E. vi, 7.

257

5 (p. 253 A), bC

aiTlav

riv

d,

Gaisford edition, wv

— Tpoaexets

IveKa; Just., Cohort.

Apophth., 105 C,

'OtJLr]po);

Certainly the idiom was chiefly in the ver'kpakvu, Blass^ conjectures a slip in the text, there. even rare and nacular hi

6 k^rjXdes;

having been changed to

alpe

imperative in his text. of the principal verb

and Chrysostom had an

eraipe,

We may suppose "a rather

and

treat

it

as

an ordinary

harsh ellipsis"

relative.^

"Os

may

indeed here be demonstrative as suggested by Noah K. Davis.^ There was undoubtedly in the later Greek considerable confusion in the use of the relatives

and the

can at present say.

Blass thought

It is

interrogatives.

possible for OS here to be interrogative. it

That

is

as

not imas one

much

"quite incredible."

Here the matter is much clearer. Even Blass ^ admits that "relatives and interrogatives become confused in Greek as in other languages." In the classical language OS (still more ocrrts) is "frequently" so employed. This use comes from Homer on down and occurs in Aristophanes, Sophocles, Herodotus, Xenophon, Plato, Lysias. Thucydides^ uses it side ^^ by side v/ith oans. The papyri have it as Moulton has shown. 15.

In

Indirect Questions.

1

Thompson, Synt.

2

Prol., p. 93.

*

Blass, Gr. of

6 '

of Att. Gr., p. 74. =>

N. T. Gk.,

W.-M.,

Gk. Gr.,

p. 474.

« Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 68. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 176. Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 178.

8

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

9

Thompson,

Synt., p. 74.

Cf. also Jann., Hist.

Prol., p. 93.

"

p. 208.

p. 331; Jann., Hist.

Prol., p. 93; 01. Rev.,

Dec,

1901, p. 441.

Gk.

Gr., p. 473;

Moulton,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

726

R. L. 29 (iii/B.c); 4>povTicras 8l wv 37 (ii/B.c). It is a little surprising, however, to find Blass^ saying that this usage "is wanting in the Cf. (f)pa^ovTes kv

rJL K(jOfxr]L

OLKOvcnp,

Tavra epyaaBrjpat, P.P.

5eT

W.

N. T."

Moulton^

F.

ii.

undoubted examples So

in his footnote gives

of OS in indirect questions after verbs of knowing, declaring, etc.

—

olSev

COP XP^'-O-V '^X^T^i

Mk.

6 ytyopev, Tt);

/X97

5

:

Mt. 6:8;

d7ra77€tXaTe a aKovere, 11:4; eiSvIa

33; apeypure 6

9

etSojs 6 Xeyei,

:

33;

5i' t]p

Lu. 6

eirolrjaep,

:

3

(cf.

Mt. 12

alrlap rjiparo avrov aTrr]yyeL\ep,

8

:

:

3

47

Ac. 22 24) 5t5d^ei v^ds a bet direip, 12 12. Cf. also Lu. 9 46. then in 1 Tim. 1 7 we find d Xeyovatp and irepl tLpup 8(.aj3e-

(cf.

;

:

:

And

:

:

used side by side after

fiaiowrai.

Cf. also Jo. 18: 21.

poovpre^.

ixi}

One may compare^

also Lu. 11

Mk.

32), ovk exovacp tL 4>ayo:(jLP.

8

:

in Lu. 8

2 (Mt. 15 47,

:

:

and note

:

6, ovk

in Lu. 23

cbs

:

ex^ o

55; 24

:

Trapad-qcro)

abrQ, with

See also

cos

ladir]

mention

35, not to

6a OS, oTolos.

The Idiom

16.

9

:

39; 10

:

1

:

61; 18

:

N. T., as Mk. For ovSeis eanp ds reminded of the old

It occurs in the

ovdeis kaTiv 6s.

29; Lu.

29;

1

Cor. 6

:

5.

Mt. 10 26; Lu. 8 17. Here one is oans. Mayser {Grammatik, p. 310) calls attention to the papyri use of 6p= 6 after analogy of ro
idiom

:

:

ovdeis

—

:

(e) "OcrTi9.

1.

Varied Uses.

we have

The form

is,

seen a variety of uses of

merely

of course, 6s,

and

rts

6s

likewise

and is

rts.

But

not entirely

Hence the combination cannot be expected to be so. It was not ironclad 6s and oans. in the ancient language, as may be seen by reference to the Epic, Ionic, Attic poets, and to Herodotus (once Thucydides) .^ Blass" finds that the distinction between them is no longer regularly preserved in the N. T., least of all in Luke, best of all in Paul. Moulton'^ finds some examples in the papyri of octtls in the sense of 6s, but doubts if the two relatives are ever absolutely convertible and thinks that on the whole the classical distinction remains undisturbed, though sometimes during the kolpt) period it had worn rather thin.^ But Jannaris^ holds that 6o-rts, having a wider scope uniform.

2. The Distinction between

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175. W.-M., p. 207 f. Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 172 f.

^

Prol., p. 91.

1

2 ^

8

lb.; CI. Rev.,

«

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

Dec,

1901, p. 441

p. 352.

f.

»

W.-Sch., p. 237.

*

lb., p. 236.

p. 69, for the exx.

.

727

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

was used indiscriminately for 6s. He is supported by Kaelker about Polybius.^ But in the vernacular modern Greek 6tl is alone common, other forms of octtis being rare, though otlvos and onvoov are found (Thumb, Handb., p. 93 f.). Kruger^ calls 6s "objective" and 6arts "qualitative and generic." W. F. Moulton^ defines 6(rrts as properly indicating the class or kind to which an object belongs. But no exact parallel can be drawn nor uniform distinction preserved. Each has its own history. Jebb^ takes 6crrts to refer to class in ancient Greek and hence In the modern Greek it is still inis either indefinite or causal. than

OS,

in postclassical times

but has also in the vernacular displaced 6s in the masculine and feminine nominative. In the LXX oarLs is less frequent than 6s and is almost confined to the nominative and accusative.^

definite,

In the papyri*'

it is less

frequent than

6s

and

usually in the

is

nom-

inative as in the N. T. (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154). 3. The Indefinite Use. This is, as a matter of fact, still the most

!

frequent in the N. T. Of. Latin quicumque. The examples are too numerous to give save a few samples. Cf. 6o-rts o-^ pairl^eL ets (TLayova

TTjv Se^iaj/

alTr}ar}T€

(Mt. 5

:

39), 6crTts apprjcr-qTal

(Jo. 14 13), oans eav :

ft

(Gal. 5

fxe

Thus

10).

:

(10

33), 6rt av

:

it is

used with

indicative or subjunctive, with or without av (eav). Cf. Mt. 13 In Mk. 8 34 et tls does not differ very greatly from 6o-Tts. :

also eau

Mt.

7

:

Mk. 10

H7],

:

30.

Has

24;

of course, indefinite also.

oo-rts is,

irav 6 tl eav TroLrjre (Col.

3

:

For vaaa

17), etc.

:

12.

Cf.

Thus

ypvxh ^rts av

23 (LXX). In P. Par. 574 (iii/A.c.) note oans ttot ovv el. 4. The Definite Examples. These are chiefly causal clauses. Some indeed seem merely descriptive. Thus Mt. 7 15, tuv 4/evhoTrpo4>y\Twv Cf. also Mt. 7 26; 13 52; 21 33, etc. The value o'iTLves epxovrai.

see Ac. 3

:

:

:

:

:

of the pronoun sometimes does not differ greatly from olos and exThus evvovxoi. o'lnves, Mt. 19 12; aXXots yeoipyoZt presses quality. Once indeed we actu1, etc. o'LTLves, 21 41; irapdhots atrim, 25 :

:

:

Cf. also TroraTn) 17 yvvij Tjrts (Lu. ToiavTTi rjTLS (1 Cor. 5:1). See also Gal. 4 24, 26. Then again it may be merely airives rjKoKovd-qaav tc3 'iTjaoO explanatory as in ywalKes xoXXat (Mt. 27: 55). Cf. Mk. 15 7; Lu. 12 1; Col. 3:5; Rev. 11:8, etc. This use of 6(ttis is particularly frequent with proper names.

ally

have

7: 39).

:

—

:

»

Quest., p. 245

:

f

For the confusion between 6s and Scrrts see also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 558 f. * W.-M., p. 209, n. 3, where a very helpful discussion occurs. * V. and D., Handb. to Mod. Gk., p. 302. B Thack., Gr., « Mayser, Gr., p. 310. p. 192. 2

Gr., p. 139.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

728

7}ris KoXelraL BrjOXeeix. Cf. also Lu. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 303, takes the explanatory or illustrative examples = 'now he,' 'one that.' Moulton^ points out that oo-ris at the beginning of a parable (cf. Mt.

So Lu. 2 8

4, ets -koKlv Aauet5

:

26; Ac. 16

:

20

1

20, Tols \6yoLs

:

be 'which for her.'

There

that' (almost adversative), while in Lu. 10

all

avT7]s='and

See Jo. 8

died'); Ac. 10

6; 10

:

:

of

qui

6(ttls (cf.

42

and

53, 'AjSpaafx oo-rts cnredavev ('seeing that

:

he

47, otrLves to Tvev/ia to ayiov eXa^ov ('since they re-

:

ceived the Holy Spirit').

8 2

:

not be taken away from

shall

it

no doubt about the causal use

is

qui).

In an example like Moulton takes it to

so appropriate.

/lov olrLPes irK-qpoiQ-qaovTai,

^Tts ovK aipatpedriaeTai

quippe

and

really a type

is

1)

:

Lu.

12, etc.

:

35; Eph. 3

Cf. also Ac. 7: 53; Ro. 2

13; Ph. 4

:

:

3; Col. 3

:

15; 6

5; Jas.

:

4

:

:

2;

Heb.

14; 1 Pet.

11, etc.

:

a matter of dispute whether in the N. T., oorts has come already to have merely examples where it is equal There are undoubted of the force 6s. Ac. 11: ('which very'). So oaTep to 28, ^tls eyeveTo, kirl KXauStou. Value of

5.

as usually in

It

6s?

is

modern Greek,

Cf. also Ac. 13

:

31; 16

16; 1 Cor. 3

:

Blass^ goes further

17, etc.

:

and finds oo-rts in Luke purely in the sense of 6s. He is supported by Jebb^ who says that "no natural interpretation can make it more in Lu. 2 4." In Acts at any rate a fairly good case can be made out for this weakened sense of 6(ttls. Cf 8 14 f Ilerpoi/ koI :

:

.

'luiavqv o'LTLPes,

12

:

10

Moulton* gives an exact hTravpLOV TjTts ecTTlv

Tfj

17

ttjv ttvXtjp 7?rts,

jj-eTOL

parallel

:

10.

from the papyri

T-qv TrapaaKevr]v

.

See also Rev. 12

{avpLOV

for

rjTLS

:

13.

Mt. 27:

62,

ecTTLV

ti).

He

quotes Hort also (Comm., 1 Pet. 2 11) in favour of the position that in some places in the N. T. no distinction can be drawn between OS and oo-Tts. Blass^ denies that Paul uses 6o-rts as the equiv:

alent of

6s.

I confess

that

I fail

to see a great deal of difference

between otTives and oh in Ro. 16 4, otrtves and ot in 16 7. Cf. also OS and rfrts in verses 5 f There is little here that calls for comment. We do 6. Case. not have attraction nor incorporation. As a matter of fact only :

:

three cases occur (nom., gen., acc.).^

*

Prol., p. 92.

nas3, 2 =»

8

'who indeed'

is

common

in Pisidia.

Cf.

Comper-

p. 13.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173.

"

Prol., p. 91.

V. and D., Handb., p. 302. The pap. show the same situation.

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173.

Thus 190

"Oo-Tts as

De Serm. Grace,

The stereotyped phrase

ijPTLva

(iu/?),

BM

ew

77

oTov

(viii/A.n.),

NP

56

Moulton,

CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 154.

opnva inscr. J.H.S., 1902,

(iii/A.D.).

p. 349, e$ orou

BM

PRONOUNS with

and the

ecos

genitive,

729

('ANTflNTMIAl) otov, is

ecos

rather frequent.

Cf.

Mt.

50 (Luke three times, Matthew and John once The each). This is the only form of the shortened inflection. LXX once^ (2 Mace. 5 10) has r/crrivos, elsewhere otov. The accusative is found in the N. T. only in the neuter singular 6tl (absent 5

25; Lu. 12

:

:

:

from modern Greek). But see (note G, p. 728) occasional ovTLva and ^vTLva in the papyri. So Lu. 10 35, 6tl av Tpoadairaprjays. Cf. 13; 15 16; 6ri kav, Mk. 6 23; 1 Cor. 16 OTL ^u, Jo. 2:5; 14 :

:

:

2

Col. 3

f.;

:

17;

on

:

:

alone, Jo. 8: 25; Ac. 9

6.

:

The

other ex-

amples are all in the nominative. In general the number of ocrrts agrees with that 7. Number. of the antecedent. But in a few instances ogtls agrees with the i'^ueTs, Eph. 3 predicate. So with 1 Cor. 3 17, vao'i olrives 13,

—

:

6\l\l/eaLV riTLs

— oo^a.

Gender.

8.

24

:

So Eph.

^TLs — "Ayap.

n'ta

may

predicate

1

Cf.

—

dent

rJTLs

is

—

:

22

eKKKrjala

f.

oi)

In Ph.

kKK\r]ala.

tjtls

1

:

—

28,

tjtls

:

:

TJrts

1

—

6tl eu

14,

aco/xa.

Gal.

of the

H.

12, 'I'tXiTrxoi's (fem.,

ttoXis;

(Jo. 21

Tim. 3

'ivdei^Ls,

the general idea of the preceding clause.

and several times the neuter plural

— to

But the gender

Rev. 11:8.

neuter singular (2 Cor. 3

OTL is

:

12.

be followed as in Ac. 16

Scott says, but Thayer has deou

:

Likewise ocms in general agrees with the antece-

dent in gender.

4

Cf. Ac. 16

:

15, oUca

the antece-

One example

Xpitrroj

KarepYetTai),

25, aTLva kav

:

of

ypdcjir]-

Cf. the absence of the neuter in the

So Gal. 4: 24; 5 19. The masculine and feminine,

TaL).

:

l^oth singular and Mt. 2 Cf. plural, are very frequent. 15; Lu. 2:4; 23 6; 7 case, gender and chapter X, vii, 55. See further for number,

modern Greek.

:

:

:

VIII, IX. 9.

Examples of ocxtls in direct questions are and Plato as quoted by Jannaris.^ An exAristophanes

Direct Questions.

found in ample of

it

occurs also in

1

Chron. 17:

6, 6tl ovk (hKodofxriaaTe fxoL

Hebrew has ii^ib. Cf. also 2 Ki. 8 14 oLKov KkbpLvov; have t'l. In Barn. Ep. c. 10 we have where other MSS. in AB, OTL Hcrc the

oTi

bi

Mcouo-tJs

number

eipriKev;

:

Vulgate has quare.^

Jannaris^

And

of instances for the later Greek.

gives

yet Blass'' calls

a it

"quite incredible," a remark impossible to justify in the light of It is, indeed, unusual, but there is no a 'priori reason

the facts. '

» *

Cf. "

Thack., Gr., p. 102.

W.-M., p. 208. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 473. It is more usual Riem. and GoelziT, Synt., p. 398. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 17().

2

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 473.

Cf.

in the

second of two questions.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

730

why

the N. T. writers could not occasionally use

oo-rts as a direct a direct question.^ The N. T. examples are all confined to 6 rt. In Mt. 7 14 otl is certainly merely causal, not exclamatory nor interrogative. In Mk. 2 16 oTL is read by BL 33 and is accepted by W. H. and Nestle as interrogative. AC al. read tL 6tl, while ND have 5td ri. It is possible, to be sure, that otl may be an " abbreviation" ^ or "ellipsis"^ for ri 6tl. But it is more probable that it is here regarded as tantamount to an interrogative (rt 6tl or 5td tI). Moulton (CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154) quotes 6tl tL in B.U. 607 (ii/A.D.) ypa\j/ov

One may note also the use

interrogative.

of

ei

in

:

:

not OTL TL eirpa^as.

This

first OTL.

But

is all

Mk. 9:11

in

the Greek uncials

all

give the

the more remarkable since the second

The Latin MSS.

clearly a conjunction.

6tl is

give variously quare, quia,

quid, etc., and some Greek cursives xcDs ovv. 'Why' is the natural and obvious idea.^ So in Mk. 9 28 6tl is read by the great mass of MSS. (including ^{BCL), though AD and a number of others have Slo. t'l, some even have 6tl 5td tL (conflate reading), a few t'l OTL. In John 8 25 both W. H. and Nestle print as a ques:

:

tion, Trjv

apxw

quia.

is

It

o tl

a very

/cat

XaXco

difficult

mean 'Why do

The Latin versions have quod or Trjv apxw 6 tl may be

v/jup;

passage at best.

speak to you at all?' (ttjv dpx'jJ'^oXajs). 'Why do you reproach me that (ort) I speak to you at all?' If necessary to the sense, 6rt may be taken here as interrogative.^ Moulton^ admits the N. T. use of ocrris in a direct question. Recitative otl is even suggested in Winer-Schmiedel, ^ but the occasional interrogative use of otl is sufficient explanation. But the passage in Jo. 8 25 is more than taken to

But

there

may

be

I

ellipsis,^

:

Chrysostom takes

doubtful.

there as relative, Cyril as causal.^

In ancient Greek

10. Indirect Questions.

common

otl

ocrrts

is

exceedingly

honours with rts.^" The astonishing thing about this use of oorts is its almost entire absence from the N. T. (cf. modern Greek, where it is not used in this sense). No example has yet been shoAvn from the papyri. in indirect questions, sharing the

Indeed the relative forms, the so-called indirect interrogatives, are not common in the N. T. in that sense. The direct interroga1

Lachmann,

2

Blass, Gr. of

8

W.-M.,

*

Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,

Praef., p. 43.

N.

«

p. 208.

The

">

use of on

8

P. 238.

9

Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

10

«

T., p. 176.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

tI

Prol., p. 94.

p. 68.

lends colour to the notion of recitative on.

p. 143.

Gk.

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 176. Simcox, Lang, of N. T., p. 68.

Gr., p. 473.

PRONOUNS ('ANTHNTMIAl) N. T.

tives are the rule in the

8u

6, XaX-qe-fjaeTal aoL otl ae

:

XABC,

supported by

Only one N. T., Ac. reading, though

in indirect questions.^

instance of 6tl in an indirect question

9

731

found

is

Even

Tvoieiv.

in the

this

Blass^ rejects "in view of the general

Why not call it a "Uterary" mark in Luke? "Ottcjs is so used once (Lu. 24 20), oTTov not at all (not even Jo. 14:4), oTos in 1 Th. 1:5, and ottoTos See only in 1 Cor. 3 13; Gal. 2 6; 1 Th. 1: 9; Jas. 1 24.

practice elsewhere," a needless conclusion.

:

:

:

:

XIX.

further chapter

0!09.

(/)

Relation

1.

qualis

This correlative form

6'?.

to

The antecedent

to qui.

is

related to

is

as

6s

always

tolovtos is not, of course,

But it is qualitative, and not a mere relative like 6s or even ocrns. In the modern Greek the word has disappeared except the form oykos (6 olosY in the dialects and is rare (14 times) in Mayser* merely mentions it in his Grammatik d. the N. T. It is in the N. T. usually without tolovtos, as griech. Papyri.

expressed.

Mt. 24

in 1

Cor. 15

:

:

21,

but

it is

11.

:

TrfKiKovTos aeiffubs ovto) ixkyas

No

Incorporation.

2.

ample

of incorporation

A

tolovtos, as in

rather unusual instance

(Rev. 16

So

of course, first person.

is,

by

several times followed

48; 2 Cor. 10

oloi 1

:

In 2 Cor. 12

18).

Th.

1

is olos :

20

—

olou

5.

:

instance of attraction occurs, but an exis

found in 2 Tim. 3:11,

o'iovs

dicioynovs

In Rev. 16 18 the addition of ttjXlkovtos ovtw jxkyas after olos is by way of explanatory apposition. But in Mk. 13 19, ToiavT-q, the incorporation is redundant after the o'ia. oh yeyovev

vTrrjveyKa.

:

:

fashion of bv

— avTov. Like

3. Indirect Question.^

we have

6s

olos so

used.

Cf. 1 Th.

we may have an

inIn 2 Tim. 3 (D for Lu. 55 Receptus 9 The Textus direct question also. in an indirect of olos the use of has Toiov) has another instance 1

5, otSare oIol 'eyevr]d7]ij.ev.

:

:

11

:

question, ovk olbaTt

Number.

4.

o'iov irveviJLaTos ecrre vixets.

may

Olos

rather than the antecedent.

Note

'

62

So

1

Cor. 15

:

48, olos

— tolovtol.

the difference in the position of the negative in ovx oXovs

olou oh,

ahrou

number with the predicate

agree in

—

2 Cor. 12 oIoi'

(Ph.

1

20.

:

:

Blass, Gr. of

N. T.

30) pecuhar.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175; W.-Sch., p. 236

f.;

Viteau, Prop., pp.

ff.

2

and

Gk., p. 179, calls tou

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

8

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 87, IGS;

*

P. 311.

^

Thumb,

llandb., p. 94.

Cf. K.-G., II, p. 439, for exx. in the older

Gk.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

732

The only example^ in the N. T. is in Ro. 9 where note the absence of re. It does not occur

Olov re kaTLv.

5.

ovx olov 5e

6,

OTL,

:

in exclamations. 'OTTOio?.

(g)

It It corresponds to the interrogative ttoTos. very rare in the N. T. (see Declensions), but occurs in modern Greek vernacular for 'whoever' (Thumb, p. 93). In the literary

Qualitative.

1.

is

modern Greek 6 was due to the

ottoTos,

Jannaris- thinks that the use of the article

Italian

quale

il

and the French

Old

lequel (cf.

English the which), since educated scribes objected to the vernacular

and

oirov

Double

2.

tov.^

Like

Office.

office of relative

and

oTos,

and

ocros

r]\iKos

instances are indirect questions (1 Cor. 3

:

has the double

it

Four

indirect interrogative.^

N. T. Th.

of the

13; Gal. 2

6; 1

:

1:9; Jas. 1 24). In Gal. 2 6, diroloi wore, we have the indefinite form ('whatever kind').^ Note here the use of tl and ottoIol. In 13 the antecedent is expressed and repeated by redun1 Cor. 3 :

:

:

dant

avTo.

Only one instance

3. Correlative.

correlative, Ac. 26

Note here the

Cf. qualiscumque.

TOLovTovs oiroios.

is

:

29,

difference in

number. {h) "0(709.

LXX

like olos and oroTos^ There are a hundred and and survives in the modem Greek.'^ which display great eight instances in the N. T. (W. H. text) that in notes variety of usage. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 63)

It

Quantitative.

1.

Philo 2.

often equal to

ocros is

o'i.

The presence

Antecedent.

outside of

found in the

is

Tvavres oaoi (Ac.

of the antecedent

5:36,

Mt. 7:12; 13:46; 18:25; Mk. 11:24, frequent, as Ro. 8 1

12.

:

But

in

:

14; Gal. 6

Mk.

3

:

28

6cra

:

not

is

12, etc.).

etc.),

Cf.

oaot

6(tol

— ourot

— avToXs

has d/iapri7Mara and Cf. Ac. 3

common

common,

37), iravTa oaa (very

as

(also

in Jo.

/SXao-^rj/uiai

as

39; Rev.

antecedents and naturally 21 16. It is common without antecedent both in the masculine is

neuter.

:

24; 9

:

:

(oaoL 3.

^

Mt. 14

:

36)

Attraction.

For a

and the neuter (ocra Mk. 9 13). This was possible in Jo. 6:11, :

different explanation

=ov

B-q

p. 179. 3 6

II,

V. and D., Handb., p. 303. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 318. Cf Sttws Lu. 24 20. p. 439. .

6

Thack., Gr., p. 192.

It

k

Tibv

6\papluv

N. T. Gk., Gk. Gr., p. 167. * Moulton, Prol., p. 93. K.-G., is rare in anc. Gk. in this sense. ttou

kKwewr. see Blass, Gr. of

^

Hist.

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 168.

:

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) but

ocrov i]de\ov,

In Lu. 11:8, Swo-ei aurw oacov In Winer-SchmiedeP it

does not occur.

it

733

occurs.

XPU^h the regular construction

I find is found in the N. T. with 6aos. examples outside of the few cases of incorporation now

stated that attraction

is

no

real

to be mentioned.-

In Ac. 9

4. Incorporation.

2

:

7

:

13 oaa

:

KaKo. is

an instance,

Mk.

(Ro. 7

Cor.

19 has 6aov xpovov.

The other examples

39; Gal. 4

instances of e^' oaov xpovov.

:

are

1)

all

:

1;

1

In Mk. 6 30 we have in W. H. oaa koI 6aa (not Tisch.), But in Ph. 4 8 6aa is repeated six times without In Heb. 10 37 oaov oaov (LXX) is in imitation of the Hebrew Kal. in Hab. 2 3. Cf. also Is. 26 20 and D on Lu. 5 3 where 6<7ov 6
:

:

:

is

now

clear.''

With

6.

Lu. 9

Cf. 5

:

:

oaa

22; Ac. 2

39; 3

:

:

:

:

:

(Mk. 3:8);

Trotet

20; Lu. 8

3;

39; 9

In Comparison.

:

10; Ac. 4

"Oaov

are fairly numerous.

d7rd77etXoj' oaa :

(oacS) is

usually with Toaovro (ToaovTco).

10

22, etc.)

:

Mk. 3 28, etc.). Questions. The instances

18; 23

Indirect

CLKOVOvres

8.

:

(Mk. 6 56; and with kav (Mt.

as an indefinite relative

Note the use

av.

5; Jo. 11

:

7: 12; 18 7.

:

:

:

—

23; 2 Tim. 1

ireiroirjKev :

(5

:

So 19).

18, etc.

used in comparative sentences

Cf.

Mk. 7:36; Heb. 1:4; 8:6;

25.

:

9.

Adverbial (Heb. 3

Kad' oaov

15; 25 40; Ro. 7:1, etc.) and of the nature of conpartake 27)

'E0' oaov (Mt. 9 :

3; 7

:

20; 9

:

:

:

junctions.

This form was used to express both age and size. (i) 'li\iKo
:

Greek. ^ It appears also in the papyri.'' Like the other relatives it might have had a double use in the N.T. (relative and indirect interrogative). But the few examples are all indirect interrogatives: Col. 2

1

:

1 eldevai rj\iKov ayojva exco, Jas.

:

5

l8ov rj'KiKov irvp rjXiKijv

P. 224.

—

Aa a matter '6
But

in the

of fact in the in

3

:

:

:

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

734

The examples

v\r]v avairreL.

atory.

Note

James may be regarded as exclamand -nyLK-nv to small11 W. H. and Nestle read TTTjXtKots in

in

also that riyLKov refers to greatness

In Gal. 6 the text and ^Xikois in the margin.

ness of the

size.

:

This again

is

indirect question

after Uere.

'O AS Relative. The use of the r forms of 6, -q, to as relative It appears in Horner^ and is common in is very old in Greek. 6 appears as demonstrative, as article Arkadian Herodotus. In griech. Dialekten, Bd. II, p. 116). Die (Meister, and as relative Griech. Dial, pp. 257, 292-300). (Hoffmann, Ach. Of. also South Ionic (where very common), from of it examples gives Jannaris^ in the later Greek. sporadically and (inscriptions), Attic Doric and sayings with to. sententious in only survives it Greek In modern (j)

and

in Crete

and Southeast Greek (Thumb,

Mayser^

p. 94).

finds

a few doubtful instances in the papyri. Wilcken (Archiv, I) gives some examples from B. M. as to hol 8k5ccKes (p. 292), ttiv ayairrjv ttiv TTotets (p. 301), and Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904, p. 155) quotes Trpos to

from B.U. 948 (iv/v a.d.) ''very illiterate." Mayser (op. numerous examples of 6 Kai which "first in Roman time" cit.) appears in the nominative. He compares this with the relative

dvpofxe

gives

use

OS Kai

and

is

inclined to regard 6 Kal as relative.

The analogy

favours the relative idea, but the article alone is sufficient in Greek. I would not insist on the relative for SaOXos 6 It /cat naOXos (Ac. 13 9), though admitting the possibility of it. of the Latin qui

et

:

means (Deissmann), not 'Saul who Paul.'

is

henceforth Paul,' but 'also

Cf. also Hatch, Jour, of Bihl. Lit, Pt. II, p. 141

In truth this use of

N. T. times.*

But

6

/cat

with double names was very

f.,

1908.

common

in

no instance of 6 as relative in the 11: 17, we have 6^1'. One either has

Dieterich'^ sees

Rev. 1:4, 8; It is used as a relative or that it is a relative. It may be a bit artificial, 6 cov all comes to the same in the end. Kal 6 riv Kal 6 kpxofJLevos but the antique and vernacular relative 6 came in as a resource when John did not wish to use yevofxevos of

N. T.

in

to say that here 6

,

God, and since there Monro, Horn.

1

608

no

aorist participle for

Gr., pp. 182

ff.

For

hist, of

elfxi.

Psychologically

the matter see K.-BL,

I,

pp.

ff.

2

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 156; Dieterich,

Gr., p. 353. Cf. also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 560; Meisterh., ^ Gr., pp. 310 ff. 1, 198 f.

Byz. Arch., pp.

See Schmid, Der Atticismus,

*

p. 6;

Ramsay,

Moulton, 6

is

Cities

and Bish.

III, p.

of Plirygia,

338; Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., XIX, 429; Deiss., B. S., pp. 313 ff.;

Prol., p. 83.

Unters., p. 199.

Winer (W.-Th.,

p. 107) rejects 6 Kal as relative.

.

PRONOUNS the article

can do nothing with

would

call for to as

If

it.

m

fiv

but grammar

treated as a substantive, that

is

to be 'Ave^-q (Eph. 4:9).

(B. M., p. 301),

that was not insuperable

manded it. phrase among the

x^pa

TTju

Rev. 1:4,

real difficulty in

8,

mwKtv

Trjf

etc.,

when the

It is possi])le

is

Moulton^ finds ttju ayair-qv

The only

(p. 304).

the nominative use, and

exigencies of the sentence de-

that this phrase had come to be a set

Christians for the eternity and unchangeable-

For the possible use of

ness of God.

articles,

in late papyri of 6 as relative, like

several examples TTiv TTOLeXs

between two

called for here

is

735

('ANTfiNTMIAl)

rts

as relative see under

VIII.

Pronouns (dvTwvujXLaL

VIII. Interrogative

KcDs,

The

Ti9.

(a)

root of the interrogative

ns

KOTepos), indefinite

(cf.

re),

is

at

€p(OTT|TLKai).

(Thess.

rts

Cf. Ionic

kI%.

bottom the same as the

Indo-Germanic root quis and Latin quis {aliquis, que).^ Curiously enough some of the grammars, Monro's Homeric Grammar, for example, give no separate or adequate discussion of the interrogative pronouns. 1.

46), or, as

txLaSbv txeTe;

(Mt. 5

Tts v-Kkbei^ev;

(Mt. 3:7).

:

rtm

Tts is either adjectival as

Substantival or Adjectival.

more commonly, substantival

like

The Absence of Gender. That it appears only in the nomand accusative is noteworthy. This fact probably had something to do with the gradual retreat of tLs before ttoTos.^ The 2.

inative

neuter in the N. T. occurs with adjectives only, as

Mt. 19 3.

tL

ayadov in

16.

:

Tts

= 7rotos. An

opposite tendency

is

seen in the use of

t'ls

=

shown examples of this idiom as early as Testament illustrations one may note tLs

Hatzidakis'^ has

TToTos.^

As

Euripides.

ovTos h(JTLV OS

New

(Lu.7:49),

t'lv^s

oi

\6yoL ovtol oOs dj^rt/SaXXere (Lu.

24 17 cf itola 24 19) tU eoTiv ovtos 6 vl6s tov avdpw-Kov (Jo. 12 34) Only once'' is ttoTos used with the article (Jas. Cf. Lu. 4 36. 4 14, and here B omits 17), while we find ris 17 <xo4)ia. (Mk. 6:2), Sometimes tU and irolov are used toTts 1? aWla (Ac. 10 21), etc. :

;

:

,

:

.

:

:

:

gether.

It

might seem at

first

ets

oIkov—ti

(Ac. 7:49).

last

t'ls

tottos

example and

Tiva

may

rj

as

if

the distinction were here Pet. 1:11)

ttoZov Kaipbv (1

insisted on, as in

But tautology seems

be true of

1

Pet. 1

:

11,

and

but not certainly

»

CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 155.

«

Cf. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 194; Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 117, 244.

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 163.

*

lb., p. 164.

207

">

Einl., p.

«

Blass, Gr. of

wo'iov

plain in the

f.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 176.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

736 In

Mk. 4 30 W. H.

Cf. also

ris Kai iroTairos in

so.^

read

:

h Toiq..

but some MSS. have

kp tIvl,

Lu. 7 39, which is not tautological. In Jo. 18 38, tI kanv a.\y}Qei.a, the neuter in

4. Indeclinable ri.

:

:

the predicate calls for no special remark.

So Gal. 3

Latin quid and English what in such a sentence.

:

Cf.

19.

This idiom be-

longs to the ancient Greek and distinguishes between the essence

a thing

of

and the

(rl)

a thing

classification of

as Gilder-

(tis),

(Syntax of CI. Gk., p. 59). Cf. voxels rlpes kare; (Ac. 19:15) and tI eanv apdpcoiros (Heb. 2:6). But this explanation will not hold for 1 Jo. 3:2, rl e<j6ij.eda, nor Ac. 13 25, tI sleeve puts

it

:

The

vTTOPoetTe.

k/xe

this

text in Acts

is

development outside of the N. T.^

neuter

rl is

used with

all

The kolpt] shows modern Greek "the

not certain. In the

genders and cases both in the singular

and plural" (Vincent and Dickson, Handb.,

p. 55).

Cf. tL (hpa

'what o'clock is it?' Ti 7umtKa; 'which woman?' Thumb, Handb., p. 94. It is not unusual in classical Greek^ to have tI as etrat;

predicate to ravra, as in Lu. 15

26

:

tI ap

raOra, Jo. 6

eir]

9 ravra

:

TL

So probably tI ravra Trotetre; (Ac. 14 15), though H here may be 'why' and not predicative. The usual construction appears in Ac. 17 20 rlpa deXa ravra elpai (cf. Jo. 10 6), 11 17 eyu) In Ac. 21 33 rts and ri are sharply disris rjiir]p; cf. Lu. 8:9. tinguished. The use of ri with yipofiat is hardly in point here (Ac. 5 24; 12 18) as it is found in the Attic* rl yevoofxaL. In Jo. 21 21 ovros 8^ rl; we must supply yeprjaerai. In Ac. 23 19, ri karip o ex^is, 5. Predicate Use of rl ivith rovro. we find the full expression. In Lu. 16 2, rl rovro aKovoo irepl aov, we meet the abbreviated idiom. Cf. Ac. 14 15 rl ravra (see also Cf. Lu. 1 66; Ac. 5: 24. The phrase rl wpds iiixas (Mt. 27: 9). 4), ri rrpbs ae (Jo. 21:22) is matched by the Attic ri ravr' knol (Kuhner-Gerth, II, 417; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177). Cf. Blass {ib) also compares rl yap not rovs ovTo^ rl (Jo. 21:21). e^o) KplpeLP (1 Cor. 5 12) with the infinitive in Arrian, Diss. eaTLP.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Epict.,

(2 Ki. 3

Gerth, 6.

Tt

17. 14.

ii, :

13),

but

efxol

it

is

/cat

aol (Jo.

also a

2

:

4, etc.) is in

Greek idiom

the

(ellipsis,

LXX

Kiihner-

ib.).

In Alternative Questions.

when

from the

Kotpri.

unknown

in ancient Greek.^

Tls

is nearly gone might have been used is not Indeed even in Latin quis occurs

Quality in general

worepo^

sometimes instead of the more usual N.

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1G4. 3,

T., p. 17G.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177.

wter."

In the

LXX

irorepos

•

Ib.

^

j^if^

«

Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 103.

§74^ obs.

4;.

PRONOUNS ("ANTnNTMIAl)

737

and the particle irSrepov occurs only once, and Moulton- finds only one example of TroreSo in the N. T. Torepos poi in the papyri, and that unintelligible. does not occur as an adjective. So in Mt. 9 5 rt yap kcmv emois

supplanted by

t'ls

that in Job (literary).^

:

ir<jiT€pov eiirelv

—

rj

21

eiirelv,

31

:

Cf. also 23

deXere airo roiv hho.

17,

:

eK toju 8vo eirolriaev,

t'ls

19; 27

:

17;

27: 21 rlva

Mk. 2:9; Lu.

7

42;

:

Moulton^ notes that "whether, 22 27; 1 Cor. 4 and predicts that "the best irorepos," archaic as adjectivally, is as future. English of the the will be of the two" Cf. wodev in Soph., Tr. 421. Interrogafive. tLs Double 7. The languages.^ Cf. t'ls t'lvos Indo-Germanic other in It is common t'l apxi in Mk. 15 24. t'ls 33. So Clem. epyaTTjs, Hom. k<jTLv 2, in Lu. but not NBDL (W. H. also 19 t'ls t'l have 15, MSS. Some :

:

21; Ph.

1

22.

:

:

and Nestle read

t'l).

Cf.

iiK'LKov-

—

:

rjX'LKTjv

in Jas. 3

:

5.

came to be used as inter8. rogatives, so t'ls drifted occasionally to a mere relative. We have seen (1 Tim. 1 7) how the relative- and the interrogative come to be used side by side. "In English, the originally interrogative pronouns 'who' and 'which' have encroached largely on the use

As

Relative.

Just as

6s

and

octtls

:

"^ of the i^rimitive relative 'that.'

makes

it

call for

usage

N.T.

clear that in the

t'ls

Moulton's sketch of the

may be

relative

facts''

the exigencies

Moulton finds it only in the illiterate papyri, but the supported by inscriptions^ and by the Pontic dialect to-

it.

is

day.*^

Moulton^ gives from the papyri,

ekKvo-r],

B.U. 822

From

if

evpop

-yeopyov

t'ls

aurd

B.M. 239 (Iv/a.d.). Trotijaet, J.H.S., XIX, 299.

(iii/A.D.); t'lpos eav XPi-o^v exvs,

the inscriptions see

t'ls

av KaKOJs

Moulton^ also quotes Jebb on Soph., 0. T. 1141: "Tts in classical Greek can replace octls only where there is an indirect question." The plainest New Testament example of t'ls as 6s appears to be Mk. 14 36 ov t'l ey
:

:

:

:

.

—

—

kX'lvj] (Mt. 8:20), c})ay wcxlv. Cf. ovk exet ttoO t'l See in the papyri, ovdiv exc^ t'l tol14). but oTov 00,70) (Mk. 14 ijaco aoL, B.U. 948 (iv/v A.D.), as quoted by Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904, But even so Xenophon has this idiom, and Sophocles, Oed. p. 155)

paao^OLV eavTols

—

:

.

1

Thank., Gr., p. 192.

^

Thompson,

2

Prol., p. 77.

^

Simcox, Lanp;. of the N. T., p. 67.

3

lb.

«

Prol., p. 9:3

^

Dieterich, Untcrs., p. 200.

^

Thumb,

p. 94).

Synt., p. 74.

f.;

CL

Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 154

f.

Thcol. Litcrzaturzcit., xxviii, p. 423 (quoted in Moulton, Prol., »

Prol., p. 93.

:.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

738

which looks Hke an indirect question.

Col. 317, has ovk ex« tL 0cD,

Cf. Winer-Moulton, p. 211; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 240,

It is not necessary to bring ^ under this construction ov yap jjdeL tI airoKpid^ (Mk. 9 6) nor Mk. 13 11. Here the idiom is really that of in:

:

direct question (deliberative question).

Mt. 6

:

ample) and see Tai

—

9.

In Ac. 13

:

:

25.

be the relative use.

el in

:

ris kaTLv

:

H.) be

So Ro. 14

25.

:

3, Ibetv 'Irjaovv tIs

It is

eanv, in-

as an accusative of general reference.

4

24, ol8a ae ris el (Lu.

Jo. 8

W.

tI is relative, tI kfxe uiropoelre elvai, ovk dixl kyoi.

stead of taking 1

Cf. also Lu. 17:8.

25 the punctuation can (so Nestle, but not

so that

possible also thus to construe Lu. 19

Mk.

:

:

may

TL XaXiyo-Tjre)

made

Cf. the direct question in

So in Mt. 10 19 (first exBut the second example in Mt. 10 19 {doOrjae-

31 with the indirect in 6

:

:

34

also).

10.

4,

The

Cf. the prolepsis av

Cf

m

rhetorical questions in

Lu. 11:5; 15 4, 8; Jas. 3 13 are not, of course, instances of this usage.^, Perhaps the anacoluthon in Lu. 11:11 (riva 8e e^ vnuv t6v :

:

—

may' have arisen because of this idiom. and 6s is, of course, usually maintained (Jo. 16 18; Ac. 23 19 f.; Heb. 12 7). It is at least noteworthy that in 1 Cor. 15 2 Paul changes from 6s (used four times) to tIul Tidy CO. An indirect question comes with a jolt and makes one wonder if here also the relative use of ris docs not occur. In Mt. 26 62 (ovdh airoKplvj] t'l ovtoL crov Karap-apTVpovaiv ;) we may have an indirect question (cf. Mk. 14: 60), though irpos would be usual (cf. Mt. 27 It is better to follow W. H. with two separate 14). questions^ and even so tI = tI karcv 6. The use of tIs as relative Blass^ calls "Alexandrian and dialectical." The LXX (Lev. 21 irarepa alrrjaeL

The

distinction

eTrtScocret;)

between

:

ris

:

:

:

:

:

17 avdpWTVos Tts)

TLVL ecLP y,

Deut. 29

does show examples of

it,

:

18

but

av-qp it is

—

Ps. 40

t'luos,

:

6 ovk eariv

not confined to Egypt, as

has been already shown.^ Brugmann (Griech. Gr., p. 561) finds Tts as relative in Boeotian and even rarely in the older Attic. 9.

Adverbial Use.

The neuter accusative

tL is

frequently used

N. T. This is classical and common and calls for little comment. It still appears in modern Greek (Thumb, p. 94). See Mt. 7 3 (rt /3Xe7rets to Ka.p(f)os;) 8 26 (rl detXoi in the sense of 'why' in the

:

tare;) 19

:

17; 20

:

ably have Tt= 'why.' aa^^aaiv 6 ovk

:

In Ac. 14: 15 ri raCra TroteTre we probCf. Mk. 11:3. In Mk. 2 24 rt TroLov(xi.v toIs note 'why,' though tL is followed by 6. It

6, etc.

'i^earip;

:

^

As Simcox

2

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 241; Moulton, Prol., p. 93.

8

W.-Sch., p. 241; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 331. « Cf. W.-Sch., p. 241. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

4

does, Lang, of the

N.

T., p. 69

f.

PRONOUNS interesting to note ttws

is

14

22

:

TL

(Lu. 2

on we

yeyovev

49; Ac. 5

:

Mt. 10 19; Lu. 12 11. In Jo. form of the common tL 6tl Here H still='why.' But in I'm tL

tI,

rj

:

:

see the full

4, 9, etc.).

:

739

('ANTiiNTiMIAl)

(1 Cor. 10 29 and Mt. 9:4; 27 46; Lu. 13 7; Ac. 4 25; 7 26) It is not unknown in TL is really the subject of yevrjTat (ellipsis). :

:

Attic Greek.i

common

It is

W. H. never LXX.

:

print twrt

(cf.

:

:

Mt. 9

:

4; Lu. 13

7).

:

in

There is very little difference between 10. With Prepositions. Tt='why' and 8ta Tt='because of what' (Mt. 15:2, 3; 17:19; Lu. 24 38, etc.) Kara tL (' according to what ') is practically how.' Cf. Lu. 1:18. For ^j; Hi't see Mt. 5 13. But 7rp6s ri (Jo. 13 28)= 'for what purpose.' In Jo. 13 22 Trept tIvos \eyei. there is no such idea. But purpose again is expressed by els tL (Mt. 14 31; 26 8; :

'

.

:

:

:

:

Mk. 14:4;

With

11.

use of

9

:

tI

19),

:

Ac. 19:3). Particles.

yap (Ro. 3

dXXd

Tt (11

:

3;

:

Paul in particular is fond of the rhetorical 4 2, etc.), tL ovv (3 1, 9, etc.), tI ert (3 7; :

:

4), ^ rt (11

rl-dpa 1:66; Ac. 12

:

:

Cf. rts apa in Lu. 22

2).

:

23 and

18.

:

As Exclamation. In Mt. 7: 14 W. H. read on (causal), not (jTevr} TTuXr/. But in Lu. 12 49 Kal ri BeXoo d i]8rj avr](j)dy] there is 12.

Tt

T]

:

no doubt of the text. W. H. punctuate as a question, but Nestle as an exclamation. Examples of exclamatory rt='how' are found in 2 Sam. 6 20; Song of Sol. 7:6 and in the modern Greek, t'l KoKos avdpunrosl Cf. Mullach, Vulg., pp. 210, 321; Winer-Moulton, p. 562. Blass^ compares the Hebrew f^^. On the whole it is best :

to take TL in Lu. 12

:

49= 'how.'

13. Indirect Questions.

have

t'ls

terrogative

irvvdavo/jLaL

neuter article t6

t'l

idiom ^ to N. T. the indirect in-

of course, the ancient

But

in the

A

:

6

good example of t'ls occurs in Ac. 10 t'lvl \6yco fxeTeTrefjLxpaade jJLe. In Luke we meet the rather frequently before the indirect question. So here).

ek\oL (1

a.v

is,

has disappeared in this idiom save in Ac. 9

oo-Tis

(MSS. divided 29

It

an indirect question.

in

:

62), TO

:

t'ls

au

eL-q

(9

:

46).

Cf. 22

:

23, 24, etc.

Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158) sees no special point in the article (cf. English "the which"). Paul sometimes uses it also (Ro. 8 26; :

1

Th. 4

by the p.

:

1 t6

The question is brought out rather more sharply The Attic use of to t'l, to ttoIov (Thompson, Synt.^

irojs).

article.

something previously mentioned is like Herm., Sim., VIII, i, 4, Clem., Horn., i, 6. Sometimes it is difficult to decide whether t'ls

74) in reference to

our

"The what?"

14. Tis or TLs.

Cf.

»

W.-Sch., p. 240.

8

Thompson,

Synt., p. 74.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177.

Cf. Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 561.

or

So

TLS is right.

In Heb. 5 In Jas. 5

read

Ro. 3

:

is,

and Nestle nva (both indefinite). course, ns, not rts. So 1 Cor. 7 18.

of

:

It occurs sixteen times in direct questions.

33, arjiialvoiv

TTolu)

davaru)

Clearly this

i]iJ.eXKei> a-KodvriaK.eLV

27 {ha toIov v6p.ov; tu)p tpywv;).

:

Cor. 15

35

:

1:11 we

Pet.

r'lva

and

The common

4 7, LXX, Lu. 24 19. :

etc.)

(Lu. 9

20.

qualitative sense

:

(LXX); Jas. 4 Mk. 11 28; Ac.

:

is

clear in

In

apparent contrast.

32; kc. 7 49 :

32),

true

23;

:

:

Cf. also

force.

D toIov Tvevnaros eare

a spurious passage, however. But some examples clearly have lost the

55),

:

also 1 Pet. 2 in

iroiov

seems also to retain the qualitative

The

:

:

:

is

(Mt. 21

k^ovala

iv Tola

18

(cf.

It

true

is

The same thing cf.

{ttoIco o-dj/xan tpxovTai.;),

find both

Other possible instances are Jo. 10 14.

nva

KaTaTnetv with

tlvo.

used in its original qualitative sense.

in Jo. 12

1

W. H.

Qualitative.

is still

1

^rjTcov

Nestle actually prints ^riTwv ripa KaTaTnelv.

13 the reading

:

W. H. have

8

:

Ho to?.

(6) 1.

12

:

Pet. 5

1

But

in the margin.

of

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

740

2. Non-qualitative.

In the modern Greek

qualitative sense.

and

Tts,

is

examples of

this

used regularly^= tolos. Indeed

tolos is

Note the accent

the usual interrogative.

weakened sense

of

Jannaris" finds as early

irolos

In Mt. 24: 42 ovk

as iEschylus and Euripides.

See

TTola r}fjL€pa 6 Kvpios vfxcbv epx^rai

there seems to be merely the force

Cf

(a), 3.

o'iSaTe

43 Tola 4>v\aKr\, Lu. 12 39 iroia Rev. 3 3 Tolav copav. This is probably true also of Mt. 22 36 Tola hroXr] (Mk. 12 28). In Lu. 5 19 Tolas and 6 32 f. Tola x
not quality.

Tts,

iopa,

Ac. 23

34 Tolas

:

also 24

.

:

:

eirapx^loLS,

:

:

:

Lu. 9

:

:

:

55) in this construction against four for

dicative in

Mt. 21

junctive in Lu. 5

:

:

24; 24

19

/ii)

:

42; Jo. 12

:

33; 21

Tolas eiaeveyKcoaLv.

:

ottoTos.

Cf. in-

and the subis found in the

19,

YloXos

LXX and in the papyri. (c)

1.

Ho 0-09. Less Frequent than

It occurs chiefly in the

ttoTos.

Gospels (twenty-seven times in

W. H.

Synoptic

text).

Meaning. It is used in the sense of 'how much' (ttoo-oj Mt. 'how great' {rbaov Mt. 6 23), and of 'how many' {Toaovs aprovs exere; Mt. 15 34). Eleven examples of Toaco occur almost like an adverb (Mt. 7: 11; 10 25, etc.). The use of Toaos xpovos cos (Mk. 9 21) is noteworthy. 2.

12

:

12),

:

:

:

—

:

1

Thumb, Handb.,

2

Hist.

Gk.

p. 94.

Gr., p. 163.

Cf. Dieterich, Unters., p. 202.

PRONOUNS 3.

In Indirect Questions.

(Mt. 27

Cf. Ac. 21

13).

:

:

741

('ANTflNTMIAl)

Sec ovk

aKoveis irbca aov KaraiiapTvpovaiv;

20, etc.

The Exclamatory Use. This is found in Lu. 15 17 iroaot fxov, and in 2 Cor. 7: 11 iroarjv KareLpyaaaro vtitv The exclamatory use of ttcos may be mentioned (Mk. <7Tou8r]u. Cf. ws in Ro. 10 15 and 11 33. Cf. 10 23 f.; Jo. 11 36). 4.

:

uladiOL rod Trarpos

{d) 1.

:

:

:

TToaos

—

in

COS

Mk.

9

:

:

21.

Tlr]X{/co<;.

Rare.

It is

found only twice in the N. T. (Gal. 6 riXlKOLs in the margin of Gal. 6

W. H. put

7:4) and

LXX

rare also^ in the

(cf.

Heb.

11;

:

It

11.

:

is

Zech. 2:2), and has disappeared from

modern Greek vernacular, Indirect Questions. Both of the N. T. examples are indirect questions. The example in Heb. 7 4 describes greatness of Melchisedek (how great), the one in Gal. 6 11 presents the size of the

2.

:

:

the letters (how large). (e)

noraTTo?.

form for iroSaTos. It no longer in the N. T. means 'from what country,' but merely 'of what sort' = 7roros. It is (Dan. O Sus. 54, "where it keeps somefound only once in It is the late

LXX

thing of

its original local

vernacular.'

It occurs

meaning")-^

It exists in the late

once in a direct question (Mt. 8

:

Greek and

27)

once probably in an exclamation (2 Pet. 3 11). Four times we it in indirect questions (Mk. 13 1; Lu. 1 29; 7 39; 1 Jo. 3:1). In Lu. 7 39 it is contrasted with tIs. :

find

:

:

:

:

(/)

Uorepo'?.

As a pronoun it has vanished from the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., The only p. 192) and from the papyri (Moulton, ProL, p. 77). example

N. T.

in the

(cf.

LXX,

Thackeray,

p. 192) is in

an

alter-

native indirect question as the conjunction irbrepov (Jo. 7:17). Cf. Latin

utrum—an.

Sim.,

28. 4.

ix,

IX. Indefinite (a)

Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

Pronouns

p. 176) cites

Herm.,

(dirro)vi)[JLLaL dopto-Toi).

Th.

Jannaris'' calls it "irrational" to accent the 1. The Accent. nominative tIs rather than tis. But then the nominative singular never has an accent unless at the beginning of a sentence or in philosophical writings (Thompson, Syntax, p. 76) and cannot

otherwise be distinguished in looks from 2.

Relation

to tLs.

1

Thackeray, Gr.,

2

II).

Tlic

tIs

same connection

p. 192.

» *

the interrogative. is

seen in the Latin

Moulton, Prol., p. 95. Ui.st. Gk. Gr., p. 1G3.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

742

and

quis, ali-quis

mann^

quis-quis

in Argive dialect).^

(cf. rio-rts

Brug-

same word as tl and cites /CIS in the Thessalian dialect. Just as in modern Greek tLs disappears before ttolos, so tls vanishes before KaveLs (Thumb, Handh., p. 95). But in the N. T. ns is still very common, especially in Luke and Acts. In general the usage is in harmony with considers -kl- in ov-d, toWclkl-s the

We

do not have evLOL in the N. T. In and tL ypa^o:. Cf Lu. 7 40. See tls tL, Ro. 8 24, in margin of W. H. As a substantive tls may be equal to 3. Tis as Substantive. that of ancient Greek.

Ac. 25

26 note

:

n

ypa\paL

:

.

:

'any one,' 'anybody' or 'anything,' as in ov5e t6v irarepa tls cttiMt. 11:27; ttws bvvaTal tls, 12 29; el tls deXei, 16 24; kav TLS vjuv eU-Q tl (note both examples like tlvos tl Lu. 19 8; cf. yLvcocTKeL,

:

:

:

Mk.

11

:

25; Col. 3

13),

:

'anything' see Ac. 25

be

= somebody '

Mk.

bk TLS

15

:

'

:

Mt. 21

:

For several instances of

3.

But the substantive use

5, 8, 11.

or 'something,' as epxeTaL

36, virb tlvos

Heb. 3

:

Tov ox^^ov 12

Cor. 9

man

:

22.

:

13.

The

In

Homer

:

plural tls

38, tls twv is

was

tls

:

:

of

tls

may

49, bpanwv

Often the

46.

So

as substantive.

iiadrjTcJop

=

Lu. 11:

tls

1,

=

e/c

'some,' as Mk. 9 1; 1 sometimes " public opinion, the

usually

:

quoted in Thompson's Syntax, p. very nearly represented by elirev 8e tls k tov 13 (cf. 11; 1; 7 36). In Heb. 2:6, hepiapThpaTo

in the street" (Gladstone,

This idiom

75). 5xXoi;,

TOV

Mt. 12

tO:v ypafJifxaTeuv

Lu. 8

Cf. Lu. 8

4.

partitive genitive (or ablative) occurs with

Tim

tls

tl

Lu. 12

TLS,

the

:

is

:

quite definite in the writer's mind, though

TLS is really

he writes thus. 4. With Numerals =' About.' With numerals tls sometimes in classical Greek gives an approximate idea rather than exact reckoning, like our "about." No certain instances of this idiom appear in the N. T. Certainly not Ac. 19 14, where tlvos, not :

TLves, is

In Lu. 7

the correct text.

Tojv fxadriTojv,

the meaning

may

'certain two' just as well. TrpoaKoXeadptvos TLvas 8vo,

'about two.'

is

where

:

it is

it

tiling is true of

even

is els

The

47).

18, irpoaKaXeaap.€Pos 8vo tlvcls

be 'about two,' but

The same

Classical also

and probably Mk. 14

:

rts

less likely

could

mean

Ac. 23

:

23,

that the idea

(Lu. 22:50; Jo. 11:49,

adjectival uses of

tls

are quite

varied. 5.

With Substantives. Here rts may = 'a kind of,' as cnrapxhv Cf Ac. 17 20, though this is not true of Col. 18.

TLva, Jas. 1 1

2

:

.

:

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 244. lb. Interrogative and indefinite

tung, tjber die Casus in der griech.

is

und

bottom the same word.

at lat.

Sprache, p. 279.

Cf. Har-

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

743

23 because of the negative,^ But the commonest use of ns with substantives is= 'certain' (really rather uncertain!). Thus Cf. rt, 11, etc. tepevs TLs, Lu. 1 5; apdpcoTos rts, Lu. 14: 2, 16; 15

2

:

:

:

i;5cop,

Ac. 8

than

TLS

:

Sometimes

36.

Cf.

the English indefinite article.

With

6.

:

The

Adjectives.

double adjectival sense."

man' ('some great man'),

great

is

There

effect is rhetorical.^

Thus Ac. 8

^

it

:

9,

own

in his

iieyav,

tlvo.

force to

Lu. 10

25; nearly always

vo/jllkos tls,

Lu. 18 2. Indeed KpLTtjs TLS rjv is too emphatic. true that our "certain" ev TLVL xoXei,

more

to give

it is difficult

"a

is

= 'si

very

Blass*

estimation.

needlessly considers this passage an interpolation.

:

Heb. rather intensifies 0o/3epd. The where tls 10 in Hjeb. tl. the matter as 2 soften ^paxv tend to 7, tone may 9, 26 ^poicrLjiov, 1 46 tl ayadop, Ac. 25 Jo. 41 tl 24 in Lu. But pLKpbv tl, we have kolvov, 2 Cor. 11 16 14 14 tl Ro. tl, a(T4)a\es Cf. also

27, (f)o^epa tls eKdoxv,

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

rather the substantive use of

But

tl.

in TvcfKos

Cf. oXkos tls (Lu. 22

both are adjectives.

:

tls,

59)

Lu. 18

and

:

35,

erepos tls

(Ac. 27:1). 7.

As

Here

Predicate.

particular/ as Ac. 5

:

rts

may

=

be emphatic

36, Xe7coj^ dvai TLva iavTov (cf.

'somebody in See also

8:9).

where note difference between In Gal. 6 3 note in d boKel tls dvai tl prjbev dv both TL and TLves. senses of tls. But the predicate may have the other meaning of So 1 Cor. 3 7; 10 19; Gal. 6: 15. In TL ('anyone,' 'anything'). Gal. 2 6 compare tl and otoIol. Gal. 2

:

6, dTro to^v

boKovvTwv dvai

tl,

:

:

:

:

The Position of

8.

tls.

It is

not material.

the substantive or adjective as in

we

els

Kdofi-qv

often have the other order as in TLva

may

It naturally follows tlvo.,

xvpc^v,

Lu. 10

Lu. 21

:

:

38,

2.

but Ti^/es

indeed begin a sentence (Ph. 1 15; 1 Cor. 8:7). In Mt. 16 28 TLvti is the antecedent of Antecedent. oLTLves, but here o'lTLves is more definite than ot would have been. 9.

:

As

:

Cf. Lu. 8

:

fxkv

— TLves

2 note nms tovs X. used to express alternative ideas, as

In 2 Cor. 10

2.

10. Alternative. 8k

in

It is

Ph.

1

:

15.

:

Cf vt6 .

tlvcov

—

—

viro

tlvccu

—

tlv^s

aXXcoi' de

erepos in 1 Cor. 3 4. 7 f and tls These are not printed tls. The Negative Forms ov tls, as single words by W. H., except ij-titl as an interrogative particle expecting the answer No, as in Mt. 26 22, juiyrt eyoi el^L, KvpLe; cf. Jo. 4 33. It is all a matter with the editor whether in ha mt tls

in Lu. 9

:

.

:

11.

(jltj

:

:

1

W.-Sch., p. 242.

2

W.-M., p. 212 f.; Blass, Gr. Moulton in W.-M., p. 213.

»

of

N. T. Gk., *

p. 178.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 178.

— A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

744

Cor.

diry, 1

The

1:15

TLPa (2 Cor. 12

uri

(cf.

Eph. 2:9), we

separation in Heb. 3

thon with

:

17)

:

TL itself (6)

1)

13; 4

and

11

:

is

may

not really have

against

it.

The anacolu-

in the next verse.

fxrjri.

/jl-^tls.

Cf., for instance,

rtra here is noticeable.

12. Indeclinable tl.

(Ph. 2

:

may

The use

of tls with

(xirXa.'yxvo.

be compared with indeclinable

survives in

modern Greek

/cart

rt.

Kal oIktlpijloI

Indeclinable

(Moulton, ProL,

p. 244).

El9 = Tt9.

This is merely one usage of els, the cardinal numeral. The idiom is common after Plutarch, but traces of it occur earlier.^ Moulton 2 sees no difference between els and tls in Aristophanes, Av., 1292. The papyri furnish similar examples. "The fact that els progressively ousted tls in popular speech, and that even in classical Greek there was a use which only needed a little diluting to make it essentially the same, is surely enough to prove that the development lay entirely within the Greek language, and only by accident agrees with Semitic."^ This use of els alone, with genitives, with substantives, was treated at the close of the chapter on els as alternative proAdjectives. For els tls see tls. For els

—

— ov

and ov8ds (n-qSeis) see Negative see later, and for els Pronouns under xi. = any one' no matter who, anything' no matter what. (c) Ha? Cf. quidvis.* We see this construction in Ac. 2: 21 (LXX), ttSs 6s eav eTLKoXearjTaL. So Gal. 3 10 (LXX) Lu. 14 33. Has with a participle may have the same force, like TraPTos clkovovtos tov "Koyov, Mt. 13 19 (cf. Lu. 11 4), and ttSs 6 opyL^oixeuos, Mt. 5 22, etc. For xSs ov = 'no one' see negative pronouns. For the adjectival uses of ttSs, see chapter on Adjectives and chapter on

noun

'

'

:

;

:

:

:

:

Article. (d)

'O Aelva. This rare pronoun was current chiefly in colloquial

It survives in the modern means "Mr. So-and-So." It occurs only once in the N. T., -n-pos top Selpa, Mt. 26 18. X. Alternative or Distributive Pronouns (a,VT(avv[iiai SaT-q-

speech (Jannaris, Hist. Gk.

Greek (Thumb,

p. 98).

Gr., p. 166).

It

:

pCai).

apply a term from ^Eschylus in lieu of a better one. The repronoun aWrjXcop has been already'' treated. "A/x^co has vanished^ from the Koij'17. (a) 'A/jL(f)6TepoL. kix4>bTtpoL has taken its place. It continues in the later Greek,^ but Thumb I

ciprocal

'

1

Hatz., Einl., p. 207; W.-Sch., p. 243.

»

Thompson,

2

ProL, p. 97.

6

3

lb.

«

Moulton, ProL, p. 57. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 320.

Synt., p. 77.

PRONOUNS

745

('ANTflNTMIAl)

docs not give it for modern Greek. It is frequent in the LXX,^ but is found only fourteen times in the N. T. It occurs without the article in all but five instances. So Mt. 9 17. Once the article is used with the substantive, dju^orepa to. irXoZa, Lu. 5 7. :

:

The other four examples have the article before the pronoun, It is possible, even probable, that 18. like ot 6.ix4>bTepoL, Eph. 2 from the word. It seems disappeared in two instances duality has :

certain that three items are referred to in Ac. 23

:

8 and in Ac. 19

:

16 the seven sons of Sceva are alluded to. A corruption of the text 16), but it is hardly necesis possible (cf. the Bezan text for 19 :

"the undeniable Byzantine use"^ sary to postulate that in view ''both" in old Enghsh). The (cf. two of d/x^orepot for more than and "the Sahidic and some also examples papyri show undoubted But Moulton" hesitates 'all.'"^ as later versions took aix(f)OTepo)v early examples are so which of colloquiahsm to admit in Luke "a Moulton. On the Dr. from objection surprising rare," a rather quoted to admit here Acts in passages in the two whole one is safe bearing on this examples papyri The dp^oTepot. the free use of of

usage include N.P. 67, 69 (iv/A.D.) "where it is used oi four men" (Moulton, CI Rev., 1904, p. 154), probably also B.M. 336 (ii/A.D.). See Bury, CI. Rev., XI, p. 393, for the opposite view. Nestle {Bed. Phil. Woch., 1900, for

three and more

N. 47) shows that German

In the

(6) "E/cao-To?.

also uses

"beide"

persons.

LXX

e/cdrepos is still

used to a limited ex-

tent (Gen. 40:5) and occasionally = eKao-ros, without dual idea (cf. In O.P. 256 (i/A.o.) and B.M. d/xc^oTepot), as often in the papyri.^ and of four in G.H. 23'' three of used is eKarepos 333 (ii/A.D.) Rev., Moulton, CI 1901, p. 440, and proper use of (ii/B.c). See eKarepov fxepos. But in the to irpos (a.d. 170), P.Oxy. 905 in eKarepos is common in the N. T., "Emo-ros appear. not does eKarepos N. T. by Kade, Kadeis and Greek modern in replaced be to but comes Kadevas (cf. KaO' els in the 1.

N.

Without Substantive.

T.).«

This

is

indeed the usual idiom, as in

Mt. 16:27; Jo. 6:7. Never with the article. 2. With Substantive. Heb. 3 13; Rev. 22 2. Thus very rare. 1

Thaok., Gr., p. 192.

2

Moulton,

6

lb., p. 79.

6

Cf.

Prol., p. 80.

:

16;

'

*

lb.

lb.

Cf. Thack., Gr., p. 192.

Thumb, Handb.,

subject of

So Eph. 4

:

:

(listrib.

p. 9G; Jann., Hist.

Gk.

pron. see Brug., Die distrib.

indoger. Spr., 1907.

Gr., p. 178.

and

On

die kollckt.

the whole

Num.

der

— A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

746

With els. This is very frequent. So We even have ava eh e/caaros, Rev. 21

3.

etc.

:

e^Tjyet TO Kad' ev eKaarov Siv e-irolrjaev,

with

els

'haaTos

21.

But

Mt. 26

in Ac. 21

we must not^ connect

:

22,

:

19,

tKaarov

ev.

With

4.

Lu. 13

It is

Genitive.

Eph. 4

15;

:

:

This

Partitive Apposition.

5.

Mt. 18

eKacTTOS

same thing

is

:

common

also with the genitive, as in

7. is

35, kiropevovTO Tavres

true in Eph. 5

:

33

Thus

frequent also.

— eKaaros

Lu. 2

eva e/caaros.

vfxeXs Kad'

d<^^re

The

3, etc.

:

This

is

a

classical construction.-

Rare in Plural.

6.

have

So

Ph. 2

kao-rot

:

but even here

4,

W. H.

enaaros in the margin.

Heb. 8:11 by eKaaros rather than Cf. avrjp is an instance of independence of Hebrew literalism. Eph. ^vith and 4: 25 Is. Mt. 18 35 with Gen. 13 11; Ro. 15 2 7. Repetition.

Note the

repetition of 'haaros in

This translation of

(from Jer. 31 34). :

:

:

:

ta"^!*

=

3 :5 (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 246). For avrjp (literal books) see Thackeray, Gr., p. 192.

UaaTos in the

LXX

AXXo?. Cf. Latin alius, Enghsh else. Used absolutely = 'An-other,' 'One Other.'' This is the commonest use of the pronoun. Cf. 1 Cor. 12 8-10 where aXXo; occurs six times. So Mt. 13 5-8 where ciXXa appears three times. But it is found alone also, as aWovs, Mt. 27 42. For aXXos rts see Lu. 22 59. Cf. ovbh 6.\\o (Gal. 5 10) = 'nothing else.' It occurs in modern Greek vernacular. 2. For Two. But ciXXos occurs where the idea of two is present (pair). Here erepos might have been used, but even in Euripides, /. T. 962 f., Blass^ finds ^drepoj' rb 8' aWo, though he considers it a "most striking encroachment" for aXXos to supplant erepos in this (c)

1.

:

:

:

:

:

Moulton

fashion. 8'

aXXTjs

G. H.

23''

— p.h — Kal top aXKov B.U. 456

{CI. Rev., 1901, p. 440) cites

(ii/B.c); 8vo, rbv

eva

ixev

(iv/A.D.). Moulton** explains the existence of

in Lu. 6

:

mi

rrjs

ttjv

appearing in Mt. 5

:

39, unless that

But the matter goes much further than that. aWrj refers to the other hand (x^ip). In Jo.

— KOL Tov oXXov.^

Cf. also Jo. 18

and aXXos are contrasted.

aXXa 1

2

3

TrevTe,

for

:

16; 20

:

was

his source.

In Mt. 12 19

ri

eyd)

aXX-qv {cnaybva)

29 as a failure on Luke's part to correct his source, a

like failure

wpoiTov

rrjs

/jllSls

3

f.

:

:

13

32 note rod In Jo. 5 32 :

—

So Mt. 25 16, to. irevre ToXavra which Blass^ finds "complete illustration in classi:

W.-Sch., p. 246 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179.

*

Prol., p. 79.

^

lb., p. 180.

6

W.-Sch., p. 245. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.

747

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

There are other N. T. examples such as aWrjv in a\\a 8vo Mt. 25 17, a\\r]i> Mk. 10 11, aWop 8vo

cal authors."

Mt. 19

:

10

aWov

12,

:

3.

As

—

9, TO.

:

Adjective.

Common.

particular Rev. 14:6, 4.

With

:

wapaKKTjTov Jo. 14:16.

8,

Mt. 2:12; 4:21; and

in

Cor. 15:39, 41.

1

not frequent.

It is

the Article.

Cf.

15, 17, 18 and

The

article sharply

John refers to a preceding example. Cf. Mt. 5 39; Mt. 27 61. alludes to himself in his Gospel as 6 aWos fjLadrjTr^s (18 16; 20 2, :

:

:

3,

is

The

may

:

be repeated, as in Jo. 18 16; 19 32. 4). This 5. The Use o/ctXXos aX\o = 'One One Thing, One Another.' In Ac. 2 12, classical and is illustrated in Ac. 19 32; 21 34. article

:

:

:

aXXos

Trpos

aWov, the idiom

is

:

:

almost reciprocal

like dXXiyXwj/.

—

—

Others.' We have dXXr? iikv aWt] In Contrast for 'Some a\\a 5e, Mt. 13 4 f. (cf. mi Cor. 15 :39 and 41; a ^j.kv erepot bk, Mt. 16:14; Kai dXXot bk ciXXo, Mk. 4:5); ol nh aWoov, Lu. 9:8; 6 els aXXot bk, Mk. 8 28; viro TLPcov aXXot 6 aWos, Rev. 17 10. 6.

bk,

—

1

—

—

:

—

—

—

:

:

7. Ellipsis of

aXXot) airoaroXoL. XotTToTs)

evbeKa.

dXXos

is

possible in Ac. 5 29, Herpos Kal

ol

:

Blass^ cites also Ac. 2

But psychologically

:

(sc.

14, Ilerpos avv tols (sc.

this explanation

is

open to

doubt. Blass^ finds this 8. The Use of dXXos and erepos Together. "probably only for the sake of variety." Certainly in 1 Cor. 12 9 f. no real distinction can be found between dXXos and erepos, which are here freely intermingled. But I am bound to insist on a real difference in Gal. 1 6 f The change is made from erepov to dXXo for the very reason that Paul is not willing to admit that it is a gospel on the same plane (aX\o) as that preached by him. He admits erepov, but refuses dXXo. The use of tl prj by Paul does not disturb this interpretation. The same thing would seem to :

:

.

—

—

ei'a77€Xtoj' rvevpa erepov be true of 2 Cor. 11 4, aWov 'Irjaovv erepov. It may be that variety (as in 1 Cor. 12 9 f.) is all that induces the change here. But it is also possible that Paul stig:

:

matizes the gospel of the Judaizers as erepou (cf. Gal. 1 6) and the Spirit preached by them, while he is unwilling to admit an:

(dXXoj') Jesus even of the same type as the one preached by him. Besides, it is not to be forgotten that in 9. =' Different.' ancient Greek dXXoj itself was used for 'different kind.' Thompson {Syntax, p. 76) cites dXXa twu btKaloiv from Xen., Mem., IV, 4. 25.

other

Cf. also ctXXd in the sense of 'but.' »

lb.

Cf. dXXd dXXr? in -

1

lb., p.

Cor. 15 318.

:

39.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

748

Indeed in

1

Cor. 15

:

stated that the glory

39, 41,

not

nh — aXXrj

ciXXtj

expressly-

it is

5e,

In verse 40 hepa occurs. Here aXXos seems to be used in the sense of 'different,' like irepos. In Latin alius was often used where earlier Latin would

have used

is

avri].

rj

Cf. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 105.

alter.

This variation of &\\os has the same relation to It means 'belonging to another,' and occurs fourteen times in the N. T. Cf. Ro. 15 20. The con'AXXorptos.

10.

it

that alienus has to alius.

:

trast with avTuv

is

seen in Mt. 17 25.

In Heb. 11 34

:

has the

it

:

notion of alienus. (d)

"Erepo?.

1.

Absolutely.

So often as

in Lu. 14

19

:

f.,

but

also

it is

used

more frequently with substantives than is aXXos. Cf. Lu. 4 :43; Ac. 7: 18 (LXX), etc. For 'irepSs tls see Ac. 8 34; Ro. 13 9. For the genitive with erepos cf. Mt. 8 21. The article is also more common with erepos 2. With Article. than with &\\os. Cf. Mt. 10 23; 11 16, etc. 3. Second of Pair. A common, probably the original, use of :

:

:

:

:

for the second of

a pair. Cf. Latin alter. It is the only dual pronominal word in the N. T. (except ap4>6and is common in the LXX^ and the papyri. ^ For avv

'irepos is

surviving repot),

piLq. see P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D,). The examples are rather abundant in the N. T. of this dual (comparative) sense (e-repos). So

erepa

Tov eva

— Tov

ttXoIw,

Lu. 5

18

:

10; 20

the use of irkpav

:

it

Kiop.ir]v,

Tov 'irepov in

7.

11.^

:

24

av

;

—

Cf. also Lu. 7: 19

Not :

r)

f.;

erepov,

14

radically different

for 'next,' as in Lu. Q

Ac. 20

15

rf}

Ro. 2:1; 13

=' Different.^

4.

Mt. 6

erepov, :

The

:

erepa.

6,

:

h

:

11:3;

31; 16

from

h

erepco f.;

this conception is

erepco aa^daru),

Cf. also

rw

13; 17: 34

:

Mt. 10

:

23.

9

:

56

eis

See* also,

8= 'neighbour.'

sense of 'different' grows naturally out

The two

of the notion of duality.

things happen just to be dif-

The word itself does not but merely 'one other,' a second of two. It does not necessarily involve "the secondary idea of difference of kind" (Thayer). That is only true where the context demands it. But note how Latin alter lends itself to the notion of change. ThompCf. Latin alius

ferent.

mean

and

alienus.

'different,'

may

be "an euphemism for /ca/cos." So eyevero to etSos TOV Tpoacoirov avTov erepov, Lu. 9 29. Cf. also Ac. 2:4; Ro. 7 23; 1 Cor. 14:21; 2 Cor. 11:4; Gal. 1 6; Heb. 7:11, 13, 15; Ju. 7. son-*

suggests that this sense

The N. T. examples

are rather numerous.

—

:

:

:

»

Thack., Gr., p. 192.

^

cf. W.-Sch., p. 244.

2

Mayser, Gr.,

«

Synt., p. 77.

p. 312.

PRONOUNS Cf. also erepccs in Ph. 3

h

15 and

:

749

('ANTflNTMIAl) erkpa

Mk.

iJ.op4>ri

16

:

12 (dis-

puted part of Mark.)^ Cf. Ac. 17:21. We have already seen that aXXos may be equal to 'different' (1 Cor. 15 39). "Erepoj occurs in verse 40 in the sense of 'different.' Ramsay (on Gal. :

1 6) argues that, when erepos occurs in contrast with ciXXos, it means not 'different' (as Lightfoot in loco), but 'another of the same kind.' Moulton {Prol., p. 246) stands by Lightfoot in spite of Ramsay's examples. 5. =^ Another^ of Three or More. But erepos comes also to be employed merely for 'another' with more than two and with no :

This usage probably grew out of the use with So Lu. 10 1, aveSeL^ev erepovs el38ofj.r]KovTa 8vo. In

idea of difference.

two groups. Mt. 12 45, :

difference

Luke

:

eTTTOL

:

32,

So in

pos, 6 erepos.

the third

:

1

But

3.

this is

:

all

Cor. 4

:

6, els

VTep rod evds ^vaLovade Kara rod

again presented by

is

:

In Ac. 4 12 the point of erepov is rather than that of Jesus, not that of difference 16-20 we have this order, 6 Trpcoros, 6 bevre-

13.

at

In Lu. 19

in kind.

erepov,

:

name

by

also be implied

Cf. Lu. 8

eVepot KaKovpyoi bvo.

/cat

hardly true of Ac. 2 that no other

may

This difference

present.

is

in 23

erepa irvev/jLaTa TrovrjpoTepa eavTOV, the notion of

occupies third place in Mt. 16

:

erepos.

Then, again,

14 and Heb. 11

:

erepot

In Mt. 15:

36.

comes in the fifth place. Blass^ admits that this use of "at the close of enumerations may be paralleled from Attic writers." See further Lu. 3 18; Ro. 8:39; 1 Tim. 1 10. But in 1 Cor. 12 8-10 erepoj occurs in the third and the eighth places.

30

it

erepos

:

:

:

We

are not surprised then to learn that the papyri furnish plenty

more than two.^ Blass indeed and Moulton seems surprised that Luke should change the correct dXXos (Mk. 4 5-8; Mt. 13 5-8) to erepov in Lu. 8 6-8. But Luke is reinforced by Paul in this laxity as to erepos. Cf. ttoXXo, /cat erepa in Lu. 3 18. Moulton (CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154) calls this "incorrect erepos" and finds it in the papyri, as in O.P. 494 (ii/A.D.). But we do not need to hold erepos in leading strings. The "subtlety" (CI. Rev., 1901, p.

of examples

where

erepos refers to

considers this extension not correct,

:

:

:

:

440) 6.

one,'

is

only called for in that case.

In

"Erepos

Contrast.

So

'the other.'

common

in

Mt. 6:24; with 6

jx'ev,

1

may

also be used in contrast for

Cor. 15:40, erepa p.'ev— erepa

contrasts with other pronouns.

be.

Thus with

'

the

It is ets

in

Lu. 7:41; Lu. 17:34 ff.; with rts, Lu. 11:15 f.; Lu. 8 5 f.; with ot nkv and aXXot, Mt. 16 14. But

6 els in

:

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 245.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179.

:

»

Moulton,

Prol., p. 79.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

750

(m'?5-) nor oWerepos (m^?^-) occurs in the N. T., though ixr]deT€pot is read in Prov. 24 21. In Clem. Horn. XIX, 12 we have oWhepos. For els eh (Mk. 10 37), (e) Other Antithetic Pronouns. 6 aXXos (Rev. 17 10) see els under 6 5e (Gal. 4 24 f.), 6 els els Numeral Adjectives. So likewise tis may be contrasted with TLs (Ph. 1 15), with aXXos (Lu. 9 7 f.), with eVepos (1 Cor. 3 4). os 5e see Demonstrative 6 8e, 6s ij.ev For the very common 6 fih Pronouns. The repetition of the substantive is to be noted also.

neither ovderepos

:

—

—

—

:

:

:

:

—

—

So

oIkos

:

:

€7rt

oIkov

Lu. 11

TTtTrret,

17; 6 aaravas top aaravav eK^aXKei,

:

Mt. 12 26 (cf. Lu. 11 18). This notion of repetition is seen in wepa /cat wepa (2 Cor. 4 16; cf. Heb. ?3i'^T ?2ii). Cf. also els Kal :

:

:

(Mt. 20

els

For

:

21; 24

— Kal

els

els

:

40

— Kal

f.;

ets

27: 38, etc.);

This threefold repetition of use of

ets

with Kara and

els

dj'd (ev

17

Kad'

h,

XI.

Numeral Adjectives. Negative Pronouns (dvTo>vu|JL(ai

(a)

OuSet?.

els

:

4

The

rhetorical.^

is

Lu. 7: 41.

els 5e erepos,

Mk. 9:5= Mt.

see

Kad'

els,

=

Lu. 9

:

33.

distributive els)

was

Ovdels is

sup-

ava

treated under

1.

Note

History.

this accent rather

dpvriTiKaC).

than

planted in modern Greek vernacular by as negative particle in form

ovdels.

but

Kapeis,

ovdev survives

Cf.- Jannaris, Hist.

dku.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 171. 2. Ou^ets.

ov8e

els,

This

is

made from

ovre eir (sometimes

also

from

Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 146) and occurs the best N.T. MSS. Cf. W. H.'s text for Lu. 22

'not even,'

sometimes in 35; 23:14; Ac. 15:9; 19:27; 26:26; 1 Cor. 13:2; 2 Cor. 11:9. Jaimaris^ finds it a peculiarity of the Alexandrian school. Meister:

hans^ has shown from the inscriptions how oWeis and ij.r]deis came to be practically universal during the third century and the first half of the second century B.C. Thackeray^ has reinforced this position

from the uncials for the LXX. The papyri are in full accord.^ In the fourth and fifth centuries a.d., the date of the great uncials, oWeis and prjdeLs had disappeared from current speech, and yet a number of instances survive in the MSS. of the 0. T. and the N. T., though others were probably replaced by ovdels and fxrjSels.^ In»

W.-Sch., p. 246.

^

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

that the change 3

is

p. 170.

due to

r

But and

see Schwyzer, Perg. Inschr., p. 114, for idea 5

being pronounced aUke.

Att. Inschr., p. 259.

*

Gr., pp. 58

B

Thumb, HeUen.,

ff.

p. 14;

Mayser, Gr.,

p.

180

f.

«

Thack., Gr.,

p. 60.

PRONOUNS

751

('ANTflNTMIAl)

deed oWeis was a sort of fashion (Moulton, CI. Rev., Mar., 1910, came in iv/B.c. and vanished ii/A.D. It was nearly extinct in N. T. times. See further chapters VI, in, (g), and p. 53) that

VII, 3.

III, 2.

The feminine form is less frequent in the N. T. than The word occurs with substantives

Gender.

the masculine and neuter.

(Mk. 6: 5), with other pronouns {aXkos, Ac. 4 12; erepos, 17: 21), but usually alone, as in Mt. 5 13; 6 24. It is common with the :

:

genitive (Lu. 18

4

:

The

34),

1 ovSeu bi.a4>kp€L bovKov,

:

explanation (Gal. 2 17,

ovbh

:

:

adverbial use of ovdev

is

a possible

In Rev. 3 not to be construed with xpetai'.

Cf. ovbtv in 1 Cor. 7: 19.

6).

the neuter

xpetaj' exo),

seen in Gal.

is

but the cognate accusative is

:

4. Ovbl tis. This is, of course, more emphatic than ovbds. The usage appears often in Xenophon, Demosthenes and other classic writers, the and the Atticists.^ For examples in the

LXX

N. T.

Mt. 27

see

:

14; Jo. 1

principle appears in ovk eaTLv

:

3; Ac.

4 32; Ro. 3 10. The same Ro. 3 12 (Ps. 14 1, 3). Cf. :

ecos ivos,

:

:

also the separation of ov Tore in 2 Pet.

—

1

:

:

21.^

—

analogy of ttSs ov and distinctly found in Demosthenes.^ Cf. Lu. 12 6, ev k^ avTOJp OVK 'idTLV. So also 11 46; Mt. 10 29, tv e^ avrccv ov irecreLTaL, In Mt. 5 18 we have ev For ovbels ocrrts see oo-rts. ov In general the history of fxridds is parallel to that (6) Mr^Sei?. 5.

Els

It is after the

ov.

emphatic, and

is

:

:

—

:

of

It

ovbels.

ovbels

:

is

naturally

/jltj.

much

frequent and

less

belongs to the discussion of

its

use instead of

Modes and Negative

Particles.

matter the fate of Mrjdeis appears only once in the text of the N. T., Ac. 27 33. The use of fMr]8h cbv, Gal. 6 3, may be compared with oWeu eifXL, 1 Cor. 13 2. In 1 Th. 4 12 note fxriSevos XP^'^V ex^jre. (c) Ourt? AND yirjTL
/jlt].

:

:

:

the editors in the separation of these forms, that

juiyrt

:

5; 2 Cor. 13

a.'yopaawp.ev, it is

Cf. Jo. 6

The

to be observed

it is

as mere particle occurs not merely in questions like

ovTos kcTTiv 6 XptdTos; Jo.

Cor. 7

:

12,

:

use of

rts

:

5.

but also with d. So ei /jltjtl But in Lu. 9 13, ei fxrjTt iropevOevTes

4

:

29,

:

possible to take

'iva

/JLT]

^tiyrt

with the conjunction

and with the negative adverb

/xi]

as the object of

But note

TL aToK-qraL.

/xt]

is

»

2 *

also (Jo.

3:3,

5, etc.).

— ns,

fxi]

W.-Sch., p. 248; Schmid, Atticismus, II, p. 137 » lb., p. 178. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 249. Cf. Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

Cor. 6

not infrequent (Mk. 13

have, contrary to the usual classic idiom, ov

p. 256.

—

f.

1

rjfxeLs

ayopacrco^xev.

1

iJLr]Tiye,

nr]Ti

in

:

:

3.

5)

So we

tls.^

The

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

752

undoubted separation of ov and aitj from tls in such examples as Mt. 11: 27; 12 19; Lu. 8 51; 12:4; Jo. 7:4; 10:28; Ac. 28:21; 12 argues for the same thing where fir] tls and 1 Cor. 4:5; 6 happen come together. The Koiv-q (Moulton, ProL, p. to TL fir] :

:

:

246) supports the use of

tls

with the negative: Tb.P. kyyaiov

/iTjSe/itSs KpaTTjcreios /i7/5e KvpLeias tlvos

With

(d) 1.

1 (ii/B.c.)

irepLyLvofievrjs.

IT a?.

Used together the words

Oi; ttSs.

call for little in

Ov merely negatives xas as in

explanation.

classic

the

way

of

Greek and =

Thus in Mt. 7 21, ov iras 6 Xeycoj/ — eiaeKevaeTaL, mean to say that 'no one' who thus addressed him

'not every one.'

Jesus did not

:

could enter the kingdom of heaven. He merely said that 'not every one' would. Cf. also ov irdaa aap^, 1 Cor. 15 39. The same :

principle applies to the plural ov iravTes x^povaL t6v Xoyou, Cf. Ac. 10 :41; Ro.

11.

9:6; 10

Scott, notes that in Ro. 10

well

mean

and that

'no,'

:

in

:

16.

But

my

friend,

Mt. 19 Mr. H.

:

16 and 1 Cor. 15 39 ov iras can Mt. 7 21 and the other clauses :

:

where dXXd occurs the dXXd negatives the whole of the preceding clause. This is certainly worth considering. Cf. Mt. 7 :2l ov irds 6 \eyu>v with ttSs 6 aKovwv in 7 2.

Ou

—

TTtts.

A

tive goes With, the verb,

The

:

26.

Here we have a

different situation.

negative statement

is

The negamade as to

same as if ovbeis had been used with an So Mt. 24 22 (Mk. 13 20) ovk av hadcdv, irdaa ffdp^, the idea is 'no flesh,' not 'not all flesh,' i.e. 'some flesh,' would have been lost, Cf Lu. 1 37 ovk ddvvaT-qaeL irdv pfj/ia, Ro. 3 20 (Gal. 2 16) ov dLKaLoodrjaeTaL rdaa adp^. See also Ac. 10 14 ov8eiroT€ irdv. Cf. ov8e irdv Rev. 7 16; 9 4. It is true that this s^5, idiom is very common in the LXX^ as a translation of 53 Cf, Ex. 12 16, 43; 20 10, etc. But it is not without analogy also in the papyri use of irds "with prepositions and adjectives of negative meaning. Thus avtv or xoipU Tdarjs virepdeaews, a recurrent formula, dwnrevdevoL iravTOS kirifj-ov, Tb.P, 105 (ii/B.c); dixo- irdaris e^ovaias, Plutarch, Cons, ad Uxor., 1 (cf. Heb. 7 7)."^ Clearly the construction was in harmony with the kolvt]. The same principle applies. Cf 1 Cor. 1 29, 3. M57 irds. oirus nil KavxwriTaL irdaa adp^. Here it is 'no flesh' as above with ov TTcts. See also Rev. 7: 1. On the other hand ixfj irds (1 Jo. 4 l)='not every' like ov irds. Tras.

result is the

affirmative verb.

:

.

:

:

—

:

:

:

—

:

:

—

:

:

:

—

.

:

—

:

1 2

W.-M., p. 215. Moulton, Pro!.,

p. 155.

p. 246.

Cf. CI. Rev.,

Dec,

1901, p. 442; Apr., 1904,

PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)

ov

—

4.

Ou

—

ttSs

and

5.

Has

—

fxr]

—

:

differ at all

from the

in construction.

ttSs

Here the ancient Greek idiom to a certain extent

oh.

comes to one's translation.

Rev. 21 27 docs not

Trav in

/x??

753

But the

relief.^

It is less

— 53 —

)kb

harsh than ov

ttSs.

LXX

behind the

lies

Cf Blass, Gr.

of

.

N. T.

—

The denial about Tras is complete as with ov ttSs. 2 21, wdv \pev8os e/c rijs aXridelas ovk laTLV. Cf. 1 Jo. 3 15; Eph. 5:5; Rev. 22 3. 6. nSs ixi] falls into the same category. Cf. Jo. 3 16; 6 39; 12 46; Eph. 4: 29; 5 3. Here also the denial is universal. But most probalily ixrjbds would have pleased an older Greek more. ov In Rev. 18 22 the same explanation holds. 7. Has Gk., p. 178.

See

1 Jo.

:

:

:

—

:

:

8.

2 as

:

Ov

— —

/JLY).

matter

is

not so

plural ovk eiaiv Tavres e^

Two

clear.

The

seen in the American Revision.

The margin

not of us." ov

:

With the

iravres.

19, the is

has:

"not

all

— xas in the singular favours the 9.

:

:

Uavres

ov goes

ov.

With

wavres ov

shall all

'not

all.'

all

shall

1

1

KOLfj,r]dr]a6iJ,e6a,

Per contra, see ov W.-M.,

The analogy

are of us."

The effect is the same not sleep' means that 'none'

be changed.'

1 Jo.

of

first.

with the verb.

'We 'We

riiJ.€)v,

translations are possible, text there is: " they all are

p. 215.

Cor. 15

as

ttSs

:

51, the

— ov above.

of us shall sleep.

irdvTes,

Ro. 10: 16 =

.

CHAPTER XVI THE ARTICLE Other Uses

(TO 'APGPON)

i^, t6. For the demonstrative 6 and the on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart^: "Der Artikel hat die urspriingliche demonstrative Bedeutung." It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. n. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A Greek Contribution. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.^ Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is "a new Greek departure."^ It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic^ and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed,

I.

of 6,

relative 6 see chapter

the existence of the genuine article in

But

it

Homer

is

denied by some.^

seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the

Homeric

phl-ases as

dispute that

it is

article in

And

ol ir\koves, ol apLaroL, etc.^

it is

such

beyond

in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the

Greek article reaches its perfection.'' The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modem Greek. ^ In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.^ But Volker^" finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox" points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. ^

Hauptr. der griech. Synt.,

^

Cf. Sclineider, Vorles. liber griech. Gr.

*

Thompson, Synt.

*

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

^

Delbriick, op.

e

Monro, Hom. Gr., pp. 178 ff. Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 40 ff.; Jebb. Moulton, Prol., p. 80 f

8

9

1"

cit.

p. 1.

of Attic Gk., p. 41. !,•

pp. 507

Cf. also

Synt. d. griech. Pap., pp. 5

ff.

Cf Brug., Griech. .

Thompson,

Synt., p. 41 ^

in V.

Thompson, Synt., p. 41 and D.'s Handb., p. 193

" Lang,

ff.

754

Gr., p. 424.

f.

of the

N.

f. f.

T., p. 45.

THE ARTICLE

is

the same form as the demonstrative

man the

The Greek

Derived from the Demonstrative.

(h)

der

is

is

755

(tO "APGPOn)

used as demonstrative,

6,

17,

t6.

article

Indeed the Ger-

So English Clyde

article, relative.

related to the demonstrative that (also relative).

the article a "mere enfeeblement" So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied apdpov to all three in truth, but distinguished them as apdpov irporaKTubv (dem.), apdpov viroTaKTiKov (rel.), apdpov 6pl<7tik6v (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonIt is an strative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of {Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls

demonstrative.

of the

It is only of recent years that

the article.

of the article has

been made.^

arate treatment for the article.

a really

study

scientific

Even Brugmann^ But Part II of

gives no sepGildersleeve's

Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller is mainly responsible for it. But even here (p. 216)

I

must demur against

" the substantive use of the article"

instead of plain substantival demonstrative.

Miller there

uses "article" in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek apdpov (ap- as seen in

The

ap-ap-lffKo}, 'to fit,' 'join').

origin of the article

from the de-

monstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro ^ thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative 6. So

Here and arSo with new proper names 6 ticle and illustrates the transition. anticipates the name which is loosely added later. "In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Iliad, 4. 501,

alxm

17

explains

5' 17

Homer it marks the article

But

Kpord^OLO irkprjaev

hepoLO

Slo.

and

Avavers between demonstrative

17

alxp-r] x^Xkcit?.

the turning of attention to a person." ^

usually marks contrast and not mere

In

Homer

definiteness.

this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence

the real article which

is

thus attributive.

in. Significance of the Article. The article, unhke the demonIt is not strative, does not point out the object as far or near. 1

There

deictic.

is

either contrast in the distinction drawTi or allu-

sion (anaphoric) to

what

is

already mentioned or assumed as well

1

Ricm. and Goelzer, Synt.,

2

Griech. Gr.

p. 794.

»

Horn. Gr., p. 178.

«

lb.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

756

NEW TESTAMENT

The article is therefore to bpiaTLKov apOpov, the definite The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing

known. article.

out like an index finger.

It

is

a pointer.

It is

not essential to

language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not " otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentu7Ji," as Scaliger^ called it.

The Greek

article is

Many words itself may be

not the only means of making words

are definite from the nature of the case.^

definite.

The word

definite, like yrj, ovpapos, TtjctoOs. The use of a prepowith definite anarthrous nouns is old, as h oUco. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is cer-

sition

When

it is not used, the object may or may not never meaningless in Greek, though it often to correspond with the Enghsh idiom, as in 17 ao^ia, 6 IlaOXos. not a matter of translation. The older language and higher

tainly definite.

The

be. fails

It

is

article is

poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article

than any one.

Its free use leads to exactness

sleeve, Syyitax, Part II, p. 215

IV.

The Method Employed by

points out in one of three ways.^ (a)

Individuals

and

finesse (Gilder-

f.).

the Article.

The Greek

article

It distinguishes

from Individuals.

The article does not drawn between individuals. the context. The translators of the

give the reason for the distinction

That is usually apparent in King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.^ A goodly list of such sins

given in

is

"The Revision

of the

New Testament,"^ such

Here the whole point the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. TO 6pos was the mountain right at hand, not 'a the other hand, the King James translators missed

as 'a pinnacle' for to TTepvyLov (Mt. 4:5).

Hes in the

So

in

article,

Mt. 5

:

1

On

mountain,'

/xerd yvvaiKos (Jo. 4: 27) when they said 'the woman.' woman,' any woman, not the particular woman in quesBut the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all

the point of It

was

tion.

'a

blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18 vital thing ^

is

to see the matter

Quoted by Farrar, Gk. Synt.,

The

:

13,

rw

d/zapra)Xc3.

The

from the Greek point of view and

p. 57,

make a word definite seen in Madvig, Synt. of the Gk. Lang., p. 8, 8 Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 70. * lb. 6 Lightfoot, Trench, EUicott, p. xxx f. ^

old idea that the article was necessary to

is

THE ARTICLE

In Mt. 13

find the reason for the use of the article.

tUtovos 1

4:56

Cor.

known

the son of the (well

vlos, it is

'iiraLuos

757

(tO 'APOPOn)

means the

praise

55, 6 rod

:

In

to us) carpenter.

Cf

due to each one.

.

6

mados in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5 :9, eu rfj eirtaToXfj, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15 8, tco kKTpconaTi., Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this :

use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5 15, tov Tr\v \vxv'mv, the article singles out the bushel, the lamp:

ixbhiov,

In 15 26, toTs KwaploLs, Jesus points In Lu. 4 20, to ^l^\Iov awoBovs tQ was the usual one and the attendant was there at

stand present in the room. to the

virrjpeTji,

the

roll

So in Jo. 13

his place.

:

dogs by the table.

little

:

the basin was

5, /3dXXei vScop eis tov vLTnrjpa,

The

there in the room.

:

article in Jo. 7

17, '^voiatrai irepl

:

ttjs

means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. The (generic) article is (h) Classes from Other Classes. not always necessary here any more than under (a). See iroprjpovs

5t5axi?s,

(Mt. 5:45); Skaioj

Kal ayadovs

particular irov

Cor. 12

1

:

13

adlKwv (1 Pet. 3:18).

virep

elre 'lovdaXoL

ao^os; ttou ypafxp-aTevs; (1 Cor.

1

e'ire

:

dXcoTreKes,

ra

So

Treretvd.

at yvvalKes

But

20).

to use the article with different classes.

So

(Eph. 5

:

it is

Cf. in

29.

So also

quite

common

"EWrives, 12

:

Mt. 8 20 note

in

:

22), ot iivSpes (5

:

at

25),

In these exTO, TeKpa (6:1), ol irarkpes (6 4), oi 8ov\ol (6 5). amples the vocative often has the article. .Cf. Col. 3 18ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5 3-10 :

:

:

:

Cf. tovs

(the Beatitudes), ot tttuxoL, etc.

(to4)ovs,

to.

aaOevij, etc.,

27. So ot aKpoaral and ot TOLr]Tal in Ro. 2 13. Cf. Rev. 11 18; 22 14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in 6 vios tov avOpw-Kov (Mt. 8 20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10 7, 6 epya.Ty]s, where the labourer

in 1 Cor. 1

:

:

:

:

:

:

represents

all

The Gospel of John is (both ideals and types). avdpojiros,

12

:

In Mt. 18

labourers.

29 tov

17 note 6 Wvlkos

:

/cat

6 TeXuv-qs.

especially rich in examples of this kind ^

Other examples are Mt. 12:35 6 ayadds 5 6 top dUaLov, 2 Cor. 12 12

icrx^pov, Jas.

4:16

:

:

Mt. 13 3 6 airelpcov. But even here the article is not always needed. So 'Ioi;5atoi; re irpooTOP In Cf. /caXoD re /cat Ka/coO, Heb. 5 14. Kal "EWr]vos (Ro. 2:9). (Mt. 24: where there is only examples like 6 ohpavos /cat 35), 777 one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class tov cLTotTToKov,

Gal.

Kkrjpovbp.o'i,

:

:

17

1

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 47. On literature upon the article sec E. Schwartz Index to Eusebius, p. 209.

in the

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

758

So debs, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3 16). Volker {Syntax, p. 19) notes in idea.

:

the papyri examples like ywri

vloi,

/cat

fj

ywq

koI oi vloi, yvuij

/cat ot

For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) Qualities from Other Qualities. The English does not 6 aprjp

vloi,

reKPa.

/cat

use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 :9-ll the gifts mentioned

have no

So in chapter 13, ayaTr-qv in verses 1-3, but but xtarts, eXTrts, d7d7rrj (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4 18 (j)6(3os is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while 17 ayairri each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 77

article.

ayairr] in 4, 8;

12

9;

7,

:

13

:

:

9

f.;

Col. 3

:

Blass (Gr. of N.

5.

from the standpoint of the German absence than in the presence of such in saying that the relative in Col. 3 It is interesting to

ticle.

God

in the songs in

:

11; 5

:

pressed with each quality, while in 5

with the whole for

In Ro. 13

list.

thing and quality.

:

But he

articles.

150)

p.

difficulty in the

correct

is

5 explains the use of the ar-

:

observe that in the

Rev. 4

GL,

T.

more

sees

of attributes of

list

13; 7: 11, the article :

12 one article

7 the article

is

{tyju) is

ex-

used

used with each

is

It is possible that tw here is the article also

which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence and 8e one might suspect t^ to be the demonstrative. In

of nev

Ro. 16

:

dLdaxw

7]u v/deXs

come

in

17, (XKoiretv Toiis

and

Sixoa-Taalas Kal

how

note

to.

(JKav8a\a irapa rrjv

neatly

tous, tcls,

Note

illustrate the three uses of the article.

neat classic idiom rovs

nouns

tcls

efxaOere woLOVvras,

— woLovvras.

For the

article

see further Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 257

to.,

ttju

also the

with abstract

ff.

V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a)

With Substantives.

Whether the substantive is pointed out as an inmakes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27 23, Tov deov ov elfxi, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, 6 deos, 1.

Context.

dividual, class or quality, the context

:

we

in English

do not need the

article,

even

if,

angel has the notion of "the special God."

In Mt. 23

:

2,

ot

as

is

unlikely, the

Cf. also Jo. 1:1.

ypafxnareLs Kai ol 4>aptcratot, the

two

classes are

THE ARTICLE distinguished as in English.

due to God. See 6 ficados, 2. Gender of the Article.

(tO "APGPOn)

In Ro. 11

:

36,

17

759

66^a, it is the glory-

Ro. 4:4). It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. T-qv TOP TO in Lu. 2 16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4 13, ttjv Naf apd, because of the implied ttoXlv. Cf. also Kacpappaovfi r-qv. But in Gal. 4 25, t6 be "kyap, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gen1

Cor. 9

:

18

—

—

(cf.

:

:

:

der of the word rather than the natural feminine. in 1

Cf. also 6

aixrjv

where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to ati-qv Cor. 14 16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article

(Rev. 3

:

14),

:

with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. rc3 /SeeXei/x (Ezek. 27: 4).

LXX

With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substan3.

since the proper

But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was' frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that tive requires the article.

the article meant nothing to the Greek.

We

him. classes

It meant definiteness to same difficulty with the article with Sometimes we can see the reason for the

often have the

and

qualities.

use of the article with proper names. Ac. 19

KTjpvaaei,

:

13.

quite capricious to us.

So

tov 'Irjaovv dv UavXos

But in most instances the matter seems The writer may have in mind a previous

mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4 9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, even when the adjective is not anar:

throus, as in 'AireWrjv tov

SoKifiov kv XpLCTio (verse 10). 'So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use -svith per-

sons

is

or for article

a mark of familiar In

contrast.

with

Germany

titles,

der

is

as

style,

but Plato uses

it

for

anaphora

some sections it is common to use the The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South

used with the

name

alone."^

seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. iiber den It

1

W.-Th.,

p. 113.

::

760

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

griech.

Art.,

NEW TESTAMENT

See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve

1891).

(Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of PhiloL, XI, pp. 483^87. Different words vary. "Names of cities most

when connected with

rarely have the article

that

true of other words also.

is

when an

article save

adjective

does not have the used (so Gal. 4: 25 f.; Rev. 3

is

one instance (Ac. 5

12) except in

prepositions,"^ but

'Iepovaa\r]ij,

:

:

Curiously 'lepoaoKvua has

28).

the article (in the oblique cases) only^ in Jo. 2 11

:

As

18.

the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17 13, ev

TJj

23; 5

:

instances of the article used with a

Bepota; 17: 15,

For further

:

10,

els

and 17:

'Adrjvcov;

eoas

Mt. 2:3; or

as "HpcbSou

not,

'AypLTnra, Ac. 25:26,

it

like

is

Mt. 2:1; and

h

:

'lop8avr]s

6, 6

Toraiios,

rals 'AdrjvaLs.

may have

is

meant we

we have

Stm

and

(Ac. 7:30)

In

find /SaaiXeus.

the usual order, but see

the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9 Cf. Tov opovs

the

6 /SaatXeus 'Rp<x)8r]s,

/SaatXecoj, Lu. 1:5. In jSao-tXeD our 'King George.' So in Xeno-

phon, when the King of Persia

Mt. 3

22;

f.

Substantives in apposition with proper names article, as in 'Upcodrjs 6 jSaatXtvs,

:

mentioned Bepoiap, and 17

16,

details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152

2; 10

:

cit}^

Stm

opovs

:

14; 16

:

12.

(Gal. 4:24), to opos

For the article 2tcov (Rev. 14 22). 1) and ^tchu 6pet (Heb. 12 with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. :

Cf.

'loi'Sas

6

:

1

:

13,

2t/xcoi'

Mt. 10

'laKapLcoTTjs,

'Iwdi'Tjs 6 ^aTTTLarris,

14

:

6 ^r]\o)T7]s,

1 f.

:

4;

'Hpw^Tjs

Here the word

etc.

the article, but not the proper name.^

In the Gospels as a rule

'Irjaovs

Cf.

has the

1

Terpaapxv^ 'ind

6

'Irjaovs 6 'Na^ap7]v6s,

;

Mk.

in

10 :47; Ac.

apposition has

Cor. 1:1. XptaTos in the

article.

Gospels usually has the article = the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly article,^ illustrating the development of Christology N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article Cf. the list in Mt. 1 if the case would not otherwise be clear. 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So 'lo-paijX in Ro. 10: 19, but tov 'lapa-qX in 1 Cor. 10 18. See also Mt. 22 42; Mk. 15 45; Lu. 2 16; Ac. 7 8; 15 1 f.; Ro. 9 13; Heb. 11 17. The use of t6v Bapa^jSav in Lu. 23 18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon's Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously

without the in the

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

W.-Th.,

2

lb.

»

See further W.-Sch., p. 153. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 152.

*

p. 112.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 153.

:

:

;

THE ARTICLE

(tO "APGPOn)

761

In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and "marks the turning of attention to a person," ^ rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. "In short the Homeric article mentioned.^

contrasts, the Attic article defines."

the article with proper names.^ see Gildersleeve,

But, as a matter of fact, no for the use or non-use of

down

satisfactory principle can be laid

For good discussion of the matter

Am.

Jour, of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb,

Handb., p. 41). Moulton (ProL, p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve "completely the problem of the article with proper names." erally introduces

Abbott (J oh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John gena proper name without the article and then

The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man's father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have uses

it.

article with

the article.

Cf.

Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; The papyri throw no great light on the

Moulton,

Prol., p. 83.

subject.

Radermacher (N. T.

Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For SaOXos 6 /cat HaOXos (Ac. 13 9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr.

confirm the N. T. usage.

:

Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes 6 here as relaSee also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke's list (Lu. 3 23-38) 'lo}ar](j> has no article, while all the

d. griech.

tive.

:

long line of genitives have rod including rod Oeov. Among the ancient writers 6 Oeos was used of the god of absolute religion in

from the mythological

distinction

gods.'*

Gildersleeve {Sijntax,

pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject.

In the N. T., however, while we have rpos t6v 6e6v (Jo. 1 1, 2), it is far more common to find simply 6e6s, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3 5) or not have it (8 9). The same thing holds true about irvevfia :

:

:

and

TTvevfxa

aytov, Kvpios, Xpiaros.

These words

will

come up

for

further discussion later.

'

Zucker, Beobachtungen uber den Gcbr.

Anabasis, p.

6.

'les 2

Artik. boi Personenn. in

Monro, Horn.

Xen.

Gr., p. 179.

Cf Schmidt, De Articulo in nominibus propriis apiid Att. scriptorcs (1S90) I, pp. 602 ff.; Kallonberg, Stu. uber den griech. Artikel (1891). * Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 48. Cf. also B. Weiss, Der Gebr. dea Artikels bei den Gottesnamen, Th. Stu. Krit., 1911, pp. 319-392. *

K.-G.,

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

762

Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6 9, /cat €K tuv dx^ap'iMV. apTOVS /cat b\papia, but inverse 11 tov% aprovs See Lu. 9 13. Cf. also vScop in 4 10 and to v8cop in verse 11. So nayoL in Mt. 2:1, but to us fxayovs in verse 7; ftfavta in 13 25, but 4.

the second mention of a word

:

—

:

:

:

Cf. Ac. 9 :4, 7; 9

ftfdwa in verse 26.

TO.

11,

:

17; Jas. 2

:

2, 3;

In Jo. 4 43, rds 8vo wepas, the article refers to Cf. Jo. 20 1 with 19 :41; 12 12 with 12 1; Heb. verse 40. 5 4 with 5 1; 2 Cor. 5 4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19 13 we have 15. Volker {Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds IlaOXos, but 6 IlaDXos in 19

Rev. 15

:

1, 6.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

common enough

the anaphoric use of the article (6)

With Adjectives.

The discussion of comes up later. Thus

tributive or predicate 1

a different construction from

8) is

:

1.

The Resumptive

Article.

6

perfectly normal in

/caXoj 6 vo/jlos (1

6 koKos (Jo.

tolijltjv

The use

in the papyri.

the adjective as at10

Tim. :

11).

the article and the

of

Pet. 3:2). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2 7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in 6 iroLix-qv 6

adjective

is

Cf. T% kaxo-r-Q

KaXos

above

is

toov ayioov Tvpo4)7]ruv (2

wepa

(Jo. 6 :40).

quite

common

:

Abbott^ thinks that

also.

this re-

duplication of the article "adds weight and emphasis to the arCf. T% tp'lt-q i]p.kpa (Lu. 9 22) with rfj i]ixkpa ttj rplTy (18 33). Abbott^ considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings ticle."

about him. 14.

:

:

But

Cf. Jo. 1:9, 41; 2

this

:

3

1;

hardly true of Jo. 6

is

5:43; 7:18; 10:11,

16;

:

13; 18

:

:

He

10.

notes also

that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always

has the reduphcated

Cf. rd Tpo^ara

article.

TOP ade\(f)dv tov Ulov in Jo. 1

:

41.

In

Homer

(10

to. e/xd

:

27).

So

the substantive usu-

comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive "repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word."^ Cf. Rev. 1 17; 3 7; 22 16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12 10. So tcov 8vo tcov aKovaavTwv (Jo. 1 :40). In Lu. 6 45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, 6 irovrjpds e/c tov woprjpov

ally

article

:

:

:

:

:

Trpo^epet to Kov7]p6v.

See in the papyri to kitwvlov

avTrjs

to \evKdv

TO Trapa aol, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.).

With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. 6 a7tos (Mk. 1 24), ttj eprifxui (Mt. 3:2), to 2.

:

ayadbv (Gal. 6 opaTo. (Col. 1

:

:

10), ot tttooxoI

(Mt. 5

:

16), Td TToXXd in Ro. 15

1

Joh. Gr., p. 63.

2

lb., p. 64.

»

3), Tds veas (Tit. :

22,

ol ao4>ol

Monro, Horn.

2

:

4),

to,

in 1 Cor. 1

Gr., p. 181.

:

THE ARTICLE 27, at

eTOL/jLOL

Mt. 25

in

The ellipsis The three uses

(tO "APOPON)

All these examples are obvious

10, etc.

:

763

simple and usually supplied from the con-

enough.

is

text.

of the article occur with the adjective alone.

The

individual use appears in such examples as 6 ayios rod deov

(Jo. 6 (1 Jo.

69), 6 dUatos (Ac.

:

5

TO

18),

:

22

14), 6 aKtidtvos (1 Jo.

:

and

TToXv

to oKlyov (2 Cor. 8

(Ro. 8:3),

aov (Phil. 14), to abbvaTOV tov vo^ov

23

15), toZs aylots (Ph. 1

:

h

1),

:

5:7), TOV

So rd

KaKa

and

f.,

:

20), 6 Trovrjpos

to ayadov

15),

(Mt.

^qpav

ttiv

The

(Eph. 1:3). very common

4

6 St/catos (1 Pet.

:

18), tov

also,

ayadov (Ro.

2:6), tovs irTOixovs (2 5), ol ifKovaioL (5:1). ayada (Ro. 3 8), to ayadov (Lu. 6 45). Cf. in

to.

particular Ro. 12

Ro. 13: 3

So

is

(Jas.

TTTCioxov

:

toXs eTovpavioLs

generic or representative (class from class)

more frequent indeed.

5

:

:

:

21

:

tov KaKov, kv

vtto

TO kyadbv (Gal. 6

:

rcS

ayad<^ to KaKov.

Cf. also

10), to Uavov (Ac. 17: 9), to Ka\6v

13:7), to ayiov (Mt. 7:6), rd opia (Mt. 19:1), tCjv The use of the neuter singular with the 23). article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass^ notes Cor.

(2

cTToplnoov

"a

as

"this

(Mk. 2

:

peculiar usage of Paul (and is

Hebrews)" and considers that

the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T.,

and may be

from the old heathen

literature, from ThuBut he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo^ and all other writers of the KOLVT], not to mention the papyri,^ show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to bodixiov

paralleled

cydides in particular."

vficov TTJs Tricrrews

in Jas. 1

:

3

also TO ixwpov TOV deov (1 Cor. TO k\a4>p6v (8

:

TTJs 9\i\j/ecos

(2 Cor.

8), TO yvojaTov tov deov

1

(cf. 1

:

4

ttjs

^ovXrjs

(Hob. 6

1

:

1

:

7)

:

belongs here.

aiiTcov

v/JicJciv

17), to

:

(Ro.

TO Trepiaaov (3:1), to bvvarov avTOV (9 TO OLfxeTadeTOV

Pet.

25), to

eirieiKes vficov

:

rd opard ticle

/cat

KocTfiov

TO.

aadevT]

tov

8cio8eKa4>v\ov KoafjLov (1

4),

Ex-

— rd

koXo.

tojv avdpcoiruv

rd TavTa (Col. 1

:

16),

adjective with the ar-

in the collective sense for persons.

(Heb. 7:7), to

—

5),

The neuter

(lb.).

sometimes appears

TO eKaTTOv

TOV

rd aopaTa

:

to.

:

(Ph. 4:5),

17), to avTrjs aadeves (7: 18).

Cor. 4

35),

vixeTepas ayaTvqs yv-qcnov

ttjs

22), to

:

:

16), rd KpvTTCL TOV (JKOTOVs (1

:

:

19), to xprjaTOV tov deov (2

amples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in aairpa (Mt. 13 48), rd aopaTa (Ro. 1 20), rd KpvirTo. (2

See

avjx^opov (7

r}p.C:v

Cor.'l

(Ac. 26:7), rd :

27

f.).

So fxoipa

See further

Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. »

2

»

The

Article not Necessary with

the Adjective.

Blass,*

who

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 155. Cf. Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 608. " Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 156. Deiss., B. S., p. 259.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

764

NEW TESTAMENT

has the best discussion of the use of the article with. adjectives, it is not accidental that, while we have h tc3 ^avepCo

notes that

Rec, Mt. 6:4), yet ds

(Text.

Lu. 8

the thing

17), since

:

rather fine point, since both (a subst. Lu. 11

Text. Rec).

In Ro. 2

17 note KoKov

iroutv.

28

:

The

22;

:

But it is a and els KpvwTrjp

not yet in existence.

kv kpvttui (Jo.

occur as well as

33)

:

(Mk. 4

prevails

(jiavepdv kXdelv

is

7

4, 10)

:

kv

re?

adjective alone

^avepw (Mt. 6

may

:

4,

In Jas. 4

genuine.

ev tc3 4>avepco is

:

express class as in

Mt. 5 45; Lu. 10 21 Ro. 1 14; 1 Cor. 1 20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So eTrrd ol irevTe 6 els 6 oXKos (Rev. 17 10). ;

:

:

:

—

With

(c)

:

—

Participles.

—

In

all

:

essential respects the article is

used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4 17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12 1, 2). For :

:

the predicate use see Jo. 10 is

common

The neuter

The

12.

participle with the article

without the substantive, as

ol irevdovvTes (Mt. 5:4). a person appears in to 'yewwpevov (Lu. 1: 35). In (Lu. 19 10) we have the collective neuter singular.

for

TO oLTroXwXos

The

:

:

abstract singular

and the abstract vTrapxovTo. pov ('my

is

seen

plural

in

m

to vTepexov

to.

Trjs

dtacpepoPTa

belongings') in 1 Cor. 13

The

yvwaecos (Ph. 3

(Ro. 2

:

the

3, for

:

18).

:

8)

Cf.

to.

more

in-

found in 6 (TTrelpwp (Mt. 13 The article with the participle is very com3). mon as the equivalent of a relative clause.^ In Mt. 5 32 iras 6 aTToXvoiv and os eav yapi]
representative or generic sense

is

:

—

:

3:8), 6 eiwuiv (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 5 32. repeated with participles if they refer to different

ol ireTLdTevKOTes (Tit.

The

article is

:

persons (Rev. 1:3) or even

if

the same person

different aspects are presented (Rev. 1

:

4,

meant where

is

where

6

rjv

comes

in

But note rc3 ayaTcbvTt -qpds Kal XvaavTL rjpds (1:5). Winer 2 makes a special point of the use of a definite predicate

between).

with an indefinite subject 1 :7), pi] TLS vpds earaL 6

(Jo. 5

:

32).^

He

would have an

like

rii'es

datv

at

TapaaaovTes vpas (Gal.

avXayoiyuv (Col. 2:8), aXXos eaTLV 6 papTVpoiV

also notes the defuiite subject

indefinite

Cf. also the article

one as in

and the future

where the German

ovk eoTLv 6 avpicov (Ro. 3

W.-M.,

1

Cf. K.-G.,

3

More frequent in John than in the Synoptists. Abbott,

I,

p. 594.

:

11).

participle in 6 KaTaKpivCiv (Ro. 2

p. 136.

Joh. Gr., p. 59

f

:

THE ARTICLE 8

20

33), Ac.

:

More

of this

22

:

Cf. Is. 1:31, ovk earai 6 afikaoiv.

avmvTTjaouTa.

to.

when the

repeated article see r^

Participle

xo-P'-t'-

765

(tO "APePON)

XX).

reached (ch.

is

For the

See further

tv ^odtlcji (1 Cor. 1:4).

VI, Position ^^^th Attributives. (d)

With the

This idiom

Infinitive.

common

so

is

must be merely touched upon here and the discussion

that

of

it

re-

it

served for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the kolvti the article is used with the infinitive

any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, it occurs once in the Odyssey^ and is in Pindar. Examples but

in

substantive.

of the articular infinitive

(Mt. 20

:

may

be seen in the nominative

23), the accusative to \a\tiv

Cor. 14

(1

the genitive eXxts xacra tov aw^eadai (Ac. 27

the ablative kKpaTovvTo tov 8),

Cor. 2

€vpeiv (2

jiri

:

:

cf.

to KoBlaai

Ac. 25

:

11),

Lu. 24

:

29),

cf.

16; cf. 2 Cor. 1

:

tw aweipeLu (Mt. 13 4), the instrumental to) fx-n The dative does not occur in the N. T. with 13). :

the article, but see deaaaadai (Mt. 11 itive

39;

20;

:

kinyvuvaL (Lu. 24

h

the locative

:

with prepositions see

frequently missing with

:

7).

Mk. 5:4;

els irelu

For the articular

The

14:28, etc.

in the vernacular

kolvt]

infin-

article is

(pap>Ti), as

Herodotus three times has clptI elvai? Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is p. 13 f. curiously rare in the Gospel of John, "almost non-existent."^ It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1 48 2 ;

:

24; 13:19; 17:5). (e)

With Adverbs.

say of the N. T.

This

It is

is

no peculiarity of the kolvt], not to in the older Greek with adverbs

common

of place, time, quality, rank, manner.*

peat what

is

said under Cases

not necessary to re-

It is

and Adverbs concerning the ad-

verbial expressions (really adjectives), like to irpoJTov (Jo. 12 TO \oLTTbv (Ph. 4:8),

Ttt

xoXXd (Ro. 15

:

22).

The

16),

:

point to note

is

used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe to, avw and ra that the article

koltcj)

(Jo.

(27: 62),

14

:

8 17

:

23),

is

17

avpiov

(Mt. 6

awepov (Ac. 20

16), t6 vvv (Lu.

5

:

:

26), 6

:

34, ellipsis of wepo), v hTvavpiou

a/jL-fiu

10), Tk vvv (Ac.

(Rev. 3

4

:

:

14), to ap.i]v (1

29), 6 irXriaiov (Lu. 10

Cor. :

27)

and note ifK-qalov alone = neighbour' in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to val and t6 oh (2 Cor. 1: 17), to e^co^ef (Mt. 23 :25), ol e^ccdev (1 Tim. Z:7),ol e^co (Mk. 4 11, W. H. text), t6 kptSs (Mt. 23 26), rd eixTrpocQtv and to. oiriaco (Ph. 3 13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. '

:

:

:

1

*

Monro, Hoin. Gr., p. 179. Moulton, Prol., pp. 81, 21G.

" "

Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 69. K.-G., I, p. 594 f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

766

In some of these examples there a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like 6 eaco av12

27, TO 'Ert axa^ (quotation)

:

the

is

(Eph. 3:

dpwiros

3

.

ellipsis of

Cor. 4

16), 6 e^w avdpcjoiros (2

(Ro.

16), 6 vvv Kaipos

:

Clyde ^ compares to vvv with Scotch "the noo." With Prepositional Phrases. ^ Cf. ol kiro ttjs

26).

:

(/)

'IraXtas

(Heb. 13: 24), oi c/c vbixov (Ro. 4 14), ol e/c vreptro/irjs (Ac. 11 2), oi Kad' eva (Eph. 5: 33), to eK p.kpov% (1 Cor. 13: 10), rd irepl vfx€)v (Ph. 1 27), at avv avTW (Lu. 9 32), to Kad' -fjnepav (Lu. 11 3), TO Kar' k/jLe :

:

:

:

:

(Ph. 1: 12;

Ro.

cf.

1: 15), to rard aapKa (Ro. 9: 5), to e^

(Mt. 20:

18), TO ava drjvapLov

13:13, classic idiom),

(Mt. 5 eirl

TO.

:

15),

TTJS

(Eph.

eh (Ro. 12

Kad'

note vo^ov tov

:

1

5), 6

Kad'

:

'ev

v/jLCis,

10),

W. H.

(Lu. 2 T-qv

ets

:

28

etc.

f.),

article occurs

kv

oMa

Tfj

and

15), to

:

In Ac. 18

:

15

with the preposi-

On

tional phrase, but not with the substantive.

and

rots

kv rots ovpavols

to.

TvavTas tovs ayiovs (1

(2

re? (jyavepu,

where the

39),

:

(12:

v^xu}v

UavXov (Ac.

text), ol wepl

(Mk. 1:36),

avTov

(jut'

/card tov vo/jlov

TO.

7775

oi

10,

=

01 wepl

man

a

his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264.

(g)

word

With Single AVords or Whole Sentences. is

used verbatim, as to

e7dj (Plato, Crat.,

405

Here the Cf. to "Etl

d).^

above (Hcb. 12 27) and to "A7ap (the name Hagar, So to 8e 'Ave(3ri (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to Et Svvy (Mk. 9 23), 18 f.), 'iv tc3 Kyair-qaeLS tov TO Ov (t)OvevaeLS ojs creavTOV (Mt. 19 ifKrialov cbs aeavTov (Gal. 5 to yap Oi) fxoLx^vaeis and 'ev rco 14), dwa^

8r]\ol

:

Gal. 4:25).

:

—

'

:

:

22 37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom .^ Blass^ remarks that the article '

AyaTTjaeis kt\. (Ro. 13

makes no

makes

least: it

direct question :

and

TTpoaev^oo/jLeda,

Lu.

1

:

rjnojv

62

meaning

of the question.

to

to the principal clause. 8eX

ttcos

Vfxas,

22 22

:

2

'e^r]Tovv

TO

t'ls

av

ttcos

:

It

eirj /zetfcoj',

:

:

:

:

:

9

:

1

Th.

yap

to

:

evevevov to tL av d'ekot KaXeladaL,

aveXcoaiv,

See

Ro. 8 26

19 48 ovx 'QvpiaKov to 22 4 (Tvve\a\r]aev to 23 avv^rjTeTv to t'ls e'ir], 22 24 e7ej'eT0 4)CKoveLK'ia Ac. 4 21 p.T]8ev evp'LaKOVTes to ttcos KoXdacovTaL, 22 30

6ev 8La\oyLafj.6s to

:

clearer the substantival idea of the in-

its relation

TrapeXdjSere Trap'

1

9), to Kai jucTd av6p.wv e\oyiadr] (Lu.

essential difference to the

does this at

4

:

46

tl wofqacoaiv, ttcos

to

Tvapa8(Jo, t'ls

8oKe'L,

yvojvaL

to tl

KaTrjyopelTaL. 1

Gk. Synt.,

'

Thompson, p. 45. Cf. Gildersleeve, Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., p. 295 f.

*

p. 14.

2

Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 263.

Synt., p. 265. «

t'l

elarjX-

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158.

THE ARTICLE

(tO "APGFOn)

With Genitive Alone.

(h)

This

the ancient Greek. ^

The

macher, N. T. Gk.,

p. 94), as seen

kolvt]

is

767

common

also a

idiom in

uses this idiom very often (Rader-

both in the inscriptions and

The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually as is shown by the gender and number as well as the

the papyri.

very plain, plied;

So Mapla

Mapla

ri

context.

2), where i;t6s is imwhere ywi] is to be supplied; where fxr^T-np is meant; to rrjs oo^-qs

(Mt. 10:

'laKw/Sos 6 rod ZejSeSaiov

tov KKcottol (Jo. 19

ri

'laKw^ov (Lu. 24: 10),

25),

:

where Tvevfxa is to be understood; ol rod Ze^edalov where viol is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15 23 p.adr]Tai is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5: 24), and dSeX^os in Lu. 6: 16 4

(1 Pet.

21

(Jo.

(cf.

Ju.

:

14),

:

2),

:

The neuter

1).

or "things."

Kaiaapos

and

plural

is

common for the

So rd eavTuv and

to.

Xpiarov

rd tov deov (Lu. 20:25), rd

TTPevfiaTos

(Ro. 8:

5),

rd

ttjj elprivr]s

h toIs tov iraTpos fxov (Lu. 2 h Tots KXav8{iov), P.Oxy. 523

:

Cf.

(ii/A.D.).

Ulol (Jo. 1: 11).

The neuter

aXrjdovs irapOLfxias (2 Pet.

rrjs

(i)

Nouns

in

As already

also.

aapKos

ttjs

(14:19), etc.

here

(Ph. 2:21),

avpiov (marg.

ttjs

Jas. 4:14), rd tov Kbap.ov (1 Cor. 7:33), rd

notion of "affairs"

'lr]aov

2:22), to

the Predicate.

ttjs

is

eis

my

avKrjs

tov also

Father.'

Uta and

to.

an abstract use

These

explained, the article

See

to.

H.,

and rd

One may note

49) for 'house of

singular has

W.

ol

like to

(Mt. 21:21),

may have

the article

not essential to speech.

however, "invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. 6 \6yos."^ As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. 6700 audpcciros djii (Lu. 7:8). It

is,

deos

Tjv

This

is

in strict accord with the ancient idiom.^

notes that the predicate

tax, p. 324)

therefore the article

is

not

is

much used

Gildersleeve {Syn-

usually something

new and

except in convertible prop-

Winer,* indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. ositions.

The

article is

nite

and undistributed.

then definite and distributed, the predicate indefiThe word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1 1, Oeos rjv 6 \6yos, :

the subject

is

perfectly clear.

It is true also that 6 deb^

rju

Cf. 6 Xoyos aap^ tykvero (Jo.

6 X670S (convertible

1

:

14).

terms) would have

I, p. 2GS f.; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 280 f. The neuter article with extremely common in Herod. Cf StauraS, tJber den Gebr. d. Gen. bei Herod., p. 25. »

K.-G.,

the gen.

is

.

The Limitation^

^

Milden,

^

Cf.

*

Winer-Moulton,

Thompson, Synt.

of the Pred. Position in Gfv., p. 9

f.

of Attic Gk., p. 4G; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 325. p. 142.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

768

been Sabellianism.^ See also

6 9e6s ayair-q eariv (1 Jo.

4

"God"

16).

:

and "love" are not convertible terms any more than "God" and "Logos" or "Logos" and "flesh." Of. also ol depLarai ayyeXol datv (Mt. 13

:

39), 6 X670S 6

o-os aKrjdei-a

The absence

(Ro. 7:7).

essential to the true idea.

In Eph. 5

44).

kaTLv (Jo. 17: 17), 6

of the article here

Cf. also avdpoiiroKrbvos

:

makes

23, avi^p karLP KecpaXr], the context

:

d/xaprm;

po/jlos

on purpose and and ^pevar-qs (Jo. 8

is

clear

it

(W. H. marg. article.

6X0S is

aprip KecpaXr] eoTLp) that apijp is subject even without the In Jo. 9 34, hp afxapriais av eyeppr]6r]s oXos, the article with not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the :

article is quite frequent strict

with the predicate in the N. T. and in It is not mere haphazard, however,

accord with old usage.

as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,^ in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of

known

the noun (as well

and predicate are

or prominent) or to the fact that subject

The words

identical.^

convertible as in the older idiom.'*

that are identical are

he had added what

If

is

in

Winer-Schmiedel,^ that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the

But even here Moulton's rule of identity and convertiThe overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedcl's many subhere is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when

subject.

bility apply.

divisions

the article occurs with subject (or the subject

noun

or proper name)

and

a personal pro-

is

predicate, both are definite, treated

and the same, and interchangeable. The usage and participles indifferently.

as identical, one

applies to substantives, adjectives

Cf. 6 Xvxvos Tov crwp.aTbs earip 6 ocpdakpos (Mt. 6

aXas

(Mt. 5

TTJs yrjs

XpicTTOs (16

5oDXos (24

:

16), els kaTLP 6 ayados (19

:

:

:

22), vpels ecrre to

6 kogjjlos (13 17), ris

(27: 11), av

kaTLP 6 TeKTWP (6

:

XaXowres (13

el (TV (1

:

(TV el

21),

el

3), ovtos ecTTLP 6

vpels oi

:

11),

17

6 5t5acr/caXos (3

(12

Kk-qpopopos rjv

fcoi)

(Mk.

6 vlos pov

to

(Jo.

cf)cos

10), ovtos eaTip 6

1 :

Kol *

3 ^

ri

fco97

(11

:

:

:

7), eyco

25, note

elpi.

both

tv po4>i]Tris

(6

:

14),

:

63),

:

Trpo(j)r}Tr]s

12), ovx ovtos eaTip 6 Kadrjpepos (9

6vpa (10

6 iroLprjp (10

:

:

articles), 670; elpi

rj

d86s Kal

cf.

8;

11), eych eipi rj

rj

Synt., p. 46.

b

19

akqdeia

p. 159,

f.),

apaaTaais

See per contra, STmcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 48. ^ W.-M., Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 522; Middleton, Gk. Art., p. 54.

Thompson,

26,

to irpevpa eaTLP to ^oootocovp (6

eyo) elpt to 0tos (8

50;

cf. 51),

:

yap eare

7), ov

1:4), 6

:

rj

TrtoTos

11), ovx ovtos

:

OVTOS e(TTiv 6 dpros (6

€70? elpi

38), av el 6

:

apa earlp 6

45), tovto earip to aoipa pov, tovto kaTip to alpa pov (26

(TV el 6 /JacrtXeus

28),

eanp

13), 6 5e aypos

:

/cat

p. 142.

THE ARTICLE (14

^ior]

17

:

(8

note

6,

(14:21),

jue

oSros

(tO "APGPON)

three separate articles), eKeivos eanu ayairCbv kaTiv 6

(Ac. 4:11), ovtos kanv

\idos

10), ovx OVTOS eaTLV 6 TOpdrjaas (9

:

(21

:

apa

28), ovK

€
r\

rinels

yap

3:4),

eiprjvr]

"AX0a

€70? dfXL TO

involved.

Note

6 /Sao-iXe^s

the superlative adjective

But

see

taxaTais TTj

''9,

rj

rj/jiepais,

eaxaTT]

it

are anarthrous (Jo.

:

6

Ke4>aKri

Cor. 3

17

13),

:

avojila (1 Jo.

(Rev. 1:8), 670? ei^t 6 wpuiTos Kal av el 6 ToXaiiro^pos (3 17), etc. is sufficient to illustrate the points :

:

:

XptaTos

17), avTos

:

evepyuv (Ph. 2

(Mt. 27 11) and ^aatXevs (Jo.

3; 2

dvpa/dLS

ri

6 avOpwivos

1 :49).

may have the article as in Rev. 1

Jo. 6

XI

sative see chapter

17

a/jLapTia kaTiv

eaxaTOL (Mt. 20

Cf. eaxart] copa (1 Jo. 2

Jas. 5

rj/jLepa,

38),

karLV

articles),

oi eaxo-TOc Trpcorot Kal ot -KpC^TOL

usual construction.

and

(3:3),

not exhaustive, but

list is

:

14), deos kaTiv 6

:

koI to

note both

17,

:

21), ovtos

5e kvplos to iruevixa kajLv (2

wepLTOfxr]

ri

:

AiyvirTcos (21

6

el

(Eph. 2

thjlojp

ea/xev

6 ecrxaros (1

This

av

Cor. 11:3), 6

k<7Ttv (1

769

:

18).

:

Even

17 above.

16) for the See further iv :

Tim. 3 :1; h KaipQ eaxaTco, 1 Pet. 1 5, For the common predicate accu:

39.

(Cases), vii,

5:11; 15

airocToKovs ecrxaroi's a-Kebei^ev.

:

(i).

In the N. T. most examples 1 Cor. 4 9 rjuds tovs

and note

15),

:

Cf. Gilderslecve, Syntax, p. 326.

Distributive. Cf. e/c drjuaplov T-qu iip.epav (Mt. 20 2), ara^ (Heb. 9:7), bis tov aa^^aTov (Lu. 18 12), eTTciKLs This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom faTTJs rjnepas (Lu. 17:4). miliar also to the English (cf. our ''by the yard," ''by the pound," etc.). It is found in the papyri. ^ But emaTos is not used in the N. T. Avith the article. Cf. ol Kad' eva kaaros (Eph. 5 33). We have once ap.
:

Tov eviavTov

:

:

:

(Eph. 2 18), to. ap.4)bTepa (2 14). Cf. TOVS bvo in Eph. 2 15. Thompson, Syfitax of Attic Gk., p. 51. Nominative with the Article = Vocative. This matter (Ji) was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see val, 6 TaTrjp (Mt. 11 26), TO aXaXov Kal Kwcfyop iruevixa (Mk. 9 25), vraTs (Lu. 8 54), TepoL

:

:

:

Cf.

:

:

6 ^aaiXevs (Jo. (Z)

19

:

97

:

3).

As THE Equivalent of a Possessive Pronoun. The does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case

article

makes

it

plain that the

word

in question belongs to the

person

The French can say j'ai mal a la tete, aXyw ttiv The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See,

mentioned. K€4>a\i]v} '

Volkcr, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 8. or of ava, Kark, tK, irpSs.

Volker notes also the presence of


Cf. Clyde,

Gk. Synt.,

p. 16.

Sec K.-C,

I,

p. 556.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

770

for instance,

Mt. 4

:

20 we have

avTuv. Cf. KaTeaetae fMOVoyevrj (Jo.

we

21

:

40;

Mk.

cf.

7

:

find

In

13).

to. St/crua

32), top vlov tov

(Ro. 7: 25), rod irarpos (1 Cor.

Cor. 12

:

18;

also 8

cf.

Cf.

18). ^

:

Jo. 1:41.

Mt. 8:3; (m)

x^tpt (Ac.

rfj

16), toj pol dovKtvo:

:

Lu. 13:

cf.

dUTva, while in verse 21

to.

Kal TOP a8e\(j)6p (2

5:1), TItov

in the

3

(Mt. 27: 24;

rds x^tpas

air€vl\}/aTO

With Possessive Pronouns. The

always used

article is

N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun

So TO. eiia 2:11) and

aa karip Kol

ircLPTa

i^xkTepos (Jo.

(xd

to.

7:6;

ejud

Lu. 6

cf.

(Jo. 17 :

:

10)

The

20).

predicate.

is

rjfxeTepos

(Ac.

article is fre-

quently repeated as in 6 Katpos 6 e^os (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.^ The Gospel of John shows Cf Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With Ihos 6 ifios very frequently. the article is customary, as in ets r-qp I8iap ttoKlp (Mt. 9:1). This .

construction

is

lbloL% (1

common

very

in the

N. T.

A

few times we meet

article, as in tStots bypuiploLs (1

without the

idios

Tim. 2:6).

Cor. 9:7),

ycatpoTs

The anarthrous examples may be only memSee

bers of a class, not the particular individual in the case.

XV, Pronouns. With Auto'?. It is

further ch.

only necessary to mention the order ami] 7] KTto-ts (Ro. 8 21), and 17 avrri aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with avros. So avTo TO TTPivixa (Ro. 8 26), but to avTo irpevfjia (1 Cor. 12 8). See (n)

:

:

:

:

Pronouns. (0)

With Demonstratives.

The

essential facts

have been

Here a bare

ready stated in the chapter on Pronouns. "05e occurs in the N. T. once with the is sufficient. TTjp -koKlp

(Jas.

4

:

13).

The

al-

summary

article, eis TrjpSe

usual position of the demonstrative

has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ovtos, UeLPos with the ordinary predicate position of The construction may be paralleled to some extent adjectives.

with the

article

by the French

Still in

la republique frangaise.

apa\T0P=' this man,' amXros, 'that he

Homer

^

tovtop top

Here we probably see did the usage become that

is.'

the origin of the idiom ovtos 6. So fixed in the Attic inscriptions the construction

is uniform.^ The Boeotian order is immaterial, The thing.^ same the inscriptions reveal ovtos 6 apdpwKos (14 30). or 2 (Lu. ovtos 25) whether 6 apdpwivos :

:

1

Cf. A. Souter, art. Luke, Hastings' D.C.G.,

2

»

who

takes tov

=

'

his,'

i.e.

For pap. exx. see Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 7. * Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 231. Thompson, Gk. Synt., p. 51. ^ Claflin, Synt. of B.D. Inscr., p. 42. Monro, Horn. Or., p. 181.

Luke.

771

(tO "AP0POn)

THE ARTICLE

be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ovtos is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, Cf. Lu. 24 21; Ac. 1 5. Even ravTrjV kiroirjaev apxh^ tQiv a-qixdoiv. In general

may

it

:

:

with proper names

the article occurs, as in outos 6

further details see chapter

For remarked that the 1:11).

'Iryo-oOs

on Pronouns.

It

(Ac.

may

be

apparent in the use of the article in does not exist in the case of the e/ccTws and connection with ouros article is wanting in the N. T. The demonstratives. correlative ToctoOtos occurs once rrikLKovTos. and Toibabe with in connection ifKovros (Rev. ToaovTO'i attributive, 6 true a article, the only with with the usually appears hand, other the on ToioOtos, 18 16). rigidity

:

in the attributive position, as in tuiv tolovto:v

and

article

TraL8io)u

(Mk. 9 37), though once the predicate position is found, at dvpafxeis TOLavTaL (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, :

like 01 TOLOVTOL (Ro. 16: 18), ra TOtavra (Gal. 5: 21).

With "OXo?, Ha? ("ATra?).

(p)

of

W. H. now

Blass^

has

ttSs

fails to find

"ATras is

found

in the

margin (Lu. 9

:

Luke and The text

chiefly in

greatly between aTras and

The MSS. vary

Acts.

Tras.

now axas

15),

(15

:

13).

satisfactory rule for the use of axas, the

any

Attic distinction of dTras after a consonant not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general

and

after

iras

airas

a vowel

does occur (when

used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6 32). "ATras, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, ttju airaaav iiaKpoOv:

Tim. 1 16), 'the total sum of his long-suffering.' Elsewhere we have either the order 6 Xaos airas (Lu. 19 48) or avavTa If ovtos also is used, we have rriv k^ovaiav TOP \a6v (Lu. 3 :21).

filav (1

:

:

ravTrjv aracrav

The

common

ceedingly it

may

(Lu. 4:6).

construction of

Cf.

adjective in

may

ttSs

be used without the

iravTa Treipaanov (Lu. 4:13), avOpwTTcov (2

tinguishes

you

avTOV airavres (Ac. 16

all

parts of the N. T.

be said that the idiom of the N. T.

ancient Greek in the use of Tras

ot

varied and interesting.

Tras is

Cor. 4 :2),

and the

is

is

an ex-

In general

In the singular

So

article in the sense of 'every.'

irdv bkvbpov '

33).

harmony with the

article.^

rav aTOfxa (Ro. 3

between cKacrros =

in

:

It

(Mt. 3

:

19), iraaav avvdbr]aLV

10), etc.

:

Blass^ dis-

each individual' and Tras='any one

please.'

= all the city' {die game Has 6= all.' So iraaa 17 ttoXis (Mt. 8 34) Stadt)^ This is the order and it is very common. Cf. irdaav t^iv '

:

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.

2

Cf. K.-G.,

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.

I,

pp. 631

'

Cf. Diels, Gott. Gel.-Anz., 1894, pp. 298

ff.

ff.

*

W.-Sch., p. 187.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

772

(Mt. 27: 45), Tavrl tQ o'lkco (Ac. 10 2). Even without the armay be 'all/ if it is a proper noun, like iraaa 'lipoaokvjxa

yrjv

:

ticle ttSs

(Mt. 2:3),

'l(ypai)\ (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, xas oUos only one "house of Israel," so that 'all' is the

Tras

there

'ItrpaijX,

is

Winer says that

idea.

it is treated as a proper name. Abstract be used with or without the article. There difference in idea between iraarj yvdocreL (1 Cor. 1 5)

^

may

substantives also

very

is

little

:

and irdaav ttjv yvcoatv (1 Cor. 13 2). With the abstract word "every" and "all" amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So waa-au T-qv riaTiv (1 Cor. 13 2), but iraar) ao(j)La (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like irdar] rfj 6\hpeL rjfxojv (2 Cor. 1 4) and a general situation like Taar) BXlxpei (ib.).^ But see iraay virofxopfj (2 Cor. 12 12), iraar] ay via (1 Tim. 5:2), (JLera irappriaias iraarjs (Ac. 4 29), etc. See also iraaa aap^ = ^ba-b3 (Lu. 3:6), usually with oh (Mt. 24 22). But note agam Tr\7]pa}craL iraaav bLKaioahvqv (Mt. 3 15) and iraarjs ttjs TpoaSoKlas :

:

:

:

:

:

:

12

(Ac.

:

(Lu. 12

:

See iraaa

11).

Cf. 2

15).

1

15, 23; 1 Pet.

:

2

:

13

In Ph.

15.

:

article is pertinent as in iraaa 1

(Mt. 28

e^ovala

Tim.

has

-rrdaa Kricns

:

its

irXeove^ias

iraaris

3, xAar? rfj iivda,

(Ro. 8

KTlais

ri

18),

:

1

But

22).

:

the

in Col.

true idea of 'every created

But what about ttpcctotokos Traarjs KTiaecos (Col. 1 15)? See also Col. 1 9 ff. and Trdaav xo-po-v (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are irdaa olKodonrj (Eph. 2 21) which is most probably 'every building' because of els vabv. So in Eph. thing.'

:

:

:

3

15 rdaa rarpia

:

separate

is

'every family,' though

In 2 Tim. 3

possible.

:

16

Ypa^i?

TrScra

is

the family'

is

'every Scripture,'

if

'all

Cf. Jo. 19:37, hkpa

portions are referred to.

ypa(f)r}.

Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have ypacfy-f), but twice occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 17

ypa
2

6,

:

ej'

ypa(f)fi,

(Ro. 1:2; 16 ypacbi)

in 2

:

once in 2 Pet.

1

26) the article

is

20,

:

Tim. 3:16 to mean

likely 'every Scripture.'

In Jas.

ypa(})TJs.

absent.

:

in the plural

Scripture,' but

'all

1

Twice

It is possible for irdaa

17, -Kaaa Soais,

it

is

we have

more

'every,'

as in iravTos Tpoaooirou (Ac. 17: 26).^ Ilas 6

N. T.

and the participle is a very common construction in the Here the idea is 'every,' and 6 and the participle are in

apposition.

to

Tras 1

Thus

ocrrts aKovti

irds 6 aKovoov

(7: 24).

(Mt. 7 26)

Cf.

Cf. 1 Sam. 7 2 Hebrew. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 1G2.

W.-Th.,

p. 111.

:

:

is

practically equivalent

ttSs 6 cpyL^oixevos f.

(Mt. 5

:

22), irds 6

Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 162) calls

this imitation of 2

Blass,

^

cf. W.-Sch., p. 1S7.

THE ARTICLE ^'Xkirwv (5

28), Tras 6 airokxiwv (5

:

773

(tO "APOPOn)

:

But

32), ttSs 6 alTCnv (7:8), etc.

sometimes we find ttSs (Mt. 13 19), iravTl b4>d\ovTL (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read See iravTl rw TrLarevovTi (Ro. 1 16). The abstract neuter tSlv Tc3. So ttoLv to da-wopevbuevov (Mt. 15 17), ivav to cxpeiXoTO is regular. without the article as in

ttovtos olkovoutos

:

:

:

(18

fievov

Cf.

34).

:

The idiom

6

the singular. 6 ttSs

:

37, 39.

7ras='the whole,' 'the totality,' is not frequent in See t6v iravTa xpovov (Ac. 20:18), It occurs twice.^

(Gal. 5

vbfxo'i

irciv

6 in Jo. 6

14),

:

das gesamte Gesetz} Cf. also Barn. 4

:

9, 6

'0 ttSs vbixo% = iras xpovos. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. a concommon never so was It whole law.' 'the 'the entire law,' ^ as ttSs 6. Greek ancient in the struction In the plural iravTes is used sometimes without the article. The

not necessary with proi^er names,

article is

(Ac. 17

:

Cf. iravTes TouSatot (26

21).

4).

:

elsewhere also, as in TavTes kpyaTaL avdpojTovs (Ac.

22

15;

:

cf.

Ro. 5:

like iravTe^

But the (Lu.

dSt/ctas

'AdrjvatoL

article is

13

:

27),

absent Tavras

12, 18), iraaLv ayadols (Gal.

6:6;

(Eph. 3:8), iravTes ayyeXoL (Heb. 1:6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 16. Blass* considers it a violation of clas1 Pet. 2 1 2 Pet. 3 16, sical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3 8 and 2 Pet. 3 cf. iraaLv roTs

in 3

10),

:

:

;

:

ttclvtuv aylcov

:

:

because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4 20, ravTcov ev Tfj awaapphes chiefly to yuyfi, because of the adjunct. But that objection :

ay lol wavTes (2 Cor. 13 12). The usual (Mt. 1:17), iravTas tov^ apxi-(pd.s (2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ras TroXets Cf. 2 Cor. 13 12. Has may be repeated with 35). Trao-as (Mt. 9 separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see See

the literary style. construction

is

ol

:

iraaaL at yeveal

:

:

Mt. 8

:

A

16.

few examples of the attributive position are found, 7)= 'the total number of the men,' as

like ol iravTes avbpes (Ac. 19

in the ancient idiom.

:

See, also, at

avToXs rraPTas aylovs (Ro. 16

:

TrScrai 4/vxa.i

avv

15), ot

1:2), Toys TravTas

was

(2 Cor. 5

whole number of

us.'

Cf. Ac. 21 21.

:

10).

ep.ol

The

(Ac. 27 37), roys avv :

iraPTes

last

a5eX4)ol

(Gal.

example =' we the

:

without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5 15; 1 Cor. 9 22; Ro. 11: 32; Eph. 4: 13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, ot Trdj/TCS kK Tov evbs apTOV neTexofiev, note the contrast with tov evbs.

But we

also find

ot iravTes

:

:

Still

more common

Cf. Ro. 8

:

32; 11

:

is

to.

raPTa for 'the

36; 1 Cor. 11

:

12; 12

6,

:

of things,' 'the

19

(cf.

all.'

here ra iravTa

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 189.

1

Green, Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 192.

2

W.-Sch., p. 189. Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 52

«

sum

f.

*

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. IGl.

-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

774 and (1

2 Cor. 5

eV);

Cor. 12

The

:

18; Col. 1

:

NEW TESTAMENT The

17, etc.

:

29), or of Travra (1 Cor. 13

:

use of

7), calls for

Traj^res

alone

no comment.

is brief. It is never attributive in position in has also an indefinite meaning which ttSs does not Thus kviavTou o\ov (Ac. 11: 26)= 'a whole year.' Has does

story of oXos

the N. T. have.

It

not have this idea apart from the

article. So Jo. 7 23, oKov avwhole man sound.' ^ Cf. Lu. 5: 5; Ac. 28: 30. In Mk. 12 30 compare e^ oXtjs KapSias (h 6\j] KapSia, Mt. 22 37) with e^ 6Xr]s rrjs 4^vxrjs. In this sense the plural also is found as in dpo^TTov vyLT],

:

'a

:

:

oXovs oLKovs (Tit. 1

:

11).

One may compare

oX??

'lepovaaXijij,

(Ac.

21:31), with Trdaa TepocroXu/ia (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order oXr] 17 ttoXis (Mk. 1 33), but sometimes 17 xoXis 6X77 (Ac. 21 :30). Sometimes we have okos and tSs in the :

same sentence as

in

2 Cor.

1

:

1

;

1

Th. 4

:

The word may be

10.

repeated several times (Mt. 22 :37; Mk. 12 30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9 34), or with tovto (Mt. 1 22). There is a peculiar use of the article with (q) With IIoXi;?. :

:

that calls for a word.

TToXus

article (attributive)

the singular

to ttoXu, 2 Cor. 8

TO.

:

regular construction with the

:

TToXXd ypdniiaTa (Ac.

:

:

:

TroXXat (Lu. 7:47),

1), at ap-apTlai at

26:24).

This

is

idiom^ as well as the frequent use of

classic

3) occurs in

:

15)

:

Cor. 10 17), note vdcLTuv ToXkuv (Rev. 17: 1

The

to toXv avrov eXeos (1 Pet. 1

and much more frequently So ol ToWoi alone (Ro. 5 15; 12 5; Heb. 12 15; to. iroWa (Ro. 15 22). With the substantive added

(cf. 6

in the plural.

Uke

:

in

all

iroXvs

harmony with without the ar-

an indefinite sense. But in 6 oxXos iroXvs (Jo. 12 9, 12) Moulton^ finds "a curious misplacement of the article." Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, aird tcop TrXrypco/zdroji' apxaloov. It is possible that oxXos iroXvs came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type 6 dj'i7p ayados from Homer and ^schylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also eK TTJs fiaTalas Vfiuv 6.va(7Tpo(t)rjs iraT poirapabbrov (1 Pet. 1 18) and viro T^s Xeyo/xevrjs Treptrojurjs ev aapu x^i-POTTOLrjTOV (Eph. 2 11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order 6 ttoXus oxXos in Mk. 12 ticle in

:

:

:

:

But it is a fact that oxXos iroKvs is the usual order in the N.T.(Mt. 26:47; Mk. 5:24; Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of ttSls, oXos, ovtos may have played some part in the matter. For oxkoL TToXXoi see Mt. 19 2; Lu. 14 25. In Mt. 21 8 (parallel 37.

:

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.

2

Thompson, Synt.

of Att. Gk., p. 53.

:

:

^

Pj.qI^ p_ g^.

THE ARTICLE

775

(tO "APePON)

we have 6 TrXeTo-ros oxXos, but it on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom ol irXdoves may be seen in 1 Cor.

Mk.

with

is difficult

9

:

37, 6 ttoXus 6x>^os)

much

to lay

stress

See further ch. XIV.

19.

:

12

As

"A/cpo?, "H/ittrw, ''Ea-%aT09, Meo-o9.

(r)

to

does not

a/cpos, it

In Lu. 16 24 and Heb. 11 21

appear as an adjective in the N. T. TO aKpov is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of ixKpov and cLKpwv in Mk. 13 27 and Mt. 24 31. This is in harmony with :

:

:

the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20;

repeated in the case of 6

:

23),

But

wLav

taxo-TV

rf?

etc.

The

WW

rjiJLepojv

3:3

is

laxo-To.

to.

indeed also iravTuv

is

Pet. 1:5).

'Ett'

ccrxa-

But

haxo-Twv toju

eir'

:

and

probably a substantive use.

ecrxaTa;

/catpco

(Heb. 1:2)

So

classical .2

is

kv

8)

9, 11). :

XtirTov :

:

is

(Mk.

(Mt. 27 64), (Lu. 12 59),

ecrxar?? TrXdi/r?

construction 6 eaxo-ros alone (Rev. 2

eaxaros (Mk. 9:35),

in 2 Pet.

17

to eaxarov

39, etc.),

:

Tov avdpdoirov (Lu. 11:26)

Tov Toou

Cf. w'-<^v alone (Rev. 11

used attributively as in (Jo. 6

situation

tcos rifxlcrovs ttjs /Jao-tXctas

Cf.

14).

:

The same

5:26).^

Is.

rfjutcrus.

Kaipov (Rev. 12

eaxoLTos is

:

(1

we may have

r]p.epuv

There

tive construction in the predicate position.

is

the parti-

no doubt of

Here also we find usually to ixkaov (like to aKpov it as to above) absolutely (Mk. 3 3), or the various prepositional phrases Hke 6ts iJ^kaov (Mk. 14 60), h txeao: (Mk. 6 47), dia fxkaov (Lu. 4 30), d»/(i ^ikaov (Mk. 7 31), rara [xkaop (Ac. 27 27), k tieaov (Mt. 13 49) iJLtcros.

:

:

:

or

iikcTov

as preposition (Ph. 2

:

The

article.

So

'Jesus in the midst.'

TTJs 7r6Xecos

(s)

There

is,

aXXot (1 Cor. 14

:

29)

is

Cf. also TOV ticle is

:

1).

aWov

The

W.

seen in the

H.),

Cf. also to

where

fxeaov

we have

LXX.

k

Cf.

p-earjs

order 6

article is frequent

of,' like

it.

It

But

is

:

pa^Tyri^s 6

aXXos occurs (Jo. 18

TOV (jvp(XTavpw6epTos (Jo. 19

repeated, like rots

with aXX

ancient Greek.

used where only two dXXos n.aQit]Ti]% (Jo. 20 3), tj oKkq

close to

are meant, as in 6 Herpos Kal 6

Mapta (Mt. 28

in Ac. 1:18.

18, ukaop top 'Irjaovp,

The

"Ere/Jo?.

is

:

See also ch. XIV.

(Ezek. 11: 23).^

but never in the sense of 'the rest ot

13) fxearjs (Ac. 26 found in to KaTareTaafxa

however, no example in the N. T.

idiom which

With "AXXo? and

:

is

marg.

24,

In Jo. 19

probably a preposition.

like the old classic

:

old partitive construc-

6), -fjnepas

jueo-os

(Mt. 14

TrXotof fieaov Ttjs daXaaffrjs

:

true predicate

tov vaov fieaov (Lu. 23 :45).

is

:

But the

15).

tion occurs in ukat^s vvktos (Mt. 25

without the

:

:

:

XoittoTs

tois,

etc.

:

32)

(Rev. 2 :24).

Thompson,

:

16).

where the ar-

Synt., p. 53.

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.

»

lb.;

i

lb.

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.

Blass*

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

776

says that no Attic writer would have said rats

He

'the remaining cities' (Lu. 4:43).

(Mt. 10:23

XB)

hepav

Trjv

eis

"incorrect" for 'the next' city, as well as 6

erepos— 'the third' in Lu. 19

:

But

20.

not the use of the ar-

it is

here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of dXXos

ticle

and

erepaLs iro\e(TLv=

considers

'irepo^

in the

The

This need detain us but a moment.

M0V09.

(f)

XV, Pronouns.

See ch.

kolvt].

essential

facts are succinctly given by Winer-Scluniedel.* Without the article ixovos occurs usually even with proper names, as 'Irjaovs ixovos

(Lu. 9 36) :

So

.

OeQ (Ro. 16 27

(jlopo:

(XBD); The articular

:

4

}xbvoL ol iJ,adr]Tai

p.bvo%

Trarrip

;

:

So Mt. 12

icate use occurs also.

(Heb. 9:7).

as in Tov novov deov (Jo. 5

:

1

But the pred-

Tim. 1:17).

tols lepevat

(Jo. 6

:

22)

(24

ij.6vols;

p.6vos

;

:

36) 6

6 apxif^p^vs

found a few times, Cf. Jo. 17: 3; 1 Tim. 6 15 f.;

attributive use 44).

is

:

See ch. XIV.

Ju. 4.

The

VI. Position with Attributives.

word or phrase

attributive.

It is necessary to

article.

go

article

does not

make a

may be attributive without the over much of the same ground again It

(Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in

order to get the subject clearly before us.

So epyov ayadov (Ph. 1:6) is attribu(a) With Adjectives. tive='a good work,' though it is anarthrous. Cf. also epyois dyadots (Eph. 2 article is

:

10).

Cf. fiLKpd

^vfxr]

(1

Cor. 5:6).

used before a word or phrase there

is

But when the

no doubt about

its

being attributive.

The Normal Position of the Adjective. and the substantive, as in to koXov

1.

article

d7a06s avdpcx)Tos (Mt. 12

:

35), to kjxbv

ovofjLa

It

is

between the

2:7), 6 In this normal

opoixa (Jas.

(18: 20).

attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the

substantive.^

Cf. correct text in Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3;

So

Tim.

20.

TTJ

vycaLvovari StSaaKaXia (1

1: 10).

1

Jo. 5:

There must be a

special reason for the other construction.^

The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the 11) both substantive and adjective irotfiriv 6 koXSs (Jo. 10 receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.^ Cf 6 vl6s p-ov 6 dya-n-qTos (Mt. 2.

order ^ 6

:

.

2

1

P. 190.

3

Thompson, Synt.

*

For copious

p. 281 ^

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 158.

of Att. Gk., p. 47.

classical exx.

of

both positions see Gildersleeve, Syntax,

f.

In Jas. 3

clearness.

:

7,

rg (pmei

rfj

dvepoiwifji,

the repeated article makes for greater

:

THE ARTICLE 17: t6

5),

TTiv yrjp rriv

i;5c.jp

TO ^oiv (4

(15

8

0ws to

8), to

:

mtpos 6

6

11),

kjxbs

TO irvtvua to Trovqpbv (Ac. 19

1),

:

ayadrfV (Lu. :

777

(tO "APGPOn)

:

(7:6),

akriOivov (Jo. 1

HfXTeKos

17

Cf. also

15).

Mt. 6

:

9),

aKy]diV7}

rj

:

G;

Lu.

Eph. 6 13; Col. 1 21; Heb. 13 20; 1 Jo. 1 2; 2 25; 4 9. There is an apparent 1, to re 'ayiov kocxiilkov, which may be compared difficulty in Heb. 9 Perhaps both ayiop and with 6 b-)(\os iroXvs above (Jo. 12 9).^

7 :47; Jo. 6

:

13; 1 Cor. 12

31; 2 Cor. 6

:

:

:

:

:

7;

:

:

:

:

:

were

KocTfiLKov

3. Article

felt

to be adjectives.

So

Repeated Several Times.

rrjP (nb-qpav Ti]v
6 fxadrjTTjs 6 ctXXos 6 ypcjaTOS (Jo.

25 :41),

in Ac. 12

:

10, riiv irvXrjv

Cf. to irvp to alcovLOV to rjTOLnacjikvov (Mt.

18

:

16), Trjv pofxcftaiav tijv

In particular note the repetition 12). SicTTOfiov T-qv b^tiav (Rev. 2 In Rev. 3: 14; 17: 1; 21:9. Rev. of the article in Heb. 11: 12; :

5 note four articles, apxoiv. Cf. Rev. 12 9; 1

Pet. 4

1

:

6

ixapTvs

6

:

:

For

idiom see Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 328 ff. pladr]

— Kai

common

this

One

6

classic

In Ph.l 29, vplv exa:

TO vT^p XpiffTov, the two infinitives following, each with

explain the 4.

ttpcototokos

6

ttio-tos,

14.

to,

first to.

When

Article with Several Adjectives.

several adjectives

with each adjective if the adjectives are used we sharply. So 6 xpcoTos /cat 6 eaxo-Tos Kal 6 aspects accent different Kal 6 kpxbp-tvos (1 4, Cf. also 6 cbv 22 cf. 13). 17; f(Sv (Rev. 1 find

an

article

But

8).

—

:

:

ordinarily the one article

45, 6

/cat

tttcoxos Kal TVcjyXos Kal yufxpos

TTtcTTos

5oOXos

/cat

the

4)pbvLp.os,

:

sufficient for

So

same substantive.

adjectives referring to the eXetvos

is

(Rev. 3

/cat

:

any number 6 ToXalirwpos

17).

of /cat

In Mt. 24

:

carries over the force of

So likewise the presence of another attribute may article.2 explain the probable predicate position iraTpoirapabbTov (1 Pet. 1 18) and xetpovrotivToi; (Eph. 2:11).^ See further (c), 5.

the

With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.* 14 27). Here the substantive is indefinite

5.

is eipr]pr]v tt^v epr]v (Jo.

It

Cf.

:

general, while the attribute

and

vbfjLos

6 dvvafievos (Gal. 3

:

21).

finds this idiom frequent in the (I.

G., XII, 7

N. 240,

makes a particular application. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 93)

kolvt].

So yvpaUa

ttju

evyepeaTar-qv

13).

With Participles. The participle may come between the arand the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in rriv Cf. 1 Tim. 1 10; Ro. 34), -nTOLfJLaafJLhrjp vixIp ^aaCkdap (Mt. 25 8 18; 1 Cor. 12 22; 1 Pet. 1 13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 6.

ticle

:

:

:

:

:

1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 177.

2

Blass, Gr. of

*

It

is

N. T. Gk.,

common enough

»

p. 160.

in classic

Gk.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 181.

Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 283.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

778

may come between

all else

1

Pet. 1

10, ot

:

tive clause)

—

the article and the participle, as in

A

Trpo(f)riTevaavTes.

may come between

long clause (including a rela-

the article and the participle, as in

— iroiovPTas.

Once more, the participle may come midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, 6 drayevvrjaas, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1 3. Either Ro. 16

17, Tovs

:

—

in the

:

may

the participle or the modifier

complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax,

occur outside of the attributive

289

p.

Gildersleeve gives co-

f.).

pious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive

The

participle.

(Mk. 3

:

may

article

Cf. Jo. 5

22).

(Jo.

be repeated after the substantive, 4 11), ot ypajj.fj.aTeh ot Kara^avres

12;

1

above

like TO vdcop rd fcov

Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13

:

The

20.

:

—

:

Cor. 15 article

:

54;

may

Pet.

1

1

25; 5

:

10;

:

occur with the parti-

when not with the substantive. This supplementary adis more common with the participle than

ciple

dition of the article

with other adjectives.^ 7

:

Cf.

roTs ev ayopq. Kadrnj-hoLs

7rat5tots

32), yvvoLKes ai avvaKoXovdovaaL avrQ (23

avTU) (Ac.

7:35),

rod

xp^'^'-ov

1

:

12; Gal. 3

:

21; Ro. 2

in deov TOV eyeipaPTos (Gal.

1

:

14

(Wi>7j to.

proper names are defuiite without the

Th. sonal pronouns

1

(1

001 (Jo.

4:26), tQ deXoPTL

:

may

have the

also

hp.ol

12), rjplp Tols irepLwaTOvaLP (Ro. 1

:

12;

Th. 4

may

5:13

Jo.

1

15, 17,

:

piadkpTts

(1

as in

res (Gal.

8:4),

— rots

T-qp

Th. 2

1:7).

:

17).

3

:

19

:

27;

1

But

f.),

the

'Irjaovp

tov

3

:

6 "KoKuv

et/xt

(Jas.

kp'lpcop

tovs TLcrTevoPTas

rjfxas

Note two

12), etc.

Cor. 8:10.

The

article

and

4:

(Eph.

articles

Eph. 1 The pronoun Cf.

:

participle

may

KaTacfiv-

6.Top4>a-

follow

tovs ireiroLdoTas (Lu. 18:9), TLPes elaip ol Tapaaaop-

the substantive has the article and the par-

If

epexd^'icrap (2

Pet.

Cor. 14

:

7; 2 Cor.

of the article

change the sense.

1

:

may

be

(cf.

above) predicate.

:

11

:

9;

:

6.irtt.dr)CTaaLV

2),

top a.p8pa

14; Jo.

4:6; Ro.

Heb. 10

:

:

2; 1 Pet. 1

:

12.

with the participle here would radically

The same 1

Cf. Lu. 16

27).

3:2;

—

18), rots TPevfjiacnv

apiraykPTa top tolovtov (2 Cor. 12

f.),

TovTOP av\\rip4>dkpTa (Ac. 23

The presence

in

Cf.

12).

:

:

rti^as

(jjcoprjp

(1 Pet.

2

:

1

tt.);

ticiple is anarthrous, the participle

So

:

not be expressed outside of the verb, as in exc^fiev ol 18; cf. 4 3). Cf., on the other hand, ly/xeTs,

yoPTts (Heb. 6

Ttvcs,

(vplp

Cf. e7w

article.

fajvres ot TepcXeLTTopLePOL.

ol

riiJ.eLS

So

article.

and

7),

:

exopTo).

po/jlov

plj]

(Ro. 7:21), av 6

19), ai'Tols rots inaTevovaLP (Jo. 1

in 1

1

(Ac. 4

Participles in apposition with per-

10), etc.

pvofiepop

Pet.

(1

8e8ofj.€Pov

XptaroO tov dopTos (1

1),

:

(Lu.

49), 01776X01; tov 64>devTOS

a.ToXKviJ.ei'ou

particular ov8e yap ovofxa eanv erepov to also Ac.

:

article

Blass, Gr. of

may

N. T. Gk.,

be used with several parp. 243.

^

as in roO aya-wqaavTos

ticiples,

ay avuPTL

/cat

(Ro. 8 :33;

raKpLVihv;

though coming again

The

first,

tw

20),

by

deos 6 biKaiQiv

tIs 6 /ca-

'

In questions the pronoun,

sometimes be really predicate. Then be absent from both substantive and parti-

may

may

the article

illustrated

is

:

use of the article with the

Jo. 5 :45).

cf.

(Gal. 2

koI irapadovTos

/xe

\mavTL (Rev. 1:5).

participle in the predicate

779

(tO "APGPOn)

THE ARTICLE

(Mk. 5 25), deep (Lu. 6 48). oiKoboixovvTi apdpooTco Th. 1:9), (1 With Genitives. From the nature of the case the genitive

ciple (predicate or attributive), as in ywi} ovaa ^ojvTi,

:

:

(6)

as the genus-case

is

In general the construc-

usually attributive.

N. T. follows the ancient idiom. This 1. The Position between the Article and the Substantive. common enough, and especially so in 1 and 2 Peter. So tov

tion in the

17

is

deov fxaKpodvfjila (1 Pet. 3

:

20); 1

:

17; 2

ular demonstrative pronouns like

Plato {Soph., 254a) has

to.

For adjective and genitive see 3 In Cf. Mt. 12 31; 1 Pet. 5:1. :

:

peated, TO

Tdv dvo

This

7/

20

Th.

eTrlyeLOS

1

20

:

:

28) or

(Ro. 3 (Jo.

aya-K-Q

6

:

14 the article

:

re-

is

See also Jo.

1

:

40,

Thus

(Ro. 8

:

tov

(2 Pet.

/cat ctcottjpos

(TOV

ixov

Tim. 4

and

15:10.

be^ib.

17

5:23),

:

16)

eavTov (Gal. 6:8), lp.aTia

(Mt. 21

Ke(t)a\riv

:

:

2

TTJs yrjs

4;

Ro.

is

aivoaToKwv

personal pro-

nearly always out:

14,

and

vijlcov

(Rev. 8:7).

:

T-qv

ttiv

8).

eavTov avXrjv (Lu. 11

yeveav

Tr\v

I,

:

:

Cf. also to ovopa oov (Mt. :

29.

17), TOV apTOV

70; 9

:

Cf. also 1

rip.oiV

(6

1:8), etc.

ayairr]v (Col. :

eavTOV (Lu. 16

:

Tim.

11), vfiuv

With the

16, 40) position is this:

Cf. 1 Cor. 15

:

9.

p. 597; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 49. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159.

Cf. K.-G.,

ev txi

9:11). We find rrj avTov (Mt. 1 21) and avTov ev Tfj

30; but not 5

(Mt. 6:

partitive the usual (but see Jo. 6

1

:

either, as is usual, 6 Kvpios p.ov

;

Cf. 9:6; 11:32),

tov epyov (1 Th. 1:3), t^v

TO tp'ltov

tQiv

ttjs

The

3:2).

irapabbaewv, Gal. 1

tov \abv avTov

aov xetp (Mt. 5

TTIV

(f)6^ov tC^v TouSatcoj/

Cf. 2 Cor. 4

39).

tovs 6
p-ov

24)

and ttiv aapKa and eavTwv to. 9),

Pet. 4

tov cktjvovs (2 Cor. 5:1),

ot/cta

TOV Kvpiov

nov cLTroKoyia, 2

xa.pi.Ti.

8)

1

Substantives without Repetition of the Ar-

side (but see tuv iraTpLKwv

21)

For a

— Koaixos (1 Pet. 3:3).

6

illustrate either order except that fiov

nouns

(Jo.

3:7).

(Tit.

onixara.

Sometimes the two types are combined, thus

3.

:

riiJLUP

vfiuiv evTo'\7]s

TTpoiT-Q

xapcn

\l/vxyj^

4, 6 Kpvirros rrjs napdlas ixpOpo^iros.

even more common.

is

19), Ti?s dTttTnjs TOV deov

:

2; 1

:

See in partic-

1.

TOiv CLKOvaavTov.

ticle.^

8

:

to tov deov irvevixa.

So^rys /cat

TTJs

2. Genitives after the

(Jo.

ttoKKoov

such genitives in this position see

series of

3

15,

tKeivov

rfj

tuv

ttjs

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

780 3.

NEW TESTAMENT The

Repetition of Article with Genitive.

low the other substantive with a repeated Tov cravpov (1 Cor. 1

cKoXiav

:

rw

18),

tov crwrrjpos

rrjv

Wei, rCo

rifxccv

(Tit.

Mwuo-ecos (Ac. 15

2

:

fol-

Here the arSo 6 \6yos 6

resembles the original demonstrative.

ticle closely

may

genitive

article.

1), riiv SiSa-

:

This construction

10).

is

not very common.^ 4.

The

19

Only

Article

29, TO opos TO.

:

Genitive.

ivith

(Ac. 26

TTJs Tcov apxi-cpecov

:

12).

Here again the

strative as in Jas. 1:25,

law, that of liberty.'

vo/jlov

Cf. e^ovalas Kal kinTpoTrrjs

Cf. Ac. 1

:

TeXeiov t6v

Volker {Syntax,

Mapia

13:22),

7}

etc.

5. Article

(Mk. 15 Mt. 4:21.

Ta/cco/Soi;

Cf.

Absent with Both.

and both substantives

tive

a-qneiov

7repi.ToiJ.Tjs

(Ro. 4

:

:

abundant illusSo with proper names

AauetS tov tov

40),

The

genitive

definite.

Cf.

(Mt. 27:

vios

is

may

7ri;Xat

11), pofxov TrtCTrecos (3

must decide whether the phrase

text

eX€i»9eptas=' perfect

ttjs

p. 16) finds

trations of these positions in the papyri. like

with Lu. almost pure demon-

12, opovs rod,

article is

:

(Ac.

'leaaai

still

be attribu-

a8ov (Mt. 16

:

18),

The con-

27), etc.

definite or not.

Cf. deov

54), evepyea-la avOpuwov (Ac. 4:9).

The Correlation of the Article. In such cases, according to if two substantives are united by the genitive, the article occurs with both or is absent from both.^ But note (H. 6.

Middleton,^

may

Scott) that (1) the genitive

be anarthrous

it

if

is

a proper

name, (2) the governing noun may be anarthrous if it depends on a preposition. The normal type may be well illustrated by Tw vofxco TTJS a/jLapTias (Ro. 7 23) and voijlco d/iaprtas (7:25). The genitive aixapTlas is an abstract noun which may or may not have the article. But voixui is definite in either instance in 'the law of sin.' See again tQ vbixco tov deov (7 22) and vbixw deov (7: 25). 6e6s can be definite with or without the article. So, again, to
:

:

TTvevfiaTOs ttjs fcorjs (8: 2), ttip eKevdeplav tjjs So^tjs tcov TeKvoiv

(8

:

21), Tr]v Scopeav tov ayiov Tvev/jtaTOs (Ac. 2

:

38), )3tj8Xos

tov deov yevecrecos

'Irjaov XpidTov (Mt. 1:1). Cf. 1 Th. 1:3; Rev. 1:1. These examples could be multiplied indefinitely. If one member of the group is a proper name, the article does not always appear. So rf? eKKK-qaia QeaaaKovLKeoov (1 Th. 1:1), but rats eKK\r)aiais ttjs TaXa-

Ttas (Gal. 1:2).

also deov iraTpds

rjixoov

(Eph.

1

:

2)

and

6 Beds

N. T. Gk., p. 159. of the Gk. Art., 1833. Cf. Mk. 10:25 W. H. text and marg. F. Moulton's remarks, W.-M., pp. 146, 174, 175.

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

The Doctrine

3

Cf.

W.

Note

::

THE ARTICLE Tov Kvpiov

Kal

iroLTTip

TO

TTveviJia

names

these with proper 12; 16

:

(1:3).

r)ixQiv

XpitrroO (1 Pet. 1

13; Ac. 2

:

Cf. also to epyop Kvpiov (Ph. 2

11;

:

781

(tO "APGPOn)

cf.

are after

38; Rev. 12

:

all

30),

7).

Then again

17.

:

Such examples as "very rare." ^ See Mt. 1:

Ac. 16:

other phrases

So the prepositional cf. Heb. 1:3), but note tv 33). In general, where the word without the de^Lq. TOV deov (Ac. 2 article is not otherwise definite, it is indefinite even when the other one has the article. One is indefinite, the other definite. So apxw Tuv (T-qp.eloiv (Jo. 2 11)= a beginning of miracles.' In Mk. 1 1, apxh TOV evayyeXlov 'Irjaov XpicfTov, the notion may be the same, though here apxr) is more absolute as the title of the book. In otherwise definite do not require the phrase kv de^tq. tov dead (Ro. 8 34;

article.

:

:

'

:

Ro. 3 25 it is possible to take eh evdet^Lu ttJs biKaioavvri'i avTov=^iqr a showing of his righteousness,' while in 3 26 xpos T-qv evbu^iv ttjs SiKaLoavprjs avTov may refer to the previous mention of it as a more :

:

Compare

definite conception.

and

3)

hKaLoavvt) deov (3

:

21),

also

tov Oeov dLKaLOdvvrjv (Ro. 10

T-qv

where, however, as in

1

:

17, the idea

probably is, 'a righteousness of God,' not 'the righteousness of God.' In examples like this (cf. deov vtos, Mt. 27 54) only the context can decide. Sometimes the matter is wholly doubtful. Cf. vlds avdpoiirov (Heb. 2 6) and tov vldv tov avdpcoTov (Mt. 16 13). In an example like diaKovos tov XptaTov (Col. 1:7), therefore, the

may

be,

:

:

:

a minister of the Christ, not the minister of Christ. So (T4>pay28a ttjs diKaLoavvrjs (Ro. 4:11), aTrXoTTyrt ttjs KOLVcovias (2 Cor. 9:13). Hence vtos tov deov (Mt. 4: 3, 6; Lu. 4 3) and 6 vlds tov deov (Jo.

idea

is

:

do not mean the same thing. The devil is represented as admitting that Jesus is a son of God, not the Son of God. In Jo. 5 25 Jesus claims 6tl ol veKpol aKovaovaLv 1

:

49;

Mt. 16

:

16; Jo. 11

:

27)

:

In Jo. 10 36 Jesus uses argimientum ad hominem and only claims to be vlds tov deov. Cf. the sneer of the passers-by in Mt. 27 40 (W. H.), vlds rod deov, and the demand In Jo. 5 27 vlds avdp6:irov of Caiaphas in 26 63, 6 vlds tov deov. may be either 'the son of man' or 'a son of man.' Cf. a simiTrjs (})covr]s

tov vlov tov deov.

:

:

:

:

lar

ambiguity in the Aramaic harnasha.

The point may become

6 XpiaTos and Ke(})aKri is not affirmed to man any rate yvvaLKds 6 avrjp (1 Cor. 11:3). At Christ is man's that sense same be woman's head in quite the In these examples deds. XpiaTov 6 head. But see also Kt^aXi) tov

very

fine indeed.

Cf. iravTos av8pds

the anarthrous substantive

is

-q

/ce-^aX?)

predicate as

is

the case with

kakyi rrjs eKKkrjcrias

5:23).

Hence the matter 1

is

av-qp

(Eph.

not to be stressed here, as another

W.-M., footnote,

p. 146.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

782

principle

comes into play. It is possible also that the qualitanouns comes in here (Eph. 5 23, KecjyoKfi

tive force of anarthrous yvvaLKOs, Ke4>a\rj

rrjs

Cf. ^kvoL

'lovdaluv (Jo. 5

Cf. Ac.

1).

1:4) and

els

r^s e7ra77eXtas (Eph. 2

hadr]K(j:v

T<Jov

l)

:

= 'a

6:1.

:

So

12).

:

"VIII, (j).

topTr]

tcov

feast of the Jews,' dpx<^v tuv 'lovbalwv (3

Cf. ^aTTTLdixa

a4>eaLV

See

eKKKrjaias, aooTrip rod crw/xaTos).

rrjs

/JLeraPolas els a(f)eaLv

ap-apTLijiV

Tociv

(Ac. 2:38),

vp-Uiv

what thorny subject.^ (c) With Adjuncts or Adverbs.

KOivwvlav tov

els

But enough

vlov (1 Cor. 1:9), prepositional phrase.

:

(Mk.

afxapTLuv

a some-

of

In general the same usage

appHes to adjuncts as to adjectives. Thus ai^co KXijaLs (Ph. 1. Between the Article and the Noun. 3 14), 17 Kar' eKkoyijv irpodeaLs (Ro. 9 11), 17 Trap' epov 8La9r]Kr) (11 27), 6 h kXaxlcrTcp aSiKos (Lu. 16 10), rrjv ev tw crc3 64)da\pco 8ok6v (Mt. 17

:

:

:

:

7:3),

ol €K irepLToprjs

TLarol (Ac. 10:45), rats irpoTepov ev

vixuv kTTLdvpiaLs (1 Pet. 1

:

Thus

2. Article Repeated."^

7^s (Mk. 4:31), Tpwcecos

(7:5),

vofjiov

Lu. 20:35; 15 26; 16

17

at

bwapeis

:

evToXi]

els

rwv

iravrcou tcov airepparwy

al ev toXs ovpavols

17

t^'V^ (7: 10).

ajvola

rfj

27.

(13:25),

Xpicrrw 'l-qaov (Ro. 3:24), ra irad-qpaTa

ev

rrjs

Cf. Ro. 2

14).

airoXv-

ra 5td tov

See further Mt. 5

1:45; Ac. 8 :1; 24:5; 26:4; Ro. 4 :11; 8

Jo.

ttjs

eirl

rrjs

:

16

:

39

11 f.; 4 17; 2 Cor. 2:6; 9:1; 11:3 In Tim. 1 14; Rev. 5 5; 11 2, 19, etc. 4; Eph. 1 15 we find both constructions tyjv Kad' u/ias wlaTLv Kal ttjv In Rev. 8:3 (9 13), to dvaiaaTrjpLOV to xpvels iravTas tovs ayiovs. <7ovv TO evwTLov TOV dpovov, thc artlclc is repeated "s\dth both adjective and adjunct. 3. Only with Adjunct. So olKovoplav deov Tijv ev rrlaTeL (1 Tim. :

Ph. 3

:

Cor. 2

1

1;

9; Col. 1

:

:

:

1

:

:

:

:

:

:

1:4), biKaiocTvvqv 'Irjaov (2

Tim.

ttjv €K

1

:

13).

xtcrrecos

(Ro. 9

For numerous

:

30), ev ayairri

tjj

ev Xptcrrco

classic illustrations of these

three positions see Gildersleeve, Syntdx, pp. 285

ff

Noun. In such cases the adjunct may be either attributive or predicate. Only the context can decide. In conversation the tone of voice, the manner, the inflection make clear what in written speech is ambiguous. Still in most instances in the N. T, the point is plain.^ The cases here dealt with are those that occur without other defining phrases. In Eph. 6 5 some MSS. read to7s kvpIols KaTo. aapKa. So in Lu. 16 10 we find both 6 kv kXaxlo^Tui olSlkos and 6 TnaTos ev eXaxlcrTo:. I see no point in Blass' Only with

4.

the

:

:

607

»

Cf. K.-G.,

2

Cf. W.-Th., p. 133, for long

8

lb., pp.

I,

135

p.

ff.;

f.

list

W.-Sch., p. 179

of exx.

f.;

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p.

159

f.

:

THE ARTICLE

(tO "APGPON)

783

remark^ that "the closely connected predicative clause could not be severed by the insertion of the article." The article could easily have been repeated or the same order preserved in both clauses. It is much simpler and truer to say that the need of another article was not felt. The same remark applies to roTs TrXouo-tots h tQ vvv aicovL (1

Tim. 6

'IcrpariX

Kara aapKa (1 Cor. 10

T(jiv

:

tVToKoiV ev doy/jLacTLV (2

Th. 4

Xpiarci (1 SoKL/JLOv kv

:

16),

:

:

rfj

m

18),

Koivuvlas

(Ro. 15

'lovdaiq,

els

(4:1),

1 :4,

avrovs (2 Cor. 9

vp-wv

tv'kxtlv

ttiv

31), tov

kv

:

11),

oi veKpol kv

10), oi KOLiJ,r}dkvTes kv Xptcrrw (1

In Col.

:

(Eph. 2

Wvrj iv aapKi

15), 6 Sea/xLOs ev Kvplco

:

rijs

Xptcrrw (Ro. 16

Cf. Ph. 1:1.

18).

h

17), tojp aTreidohvTWV

:

13), tov

Cor. 15

:

and

Xpto-rc3,

Ph. 4 19, TO TrXoOros clvtov kv bb^-jj ^^ XptaTui 'I-qaov, more than one adjunct occurs outside the article. Cf. Eph. 3 4, 13. Blass^ considers this idiom peculiar to the N. T., but pertinent examples are cited ^ from Herodotus V, 108, 17 d77eXia irepl tuv l^apdlcov, Thucydides, II, 52. 1, etc. The vernacular character of the N. T. It is not common in classic diction renders it more frequent. :

:

Greek.* 5.

When

"It often becomes inconvebetween the article and the

Several Adjuncts Occur.

nient and clumsy to insert

all

of these

Even so, but at bottom the matter does not differ from the examples above. We have seen the same freedom with a second attributive adjective (cf. Mt. 24:45). See a good example of two adjuncts in Eph. 1 15, ttiv Kad' v/jlols Thc first attribute may be adjective, KicTTLv kv tCo Kvp'iw 'lii]aov. So to Kad' fjpaiv x^i-pb'Ypa4)ov rots genitive, adverb or adjunct. substantive."^

in principle

:

doynacTLV (Col. 2 rriv

e/c

6eo\j

:

14), ttjs kprjs irapovaias irakiv xpos u/xas (Ph. 1

biKaLOGVvqv kwl

tyj

k\Tri8a

(1 Pet.

examples

1:3), Tovs kv

Trjv

Cf. Ph. 1:5.

kv Tui 'lovda'iafjLU) (Gal. 1:13).

participle readily yield

(3:9),

TrtCTet

k/jLriv

The

:

26),

avaaTpocpriv iroTe

and the

article

like 6 KaTo. iroXv avayevvrjaas eis

bvvdjxei

deov

ippovpovfxkvovs

Slo,

Trtcrrecos

and and the substantive. So TTjs kv TCO Koa/jLui kv kirLdvp-lq. 4>dopa.s (2 Pet. 1:4). Cf Ac. 21 28. For similar position of several genitives and adjuncts see 2 Pet. 2:7; Lu. 1:70. In particular note Ro. 16:17 for the various phrases between tovs and iroiovvTas. Note the many ad(1:5).

But sometimes the

genitives) are inserted

several adjuncts

between the

(cf.

adjectives

article

.

juncts in Ro. 3

:

25

f.

See further

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 160.

2

lb., p. 159.

*

The

6

Blass, Gr. of

vi, (a), 6.

«

three regular positions are

N. T. Gk.,

p. 160.

common.

W.-Sch., p. 180. Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 286.

3

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

784

Phrases of Verbal Origin. Phrases that are consciously verbal do without the repeated article.' So in Ro. 6

6.

in origin readily

we have read

:

t6v davarov avrov e^a^rTi(J6r]^xev

eis

Tos,

tov ^aivTlayiaTOs

avveTacf)7]fxev aura) 5td

therefore, that here

not with

els

tov davarop is to

and

els

we

in the next verse

tov Oavarov.

It is plain,

be construed with

/SaTrrto-yua-

In other examples the verbal construction

(TvveTa(j)r]nev.

appears in other contexts. It is, however, possible that the usage with the verb renders the anarthrous construction more frequent.

So Ph.

1

:

26,

irapovclas ttoXlv irpos

TTjs enijs

4: 20).

TrapetvaL irpos vp-as (Gal.

with

2

(1 Pet.

TracFX^i-v virep

dXi^opeda virep (2 Cor.

:

maybe compared with

vfjLas,

Cf. also wad-qpara virep (Col.

21), d\bl/e(nv virep

The

1:6).

classic

(Eph. 3

:

1

13)

:

24)

with

idiom shows similar

examples.^ Exegetical Questions.

7.

Sometimes

it is

quite important for

doctrinal reasons to be careful to note whether the adjunct

Thus

kv

aapd

ev rfj

rfi (TapKL, if

is

in

:

But

nite assertion of sin in the flesh of Jesus.

predicate and

The

if

the phrase

is

to be construed with KareKptve, no such statement

Here the grammarian is helpless to decide the point. must step in and appeal to the context or other

made.

is

is

is

Ro. 8 3, KareKpLve rriv apapriau attributive with apaprlav, there is a defi-

attributive or predicate.

interpreter

One conversant with Paul's theology will feel here meant to be taken as predicate. The

passages for light. sure that eu aapd

same ambiguity

is

arises in verse 2, 6 popos tov irpevpaTos

XpiaTUi r]\ev9ep<j)aep ae airo tov popov

ttjs

ttjs ^ccrjs

apapTtas Kal tov Oaparov.

ep

Here

ep XpuaTui is predicate with riXevdepcjoaep. Ro. 3:25 probably ep rw avTov atpaTL, as well as els epSei^LP is predicate with irpo'eOeTo. Another example from Romans is found So in in 5 8, where els ripas belongs to avplaT-qaLP, not a-yaTry^v. For further Jo. 15 11 ev vplp is construed with fj, not r} ep-q. illustration see Ac. 22 18; 1 Cor. 2 :7; 9 18; Eph. 2 7; 3 12; 5 26; Ph. 1 14; 3 9; Col. 1 9; Phil. 20; Heb. 13 20. Examples occur also of attribu8. Anarthrous Attributives. tives when the article is absent from both substantive and adit is

So

reasonably clear that

in

:

:

:

:

:

junct.

Thus

(Mk.

TvclAop

Kad' vwep^oXrjP d86p

2 Cor. 11 :23, 27.

1

:

(1

The

:

yeveTrjs

eK

(Jo.

9:1),

23), x^^P^ ^^ irvevparL 0,71(0

Cor. 12

:

31), etc.

Note

avdpcoiros

(Ro. 14

ev

17),

older Greek furnishes illustration of this

1

W.-Th.,

2

W.-Sch., p. 180. lb. But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159) doubts

3

:

in particular

idiom.^ p. 136;

:

:

:

apdpcoirop

Tvevp,aTi cLKaddpTip eTL

:

:

W.-Sch., p. 180.

it.

THE ARTICLE

Several Attributives with KaL Same Person

(d)

Several Epithets Applied to the

1.

already under

For

785

(tO "APGPON)

classic

examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax,

See

or Thing.

Usually only one article

4.

vi, (a),

then used.

is

p. 330.

So, for in-

stance, 6 raXatTTCopos Kai eXetvos Kal ttccxos Kai rvcpXds Kal yvfxvos (Rev.

3

This

17).

:

Mk. 6:36 Kal

fxri

the normal idiom in accord with ancient usage.

is

Ac. 3

TTotiycras,

Kal Trarepa,

Mapias

vios ttjs

2 Pet. 2

20 (3:2) Tov

:

Heb. 3:1; Rev.

15;

does occur,

article

49

1

:

6 5^

9 (both

6

1

and

:

Eph. 6

7;

:

Tim. 4 3 1 Tim. :

21;

When

rfj).

So

ambaa^

9 t6v Kvpiov

:

Kvplov Kal crojTrjpos, 1

Cf. also Gal.

Tols irtaTols Kal eireyvwKoaL.

6

:

14 top dytov Kal SUaLov, Jas. 3

:

:

Lu. 6

Kal a8e\(f>6s 'laKoo^ov,

a second

accents sharply a different aspect of the

it

So in Rev. 1 :17 6 TpcSros Kal 6 would have been sufficient, but would have obscured the separate affirmations here made. Cf. also to "AX0a Kal TO '12 in 1 8; 21 6. In Jo. 21 24 W. H. read 6 /xapTvpoov

person or phase of the subject.

one

eaxo-Tos, Kal 6 ^ojv,

article

:

article is ticle

but they bracket

raOra,

A

very doubtful.

The second

17

(brackets

Pet. 4

:

14, to

W.

H.) in Ac. 17

86^-qs

ttjs

:

19,

Kal to tov deov

(due probably to the second genitive to emphasize each).

irvevfjLa

Jo.

1

Kal 6.

similar superfluity of the second ar-

appears in the second

and in the second to in So

:

:

Trepl TovTcov Kal 6 ypa\j/as

1

:

only one

40.

above. Outside of special cases like these found when several epithets are applied to the The presence of a genitive with the group of words

See

(c), 9,

article is

same person.

does not materially alter the construction. The genitive may occur with either substantive and apply to both.^ So 6 Beds Kal waTrip riixojv

Th. 3

(1

As a matter

:

11)

and tov

Kvpiov rjuccv Kal aooTrjpos (2 Pet. 1:11).

of fact such genitives (see above) occur either inside

or outside of the regimen of the article. (Ph. 4

:

20), 6 Beds Kal TraTrip tov Kvplov

1:3; Eph. 1:3).

Cf. tj/jlOiv

tc3 Oecp Kal iraTpl

The presence of rajLui^ any more than the use

affect the construction fjixoov

above.

In Ph. 3

:

riij.cbv

3; 2 Cor. with Kvplov does not (1 Pet. 1

:

of Kvpiov itself or

3 one adjunct comes before one

j^articiple,

the other after the other participle, but only one article occurs.

A

most important passage

TtjctoO XptcTTov.

is

2 Pet. 1:1, tov deov

fincou Kal

auTrjpos

Curiously enough Winer^ endeavours to draw a

distinction

between

noun with

o-wrr/pos"

this passage,

and the

"where there

is

not even a pro-

identical construction in 2 Pet. 1:11,

TOV Kvpiov r)p.ihv Kal aooTrjpos TijaoD XptuToO, which he cites^ as an example of "merely predicates of the same person." Stranger 1

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 155.

2

W.-Th.,

p. 130.

3

lb., p. 126.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

786

he bases his objection on doctrinal grounds, a matter that The matter is handled in Winer-Schmiedel,^ where it is frankly admitted that the constill,

does not per se concern the grammarian. struction in 2 Pet. 1: 1

2:20; 3:2,

the same as that in 1: 11 and also in

is

Schmiedel says also that ''grammar demands that one person be meant." In Ju. 4, tov ixbvov SeairoTrjv Kal Kvpiov 18.

'Irjffovu

riiJLojv

Kvpios is so

The same remark

it.

same point

the

XpidTov,

name

applies also to 2 Th.

and Eph. 5

Kal Kvplov 'Irjaov Xptarov,

:

but the fact that

holds,

often anarthrous like a proper

h

5,

rfj

1

slightly

weakens

12, rod 6eov

:

rip.ojp

^aaCKda rov XptaTov

often occurs without the article). One person be described in these three examples, but they are not so clear as the type rod Kvplov f]p.Q:v koI aiorrjpos (2 Pet. 1 1, 11). In

Kal deov (since 6eov

may

:

Tit. 2

:

13, Tov fxeyaXov deov Kal awTrjpos r}p.wv XpLarov

almost certain that one person

is

again described.

'Irjaov, it is

Cf. also

riiv

where the one article unites closely the two substantives. Moulton^ quotes most pertinently papyri examples of vii/A.D., which show that among Greek-speaking Christians "our great God and Saviour" was a current form

naKapiav kXriSa Kal

kTn.4>o.vHav ttjs So^ijs,

of speech as well as

Ptolemaic formula, tov iieyoKov deov

the

He cites also Wendland's argument^ that the rival rendering in Titus is as great an "exegetical mistake" as to make two persons in 2 Pet. 1:1. Moulton's conclusion^ is clear enough to close the matter: "Familiarity with the everlasting apotheosis that flaunts itself in the papyri and inscriptions of Ptolemaic and Imperial times lends strong support to Wendland's contention that Christians, from the latter part of i/A.D. onward, deliberately annexed for their chvine Master evepyerov Kal aoiTrjpos (G.

H.

15, ii/n.c.).

the phraseology that was impiously arrogated to themselves by of the worst of men."

some 2.

When

Mt. 23

:

to he

2

ol

Distinguished.

ypanpLarels

'\wavov Kal oi ^aptcatoi, 6 Kal TOts TrpoJTOis,

14

43)

:

Tovs

Jo.

*Iip(X)8t,avoJv,

Kal

(f>l\ovs

4 37

Jas.

dpxiepets

ol

Tuv

Kal

1

2

Tovs

:

21

Then the

rots /jLeyLaToicnu

ot irpoayovTes

Kal

ol

:

Lu. 11:39 tov 23

:

ol ayioL Kal ol

repeated.

is

2

:

18

ol

4

So

ixad-qral

avrov Kal rots xtXtapxots

Mk.

ypafifxarels,

yeiTOvas,

Mk.

Kal ol aKoXovdovpres, 11

12

iroTrjplov Kal

13

:

tov

:

18

(cf.

rcov (Paptaaicov irivaKos,

15 :6

tovs dpxiepets Kal tovs oxXous,

3:86

TO y\vKV Kal to tlkpov, Ac. 26

20

article

^aptaalot,

ol

6 arelpcov Kal 6 depl^wv, 1 Cor.

:

3:11

Rev. 18

11:9

Kal

awdaToXoL Kal

:

30

4>VTevcov Kal 6 irori'^ccv,

6 ^aaiXevs Kal 6 rfyep-dcv,

ol Trpo4>r]TaL.

P. 158.

3

On

Prol., p. 84.

•

Prol., p. 84.

2a;ri7P in

Cf. Rev. 11:4;

ZNTW,

v.

335

f.

THE ARTICLE The

(tO "APGPON)

787

can be extended almost indefinitely.^ same number, gender and case. But Nor have I referred to abstract words of quality like the list in Rev. 7 12, or examples like ras (Ti;j'a7a)7ds /cat ras apxas Kal rds It is not contended that these groups are e^ovalas (Lu. 12 11). all absolutely distinct (cf. ol jpaix/jLareLs Kal ol ^apLaaloi), but that they are treated as separate. Even with the scribes and Pharisees 13

16; 2

:

Th.

1

8.

:

list

these are examples of the

:

:

they did not quite coincide.

two 2

:

So Lu. 8

articles.

18

24

:

Mt. 21 :45; Ac.

11:15

^apiaatoL,

oi

KoXkv^Larciv Kal ras KaOedpas tcov iroiKohvTWV

Ac. 25

:

15; 1 Cor. 11

:

11

The use

6.

:

sometimes be partly responsible for tov vdaros,

t(^ av'eiiw Kal rcS kKv8(jovl

Kal

'Iccavov

ot nadrjral

Cf.

may

of another attributive

27; Rev. 13

:

rds

Cf. also Lu. 20

.

Mk.

Tpaire^as toov :

20j

10.

Groups Treated as One. Sometimes groups more or less disone for the purpose in hand, and hence use only one article. Cf. rds <^tXas /cat yelropas (Lu. 15 9), tovs vop.iKovs 3.

tinct are treated as

:

Kal 4>apt(ratous (14 Kal jpap.p.arkwv

:

3), rds TrXaretas

(Mk. 15

Tcov ^apLaaloJV Kal

18),

(Eph. 2

Trpo(j)r]Ta}V

:

20),

1

(W. H.

text)

airoXoyia

rfj

iJLrJKOs

K\r](nv Kal eKXayrju (2 Pet. 1

17:

23

'Za88ovKaicov (Ac.

(Ph. 1:7), TO tXcltos Kal

we have

:

(14

rdv 'EinKOVplaiv

1),

:

pv/ias

/cat

Kal

Cf.

ttju

Kal

(Ac. 17

Srcot/ccoi'

:

rcov aTroaToKcov Kal

7),

v\{/os

evayy e\lov

rod

/Se/Satwcret

Kal (3ados Kal

10).

:

21), twp ivpea^vTkpwv

:

(Eph. 3

in Tit. 2

:

:

18), ttjv

So in Mt. 'Iccavr]v, where

13.

rov Uerpov Kal 'IaKO)j3ov Kal

is probably more frequent in examples where a genitive occurs also, or some other attribute.^ So Ph. 1 20 TTjv aiTOKapahoKiav Kal eKTriSa jjlov, 1 19 rrjs vp.wv 8er]aeo:s Kal eirLXoprjylas tov TvevpaTOs, 2:17 t^ duaia Kal XeLTOvpyla ttjs Trtcrrecos. Cf. also 1 Th. 2 12; 3 7; Mt. 24 3; Ro. 1 20; Col. 2 8; Eph. 3:5; 2 Cor. 1:6; Lu. 14:21; 1 Pet. 2:25; Ph. 1:25; 1 Th. 3:7. These are all the simplest and clearest illustrations. Obviously, therefore, whether one or more 4. Point of View. articles are to be used depends on the point of view of the speaker In geographical terms the matter of freedom is well or writer. illustrated. Thus in 1 Th. 1 7 we have h rfj MaKedovia Kal h rfj 'Axata, while in the very next verse we meet h rfj MaKeSovla Kal 'Axata as in Ac. 19 21. These two Roman provinces are distinct, but adjacent. Cf. also rrjs 'lovSalas Kal Sa/xaptas (Ac. 8:1; cf. 1 31), where these sec8), TTJs 'lovSaias Kal FaXtXatas /cat Sa/xaptas (9 tions of Palestine are treated together. Cf Ac. 27 5. In Ac.

the three are one group.

This

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

15

:

3 note

ti7J'

re ^oivlKrjv Kal SaAiaptaz/,

together are not even contiguous. 1

Cf. W.-Th., p. 128.

In Ac. 15 2

:

the two sections treated :

23, Kara

w.-Sch., p. 15G

f.

t7]v

'Avrto-

2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

788

we have a city grouped with two counMt. 4 25), while in 15 41 we meet ttjv Zvpiav Kal rrjp KiXiKtaj' (W. H. text). Hence no absolute conclusions can be drawn from the one article in Ac. 16 6, zriv_^pvyiav X^iCLP Kal "EvpLav Kal KCKLKlau,

Lu. 5

tries (as in

17;

:

:

:

:

FaXaT LKrivjCupayicf. reverse order in 18 l231 asjto the^eparateness^ of jthe terms "Phrygia'' and "Galatic region." Cf. also Kal

/

^

Lu.

1, Trjj^ 'iT ovpal as Kal

not wholly whimsical.

But the matter

TpaxoiviTidos x'*'pas.

In Ac. 2

:

9

f.

note the

is

with Meao-

Tr}v

which stands alone, while we have also XIovtov Kal ttiv probably because the province of Asia (not Asia Minor as a whole) is meant. Then again we meet ra pkprj rrjs Al^vtjs rrjs Kara Kvpr]vr]p, because of the details stated. In Ac. 8 f the use of rciv twice divides the synagogues into two groups (men from Cilicia and Asia on the one hand, men from Alexandria, Cyrene and Libertines (?) on the other). The matter is simple geography but for Ai^epTLvoov, and may be after all if we only knew what that term means. See Winer-Schmiedel, p. 158. Cf. also Rev. 14 7, where two words have articles and two do not, and Ac. 15 20, where three words in the list have articles and one, ttulktov, does KOTaplav, 'Aaiav,

.

:

:

:

So in Ac. 13

not.

we

find

article

U.

rep

Kal

we have top UavXov Then again in Mt.

50

:

tQ B.

Kal B.,

17

:

1

while in 15

:

observe the one*

with Peter, James and John, while in Heb. 11 20 we see :

The

empha-

evKbyricrev Taad/c tov

TaKw/3 Kal tov 'HtraO.

size the distinction

between subject and object as in Mt. 1 2-16. twv rrp. (Ac. 15 4) and oi air. Kal oi wp. (15 6)

Cf. also Twv

with

air.

Kal

Toov air. Kal xp.

articles here

:

:

tuv (16

:

4).

:

5. Difference in Number. If the words combined differ in number, usually each one has its ONVn article. The reason is that they generally fall into separate classes. So 6 avayLvoiUKo^v Kal ol

CLKOvoPTes

(Rev. 1:3),

aak^tiav Kal rds

aapKos Kal tccu SLavoLoiv (Eph. 2:3),

ttjs

KocrpLLKas kiTLdvplas (Tit.

2

:

12).

But one

article

Trjv

may

also be found, as in

rc3 Koapc^ Kal ayyeXois Kal avdpcoTots (1 Cor. 4:9). Here, however, the anarthrous words "particularize the tQ Koapw.'^^

Yet in 1 Jo. 2 16 irdv to ev words each with the article. :

6.

Difference in Gender.

tc3 Kocrpi^ is

So,

if

"particularized" by three

the gender

likewise usually the repetition of the article. 'Iriaovv Kal ttjv avaaraaiv,

10

:

21 TOV ovpavov Kal

TpcoTovs,

Ro. 8

:

2

TTJs

Mt. 22 4

Tr\%

:

yr,s,

Cf.

2

W.-Th.,

p. 127.

different, there is

Cf. Ac. 17

raOpoi pov Kal

Ac. 13

apapTias Kal

W. M. Ramsay,

1

oi

is

:

18 tov

(HTLaTa,

to.

Lu.

50 rds evaxvpovas Kal tovs tov dapcLTOV, Col. 4 1 to biKaiov :

:

Expos., 1895, July, pp. 29-40.

Kal

Heb. 3:6 peated 14

Eph. 2

iaoT-qra,

Tr\v

:

2

SiSacrKaKlas (Col.

(Mk. 12

:

to.

15

26

20;

4,

(.VToKp-aTa Kal

both gender and number (as in to have separate articles.

differ in

irarep aeavTOV Kal Trjv p-qrkpa Kal TrjV

Lu. 14: 26, t6v

Cf., for instance,

to,

more customary

22), it is still

yvvalKa Kal

33),

:

So also Ac.

TtKva Kal tovs abeK(t>ovs Kal rds a8e\(f)as.

30; Col. 2

:

re-

(Lu.

^pa-yp-obs

22).

indeed the words

If

Col. 2

:

:

a/JLapTiais,

usual, the

Sec rds d8ovs Kal

not necessary.^

23), Tdv okoKavTWiJ.6.TWV Kal dvaiGiv

:

Though

ttip Trapprjaiav Kal to Kavxvi^oi.

article is

rats

Kal

irapairTOJiJiaaiv

toTs

1

789

(tO "APGPOn)

THE ARTICLE

:

13; 1

Tim. 5

23; Rev. 2

:

The

19.

:

papyri illustrate the N. T. usage of the article with several substantives (cf. Volker, Syntax, p. 20). So 6 rJXtos Kal aeXrjvr], Pap. L, Dieterich, Abraxas, p. 195. 9.

With Disjunctive

7.

a disjunctive preposition be

If

Particle.

used, there will naturally be separate articles (even

when

Kal is

the connective), whatever be true about number and gender. So Hera^v rod vaov Kal rod dvaiaaT-qpiov (Mt. 23 35 cf. Lu. 11 51). So :

:

when 5

17), TO) Trarpt

:

Tov p.bhov

iiTTO

28

the conjunction

:

Tj

occurs as in rbv

ttj ^trjrpc

t)

VTO

Blass^

17).

t?

(15

TTju K\lvr]v

v6p.op

5), to (tkotos

:

(Mk. 4

:

r)

tovs Tpo4)i]Ta%

^ to

21), Tc3 Xac3

cos

ri

(Jo. 3

(Mt. :

19),

toIs Weat. (Ac.

makes the point that outside of Ac. 14:5, TOiv we generally find the repeated article with

WvQiv re Kal 'lovbalwv,

a proper name does not need the 1, but 6 re aTpaT-qyos

re Kal.

Even here

article.

Cf. 'lovbaiwv re Kal "EWrjvoov in 14

Kal ol dpxtepeTs (5

:

'lovbalwv as

24) with difference in

VII. Position with Predicates.

with the predicate noun, that

is

here before us.

It

:

number

also.

not the use of the article

is

like ovtos kaTiv 6 kKtjpopoijlos (Mk. 12 7), That point has already been discussed :

under v, (i). When the article occurs with the substantive, but not with. the adjective, the result is the equivalent of a relative clause.

Cf. fxeyoKr)

'with a loud voice,' with elevated.'

(Ac. 14

(f)o)vfj

:

and

10)

iieyaKri tt} 4>wvy

i>iovfj

ij.eya\ri

avaKeKoXvpfxepco -Kpoauiirw (2 Cor. 3

See also

unveiled face' and aKaTaKoXvirTw the head unveiled.'

Cf.

ttj

/ce^aXj? (1

Mk. 3:1,

(7

:

57)

=

(26: 24)= 'with the voice :

Cor. 11

h^rjpafxneprjp

exoip

Other examples are TfKUipwix'tprip ttip Kapblap (Mk. 8: plav nel^oo (Jo. 5: 36), T-fjp aydrrfv eKTevrj (1 Pet. 4 8), :

18)

= 'with

5)

= 'with

:

Trju

xeipa.

17), T-qp p.apTvttjp apa<jTpo(l)r]p

KaXrjp (2 12), awapa^aTOP ttjp lep(a(7Vvr]P (Heb. 7: 24), to. aiadr]Tr] pea In all these and similar examples the point 14) yeyvp.paaij.epa (5 :

:

is

.

quite different from that of

tlie

attributive position of the article.

Most of the instances occur with I

lb.

^

exco.

Note the absence

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 163.

of the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

790 article

with

icate.

Cf. TovTo dXrjdk

aToypa4)r] Trpwrr; (Lu. 2

rg KoKovfxkvu (Lu. 1 vals

TOLs

:

36)

elprjKas (Jo.

may

2) :

because

D

be noted.

use of the predicate position "a

gnomon

more simple combinations.

in the pred-

it is

The position of avrfj in Mk. 7 5 reads kol-

18).

:

Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 292)

xcpo't*'-^

side of the

:

4

considers this

of artificial style" out-

See also Milden,

The

Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek (1900, p. 43). It is noticeable in prepositional phrases, as in Xen., Anab., 1, 3, 14, 5id 0tXtas

TTJs x'^po-^-

Vm. The

Absence of the Article. I do not care to use the term "omission" in connection with the article. That word imphes that the article ought to be present. As has been already shown, the article is not the only means of showing that a word is This luxury in language did not become indispensable.

definite.

The servant never became

There remained in the classic which were intelligible without the article. Indeed, new phrases came into use by analogy without the article. I do not think it is necessary to devote so much space to this phase of the subject as is done in most grammars. Most of the cases have already come up for discussion in one way or another. It is sufficient here to give a resume of the chief idioms in the N. T. which are wdthout the article and are still definite. Much of the modern difficulty about the absence of the Greek article is due to the effort to interpret it by the standard of the English or German article. So Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 119) speaks of "appellatives, which as expressing definite objects should have the article"! Even Gildersleeve, in chscussing the "Absence period

many

master.

parallel phrases

of the Article" (note the phrase. Syntax, p. 259), says that "prepositional phrases ticle as in

contrast

and other formulae

may

dispense with the ar-

the earlier language," and he adds "but anaphora or

may

bring back the article at any time and there

pedantical uniformity."

Admirably

and "bring back," dim ghosts

said,

is

no

except "dispense with"

grammar. Moulton^ which should be translated 'words of eternal life' (as marg. of R. V.). There are indeed "few of the finer points of Greek which need more constant attention"^ than the absence of the article. The word may be either definite or indefinite when the article is absent. The context and history cites Jo. 6

:

68, prjuara fwrjs

of the phrase in question

expression into English or

of the old

aicoviov,

must

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

ProL,

p. 83.

The

decide.

German

is

translation of the

not determined by the mere

N. T. Gk.,

p. 315. 3

lb.

791

(tO "APePON)

THE ARTICLE

absence of the Greek article. If the word is indefinite, as in Jo. 4 27; 6 68, no article, of course, occurs. But the article is absent in a good many definite phrases also. It is about these that a few words further are needed. A brief summary of the various :

:

types of anarthrous definite phrases is given.^ A sane treatment of the subject occurs in Winer-Schmiedel.^ Here the article is used or not at the (a) With Proper Names.

So rbv but Tov Havkov in verse 15.

will of the writer.

6v IlaCXos KrjpixjatL (Ac. 19

'Ir/croOf

The reason

13),

:

apparent in these three examples. Words in apposition with proper names are usually Cf. Mt. 3 6; Mk. 1 5. See further v, (a), 3. anarthrous. We have seen that the substantive Genitives. With (6) :

:

may

be definite (Mt. 16

still

Cf. TTvKai

q.8ou

Cor. 15

(1

:

10),

anarthrous, though not necessarily so.

if :

is

18), avaaraais veKpcov (Ac.

\6yov deov (1 Th. 2

23

:

6),

Geov

x^-P'-'''^

Cor.

13), tottiplov Kvpiov (1

:

10 21), vU dia^oXov (Ac. 13 10), etc.^ In particular, personal pronouns in the genitive were not always felt to need the article. :

:

eavTov (Lu. 13

See further

Cf.

KTJirov

this

idiom freely (Blass-Debrunner,

:

19).

The

v, (h).

LXX

uses

English can show the

p. 151).

same construction. "

Eye of newt and toe of frog, Wool of bat and tongue of dog, Adder's fork and bUnd worm's sting, Lizard's leg

and hornet's wing."

— Macbeth.

These were also often considSo ku o'Uu} (1 Cor. 11 34. Cf. h Tu> oIklo, 'in the house,' Jo. 11 20)= 'at home.' So we say "go to bed," etc. Moulton^ pertinently cites English "down town," "on 'change," "in bed," "from start to finish." This

Prepositional Phrases.

(c)

ered definite enough without the article.

:

:

not therefore peculiar to Greek. It is hardly necessary all the N. T. examples, so common is the matter. Thus with avk observe di'd /xepos (1 Cor. 14 27). With aivb note

idiom

is

to mention

:

dr' irfpov

17: 29),

(Mk. 15

air'

ovpavQiv

:21),

a'yopas

dvr'

(Heb. 12

:

21 13, :

For

(1 Jo. 1:1), dTro /cara/SoXrjs

11:25), dxo

veKpCjv

dTTO jioppa, invb votov, aird 8vanu>v.

5td

note

dx' ovpavov (Lu.

25), dTro amroXrjs (Rev. 21

amToKccv (Mt. 2:1), dr' dpx^s 35), aird fxepovs (Ro.

(Mk. 7:4),

5td vvktos (Ac. 5

:

19),

i5td

(Lu. 16

So

:

13), dTro

(Mt. 13

(Lu. 4

(Lu. 4:30), 6td

:

13).

iJ,eaov

(17:11). 1

»

See on the whole subject K.-G., I, pp. 598 See extensive Ust in W.-Sch., p. 166 f.

ff.

:

Cf. Rev.

30).

axpi- Katpov

fxeaov

:

^

Pp.

»

Prol., p. 82.

1(52

ff.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

792 For

€ts see els q.dr]v (Ac. 2 27), els ohpavov (1 Pet. 3 22), aypov (Mk. 16:12), eh dakaaaav (Mt. 17:27), eis oIkov QAk. 3 20), eis irpodoiirov (Mk. 12 14), eh fxeaov (Mk. 14:60), €ts oUlav (2 Jo. 10), eis TeXos (Mt. 10 22). :

:

CIS

:

:

:

For ev may be noticed ev ovpavQ (Mt. 6 20), ev ovpavols (Heb. 12:23), ev vypl(TTOis (Lu. 2:14), ev be^iq. (Heb. 1:3), ev Koafica (Col. 2 20), ev aypQ> (Lu. 15 25), ev ayopq. (Lu. 7: 32), h oUco (1 Cor. 14 35), ev eKK\riaia='iit church' (1 Cor. 14 19), ev Trpoadoiro} :

:

:

:

:

(2 Cor. 5 O'PXV (Jo. 1

Examples

(Ro. 13

13),

:

(2 Cor. 10

ev

KatpQ (Mt. 24

3), ev avOpdoiroLs

:

(Lu.

45), ev

:

1

:

25), ev

9).

:

of e^ arc

k fxepovs

(1

Cor. 12 27), :

(Ac. 26:4), e^ apxrjs (Jo. 6

veoTTjTos

e/c

aapd

1), ev

:

18

vvKTL (Ac.

ev iiixepa

12),

:

64),

:

k

k

(Eph. 6 (Mt. 27:

\}/vxvs

Se^t^j^

:

6),

38),

c^ ev(^ivbp.wv (Mt. 25 41), e^ apLarepcbv (Lu. 23 33), k /zeaou (2 Th. 2 7), k KapSias (Ro. 6 17), k veKpoJv (Lu. 9 7), e^ ohpavov (Jo. 1:32). For c'coj observe ccos ciSou (Mt. 11 23), ecos ohpavov (Mt. 11 23), ?W5 5i;(7Mcoi^ (Mt. 24 27), em eairepas (Ac. 28 23), ecos reXous (1 Cor. 1:8). :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Examples

of

are

eTri

irpoawTTOV (Lu. 5

€7rt

For Kara see (Ac. 27

:

:

errl 7775

fiexpi

14),

:

(Mt. 24

dbpais

eirl

Kar' ocjidaXfxovs (Gal. 3,: 1), Kara Xt/3a

(Ac. 25

:

observe

(Ac. 8

16), Kara jxepos

:

33),

:

/cat

26), Kar' dpxds

(Heb. 9:5),

mrd x^pov

(Heb.

1

:

/card adp/ca (2

10),

Cor.

Pet. 4:6).

3), Kara, avdpwirovs (1

For

(Lu. 2

12).

:

/card i^ea7]iJil3piav

12),

/caTo, TrpoacoTTOV

10

:

liexpi-

neaouvKrlov

(Ac.

20

:

7),

p-expi.

reXovs

(Heb. 3:6).

For xapd note 16

:

Trapd

daXaaaav (Ac. 10

:

32),

Trapd 7rora/x6v (Ac.

13).

For For For

see

irepi

see

irpo Trpos

irepl fjLearjiijSplav -n-pd

/catpoD

observe

(Ac. 22

(Mt. 8

:

:

6).

29).

irpoaoiirov Trpos Trpoffwivov (1

Cor. 13

:

12), irpbs

eairepav (Lu. 24:29).

For

viro

see

utt'

ohpavov (Lu. 17

:

24).

be noted that this usage after narrow range of words, some of which, It will

sent single objects.

More

confined to a rather

of this a little later.

examples have articular parallels. examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax,

abundant

all is

like ohpavbs

and

7^, repre-

Most

of these

See also v, (/). For classic The papyri furnish p. 259 f.

parallels (Volker, Syntax, pp. 15-17) as

do the inscripN. T. Gr., p. 92). {d) With Both Preposition and Genitive. It is not surprising to find no article with phrases which use both preposition tions (Radermacher,

and genitive

like

793

(tO "APOPGn)

THE ARTICLE

tvayytKiov 6eov (Ro. 1:1), awo b^aKixdv

els

crov

(Lu. 19:42), k de^tcov nov (Mt. 20:23), air' apxyjs Koanov (Mt. 24:21), irapa Kaipov rjXLKias (Heb. 11:11), ev /caipw iretpaafiov (Lu. 8:13), ciTro /cara/SoX^s Koafiov (Mt. 25:34), h ^paxiovt avrov (Lu. 1:51), etc.

These may be without So EuayyeXiov Kara the article, rod evayyeXlov (Mk. MSS., many in apxri Gospel the before MdpKov Titles of Books or Sections.

(e)

being already specific enough.

1:1),

yeveaew

iSt/SXos

be seen in

Pet.

1

'A7roKdXi;i/'is

1 f.

five hues.

The

article

used quite idiomatically in 1 Peter. These often do without the (/) Words in Pairs.

Words

often, of course, the article is used.

Very

'Irjaov

good example of anarthrous headings may (cf. Hort, 1 Peter, p. 15), where no article

whole opening sentence of

occurs in the is

XpLarov (Mt. 1:1),

'Irjaov

A

Xpto-ToO (Rev. 1:1).

article.

day and night wktos mt rifxepas

for

Enghsh) frequently occur together. Cf. (Mk. 5:5), wepas /cat wktos (Rev. 4:8). They occur singly

(as in

without the

WKTOS (Mt. 25

fikarjs

Cor. 8

yfjs (1

CTTi

wktos (Jo. 3:2),

as

article, :

See also other pairs like

6).

5; cf. 2 Pet. 3

:

:

also

(Rev. 21:25),

rjnepas

5), Trarepa ^ fiyjTepa

ku ovpavui etre

(Mk.

7: 10),

4:5). Indeed the anarthrous construcdXXd (cf. tion is common in contrast with v, elVe, ovTe, p.r]T€, oh Ro. 6 14). For long lists of anarthrous words (definite and indefinite together) see Ro. 8 35; 1 Cor. 3 22; 12 13, 28; 2 Cor.

fcoiras

veKpovs (1 Pet.

/cat

—

:

:

:

11

:

25

avr]p

e/c

Pet. 1:2;

1

f.;

Heb. 12

yvvaiKos (1 Cor. 11:8).

:

18, 23; 1

Some

:

Tim. 3

16.i

Cf. also

:

of these usages belong to

proverbs, formulae and enumerations. See Gildersleeve, Sijntax, (Rap. 260. The kolvt] (inscriptions and papyri) shows the idiom

dermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 94).

Ordinal Numerals. The article is usually absent in exThe ancient idiom is here followed.^ The ordiwas often felt to be definite enough alone. This was true of the

(g)

pressions of time. nal

(Lu. 2 1), ^i' cipa tpItt] (Mk. 15 25), Eph. 6 2; Ac. 2 15. But it was not confined to the predicate by any means, nor even to prepositional

predicate.

Cf.

phrases like Cor. 12

aTroypari TrpoiT-q

(Jo. 19

?iv cbs e/crr?

:

:

»

2

33), etc.

14).

Cf.

dTro eret

:

:

:

:

20 18j, wkpas (Ac. 10 Trej^re/catSe/cdrw (Lu. 3:1),

dTro Trpcbrrjs

2),

(Ac. 10 :9), ep

15

:

i7Mepas (Ac.

:

rerdpTTjs

Cf. Ac. 23

:

23.

:

ecos

tp'ltov

30),

Trept

ecos

ovpavov (2 Ihpav

eKT-qv

chpas epaTrjs

(Mk.

The same construction occurs

W.- Sch., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 149. Thompson, Synt., etc., p. 54; W.-Th., p. 126. See further

also

Cf.

CI. Rev., 1906, p. 304; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 261.

J.

Thompson,

in 8ie\66pres

15

irpdoTrjv

(pv'XaKrju

33, ytvonkvq% cipas

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

794

Cf.

:

cate the article

:

not

article are

:

See

often absent.

is

Mk.

Cf.

10).

:

Examples with the

Mt. 27 64; Lu. 12 38; Ac. 10 40. In the Predicate. As already shown in v, {i),

wanting. {h)

12

Sevrepav (Ac.

/cat

eKTTjs.

in the predi-

Cf. 0e6s

v, {i).

6 Xoyos

riv

1:1), 6 deos ayairr] earlu (1 Jo. 4:8), etc. This is the rule unless the terms be convertible or the predicate is singled out as prominent. For the superlative without the article see also 1 Jo. 2 18. (Jo.

:

Cf. 1 Pet. 1:5, ev

ecrxaT-o) /catpuj.

Abstract Words.

(i)

In English the presence, not the abwords needs explanation. Hence

sence, of the article with abstract

the anarthrous

Gal. 5

lists in

:

20

22

f.,

harmony with our idiom than the

in

In German,^ however, the opposite absent in the Greek, where the

5:12, 13; 7:12.

The

true.

seem to us much more with the article in Rev.

f.,

lists

often

is

German

article is often

would have it. Cf. Ro. 1 29. See iv, (c), for discussion of article with abstract nouns. No vital difference was felt between articu:

and anarthrous abstract nouns (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 259). (i) Qualitative Force. This is best brought out in anarthrous nouns. So el e^eatLU au8pl yvvalKa airoXvaaL (Mk. 10 2; cf. 1 Cor. lar

:

7: 10), xapaScocret yovels (13

kirl

12),

:

yvvauos, 6 Xpicros

In

Cf. also

Eph. 5:23,

at yvvoLKes rots avbpaaLv (verse 24)

and

class.

(k)

See

and

/ce^aXi) rrjs eKKKrjaias

utos

— xaxTjp (Heb.

Only Object of Kind.

:

Some

14), yovevaiv

kariv K€(pakri

avrjp

article, class

1)}

These partake of the nature of

They

article.

may be passed by

These

also

of these anarthrous examples ap-

pear in prepositional phrases like e^ apLarepcou (Lu. 23 8e^tcov (ib.), etc.

ttjs

avTOs aoorrip rod aooiiaros.

proper names and often occur without the often have the article.

:

note the generic

12

— reKva

irarrip reKvov

fxovoyovov^ irapa. Trarpos (Jo. 1

cos

(Ro. 1:30).

CLTeLdels

davarov Kal

a.8e\4>ds a8e\(t>6v eis

:

33),

(already discussed)

.

k

The

by such words as yrj and ohpavol (2 Pet. "heaven and earth." Cf. (/), Words in Pairs. 0dXao-(7a we find sometimes anarthrous with prepositions (Ac. 7 36; 10 32) and in Lu. 21 25 r]xovs dakaaarjs Kal aaXou. But it has the point

is

3:5).

best illustrated

Cf. English

:

:

:

article in contrast

with

yrj.^

See also Lu. 21

:

25

kp lyXiw Kat creXTjvr] Kal

17X101;. So we can say "sun, moon and stars," etc. Gdraros should also be noted. Cf. ICor. 15:21;Mt. 16 28; 20: 18; Lu. 23: 15; Ph. 1 20, etc. It is anarthrous as subject, object, with adjectives and with preposi-

aarpois,

Mt. 13 6 :

17X101;

dj'aretXavTos, 1

Cor. 15

:

41 86^a

:

N. T. Gk.,

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 82

:

p. 150. f.;

W.-Sch., p. 170.

^

w.-Th.,

p. 121.

:

THE ARTICLE

(tO "APGPOn)

795

tions. Many of these examples occur with prepositions like Lu. 21 25 above, or with a genitive like vie dia^oXov (Ac. 13 10).^ Cf. 1 Pet. The word 0e6s, like a proper name, is freely used with and 5 8. without the article. But it is "beyond comparison the most frequently in the Epistles without the article." ^ This may be alone as :

:

subject, deos (Ro. 8

:

33)

as a predicate, Beds

;

rju

6 'Koyos (Jo.

1:1); as

h

dew (Jo.

genitive, yvuaeojs deov (Ro. 11:33); with prepositions,

3

21); ^vith adjectives, 9e6s evXoyrjrds (Ro. 9

with participles also, deQ ^uiVTL Kal ak-qdivia (1 Th. 1:9); in conjunction with Trariyp (Gal. 1:1). These illustrations can be greatly multipHed. So :

:

5);

and Truevfxa ay lov may occur with and without the arGarvie^ quotes Bartlett on Acts as saying that when irvevna is anarthrous it describes the human condition, not the divine

also wvev/uLa ticle.

iiyiov

But

agency.

may

it

rule, as there are

a genitive hke

k

if

riv TTveviJLa

that the article taught,* that

The use

of Trvevixa with

9)

is

the Son.

:

is

Cf. also 15

proper

by

the personahty of the Holy Spirit

Jo. 14

26, to irvevfxa to ayLov, where spoken of in distinction from the Father and

name

:

See also to

26.

:

at the baptism of Jesus. tically a

when

absent

is nullified

the Holy Spirit

God,

it.

and with a preposition, some examples. An example :

3:5), accounts for (Jo. 7 39) merely illustrates the use of irvevixa as substantially a proper name. As for Middleton's rule

like debs

to

this is not a purely artificial

Xpiarov (Ro. 8

irvevjia

irvevnaros (Jo.

like ouTTco

is

be questioned

evident exceptions to

irvedfxa

Kuptos, like deos

and

to ayiov (Lu. 3 irveviia, is

:

22),

often prac-

N. T. In the Gospels it usually refers Lord, while in the Epistles of Paul in parnearly always means the Lord Jesus.^ It is not merely in in the

like the O. T.

ticular it

a prepositional phrase

like the

common

ev Kvplui (1

the genitive like to epyov Kvplov (1 Cor. 16

Cor. 7: 22), or

but especially Kvptos Ttjo-oDs XpLOTTos (Ph. 1:2; 2:11, etc.). In the Gospels 6 XpLffTos is usually a verbal adjective='the Anointed One,' the Messiah (Mt. 2 :4; Jo. 1:41). In Mt. 1:1; Mk. 1:1, we have XptcTTos as a proper name and even in the words of Jesus as reported in

Mk.

:

10),

9 41, Xpto-roO, and in the address of Peter in Ac. 2 :

:

was a natural growth. In Paul's Epistles Xpto-Tos is more frequent than 6 Xpto-ros.^ There is even a development in Paul's use of 'Irjaovs Xplcttos and Xpto-ros 'Irjaovs. 38, 'Irjaov XpiaTov.

It

N. T. Gk.,

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

W.-Th., p. 122.

3

Expos., Oct., 1909, p. 327. See Rose's list for Paul's use of

^

trine of the

Gk.

Art., pp.

486

p. 148.

if.

It

W.-M., footnote,

"

Cf.

6

w.-Th.,

Middleton's Docbased on Textus Rec.

Kvpios, XpiarSs, etc., in is

p. 151.

p. 124.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

796

In his earlier Epistles the former is the rule (cf. 1 Th. 1:1), while Epistles he prefers Xpiaros 'Irjaovs (2 Tim. 1:1). Other examples of this idiom are seen in Koa/xos, which even in the

in the later

nominative is anarthrous, knot Koa/jLos eaTahpwrai (Gal. 6 14). Cf. Ro. 4:13. See also kv k6(tixoo (Ro. 5 13) and cnrb Kara^oXrjs kocthou No^tos is a word that is used with a deal of free(Lu. 11 50), etc. dom by Paul. In general when voijlos is anarthrous in Paul it :

:

:

refers to the edv kv

Mosaic law, as

vofjLov irpdcraris

vofjLcp

(2

:

23),

and

Cf. €7co 5ta vo/xov

(Ro. 6

:

(2

:

It occurs so

in the genitive, like e^ epywv airedavov (2

vofxco

In iTepov

14).

In 2

indeterminate.

So 17). with prepositions, as

in ewavairavT^ vonco (Ro. 2

25), etc.

vo/jlov

(Gal. 2

dXXd

(7: 23) v6yuos= 'principle,'

14, Wpt]

:

vojjlov

19), viro vbp.ov

:

to.

/jlyj

vo/jlov

exovra, the

:

viro

:

16).

X'^P'-^

and is here Mosaic law

meant, but not in iavrols elalv vbp.os. It is at least problematical whether vb/xos in 2 13, ol aKpoaral vbixov, and at vrotTjrat vbfxov (note the article with the other words) means the Mosaic law and so really definite or law as law (the hearers of law, the doers of law).^ X. The Indefinite Article. The Greek had no indefinite article. It would have been very easy if the absence of the article in Greek always meant that the noun was indefinite, but we have seen that this is not the case. The anarthrous noun may per se be either definite or indefinite. But the Greek made an approach to the modern indefinite article in the use of els and ns. The later writers show an increasing use of these words as the practical equivalent of the present indefinite article. This matter has already been discussed under these two words (ch. XV). An example of tls is seen in voixLKbs rts (Lu. 10:25). The tendency was constantly for els to displace rts, so that "in modern Greek is

:

the process

This use of

is

complete,"^

els is

i.e.

drives out

els

rts

in this sense.

seen in the papyri and need not be denied in the

As a N. T. example of els='a' see els ypa/jL/xarevs (Mt. 8 19).^ The indefinite article does not appear with predicates in the modern Greek. ^ Unus in the sense of the indefinite article N. T.^ :

is

N. 1

174

one of the peculiarities of the Latin Vulgate (Jacquier, Le T. dans VEgl. Chr., Tome II, p. 122). For a

full

and detailed discussion

3

Moulton, Moulton,

*

Cf. for

6

Thumb., Handb.,

2

of the

whole matter see W.-Sch., pp.

ff.

Prol., p. 96. ib., p.

LXX

97.

use, C.

See

Thumb, Handb.,

Cf. Jann., Hist.

and

p. 42.

S., Sel., p.

p. 41.

Gk. Gr.,

25.

p.

164

f.

CHAPTER XVII VOICE

(AIA0ESI2, Genus)

Point of View. For a discussion of the nature of the verb see chapter VIII, Conjugation of the Verb, i and ii. See (a) Distinction between Voice and Transitiveness. I.

and chapter VIII, vi, for a discussion of this point. The matter might have been well reserved for syntax, but it seemed worth while to set forth at once the fundamental facts about II, (b),

assumed, therefore, that one understands that deal with the question of transitive or innot does voice per se point concerns the verb itself, not the That action. transitive voice.

It is here

Active and middle verbs may be either transitive or inPassive verbs may even be transitive, though usually intransitive, in one sense of "transitive." But Gildersleeve^ holds voice.

transitive.

that

"a

transitive verb

is

a verb that passes over to a passive

rather than one that passes over to an object."

That

is

truer of

Latin than of Greek, which, "with a lordliness that reminds one of English," makes a passive out of any kind of an active. Terminology in syntax is open to dispute at many points, but I see only hopeless confusion here unless voice is kept to its real meanIn Kijhner-Gerth^ it is held that "the active has a double meaning," either intransitive or transitive. My point is that the voice per se has nothing to do with that question. Some verbs are intransitive, some are transitive, some are used either way. ing.

This freedom in the use of verbs increased till in the later Greek verbs that were once intransitive become transitive.^ Brugmann^ properly separates the question of transitive and intransitive verbs from that of voice siderative verbs).

(cf.

Some

iterative, intensive, inchoative, de-

were due (Mk. 6:6), The modern Greek preserves the same

of the intransitive uses of verbs

to the absence of the reflexive pronoun, as in repLrjye airoppixpaPTas (Ac.

27: 43).^

1

Am.

Jour, of PhiloL, 1908, p. 279.

2

Bd.

I,

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 357.

p. 89.

797

*

Griech. Gr., p. 4G7.

*

Jebb.,V. and D.'s Handb., p. 318.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

798

NEW TESTAMENT

freedom in the use of transitive and intransitive verbs and has peculiarities of its o^vn.^ (&)

ject.

Meaning of Voice. The use of voice then

not to the object.

Voice relates the action to the subis

to direct attention to the subject,

That concerns

transitive

and

intransitive verbs.

StahP puts it crisply: "The voice of the verb describes a relation of the verb-idea to the subject." The Cf. chapter VIII, vi, (6). (c) Names of the Voices. names come from Dionysius Thrax (about B.C. 30), but "he has of a middle sense," ^ showing that already the middle disappearing before the passive. The terminology is very poor. Gildersleeve^ calls the fashion of the Germans "a positively indecent nomenclature," since they call the voices genera {yevrj),

no inkling is

"based on a fancied resemblance to the genders." follow the French voix (Latin vox), found

first

We

in English

in this sense in the

Grammatica graeca nova of J. Weller (a.d. 1635).^ See chapter VIII, vi, (c), (d), (e). (d) History of the Voices. Cf. also Jannaris, Historical Gr., p. 362 f.; Moulton, Prol, p. 152. In the pro-ethnic language there were probably both active and middle. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Syntax, Bd. II, p. 413. There was in the Sanskrit, save in the present the passive meaning with the use of middle and active endings was sure to bring confusion and a tendency towards simplification. It was inevitable that the three voices

no passive as there was none system.^

The

rise of

In the actual outcome, the passive, though an interloper, ousts the middle of its forms and of most of its uses.'' In the modern Greek vernacular, therefore, we find only

should go back to two.

two voices as to form, for the passive has taken over the meaning of the middle also (Thumb, Handh., p. Ill f.). In the beginning there were only active and middle. In the end we find only active and passive. The verb development in the (e) Help from the Sanskrit. Indo-Germanic languages has been more independent than that of nouns. Latin, for instance, has recast its verb-system, and it Sanskrit is quite difficult to compare the Greek and Latin voices. 1

Thumb., Handb.,

2

Kjit.-hist. Synt. d. griech.

»

Thompson,

«

Notes on Stahl's Synt. of the Gk. Verb

p.

112

f.

Verbums,

p. 42.

Synt., p. 158. in

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908,

p. 275. 6

c

Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 233. Whitney, Sans. Or., p. 201.

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 362.

VOICE (aiaoesis)

799

and Greek have preserved the voices best of all. Hence the Sanskrit can throw a good deal of light on the Greek voices.^ (/) Defective Verbs. Not all verbs were used in all the voices. Some were used only in one, some in two, some in all three. Then again, some verbs had one voice in one tense, another voice in another tense. This is just like the Sanskrit,^ and just what one would expect from a living language in contrast with an artificial one. Brugmann,^ indeed, divides verbs, as to voices, according to with active only, middle only, with both, etc.). In the N.T. Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gl^., p. 180) finds the same general use of the voices as in the older Greek, the same difficulty in differthis principle (those

and the same "arbitrariness" in the use But much of this difficulty is due to coming

entiating the voices,

of

individual verbs.

at

the matter with preconceived rules. is

quite unsatisfactory.

Blass' treatment of the voices

Cf. further for this matter, cliapter VIII,

VI, {d). II.

The

the active

Active Voice (8id0€(ns evep-yeriKTi).

The

Stoics called

bpdi] also.

Meaning of the Active Voice.

In this voice the submerely represented as acting or existing, for state (cf. elu'i) must be included as well as action. It is not certain whether the active or the middle is the older, but the active is far the more (a)

ject is

common. (6) Either Transitive or Instransitive. There is nothing peculiar in the N. T. about this. Each verb has its own history. One originally transitive may become intransitive and vice versa ^ Cf. dyco

which

may

be intransitive ayufieu (Mt. 26:46;

interjectional aye, Jas. 4

In apavres (Ac. 27

:

:

13, 17) the object is

probably understood

usually transitive,

intransitive in Ac. 27: 14

(ejSa'Keu,

5:18

:

(tr.)

and

in

Mt. 13 26

'rushed').

(intr.).

So

Lu. 7 38, but intransitive in Mt. 5 45. sitive (Mt. 10:8), but see Mt. 26:46. :

:

the 35). (7171'

Mt. 6:28 and 2 Cor. 9:10. BaXXw even in Jo. 13:2 (cf. Ac. 22:23), but it

Cf. also av^auoo in

vavp).

cf.

13) or transitive yjyayov avrbv (Lu. 19

:

is is

Cf. BXaaravco in Jas. iSpexw is transitive in

'Eyelpco is usually tran-

EvayyeXi^o:

is

transitive

Rev. 10: 7, but intransitive in 14: 6. "Ex^ is transitive except when used with adverbs, when, as in ancient Greek, it may be intransitive. Cf. robs kukcos Ixovras (Mt. 4:24), eaxarcos exet (Mk. in

1

2 '

<

Comp. Philol., p. 404 f. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. Gricch. Gr., pp. 459 ff. Cf. Thompson, Synt., Cf. Jtinn., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 357.

Giles,

p. 159.

5

23),

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

800

exovra (Jo. 11: 17), ourcos ex^L (Ac. 7:

T]8r)

(Ac. 24

:

25).

KXti^oj is

Mt. 8

1),

TO vvu txov

but intransitive in intransitive, though also transi-

transitive in

20,

:

In Ac. 7 42 arpk4>o} is In the N.T. dpLafx^evoo is transitive and the same But in Text. Rec. kfjLadijTevae is intransitive in is true of ixadr]T€vw. Mt. 27 57. Cf 8vvo: intransitive in Lu. 4 40 and
:

12.

:

tive elsewhere.

.

:

:

:

(Thumb, Handb.,

p. 112)

and verbs that

from one use

oscillate

to the other.

Composition. These may may be just the opposite. As examples of transitive compounds from an intransitive simplex take dLafSalvw (Heb. 11:29), but intransitive in Lu. 16:26. So (c)

Effect of Prepositions

make

.in

the verb transitive or the result

dirjpxero rrjv Tepetx'*^ (Lu.

19

11), TapepxG(^d^ T-qv Kpiacv (11

:

of

(simplex either

ayci}

are

(Mt. 7

aira.'yo}

18

Trpoayco (Lu.

:

13),

:

tr.

or

On

42).

which are often intransitive

intr.)

(Mt. 9

7rapd7co

:

The compounds

the other hand, instransitive compounds abound.

:

Treptayw (Ac. 13

9),

:

11),

but not dra7co. Cf. also With /3dXXw note e7rt/3dXXw in Mk. 4 37 3

39), i»7rd7co (Jo.

8),

:

Mk. 4 29. and the peculiar kirt^aXcov in 14 72. Examples of several intranThus airexoo (Mk. sitive compounds of exco occur in the N. T. 14 41), hexo: (Mk. 6 19), exexw (Lu. 14 7; Ac. 19 22), irepikxca Here the (1 Pet. 2 6), Trpoaexco (Mt. 7: 15), vwepkxoo (Ph. 4 7). substantive has dropped out in most cases and the verb comes to Trapadldwfn in

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

stand alone

Cf. avamfiivTOi (Mt. 2

(cf. irpoakxoi vovv).

(Ro. 16:17) and

ttpoo-kotttco

:

12),

iKK\ivoi

Karairavco is transitive

(Jo. 11:9).

Heb. 4:4, 10. Cf. aToppliTTco in shows intransitive compounds with ava- (Ac. The modern Greek 5 22), dTTo- (Ac. 3 26), kwL- (Lu. 2 39). surpasses even the kolpt] in its facility for making all sorts of compound verbs (tr. and intr.) and in particular verbs compounded with nouns, like kTeKvoTp64)T]aev and t^evobbxw^^ (1 Tim. 5:10). Cf. in Ac. 14:18, but intransitive in

Ac. 27 43.

^rpecjiw

:

:

:

:

Thumb, Handh., p. 112. (d) Different Tenses Vary. '

first aorists

Cf.

eaTT]

is

all

the

compounds

no exception, as

rr}v

vavv

is

of

10

:

6)

from

Thus

:

This distinction

36).

Acts 27 28 :

(Stao-rTjcrai'Tes)

Some of the "strong" intransitive when the present is

avtopya (1 Cor. 16

airoXXviJLi,

(Mk. 9

'iarqpn.

to be supplied.

or primitive perfect actives are transitive.

Thus where both second and and the first transitive.

intransitive

(Lu. 6:8), but laT-qaev avTo

applies to is

occur, the second

laravaL (Lu.

:

9)

13

from :

25)

avolyw, airoXoAa (Mt.

from

IVrT/Att,

irkiroida

801

VOICE (aiabesis)

Moulton^ 19) from TeWoj, akarjwa (Jas. 5 2) from a-fjro). seems to confuse "transitive" with "active" and "intransitive" with "middle" in his discussion of these perfects: "We have a number of cases in which the 'strong' perfect active attaches itself in meaning to the middle." The middle is not in itself intransitive, (Ro. 2

nor

:

:

the active in

is

itself transitive.

had no

perfect originally

"The

conjecture that the

distinction of active

and middle,

its

person-endings being peculiar throughout, affords the most probable explanation of the facts: when the much later -Ka perfect arose, the distinction had become universal." It is doubtless true that in the primitive -a perfect there was no distinctive middle form. But why seek for a middle sense in the primitive perfect active because

it

does happen that yeyova (Jo. (Jo. 17

from

1)

:

many

happens in

epxo/JiaL,

1

two

:

cases to be intransitive?

found with

4) is

ylvoixai

intransitive middles.

and

It

k\rfKvda

It is also true

few verbs which have perfect. So it is with intransitive, this primitive, but not always Rev. 11 17), ireirovda (trans.. etXr^^a cLK-qKoa (trans., Ac. 6 11), Heb. 8 6). (trans., 13 reruxa is, Lu. (intr. as the verb itself 2), itself), though verb like the intr. 1 15, So with KeKpayev (Jo. that future middles are the rule with a

:

:

:

:

:

(some MSS. in Lu. 19 40) is future perfect middle. 10 4) is transitive, though defective, while eotfca (Jas.

K€Kpa^ofxaL

:

Ol8a (Jo. 1 :6),

19

:

:

like

e'icoda

(Mk. 10

:

is

1),

But

intransitive.

yeypa4)a (Jo.

22) is transitive.

(e)

The Active

the voice,

as Causative. But this usage is not due to and is, besides, common to all languages.^ Cf.the Hebrew

Viteau ("Essai sur la Syntaxe des Voix dans Grec du N. T.," Revue de Philologie, 1894, p. 2) says that the Greek voices would not be strange to a Jew who was used to the seven conjugations of the Hebrew verb. But the point is not

Hiphil conjugation. le

strictly parallel.

In one sense this idiom

what one does through another he does avTov dmreXXet (Mt. 5

:

i.^

due to the fact that

himself.^

But

45), strictly causative.

tXa/Sev 6 IltXdros tov 'It^crovv Kal kixaurlywaev,

Cf. top tjXlov in Jo. 19

:

1,

the other kind of causa-

So also with TepLheixev (Ac. 16 3). There was indeed a remarkable increase in the LXX in the number of verbs used in the causative sense, many of which had been usually intransitive. Cf. /Sao-tXei/co, which occurs 36 times in the causative sense in the LXX (cf. Judg. 9:6)." The Hebrew Hiphil is partly

tive occurs.

:

^

Cf. Jann., Hist.

1

Prol., p. 154.

»

Gildersleeve, Synt. of CI. Gk., p. 63.

«

C. and

S., Sel., p. 76.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 359.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

802

See further verbs in

responsible for this increase.^ Kara8ov\6co (Gal. (/)

Active with Reflexives.

unusual in this construction. €/3aXev eavrov

21

Certainly

there

is

21:8), irpoaex^Te eavrois (Lu. 17:3).

(Jo.

nothing

(Mk. 15

Cf. accaov aeavrop

:

30),

Cf. Jo.

Blass^ indeed says that the ''active for middle" occurs.

18.

:

One

like

-oco,

2:4).

hesitates to subscribe to that dictum.

indeed true that

It is

much

the use of the reflexive pronoun with the active brings out

than the mere middle. It is not necessary to say that KaTadovXol (2 Cor. 11 20) is used "for"

more sharply the

reflexive relation

:

It is true that reipdfco in the

the middle. TeLpaofjLaL,

but this

is

has

erally

MSS. vary (Lu. 18

(TLv

TTOLetadaL

number

7

common

and middle

(Jo.

14:23), iroXenov (Rev. 11:7),

15

:

13), cFv<xTpo4)y]v

And

aT0v8r]v.

of Toteco with

eXeos (Lu. 10: 37), KOTverbv (Ac.

(Tvvufxoaiav (Ac. 23

xotew

where

though the N. T. gen-

f.),

ixovr]v

1),

in the Attic,

ava^oKrjv, X670J', wopeiav,

5:27), :

With

of examples of the active

greatly between active :

supplants the Attic

not due to a confusion of voice.

the N. T. does show a the middle was more

kolvt]

8:2),

(Ac. 23

:

the

eKdlKr]-

kp'lglv (Jo.

avix^ovKiov

(Mk.

But

this is

12).

what we find in the KOLvi] (inscriptions and papyri). Cf. Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 120. So even /3tdfaj and eTTLXavdavoj (Mayser, Gr., p. 386). The same tendency appears in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 114). Cf. bikppri^ev to. lixana avTov (Mt. 26 65). In these examples Blass has in my judgment read too much into the active voice. But it is certain that in Trpocrexere eavTo'is (Lu. 12 1) there is more emphasis on the reflexive idea than precisely

:

:

in
active.

5

:

15).

Cf.

Impersonal Active. Cf. xeptexet

h

rfj

Moulton, Prol,

p. 157.

Some impersonal verbs

occur in the

2:6), and

ejSpe^ev (Jas.

ypa(t)fj

(1 Pet.

17).

:

{h)

Infinitives.

These do not alwaj^s

voice, especially in the "epexegetic" use,^

to see," infinitive

XX,

(ch.

reflect

Hke

the force of the

our' English "fair

"good to eat." Cf. KpLdrjvai and Xa^elv, Mt. 5 has no voice in Sanskrit. See further under

:

40.

The

Infinitive

Verbal Nouns).

Active Verbs as Passives of Other Verbs.^ Thus awodvrjaKoo is more common than the passive of cnroKTeivco (-KTepvoo), though examples of this passive occur in the N. T. (Rev. 6:11, etc.). W. H. read KaKcos exet in Mt. 17:15 rather than Kaxcos So e/cTrtTTTco (Ac. 27: 17, 26, 29) occurs 7rd(rx€t (cf. ttolco KaKus, etc.). (i)

1

2

Thack., Gr. of the O. T. in Gk., p. 24. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 183.

^

cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 63.

Thompson,

Synt., p. 172.

^

803

VOICE (aiaoesiz) as passive of k/SaXXo;, but note k/3aXXeo-^at in Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 75.

turn

'I

am

told.'

in the sense 'It

is

But

In

in 5

reported.'

:

1

Cor. 11:18

1

d/couerat

But

in all

Mt. 8

:

12.

Cf.

has the classic

d/vouco

the passive

itself

occurs

such cases the distinction

between the verbs is not really lost. in. The Middle Voice (SidGeo-is |i€crT|). See chapter VIII, (a) Origin of the Middle.

vi, (c), for

the

uncertainty as to the priority of active and middle.

That quesBoth active and

is an open one and must be left open. middle appear in Sanskrit and in Homer. The prehistoric situation Logically the active would seem to come is purely speculative. first, though the difference in form may be due to variation in sound (ablaut).^ Probably at first there was neither active nor middle, the distinction being a development. In the Sanskrit we meet a full system of both active and middle forms for all the tenses (not all the modes), the participle, however, having only a

tion

system and the infinitive no voice at all. But each verb own development and that was by no means uniform. Some had a very limited use as to voice, tense and mode. In Homer indeed the middle is rather more common than in later Greek.^ It is only in the Sanskrit, Zend (Old Persian), Greek and Gothic that the middle is kept as a distinct voice."* In the Gothic only remnants of the middle are found,^ while in Latin the middle as a separate voice disappears.^ It is very difficult to run a parallel between the Latin and_ Greek voices. But there is a considerable remnant of Latin middles like miror, sequor, utor (cf Draeger, Hist. Syntax, pp. 145 ff.). The final disappearance of the Greek future and aorist middle before the passive is well sketched by Jannaris.'^ But at first we are not to think of the passive at all, that interloper that finally drove the middle out of use. It is urged that the term (&) Meaning of the Middle. "middle" is good because the voice in meaning stands between partial

has

its

.

the active and the passive.^ the middle

is

But, unfortunately for that idea,

older than the passive.

It is true that the passive

arose out of the middle and that the middle

marks a step towards

Moulton, Prol., p. 152. ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. * Cf. O. Hoffmann, Das Prasens dcr indogcr. Grundspr., 1889, p. 25. In the Bantu language Mr. Dan Crawford finds 16 voices (reflexive, reciprocal, intensive, etc., all having special forms). ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 362 f. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 406. 8 Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 57. « lb., p. 405. »

2

<*

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

804

The

the passive.

was a sepaand all verbs.

passive idea existed before there

rate passive form, a thing never true of

all

tenses

The Hebrew Hithpael conjugation is somewhat parallel/ but not wholly so. The only difference between the active and middle is that the middle calls especial attention to the subject. In the active voice the subject is merely acting; in the middle the

voices

subject

What

acting in relation to himself somehow.

is

this pre-

the middle voice does not say. That must come out of the context or from the significance of the verb itself. Gildersleeve ^ is clearly right in holding that the interpretation of the cise relation is

between active and middle is in many cases more than grammatical. "The middle adds a subjective element." ^ Sometimes the variation from the active is too minute This "word for one's self" is often for translation into Enghsh. very difficult of translation, and we must not fall into the error of explaining the force of the middle by the Enghsh translation. As examples (c) Often Difference from Active Acute. difference lexical

note:

alpeoi, 'I

'I

o-Kco,

T

take to myself ('choose'); avanLfivrj'I remind myself ('remember');

aua/jLinvnaKOfxai,

hold off; airexomi-,

'I

ctTrexw,

take'; alpkofxat,

remind';

give back'; aToSidofxai,

'I

aTro8l8o)ni,

bold myself off

'I

give back

'I

('abstain');

my

of

owm'

('seU'); d7r6XXi;Mi, 'I destroy'; dTroXXuAiat, 'I perish'; aTrrw, 'I fasten';

touch'; apx^J, 'I rule'; apxanai, 'I begin';

'I

oLTTTo/jiaL,

counsel';

yevofjLaL, 'I

take counsel'

'I

l3ov\evoiJLaL,

marry' ('bridegroom'),

yaixkoixai ('bride'); 7euco, 'I

taste'; 7pd0c«j, 'I enrol';

'i(xro.p.ai,

'I teach';

'I

ya/j-ko},

'I

y pb.(i)op.ai

give to taste';

'I indict'

(but 'enrol

Samfco, 'I lend'; Savel^oixai, 'I

one's self in Lu. 2:5);

bMaKoi,

/SouXeuo;,

('deliberate');

didaaKOfxaL,

'I stand'; 'Kavdavu, '1

'I get taught';

escape notice';

fxiffdou, 'I let,' fj.Lad6oiJ.aL,

'I hire'; Trauw, 'I

'larrjuL,

borrow'; 'I place';

\avdavoixai, 'I forget';

make

to cease'; Tavofiai,

*I cease'; reido}, 'I persuade'; ireidoixaL, 'I obey'; ^atj'w, 'I (f)aivonaL,

'I appear';

4>o(^eo^,

'I frighten'; (j)ol3eonaL, 'I fear.'

show';

These

examples in the N. T. illustrate the difference between the two voices.^ (d)

may this:

This remark a truism, but it is justified when one can read "As the active is used in place of the middle, so the middle

The Use of the Middle not Obligatory.^

sound

like

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 277. Cf. Moulton, ProL, p. 153.

1

Ewald, Heb. Gr.,

3

Viteau, Essai sur la Synt. des Voix, p. 17.

4

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Synt., p. 117 6

f.;

§

"

243.

Gk.

Gr., p. 360;

Thompson,

Clyde Gk. Synt.,

Synt., pp. 168

ff.

Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gk., p. 66.

p.

58

f.;

Farrar, Gr.

805

VOICE (aiagesis)

^ often stands for the active which would naturally be expected." " interchangeably." Winer^ also speaks of the two voices being used Winer loses, one of his examples, for W. H. have avyKokei in

But

Winer correctly says that "it depended on the writer" which he would use. Of course, but that is not to say that no distinction existed. In Jas. 4 2 f., atretTe /cat ov Xa/xseems rather on purpose fiavtre, Blotl Ka/ccos airdaBe, the middle Lu. 15

:

9,

as in verse 6.

:

Blass^ ('ye ask for yourselves amiss,' Farrar, Gk. Syntax, p. 118). general in admits he though calls this ''an arbitrary interchange,"

ordinary requests (as from God), but the N. T., Mt. atreo/xat in business transactions (its usual use in in Jas. 4 2 f. point very the be 27 20; Lu. 23 23). This may in loco) on (James Mayor with agrees and 1 Jo. 5 14. Moulton^ "When says: loco) {in Mayor the correctness of the distinction. words, the using implies it ahetade, airetre is thus opposed to atreco for

the N. T. use of

:

:

:

:

without the spirit of prayer." See the same distinction drawn in Mk. 6 22-25; 10 35, 38 (Mt. 20 20, 22) 1 Jo. 5 15. Blass (Gr. Herod's offer to Salome of N. T. Gk., p. 186 note) observes that her use of the middle justifying him to gave her business relations :

:

:

(Mk. 6

:

24

f.).

When

;

:

the active and the middle occur side by

to the distinction. It is to be recalled in different stages of the language varied verb again that the same hardly pertinent to bring an inis it Hence in the voice used. because the middle is not used writers, T. dictment against the N. Attic Greek. As a matter of the in was it as with all verbs just

side the attention

is

drawn

from the Attic. Blass {Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 186) succinctly says that "the New Testament writers were perfectly capable of preserving the distinction between the active and the

fact,

Homer

differs

Mk. 14:47 note airaaaixevos ri]v (xaxo-ipav, while in In Matthew we a-wkcnraaev rrip /idxatpav avrov. have Mt. 26 51 we in Mark middle the supplanting awo and avrov pronoun have the dt, (op. Radermacher 120 f.). Gr., T. p. N. Radermacher, (cf.

middle."

So

in

:

however, as a result of his researches, finds in the The point of im Gebrauch des Mediums." "Undcherheit KOLvri 7 24 afivveadat = in Ac. So always. same the not is the middle middle 'assist,' not 'ward off from one's self,' but the force of the So in Col. 2 15, a-ireKdvaaixevos rds apxas, it is not is present.

p.

119),

:

:

'undress,' but 'throw off

from one's

self.'

N. T. Gk.,

1

Blass, Gr. of

2 3

W.-Th., p. 256. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

*

Prol., p. 160.

Cf. also ir\r]f)ovadac in

p. 186.

p. 185.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

80G Eph.

1: 23

and

tXtjpoOv in 4: 10.

much freedom

as

Thus

as in the N. T. 95) occur side

also

II,

Moulton* shows that there is and middle and eap alprjaOe (G. H. 36, b.c.

in the papyri in the use of active

by

edi^ alpfjTe

So

side.

yan€l(TdaL

= nuhere

fell

out of use.

See

(/).

Either Transitive or Intransitive. Thus kav fxri vlxp^vTai (Mk. 7:3) and rj^/avTO avrov (6:56), but e^iaraPTO (6: The middle is not, 52) and elaeropevevTo (6 56) are intransitive. therefore, intransitive in itself. That is a matter that belongs to the verb-stem. As to the future middles, like ^rjaofxai, see discus(e)

ra.%

xt'/'as

:

sion a little later.

Some

verbs, indeed, are transitive in the active,

but intransitive in the middle Cf. Hatzidakis, Einl., pp. 201 (/)

Direct Middle.

It

is

(cltoWvijll, a-iroWviJLat, ^aii'co, (f)aivonaL). ff.;

Thompson, Syntax,

p. 161.

necessary to discuss the various uses

of the middle, but the divisions

made by the grammarians are more They are followed here merely

or less arbitrary and unsatisfactory. for convenience.

The middle

no one word, not even tially

voice

is

very broad

reflexive, covers all the

in its

ground.

scope and

It

essen-

is

the voice of personal interest somewhat like the dative case.

Grosse (Beitrdge zur Syntax des griechischen Mediums und Passivums, 1891, p. 4) denies that the reflexive is the original use of the middle. But Rutherford {First Gk. Syntax, 1890, p. 74), derives

both passive and middle out of the reflexive use. For the various uses of the middle in Homer, who is specially fond of this voice, see Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 7. But, curiously, Monro mentions "the Intransitive use" as one of the separate idioms of the middle. Nearly every grammarian ^ has his o^vn division of these "uses" of the middle, none of which the Greeks themselves had. Gildersleeve^ is justly impatient with this ovcrrefinement and observes that "one must needs fall back on the way of the language," which "is capricious in such matters." It is needless to take up philosophical abstractions like "subjective" and "objective." It is not possible to tell whether the direct middle (reflexive middle)

direct middle

is

Greek

generally.*

active

and the

was the

original use of the voice or not.

comparatively rare in It

Homer and

began in the kolvt] to disappear, before the pronoun (cf. N. T.), but the direct middle

reflexive

' Prol., p. 158 f. He cites also awapai Xoyop, B.U. 775 pap. use the middle also.

2

Bd. »

The

in the early

(ii/A.D.).

But the

Gk. Synt., p. 117; Drug., Griech. Gr., pp. 459 ff.; K.-G., pp. 100 fT.; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., pp. 49 ff. * Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7. Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 278. Cf. Farrar, I,

^

807

VOICE (aiagesis)

revived again as the indirect middle disappeared before the passive because of "its subtle meaning."^ Hence in Neo-Hellenic "almost every transitive verb, if active, admits of a direct middle."

In modern Greek this direct reflexive is nearly the sole use of the The modern Greek has no distinction in forms between

middle.^

middle and passive, but the middle signification survives. Thus Xoufoyuat means 'I bathe myself (Thumb, Handb., pp. Ill, 114). Thumb finds the direct reflexive use common. Moulton^ practically confines this idiom in the N. T. to awrjy^aTo (Mt. 27: 5), 'he hanged himself,' and even here Moulton suggests 'choked' as a truer English translation. This is indeed "a survival from classical

Greek," but there seem to be other N. T. examples cited by Winer^ from Jo. 8 59 (cf. also 12

The example tKpv^r],

passive, as

is

(2 Pet. 2

:

36),

But in us Xovaanhri middle is evident, as Moulton admits in Cf. XovaaaOe (Is. 1 16), 'wash you.' Note

Moulton^ points

22) the direct

:

also. :

the Appendix (p. 238).

out.

:

'washed yourselves' (1 Cor. 6:11, correct translation in margin of Rev. V.). A good example also is OepfxaLvofxevos (Mk. 14: 54), 'warming himself (Rev. V.). It is rather gratuitous to doubt the direct middle TapaaKevaaeraL, 'prepare himself (1 Cor. 14:8). But Moulton adds fxi] aKvWov (Lu. 7:6) to Winer's list and illustrates by "the illiterate contemporary papyrus O.P. So also 295, ixri aK\vWe lar-qv^' (active and reflexive pronoun). pavrlacovTaL (W. H., Mk. 7:4) and ^aTTtaoovTaL (marg.) are both

also aireXomaade,

direct middles.

middle.

Zcoo-ai

(Ac. 12

Aoynarl^eade (Col. 2

8),

:

20)

:

And

ject yourselves to ordinances.'

"AxTo^at ('fasten myself

be also.

is

'gird yourself,'

is

also direct

probably direct middle, 'subviroraaaeade (Col. 3

to,'

'touch')

is

:

18)

may

really the direct

middle (Mk. 8:22). 'EweKTeLvofxevos (Ph. 3: 13) is 'stretching myself forward.' Cf. also vive(yTeCKap.t]v (Ac. 20:27), 'withdraw myself; aprLraaao/jievos (Ro. 13:2), 'line one's self up against.' In the case of TepL^aWofiaL it is probable that we have the direct middle 'clothe one's self (Mt. 6 29). The accusative of the thing :

is

added

in

Rev. 3

:

18.

It is possible to regard auawaveaOe

(Mt.

may

be 45) 5) merely the direct middle, 'enrol himself,' though the causative idea is possible. In Lu. 12 15 cfyvXaaaeaOe ('guard yourselves 26

:

as

direct

middle.

'AwoypaypaadaL

(Lu.

2

:

:

from') follows the classic idiom. is

'Avexofxepot a\\r]\cov

also the direct middle, 'holding yourselves 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3G0.

"

lb.

2

lb.

5

w.-Th.,

3

Moulton,

«

Prol., p. 156.

Prol., p. 15G.

(Eph. 4:2)

back from one an-

p. 253.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

808

The same

other.'

15 :29).

In

1 Pet.

thing 5: 5

true of aTrkx^adaL elbw\odvTOiv (Ac.

is

raTreLvocfipoavvrjv

kyKon^waaade, 'gird your-

we may have the same idiom. In Ac. 18: 5, avveixero toj Xoycp, we may have the direct middle, 'held himThere are to be added, besides, some of the self to a word.' selves with humility/

causative middles, hke

/SdTrrio-ai

(Ac. 22:16), 'get yourself bapIt is true that the list

tized' (cf. k^awTLo-avTo, 1 Cor. 10:2).

not a large one, but the idiom

The

is

clearly not obsolete in the

causative middle has a wider use also, as will be

is

N. T.

shown

directly.

Causative or Permissive Middle.

(g)

Cf. the

German

sich

This occasional use of the middle does not distinguish from the active and occurs both with the direct and the indi-

lassen. it

rect use of the middle.^

It

is

just so in

modern Greek (Thumb,

Handb., p. 114f.). It is, like transitive and intransitive, more the notion of the word than a phase of the middle voice.^ In later

Greek the causative sense occurs only with the

It is

not to be forgotten that originally there was no passive form

at

direct middle.^

The verb-idea and the context then alone decided the Even in the aorist and

all.

voice as between middle and passive. future,

where the passive

later has

a distinct form, the line was

not always sharply drawn, especially in the future.

But

More about

one hesitates to find a passive voice in the middle form, though it sometimes happens. Some few of these causative middles could be explained as passives, but by no means all. Certainly eKXe^a/jLevovs (Ac. 15 A considerable residuum remains. "In 22) is a true middle. Tb.P. 35 (ii/B.c.) eavrbv alrLacreTai, 'will get himself accused,' is a middle."* In Ac. 22 16, jSaTrrtcrat /cat airoXovaai rds aidaprias crov, this a little later.

in the aorist in particular

:

:

we have

the causative middle, one a direct, the other an indirect,

middle, 'get yourself baptized and get your sins washed away.'

So then k^aivTlaavTo (W. H. text in 1 Cor. 10 2) is causative, though many MSS. read e^awTlcrd-qaav. Blass^ has eccentric notions of textual criticism, for he rejects the middle here and contends Blass^ for it in Lu. 11 :38 on the authority of one minuscule! :

also argues that the sense of 'let' or 'allow' belongs to the pas-

sive rather

Thus

than to the middle, but this

adLKelade

and

awoaTepeiade (1 Cor. 6

is :

actives in next verse), 'let yourselves be

by no means

7)

may

certain.

be middles

(cf.

wronged and robbed.'

1

Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gr., p. 67.

*

Moulton,

2

Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 361.

^

Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 187.

«

lb., p. 185.

8

p. 162.

Prol., p. 162.

809

VOICE (aiagesis)

This permissive sense of the middle is closely allied to the causa^ In Lu. 2 5 airoypa^/aaeai may tive and approaches the passive. himself enrolled/ though airo'have causative, above) be (see (/) In Mt. 5 :42 bavlaaadai is 'to have 7pd<^ea^at (2 1) is passive. :

:

money

lent' ('to

MiadccaaaeaL (Mt. 20

borrow').

In

out for wages' ('to hire'). ^vpaadai (or ^vpaadai), (Tovrai T-qv KtclioKriv

we

(Ac. 21

1

Cor. 11

find the permissive middle.

But

24).

:

'Kovaaade,

3

:

5

according to text of Rev. V.

Trept/SaXetrat

(/) above.

comes rather

In Lu. 14 18,

19, exe

:

^le

Ke4>a\aLCoaaadaL

to. *lravTa

kv toj

the voice, but to the verb

Xpl(XtQ>

Cor. 6

(1

close to

more Uke modern English.

struction

Deut. 23

(cf.

Cf.

(Gal. 5

aTOK6\povTai.

causative, 'have themselves castrated'

'to

is

1)

:

let

6, /ceipda^co, Kt'ipaadai

:

:

1).

11).

:

:

^

^vpi]is

12)

So

aire-

In Rev. See

the passive sense.

we have a

con-

causative idea in

dm-

-KaprtTtitikvov,

The

(Eph.

1

:

10)

is

not due to

itself (-oco).

Indirect Middle. In the flourishing period of the language this was by far the most frequent use, but it finally faded before the active and the intensive (reflexive) pronoun or the passive.^ In force 1 Cor. 15 28, viroraynaeTaL, the passive may bear the middle {K)

:

(Findlay, Expos. Gr. T., in loco). But in general the indirect middle is abundant and free in the N. T. In the modern Greek Thumb gives no instances of the indirect middle. The precise

shade of the resultant meaning varies very greatly. The subject is represented as doing something for, to or by himself. Often the

mere pronoun is sufficient translation. Each word and its context must determine the result. Thus in Heb. 9 12, alwvlav \vTpw(nv :

Jesus

evpajjLevos,

by

himself.

is

He

represented as having found eternal redemption found the way. In Mt. 16 22, Trpo(T\afi6p.evos :

In

Mk.

9

8, TrepL^\e\l/anevoi, takes Jesus to himself.' In Lu. 8 27, round.' looking 'the disciples themselves suddenly In 8 52, himself.' on garment ovK evtbrnaro Ifxariov, did not put a beat 'they meaning, changed really eKOTTTOPTo avT-qv, the word has

avTov, 'Peter

:

:

'

:

themselves for grief as to her' ('bewailed her'), actually a direct middle. "We have, in fact, to vary the exact relation of the reflexive perpetually if we are to represent the middle in the form appropriate to the particular example." ^ That is precisely the case.

So

Trpo(TKa\e
ciples to himself.

(Mt. 10 Cf.

:

1)

represents Jesus as calling the dis-

elaKoXovnaL (Ac. 10

:

23).

So

irpocrXan^aveade

(Ro. 15 7; cf. also wpoaeXalSeTo) is 'take to yourselves.' Kalaapa behalf.' AlprjaoeruaXoOMat (Ac. 25 11) is I call upon Caesar in :

my

'

:

1

Thompson,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 360, 362.

Synt., p. 162. «

Moulton,

Prol., p. 157.

~

(Ph.

fiaL

10

:

9),

1

22)

:

In

probably

avTOV in

is 'I

though only

('procure'). is

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

810

take for myself ('choose'), while KTrja-nade (Mt. in the middle, means 'provide for yourselves'

airaaaixtvo^ Trjv ixaxaipav

'drawing his

sufficient,

Mt. 26

(Mk. 14

:

47), the possessive

own sword'

aireaTaaev

(cf.

'E/crtm^a/iews ra ifxana (Ac. 18

51).

6) is rather 'shaking out his clothes from himself,' while aTevixparo rds xetpas (Mt. 27 24) is probably 'he himself washed his hands.' In airudelade avTov (Ac. 13 46; cf. Ro. 11: 1) the idea is 'ye push it :

:

:

:

away from yourselves' ('reject'), 'kirkboade (Ac. 5 8) is away for your own interest' ('sold'). 'Ewo-^to-aro (Ac. 5

'ye gave

:

'kept back for himself.'

In

kTnbeLKvbixtvaL

means

2)

:

xtrcDms (Ac. 9

:

39) the

women were

'showing garments belonging to themselves.' Note the fulness of meaning in repLeTotrjaaTo (Ac. 20 :28). Cf. irapa4

TripelaOe (Gal.

6

20).

:

In

(Heb. 12

UapaLTrjarjade

In Col. 4

10), aireLTanr]v (2

:

Stefcoo-aro (Jo.

21

25)

:

:

7)

is

Cor. 4

we have

'beg

off

5, t6v Kaipov e^ayopa^6iJ.evoi,

:

:

2), *^KTpeTOfxaL (1

Tim.

'he girded round himself.'

from yourselves'

we have 'buying

('reject').

the oppor-

tunity for yourselves out of the open market.' AiroOeiievoL (Heb. 12 1) is 'laying aside from yourselves every weight.' In e^eXe^aro '

:

we have

(Lu. 10:42)

bibvoKeTo (Lu. 16

19)

:

'she selected for herself ('chose'). is

'Eve-

'he put clothes on himself,' though this

may

be direct middle with accusative of thing added. KaroTrrptCor. 3 18) is probably 'beholding for ourselves in a mirror.' In Ro. 3 25, ov irpo'tdeTo 6 Beds, note that it was God's own Son whom he set forth. This free indirect reflexive use came to be the typical middle in the flourishing period of the Greek ^o/xevoL (2

:

:

No

language. this

or

Xpa.op.aL

sity')

fixed rule can be laid

any other use

may

means

down for the translation of Even "deponents" like

of the middle.

be indirect middles. This word from xpn ('necesmake for myself what is necessary with something'

'I

An interesting group of middles occurs p. 158). 22—25, ave^akeTO, biaypooaopai, bLaTa^afxevos, irapayevonevos,

(Moulton, Prol., in Ac. 24

:

/xeTeirep\l/aTO,

bLaXeyop-hov, wopevov, peraKoXeaopat.

" indirect" middles, as

is

obvious.

These are not

Cf. also k/5aXX6yuewt (Ac. 27

:

all

38)

and TpoaeXaPero (Ro. 14 3). It is interesting to note the difference between irapelxe in Ac. 16 16 (the damsel who furnished gain for her masters) and TapeixeTo in Ac. 19 24 (Demetrius who furnished gain for his craftsmen and himself). So xet^co is 'to exercise suasion,' and Tret^o/xat to admit suasion to one's self (Moulton, :

:

:

'

Prol, p. 158). (i)

Reciprocal Middle. Since eavTuv was used in the recipit was natural for the middle to fall in with this idiom.

rocal sense,

:

VOICE (AIAeESIs)

Thus

(Mt. 26

'they counselled with one anfrom e^eKeyovTo (Lu. 14 7), 'they seats for themselves.'^ So also t^ovKtvaavTo

(Tvvej3ov\ev(TavTo

other,' does

not

811

:4),

differ radically

selected the first

:

(Jo, 12:10), avveredeLVTO (9:22), avvava/jLlypvadai (1 Cor. 5:9), KpivtaSai (6: 1), kixaxovTo (Jo. 6:52), bLokeybnevos (Ac.

9

34, Trpos aWrjXovs dieXexdrj'^o.v,

:

The

reciprocal pronoun) .^

Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

we have

modern

reciprocal middle survives in

p. 114).

For

Mk.

In

19:8.

passive deponent with

examples see Gil-

classic

dersleeve, Syntax, p. 66.

Here the pronoun and the middle (j) Redundant Middle. both occur. This idiom is found as early as Homer and indicates a dimness in the force of the middle on the part of the speaker.

"The

effect is artificial"

according to Thompson.^

Gildersleeve

{Syntax, p. 68) sees in this idiom the effort to bring out

Moulton (ProL,

clearly the reflexive force of the middle.

more

p. 162)

cites from the papyri iavTov alTiaaeTai., Tb.P. 35 (ii/B.c). This redundance probably began very naturally. Thus in Ac. 7 58, dirWei'To TO. ijudna avroov, the personal pronoun is added, not the reflexive. So in VTroSrjaaL to. aavdaXLO. gov and Trepi^aKod to lp.aTi.bv GOV (12 8) and cCKatpal gov T-qu Ke4>a\7]v (Mt. 6 17). Cf. v'ncTovTai. rds xeipas (Mt. 15: 2) without the pronoun. So in Lu. 14: 1, Kal avToi Tjaav TrapaTrjpovfjievoi, the avTol wavers between mere personal and intensive. Cf. the active in Eph. 5 26, irapaGTrjGj] avTos eavTQ. But in Jo. 19 24 the LXX quotation is given as biepepiGavTo eauTois, while in Mt. 27 35 it is merely biepeplGavTo. Note also e^uauroj (Ac. 20 GeavTov Tapexbpevos (Tit. 2 7) and TroioO^uat 24). See also avedpbl/aTO avTov eavT^ ets vlop (Ac. 7 21) and 1 Tim. 3 13 iavTots wepLTOLovvTaL. Most of the examples, however, in the N. T. occur with verbs which are not found in the active. Cf, Lu. 9 23 apvrjGaGdo: eavTov, Ac. 24 10 to. irept epavTOV airoXoyovpaL, 26 2 :

:

:

:

—

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

:

riyitipai

(k)

tpavTov, Ph. 3

:

:

12 kpavTov ovtoj Xoyl^opa:.

Dynamic (Deponent) Middle.

"I would fain

drip-pan middle, the TravSkrrjs middle, the middle that the bottom to catch the drippings of the other uses."^ is

the most difficult use of the middle to explain.

call is

And

Some

the

put at this

writers

dynamic and the deponent. Others, like Thompson,^ make the dynamic include the deponent. The name "deponent" is very unsatisfactory. It is used to mean the laying

distinguish between the

1

Moulton,

2

Cf. Jann., Hist.

*

Gildersleeve,

'

Synt., p. 161.

Prol., p. 157.

Gk.

Am.

Gr., p. 361.

»

Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 1G6.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 277.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

812

NEW TESTAMENT

aside of the active form in the case of verbs that have no active voice. But these verbs in most cases never had an active voice.

Moulton^

is

term in realityno middle as to middle

clearly right in his contention that the

applies as well to active verbs that have

verbs that have no active. The term is usually applied to both middles and passives that have no active (Clyde, Gk. Syntax, p. 61). Others 2 use the term for middle verbs that have no longer

But "deponent" is a very poor definition. Nor the word "dynamic" much better. Winer's remark^ is not

a reflexive idea. is

very lucid: "From Middle verbs are to be carefully distinguished Deponents." They are indeed either transitive or intransitive, but some are in the middle voice, others passive. But the point about all the "dynamic" middles is that it is hard to see the distinctive force of the voice. The question is raised whether these verbs have lost the middle idea or never had it. "Like the rest of us, Stahl has to go into bankruptcy," Gildersleeve'' remarks on Stahl's attempt to explain this use of the middle. Moulton (Prol, inp. 158) thinks that in these verbs "it is useless to exercise our

genuity on interpreting the middle, for the development never progressed beyond the rudimentary stage." But these verbs perIt is possible sist in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 113). that the Greeks were

sensitive to the exact force of this

more

we are, just as they used the intensive particles so Where guessing is all that we can do, is it not clear that

middle than freely.

"dynamic" middles represent the original verb before the was drawn between active and middle? The French says je m'apergois, I perceive.' The intensive force of this middle these

distinction

'

is

common

mental action which are so

partially seen in verbs of

in

Greek, hke aiadavonat (Lu. 9 45), apveofxac (Lu. 12 9), TrpoatrtaoMai (Ro. 3 9), do-7rafo/zat (Ac. 25 13), dLajSe^aLOVnat. (Tit. 3 8), Karain \aijLpaponaL (Ac. 4:13, but note KaraXafxlSavcj: in the same sense :

:

:

:

:

Ph. 3:12), kvTkXXoixat (Heb. 11:22), kTnKavdauofjiaL (Mt. 16:5), euxojuat (Ro. 9 3), rjyeofxai, (Ph. 3 8), \oyi^oiJLaL (Ph. 4 8), iialvofiai (Ac. 26 25), txkfi4>ofiaL (Ro. 9 19), 4>ei8oiJLai (Ro. 8 32). I unagine that the personal interest of the subject is not so difficult to recog:

:

:

:

:

:

nise in such verbs, especially since in a

word

like KaTa\o.ix^a.voixa.i

occurs also in the active.

not "deponent," but vary,^ as does the N. T. in the use of it is

Thus we have

avii^ovKiov iroLrjaavTes

TrotoOAtat

(Mk. 15

»

Prol., p. 153.

^

Am.

2

Thompson,

^

Moulton,

3

W.-Th.,

Synt., p. 161.

p. 258.

The papyri

and

Trotw

with nouns.

1),

but

fxvelav ttolov-

:

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 278. Prol., p. 159.

VOICE (aiagesis) (Eph.

fievos

1

16).

:

Not

the N. T.

Cf

in the aorist.

commonly

are

in the aorist

At any

all .

813

There is the utmost freedom in the matter in the ''deponents" of mental action are middles These

jSouXo/zat, kvOv^xkojiai, eTrt/xeXeo/xat, evXa^eojjLaL.

called passive deponents in the present as well as

and future, but the matter

is

not clear by any means.

rate there are middle verbs which are very hard to explain,

like ylvoixai

(Mt. 8

:

26), aXkonai (Jo.

4

:

14), a(f>LKvkofxaL (Ro.

haiiaprvpoixai (Ac. 2:40), epxcfiaL (Jo. 1:39),

(Mt. 26

16

:

19),

epja^opaL (Mt. 25:

(Mt. 13 1), avve-rrofjLaL (Ac. 20 probably passive. It is not hard to see the reflexive idea in Sexofiat, (Mt. 10 14). UepL^XeTo/xai. is always middle in the N. T. (cf. Mk. 3:5), accenting the movement of the 16), Kade^ofiai

4;

cf.

sequor).

:

55), Kadrjiiai

:

:

Kelfxai is

:

eyes or concern expressed in the look. There are also passive deponents that correspond to this list that really do not seem to be passive in idea, like povXo/xaL, bl'vajiai, (jyajSeofxai. Some of these verbs have both middle and passive forms, Hke '^ivop.ai (eyhero,

Not all of these middle "deponents" have middle forms in all tenses. Cf. ykyova, rjXdov, kX-qXvda, eXadov. Then, again, some verbs have the deponent or dynamic middle only in the future, like 6^oiJ.aL, though Homer is

kyevqdriv) , bkxopiai (eSe^aro, ebkxGr]v).

But the

fond of the middle forms of this verb.^ middle call for special treatment. (t)

aorist

Middle Future, though Active Present.

and future

Some

verbs,

active in the other tenses, have the future only in the middle.

No

phenomenon is knowTi. For a list see Some of them are really separate verb-

real explanation of this

chapter VIII,

vi, (d).

roots, as opaco,

kadio),
oxpoixaL',

Others represent a special

variation of the future form, like airodavovixaL,

both

KOfxlaofiai

aKovaofxaL,

and

—^r]cropLaL,

KO(XLovpai.

yvcoaopai,

In other instances the old

N. T. before the active yeXaacj, KXavao}, Kpa^w,

ireaovixat, irionaL,

Others are regular enough, eaopai, davpaaofxaL,

classic

re^opat.,

(fyeii^opai.

middle has vanished in the

future, as in apapr-qao:, airavT-qaw,

-rral^w,

but like

pemoo, etc.

Some

apiraaoi),

verbs, like aKovw,

Some of these middle futures no difficulty. Thompson^ calls them all "strict middles," but most of them are as "deponent" as the verbs in the previous section. Clyde ^ quotes Curtius' explanation that an act in the future lies mainly in the mind of the speaker. But on the whole the matter remains unexplained, though the number has greatly decreased in the N.T. as in the KOLvi] generally.'* See also Dieterich,

fdco,

use either voice in the future.

create

1

Monro, Horn.

2

Synt., p. 105.

So the other poets. Gk. Synt., p. GO.

Gr., p. 7. »

Thompson, «

Moultou,

Synt., p. 165. Prol., p. 154.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

814

Untersuch., p. 205; Radermacher, justly takes

"the existence of

NEW TESTAMENT

N. T.

Gr., p. 120.

Moulton^

this large class of futures as addi-

tional evidence of a close connection between the middle flexion and the stressing of the agent's interest in the action of the verb." The use of the middle future (and occasionally aorist) as passive

comes under the passive voice, for it

The Middle Retreating

(m)

ing because of the active (cf

This

.

is

d/xaprTjo-co

See under

really passive.

in the N. T.

This

is

iv.

happen-

above) as well as the passive.

There was a considerable and even of confusion among writers in the later period.^ Different words had different histories in the matter. But we have just seen from the Hst of "dynamic-deponent" middles plenty of evidence that from the day of Homer on the function of the middle voice was indistinct in many verbs.^ "The accuracy with which the middle was used would naturally vary with the writer's Greek culture."^ And, it may be added, with the author's feelings at the moment. The judgment of Simcox^ is right, that the middle "is one of the refinements in Greek idiom which is perhaps beginning to be blurred in some of the N. T. is

true of the

amount

of variation

writers,

but

But

it is

It is

preserved to a greater or less extent in most."

is

no more "blurred" than in other writers of the

simply that

vive with

in general.^

kolvt]

all

all

kolpt].

the distinctions of earlier times did not sur-

On

the verbs.

used colloquially and

the whole, in the N. T.,

alTovfiai for

atrcD

is

the more elevated style, but

usage varies with different writers as in the LXX. Cf. Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 389. So mTepeon in Heb. 4: 1, but iarepovixat. in Ro. 3 23. But the change in the N. T. is mainly in the disuse of the middle, not in a new use of it. From Homer to modem Greek plenty of middles are hard to define, and the N. T. is no more erratic than the rest of Greek, not to say of the kolvt} (Moulton, ProL, p. 159). But the delicate distinctions between :

the active and the dynamic middle are lost in modem Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 112), if indeed they ever really existed. IV.

The Passive Voice

(a)

Origin of the Passive.

(StdGco-is iraGTiTiKii).

See chapter VHI,

discussion of the rise of the passive voice. ^

Monro, Horn.

1

Moulton, ProL, p. 155.

*

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 363

8

Hatz., Einl., pp. 194

<

Moulton,

5

lb., p. 159.

6

Lang, of the N. T.,

Prol., p.

Cf.

ff.

158

vi, (e), for

Gr., p. 42.

f.

Cf Thumb, HeUen., .

p. 127.

f.

p. 95.

'

a

In Sanskrit the middle

Cf. K.-G., Bd.

I,

pp. 121

ff.

815

VOICE (aiagesis)

was liable to be used in the passive sense. ^ As is well known in Homer, the future passive forms do not occur except two, fjLLyqaeadat and SarjaeaL (Stahl, Syntax, p. 66), and the distinction between aorist middle and aorist passive is indistinct. Indeed, strictly spealdng, there was no passive voice as to form in Greek, as there was none in the original Indo-Germanic speech.^ The passive sense was developed in various languages in different ways. This sense may be due to verbs of state, but Greek fell upon various devices like the active of some verbs (KaKws tx^, iraax^^)) the mere use of the middle, the development of two special tenses by the use of active endings (aorist) and middle (future) with a special

suffix.

In

Homer ^

e^\i)iir]v,

appears as a passive,

eax^drjv

kKTaixr\v, kaxoiJLrjv

"Even

as passives just like /SaXXo/iat, exonai.

being late."*

In

in Attic

Homer

occur

kaxop-riv

also the

form sometimes has practically the active This much of repetition is necessary to signification.^ or middle It is really no clearly before us. passive the position of the get distinctive aorist passive

Of. all in form as compared with the active and middle. French je me trouve and the use of reflexive pronouns in English. The subject is represented (6) Significance of the Passive.

voice at

as the recipient of the action.

He

is

acted upon.

The name

comes from patior (cf. Taax(^ vto in Mt. 17:12). The use ATTOKTavdfjvaL (Mk. 9:31) occurs as well as cnrodurjaKeLv.

"passive" '

of

irepiKeLixai

as the transitive passive (Ac. 28

:

20) of

TrepLTldrfUL is

somewhat different. The idea of having an experience is very vague and allows wide liberty. The point to note is that at first Only the this idea had no distinctive form for its expression. context and the force of the verb itself could make it clear. The future passive, being built upon the earlier aorist passive, reflects the Aktionsart of the aorist.^ (c)

With Intransitive or Transitive Verbs.

"Theoret-

ought to be formed from transitive verbs only with an accusative object."^ But Greek follows no such narrow rule. That is an artificial rule of the Latin which Greek knows nothing about. ^ Cf. KaTrjyopelTaL viro tQ)v TouSatcov (Ac. 22 30).

ically the passive

:

Other N. T. examples are

diaKovrjdrjvaL

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp. 201, 275.

»

Thompson,

*

Gildersleeve,

6

Sterrett,

7

Gildersleeve,

8

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Synt., p. 162.

The

Am.

'

:

45), eyKoXtiadat (Ac.

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 464.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 278.

Dial, of Horn.,

Am.

(Mk. 10

N. 27.

«

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 464.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 279.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 359.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

816 19:40),

evapea-TeladaL

napTvpeladai (Ac. 6

N. T.

:

(Heb. 13:16),

3),

NEW TESTAMENT Kareyvwa/j.evos

(Mt. 2

xp'7i"cf'''f€0"^cit

:

12).

(Gal. 2:11), Blass (Gr. of

"only in Lu. 2 26 do we have riv The passive is used with both active and Thus we have from Xoyl^ofiaL both ekoyiaaixriv and

Gk., p. 185) notes that

:

avTco Kexio77Mart(7/^ei'o^."

middle verbs. ekoyiadrfv.

Cf.

kyepo/jLrjv

and

eyevrjdrjv

The Passive Usually

{d)

sarily so.

AtSdo-Kco, for

from

ylvoixat..

But

Intransitive.

instance,

is

it is

not neces-

transitive in the passive, as

Th. 2: 15), and note Karr/xwews T-qv bbbv (Ac. 18:25). Cor. 9: 17; Lu. 7: 25; 9 25; Gal. 2 7. 1 Transitive passives are usually verbs that in the active have two accusatives or an accusative of the thing \vith the person in the dative or abkbibaxdnTi (2

See also

lative.

:

This accusative of the thing

Cf. eiTLaTevdrjaav

to.

(Rev. 7:9).

:

is

retained in the passive.

\6yLa tov Oeov (Ro. 3:2),

For

irepL^e^X-qu'evovs

aroXas

"Accusative" in chapter XI, Cases. Cf. also T-qv akvcnv ravT-qv Trepket/xat (Ac. 28 20). The transitive passive "deponents," like p-i] 4>o^r]driTe avrovs (Mt. 10: 26), call for special discussion a little later. Certainly there is no "passive" sense in iropevdyjvaL. The vernacular^ in later times Xeu/cds

full list see

:

preferred the active to passive.

N. T.

illustration.

In

ently has the force of

'let'

Cf. also TepLTepvrjade (Gal. 5

and

Cf. airovaiv (Lu. 12

ayviadr]TL (Ac.

:

or 'get'

2).^

21

:

(cf.

:

20) as

a

24) the passive appar-

the causative middle).

It is possible so to regard abiKelade

Cor. 6 6 f.). Sometimes, indeed, it is difficult whether a verb is middle or passive. Cf ttcoxoI eua77eXi^oPTaL (Mt. 11:5), -Kpoixop-tda (Ro. 3:9), hvbvvapLomde (Eph. 6 to

aTToarepeLcrde (1

:

tell

.

:

Indeed, as already said, in

10).

all

the Greek tenses save the

and the future it is always an open question whether we have middle or passive. "The dividing-line is a fine one at best" (Moulton, Prol., p. 162). Only the context and the verb-idea can decide. So with kydpop.ai (Mt. 27:63), irepuairaTo (Lu. 10:40) and dopv^k^xi (10:41), /Stdrerat (Mt. 11: 12). Cf. perfects in Ac. 13:2; 25:12; Ro. 4:21; 1 Pet. 4:1; Jo. 9 22. (e) Aorist Passive. This tense calls for special comment. As already stated, in Homer the aorist middle form, like the other middle forms, was sometimes used as passive.^ In itself there is no reason why this should not be so. The distinctive passive aorist (second and first) grew up side by side with this use of the aorist middle. 'E^dj'r;?' and l^-qv are really the same form at aorist

:

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 359.

2

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 185. Seymour, The Horn. Dial., p. 74. Cf. Brug., Griech.

3

Gr., p. 464.

VOICE (aiagesis)

Out

bottom.*

817

of this intransitive aorist active

grew

(cf, airoXuiXa)

the so-called second aorist passive forms (-^v) with active endings.

We have cKpv^rjv (Jo. 8 from o-reXXco, etc.) and

from the transitive kputttco (cf. eaTaXrjp 14 28) from the intransitive probable that riyepOtj sometimes (as in Mk. 16 6) is :

xatpw.

It is

59)

exap-qv (Jo.

:

:

merely intransitive, not passive, in idea. Moulton (Prol., p. 163) says "often." In 1 Cor. 15: 15 f., etc., the true passive "emphapassive in sense, like

(Moulton, Prol.,

3) is more Hkely Th. 4 14), 'was put to sleep' Moulton quotes from the papyri "a

vTerayriaav (Ro. 10

kKoifiijdriu

162).

p.

purely middle use of

Ch.P. 3

But

God."

sizes the action of

(1

asleep',"

KOLixrjdyjvaL, 'fell

He

:

:

rjulKa ^iJ,eWov Koifirjdrjpai

a "clear passive" in Iva to. 7rp6j3aTa em KOLfj.r]dfji, F.P. 110 (i/A.D.), but eKoXX-qdr] (Lu. 15 15) can be explained as passive or middle in sense. In a few verbs {iaT-qv, kaTadrjv) a distinction was developed.^ W. F. Moulton thinks (Winer-M., p. 315, n. 5) that "a faint passive force" may be observed in aTadrjvaL in the N. T., but hardly in Mk. 3 24. Cf. also eypaxj/a,

(iii/B.c).

finds

:

:

intransitive crradrjaoixaL in

Greek

is

Mt. 12

:

25, 46.

aorist passive for arcKw, 'stand,'

'EaTadyjKa in

and

modem

earrjdrjKa for ar-qvoi,

(Thumb, Handh., p. 145). The correct text (W. H.) in 21:3 is ava^avavTes Tr]v Kvirpov (active), not ava4)avevTe% (passive). But still some MSS. do have this transitive second aorist 'place'

,Ac.

one keeps in mind the origin of this aorist may be the less surprised to also transitive like the active. Already in Homer this was

passive participle.

If

passive form (from the active), he find

it

true.

The

which had no active, But they were not always

so-called passive "deponents," verbs

formed the

aorist with the passive form.

Some

intransitive.

of

are really transitive.

them were

so, like TopevofxaL (Mt. 8:9), (Mt. 17:16), but most of them They probably represent a survival of the

(Mt. 27:3),

lxeTafj.e\oiJiaL

bbvajxai,

old active origin of the aorist passive forms.^

the transitive passive deponents note (Lu. 5: 12), hdvfxrjOeuTos (Mt. 1:20),

e^ovkrjdri

kireixtX-qdr}

As examples (Mt. 1:19),

(Lu. 10:34),

of

eSerjOr]

ko^i]d-n

These passive aorists have precisely the construction that the middle or active would have so far as case is (Mt. 14

:

5)

concerned.

.

The

distinctive passive sense

is

absent.

Some

of the

"deponents" have both a middle and a passive aorist with a distinct passive sense. Thus note the middle and passive voices side Comp.

1

Giles,

2

Blass, Gr. of

*

See ch. VIII,

Philol., p. 410; Brus-, Gricch. Gr., p. 465.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 181.

vi, (c), for list of these

N. T. passive

aorists.

; .

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

818 by

and

side in apprjcanevos

that this context

(Lu. 12

aTrapprjdriaeTaL

strict passive sense, like eTnawaxOeLcrup (12

b OVK airoKoXvipOrjaeTat, (12 /C7jpux057(T€Tai

(12

(12

r)pi6nr]PTaL

deponents

:

:

2), ypcjadrjaeTaL

and

3), TTcoXowrat

:

7), d^e^iyaerat

(12

(12:4f.),

(l>o^r}OrJTe

Cf. also airo8e^aadat (Ac. 18

:

and

:

(Mt. 6:1),

TO deadrjpaL avTols

and

(12:5),

'Koyiaap.epos

:

6),

also the passive

(12:7).

(l)o^elade

where the (Mt. 22 11) and

wapedexOrjaap (15

voices are distinguished, OeaaaaOaL tovs apaKeL/xhovs irpos

in the

2), aKOvaQ-qatTai

But note

^o/STj^rjre

27)

them

ovk eaTcv eTrCkeK-qa iikpop (12

10).

:

(12

of

avyKeKoKviiiikvop iarlp

1),

:

happens

It so

9).

:

Some

of passive forms.

is full

:

4),

:

(Heb. 11

:

and

19)

22:37), laaaTo (Lu. 9:42) and ladrj (Mt. 8:13), epvaaro (Col. 1 13) and epvadrjp (2 Tim. 4 17), exapiaaro (Lu. eXoyiadr] (Lu.

:

and

7: 21)

:

xo-pi-<^^vaL

and

(Heb. 12

:

k^ekk^aTO

(Mk. 13

Tpo4)ris

19)

(Ac. 3

exe :

but

and

(Mt. 6

aireKplpaTo (Ac. 3

10).

:

:

12),

difference in sense.

'

(Lu. 14

6 eKXeXeypepos

:

also wapjiTrjaapTo

19, perfect passive)

(Lu. 9 :35); Kopeadkpres

KeKopeafxhoi kare (1 Cor. 4:8).

tjSt;

possible to see a difference also yePTjdrjToo

One may note

KapriTrip.kpop

/xe

20),

(Ac. 27:38)

14).

:

AireKpidr]p

between (Mt. 25

eyepero (Jo. :

9)

1

:

It is

and

14)

steadily drove out

though both are used transitively with no frequently have aireKpLPaprjp,

The papyri more

^

though both forms continue in the kolpt]. Cf. also aToXoyrjdrjpaL (Lu. 21 14), heUxBwo-p (Mk. 9 34), kdavpaadr} (Rev. 13 4), though with passive sense in 2 Th. 1 10. As a result of this inroad of the comparatively new passive forms the aorist middle forms vanished. In modern Greek the passive aorist form is almost invariably used for both the middle and the passive ideas. This tendency seen in the N. T. (and the rest of the kolpt]) has triumphed over the aorist middle.^ In Ro. 10 3, rfj dLKaioavpy rod deou ohx vTreTa.yr]aap, the Rev. V. translates 'they did not subject themselves :

:

:

:

:

to the righteousness of God.' (/)

Future Passive. As has been mentioned several times Homer has only two future passive forms (second futures)

already.

The The

passive voice indeed occurs but rarely in the Boeotian dialect.^

future in -drjaopat

is

comparatively

late.

At

first,

certainly,

the distinction between passive and middle (and active also, -^p, -drjp)

was

''a distinction of function,

not of form."^

surprising to find the middle future form in

passive sense

(cf. all

»

Moulton,

2

Cf. Jannaris, Hist.

not

is

the

the other tenses save aorist), where the forms

Prol., p. 161.

and D.'s Handb., *

It

Homer used with

Gk.

p. 315.

Gr., p. 362; Hatz., Einl'., pp. 196 3

ff.;

Jebb

in V.

Claflin, Synt. of the Bceot. Dial., p. 67.

Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gk., p. 61.

819

VOICE (aiagesis)

two voices are identical. In later prose the future middle form continued to be used in the passive sense even in the great prose writers (Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, DeIn the LXX Conybeare and Stock {Selections, p. mosthenes).^

for the

75

f.)

avTOV

same idiom.

find the

ecos Trpcot, /cat

Ex. 12

Cf.

oaTOvv oh avvTpbpiTai

10,

:

om

ahrov.

oltt'

airoXeirl/eTai. air'

It is quite

withm

bounds, therefore, to speak of "medio-passives" in the future as in the aorist.^ The idiom appears in the papyri. ^ So narrow is the Is xept/SaXetrat (Rev. dividing-line between middle and passive. 3

:

to

5)

middle or passive in sense? The same ambiguity exists as (Gal. 5 12). Considering the rather large list of

cLTTOKoxl/ovTaL

I

once used the middle future as passive in sense the idiom is rare in the N. T. In general, therefore, the future passive form has made its place secure by the time of the kolvt]. Even verbs that have no active form have the future passive as well as the

verbs'* that

Thus

future middle.

(Lu. 12

:

aTrapvfiaonai

28

9); laaofxaL (Ac.

:

(Mk. 14 but

27),

31),

:

but

aTrapvrjdifaofxat

(Mt. 8:8); and in But the future passive

laOrjaeTaL

Ro. 2 26 \oyLa6rjaeTai is passive in sense. form was destined, like the other futures, to disappear as a distinct form. Only the compound tense occurs in the modern Greek.^ But, meanwhile, the future passive form took over the uses of the vanishing future middle forms.^ It is possible to find a passive :

sense in ewavaTrarjaeTaL (Lu. 10

(Mt. 8

avaKKidrjaouTai

ceraL (Mt. 19

(Lu. 16

:

:

5).

:

11),

:

(1

Cor. 15

Cf. also dav/J-aadrjaovTai (Rev. 17

(Mt. 24

31), 4>avi)(yeTai

:

(Heb. 7

6), ixerafieX-qdriaeTaL

KOLiJirjdrjaofxeda

:

:

21),

:

51), koXXtj^tj-

8), TTuadriaovTai

Cor. 15

30), i;7rora777
28).^

:

which reinforces the argument In 1 Cor. 15 passive may also be devoid future the But passive. for the true transitive just like the aorist passive. even idea and passive of the :

28 note also

Cf. aTTOKpidiqaoixaL (Mt. 25

:

uTroraTf),

37), kvTpa-wqdovTai rov vibv

(Mt. 21 37), :

(Heb. 13 6). The passive a4>aLpedrja€TaL (Lu. 10 42) has the usual sense, but one wonders if in uv re b4)dr]
<})o^r}dr]aoiJLaL

:

:

:

:

'

*

Gildersleeve,

ib., p.

73

Cf. Hartel, Abrifi der Gr. d.

f.

hom. und herod.

Dial., 1888, p. 40.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 162.

2

Brus., Griech. Gr., p. 463

*

Clyde, Gk. 8ynt., p. 61; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,

5

Cf.

8 '

f.

»

p. 171.

Thumb, Handb.,

pp. 115, 125. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 363.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 163.

Cf., for the

LXX,

Helbing, Gr., p. 98.

820

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Ki. 18:

1).

It

possible, of course, for

is

ojv

to be attracted to the

case of TovTcop from oh ('in which,' 'wherein'). COL

would be

'

I will

Then

64)9r]crofxal

Note the new present

thee.'

But the future middle

(Ac. 1:3).

vofiaL

appear to

persisted in

oTrra-

yevrjaofxai,

8vvr](XonaL, hiniieKrjcroixaL, 7ropeucro/xa6.

As already noted, {g) The Agent with the Passive Voice. the Greek has no difficulty in using a verb in the passive which was not used Avith the accusative in the active. Thus note kyKoKetadai (Ac. 19:40), Kar-qyopeLTaL vtto tccu 'lovdaioov (Ac. 22:30),

TrcTrt-

arevixai to evayyeKiov (Gal.

2:1)}

A few verbs idiomatically use

dative with the passive.

Thus

SauXw (Ac. 9

(Ro. 10: 20),

The

6:1).^

(Mt.

k4>auri

1

direct agent

4:1), the intermediate

on Prepositions)

by

cb(f>dv

(1

Cor. 15- 7

:

5ta

(Mt.

1

:

22).

f.), deaeij^aL

The agent

(Mt. (Mt.

by airo (2 Cor. 3 18), k (Gal. 4 See also discussion under Instrumental Case :

:

Teirpayfj.kvov

whether dative or instrumental. In the N. T., as ancient Greek (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 72), the instrument sometimes personified and treated as an agent. Cf KoXa/xov vird

(Lu. 23

is

inro

(see chapter

(chapter XI, Cases) for discussion of avTui vnth earlv in

the

24), evpWrjv

most commonly expressed by

is

also expressed

is

17:7).

4), irapa (Jo.

20),

:

hyvwadi] tQ

15),

:

.

avejJLOV aa\ev6iJ.evov ;

(Mt. 11

:

7).

Impersonal Construction.

(h)

This

is

the usual idiom in

the Coptic in lieu of the absence of the passive.

But it is often Moulton shows.^ He com^ the German man, the English one. the Aramaic this impersonal plural

rather rhetorical than s^mtactical as

pares also the French on,

Wellhausen^ shows how in

was common. One notes alTovaiu (Lu. 12 20), where a passive would be possible. Cf. away ova lv Kat ^oXXovaLV /cat KaieraL (Jo. 15 Note in particular k^T]papd7} 6) where the passive occurs in KaieraL. :

:

15 6). Cf. also Tpk^waLv avrrju (Rev. 12 6). use of the impersonal passive like wLaTeveraL and o/jLoXoyeXraL (Ro. 10 10) is another matter and calls for no comment. It is

Kal (TwayovcLv avra (Jo.

:

:

The

:

rare in Greek as 77).

compared with Latin

Cf. the plural in 10

in 1 Cor. 15

:

12

ei

:

14

f.

(Gildersleeve, Sijntax, p.

See also the personal construction

8e Xptcrros K-qpvaaeraL otl.

1

Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., etc., p. 77.

2

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 185.

^

Prol., p.

<

Einl., p.

58 25

f. f.

CHAPTER

XVIII

TENSE (XPONOS) Complexity of the Subject. Probably nothing connected with syntax is so imperfectly understood by the average student as tense. This is due to various I.

causes. 1. The Difficulty of Comparing Greek Tenses with Germanic Tenses. "The translators of our English version have failed more frequently from their partial knowledge of the force of the tenses than from any other cause." Ignorance, one may add, both of English and Greek still stands in the way of proper rendering of the Greek. The English, like the other Germanic tongues, 2 has only two simple verb-forms. We have a great wealth of tenses in English by means of auxihary verbs, but they do not correspond with any of the Greek tenses.^ It is the commonest grammatical vice for one to make a conjectural translation into English and then to discuss the syntactical propriety of the Greek tense on the basis of this translation.^ Burton^ indeed justifies this method for the benefit of the Enghsh student of Greek. But I submit that the practice brings more confusion than help. " The Aorist for the Enghsh Perfect, and the Aorist for the English Pluperfect" Burton urges as "a pertinent illustration." But that method keeps the student at the English standpoint, just the thing to be avoided. The Greek point of view affords the only sure basis of operation. Winer ^ laments that "N. T. grammarians and expositors have been guilty of the greatest mistakes" here, though it cannot be said that Winer himself always lives up to ^

his just ideal.

'Translation into English or

German

the least

is

point to note in judging a tense. 1

Farrar, Gk. Syn't., p. 123.

'

Weymouth, On Rendering

K.-G., Bd. I, Gk. Aorist and 2

into Eng. of the

p. 129.

Perf., 1894,

p. 11. *

6

Comm. on Matthew, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 4 f. Cf. Broadus,

p.

821

54 note. «

W.-Th.,

p. 264.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

822 2.

Most

NEW TESTAMENT

Bad Influence of the Latin on Greek Grammarians. of the older Greek grammars were made by men who knew Even to-day^ the study of the Greek hampered by the standpoint of Latin idioms which de-

Latin better than Greek. tenses

is

veloped under very different conditions. This is true of school in particular, whereas Latin has had no influence on

grammars 2

the Greek tenses themselves by the time of the kolvt]. The perfect and the aorist blend in Latin, while that is not true in Greek till a very late date (1000 a.d.)-^ The separate Greek development (cf. the Sanskrit) was due to the genius and spirit of the Greek people and has continued throughout the history of the language,* though in modern times the Greek tenses have suffered serious modification. The Latin tenses must be left to one side. The time element is more prominent in the Latin. There is no time ele3. Absence of Hebrew Influence. ment at all in the Hebrew tenses. Hence it is not strange that the LXX translators had much trouble in rendering the two Hebrew tenses (perfect and imperfect) into the Greek with its richness of tense.

A

similar difficulty exists for the English translators.

sometimes occur, like eydo dixL (BA in Tob. 5: 15).^ But such translation Greek left no lasting impress on the Greek of the N. T. save in irpoakSeTo irkixxPu (Lu. 20 12; cf. Ex. 25 21). The problems of the Greek tenses are not to be solved by an apCurious devices (possibly

Kadlaoixai

(B in Ju. 6:

slips)

18), eaoiiac bibbvaL

:

:

peal to the Semitic influence.

Gradual Growth of the Greek Tenses. There is no Homer and no future passive. The aorist pasThe past perfect is rare in Homer,' and it does is also rare.^

4.

future optative in sive

not occur with the idea of relative time. "In the examination of tense usages, we must be careful to observe that tenses, in the sense in which the

personal suffixes.

1

2 '

Gk.

is

now

used, are of comparatively late

In the beginning the verb-root was used with

development."^

some

word

At first

this

was enough. Some verbs developed some few all the tenses.

tenses, others other tenses,

Mutzbauer, Die Grundl. d. griech. Tempusl., 1893, p. J K. Roth, Die erziihlenden Zeitformen bei Dion, von Hal., p. 5. Ernault, Du Parfait en Grec et en Lat., 1886, p. 164. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gr., p. 440.

Tempusl., 1893, p. vi

*

Mutzb., Die Grundl.

5

Cf. Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

«

Sterrett, Dial, of Horn.,

^

Monro, Horn.

8

Giles,

Man.

of

d. griech.

N.

42,

Gr., p. 44.

Comp.

Philol., p. 482.

f.

TENSE (XPONO2)

823

"Aktionsart" of the Verb-Stem. Aktionsart ("kind of acmust be clearly understood. The verb-root plays a large part in the history of the verb. This essential meaning of the word itself antedates the tense development and continues afterwards. 5.

tion")

There

thus a double development to keep in mind. There were two verb-types, the one denoting durative or linear

is

originally

action, the other

momentary

other punctiliar (momentary), like i]veyKov ToX^tdco,

€T\r]v.

With other verbs the

sharply, the root could Xky-co, e-Xey-o-v).

distinction

So e-^ay-ov is punctiliar, while Moulton^ rightly observes that this

of "defective" verbs.

So opdw,

Moulton notes exw

as a

(prj-ixl,

kadiM is

the

eldov,

was not drawn

(cf.

was before there was any idea

later tense.

durative.

{/)epw (ferd),

(tuli).

be used either way

All this

Hence some

or punctiliar action. ^

verbs have two roots, one linear (durative), like

is

'i-cfyrj-v;

of the

linear or

the explanation

word that can be

used either for durative, as in Ro. 5:1, or punctiliar, like aorist Uxov (cf. eaxfs and exets in Jo. 4 18). The regular ithom for a papyrus receipt is eaxov xapd aov. This matter of the kind of :

action in the verb-root (Aktionsart) applies to

all verbs.^

It

has

long been clear that the "tense" has been overworked and made The verb itself is the beginto mean much that it did not mean.

ning of

all.

But

scholars are not agreed in the terminology to be

Instead of "punctiliar" (punktuelle Aktion, Brugmann), others use "perfective" (Giles, Manual, p. 478). But this brings All verbs may be inevitable confusion with the perfect tense.

used.

described as "punctiliar" (pwnHwe/0 and "non-punctiliar"(m'c/ii-

But the *'non-punctiliar" divides into the indefinite and the definite linear (completed or perfect). The notion of perfect action as distinct from point action came later. The three essential^ kinds of action are thus momentary or punctiliar when the action is regarded as a whole and may be represented by a dot (.), linear or durative action which may be the continuance of perrepresented by a continuous line fected or completed action which may be represented by this graph • The distinction between punctiliar and perfected action is not clearly drawn in the verb-root itself. That is a Brugmann^ credits this "perfected" later refinement of tense.

punktuell).

linear (durative)

,

.

idea to the perfect stem.

"Iterative" action belongs to certain

*

Man., etc., p. 477 f. 110 f. Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131; Stahl,

6

Griech. Gr., p. 472.

1

«

Giles,

Prol., p.

«

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 469.

Krit.-hist. Synt. d. griech.

Vcrbums,p. SO

f.

«

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

824

stems (reduplicated, kind of action. 6.

like yiyvofxai),

NEW TESTAMENT

but

it

is

not a fundamental

The Three Kinds of Action Expressed

Tense.

These ideas

Terms of

in

(punctiliar, durative, perfected state) lie be-

hind the three tenses (aorist, present, perfect) that run through The forms of these tenses are meant to accentuthe moods.

all

The aorist stem presents action in its simplest form {a-opL(7Tos, 'undefined'). This action is simply presented as a point by this tense. This action is timeless. The present is also ate these ideas.^

timeless in itself as

is

the perfect.^

It is confusing to

apply the

expression "relations of time" to this fundamental aspect of tense, as is done by some grammars.^ Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 121) uses Zeitart and Zeitstufe, but It

is

better to keep "time" for

why its

Zeitart instead oi Aktionsartf

natural use of past, present and

and to speak of "kind of action" rather than "kind of time."^ These three tenses (aorist, present, perfect) were first developed irrespective of time. Dionysius Thrax erred in explaining the Greek tenses from the notion of time, and he has been followed by a host of imitators. The study of Homer ought to have prevented this error. The poets generally do not bring the

future,

time relations to the of Language, p. 300)

fore.^

Even Paul

{Principles of the History

falls into this error.

It is doubtless easier

to trace the history of the verb than of the noun, but as mistakes lie along the way.

many

But for the indicative the Greek There are no past history. simple had a tenses would have is an anomaly subjunctive future The tenses in the subjunctive. 7.

Time Element in Tense.

of very late Greek.

discourse

and

is

The

future optative occurs only in indirect The time element in the

not found in the N. T.

infinitive is confined to indirect discourse

and

/xeXXw.

Time

in the

only relative to the principal verb. It is thus kind of participle time of the action, that is expressed in these forms.^ the not action, the three grades of time had tenses of their indicative the in But own. The Greeks evidently felt that there was no need for time is

modes except in a relative sense. As a matter of fact, the real time of subjunctive, optative, and imperative is future

in the other

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 469. Class. Gk., p. 79.

1

K.-G., Bd.

3

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 433; Gildersleeve, Synt. of Cf. Benard, Formes Verb, en Grec, 1890, p. 279. Mutzb., Die Grundl. d. griech. Tempusl., 1890.

4 6

6 '

I,

p. 130.

Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., vol. II, 1880, p. 149. Cf. Spyridis, Lang. grec. actuelle ou mod., 1894, p. 287.

TENSE (XPONOS) in relation to speaker or writer.^

It

was evidently with

825 difficulty

absence of time in Hebrew) that time was expressed in a positive (non-relative) sense even in the indicative. It is only by the (cf

.

augment (probably an adverb) that past time is clearly expressed.^ "Homer and later Greek writers often use the present with an adverb of time instead of a past tense, a construction which has an exact parallel in Sanskrit and which is therefore supposed to be Indo-Germanic." ^ There is no really distinctive form for the present indicative. The future was a later development out of both the present and aorist. See chapter VIII, Conjugation of Verb. The augment was not always used. Homer used it only when it

But past time was objective and the three kinds of action (punctiliar, durative, perfected) were regularly expressed with the tenses (aorist, imperfect, past perfect). There is Aktionssuited him.

and future time, but the tense development extent here. There are only two tenseforms in the present and practically only one in the future. But both punctiliar and hnear action are expressed, but not differentiated, in the present time by the same tense, as is true also of

art also in the present

did not go on to the

full

the future. The kinds of action exist, but separate tense-forms unfortunately do not occur."* There might thus have been nine tenses in the indicative: three punctihar (past, present, future), three linear (past, present, future), three perfect (past, present, Because of this difference between the indicative and future).^

moods

the other

in the

matter of time some grammars*' give a

separate treatment to the indicative tenses. It is not an easy matter to handle, but to separate the indicative perhaps accents

the element of time unduly.

Even

in the indicative the time

subordinate to the kind of action expressed. A double idea thus runs through tense in the indicative (kind of action,

element

is

time of the action).

Faulty Nomenclature of the Tenses. There is no connames given the tenses, as has already been explained. Cf. chapter VIII, vii, (6). The terms aorist, imperfect and perfect (past, present, future) are properly named from the 8.

sistency in the

and future the time element. There is

point of view of the state of the action, but present are

named from 1

2 3

6 "

the standpoint of

Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, 1890, pp. 23, 27. Cf. Seymour, Trans, of the Am. Philol. Asso., 1881, p. 89. " Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131. Giles, Man., etc., p. 487. Cf Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 120 f. Cf. Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, pp. 8, 22. .

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

826

no time element in the present subjunctive, for instance. But the names camiot now be changed, though very unsatisfactory. This is the com9. The Analytic Tendency (Periphrasis). the Germanic tense in tongues. It expressing mon way of very older Greek and was frequent in the unknown to not was the LXX under the Hebrew influence. See an extended list in Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX, pp. 68-71. The tendency is strong in the N. T. See the summary already given in chapter VIII, vii, (j). In the modem Greek the periphrastic form has displaced the usual inflected forms in

all

the tenses but the

and aorist. These are "simple." The rest This analytic tenare "compound" (Thumb, Handb., p. 115).^ It did dency affected the durative and perfect kinds of action. present, imperfect

not suit the purely punctiliar idea. 10.

The Effect of Prepositions on the Verb.

This

is

This subject has already been another aspect of Aktionsart. Delbriefly discussed from the standpoint of the prepositions.^

worked the matter out with thoroughness and he by Brugmann.^ Moulton^ has applied the principle

briick^ has

followed

N. T. tion.

The

verbs.

durative

it is

point

is

that often where the simple verb

is

to is

rendered "perfective" by the preposition in composi-

This peculiarity

is

common to

the Indo-Germanic tongues

all

and reaches its highest development in the Germanic (cf. English and German) and the Balto-Slavic languages." Thus we in English say bring and bring up, burn and burn up, carry and carry off, come and coine on, drive and drive aivay {hame, in, off, out), drink and drink up, eat and eat up, follow and follow up, go and go away, grow and grow up, knock and knock down, make and make over, pluck and pluck out, run and run away, speak and speak out, stand and stand up, take and take up, wake and wake up, work and work out.'' The "imperfective" simplex becomes "perfective" in the compound. Prof. A. Thumb ^ has a paper "Zur Aktionsart der mit Prapositionen zusammengesetzten Verba im Griechischen," in which he compares some tables of Schlachter for Thucydides with some by Prof. S. Dickey for the N. T. Thucydides shows for the present tense 260 simplicia verbs to 83 compound, for the aorist 158 to 199. Dickey has investigated about thirty N. T. verbs and D.'s Handb., pp. 323, 326.

1

Jebb

2

Cf. ch. XIII, IV,

6

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 482.

»

Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 146-170.

^

Cf.

*

Griech. Gr., pp. 482 Prol., pp. 111-115.

»

Indoger. Forsch.,

6

in V.

(z).

ff.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 112.

XXVII.

827

TENSE (XPONOS) like

dTT^x'^^j

etc.

He

reports for the present tense a proportion of

1160 simplida to 83 compound, for the aorist 885 to 226. It is unfortunate that the term "perfective" is used for this idea, since it

Some

inevitably suggests the perfect tense.

writers^ use "perfec-

tive" also for the aorist or punctiliar action, a

means

of

fur-

still

Brugmann^

uses "Perfektive Aktion" for the effect of the preposition in composition and " Perfektische Aktion" ther confusion.

a distinction hard to draw in English. Latin and Greek both show abundant illustrations of this use of prepCf. sequor and consequor, facto and efficio, teneo and ositions. Moulton^ thinks that the freedom in the position of sustineo. for the perfect tense,

the preposition in

Homer

helped the adverb to retain

The

longer than in later Greek and Latin. tion here

best seen in the prepositions

is

But even

its

force

point of the preposi-

dTro-, 5ia-, Kara-, avv-.^

examples preserve the But in Lu. 8 29, the perfective sense of avv combines

in these the actual majority of

original local

meaning and so are not

xoXXots xpbvois avwqpTaKei avTov,

perfective.

:

with the past perfect tense and the locative (or instrumental) TToXXots xpovoLs to denote "not the temporary paroxysm, but the

estabUshment of a permanent hold" (Moulton, is

effective ('grasping the point,' as in Lu. 16

€7rt7tvcbo-Kco is

and

my

perfective ('knowing

:

13

:

28), lyvi^iv

4, lyvo^v tI

iroLrjao:)),

lesson,' as in 1 Cor. 13

einyvoJvaL also ('recognising,' as in

Mt. 14:

So

Prol., p. 113).

Mk.

durative ('gaining knowledge,' as in

'^LvwGKOi is

35).

:

12),

Moulton

(ib.,

p. 114) calls particular attention to ol airoWvfjievoL (1 Cor. 1

:

18), 'the

where the destiny is accented by awo, and the process is depicted by the tense. In Heb. 6 18, ot Ka.Ta4>vybvTes, the perfective sense of Kara coincides with the effective aorist. So even when perishing,'

:

the tense

durative, the notion of completion

is

preposition as contemplated or certain.

the perfect tense of the simplex (Lu. 8 :53).

is sufficient,

perfect, so that awkdvwKev (Lu. 8

occurs for the notion of 'dying.'

is

expressed in the

(Lu. 8 49) but not so in airWavev redprjKev

:

became obsolete outside of the 42; cf. 2 Cor. 6:9; Heb. 11 21)

as simplex

Qpr]<jK(jo

In

:

:

"The

linear perfective expressed

meaning sufficiently, denoting as it does the whole process leading up to an attained goal."^ Moulton notes also the iterative use of aTTodprjaKoo in 1 Cor. 15 31, and the frequentative in its

:

1

Cor. 15:22.

active of

See also the "perfective" use of

dirodvrja-Kco.

In

Man.,

airoWvfxi.

and

aTroKTelu(j:,

airdXhviJLai (oiTroXcoXa)

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

1

So

2

Griech. Gr., p. 472.

*

Bnig., Gricch. Gr., p. 482.

»

Prol., p. 112.

6

Moulton,

Giles,

p. 478; Blass,

p. 1S7.

Prol., p. 114.

the

the sim-

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

828 plex

Even

obsolete.

is

in the present tense the force of dTro-

is

15 17), cLTToKKvueda (Mt. 8 25), where Moulton^ explains airo- as suggesting "the sense of an inevitable doom." Cf. also evyo} (Mt. 2 13), Cf. ToTs dTroXXu/zei'ois (1 Cor.

obvious.

1

:

18), aToXKvixaL (Lu.

:

:

:

with Sia^e^Tco (Ac. 27:42), and kKcf)€vyo3 (Heb. 2:3), 'to rrypea; (Ac. 24 23), escape, Ka.ra(l)tvyoi (Heb. 6 18), to find refuge (Lu. 2 51), and continually' keep Siariypeco, 'to 'to watch,' with 'to

flee,' '

:

'

;

'

:

:

(Lu. 2

avvT-qpeoi

19), 'to

:

keep together

(safely)';

(Mk. 14

o-Trdco

:

47),

'to draw,' with haa-Kau (Mk. 5 4), 'to draw in two'; Kaico (Jo. 15 6), 'to burn,' with Kara/caiw (Ac. 19 19), 'to burn up'; Kplvoi (Jo. 5 30), 'to judge,' with KaTaKpivoo (Mt. 12:41), 'to condemn'; Xuco (Lu. 3:16), 'to loosen,' with KaraXuco (Mt. 24:2), 'to destroy'; exco (Ac. 13 5; Rev. 10 2), 'to have' or 'hold,' with kirkxc^ (Ac. 3:5), :

:

:

:

:

'to hold

and

:

on

dTrexw

and awexoo (Lu. 8 (Mt. 6 5), 'to have

to,'

:

45), 'to hold together' or 'press,'

in

:

'receipt in

full,'

ostraca give numerous illustrations.

an exhaustive 1

:

It

to prove the point.

is

Cf.

f.

not necessary to iJLevcb

make

/cat irapafxevu}

(Ph.

where the point hes in the prepthough not "perfective" here. So jLvccaKofxevr] Kal amyLvoi-

25), xatpw

osition,

list

As to dTrex" for The papyri and

etc.

see Deissmann, Light, p. 110

full,'

aKOn'tv-q (2

Kttt

Cor. 3

crvpxaipoj (2

:

17),

2), avayivoiOKeTe

(Lu. 6 38),

6.vrip.eTprjdr)(T€TaL

:

:

r)

exoj'res

/cat

eTriyivooa Kere (1

— KarkxovTes

:

13), nerpeLTe

(2 Cor. 6

:

10).

Cf.

In some verbs- the preposition has so far lost its original force that the "perfective" idea is the only one that survives. Dr. Eleanor Purdie (Indog. Forsch., IX, pp. 63-153, e/cjSaXe

(Mt. 22

:

13).

compared with Homer was increasingly confined to the constative sense, while the ingressive and effective simplex gave way to the "perfective" compounds. Moulton^ is inclined to agree in the main with her contention as supported by the papyri (and Thumb thinks that modem Greek supports the same view). At any rate there is a decided increase in the number of compound verbs. The ingressive and effective uses of the aorist would natuBut it remains rally blend with the "perfective" compounds. true that the Aktionsart of the verb-root is often modified by the 1898) argues that the usage of Polybius as

shows that the

aorist simplex

preposition in composition. 11.

"Aktionsart" with each Tense.

It

is

that three separate kinds of action are developed

not merely true (punctiliar, dura-

that are represented broadly by three tenses in all the modes, though imperfectly in the present and future tenses The individual verb-root modifies greatly the of the indicative. tive, perfected),

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 114.

^

lb., p. 112.

^

ib.,

pp. 115-118.

829

TENSE (XPONOS)

This matter can only be hinted at but must be worked out more carefully in the discussion of each tense. The aorist, for instance, though always in itself merely point-action, "punctiliar," yet may be used with verbs that accent resultant idea in each tense. here,

the beginning of the action or the end of the action. Thus three distinctions arise: the unmodified point-action called "constative," the point-action with the accent on the beginning (inceptive) called "ingressive," the point-action with the accent on the conclusion

The names are not particularly happy, but they will answer. "Constative" is especially awkward.^ In reality it is just the normal aorist without any specific modification by the verb-meaning. Hirt^ does not use the term, but divides the called "effective."

and "effective" when there is this special Aktionsart. But the use of these demands another term for the normal aorist.^ As an example of the "constative" aorist for the aorist into "ingressive"

whole action take So also k^riyrjaaro

taK-qvwaev (Jo. 1 (1

:

:

accents the entrance of

the Logos upon

nation).

14) is

'Edeaad/jLeOa (1

:

the earthly

14), for

18), while eyeveTO (1

:

14)

is

his life

life

of Jesus.

and on earth (Incar-

"ingressive,"

probably "effective" as

is eXdjSo/xej/

(1 16), accenting the result ("resultative," Brugmann, Griech. So likewise in the so-called "present" tense various Gr., p. 475). :

by the various "classes" of verbs or "conThe perfect and the future likewise have many varia-

ideas exist as set forth

jugations."

tions in resultant idea, growing out of the varying verb-idea in

These must be borne in mind be indicated in the proper place in discussing each tense. 12. Interchange of Tenses. The point here is not whether the Greeks used an aorist where we in English would use a perfect, but whether the Greeks themselves drew no distinction between an aorist and a perfect, a present and a future. It is not possible to give a categorical answer to this question when one connection with the tense-idea.

and

will

recalls the

slow development of the Greek tenses and the long There was a time long after the N. T.

history of the language. period'*

when

the line between the aorist and the perfect became It is it had been largely obliterated in Latin.

very indistinct, as

a question for discussion whether that was true in the N. T. or not. The subject will receive discussion under those tenses. The future grew out of the present and the aorist. The present continued to be used sometimes as vivid future, as is true of all languages. But it is a very crude way of speaking to say that one tense is used 1

Moulton,

2

Handb.

d.

»

Prol., p. 109.

Griech

etc., p.

392.

^

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 475. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 410.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

830

NEW TESTAMENT

"for" another in Greek. That would only be true of ignorant In general one may say that in normal Greek when a certain tense occurs, that tense was used rather than some other because it best expressed the idea of the speaker or writer. Each That idea is normal and tense, therefore, has its specific idea.

men.

can be readily understood. Various modifications arise, due to the verb itself, the context, the imagination of the user of the tense. The result is a complex one, for which the tense is not wholly The tenses, therefore, are not loosely interchangeresponsible. Each tense has a separate history and presents a distinct able. Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 264) idea. That is the starting-point. one of these tenses strictly and saying: "No is entirely correct in Writers vary greatly in another." for stand properly taken can the

way

instance, shows

The

tenses.

A

that the tenses are used.

vivid writer like

his lively imagination

by

Mark,

for

swift changes in the

reader must change with him.

It is

mere common-

place to smooth the tenses into a dead level in translation and Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. misses the writer's point of view. is doubtful whether in the N. T. we are justified in making "sharp distinctions between the imperfect, aorist or perfect; a

124)

subjunctive, imperative, or infinitive of the aorist or present."

But

for

my

part I see no more real ground in the papyri and inwe find in the ancient Attic

scriptions for such hesitation than

Thumb

Greek. spite of

heavy

{Handh., p. 116) notes that modern Greek, in has preserved the distinction between hnear

losses,

and subjunctive.

I

shall discuss the tenses according to the three ideas designed

by

and punctiliar action even

in the imperative

them rather than by the names

accidentally given.

n. Punctiliar Action. This

is

the kind of action to begin with.

possible always to tell

which

is

It

is

probably not

the older stem, the punctiliar

by side, though the The aorist tense, though at first confined to verbs of punctiliar sense, was gradually made on verbs So also verbs of durative action came to have of durative sense. the tenses of punctiliar action.^ Thus the tenses came to be used

They come

or the linear.

punctiliar action

is

into view side

logically first.

for the expression of the ideas that once belonged only to the root.

The

Stoic grammarians,

who gave

us

much

of our termi-

nology, did not fully appreciate the aorist tense. They grouped the tenses around the present stem, while as a matter of fact in

many

verbs that 1

is

impossible, the root appearing in the aorist,

Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 241, 316.

TENSE (XPONOS) not in the present.

Cf. e-aTr]-v

{'i-o-Trj-fxi)

,

831 e-Xa/3-o-v (Xa//|3dz^-co)

etc.

,

This error vitiated the entire theory of the Stoic grammarians.^ Grammatical forms cannot express the exact concord between the logical and the grammatical categories,^ but the aorist tense came very near doing it. By Homer's time (and Pindar's) the

between the aorist and imperfect tenses is fairly well drawn, though some verbs like e-^rj-j' remain in doubt.^ So we In modern Greek the ancient aorist start with the aorist tense. is the base-form on which a number of new presents are formed (Thumb, Handh., p. 143). J. C. Lawson {Journ. of Th. St., Oct., 1912, p. 142) says that Thumb would have smoothed the path of distinction

the student

if

he had "dealt with the aorist before proceeding to

the present."

The Aorist

1.

way

the only

the normal

The

{a6ptaro<;).

aorist, as will

method

The Greek

of doing so.

In the

loving language" (Broadus).*

kolvt]

this true of the

is

in truth

the aorist

is

"an

is

not it is

aorist-

even more

is

(Thumb, Handh.,

frequent than in the classic Greek especially

be sho^ai,

of expressing indefinite (undefined) action, but

p.

120),

N. T.

Gildersleeve^ does not hke the

name and

prefers "apobatic,"

but that term suits only the "effective" aorist. The same thing The name aorist does very well on the is true of " culminative." whole.

what

I

doubt

is left

if

the aorist

is

a sort of " residuary legatee," taking

The

of the other tenses.

rather, as I see

it,

the aorist

preserved the simple action and the other tenses grew up around It is true that in the expression of past

it.

and with

time in the indicative

the tense used as a matter of course, unless there was special reason for using some all

other tense.

the other moods, the aorist

"an und

It gives the action

is

fiir

sich."

use of the "imperfect" with verbs of speaking

be aorist in

The conmion

(ee^T;,

eXe7e)

may

fact.

(a)

Aktionsart in the Aorist.

(a)

Constative Aorist.

in the use of terms.

There

is still

a good deal of confusion

Gildersleeve (Syntax of Attic Ch\, p. 105)

"complexive" to "constative." Moulton^ connnents on Miss Purdie's use of "perfective" in the sense of "punctihar.'-.

prefers

1

Steinthal, Gesch. d. Sprach., p. 306

2

Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 300.

»

Cf. Gildersleeve,

Am.

f.

Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 101;

Monro, Horn.

pp. 32, 45. *

Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T.,

«

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 397

f.

p. 137. ^

Pro!., p. 116.

Or.,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

832

So Giles ^ uses

''perfective or

momentary"

for the aoristic action,

but he also (p. 478 note) uses constative. But Moulton^ also makes a distinction between "constative" and "punctiliar," using "punctiliar" for real point-action and "constative" for what is merely treated as point-action. That is a true distinction

but the growing number of constative aorists harmony with the simple idea of the tense. Brugmann^ constative, ingressive and effective aorists, all three on the

for the verb-root,

was rests

in

punkhiell idea

and draws no sharp distinction between "punctil-

iar" and "constative."

Delbriick^ divides the punktuell or aorist

into Anfangspunkt or Ingressive, Mittelpunkt or Constative

and

SchluBpunkt or Effective. The constative accents the "middle The idea of Delbriick and Brugmann is that punktuell point." "action focused in a point." ^ "The aorist describes an event as a single whole, without the time taken in its accomplishment."^ It seems best, therefore, to regard "constative" as merely the normal aorist which is not "ingressive" nor "effec-

action

is

tive." is

The

root-difference

between the

"describes."^

The

aorist

and the imperfect

"constative" while the imperfect "constative" aorist just treats the act as a

just this, that the aorist

is

whole entirely irrespective of the parts or time involved.* But the aorist can If the act is a point in itself, well and good. point. This is the advance not is a which an of act be used also are punctiliar All aorists verb-root. the makes on that the tense aorist "constative" The Prol, Moulton, 109). (cf. p. in statement point-action. in itself not is which punctiliar as an act treats That is the only difference. The distinction is not enough to make a separate class like ingressive and effective over against single

the purely punctiliar action. Thumb (Handh., p. 122) passes by "constative" as merely the regular aorist "to portray simply an action or occurrence of the past," whether in reality punctiliar

He finds both ingressive and effective aorists in modern But Thumb uses "terminative" for both "ends" (initial and final), a somewhat confusing word in this connection. The papyri show the same Aktionsart of the aorist. So note constative

or not.

Greek.

1

Man.,

2

Prol., p. 116,

p.

481

^

f.

but not on

p. 109.

5 Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., "momentan, effektiv, ingressiv."

p. 184.

^

Griech. Gr., pp. 475-477. Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 230.

But

7

Moulton, Intr. to the Stu. of N. T. Gk., 1895, Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 302.

8

Moulton,

6

Prol., p. 109, prefers

"summary"

Cf. K.-G., Bd.

p. 190,

to "constative."

I,

p.

157,

TENSE (XPONOS) B.G.U. 423

OTL ne kwaiSevcras koXus,

TeacrepaKOVTa Kai ?^ ereaiv

is

:

6 vaos ovtos,

The whole

aorist.

In Mt. 5

treated as a point.

Thus in Jo. 2 20, we have a gOOd

(ii/A.D.).

OLKodoixrjdr]

example of the constative years

833

period of forty-six

we have a very

17, rfKdov,

:

simple constative aorist, just punctiliar and nothing more, describing the purpose of Christ's mission. aorist in this sense

The

and

ingressive

This has always been so from the

the effective uses of the tense.

nature of the case.

It is true that the constative

more frequent than the

far

is

number

increasing

com-

of "perfective"

pounds, as already shown, increased the proportion of constative When the action is in itself momentary or instantaneous aorists.^

no

These examples are very numerous on Cf. in Ac. 10 22 f., kxpy^mTladt],

difficulty is involved.

almost any page of the N. T. fieraTefxrl/aadaL,

10

:

41

Mt. 8 3; Ac. But verbs that

Cf.

f.

the moods.

:

aKovaai, e^evtaev, :

5

:

See the aorists in Ac.

avvrjXQov.

This

5.

is

the normal aorist in

may have

are naturally durative

all

the

In kKaprkp-qaev (Heb. 11:27) we have a verb naturally "durative" in idea, but with the "constative" aorist. Cf. also c/cpu/S?? Tpipirjvov (Heb. 11:23), where a period of time is summed aorist.

up by the constative M. (Ro. 5 14).

/Ltexpt

aorist.

A

:

Cf. elSaaiXevaeu 6 dauaros

good example

is

e^r](xap Kai

'A5d/^

cltto

k^aalXevaau

Here e^rjaav is probably 1 Th. 5 10, but e^aal\tvaoLV is clearly constative. The period of a thousand years is merely regarded as a point. Cf also Jo. 7 9 efj.eLvcv h ttj TaXiXaia, 10 40 efiavev hKel. See also Ac. 11 26 eyeveTO airoTs hiavrdu oXou H€Ta Tov Xpto-ToO xtXta ingressive,

though

err]

(Rev. 20

^rjac^fxev is

4).

:

constative in

.

:

:

:

:

cvvaxdrjvaL kv kviavTov Kai

rfj

(.KKK-qala,

/jLrjpas

e^,

28

14: 3 Uavov xpovov bikrpi-^av, 18: 11 kKadiaev :

30

bieTiav

e/jLeivev

Cf.

oK-qv.

Eph. 2

:

4.

See det— StereXecra in B.G.U. 287 (a.d. 250). Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 105) calls this "aorist of long duration" (constative).

For a striking example of the constative (summary) use of the note e
:

— ovk

ovTOL iravTes

or separate 2 iravTes

In

tax^v

Mk.

12

nothing more than this. Repeated actions are thus grouped together, as in Mt. 22 28, p. 106) is

:

a.vTi]v. :

So

44, Tavres

are contrasted sharply vir^p -wavTOiv

Gildersleeve's "aorist of total

tKoniaavTo (39).

negation" (Syntax,

rpts kpa^blad-qv,

— e^aXov, by the

avrr]

aorist.

8(

—

elSaXev,

There

is

(2 Cor. 11

Moulton, ProL,

p. 115.

«

:

25).

the two actions

no

difficulty in els 14).

The

either as constative (like

kjSao-l-

airkdavev apa oi xdj'Tes aTredavov (2 Cor. 5

same verb may sometimes be used 1

rpU havayrjaa

:

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 193.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

834

Rev. 20 4 above) or ingressive Rev. 11: 17, though true here of

Xevaap, 'reigned,'

'assumed dramatic

rule,'

but

16, ov

7rXr?pcoo-at is

been

said,

N.

ixi]

Mt. 5

may mean

/SaXeTi/

13)

12)

Moods and

T.

only in a

'kept silence'

is

kaiyqaav

is

In

Tenses, p. 21.

line

with what has already

'throw' (constative),

Moulton, Prol,

Cf.

God

the constative aorist, while

In

17.

:

:

e^aaiXevaas,

(/cai

ingressive as

is

we have

reXearjTe,

'hit' (effective).

or

sive)

aiyrjaaL (verse

effective in

15

ealyrjaev (Ac.

Cf. Burton,

(Lu. 9 :3G). :

Thus

sense).

(constative),

Gal. 5

:

'let fly' (ingres-

Illustra-

p. 130.

tions occur in the N. T. in 'ijSaXev avTov els ^v\aK-qv (Mt. 18 30, constative, 'cast' or 'threw'), /3dXe aeavTov hrevdev kcltcjo (Lu. 4:9, Note kvTevdev, as well as "perfective" force of ingressive, 'hurl.' :

Mt. 5

Cf.

Kdrco.

:

29), i^aXev

/car'

avTrjs (effective, 'beat,'

Ac. 27:

14). (0)

It

is

notion at

This

Aorist.

Ingressive

aorist.

It is purely

all.

Thus

kiTToox^voev,

14:9,

is

'became

eXa^ov avTov (Jo. 1

But

Mt. 22 :7 3:9),

=

is

'

clear in Jo. 1

=

:

41)= 'burst

So

So

10.

But

in oaot

:

kdvjio^dr]

23),

as

is

eKOiidrjdr] :

22),

irXovTrjarjTe (2

into tears'

and

11:35).

In

cSaKpuo-ev (Jo.

16).

(Mt. In Lu. 15 32

(Ac. 7:60),

iaxvaafiev fx6\Ls

'became angry.'

(Lu. 8

ingressive,

Cor. 7:9),

:

12) the ingressive idea occurs, as in oh xapeXa-

(Ac. 27: 16), tuar^ao^aiv (Lu. 6 driTe (2

'did not recognise.'^

is

earnest to know.'

wpyicdr]

h.<j>hTrvo^(j€v

t^iiaev

:

it is

Perhaps in

just before).^

airedavev

meaning

Cf. iKkavaev (Lu. 19

in verse 11. (vs. 42)

inchoative

or

inceptive

a matter with the individual verb.^ 'became poor'; ei'r]aev, Ro. is

alive' (cf.

this could be constative.

eyj^ajs

the

8:9,

2 Cor.

Jo. 16 :3, ovK eyvo^aav, the

fiov

is

not, however, like the "constative" idea, a tense-

Cf.

(Mt. 2

i]yaiTi](jev

Cor. 8:9).

:

also

86^r}Te

/xt)

:

(Mk. 10

:

21), eXuTTTj-

The notion

is

com-

with verbs expressing state or condition (Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 16). Moulton quotes ^aaCkehaas avaira^qaeTai, having come to his throne he shall rest,' Agraphon, O.P. 654. See also

mon

'

Moulton {Prol, p. 248) cites Jo. 4:52, KoiJ.\p6Tepov eax^v, 'got better,' and compares it with eau KOfiipus ax
B.G.U. 423

:

(ii/A.D.).

:

See Gildcrsl., Synt., p. 105. ' Cf. Abbott, Job. Or., p. 328. * These ingressive aorists are often denominative verbs. Cf Gildersl., Synt. 6 Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 104. of Att. Gk., p. 104. 1

Blass, Qr. of

2

lb.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 193.

.

835

TENSE (XPONOS) suggests "upshot aorist."

Giles ^ calls

aorist of the "culminat-

it

But the idea

is that emphasis is on the end of the action as opposed to the ])eginning (ingresThe This is done (if done) by the verb itself (Aktionsart) sive). following examples will make the matter clear: iroirjaaTe Kapirov

ing point," following Monro.^ laid

.

24), eveTTprj8), K\daas (6 6), iTeXeaev (7: 28), oj/jlolcoOt] (13 (22:7), kKkp8r](Ta (25:20), eTretaav (27:20), kXWri (Mk. 7:35), earaOrtaav (Lu. 24 17), eKpvjSr] (19 :42), fijayev (Jo. 1 :42), dxe-

(Mt. 3

:

:

:

c€v

:

(Ac. 5

ffTTjae

(21:32),

:

(12

37), TrXr^pcbo-ajres

eKojXuo-ej/

(27:43),

:

25), eireaev

(20

(Ph. 4:11),

tp.adov

:

9), kirahaavro

(Rev.

hUriaev

A

good example of the effective aorist in the papyri is So then in the case of each aorist eaoocreu, B.G.U, 423 (ii/A,D.). the point to note is whether it is merely punctiliar (constative) or whether the verb-idea has deflected it to the one side or the other (ingressive or effective). It needs to be repeated that there is at 5:5).

bottom only one kind

of aorist (punctiliar in fact or statement).

always means point-action. The tense, like the mode, has nothing to do with the fact of the action, but only Sometimes it will not be clear with the way it is stated.

The

tense of

itself

from the context what the Aktionsart

is.

of prepositions applies to all the tenses.

The "perfective" force It must be said also that

the Aktionsart in the aorist (ingressive, effective) applies to all the modes. Indeed, because of the time-element in the indica-

by the augment and secondary endings) the real the aorist tense is best seen in the other modes where

tive (expressed

character of

we do not have notes

of time.^

It

merely a matter of con-

is

venience, therefore, to note the aorist in the different modes, not because of any essential difference (outside of the indicative).

One

is

Gildersleeve*

in constant danger of overrefinement here.

criticises

for "characteristic prolixity" in his treatment of

StahP

the tenses.

A

few striking examples are

sufTicient here.

The caution must be once more re(h) of the aorist indicative we have subdivisions in these peated that (punctiliar action). The variaroot-idea one and tense only one Aorist

Indicative.

tions noted are incidental

and do not change at

mental idea. (a) The Narrative or Historical Tense.^ 1

Man.,

2

Horn. Gr.,

^

Krit.-hist. Synt., pp. 148-220.

«

Burton, N. T.

p. 498.

the indicative.

p. 48.

Moods and

'

Moulton,

^

Am.

this funda-

It is the tense in

which

Prol., p. 129.

Jour, of

Tenses, p. 19.

all

Pliilol.,

1908, p. 400.

It is the cliaraeteristic

Cf. Bcrnhardy, Wiss. Synt., 1829, p. 380.

idiom

in

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

836

a verb in ordinary narrative

Greek

is

Hence

using some other tense.

put unless there is reason for enormously frequent in the

it is

Writers vary greatly, of course, in the use of

historians.

the tenses as of words, but in the large view the point holds.

The

and in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 122). Almost the Gospels and Acts will show an abundance of

aorist holds its place in the papyri

as the usual tense in narrative

any page

in

aorist indicatives that illustrate this

the

eight

in Ac.

aorists

aorists in 21

:

13:13

f.

point.

(no

Cf.,

for instance,

other tense), the eight

(no other tense), the three aorists in 25

1 f.

1 f.

:

In these instances the tenses are not all in indicative mood, though predominantly so. See again the fifteen The aorist was used in aorists in Ac. 28 11-15 (one perfect). (no other tense).

:

narrative as a matter of course.

Heb.

Note the many

aorists

in

11.

The redundant use

= *took and

sowed'

airrjkdev kol dirtv (Jo.

arity of Greek.

of the verb as in Xa^wv ecnreipev (Mt. 13

is

not a peculiarity of the aorist tense.

5: 15)

= 'went and

told.'

Nor

It belongs to the vernacular of

But we no longer

is it

:

31) Cf.

a peculi-

most languages.

find the iterative use of av with the aorist ac-

cording to the classic idiom (Moulton, Prol., p. 167). (j8)

The Gnomic

Aorist.

Jannaris^ calls this also "empiric

aorist," while Gildersleeve^ uses "empirical" for the aorist with

a negative or temporal adverb, a rather needless real "gnomic" aorist is a universal or timeless

distinction.

aorist

The

and prob-

ably represents the original timelessness of the aorist indicative.^ This aorist is common in Homer ^ in comparisons and general sayings. The difference between the gnomic aorist and the is that the present may be durative.^ But general truths be expressed by the aoristic present. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 109) compares this use of the aorist to the generic article. Winer^ denies that this idiom occurs in the N. T., but on insuf-

present

may

Abbott rather needlessly appeals to the " Hebrew influence on Johannine tense-construction" to explain k^\iidrj /cat It is a general k^ripavdr] (Jo. 15:6) after kav fxrj tls fiepri eu e/xot. construction here and is followed by three presents (aoristic). This is a mixed condition certainly, the protasis being future

ficient grounds.

"^

= Synt., p. 112. Gk. Gr., p. 436. Schmid, tjbcr den gnomischen Aorist der Griech., 1894, p. 15. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 278. « W.-Th., p. 277. 4 Mom-o, Horn. Gr., p. 48 f. ' Joh. Gr., ^ Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 54. p. 327. 1

Hist.

^

J.

Cf.

.

TENSE (XPONOS) (third class,

But

undetermined with some Hkehhood of

eSo^aadr] (Jo. 1.5

:

8) is

Tou Kai vaTepovvrat (Ro. 3

merely the "timeless"

what

I

:

possibly also gnomic.

But

23).

aorist,

in Jo. 15

fulfilment).

Cf. Travres

r/yuap-

we may have

6, 8,

:

like orav deXys,

Radermacher {N. T.

tetus, IV, 10, 27.

adds,

837

in

i^fj'XOes,

Epic-

and do not admit: "The genuine gnomic aorist appears Gr., p. 124) so thinks

to be foreign to the Hellenistic vernacular."

It survives in modern Greek, according to Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 436. Moulton (Prol, pp. 135, 139) admits it in N. T., but (p. 134) considers Jo.

15

:

6 the "timeless" aorist, like

aTroAotxrjv et

There are other examples,

like Upvypev

386.

followed by presents

(13:48),

e/3aXoj/

fxe 'Keipeis

(Mt. 13

virayei, xcoXeT, rjyopaaeu

cb/iotw^r?

Ale, which is

in Eur., :

44)

(13 :46), avveXe^av

(18:23), UaOtaau (23:2),

—

(Lu.

ev86Ky]aa

3:22),

kbiKaiiody] (7:35), k8i8a^ev (Jo. 8:28), aveTciKev and the other aorists in Jas. 1 11, kaXecre— eSo^acre (Ro. 8 30), k^-qpavdr}— :

Pet.

k^e-jreaev (1

less is

a

53.

Lu.

1

:

24;

:

LXX,

Is.

40

:

7).

It is true that the time-

Hebrew perfect is much like this gnomic aorist, but it common enough Greek idiom also. Cf. further Lu. 1 51It is not certain that evdoK-qaa (Mt. 3 17; 17: 5; Mk. 1 11; 3 22) belongs here. It may be merely an example of the :

:

:

:

timeless aorist used in the present, but not gnomic. (f).

Burton {N. T. Moods and Tenses,

thinks (7)

it

See under

p. 29) finds it difficult

and

originally "inceptive" (ingressive)

Relation

to the

imperfects.

Imperfect.

But the

of" the imperfect.^

The

aorist

is

aorist

is

not used "instead

often used in the midst of

The Old Bulgarian does not distinguish between In modern Greek, aorists and have the same endings (Thumb, Handh., p. 119),

the aorist and the imperfect. imperfects

but the two tenses are distinct in meaning. Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 122) thinks that in the kolvt] he finds the imperfect used as aorist, as in e/c tcju ISlo^v kxveL (kwoUi.) t6v jSw/jlov (Inscr. de la Syrie 2413=^), and heaa^yei^ for 5teo-d0?j(ras (P. Lond., XLII, Kenyon 30). But I venture to be sceptical. In both passages the imperfects

urges the

common

make

perfectly good sense.

use of krekevTa, but that

Radermacher

may

be merely descriptive imperfect. I grant that it is "willkiirlich" in Herodotus (in 1214) to say Sie^^dpT/ mt TeKevra, as in Strabo (C 828) to have heXevTa StaSeSeKrat. It is "rein stilistisch," but each writer exercises his own whim. Winer^ properly remarks that it "often

—

' Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 46; Leo Meyer, Griech. Aoristc, p. 97; Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 243; Moulton, Prol., p. 128. 'II;' may be either aorist 2 W.-Th., p. 27G. or imperfect.

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

838

depends on the writer" which tense he will use. Why "often"? not "always"? The presence of aorist, imperfect and past perfect side by side show how keen the distinction was felt to be.^ Blass- seeks to distinguish sharply between 'ekeyov and el-Kov, but with little success. The trouble, as already stated, is probably that eKeyov may be either aorist (like eKnrov) or imperfect. He admits that Thucydides introduces his speeches either with eXeye

Why

or eXe^e.

"an actual interchange In any given incident the speaker or writer may have

Gildersleeve,^ like Stahl, denies

of tenses."

the choice of representing it in narrative by the aorist (punctiliar) or the imperfect (durative). An interesting example is found in Mk. 12 41-44.* The general scene is presented by the descrip:

e(9ewpet and the durative present ^aWeu by ttoXXoi— e/3aXXof. But the figure of the widow woman is singled out by the aorist e^aXev. The closing reference by Jesus to the rest is by the constative aorist Tavres e^aXov. Note also the precise distinction between dx^v and efioXtv at the end. Where the aorist and the imperfect occur side by side, it is to be assumed that the change is made on purpose and the difference

tive durative imperfect It is generalized

be sought.

in idea to

In juxtaposition the aorist

lifts

the cur-

and the imperfect continues the play. Cf. hvara^av (ingressive, 'fell to nodding') and hdOevdov ('went on sleeping') in Mt. 25 5. So Tis /uov T]\paTo; Kai irepu^XkirtTo (Mk. 5 32), 'He began tain

:

:

to look around because of the touch.'

See also k\W-n

yXcoaarjs avrov, Kai eXdXet op^cos (7:35).

A

pears in ayyeXoL edidov (13

TrpoarjXdop Kai Si-qKOPOvv

8); Kare^r] XatXai/'

:

Kpa^arrov ainov Kai

Karevoovv Kai eUov (Ac. 11

—

8;

:

Mk.

11

:

:

In Lu. 8

13).

Once again note

airkOavtv.

Mt. 21

:

avTu (Mt. 4

:

11); eweaev

/cat

rjpe

tov

— Kai avi>e7r\r]povPTO (Lu. 8 23); (Jo. 5:9); ave^r] — Kai kblbauKiv (7 :

TrepteTrdret

k^rjXdov Kai tKpavyaiov (12

6 Seands rijs

similar distinction ap-

eUafxev

6).

:

— Kai

eKooXvofxev

Cf. further Ac. 14

18; Jo. 20

:

3

f

In

.

1

:

14)

53 note KaTeyekwv and

:

in 9

:

49 and

10; 1 Cor. 3

Cor. 10

:

:

6;

4 note Imov

in 11:23, irapedcoKa, Tape8i8eTo. The same sort of event be recorded now with the aorist, as ttoXu ttXtjOos rjKoXoWriaeu

'iwLvov;

will

(Mk. 3:7), now with the imperfect, as rjKoXoWeL oxXos toXvs (5 Cf. Lu. 2 18 and 4: 22.^ But the changing mood of the

:

24).

:

writer does not other.

A

quency

of

mean

that the tenses are equivalent to each

word further is necessary concerning the relative freaorists and imperfects. Statistical syntax is interesting,

1

Gildersl., Synt., p. 114.

3

Am.

*

Burton, N. T.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 192.

Jour, of Philol., 190S, p. 398.

Moods and

Tenses, p. 30.

6

lb.

839

TENSE (XPONOS)

and not always conclusive. Schlachter^ has applied Homer. In both Iliad and Odyssey the aorists in the indicative are more numerous than the imperfects. Gilder-

laborious

statistics to

Jacobsthal {Der Gesleeve ^ found a similar result in Pindar. hrauch der Tempora und Modi in den kretischen Dialektinschriften)

But Hultsch'' found Polybius, and Prof. Miller^

finds the aorist surpassing the imperfect.

very abundant in has added statistics for other writers. "The imperfect divides the crown with the aorist in different proportions at different times and in different spheres.'"^ A further extended quotation from Gildersleeve^ is pertinent: "Not the least interesting is the

the imperfect

table in which Schlachter has fessor Miller's

and from which

it

combined

indicative gradually diminishes until in

Xenophon.

Then

his results

with Pro-

appears that the use of the aorist it

finds its

the aorist thrusts itself

low-water-mark

more and more to

culminates in the N. T. The pseudo-naivete of Xenophon suggests an answer to one problem. The Hellenica has the lowest percentage of imperfects, but it mounts up in the

the front until

it

The other problem, the very low pere.g. Matthew 13 per in the N. T. imperfect centage of the gingerly, and well approaches Schlachter 7 cent.. Apocalypse whose 46 per Josephus to contrast marked in he may. It stands

novelistic Kyropaideia.

—

—

cent, of imperfects

shows the

artificiality of his style,

as does his use of the participles {A. J. P.,

IX

somewhat

154), which, accord-

more than thrice as often as St. John's of the aorist indicative can predominance This Gospel (41:12). of the aorist impredominance the from dissociated be hardly perative in the N. T. (Justin Martyr, Apol I, 16. 6), although the

ing to Schlachter, he uses

predominance of the aorist imperative has a psychological basis which cannot be made out so readily for the aorist indicative. Besides, we have to take into consideration the growth of the perfect and the familiar use of the historical present, which is

down in The personal kept

or literary form,

»

XX

109, XXVII 328)." St. Luke alone (A. J. P., equation, style, character of the book, vernacular all

Stat. Unters. iiber

come

into play.

It largely

depends on what

den Gebr. der Temp, und Modi bei einzelnen griech.

Schriftst., 1908. 2

Am.

»

Der Gcbr. der erziihlenden Zeitf. bei Polyb. Am. .Jour, of Philol., XVI, pp. 139 ff. Cf. und Meth. der synt. Porsch., 1853.

*

Ziel 6

Jour. of. Philol., 1876, pp. 158-1G5.

Gildersl.,

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 242.

(1898). also L. Lange,

«

Andeut.

lb., p. 244.

iiber

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

840

aiming to describe a scene with vividOtherwise he uses the aorist, on the whole the narrative tense par excellence} "Hence the the writer

If

is after.

he

is

ness, the imperfect predominates.

aorist is the truly narrative tense, the imperfect the truly descrip-

tive one; (5)

and both may be used

Relation

to

the

of the

same transaction."

It is rather shocking,

Past Perfect.

after

Winer's protest that the tenses are not interchanged, to find him saying bluntly: "In narratives the aorist is used for the pluper-

Burton* helps the matter by inserting the word "Eng-

fect."^

Winer meant "German pluperfect." by using "translated." "We often translate the aorist by a pluperfect for the sake of clearGoodwin^ adds more exactly that the aorist indicative ness." merely refers the action to the past "without the more exact That is the specification" which the past perfect would give. lish" before "pluperfect."

Gildersleeve^ does

The speaker

case.

more

much

better

or writer did not always care to

precise specification.

He was

make

this

content with the mere narra-

we moderns Hke. back into the Greek We All that one is entitled translation. German aorist our English or the context "imoccurs where sometimes the aorist to say is that in English we where main action,"^ the before completion plies prefer the past perfect. This use of the aorist is particularly common in subordinate clauses (relative and temporal and indirect discourse).* It must be emphasized that in this construction the tive of the events without the precision that

are therefore in constant peril of reading

"The is not stressed in the Greek. Greeks neglected to mark the priority of one event to another, leaving that to be gathered from the context."^ Strictly therefore the aorist is not used for the past perfect. The Greeks cared In Mt. 14 3 it is plain that Urjaev and not for relative time. airkdero are antecedent in time to rjKovaev, verse 1, and direv in verse 2, but the story of the previous imprisonment and death In of John is introduced by yap in a reminiscential manner. antecedence of the action

:

Mt. 2

:

9 Of eUov points back to verse

(Mt. 22 34) :

;

»

Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 158.

2

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 77.

3 6

^ 8 9

2.

Cf. also 6rt

ore eveiraL^av avTui, e^edvaav avTov (27

:

31).

h4)iiJ.o:aev

So in 28 2

" N. T. Moods and Tenses, ^ Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 109. W.-M., p. 343. Gk. Moods and Tenses, p. 18. Cf. Gildersl., Synt., p. 109. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 47. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437. Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 76. Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 169.

:

p. 22.

841

TENSE (XPONOS) eyevero is antecedent to rjXdev in verse

ticular

fi8et

In 27

1.

and compare with

OTL -KapkbwKav

:

18 note in par-

eyivwo-Kev 6tl irapade-

Here in verse 7). which Matthew did not care to make. In Lu. 19 15 we have oh 8e86:Kei, but tI duwpayfxaTevaavTo. Other examples where the antecedence is not expressed, though true, and the aorist is used, are kireXaOovTo (Mk. 8 14), tiretSriTrep

Mark

Mk.

in

dcjKeLffau

15

10

:

draw the

did

(cf. otrcues TreTrotriKeLaav

distinction

:

:

krex^lprjo-av

hedmaro

:

riKovaav

OTL

(6

(8

(Lu. 1

(11

cos

kreKeaav (2

elrrev :

:

CTretSi)

39),

24

27), a r]ToiiJ.aaav (Lu.

(4:1), ov

30 and note

:

1),

OTL avk^\t\p€v (9

16),

:

:

:

eyevaaro (Jo. 2:9),

ojs

1),

kirXripwatv (7: 1),

(4:50), k^evevaev (5:13),

18),

6tl k^k^akov (9

(13

eXrjXu^tt), ore ivi\pev

:

12),

:

ovov

35), cos

cos

tykvero

VTrrivTrjaev

airk^riaav (21

:

9),

In matter Jo. 18 24, aTrkareCKtv ovv, the presence of ovv makes the If ovv is transitional, there would be no antecedence. less certain. But if ovv is inferential, that may be true, though Abbott con-

oi)s

t^eXk^aTo (Ac.

1:2),

oi)s

irpokyvo:

(Ro. 8

:

29.

Cf. 30 also).

:

the aorist "an aggressive tense, particularly in the active voice, where it encroached on the domain of the perfect, and all but supplanted the pluperfect." siders

it

That is was one

"impossible."^

and yet

true,

it

Clyde^

calls

must not be forgotten that the

much

of the original tenses,

aorist

older than the perfects or

In wishes about the past (unattainable wishes) the N. T. uses o(l)€\ov (shortened form of &(j)e\ov) with the aorist indicative (1 Cor. 4:8) 6(f>e\6v ye e^aaCKevaaTe. A similar remark applies to use of the aorist indicative in conditions of the second

the future.

without av in apodosis (Gal. 4 15) or with av In both cases in English we translate this aorist by

class (past time), (Jo. 11

21).

:

:

a past perfect. (e)

Relation

to the

The

Present.

so-called

Dramatic Aorist

is

In Sanskrit this is the comhas just taken place.^ One what express to mon use of the tense indicative is not still aorist timeless or gnomic wonders if the action in the punctiliar for tense specific of absence a The older. possibly the oldest use of the tense.

made

present

this

idiom more

natural.''

This primitive use of

the aorist survives also in the Slavonic.^ Giles suggests that "the Latin perfect meaning, like the Sanskrit, may have developed directly

from

this usage."

The idiom appears

Cf. Burton,

Joh. Or., p. 336.

2

Gk. Synt., p. 76. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 329. Giles, Man., etc., p. 498. "The

6

time."

lb., p. 497.

Homer« and

N. T. Moods and Tenses,

1

»

in

*

aorist

is

is

p. 23.

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 129.

used not unconiinonly of present ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 48.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

842

dramatic poets where a sudden change comes,^ It is a regular idiom in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 123) as Teivaaa, 'I grew hungry/ 'am hungry still.' This aorist is used of actions

found

chiefly in the

or in colloquial speech or passionate questions.^

The

which have just happened.

Moulton {ProL,

effect reaches into the present.

who "had a

quotes a traveller in Cos

p. 247)

pleasant shock, on calling for a cup of coffee, to have the waiter

The English can

cry "E00aa-a."

still

use a past tense in passion-

Moulton* speaks

ate questions affecting the present.^

where an

of "cases

denotes present time," though he

aorist indicative

"None of these examples are really in present time, for they only seem to be so through a difference in idiom between Greek and English." This latter statement is the truth. The aorist in Greek, particularly in dialogue, may be used for what has just happened. It seems awkward in English to refer this to past time, but it is perfectly natural in Greek. So we transFrom the Greek point of view late it by the present indicative. in the Greek. The examples English, not lies in the the peculiarity adds:

N. T. are numerous enough in spite of Winer ^ to be worth noting. Moulton^ has made a special study of Matthew concerning the translation of the aorist. " Under the head of things in the

'

just happened' come 9 Xevaev,

and 14 12

6.4)7] Kafxev,

18

15

:

eTTolrjae,

eiradou,

:

:

28

65

27:46

and 17 12

15 waprjXdev

:

20

:

12

:

2,

etc.,

e/SXacr^iy/iTjcrev,

kyKaTeXiwes,

26

elwov,

10

:

26

riKOvaare,

28:7

16

riyepdrj,

-as,

eTroirjcrav

27 forbids) and perhaps

^X^e (with

:

14

€(j)6a<xev,

eKep87]aas,

26

18 erekevTriaev (with apn), 5

:

64

28:18

kiiol-

6

;

:

12

aweKaXvrpe,

26

13

:

27 19 (unless 11:

€t7ras,

edodr]

Certainly this

eyevrjdr]."

rJSr?)

17

:

28

ripyaaaTO,

25,

:

:

:

a respectable

is

Matthew. Add eixepiadr] (Mt. 12 :26). These all can be translated by the English 'have.' EvdoKrjaa (Mt. 3 17 and parCf. 6v evboK-qaev allels) is a possible example also. \pvxh ij-ov It is a "timeless" aorist^ and may be gnomic, (12 18, LXX). list

for

:

17

:

as already pointed out. ^a.p.r]v

(14 are

7

:

:

Cf. 2 Pet.

Ik rrjs veoTtiTOs; e^eaTT] in

41).

Mk.

3

:

1

21;

17;

:

Mk.

:

20, €0uXa-

— TrapaStSorat

Other examples of the aorist for what has just happened kireaKel/aro (Lu. oiiK eariv w5e (Mk. 16:6); rjykpQt]

—

rjyepdTj,

16); iiydpaaa, eyrjixa (14

(16:4);

10

ciTex^L, rjXdev

kpu/S?/

:

18-20);

(19:42); outws

Hwev,

ijyepdr]

evpWr) (15

(24:34);

1

Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses,

^

W.-Th.,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437.

«

Prol., p. 140.

3

Gildersl., Synt., p. 113.

^

Moulton,

4

Prol., p. 134.

p. 18.

:

32)

;

eyvuu

irpoaeKvvrjaau (Jo. p. 278.

Prol., p.

134

f.

843

TENSE (XPONOS) 4 :20);

i^KOvaas (11 :42); a.Trj\dev (12 :19); ri\dov els ttjv (hpav ravrrjp

(12 :27); ^X^ei/ (13

possibly gnomic; :

With

:

to

make

2).^

k(t>avep(^d-q

vvu e^o^aaOr] (13 :31),

eTrtdaare vvu (21

:

action forward.

eyvco, eyvoiv

8 is Cor.

ecrxes,

(a.d.

:

Cf. tovto

:

8;

common

this use of the aorist adverbs of time are

(Jo. 21

B.G.U. 287

:

10); k8ov\ojaa, eyevojjLrjv (1

clear the present relation of time.

present see

Imt kdo^aaa (17:4)

Cf. ttoiw in verse 23); eireaev, eweaeu (Rev. 14

19, 20, 22.

18

1);

'I did glorify thee,' while eoo^aaOr] in 15

points backward,

9

:

tJStj

tp'ltov

14) where tovto has the effect of bringing the For a sharp contrast between the aorist and So Wvaa Kai d^t[(i], Kai vvv ov ex^Ls (Jo. 4: 18). See in particular Cf. also Lu. 10:24. 250).

and eyvwaav

in Jo. 17

:

The

25.

illustrated in the participle in Lu. 10

:

timeless aorist

18, ededopovp

t6v

is

well

I,aTavav

TctabvTa.

The problem just here is not (f) Relation to Present Perfect. whether the present perfect is ever used as an aorist. That will be discussed under the present perfect. If the distinction between the two tenses was finally ^ obliterated, as early happened But that in Latin,^ there would be some necessary confusion. has not happened in the N. T. period. Jannaris^ notes it reguIt is undeniable that the early Sanskrit larly about 1000 A.D. used the aorist chiefly for ''something past which is viewed with reference to the present" and it disappeared before the growth of the other more exact tenses.^ The perfect may be said to be a development from the aorist, a more exact expression of completed action than mere "punctiliar" (aorist), viz. state of comBut in the Greek the aorist not only held its own with pletion. the other tenses, but "has extended its province at the expense of the perfect," particularly in the N. T. period, though different But was the aorist used "for" the writers vary greatly here.*' perfect? Clyde ^ says: "The aorist was largely used for the perWiner ^ rephes: "There is no passage in which it can be fect." certainly proved that the aorist stands for the perfect." sleeve'-'

more

correctly says:

we should expect the »

Cf.

Moulton,

"The

perfect,"

Prol., p. 135.

i.e.

Gilder-

very often used where in English. But the trans-

aorist

^

is

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 440.

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 78. Still, in Lat. the aorist must be noted for sequence of tenses. Cf. Mcillet, L'Aoriste en Lat., Revue de Phil., 1897, p. 81 f. 4 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437. Cf. Hatz., Kinl., p. 204 f. '

6 «

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp. 298, 329. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199. Gk. Synt., p. 78.

»

W.-M.,

»

Synt., p. 107.

p. 344.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

844

lation of the aorist into English will call for special discussion a

What is true is that the action in such cases "is regarded as subordinate to present time,"^ in other words, the precise specification of relative time which we draw in our English perfect is not drawn in the Greek. The Greek states the simple undefined punctiliar action in a connection that suggests present time and so we render it in English by our " have."^ But Farrar^ is right in insisting that we do not explain the Greek tense by the English rendering. In truth, the examples given under the head of "Relation to the Present" (e) may often be rendered by the little later.

Enghsh "have" with

tolerable accuracy.* Sometimes the use an adverb or particle helps the English. The examples are rather numerous in the N. T., as in the papyri,^ where the aorist and the present perfect occur side by side. Thus x^p'i-^ S^v aireypa\paii7]v Kol ireTrpaKa, O.P. 482 (ii/A.D.) rrjs yevoiJ.€vr]s /cat aTOTeireiJ.iJ.kpr]s yvpaiKos, N.P. 19 (ii/A.D.). Moulton adds: "The distinction is very clearly seen in papyri for some centuries." In most instances in the N. T. the distinction is very sharply drawn in the context, as in 6tl erd^r?, /cat otl ey-qyeprai (1 Cor. 15:4). So eKTladrj, eKTiarat (Col. 1 In most instances where Cf. Ac. 21:28. 16). we have trouble from the English standpoint it is the perfect, of

;

:

not the aorist that occasions 13 :46).

We

perfect*.

As a

it,

come back

shall

rule all that

is

as in

irkivpaKiv

/cat

(Mt.

rjyopaaev

to this point under the present

needed

a

is

little

imagination on the

part of the English reader to sympathize with the mental alertness expressed in the changing tenses, a sort of

arrangement. eTreXaOeTo

Cf. Kanvbriaev yap eavTOV Kai

dTo2os

rjv

( Jas.

1

:

24)

The

.

cerning the aorist in those examples where (Lu. 5

:

eWtuis

/cat

single point to note con-

we use "have"

the Greeks did not care to use the perfect. Xecrat diKaiovs

"moving picture"

o.ireKiiKvdev

32) with ov yap fjXdou

is

that

Cf. ovk eXrjXvda Ka/caXecrat

(Mt.

6t/catous

two ways of regarding the same act. That is the whole story and it is a different thing from saying that the aorist is used "for" the present perfect. Here are some of the most interesting examples in the N. T. where "we" in English prefer "have": riKovaaTe (Mt. 5 21); evpov (8 10); avkypccre 9: 13), just

:

(12

:

3); ewaxi'vOrj

/cat

yjKovaav

/cat

:

emp-p-vaav (13

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 48. Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, the N. T., p. 24. » Gk. Synt., p. 125. « Moulton, Prol., p. 140.

:

15,

LXX,

Is.

6

:

10.

1

*

p. 18; P.

»

Thomson, The Gk. Tenses

lb., p.

142

f.

in

TENSE (XPONOS)

845

Likely enough the timelessness of the Hebrew perfect may have caused this translation into the aorist so common in the LXX), TjKvpcoaaTe

(15:6); avve^ev^eu (19:6); aveyvoore

16); CKprjKare (23

(28

6); k^earr,

:

:

23); KarkcTrjaev (24

(Mk. 3

Cf. aXXd Kadevdn);

36.

(15

:

21); eyvc^aav (Jo. 7

(10

:

32); kbo^aaa (12

(13

:

^pav

:

(Lu. 5

:

35;

d0^/c6j/ (8

cTLaaare (21

23)

:

:

riyepdrj

:

18);

Uu^a

14); e^eXe^d^Tji'

:

15); ovk tyvwaav (16

Mk.

:

22); rjpapTOV

:

29); IXa^ov (10

:

';

en aKhWeis] 5

cf. ri

Cf. So^dcrco); 'h^a (13

(21:

KaT-qpriaoj

26); irapeSoOr] (10

:

34); eyvcopiaa (15

:

otl

45); kiroirjaeu (27

cnredauev (5

;

26);

28.

:

18); riyairrjaa (13

— Wr]Kau (20

21)

:

eldafxeu

:

:

3);

Abbott remarks, that the Greek perfect does not lay the same stress on what is recently completed as does the English "have." Cf. also ovk Jo. 4

€yvi>i (1

:

:

2)

:

Cf. 1 Cor. 8:3);

8.

in verse

airecrToKKev

;

9 and

Cf.

10) .^

Jo. 4

e(f)avepu:dr] (1

riyaTrrjKafxev,

14

:

efxaOov (4

;

:

The same event and is

kKadiaev

;

in

Mk. 15:44 rjdr}

is first

means

'has died.'

(or TrdXat) aTedavev.

rjb-q

The

:

13).

redvriKev

distinction

However,

pertinent.

dTre^aj/ei/^'died,'

Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 108.

The

point.

is

practically 'to be dead,' while

This idiom

Epistolary Aorist.

(r?)

eXa^op (Ph.

;

mentioned by

not here very great, but each tense

TfBvrjKiv

Contrast margin, in

(Heb. 1:3); k^karw^v (2 Cor. 5

11)

then referred to by

is

8.

9.

:

rjyaTrjaafxep in

verse 10 with rjyaTTjaep and aweareLXev in verse 10)

3 12)

:

is

merely a matter of stand-

writer looks at his letter as the recipient will.

It is

probably due to delicate courtesy 'and is common in Latin as well as in the older Greek, though less so in the later Greek.^,

The most frequent word so used was lypa\pa, though also common. The aorist has its normal meaning.

€Tvep.^a

w^as

One has

merely to change his point of view, and look back at the writer. In 1 Jo. 2 12-14 we have the rhetorical repetition of 7pd0co, :

eypaipa (note the perfects after 6rt).

But

in 1 Jo. 2

:

21 eypa\pa

may

be the epistolary use, though Winer* protests against it. Here as in 2 26, ravra eypaxpa, the reference may be not to the whole epistle, but to the portion in hand, though even so the standpoint is that of the reader. Cf. also 5 13. In 1 Cor. 9 :

:

:

15 also the reference irpokyparpa kv oXiycp,

is

to the verses in hand.

the allusion

may

written or to the whole epistle, as

Certainly

22).

Cor. 4

:

ypa.4>oj

is

Kadoos

be to what Paul has just true of tTrearetXa (Heb. 13

the usual construction in the N. T.

14; 14: 37; 2 Cor. 13

:

'

Most

2

Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 324.

8

Jann., Hist. Ck. Gr., p. 437.

of these exx.

is

In Eph. 3:3,

10, etc.).

''Ey paxjya

from Mt. come from Moulton, *

:

(1

usually refers

Prol., p. 140.

W.-Th.,

p. 278.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

846 an

to

epistle just finished (Phil. 19; 1 Pet. 5

12;

:

1

Jo. 5

:

13),

but even so the standpoint veers naturally to that of the reader. This is particularly so in Gal. 6:11 which probably refers to the concluding verses 11-18 and, if so, a true epistolary aorist. In

Ro. 15

same

:

be^ to another portion of the

a whole.

Cor. 2

:

3, 4, 9; 7: 12;

3 Jo.

instances as in Ac. 23 in Phil. 11

av€TreijL\pa

:

But

9.

eir€fx\pa is

30; Eph. 6

and

cited."

is

clearly

The

due to

:

Cor. 5:9, 11,

1

Roman

epistolary aorist

found

22; Ph. 2

ri^ovK-qd-qv

Curiously enough Gildersleeve^ says: [Ep. aor.]

In

to a previous letter, as seems to be true also in 2

eypa\}/a refers

So

may

15 the reference

epistle or to the epistle as

in Text.

"The

:

in

undoubted

28; Col. 4

and

N. T. not to be in Latin (cf. is

Cicero's Letters), probably because of our having

The idiom

material.

8.

aorist in the

influence,

more common more

is

:

Rec. 2 Jo. 12.

epistolary

occurs often enough in the papyri.

Cf.

B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.), eypaxj/a vrrep aiirov prj idoTOs Ypd/x/xara, P.Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). There is therefore no adequate reason for denying its presence in the N. T. examples above. The future was probably (cf. Brug{&) Relation to the Future. marm, Griech. Gr., p. 480) a late development in the language, and other devices were at first used, like the present indicative, ere/ii/'a,

the perfect indicative, the aorist subjunctive.

was

The

aorist indica-

one of the expedients that never quite disappeared. It is not exactly, like the epistolary aorist, a change of standpoint. It is a vivid transference of the action to the future (like the present epxomi-, Jo. 14 3) l^y the timeless aorist. The augmented form is still used, but the time is hardly felt to be past. This idiom survives in the Slavonic also.^ It is a vivid idiom and is still found in modern Greek.'* Thumb (Handb., p. 123) cites /ct av p.k aov(3\i(7eTe, evas TpaLKos exadr], even if you impale me only one Greek perishes.' Radermacher (iV. T. Gr., p. 124) cites from tive

also

:

'

Epictetus, orav OeXys,

the future."

e^7]\6es.

Gildersleeve^ calls

Burton*' considers

it

it

"a

vision of

"rather a rhetorical figure than

a grammatical idiom," but the idiom is not so strange after all. Cf. Eur., Ale, 380, a.TroAbp.T]v el fxe \ei\l/eis='I perish if you leave me.* The examples are not numerous in the N. T. and some Cf. kav aov aKovaj}, kKepBriaas t6v abe\4>bv of them may be gnomic. aov (Mt. 18 15. Cf. xapdXa/Se as the next apodosis in verse 16 :

and

eoTco

in verse 17); tav Kal

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Synt., p. 128.

3

Giles,

N. T. Gk.,

Manual,

p. 499.

p. 194.

ya/jLTjays,

ovx

riixaprt^ (1

Cor. 7

<

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437.

^

gynt. of Attic Gk., p. 114. N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 23.

«

:

847

TENSE (XPONOS) 28); orav fieWn cakTri^uv, Kal eTeXeaOr] (Rev. 10 eav

tls

nrj

fxevy

kv

eixoi,

e^XijOr]

—

/cat

:

(Jo.

k^r]pa.v6i]

probably also 15 6), though

7),

:

may

be merely gnomic, as already stated. Cf. the use of 26, 28 in a condition of the efxepiadt] and e(t>da(rev in Mt. 12 (twice) is explained (verse tbo^aad-q In Jo. 13 31 present time. 32) by 5o|do-€i koI eWvs So^dcrct. The special use of the aorist indicative (t) Aorist in Wishes. in wishes about the past and conditions determined as unfulfilled this

:

:

be discussed in chapter XIX, Modes. Where so much variety is (k) Variations in the Use of Tenses. In modern English we be expected. is to freedom possible, great

will

make

a point of uniformity of tense in narrative.

almost

made a

The Greeks

It is jejune, to

point of the opposite.

say no

more, to plane downi into a dead level the Greek spontaneous In Matt. 4:11, Cf. ritxaprov koL varepovPTaL (Ro. 3 23). variety. :

for instance,

we have

StrjKovovv

(imperfect).

airekB6iv,

iz'eir

a

paKtv

fact, or to

,

a
(historical pres.), Trpoarikdov (aor.),

In Mt. 13

elx^v, rjyopaaev.

:

45

f.

note

karlu, ^r]TovPTi, €vp6)v,

"When

convey a meaning, there

is

they wished to narrate good ground for holding

that they employed the tense appropriate for the purpose, and that they employed it just because of such appropriateness."^

That is well said. The explanation is chiefly psychological, not mere analogy, which is true of only a few tenses, especially in Janlate Greek (Middleton, Analogy in Syntax, 1892, p. 6). naris. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437, lays probably too much stress on "the terminal homophony of the two tenses" (aor. and perf.). The Greek aorist (X) Translation of the Aorist into English. ind., as can be readily seen, is not the exact equivalent of any tense in any other language. It has nuances all its own, many of them difficult or well-nigh impossible to reproduce in English. Here, as everywhere, one needs to keep a sharp line between the Greek idiom and its translation into English. We merely do the best that

we can

in

English to translate in one

the total result of word (Aktionsart)

,

way

or another

context and tensc.^

tainly one cannot say that the English translations

Cer-

have been

Greek aorist.^ Weymouth in his Neiv Testament in Modern Speech has attempted to carry out a consistent Moulton* has thought the matter principle with some success. successful ^vith the

1

2

Thompson, The Gk. Tenses Weymouth, On the Rendering

P.

«

1894, p. 151. *

Prol., pp.

135-140.

in the

N.

T., p.l7.

Gk. Aorist and Thomson, The Gk. Tenses in the N. T., into Eng. of the

Perfect, p. 23.

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

848

NEW TESTAMENT

important enough for an extended discussion. that the Greek aorist is true to itself, however it English.

Take

nves

In Mt. 3 but 'warned' will

Greek puts

Moulton

:

is

6), for

clear

rendered into instance,

'fell

"and so have fallen 7 vireSeL^ev may be translated by 'has warned,' answer. The English past will translate the

asleep (at various times),' asleep."

Cor. 15

tKOLiJLrjdrjaav (1

He makes

explains,

:

many cases where we prefer "have." Burton "The Greek employs the aorist, leaving the

aorist in

clearly thus:

it

context to suggest the order; the English usually suggests the

The Greek aorist takes no note of any interval between itself and the moment of speaking, while the English past takes note of the interval. The Greek order by the use of the pluperfect."

and the English past do not exactly correspond, nor do the Greek perfect and the English perfect. ^ The Greek aorist covers much more ground than the English past. Cf. 5t6 eKXrjdr] 6 aypos eKeivos 'Aypos Mp-aTos ecos rrjs arnxepov (Mt. 27: 8), where the Greek aorist

aorist

is

connected with the present in a way that only the See also ecos apTi ovk fiTr]aaTe (Jo.

English perfect can render. 16

From the Greek point of view the aorist is true to its The aorist in Greek is so rich in meaning that the genius.

24).

:

owTi

English labours and groans to express it. As a matter of fact the Greek aorist is translatable into almost every English tense except the imperfect, but that fact indicates no confusion in the Greek.^

The aorist of these (c) The Aorist Subjunctive and Optative. two "side-moods"^ may very well be discussed together. The two moods are not radically different as we shall see. There (a) No Time Element in the Subjunctive and Optative.^ is only relative time (future), and that is not due to the tense at The subjunctive

all.^

is

future in relation to the speaker, as

often true of the optative, though the optative standpoint

more remote, a

sort of future

is

is

then

from the standpoint of the past.

As between the aorist and (/3) Frequency of Aorist Subjunctive. present in subjunctive and optative, the aorist is far more common. For practical purposes the perfect

may

be almost

left

out of view;

moods the action is either punctiliar (aorist) or durative (present). The contrast between point and linear action comes out simply and clearly here. It is just that so rare.

it is

As a

rule in these

1

N. T. Moods and Tenses,

2

lb., p.

*

Gildersleeve,

Am.

6

K.-G., Bd.

p. 182.

24

p. 27. 3

f.

I,

Thomspon, Gk.

Synt., 1883, p. xix.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 401. 6

Stahl, Hist.-krit. Synt., p. 171.

TENSE (XPONOS)

849

seen between the aorist and the imperfect indicative.^ In the classical Sanskrit the subjunctive^exists only in a remnant of the first person, which is treated as an imperative, but it is common

In Homer (both Iliad and Odyssey) preponderance over the present (65 to 35 for the average between subjunctive and optative, about the same

enough

in the early language.^

the aorist

is

for each).='

in great

Gildersleeve'* considers the difference

mere lack

of the constructions, not to

The

early stage of the language.

subj.

due to the nature

of differentiation in the

is

more common

in

Homer

than in the later Greek and the aorist subj. is correspondingly abundant. There is no doubt that the aorist is gaining in the KOLvi] over the present in the subj., opt., imper. (Radermacher,

N. T.

Gr., p. 123).

The

distinction

is

understood.

Cf. Aiexpts av

and axpi-s civ eirlKaipou 8oKfj (duration), I. G., XII, Radermacher cites also ottcos Xa/jL^avwcnv and ottcos Xa^oiciv, 5, 647. oirws virapxri and tva 8o9fj from a Pergamum inscr., N. 13 (b.c. 300). He fears that this proves confusion between the tenses, and appeals also to the papyrus example tva ypd^co Kal 4)\vapr](T0} (Deissmann, Licht, p. 153). But there is no necessary confusion here. The modern Greek preserves clearly the distinction between punctihar and Hnear action in the subj. and uses the aorist and present side by side to show it (Thumb, Handb., p. 124). The situation in the N. T. is even more striking. Mr. H. Scott, r/Xtos

(aim)

8vri

Birkenhead, England, writes me that he finds only five present subjs. in Acts and one (13 41) is a quotation. In the Pauline Epistles (13) he notes 292 dependent aorist subjs. and only 30 dependent pres. subjs. Gildersleeve^ complains of Stahl's weari:

someness in proving what "no one will dispute." The point is is used as a matter of course unless durative (linear) action is to be emphasized or (as rarely) the completed state is to be stressed (perfect). But variations occur even here. Thus Abbott notes only two instances of the pres. subj. that the aorist subj. or opt.

"^

1

2 » *

Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 82; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 298.

p. 194.

Schlachter, Statist. Unters., pp. 236-238. Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 245.

« lb., p. 400. Joh. Gr., p. 370 f. But there is little point in these exceptions. Abbott rightly notes the variations in the major uncials between -lari and -l^v in 8

Mk. 1

:

9

:

43-47.

40; 9

{tav to

23; 8

:

:

47

Mr. H. Scott

be supplied); 13 4 (=

(12 in aU).

finds kdv with pres. subj. also (W. H.) in ]\Ik. In Lu. he adds 5 12 (=Mk. 1 40); 10 G, 8, 10

(4 in aU).

Mk.

1

:

:

:

3;

40); 10

:

20 2S :

13 bis;

But he makes 78

:

1.5

:

14; 17

:

In Mt. he notes

(8 in all). :

20; 21

:

21

;

.5

24 49 :

23; 6

:

bis; 2(3

aor. subjs. with iav in the Synoptics.

:

22, :

35

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

850 with

Mk.

kav in

apart from

/ii?

:

:

:

:

the Synoptics

in

subj.

aorist

(9 45; 14 31) and two in Lu. (6 33; 19 31), and except changes with exw and dk\w. The

well-nigh universal with

is

kav.

John there is more diversity between the two tenses. "Most Greek writers observe the distinction between the aorist and present subjunctive, as Englishmen observe that between 'shall' and 'will,' unconsciously and without any appearance of But we have seen above deliberately emphasizing the difference. (2511) that John employs the two forms with great deliberateness, even in the same sentence, to distinguish between the beginning of 'knowing' and the development of it."^ Cf. Iva ^vC^Te koI yLVWffKTjTe (10 38) and el ravra olbare, luaKupLoi eare kav TroLrJTe avra (13 17), where the pres. is again used purposely. Note also John's Tt TTOLu^nev (6 28) and Luke's tI iroLTja-uiJLev (3 10). We need not fol-

But

in

:

:

:

:

low

all

the details of Abbott,^ but he has

made

it

perfectly clear

that John makes the sharp distinction between the aor. and pres. Cf. kav tls subj. that is common between the aor. and imperf. ind. 14

:

8

(Jo.

Tr)pr]crri

13)

and

:

and

51)

kav Trjpoofiev (1 Jo.

3

6 av andixev (1 Jo.

2:3);

oTi av alrriai^Te (Jo.

But Paul

22).

:

knows the

also

punctihar force of the aor. subj. Cf. dyuapTTjo-co/xe?' (Ro. 6 15) with kiTLfxevconev (6:1), where the point lies chiefly in the difference of :

See also 2 Tim. 2

tense.

Cf.

vofxl/jLus a6\i}ari.

jjiT]

tions the aorist subj.

(Mk. 12

In

14).

:

peace already

=

made

'

mt

5, kav 8e

in Gal. 5

particularly

ad\fj tls, ov an^avovTai. kav :

:

on enjoying

keep

(SiKaLOjOevTes)

In deliberative ques-

17.

common,

ex^pev (Ro. 5

dpiivriv

designedly

occurs

is

:

Trotryre

1)

as in hwjxev

bCipev

/x?)

r)

the durative present

peace with God,' the p. 186) thinks

Moulton (Prol,

.

that the aorist subj. in relative clauses like 6s av (jiovemr] (Mt. 5 21), or owov kav Karaka^ji (Mk. 9 18), or conditional sentences :

:

like kav aa-Kaa-qade

one doubts

if

Cf.

wth

But

47) "gets a future-perfect sense."

:

after all this

into the Greek. aorist subj.

(Mt. 5

Mt. 5

ob fiv (Jo.

:

6

is

31. :

not reading English or Latin The special construction of the

35; 18

:

11)

comes up

for discussion

elsewhere. (7)

Aktionsart.

The

three

Thus

course, iruthe aorist subj.

merely constative, as

aorist is kav

fir]

TLS

fikv aoL,

nkvy kv

kpLol

(15

:

6).

the ingressive use

kinds of

is

in IVa fxapTvprjar] (Jo.

1

15

is kav fjLelvrjre kvk/jLol (Jo.

In Jo. 6

:

evident in

lieve' (cf. tva irLaTevrjTe in verse 29). ayaTiofxev (1 Jo. 3 :23);

point-action occur,

TrepLiraTriao:fj,ev

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 381.

30, Iva Ibup-tv Kal xto-Tcuo-coyuei/

:

Cf.

7).

inaTemw-

= come '

to be-

Cf. also tva irL(XTevcrunev

(Ro. 6:4; 13 ^

lb., pp.

:

13).

369-388.

of

1:7) the

ko.l

The

TENSE (XPONOS) effective aorist is seen in Karap'/rjai] (1

sition

Cor. 15

:

ttcos

TrXr/pw^coati'

(Mt. 26

:

54).

Cf. orau

24) for the "perfective" use of the prepo-

In the modern Greek the (Thumb, Handb., p. 124).

also.

AJxtionsart

851

aorist subj. preserves

It seems clear Hhat origboth in Sanskrit and Greek prohibition was expressed only by the subj. Hence the growth of the imperative never finally displaced it. In particular the aorist subj. held its place in prohibitions as against the aorist impcr. (a late form anyhow). This In the N. T. distinction has held in the main right on through. examples of the aor. imper. in prohibitions do occur in the third person, but the aor. subj. is the rule. In the second person the rule is still absolute. Moulton^ has given a very interesting dis(5)

Aorist Subjunctive in Prohibitions.

inally

cussion of the development of the discovery of the distinction The aorist subj. is of course between the two constructions. Inasmuch as the propunctiliar, and the present imper. linear. hibition is future, the aorist subj. would naturally be ingressive. Gottfried Hermann long ago made the distinction, but one day a few years ago Dr. Henry Jackson tells how he got the idea from a friend (quoted by Moulton^): "Davidson told me that, when he was learning modern Greek, he had been puzzled about the distinction, until he heard a Greek friend use the present This gave him the imperative to a dog which was barking. and immediately stumbled Plato's Apology, clue. He turned to 'before clamour instance, 20 E, dopv^-qar^re, excellent upon the " This disbegun.' 21 A, dopv^etre, 'when it has begins,' and firj punctiliar aorist subj. and in harmony with the is clearly tinction It is maintained in ancient Greek the durative present imper. Greek, and Moulton^ shows how the papyri abunmodern in and dantly illustrate it. Unfortunately the present imperative is rare in the papyri from the nature of the subject-matter, but the few examples agree to the distinction drawn. The aorist subjunctive Moulton (JProl., p. 123) finds in O.P. (all is abundant enough. /jlyj

with

ii/A.D.) six aorist subjs.

quest in a

letter.

Cf also .

/jltj

JU17.

dXXcos

Thus

refers to a re-

ixi] a.ij.e\-f]aj]s

Trotijcrps,

6pa

ix-qdevl

— irpoaKpohaiis.

But TovTo fiij X€7€, O.P. 744 (i/B.c), is in a letter in reference to what had already been said. So ^i?) aycovia, 'don't go on worrying.' Another good example avTov.

Moulton

is

clinches

one already writing) and

in it fxri

1

Monro, Horn.

2

Prol., p. 122.

Hb.P. 56 (iii/s.c), av by the modern Greek ypaypus (to

ixii

kvbx^n

ypcKpjjs (to

one who has not begun).

Gr., p. 240. »

ovv nrf

lb., p.

122

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

852

NEW TESTAMENT

But the is not admitted by all modern scholars.^ mainly in the use of the present imperative, not in the aorist subj. Examples like ^117 davfxaajjs (Jo. 3:7) do occur, where the thing prohibited has begun. Here it is the constative aorist rather than the ingressive which is more usual in this Moulton^ quotes Dr. Henry Jackson again: "M17 construction. Spaans always, I believe, means, *I warn you against doing this,' 'I beseech you will not'; though this is sometimes used when the thing is being done; notably in certain cases which may be called colloquial or idiomatic, with an effect of impatience, /x?) daviiaa^s, (fypovTLcrjjs, 'Oh, never mind!' /x?) SeLa'ifis, 'Never fear!' 'You mustn't be surprised!' " Add also p.r] (^o^rjdfis (Mt. 1: 20). But, as a rule, it is the ingressive aorist subj. used in prohibitions to forbid a thing not yet done or the durative present imper. to forbid the continuance of an act. The N. T. is very rich in examples of both of these idioms because of the hortatory nature of the books.^ Moulton^ finds 134 examples of ^117 with the pres. imper. and 84 of iii] with the aorist subj. In Matthew there are 12 examples of aii? with the pres. imper. and 29 of m^? with the

The

distinction

difficulty lies

/jltj

But these figures are completely reversed in the Gospel of Luke (27 to 19), in James (7 to 2), in Paul's Epistles (47 to 8) and John's writings (19 to 1). The case in Jo. 3 7 has aorist subj.

:

already been noticed.

It

may

be said at once that the excess

examples of pres. imper. over aorist imper. is the old situation in Homer.^ In the Attic orators. Miller {A. J. P., xiii, 423) finds the proportion of ^ui) Toiei type to /n? iroLrjaris type 56 to 44, about the same as that in the N. T., 134 to 84. In the N. T. this predominance holds except in Matthew, 1 Peter and Rev. (Moulton, Prol., p. 124). The aorist imper. was an after-growth, and yet is very common in the N. T. (and LXX) as compared, with the older Greek.^ In the Lord's Prayer, for instance, every tense is Gildersleeve remarks that the aorist suits aorist (Mt. 6 9-13). "instant prayer." But cf. Lu. 11:2-4. However, the point is of

:

1

Cf. R. C. Seaton, CI. Rev.,

Dec,

1906, p. 438.

2

Pfol., p. 126.

Mr. H. Scott properly observes that "the correctness of these figures will depend upon how a repeated jui? or yinjSe without a verb is to be counted. E.g. is Mt. 10 9 f. to be counted as one or as seven? The same ^

lb., p. 123.

:

question arises with a verb without a repeated kav or

me

iva,

etc.

It

seems to

that these are merely abbreviated or condensed sentences and should be

coxmted as

10 9 :

f.

if

printed in extenso

— as

would count seven instances

*

lb.

'

Gildersl., Justin

6

MartjT,

of

Gildersl., p. 137.

separate sentences. mi?

In that case Mt.

with subj. aor."

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 244.

TENSE (XPONOZ)

853

here that in the N. T., as a rule, the idiom gives Cf.

(Mt. 5

voiilarjTe

fxri

:

17);

datv'eyKxis

fxr]

little difficulty.

(Mt. 6

rf/jids

:

13; Lu.

11:4); fxi} elaeKOelv els tov ireLpaafMOP (Lu. 22:40). Cf. /xt) aa\Tla-[js (Mt. 6 :2), 'don't begin to sound,' and fxri Orjaavpl^eTe (6 19), they were already doing it.' Note again yui) Score ^tvjSe j3a\riTe (Mt. :

*

and

7: 6)

:

Xeynv.

ap^r]<jde

fJLT]

:

we have the

avKOipavT-qariTe,

fxrjde

With Mt. 3 9 ^i) 86^riTe Xeyeiv comBut in Lu. 3 14, p.y}btva dLaaeiarjTe

Kplvere (7: 1).

m'7

pare Lu. 3:S

constative aorist rather than the

if John spoke in Greek In Lu. 11 7, ^ut? iioi kottovs 7rapexe='quit troubling me,' while in Rev. 10 4, fx-qavTa'Ypa.\pj}s = 'do not begin to write.' (Cf. ijfjLeWov ypa(^Hv in same verse.) It is not necessary to labour the point. But in Mt. 6 25 we have /xj) 34, yui) ovv neptfxepLfjivare, implying that they were anxious; m 6 Once more, in Mt. txv7]ar]T€, a general warning in conclusion. 10 26, note /xi) ovv cl)o^rjdrjTe avTovs, the warning against fearing

imper. (the soldiers were present,

pres.

more restrained

to them,

at

any

rate).

:

:

:

:

:

evil

men;

in 10

:

5:45, fxri doKelre, it in 2 Cor. 11 16, :

6

:

43

31,

/jlt]

ovu
In Jo.

being afraid.'

implied that 'they had been thinking that';

is

yoyyv^ere

uri

m'7

'no one did, of course,'^

tIs jue do^rj,

is

interpreted by kyoyyv^ov

In Jo.

in verse 41.

Cf.

In p.7] 86^ri (2 Cor. 52), 'they were weeping.' nil Kkalere (Lu. 8 the normal use of /jly] Cor. 16 11) 11: 16) and nv e^ovdevqaji (1 person. A good with the third with the aorist subj. occurs :

:

double example ('don't keep

and

in

p.r]

cop-Q

In Col. 2:21

salute').

Lu.

occurs in

carrying'),

10

is

2 Cor. 6 p.ri that the people were guilty, :

B

has

ixxj/rjade.

Mary must and

:

if

17,

(Jas. 5:12).

^aWavnov stop to

a warning to the Colossian

by the

(jltj

As

gnostic asceticism.

the prophet

(xov aivTov,

cease clinging to him.

dfjLvvere

ix-q

aiTTeade,

In Jo. 20

/Jaardf ere

^177

aairaarjade ('don't

In assumes ^^AQ be followed as by Paul, but

Christians not to be led astray 17, aKaOaprov

4,

:

txr]8eva

Cf.

(Is.

52

:

11)

Jesus indicates that

fxrire bpLoajis

(Mt. 5

:

36)

to the present imperative fur-

word is necessary here. Moulton^ thinks that "rather strong external pressure is needed to force the rule upon Paul." John has only one case of fxt] with the aorist subj., and yet Moulton holds that all his uses of the present imper. fit the canon completely. The difficulty in Paul's use of the pres. imper. is due to the fact that the present tense It is sometimes punctiliar. There is an is not always durative. aoristic present imper. as well as an aoristic present ind. One ther discussion belongs elsewhere, but a

of the imper. presents 1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

is

merely exclamatory

N. T. Gk.,

p. 196.

(cf. aye, ^

Jas. 5:1).

Prol., p. 125.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

854

Another, like 6pa with iJLT]8ed etirns (Mt. 8 4), is almost hke a "sort Besides, the Aktionsart of the of particle adding emphasis." ^ word comes into play. The word may have a punctiliar meaning or it may accent a special phase of linear action (iterative, cona:

Hence the answer^ to /xt) iroieL, which usually =' Stop be in a given case='Do not from time to time,' 'Do not as you are in danger of doing,' 'Do not attempt to do' or simply 'Do not do' (aoristic present). In Eph. 5: 18 fxri fjiedvaKeade may mean that some of them were getting drunk (cf. even tive, etc.).

doing,'

may

Table,

the Lord's

at

may

In

course of action

a

or

Cor. 11:21),

1

anapraveTe (Eph. 4

25) be prohibited. in dpyi^eade). So implied (cf. the imminent peril of sin may be present, though the aoristic have 9) we may jui) \l/ev8e(x9e (Col. 3

(the habit)

^n)

:

:

the usual linear notion

4

and

kinTiQeL

ixr]8evl

14),

:

But

pertinent.

is

KOivwvei (5

ix-qde

:

cf.

22)

jut)

Tim.

dneXec (1

and

,3

/xi)

yiveade

cos

16), where the verb accents the ingressive oi vTTOKpLTai (Mt. 6 idea. In the modern Greek "as a prohibitive the aorist subj. is on the whole less commonly used than the present" (Thumb, :

instances, but

work for

the subj. in

modern Greek does

practically

the

all

of prohibiting.

Aorist Subjunctive with

(e)

few

M17 with the present imper. survives in a

Hatidb., p. 127).

comment

here, not the

It is

oii ixrj.

mode nor

merely the tense that

the negative.

calls

The present

was sometimes used with ov ni] in the ancient Greek, but no examples occur in the N. T. The aorist is very natural as the Of the 100 examples of oh nij in action is distinctly punctiliar. aorist subj., 14 arc future inds.'' with the the W. H. text, 86 are (Mt. 5:20); oMrc ov p.7] ttIco (Mk. 14:25). Cf. ou fxri ei(7eX07jre subj,

The other

aspects of the

(chapters on Modes and (f)

the N. T.

yhoLTo

(cf.

Gal. 6

is :

more frequent than the present

in m')

It is

14)

and the

is

11:14);

(effective,

1

The

rarity of the optative itself.

Cf

preserved.

distinction of tense Tr\r]dvvBdi]

be discussed elsewhere

will

partly due to the relative frequency of

Aorist Optative.

This

subject

Particles).

.

/xrjSeis cttayoL

Pet. 1:2);

(ingressive,

Karevdvvai

Mk.

— irXeovaaai

16, Kal TrepLcraemaL (constative, 1 Th. 3: 11 f.). Cf. 8ur] (2 Tim. 1 occurs aorist The wishes. are These 16. 4 Tim. 2 Cf. 18). :

:

Cf. t'l av iroL-qaaLev (Lu. 6:11). In the N. T. certainly the optative usually refers to

also with the potential opt. as in

Ac. 26

:

29.

the future (relatively), though Gildersleeve^ 1

Moulton,

*

lb., p. 190.

Prol., p. 124.

^

lb., p.

^

Am.

125

f.

is

willing to '

admit

lb.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 403.

855

TENSE (XPONO2) uses the potential opt. with

Homer

that

The

past.

The

(d)

is

characteristic of the

subj.

In Homer the aorist imperative, common as the present, while in the

not so

is

This frequency of the imper. though in the end the

remarkably frequent. ^

is

it

generally,-

kolvt]

commands

to be used in positive

came

a few times of the be noted.

Imperative.

Aorist

as already stated,

N. T.

ai'

opt. in indirect questions has to

like

the Latin.'

There is no complication in the positive command, like the ban put upon nil TToi-qaou from the beginning of our knowledge of the Greek language.* Hence in the positive imperative we are free to consider the significance of the aorist (and present) tense in the essential meaning. Here the distinction between the punc-

and the durative

tiliar (aorist)

(present)

is

quite marked.^

In-

"the essential character of aorist action, therefore, we must start with the other moods" than ind. It is easier, for the time element is absent. deed Moulton {Prol,

p. 129) holds that to get at

Cf. xeptjSaXoO to InaTLov aov Kal aKoXoWei /jlol (Ac. 12 8). It is exactly the distinction between the aorist and imperf. ind. (cf. :

e^eXewj/ rjKoXovdeL in

like the

precedmg,

verse

The

9).

constative aorist, xept/SaXoO,

^coaai. Kal virbb'qcfai. to. aavBaXLo. aov.

In Jo. 5

is :

8

note apov Tov Kpa^aTTov aov /cat TreptTrdret (the ingressive aorist and the durative, 'walking,' Svent on walking'), and the same tensedistinction

5:11).

is

In

(cf. cTetpe

preserved in verse

i;7ra7e v'^aL (Jo.

Ipov in 5:8).

aorists in Jo. 2

the present offer to the

11)

note

:

9

Cf.

:

7)

— Kal

irepu-KaTiL (cf

the present

i'TraTe is itself

9, rjpe

Mk.

5-8 (the effective

(tikpere

stands out.

master of the

feast.

2

:

.

further aoristic

In the midst of the

9, 11.

TroL-qaare, yefxiaare, avrXriaaTe vvp)

probably a polite conative In the Lord's Prayer in Mt. (6 9It is

:

ayLaadr]TCO, yevrjd-qTCO, 86s, a0es

and daeXde

— Tpoaev^ai

in

6:6. In opposition to 56s arinepov in Matthew we have 8l8ov to 3, a fine contrast between the punctiliar KaO' rtp-'epav in Lu. 11 and the linear action.'' So tw aWovvTi 86s (Mt. 5 42) and tuvtI alTovvTi 8i8ov (Lu. 6 30) xo-PVTe h eKelvrj ttj vixepa (Lu. 6 23) and :

:

:

Xaipere (Mt. 5

:

:

;

12); apare raOra ePTevdeu,

Troietre

(Jo. 2

:

16,

a

13 a pointed distinction in

very fine illustration). In Ro. 6 the tenses is drawn, nr]8e irapiaTaveTe rd :

/X17

/xeXrj

vp-dv oirXa a8iKias

tjj

forbidden, anapTiq., oKXa TrapaaTrjaaTe iavTovs (one the habit of sin also vvv Cf. enjoined). the other the instant surrender to God

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 214

1

Gildersl.,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 451.

I

lb., p.

*

Moulton,

449. Prol., p. 173.

f.;

Apr., 1909, p. 235.

6

Thomson, The Gk. Tenses

«

Moulton,

Prol., p. 129.

in (lie

N. T.,

p. 29.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

856

—

Tropeverai, ttoIt]verse 19. In Lu. 7 8, Kopehdr]TL the ind. the As with aoristic. are also presents the aov—Koiei, word. with durative So iieivare a used be may (constative) aorist durative in itself, is action, The 15 (Jo. 9). kv Ty ayaTj] rfj kfxfj

irapacTTriaaTe in

:

:

juer'

enov

(Mk. 14

:

Mt. 26

Cf.

treated as punctiliar.

So with

34).

:

o:8e Kal

38, fxelvare

naKpodufxriaare

ypriyopeLTe

rrjs

ecos

irapovaias

Tim. 6 20. Cf. 2 Tim. 1 14; 1 Jo. 5 21); raOra irapaOov (2 Tim. 2:2); awKaKoCf. the aorists in Jas. 4 9. 15). Tradrjaov (2:3); (xwovSaaov (2 Most of them call for little comment. Cf. Jo. 4 16, 35. AbTov Kupiov (Jas.

5:7);

(f)v\a^ov (1

irapadijKt^u

7571'

:

:

:

:

:

:

bott^ notes the avoidance of the aorist imper. of Tnarevoj, possibly because mere belief (aorist) had come to be misunderstood. The pres.

The

imper. presses the continuance of faith

(cf.

Jo.

14

:

11).

real force of the effective aorist is seen in Xvaare tov vabv rov-

Tov (Jo. 2

:

19).

In

Mk.

force of the preposition

15

:

32, KarajSaTca vvv, the "perfective"

added.

is

Moulton^ notes that

1

Peter

shows a marked liking for the aorist (20 aorists to 5 presents in commands, H. Scott), while Paul's habit, as already noted, is just the opposite. Moulton^ has an interesting comment on the fact that "in seven instances only do the two evangelists [Mt. 5-7 and Luke's corresponding passage] use different tenses, and in all of

them the accompanying variation

the differences in a

of phraseology accounts for

way which shows how

delicately the distinc-

was observed." There may be variations in the translation of the Aramaic original (if the Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Aramaic?), "but we see no trace of indifference to tion of tenses

In the imperative also different writers One writer is more fond of the aorist,

the force of the tenses." will prefer

a different tense.

Note the impressive

another of the present.

aorists, apare tov

XWov, Xvaare avTOV Kal d^ere avTOV vrayeLV (Jo. 11 39, 44). Abbott'* rightly calls the aorist here more authoritative and solemn than :

the present would have been. The aorist here accords with the consciousness of Jesus (11:41, vKouaas). The aorist imper. occurs in prohibitions of the third person, like m'? yvoirw (Mt. 6:3); KaTa^aToo (24:17); All? eTL(XTpe\PaTco (24:18). occurs in ancient Greek, as nrjde ae KLvrjaaTw /X17

But

fjLT]

and the

aorist subj.

rarely found (1 Cor. 16

:

was

11; 2

preferred.

Th. 2

:

This construction tls,

Soph. Ai. 1180.

In the N. T. this

3).

The Aorist Infinitive. In Homer the durative (present) idea more common than the punctiUar (aorist) with the infini-

(e)

is

is

1

Joh. Gr., p. 319

2

Pro!., p. 174.

f.

'

lb.

*

Job. Gr., p. 318

f.

TENSE (XPONOS) tive, as

There

with the imperative.^

857

except relative time in indirect discourse.

inf.

belongs elsewhere, but here

cellent

Radermacher

inf.

The

we have only

finds the aorist

and the

TepLTaretv

iJiriSe

PLKrjaaL

fx-qSe

iii/A.D.),

So

k^ekdelv.

ix7)be

by the

aorist

pres. inf. together in

the Carthaginian inscr. (Audollent, 238, 29, X€if

in the

history of the

do with the ex-

to

of punctiliar action afforded

illustration

no time

of course,

is,

inf.

rpe-

fjLr}5e

in the papyri

I, 183, 25. The features of the tenses in the inf., once they are fully established, correspond closely to the use in the moods.2 As a matter of fact originally the inf., because of its substantival origin, was devoid of real tense-idea (Moulton, Prol.,

B.G.U.,

p. 204),

and

it

ciated with the

word.

was only by analogy that tense-ideas were assoinf. But still the aorist inf. deserves a passing

Take Ac.

15

TrapaKa^eiv kol top

:

37

f.,

for instance,^ Bapra/Sas be ejSovXeTo avp-

Here the constative

tov koX. MapKov.

'I.

But

perfectly natural for the proposed journey. IlaOXos be rj^iov

—

(Jvvirapakap.^aveLv

p.ri

aorist

Paul was keenly

tovtou.

He

conscious of the discomfort of Mark's previous desertion.

was not going (durative).

An

to subject himself again to that continual peril

Mt. 14

Cf. also

gressive aorist),

mt

22, rjuajKaae tovs p.adt]Tas

:

irpoayeLv avrov (durative, 'go

example occurs

interesting

in Jo. 13

cLKoXovdrjaaL (ingressive aorist for

oLKoXovdeLP

The

is

For

36

:

oh bvvaaai

f.,

The

fxoL

vvv

act); bta tL oh bvpafxaL aoi is

Peter's idea).^

distinction in tenses

is

bvpafiai, 8v-

well observed.

27) and Xa^elp (14 17); and ^aardaai (Rev. 2:2); TrtcrreDcrat (Jo. 5 44) (12:39).^ Abbott notes also that woLrjaai. occurs in

bvpap.aL see :

new

the predominant construction with

paTos, 0eXaj, KeXevu, etc.^

^aard^eLP (16

a

(in-

e/jL^ijuai

on ahead of him').

'keep on following,'

dprt (durative,

aorist inf.

is

see the outcome,

further \ap.^apeLP (Jo. 3

:

:

12)

:

and TntjTeheip John with bvpa/xaL only

37, whereas Ibelp, elaeXdelp, yepprjSo with deXw note Xa^e'tp (Jo. 6 21); TTtdo-at (7 44), but epwrdp (16 In Mt. 5 17 f. KaraXdcraL and 19). TrXTjpwo-at are effective, but aLyrjaac (Ac. 15 13) is ingressive, while aiTTJa-ai (Mt. 6 Cf Lu. 7 24 f The aorist inf. 8) is constative. is rare with /xeXXa' (aTroKa\v(pdfjpai, Ro. 8 18; Gal. 3 23, though cLTTOKaXhTTTeadaL in 1 Pet. 5:1). So 'i/j-eWop airoOapetp (Rev. 3:2). Cf. Rev. 3 16; 12 4. A good example of the constative aorist dfjpai

are natural (3

:

3

in Jo. 11

:

ff.).

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

.

:

:

:

1

Gilrlersl.,

2

Moulton,

and Tenses, » *

:

Am.

Jour, of

I'liiloL, p.

Prol., p. 204.

p. 30.

244.

In Sans,

tlu- inf.

Cf. (iildersl., Synt., p. 133

has no tenses at

f.;

Cioochvin,

all.

Moods

Plato, Theat., 155 C, avev tov yiyvfadaL ytvkadai hbvvarov.

Moulton, ib., p. 130. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 361.

^

«

N. T. Gk., p. 196 Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 360 f. Blass, Gr. of

f.

:

inf.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

858

occurs in Ro. 14

as the

:

21.^

The

ind., ovk ^\6ov /caraXCcrat

aorist inf.

(Mt. 5

(Lu. 9:54), the imper.,

KaTa^TJvai

:

is

used with an aorist

17), the subj., dTcoixtv

a
OarpaL

irvp

But

(Mt. 8:22).

inf. is common also with durative tenses hke k^rirovi' ewdpaL (Lu. 18:13). There (Mk. KpaTTjcxaL 12:12); ovk ijdeXev in the N. T. of an aorist inf. used to instance no apparently is In Lu. 24 46, represent an aorist ind. in indirect discourse.^ avacTTrjvaL eK veKpdv, iraOelv Kal we have the yeypaiTTai ovTUS oTi usual timeless aorist, the subject of ykypawTaL. So fxri Ibetv (2 26).

the aorist

—

:

:

In Ac. 3

and

:

18

pres. inf.

iradelv is

the object of

ir poKaT-qy yeiXev.

with prepositions vary a good deal.

The The

aorist aorist

occurs with nera (Mt. 26 32; Lu. 12 5, etc.), with -n-pd (Lu. 2 21; Jo. 1 :48); Trpos (Mt. 6:1); eh (Ph. 1 :23); and even with kp :

:

:

Cf. 12). 27), but only once wth 5ta (Mt. 24 Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 49 f. The following are Mr. H. Scott's figures for the Synoptics

sometimes (Lu. 2

:

:

Articular Infinitive t6

:

TENSE (XI'ONOS) aorist appears in wX-npcoaavres (Ac. 12 irapaXa^ouTes

859

25), the constative in

:

irelaavTes rovs ox^ovs Kal 'KLdaaavres tov llavKov (Ac.

The

(Ro. 5:1).

dkvres

constative

The

27:4); inaTevaavTes (Jo. 7: 39).

relative (6s

+ verb)

20

ofioaas

23

:

6

f.,

The

cedent.

and Tenses,

we have

bixvvei,

aorist

is,

punctiliar force of the It differs

expression.

identical

from the In Mt.

action, not

ante-

Moods

'0 6yu6aas='the swearer,' 6 Xa/3cbj'='the re-

Seymour,

Cf.

5i/caiaj-

;

strictly speaking, timeless (Burton,

is,

p.-69).

ceiver,' etc.

The

more general

in being a

19)

:

aorist participle in itself

well illustrated in this idiom.

is

14

seen again in irapaSovs (Mt.

is

of course, merely punctiliar action. '0 and the Aorist Participle. (|S) aorist part,

aw-

Further examples of the effective aorist are

(ib.).

"On

the Use of the Aorist Part, in

Greek," Transactions of the Am. Philol. Ass., 1881, p. 89. In John the examples, however, are usually definite.^ Contrast 6 \a^u}v (Jo. 3

32)

:

and

45)

may

ol

probably='the Baptist' with xas aKovaavTes, ol TvoL-qaavrts

be used with any tense of the ind.

32 occurs with

ea-tppayLaev,

28

with

was

ol

TTOL-qaavres (5

Xa^ovres fxaxaipav ev fiaxaipri airoKovvrai.

f.)

aorist in each instance

as = future perf.^ in

accOweraL

(Mk. 13

Cf. 6 ypovs

OVTOS.

:

is

eKiropevcxovTaL.

timeless.

— Kal

/jltj

simple punctiliar action

But

in Jo. 3

:

ixaOccv

{
part,

6 \a^<:ov in Jo.

3

:

with epxerai, Cf. Mt. 26 52, iravTes In simple truth the (6

:

45)

:

not necessary to take

it

an example like 6 vroixeivas els reXos ovtos So Mt. 10 :39. Note the resumptive 13). erocpaaas

Cf. Jo. 7: 39; 16: 2; 20

47).

It is

—

+ aorist

'0

Thus

UKOvaas

6

oi

:

6 anohaas

(5:25,29).

is

TOtrjaas bap-qaerai (Lu.

fj

12

:

which examples the alone presented in a timeless manner. :

29, in all of

13, obbels avafik^-qKev els tov ovpavbv

6

el prj

€/c

tov ov-

pavov KaTa^as, the content suggests antecedent action.

Cf. also

6:41, eyw

Mt. 10:

40; Jo. 5

elpi

:

6 apTos

6

15, 6 xotTjo-as;

top airoareiXavTa in

KarajSds^;

Heb. 10

:

'0

29.

and the

aorist

part,

sometimes used of an act past with reference to the time of writing, though future with reference to the action of the principal .verb.* This classic idiom occurs in the N. T. also. Cf. is

'lovdas 6 'laKapLOjTTjs 6 Kal

wapaSovs avTov (Mt. 10:4;

usually the phrase

ivapaMohs (26

Ac.

is 6

:

25; Jo. 18

cf. :

2,

also 27:3); 5).

So

in

16 both yevop'evov and avKka^ovaiv are future to wpoel-Ke. In Col. 1 8 6 /cat brfKdouas is future to epadeTe. So Jo. 11:2 (cf. 1

:

:

12

:

1

==

*

3)

rjv

be

Mapiap

Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

rj

a\ei\l/aaa

tov Kvpiov pvpco Kal eK/id^aaa tovs

p. 363.

As Abbott (locH, Joh. Gr., p. 3G2. Goodwin, Gk. Mooda and Tenses,

s

p.

M

f.

;

n,^ p 354 f_ CI. Rev., Feb.,

Humphreys,

'91.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

860

Cf Ac. 7 35 rod 64>6ePTOs, 9:216 iropdrfcras. This development, though apparently complex, is due to the very indefiniteness (and timelessness) of the aorist participle and the TTodas avTov.

..

:

adjectival force of the attributive participle.

This is the usual idiom with the circumstantial participle. This is indeed the most common use of the aorist participle. But it must not be forgotten that the aorist part, does not in itself mean antecedent action, either relative or absolute.^ That is suggested by the context, the natural sequence Antecedent Action.

(7)

As examples

of events.

of the antecedent aorist part,

cedent from context, not per

4:2);

I8ibv

—

take vrjaTevaas

se)

(27

earpexl/ev

fi€TaiJLeXT]dels

:

3)

(Mt.

dj^ex^pTjcrei',

pti/'cts

;

(ante-

— kireluaaev —

These so-called antecedent aorists do verb in position in the senprincipal the precede not have to Kpar-qaas ttjs x^^P^s (Mk. 1:31), tvxo.avTrjv ^yeLpev Thus tence. awrjy^aTo (27:5).

cLTreXdoiv

piarovp-ev

17:31),

— aKOvaavres (Col. 1:3, 4), Uadiaev — yeuoixevos (Heb.

Kpiveiv

jueXXet

— irapa(TX<^v

This idiom

1:3).

(Ac.

very

is

common in the N. T. as in the older Greek.^ Indeed, one ticiple may precede and one may follow the verb as in Lu. 4 plxl^av

— e^7j\dev — ^\a\pav.

In Heb, 6

guished from the present, heSd^aade dLUKOPovvTes.

In Ro. 5

Adam

ence to

also.

— bt-aKovrjaavTes

roh

The

14).

principal verb

may

35,

:

distin-

is

aylois Kal

a refer-

be

itself

In Lu. 23 19 rjv punctiliar periphrastic (aorist passive), rjv being aoristic

future as in apas IBXtjOeis is

aorist

16, 81 evbs anaprrjcraPTos, there is

:

(verse

—

10 the

:

par-

Moulton {ProL,

(inscr. 18).

(1

Cor. 6

249)

cites

irotrjaco

p.

Cf. ^aav yevofxepoL in

:

15).

:

from Pelagia tpapds in and

^v aKovaaaa

Thuc.

4, 54, 3,

el'??

Herod. 3 27. See Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 125. It is so with the (5) But Simultaneous Action is Common also. Here again circumstantial participle as with the supplementary. It is simple enough with the suppleit is a matter of suggestion. mentary participle as in eXadop ^epiaavres (Heb. 13 2), though rare, the present suiting better (cf. Mt. 17: 25). The usual idiom is seen in kiravaaTo Xakasp (Lu. 5:4). Indeed this simultaneous action :

:

is

in exact

harmony with the

punctiliar

meaning

of the aorist

common

idiom (chiefly circumstantial) in the elwep (Mt. 2:8); N. T.3 as in the older Greek.^ So irkfixPas

tense.

It is

a very

airoKpiBds elirep (22

—

:

1)

;

1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 166. 2 W.-M., p. 433. ' Moulton, Pro!., p. 131.

T^fxaprop p. 197;

*

wapadovs alfia

Burton, N. T.

dUaioP (27 4)

Moods and

:

av

;

Tenses, p. 70;

Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses,

p.

49

f.

TENSE (XPONOS) re KoXcos eTrolijaas irapayevbfxivos (Ac. 10

(27

Cf. Ac.

3).

:

1

24; Ro. 4

:

:

:

861

33)

XfiV^o-fxevos kTre
;

20; Hcb. 2

:

It is needless

10.

to press the point except to observe that the order of the part,

immaterial. 15

30)

:

rjXdap airevaavres

;

19:5);

k-Kol-qaav :

So

33 above.

:

(Lu. 2

:

in auaou KarajSas

Cf. aireiiaas

16.

to irvevixa (Ac.

kjiapTvprjaev 8ovs

(15:9);

Tim. 4

Note Ac. 10

15:8);

/card/Srj^t,

of the part, after the verb

2).

common

very

is

:

Lu.

bikKpLVtv Kadapiaas

airoaTdXavTes (11:30); kyKaTeXenrev

10); eXd/Sere rtdTevaavTes (Ac. 19

is

(Mk.

ayair-qaas

(2

This construction in the N. T. The

coincident use of the aorist tense occurs also with the imperfect, as avvriXXaaaev eiirujv (Ac. 7:26), kin^akoiv eKkaitv (Mk.

—

14

72)

:

;

the present, as aTroKpiOeU Xeyet (Mk. 8

fect, as eKireT\ripo}Keu

as KoXus

— avaaraTriaas

(Ac. 13

In

Jo. 6).^

ToiriaeLs Tpore/ji^as (3

33)

:

;

:

29)

;

the per-

and the

future,

many examples

only

exegesis can determine whether antecedent or coincident action

intended, as in Heb. 9

—

12, eiarjXeev cupd/xews (Moulton, Prol, So Moulton (ib., p. 131) notes elirovaa for antecedent and eiwaaa (BC*) for coincident action in Jo. 11 28. The coincident is

:

p. 132).

:

aorist part, is

common enough

The papyri show

sleeve, Syntax, p. 141). 8ovs,

ceLs

F.P. 121

(i/ii

the ancient Greek (Gilder-

in

a.d.),

it

Cf. ev

also.

toltj-

a constant formula in the papyri

(Moulton, ProL, p. 131). Moulton {ih.) illustrates the obscure tTn^oXicv in Mk. 14 72 by kn^oKuv awkxojcev Tb.P. 50 (b.c.),. :

'he set to and

dammed

"with the

point of the linear eKXaiev."

(e)

Some

first

up.'

If it is coincident in

Mark,

it is

so

Subsequent Action not Expressed by the Aorist Participle. writers have held this as possible, though no satisfactory

examples have been adduced. Gildersleeve^ denies that Stahl succeeds in his implication. " Coincidence or adverbiality will explain the tense." Burton^ Hkewise admits that no certain instance of an aorist part, used to express subsequent action has been found. He claims the idiom in the N. T. to be due to "Aramaic influence." But we can no longer call in the Aramaic or Hebrew, alas, unless the Greek itself will not square with itself. The instances cited by Burton are all in Acts (16 23; 22 24; 23 35; 24 23; 25 13). :

"In

all

these cases

it is

:

:

:

:

scarcely possible to doubt that the par-

ticiple (which is without the article and follows the verb) is equivalent to nal with a co-ordinate verb and refers to an action >

Burton, N. T.

Moods and Tenses,

p. 65.

p. 50. ^

Am.

*

N. T. Moods and Tenses,

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408. p. 66.

Cf Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, .

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

862

NEW TESTAMENT

subsequent in fact and in thought to that of the verb which it follows."! This view is held by Prof. Sir W. M. Ramsay^ to

apply to Ac. 16

:

6,

and

is

in fact essential to his interpretation

12 25 and regards these instance urged is Ac. 21:14. Another examples as "decisive." is still unconGildersleeve^ all? after ''decisive" But are they notion "is not Greek" such a that says bluntly vinced. Blass* of that passage.

and even

Rackham^ adds Ac.

:

refuses to follow the uncials in Ac. 25

:

13 in read-

Moulton^ refuses to ing aairaaaixeuoL rather than aairaaoixevoL. 12:25: "But to of Ac. interpretation his in Rackham follow take avvTrapoKa^ovTes in this

way

involves an unblushing aorist

of subsequent action, and this I been paralleled in the N. T. or

must maintain has not yet

Schmieden comments on Ac. 16 that the participle must contain,

6:

'they went'

(dLijXdov),

outside."

:

if

And, once more,

"It has to be maintained not something antecedent to

at least something synchronous with

no case a thing subsequent

to

it,

if all

it,

in

grammar and be given up." The

the rules of

sure understanding of language are not to matter might safely be left in the hands of these three great grammarians. But an appeal to the examples will be interesting.

all

As

to Ac. 12

:

25, virkaTperJ/av

—

iv\y]p6)
(TVVTrapa-

no problem at all unless els be read rather than e^ or airo. It is true that {
XajSoires 'lc:avr}v, there is

:

always correct, but if they are right in reading eh, the text has been otherwise tampered with. Even granting the genuineness of eis and the "subsequent" aorist, we are absolutely in the dark as to the sense of the passage.

With

els

the coincident aorist

is

good Greek, but still leaves us in the dark. With e^ or cltto there is no problem at all, TrXrjpcoaavTes being antecedent, and awwapa\aj36vTes coincident.

In 16

:

6, dLrjXdov de Trjv

^pvyiav Kal Ta\aTLKr}v

N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 66. Paul the Traveller, p. 212. Cf. discussion in The Expositor in 1894 and The Exp. Times, Aug., 1894. In The Exp. Times (1913) Ramsay has sought another interpretation of the passage without the notion of "subsequent" action. * Comm. on Acts, p. 183 f. * Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408. Cf. also his Pindar Pyth., IV, 189. 1

2

St.

B

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197

6

Prol., p. 133.

7

Encyc.

Bibl., II, p. 1599.

f.

TENSE (XPONOS) KoAvdhres

XO}pa.v,

8G3

rod ayiov irvevixaTOS XaXijcrat top \6yov kv

viro

rfj

Paul was headed west for Asia, but, being forestalled by the Spirit, he turned farther north through "the Phrygian and Galatic region." Later he tried to push on into Bithynia, but the Spirit again interposed and he deflected northwest to Troas (16 7 f.). One is not entitled to make K0i}\v6evTes = Kal eKuiXW-qaav because of the exigences of a theory that demands that "the Phrygian and the participle

'Aalq.,

is

naturally antecedent (or coincident).

:

Galatic region" be Lycaonia (southern part of the Roman province of Galatia), which had already been traversed (IG 1 f.). :

Besides, the narrative in 16

:

6 seems to be not resumptive, but

a new statement of progress. Whatever the fate of the much discussed "South Galatian" theory, the point of grammar here is

very

clear.

<j)v\aKrjP,

Another so-called instance

TrapayyeiKaPTes

tc3

in 16

is

This

Secr^uco^i^Xa/ct.

is

:

23, ejSaKov

els

SO obviously a

it would never have been adduced need of examples to support a theory elsewhere. Certainly "in 17: 26 oplaas is not 'later' than the eTrolrjaep in time" (Moulton, Prol, p. 133). Still worse is the instance in 21: 14, elTovres' ToO Kvpiov to 6eKr]fj.a yipefxri ireLOofxepov 8e avrov riavxaa-atxeu The participle is here necessarily antecedent or coincident adco. eiiras, So in 22 24, kueXevaep (this last remark of acquiescence)

case of coincident action that

but for

.

the participle 'Keyuip

of

in

e^f]

Heb. 2

:

— KeXevaas

11

f.;

Ac. 7 35.

in 23

by three coincident

:

:

35.

—

:

coincident like the

is

common

avoKpiOeU divep.

Cf.

same thing is true di^e/SdXero is expanded

Precisely the

In 24

:

aorist participles,

23,

etScos

—

eiiras

— dLaTa^afxepos.

There remains 25 13, KaT-qPTrjaap els Kaia-apiap dairaaafxepoL top Here Blass, as already noted, accepts the future aairaaoBut even so, if one nepoL, but the aorist is probably correct. :

^rjffTop.

simply notes the "perfective" force of the preposition in KaTijPTr]cap, 'went down,' he will have no difficulty at all with the coinci-

dent action of the aorist part. KaT-fiPTrjaap is the effective aorist and accents the end (reinforced by /car-). 'They came dowTi saThe salutation took place, of luting' ('by way of salutation').

when they were "down"

Findlay {in loco) conThus vanish into air the examples of "subsequent" action with the aorist part, in the N. T., and the construction is not found elsewhere. Moulton \vTp(l)(raaa. {Prol., p. 132) cites from the papyri, e^ o:p Swaets 2. nov TO. i/jidTLa 8p. tKaTOP O.P. 530 (ii/A.D.), a clear case of coincident action. The redemption of the clothes is obtained by paying the course,

nects

aair.

with the

initial

(/car-).

act of KaT-qpT-qaap.

—

iiundred drachmae.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

864 (f)

Aorist Participle in Indirect Discourse (Complementary ParIt is a rare construction on the whole/ though more

ticiple).

This aorist part, is abIt is another insolutely timeless, not even relatively past. stance of the coincident aorist part. So 6aa r]KomaiJ.ev yevofxeva frequent with opdoj than with

Weupow

(Lu. 4:23), (10

:

In

18).

a/couco.^

top I^aravap

ireaovTa

we

cos

aaTpaTrrjv

e/c

tov ovpavov ireaovTa

Contrast

have the constative aorist.^ eldov aarepa

tov ovpavov Trexrw/cora

ets the perfect in Rev. 9 1, ava^alvoPTa eUou aXkov 7 Rev. 2, TTjv yrjv, and the present in kv tw ovo/xaTi aov kK^aXKovTa baip-bvia (Lu. (linear), and eibaixev :

ck :

nm

9 :49).

10

:

3;

Cf. elbev ai>dpa—ei(xe\96vTa Kai

26

:

ijKomafxeu — hexdetaav

13);

kivLd'tVTa

(Ac. 9

(2 Pet. 1

:

:

12.

So in

18).

PuNCTiLiAR (AoRiSTic) PRESENT (6 eVecrro)? ;^poVo9). The present tense is named entirely from point of time which only But a greater difficulty is due to the applies to the indicative. tense between punctiliar and linear the in absence of distinction 2.

found in the indicative, since in the shown, the aorist is subj., opt., imper., always linpractically present so-called the and always punctiliar punctiliar. strongly itself is verb the of Aktionsart ear, unless the

action.

This defect

is chiefly

inf.

and

part., as already

Cf. discussion of the imper.

But

in the ind. present the sharp

line drawTi between the imperf. and aorist ind. (past time) does not exist. There is nothing left to do but to divide the so-called Pres. Ind. into Aoristic Present and Durative Present (or PuncThe one Greek form covers tiliar Present and Linear Present). only gradually developed was present The ind." in the both ideas about e-r]-v, whether aorist confusion the (cf. tense distinct as a

The present is formed on punctihar as well as linear wise therefore to define the pres. ind. as denoting not roots. "action in progress" like the imperf. as Burton^ does, for he has

or imperf.).

It is

to take

it

back on

p. 9 in

the discussion of the ''Aoristic Present,"

a ''distinct departure from the prevailing use of the present tense to denote action in progress." In sooth, it is no "departure" at all. The idiom is as old as the tense itself and is due to the failure in the development of a separate tense

which he

calls

the ind. of present time. 7Pa0", etc., in which the stem has the form generally found only in aorists (§ 11, § 31) may be

for punctihar

"The forms

1

Gildersl.,

and

eitxl,

Am.

linear action in

dixi,

(t>vt^i,

ayo^,

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408.

^ Moulton, Prol., p. 134. Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 51. * Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 120 f.; Sayce, Intr. to the Science of L., vol. II, ^ N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 6. p 152 f. 2

;

TENSE (XPONOS)

865

regarded as surviving instances of the 'Present Aorist,'

of a

i.e.

We may

present not conveying the notion of progress.

com-

pare the Enghsh use of / am, I go (now archaic in the sense of

/

am

I say, {says she), etc."^ Hear Monro again: "The not a space of time, but a point," and, I may add,

going),

present

is

Some

yields itself naturally to aoristic (punctiliar) action.

ents are also "perfective" in sense like

may

ent" tense (punctiliar),

pres-

so-called "pres-

be used, therefore, to express an action simply

a process (durative or

Some

perfect). 2

The

tjkw.

of the

a state (perfective or

linear),

root-presents (like ^tj-mO

are aoristic.

came originally out of the root-meaning also (cf. t]K(jo, ol8a) and grew out of the present as a sort of intensive present.^ The notion of state in vlkQ), Kparco, rjiTCjidLat is really that of the perfect. So the momentary action in jS?? (e-^rj-v) becomes linear in the iterative /3t-|3a-co, 'patter, patter.' Moulton^

The

perfect

"the punctiliar force is obvious in certain was probably therefore aoristic, or at least some roots were used either as punctiliar or linear, and the distinctively durative notions grew up around specially formed stems and so were applied to the form with most verbs, though never with all. In the modern Greek we find "the creaclearly recognises that

The

presents."

original present

tion of a separate aorist present (Tayo))," while Tayaivco

is linear.

keep going,' while irayu is 'I go' (single act). Cf. Thumb, Handh., p. 119. "As a rule the present combines

So

irayalvo:

is

'I

cursive (durative, continuous, etc.)

and

aorist action" {ih., p. 120).

aoristic present = undefined action in the present, as aoristic

The

past (ind.)

= undefined

fected

There

action.

we

In the case of ayw

action in the past.

see a root used occasionally for punctiliar, linear

and even per-

naturally aoristic roots,

are, besides the

three special uses of the aoristic present (the universal present,

the historical present, the futuristic present).^

The Specific Present. Gildersleeve^ thus describes this simform of the aoristic present in contrast with the universal present. It is not an entirely happy description, nor is "ef(a)

plest

by Jannaris,^ since there may be inand constative uses also. The common eifxi (Jo. 10 11) often aoristic. A fine example of the constative aorist pres-

fective present," suggested

gressive is

:

ent occurs in Lu. 7

:

'Koi-qaov, Kal

Cf

Trotet.

'

Monro, Horn.

*

Prol., p.

8

Synt. of CI. Gk.,

119

8, TropeWrjTL, Kal TopeveraL e^op/ctf oj

.

Gr., p. 45.

f.

'

Giles,

p. 81.

"

tre

(Mt. 26

Giles,

Man.,

Man.,

:

Hist.

63)

p. 484.

p. 485. »Cf. ^

— t'pxof

Gk.

;

,

opco '

Moulton,

nal epx^raL

(Ac. 8 lb., p.

:

—

23)

491

f.

Prol., p. 120.

Gr., p. 433.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

866 aprt

iSXeTTco

etc.) is aXrieoiS

(Jo. 9

:

The frequent

25).

14:8);

ov

— dXXa

Xa/x/Saj/oj

is

oaoL ovK

ixovcnv,

iroBev epxofjLaL (Jo.

p. 247) notes

mann, (6)

is

5:34),

(Jo.

8

how

eyucjocrap

22, 28,

:

etc.

41)

So

.

(Mt.

0r?aci/

;

In

Mk. 2:5

(Rev. 2

— rjMev (Jo.

:

24)

;

Cf.

iroOeu rfKdov

and

Moulton {ProL, Mt. 6 2, 5, 16, airkxovai, the combination of and the perfective use of airb makes it very :

14)

;

ex^L

in

16

:

21).

:

have as

it

were their money do^vn, as soon

The "perfective"

as their trumpet has sounded." 41)

(Mk. 5

'Keyco

(xol

\eyu}

ovk

oirLves

the aoristic pres. vivid. " The hypocrites

:

:

effective aorist present as in idrat (Ac. 9:34).

a(}>levTaL

14

Uyo: (Mt. 5

kydi 8e

aoristic present (constative)

example of the specific XeTW (Lu. 12 :44). Cf.

dTrexw

(Mk.

copiously illustrated in the papyri and ostraca (Deiss-

Light, etc., p. 111).

The Gnomic Present.

This

is

the aorist present that

is

time-

gnomic present (cf. the Gnomic Aorist) and differs very little from the "Specific Present." In Mt. 23 2 eKaOiaav is gnomic, and in verse 3 we have the aoristic presents (gnomic also), \eyovaiv yap Kal ov iroLomiv. Note Jo. 9 8. Cf. also cbs \kyov(nv (Rev. 2 24). Good instances are found in 1 Cor. 15 42 ff., (nreiperai. So ibcnrep ol vroKpLrai Abbott^ has great difficulty with k ttjs TaXiiroLovaL (Mt. 6:2). It is this gnomic present. Xatas !vpo(i>i]T7]s ovk eyeiperat. (Jo. 7: 52). It is not true, to be sure, but this was not the only error of the Sanhedrin. Cf Mt. 7 8. This vivid idiom is popular in all (c) The Historical Present. "We have only to languages,^ particularly in the vernacular. overhear a servant girl's 'so she says to me' if we desiderate proof that the usage is at home among us."^ Cf. Uncle Remus. less in reality, true of

all

It is really a

time.

:

:

:

:

.

:

Curiously the historic present is absent in Homer."* But Gildersleeve^ applauds Stahl for agreeing with his position "that it

was tabooed as vulgar by the epos and the higher lyric" (A. J. P., It is absent from Pindar and the Nihelungenlied. xxiii, 245). Gildersleeve^ also observes that it is much more frequent in Greek than in English and is a survival of "the original stock of our languages."

and

aorist."

"It antedates the differentiation into imperfect or Note-Book Present" (like yly-

The "Annahstic

vovroLL xaTSes bvo) is

same use of the aorist present. Mt. 2 4, but that is more like the

practically the

Moulton^ suggests yewarai

in

:

1

Joh. Gr., p. 358.

=

Am.

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 434.

«

Syntax

3

Moulton, Prol., p. 120 f. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 47.

'

Prol., p. 120.

*

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 393. of CI. Gk., p. 86.

— TENSE (XPONOS) Brugmann'

futuristic (prophetic) use of the present. hist. pres. into

ents

This vivid idiom

modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

LXX,

in the

divides the

"dramatic" and "registering" or annalistic pres-

Gildcrsleeve).

(cf.

867

since

Thackeray

p. 120).

{Gr., p.

is

preserved in the

It is

common enough

xx) notes 151 examples in

1 Samuel, though it is rare in 2 Samuel and 2 Kings ("absent," Thackeray, Gr., p. 24). But Hawkins (Horae Synopticae, p. 213) finds it 32 times in 2 Samuel and twice in 2 Kings. Hawkins (lb.) finds the hist. pres. in the LXX 337 times. Josephus uses it also. The N. T. examples are thus "dramatic." The hist. pres. is not always aoristic. It may be durative like the imperfect.^ This point has to be watched. Blass^ considers that the historical present "habitually takes an aoristic meaning," but room has to be left for the durative meaning also. It is common

in the Attic orators

and in the N.

Luke's Gospel has

rare.*

it

Luke where

T., except in

it is

only 9 times (possibly 11) and the

Hawkins, from whose Horae Synopticae (2d ed., Acts 13 times. pp. 143 ff.) these figures are taken, finds 93 historic presents in

Matthew

(15 of them in Parables), but 1G2 in John and 151 in Mark. It is rare in the rest of the N. T. It is most frequent in Mark, John, Matthew and in this order. Mark indeed uses it as often as 1 Samuel, though a much shorter book. John's

Gospel

is

much

Mark

not great.^

is

eTopevojjLrju

—

epxcixac

/cat

difference

(ii/B.c.)

— eXeyov,

etc.

discourses

between John and

Moulton*^ adds that the idiom

Cf. Par. P. 51

in the papyri.

when the

longer than Mark's, but

and dialogues are eliminated, the

avvyw

common

is

— bpS) — /cXat7co

Moulton

illustrates Xeyei

the Oxyrhynchus Logia by Ka2aap Xeyet, Syll. 376.

See Oxy. 37 (a.d. 49). Luke's manifest reluctance to use it (changing Mark's historical presents except in 8 49) is due to the fact that in Luke's time the construction was regarded as "too familiar for his liking." He is 'Irjaovs in

also

a(})ripTraaev

mi

^ovXeraL, P.

:

Mark and John are the dramatists. would feel differently about it. "Josephus would use the tense as an imitator of the classics, Mark as a man of the people who heard it in daily use around him; while Luke

the scientific historian, while Different

^

Gk.

writers

Gr., p.

484

f.

The

hist,

present

demands merely that

tlie

take his stand with the writer in the midst of the moving panorama. briick, Versl. Synt.,

Bd.

II, p.

261.

'

Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 188. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, p. 143

*

p. 11.

f.

"

Ih.

«

Prol., p. 121.

reader

Del-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

868

would have Greek education enough to know that

was not enough to recall the encouragement of classical writers whom he probably never read and would not have imitated if he had read them."^ But what about John? Jannaris^ remarks that the idiom was common in the late Greek as in the early. The personal equation may have to explain the variations in the Gospels. Blass^ undertakes to give a philosophy of the matter on the theory that the "circumstances," "incidentals" and "final results" are ex-

common

it

in the cultured speech of his time, but not

pressed in the past tenses of the ind., while the "principal actions"

He

are found in the historical present.

cites Jo. 1

:

29-42

in

il-

— Xeyec — eixaprvprjaev — — \eyeL — — — \eyeL — dirav — \eyu — r]\dav Kai eldav — — — One doubts the phenomena can be Xe7et — ijyayev — lustration

(jSXeTret

laTrjKet,

(Tap

r;KOi;-

rjv

elirep)

evpiffKei

rjv

if

.

Matthew and Luke

brought under any

rule.

the narrative, while

Mark and John

avoid

it.*

of using Kal before the historical present, while

use

to enliven

l8ov

Mark

has a habit

John often employs

But there is no doubt of the vividness of the narrative in Mark and John which is largely due to the historical Modern literary English abhors this idiom, but it presents. asyndeton.^

ought to be preserved in translating the Gospels in order to give the same element of vividness to the narrative. The historical present may begin ^ a paragraph (often so), occur in the midst of In Mt. 3 1 aorists and imperfects, or alternate with aorists. In Mk. irapayiveTaL 'Icoapiqs is preceded by a note of past time. 5 15 epxoPTaL Kal Oeojpovaip occur between aorists. In Mk. 4 37 :

:

:

the realistic yiperaL

XatXai/'

is

followed

by the Mt. 13

imperfect.

As

44. Sometimes specimens of this present in parables see the MSS. vary as between ^atj^erat and kcjiaprj (Mt. 2 13). The variation in parables may be partly due to obscuration of the gnomic nature of the narrative. In such a wealth of material for illustration it is hard to select, but note John 20. In verse 1 f. :

:

note epx^raL

ment

of

perfects /SXtTrei

Mary. till

Then

aorists.

all

indicating the excite-

the narrative goes on with aorists and im-

Peter and John draw near the tomb,

— Ipx^Tai —

jected (ovK

by

— jSXexet — rpex^c — epxerat, decjpei (5-7)

when we have

with two parenthetic aorists inter-

In verse 8 the narrative is resumed In verse 12 again 6ewpe2 shows the surprise of Mary

eiarjXdep, eiarjXdep).

at seeing the angels (XkyovaiP

— \kyet,

verse 13),

as in verse 14

^

Prol., p. 121.

*

Hawkins, Hor. Synop.,

2

Gk. Gr., p. 434. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 188.

^

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 350. W.-Th., p. 267.

"

Hist.

«

p. 144.

869

TENSE (XPONOS) the present

Historical presents run

used when she sees Jesus.

is

through the dialogue with Jesus (15-18). Then the resumptive ravTa elirev. That is enough to say on the subject.

The Futuristic Present.

(d)

This futuristic present

The

or aoristic.^

ally punctiliar

is

gener-

construction certainly had

origin in the punctiliar roots,^ but

some

its

N. T. examples

of the

English "I am going," as well as "I go") are durative, as Moulton^ shows. Thus in 1 Cor. 16 5 hkpxom'- (in contrast Vivomi' with biekdo}) means 'I am going through' (Macedonia). leans to the aoristic'' and so ylvtrai (Mt. 26 2) may be punc"In avpt-ov a.'Kodvi)aKoiJ.ev (1 Cor. 15 32) we have a verb tiUar. in which the perfective prefix has neutralized the inceptive force (cf.

:

:

:

of the suffix

it

-icr/cco:

only the obsoleteness of the simplex

is

The aorisever to borrow a durative action."^ tic origin of many present-stems has already been shown (and some perfectives like ^/cco). Thus all three kinds of action are

which allows

it

found in the present (punctiliar, durative, perfect). All three kinds of time are also found in the present ind. (historical present = past, futuristic present = future, the common use for present Some of these "momentary presents" are always future. time).

So

efjui

Greek

in old

The N. T.

ent.^

prose,^

but

Homer

uses dixL also as a pres-

uses epxo/xat and -KopevonaL in this futuristic sense

Indeed "the future of Greek was originally a present" (Jebb in Vincent and Dickson's Handbook, p. That is too strong, for the future ind. often comes from 323). (Jo. 14

:

2

not

f.),

the aorist subj.

et/xt-

Cf.

ayeaaL (Lu. 17:8) are really old aorist subjs.

futuristic pres. occurs in the inscriptions

The

Petersen-Luschan, an

nrj

p. 160,

TrawtTaL, epxerai, B.

avafialvoi, k-KidiiK-qv,

Trteaai and Mt. 24:40f.

In the N. T. such so-called futures as

O. P. 1157, 25 O. P. 1158, 23

f.

N. 190, avbe M. II, 417

f.

(A.D./iii),

in

See

(Iv/a.D.), avriypaypov Kayo)

ypaxj/ov

Cf.

(A.D./iii).

and papyri, as

tls dStKiyo-??, viroKeLTai.

fxot

Kal

ire/JLirw

Radermapher, N. T.

ai'Tia

Gr.,

In South Italian Greek the futuristic present is the only p. 124. means of expressing the future ind.^ The other use of the futuristic

present

is

the dramatic or prophetic.^

sort of counterpart to the historic present

1

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., Bd.

2

Giles,

*

Gildorslcevc,

Man.,

p. 485.

Am.

»

II, p.

8

"This present is

309; Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 484. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 189.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 393.

Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 434.

—

a very frequent in

Prol., p. 120.

\ Moulton, Prol., p. 120. ^

—

«

Gildersl., Synt., p. 84.

"

Giles,

p. 10.

Man.,

p. 485.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

870

the predictions of the N. T."^ certainty of expectation that

It is

NEW TESTAMENT not merely prophecy, but As examples note Mt.

involved.

is

17:11 'HXetas epx^Tai Kal airoKaTaaTrfaet Travra, 24:43 iroia (f)v\aKfj 2 yiverai Kal Trapadidorat, 26 KXtTTTrjs epx^Tat., 26 18 ttolco to TTCicrxa, 27 63 eyelpofxai, Lu. 3 9 eKKOTTTeTai Kal /SdXXerai, 19 8 35 6 Oepiafxds epx^rai, 8 14 irov vwayco, SiScciJiL Kal otTroStSco/ii, Jo. 4 6

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

8

:

21

eipl

virayco Kal ^rjTrjaeTe,

20

ey(ji,

:

In Jo. 10

KaTapyeTraL.

10

:

15

17 ava^alvio, 21 :

15

ff.

^l/vxw P-ov Tidrjpi, 12

Trjv

23 ovK

:

ridrfpL

aTodprjaKeL,

1

:

26

really covers the

oirov

26 whole of

Cor. 15

:

viewed as a unit (constative aorist).In Mk. 9 TapadldoraL, in Mt. 17:22 peWeL irapablboadaL. This use of AteXXco and inf. is a sort of half-way station between the Christ's

31

life

:

we have

and the punctiliar

futuristic present

The

Cf. Jannaris, Hist.

futuristic pres. startles

It affirms

tion.

certainty.

and

future.

and arrests attenand not merely predicts. It gives a sense of Cf. in Mt. 18 12, atprjaei Kal wopevdels fryrei together,

Gk. Gr., p. 443.

061)761

3.

:

(Rev. 9:6).

The Punctiliar

Future (6 fieXXcov )(povo
Punctiliar or

(a)

both in origin

(Aoristic)

Durative.

It was a late tense, little used in the early (g). Vedic Sanskrit, and as a distinct form gradually disappeared from the modern Greek, where the periphrastic forms like 6a Xuw

in ch. VIII, VII,

(Xuaco)

But the modern Greek has developed thus two (Thumb, Handh., pp. The Germanic languages (cf. English shall and will)

alone occur.

futures, 6a Xucrw punctiliar, ^d Xuw durative 116, 125).

have only the periphrastic future.

For the history

ind. see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 552

had no modes,

i.e.

it

was confined

ney, Sans. Gr., p. 201).

The

ff.

of the future

In Sanskrit the

fut.

practically to the ind. (Whit-

oldest roots are

derived either

from punctiliar presents (ind.) or aorist (punctiliar) subjunctives.* Gradually the future was formed on duraCf. TriopaL, ^TjaopaL. tive roots also. Thus pevco, '1 shall remain.' Some verbs formed two futures,^ one punctiliar, like axw^ from e(rxoi'='I shall obtain,'

the other durative, like

e^co,

'I shall have.'

The

kolvy}

has

dropped axw^, as it has " generally got rid of alternative forms." ^ So also Opk^opai (rpex^) was durative and SpapovpaL {e8papoi>) It is probable punctiliar,'^ though both are absent in the N. T. 1 2

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 1S9. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 352.

'

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 479.

*

Giles,

Man.,

p. 447.

^

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 480.

«

Moulton,

'

Thompson,

Prol., p. 150.

Synt., p. 219.

TENSE (XPONOS)

we have with most verbs a purely aorist stem. The middle future

that in the future passive punctiliar future formed

871

on the

was usually durative, the future passive punctiliar.' Very few of list of examples given by Jannaris can be illustrated in the N. T. owing to the disappearance of the future middle before the

the

In

future passive.

Pet. 4

1

durative and certainly

:

18

(jjavrjaerai

(fyavelTai

(Mt. 24

Lu. 16 31 iraad-qaovTai. is punctiliar not occur in the N. T. So Krrjaeade :

:

(LXX, 30)

is

Prov. 11:31)

is

So

in

punctiliar.

(effective),

but

irdco^xaL

tols \{/vxo.s

iifxasv

(Lu. 21

does 19)

:

seems to be durative, though no fut. passive of this verb appears in the N. T. So also avpaxdwopraL (Mt. 24 28) is punctiliar (effective). But the very disappearance of the future middle (as with the Attic (po^-qaofxaL) threw the burden of the durative future ^ on the future passive. So 4)o^y]dr]cfoixaL in Heb. 13 6 is durative. Cf. So also dXXo. /cat x^pi?the durative apKeadrjadixeOa (1 Tim. 6:8). :

:

(Ph. 1

aofxai

:

xapwovTaL in Lu. (1

1

:

14

is

and

seem

yePTjaeraL

:

ingrcssive punctiliar,

15) is effective punctiliar.

:

Cf. also Jo. 16

durative.

18) is

But

in Jo. 16

In Heb. 9

ingressive.

:

:

20, 22,

20 both

28

though

as w\r]adr)aeTai \vTtr]Qr}(Teade

6(t)6riaeTaL (cf.

Ac.

but 6\j/op.ai may be either durative (Mt. 5 26 16) 19 1 37; Rev. 22 4) or punctihar (Jo. 1 39; Heb. 50; 8; Jo. excellent example of the effective future is An 12 14, etc.). found in 6 vToixelpas els reXos (TcodrjaeraL (Mt. 10 22). So the same form in the future may be either punctiliar or durative, as is

:

ingressive,

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

viJLas (Mk. 14 28) is durative, while a^et is punctiliar (ef=' bring ').^ lleiaonep is punctiliar (effective) in Mt. 28 14 and durative in 1 Jo. 3 19. So ypcoao/xai is punctiliar or durative (Rev. 2 23). As punctiliar ypcoaofxaL may be either ingressive (1 Cor. 14 7, 9), effective (1 Cor. 4: 19) or merely constative

Tvpoa^w

:

fective

:

:

:

:

(Jo.

8

:

From

28, 32).

the nature of the action as future this

Aktionsart of the verb will not be as prominent^ in the future aorist as in the other punctiliar constructions.

Blass^ even goes

so far as to say that the future "is the one tense which does

not express action [kind of action, he means], but simply a time relation, so that completed and continuous action are not diffe-

But it must be borne in mind that the future tense makes as much distinction between punctiliar and dura-

rentiated." in itself

1

Cf. K.-G., Bd.

I,

pp. 114

ff.,

170

ff.;

Giles,

Man.,

p. 483; Jann., Hist.

Gk.

Gr., p. 441. 2 *

6

Moulton,

Prol., p. 150.

Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 201.

=>

lb., p. 149.

p. 33. j.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

872

tive action as the present tense does.

The

difference

is

that the

usually punctiliar, while the present is more often duraThe point need not be pressed. Other examples of the

future

is

tive.

punctiliar aorist are KoXeaeis (Mt. 1

(Mt. 5

:

4) effective,

and so

:

21) ingressive; TrapaKk-qB-qaovTaL

xopraaOrjaovTai,

In

gressive while K\r]6r]aovTaL is effective. ^iiiOTTOL-qB-naovrai

kXevdepoiaeL

and

but

In Jo.

vTroTayqaeTaL (effective).

effective = 'set

free'

(cf.

k\€r]6r]<jovTaL is in-

Cor. 15

1

:

22, 28 note

8:32 note

ekevdepoL yevqaeaOe, verse 33)

and use the future

So then both in origin (h) The Modal Aspect of the Future. not merely a tense in the true sense

is

.^

chiefly punctiliar.

The

future indicative

is

of that term, expressing

It is almost a mode on a par with the state of the action. Gildersleeve^ puts the matter imperative. and the subjunctive

says: "The future was originally a mood." Latin the forms of the future come for the and In both Greek subj. and it must be treated as a mode as the most part from Delbriick^ and Giles^ put it wholly under Indeed tense. well as a

plainly

when he

moods.

It partakes, as

mood and

tense,

aspect of the fut.

Like the subj. the or deliberative.

a matter of

fact, of the qualities of

both

and both need to be considered. The modal ind. is seen in its expression of mil and feeling. fut. ind.

We

have a

may

be merely

futuristic,

volitional

same thing

reflection of the

in our

has had a precarious history in shall Its place was always challenged by the present and Greek. even by the aorist ind., by the subj. and imper. modes, by periphrastic forms. It finally gave up the fight as a distinct form in

and

will.

The

fut.

ind.

See under 3, (a). In the modern Greek the distinction between the periphrastic fut. and the subj. is practically lost.« The modal aspects of the fut. ind. appear clearly in subordinate In indirect discourse the clauses where the tense is common. future ind. merely represents the direct discourse (cf. Ro. 6 Greek.^

:

future vnih. the descriptive or identifying relative^ (Jo. 6 51) shows no modal features. But it is found in other relative clauses where purpose (Lu. 7 27) or result (Lu. 7:4) is ex8).

The

:

:

in temporal clauses

The future has also a modal value (Rev. 4:9; 17: 17), in final clauses (Lu. 20

pressed.

10;

:

Prol., p. 149.

1

Moulton,

3

Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 320

=^

6 »

Gildersl., Synt., p. 115.

B

:

Synt., p. 115.

f

Man., pp. 500, 505; Thompson, Synt., p. 218. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 552. Blass, Hermeneutik und Ivrit., 1892, p. 199.

*

Heb. 3

12), in

873

TENSE (XPONOS)

conditional sentences (Lu. 19 40), in wish '(Gal. 5 12). In Rev. 3 9 the fut. ind. and the aorist subj. occur side by side with tva. But in independent sentences also the modal aspects of the future :

:

:

appear.

Merehj Futuristic. This is the most common use of the future and in itself would not be modal. It is the prospective, what (a)

The predictive^ (or prophetic) future hes before the speaker.^ (usually constative), though the aoristic as classed be has to is durative or punctiliar may action the whether to as question have crossed the speaker's mind. Cf. Mt. 21 37 hrpadodrjaeraL, 24 30 aTrocrreXet, 41 ciTroXea-et, 43 apdrjaeTaL Further good examples of the predicCf. Mk. 13 24-27. etc. Unfortunately in Engtive future are in Mt. ll:28f.; 12 31. Ush we have no established principle for the translation of the predictive future. In the first person it is done by "shall," and

not

:

—

irrjaovTac,

:

:

:

naturally

by "will"

in the second

and third persons.

not

It is

always easy to distinguish the merely futuristic from the volitive future, "but we have to reckon with an archaic use of the auxil^ The use of iaries which is traditional in Bible translations." "shall" in the second and third persons

is

almost constant in the

R. V. both for the volitive and the futuristic uses. If "shall" could be confined in these persons to the volitive and "will" to the futuristic, even "the solemnly predictive,"'' it would be a In gain. 5 Thus in Mk. 14 13 airavTria-a would be 'will meet.' :

give you rest' (R. V. But avairamoi here may be voUtive. If so, 'will' is correct. So in Mt. 12 31 d^e^Tjaerat would be 'will be forgiven' (R. V. 'shall'). Cf. also Mt. 26 13, Moulton^ notes that airapviiari XaXr?0i7o-eTat='will be preached.'

Mt. ll:28f.

avairavao)

would be

'will'), evpr](xeTe 'will find'

'shall

(R. V. 'shall').

:

:

Mk. 14:30; Lu. 22:61) is often misunderstood because of the rendering 'shalt deny me.' "It could not thereHere "will" is fore be Peter's fault if Jesus commanded him." Cf. Mt. 25 29, 32; Lu. 19 43. With the free from that peril. (Mt. 26:34;

:

:

negative the English "shall" becomes volitive not.

Cf.

Mk.

13

Sometimes (very

:

31, ov TapeXevaovTaL (cf. ov

rarely) ov

tirj

the usual aorist subj.) as in ov evprjaovaLU 1

2 3 *

fjirj

when

the Greek

irapeXOri in

13

:

occurs with the predictive fut. fxii

(Rev. 9:0); ovKert ov

TrapeXevaovrat (Lu. 21

fxi]

evp-qaovaip (18

Dclbruck, Vcrsl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 309. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 34

Moulton, Prol., p. 150. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses,

:

:

(cf.

33); ov

14; cf.

is

30).

/^i)

airfjXdev,

f.

p. 34.

^

Moulton,

»

ib., p. 150.

Prol., p. 151.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

874

The

aTTcbXero).

construction of ov

fXTj

with the

fut. ind. is

"mori-

N. T./ only 14 and some of these doubtful (MSS. vary greatly between aorist subj. and fut. ind.). Some of the 14 are examples of the volitive future. In Mt. 15:6 ov fxri TLixr^au is probably volitive,^ though some hold it predictive. The three divisions (futuristic, voli{0) The Volitive Future. tive, deliberative) glide into one another both in the subjunctive and the future ind.' The volitive future is practically an impera-

bund"

in the

tive in sense, for the will

exercised.

is

The

futuristic glides im-

perceptibly into the volitive "as in the colloquial av will see to that,' \peLs

(Lu. 13

9).

:

:

13

:

10) is

24), k^ofut. ind.

The impatient ov iravaj] diaarpecpoop (Ac. almost imperatival, certainly volitive. "The future ind.

occur together, 6pa

is

'you

oxpji,

Mt. 27:4."4 Cf. vf^eh o^^eade (Mt. 27: In Heb. 8 5 the imperative and the

exceedingly

the fut. ind.

is

iroirjaHs.

common

In legal precepts

in this sense (volitive)."^

But the idiom

unclassical.^

and "is

itself is classical

not a milder or gentler imperative. A prediction may imply reIt sistless power or cold indifference, compulsion or concession."^

LXX. It is chiefly found in the N. T. from the 0. T. Cf. /caXecrets (Mt. 1:21), ovk eaeaOe (6:5); epeTre (21 3) = el'Trare (Mk. 11:3). Cf. Jas. 2:8; Ro. 13 9; The voHtive future really includes purpose (will) Gal. 5 14. in the first person, as well as in the second and (rarely) in the is

exceedingly frequent in the

in quotations

:

:

:

Thus

third.

will sing,'

:

15)

= 'I

will pray,' 'I

not mere futurity.

we seem

18)

Cor. 14

irpoaeh^oixaL, \pa\oJ (1

to find

'will,'

So in avaaras iropevaofxaL (Lu. 15 not mere declaration. Most of the ex:

(Mt. 6:5), and Ro. 7:7). But some examples occur in the third person also; though Burton^ is sceptical. Cf. earai in Mt. 20 26 f. (note deXri)- So Mk. 9 35. In Lu. 10 6 we have eTavaTaijaeTaL kir' avTOP i] elprjvr], while in Mt. In the volitive future elprjpr} vfxwv ex' avTrjv.^ 10 13 eXdcLTO}

amples are in the second person,

like ovk eaeade

are chiefly negative (4:7; Ac. 23

:

5;

:

:

:

:

ri

'will'

is

the English translation for the

the second and third.

a volitive use.

The

rare use of

Gildersleeve (Syntax,

p.ri

first

person, 'shall' for

with the

p.

117)

is

fut. ind.

shows but

sceptical,

jSovXijaeade Moulton (Prol., p. 177) cites from Demosthenes (I/a.d.) /xi) e^ecrrat, B. (iii/A.D.) B. 197 814 dbkvai and from U. U. ijlt]

1

Prol., p. 190.

»

Moulton,

*

2

Burton, N. T.

Moods and

Tenses, p. 35.

Prol., p. 184.

lb., p. 177.

"

fi

lb., p. 176.

8

6

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 209.

»

Gildersl., Synt., p. 116.

N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 35, N. T. Gk., p. 209.

Blass, Gr. of

TENSE (XPONOS)

875

—

B. M. 42 JU17 KpaT-qaeis (ii/B.c). Blass^ quotes firjSeva from Clem., Horn., Ill, 69, and Moulton (ProZ., p. 240) adds 19, and Xe^ets 8e nrjhkv, Eurip., Med. Uri drjaavplaeraL, D in Mt. 6 822, and observes (p. 248) that MS. evidence should be watched on the point. Sometimes ov n-q occurs with the voUtive future as in ov ixrj TLp.i]ati. (Mt. 15 5); ov earai aoi tovto (16 22). In Mt. 26 35 ov ixrj aTapptjaofjiaL is also volitive (cf. Mk. 14 31). The volitive future seems to be found in Lu. 10 19, ovSep ov y.ri v/jLOLs a.8LKT}(TeL (W. H. text), but it is durative. But ov alone is the a4>r](Tis,

fxfl

HLjir](jtTe

:

/jlt}

:

:

:

:

:

usual negative in the volitive future, as in ovx apiraau ns X^i-pos

and

fjLov

10

(Jo.

(Mt. 16

jiri

side in Jo. 1

Particles.

It

Cf.

airoXcovTaL) . :

38

:46).

(cf. 1

pres.

On

01;

e/c

tjJs

imper. /X17

see

possible that ov KanaxvcovaLP avTrjs

is

18) is voUtive.

:

Deliberative

(7)

Cf. ov

28.

by

fut. ind. side

Modes and

:

Burton ^ has pointed out that ques-

Future.

two kinds (questions of fact or questions of doubt). make an inquiry for information about the past, present or future. These questions employ the moods and tenses as other simple declarative sentences in both direct and indirect discourse. But deliberative questions ask not for the

tions are of

Questions of fact

but about the "possibility, desirability or necessity" of a proposed course of action. The subj. as the mood of doubtful facts,

assertion

is

may

The

direct questions except Ph. 1

TL yparj/oj

is

Kai

eiirri

side

if

:

26)

it is

22, tI

also doubtful

tIs

be rhetorical.

fut. ind. are all

ov yvoopi^oj,

alpr]<jop.a.t.

where the

alpr](ToiJiai..y

t'l

not certain whether

In Lu. 11:5,

aorist subj.

:

may

N. T. with the

doubtful. (W. H. marg. have

(Ac. 25

is

Deliberative questions (like questions

be merely interrogative or they

deliberative questions in the

punctuation

future

So deliberative questions use either

case.

the subj. or the fut. ind. of fact)

The

perfectly natural here.

from the nature of the

In

o-x<S

ypaipo: is fut. ind.

t^ vp.wv e^et (l>l\ov Kai Tropeixrerai

or

—

and aorist subj. occur side by Cf. Mt. 7: 6, with nrjTOTe; Eph.

avTw, the fut. ind. (rhetorical)

we can

trust the reading.

with ha (0. T.). The examples of the fut. ind. in deliberative questions are all disputed by some MSS. which have the aorist 6

:

3,

subj., so that Blass"*

tically uses

since the best fut. ind. in

remarks that "the N. T.

only the conjunctive"; but that

MSS.

some

(see

W. H. and

instances.

1

lb.

'

Hlass, Cr. of

*

lb., p. 210.

is

in this case prac-

an overstatement,

Nestle texts) sujiport the

As an example

of

merely interroga-

2 N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 30, 7G N. T. Gk., p. 211. Cf. W.-Th., p. 279.

f.

— A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

876

tive deliberative questions with fut. ind. take

(Lu. 22

xo-'i-pv

the

In Jo. 18

49).

:

h

fia-

we may have but note ^ovXeaOe. The N. T.

or the aorist subj.,

fut. ind.

TraTa^ofiev

ei

39, ^ovXeaOe airoXvaco,

:

examples are nearly all rhetorical. So Mt. 12 26 ttcos (jTaOrjaeTaL, Mk. 4:13 TTois yvucreade, Jo. 6 68 xpos rlpa a-Kekevabntda. Cf. further Ro. 3:5; 6:1 (the common t'l epovfiep;); 9 14; 1 Cor. 14 7, 29, 51; 1 Tim. 3 5. Cf. Lu. 20 15. Cf. ayopiiacofjLev Kal 9, 16; 15 :

:

:

:

:

:

(Mk. 6 37). The Future in

86}<70fjLev

(c)

:

:

The

Moods.

the

future

Greek

occurs

it

not true of any other

is

common

any time

true of

is

gnomic

(cf.

In the gnomic future the

indirect discourse the time

principal verb, though

it

(Mt. 20

IXLoav OTL \rnx^l/ovTaL

present).

So

/xoXis

In

(7:3), etc.

be absolutely past.

10)

:

and

xPll^OLTia^i,

relatively future to that of the

is

may

aorist

5:7);

aTodavetraL (Ro.

biKaiov tls

here than in the

fut. ind. expresses absolute

Cf. TOTe 64/cvTaL (Lu. 21:27).

time.

virep

it

tense.^

The Indicative. It is far more other moods. In direct discourse the (a)

act

from the

differs

moods where

other tenses in this respect, that in the has always the element of time. This

;

elirf^v

crr]fxalvccp to'lco

So with hodavaro)

So^aau

TovOtbv (Jo. 21: 19) .2

There never was a fut. imthe N. T. have already

The Subjunctive and Optative.

(/3)

perative.

The

so-called fut.

W. H. admit

been discussed. but claim

it

subjs. in

to be a

o\py](jde

to the text in Lu. 13

MSS.

:

28,

The same thing may be

late aorist subj.^

Rev. 8 3, but not of be a lapsus calami^ for Kav3. Kav6r](X(joiJ.at in 1 Cor. 13 Expositor, May, 1912, p. 401) quotes Hamack {The xn^wiJLai. " Kavdrjaojiai is to be recnot Kau^j^crco/xai Von Soden as saying:

true of

6wo-r7,

read by

in Jo. 17:2;

This

:

:

may

—

—

ognised as the traditional form give

But Harnack

Kai;xT70"w/xat."

examples in late Greek are the

refuses to ''saddle" Paul with

fut. ind. "spelt

One

of the subjunctive."

vowel (r? the Latin subj. future. to)

The

and that

indirect discourse,

MSS. which do not

Jamiaris^ thinks that these sporadic

this Byzantine "deformity."

and

in families of

fut. opt.

is lost

with the thematic

naturally thinks of

never had a place save in

in the

N. T.

The future inf. was never a common con(7) The Infinitive. The six struction and was almost confined to indirect discourse.^ 1

Blass, Gr. of

2

lb.

'

Appendix,

6

See the

N. T. Gk.,

p. 172.

list in

p. 201.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 151.

*

lb.;

^

Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 556.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 48G.

:

877

TENSE (XPONOS)

examples in the N. T. seem to be punctiliar save two (Ac. 11 28; Jo. 21: 25). MeXXo; has the fut. inf. three times, but only in the case of Ueadai. (Ac. 11 28; 24 15; 27 10). The three other instances of the fut. inf. in the N. T. belong to ind. discourse. One (x'«jpi70'€tJ') occurs with olixai (Jo. 21 25), one (ecreadai.) with :

:

:

:

:

HTjviio},

more exactly

or

firji'vdelaTjs

ijlol

after eirL^ovXr] (Ac. 23

eiTL^ovXrjs

one

ecreaOaL),^

:

30, genitive absolute,

with

(elaeKeva-eadai.)

oiivvo}

So that the fut. inf. "was already moribund for practical purposes." ^ In the papyri Moulton found the fut. inf. often a mere blunder for an aorist. In Ac. 26 7, B has the fut. In the fut. inf. the time relation is only relative, inf. after eXwi^ca. as with all infinitives, not absolute as in the ind.^ Elsewhere with such verbs the aorist inf. occurs as with eXTrtfco (1 Cor. 16 7) /leXXco (Ro. 8 18); ofxvvo: (Ac. 2 30); o/xoXoTeco (Mt. 14: 7); irpoadoKaw (Ac. 27 33) TrpoKaTayyeWoo (Ac. 3 18) or the present inf. as with /xcXXo (Ac. 3 3); or the perfect inf. as with eX-n-tfco (2 Cor. 5 11). (Heb. 3

18).

:

:

:

:

;

:

;

:

:

;

:

:

The Participle. The future part, was later in its development* than the other tenses of this very ancient, even prehistoric,^ The fut. part, was never developed in the verbal adjective. Boeotian Dialect.^ It is by no means dead in the papyri. Moulton^ notes "the string of final fut. participles in O. P. 727 (U/a.d.); B. U. 98 (iii/A.D., etc." See also KOLvoKoynabixevov P. Goodspeed 4 {(T)Ta97]a6fxeva P. Tb. 33 (b.c. 112), and the list in (ii/B.c.) Ta It seems to me to be more conunon in 0. P. 1118, 10 f (I/a.d.). the papyri than in the N. T. Simcox^ suggests that its rarity in (5)

—

is

14; 20

7 and epxafievos in Rev.

:

3,

Cf. /xeXXw in Ac. 18

due to the use of other phrases.

the N. T.

1

4, etc.

:

The time

is,

:

of course,

only relative to that of the principal verb, as in e\i]\WeL ivpo(TKvvr]au)v The anarthrous examples are volitive^ and are the (Ac. 8 27). They are used for purpose or aim. Cf. Mt. 27 most frequent. :

I''

49 epx^raL adcawv, Ac. 8 27 ikrfKWeL irpoaKvurjauv, 22 5 ewopevofxr^v 11 ape(37]P TpoaKVPrjawv, 24 17 Tvoiriawv Kapeyevbp.r]v, Heb. a^coi/, 24 :

:

:

:

13

:

11

:

17 aypviTVomiv 13.

These

dairaaofxevoL in

all

cos a.Trob6:aovTes.

seem to be

Ac. 25

:

13.

Cf. also V.

punctiliar.

This

is

1.

cos evpr]aa:v

Some MSS.

in

Mk.

also read

surely a slim showing

com-

Simcox, Lang, of tho N. T., p. 120, suggests omission of m^XXw. 2 Moulton, Prol., p. 151. Cf. Hatz., Einl., pp. 190 fT. s Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 202. * Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 71. ^ Prol., p. 230. « Lang, of the N. T., p. 126. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 151. » Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 496. « Claflin, Synt. of the B. Inscr., p. 73. >» Moulton, Prol., p. 151. That is, in the old Gk. Both volitive and futuristic are rare in the N. T. 1

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

878

pared with the Pet. 2

the article

22

49)

:

is

KaKwaoiv (1 Pet. 3

(Ro. 8 :34);

The

(d)

not volitive.

futuristic,

6 7rapa86jacov (Jo.

;

Some MSS. read The future

classic idiom.^

:

6

:

64)

to eaofxevov (Lu. :

22)

;

6

37); 6 KaraKpLvuv

:

(Heb. 3:5).

tcop XaX-qOrjao/jihojp

is

So with

participle with

awavT-qaovTa (Ac. 20

13); rb yevrjaofxevov (1 Cor. 15

Periphrastic

phrastic future

to.

;

in 2

KonLoviievoL

rather than aSiKovnevoL.

13,

:

NEW TESTAMENT

Substitutes

for

as old as the Sanskrit

the

The

Future.

peri-

and has survived the

in-

form in Greek. Some of these forms are durative, probablymost of them, but a few are punctiliar. Jannaris notes in Soph-

flected

O. C. 816,

ocles,

and 0. T. 1146,

iaa,

\vTr}dels

oh

eaa,

(najTr-qaas

but no examples of the aorist participle and eaofxac occur in the N. T. They are all present parts, (like eaeade ixiaoviJLevoi, Lu. 21 In the LXX we actually have the inf. with 17) and so durative.

(Num. 10

eaoMat

2;

Cf. Gal. 3

The

5:1.

2 Sam. 10 inf.

11; Tob. 5 15). The use of approaches the punctiliar future. ^ Cf. :

:

Tpoaayayeip (Ac. 12:6); ixeWovaav

TjfjLeXKev

18.

:

with the aorist

/xeXXo)

:

23),

(Ro. 8

aTOKa\v(f)drjvaL

with which compare the pres.

:

Pet.

inf. in 1

Rev. 3:2, 16; 12 4. The was sometimes expressed by OeXo: and in the later

aorist inf. occurs also in

volitive future

:

Greek helped drive out the future form. It is disputed whether N, T. ^eXco is ever a mere future. But in a case like deXeLs eiirwuev (Lu. 9 54) we note the deliberative subj.^ Cf. Mt. 13 28. So l3ov\ea6e airoXvaco (Jo. 18 39). BouXo^at is less frequent in the N. T. than deXo: and can hardly be resolved into a mere future. It is purpose. Cf. examples with the aorist inf. in Mt. 11:27; in the

:

:

:

Ac. 5 tion,

:

28; 17: 20.

and

it is

With

deXco

the aorist

inf. is

the usual construc-

nearly always easy to see the element of will as

dominant. In a few cases

deXcjo

tive fut. ind.

40, ov OeXere eKdetv irpos pe, Ac. 25

Xets

— KptdrjpaL;

Cf. Jo. 5

:

:

20,

off

towards the

Here we have an approach to the

the auxihary has not yet lost Jas. 2

seems to shade

its force.

where the formula

is

But Mt. 16

voli9, de-

but

later usage,

Cf. also Jo. 6

polite.

:

:

67; 9

:

27;

in Jo. 7: 17 the

R. V. rightly preserves "willeth." So in 24. Herodotus shows a fondness for kdeXco as a quasi-auxiliary, and the connection between him and the modern Greek usage is doubtless through the vernacular. Cf. Jebb in Vine, and Dickson, p. 326. Even Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,

1

Cf.

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 443.

"The

between pres. and Man., p. 479. Moulton, Prol., p. 185.

ind." "

difference Giles,

:

p. 335.

Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 2.53. aor. furnishes the explan. of /ieXXw

with aor.

879

TENSE (XPONOS)

may

bbvanai

contain an "inceptive future."^

MSS. vary between :

and

ixeKKovaiv.

:

36 the

in the

N. T.

In Lu. 20

But

retains its real force even in examples like

bbvaixai

3

bbvavrai

24; 10

:

38; 14

:

7; Jo. 13

ypaypai ovk ex^ (cf. ctx^

t'l

:

Mk.

In Ac. 25

37; Ac. 17: 19.

2 19; 26 note

:

:

7pdi/'aj).

in. Durative (Linear) Action. The principles underlying the use of the tenses have

now been

set forth with sufficient clearness to justify brevity.

Indicative.

1.

The Present (6 evearoos) for Present Time. It has already been seen that the durative sense does not monopolize the "present" tense, though it more frequently denotes linear action.^ (a)

The verb and

the context must decide.

As with the ). The Descriptive Present. Its graph is ( frequent use. Cf. this is the most imperfect, so with the present auiaov. Mk. aorist So 4 38; Contrast awoWviJLeda (Mt. 8 25. Ij' (3 (Jo. 25 epxoiiai 5:7); (/)atvet Lu. 8 24) ajSepvuvrai (Mt. 8) Cor. 12 9); dav21 TeXttTai (2 31); (1 Jo. 2:8); awx^weTai (Ac. (a)

:

:

:

;

:

;

:

:

ourcos

OTL

judf CO

rax'^'j^s

neTarideaOe (Gal. 1:6);

€7rt(7Tp€0eTe

(4:9);

Th. 3:8. In these examples the duraand has to be translated by the obvious tive action is very in English, 'We are perishing,' form progressive (periphrastic) 'ixovcTLv

'

(Mk. 2

Our lamps

:

Cf. 1

19).

But

are going out,' etc.

in the case of daviia^o: (Gal.

1:6) 'I wonder' brings out the durative idea, though 'ye are changing' is necessary for ixeTaTideaOe. Cf. ex^L (Jo. 3 36) where :

'has'

is

durative.

Cf.

^rjTovjjLev

(Lu. 2

:

48), ov OeXofxev (Lu. 19

:

14).

This is a poor name in lieu of a (0) The Progressive Present. action still in progress. Usuof past present the for one better ally

an adverb of time (or adjunct) accompanies the verb. Cf. earlv ecos it "Present of Unity of Time." English by a into translated be has to Often it Jo. 2:9). (1

Gildersleeve^ calls apTL

sort of "progressive perfect" ('have been'), though, of course, that is

"So

the fault of the Enghsh.

modern Greek,

in

e^rjvTa

iJLrjvas

(Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 222). The durative present in such cases gathers up past and present time into one phrase" (Moulton, ProL, p. 119). Cf. 'Uov rpia err] d0' ov 'ipxopai (Lu. 13 7);

a' ayawo)

:

Toaavra

err}

8ov\evo} aoi (15

ToaovTov xpovov

p.ed'

vpuv

:

29); iroKvv

eipl

27); TrdXat SoKetTe (2 Cor. 12 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 443.

»

Synt., p. 86.

and Tenses,

p. 10.

(14 :

:

i]5r}

xpovov ex" (Jo. 5:6);

9); air' apxv^ MC"' ^MOi' ^(^Te (15

19).

:

Cf. dTro /Spe^ous ol8as (2 Tim. ^

Moulton,

Prol., p. 119.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 189; Burton,

N. T. Moods

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

880 3

It

15).

:

1 Jo.

(7)

3:8. The

a

is

common

In Jo. 8

:

:

26

So

f.).

(Lu. 18

12)

:

;

vqareixj} 8ls

Xere (11

ravu

:

:

K\ooiJiep

26); ea^tet

3:6);

(1 Jo.

graph

is (

).

SovXayccyo}

tov aa^^ciTOV, airodeKaTevoj iravTa ocra KTccfxai

(19

didc^fjn /cat cnrooldcjOfXL

16); 6v

Its

i/TrcoTridfco /cat

:

purpose in Zaccheus, when Cor. 10

Cf. 2 Pet. 3 :4;

really absolute.

is

el/jLl

Customary Present. 25); irvKTevo) and

Iterative or

Cf. kyKpareveTac (1 Cor. 9 (9

idiom in the N. T.

58

(10

a/jLapraveL (3

Cf.

a new

refers to

29); KOLixwvTai (11

:

8).

:

it

aoristic); o evXoyovpLev (1

KarayyeX-

TpoXaiufSaveL (11: 21);

16);

:

(11

/cat iriveL

unless

8,

:

would be

it

Mt. 9

:

:

30); ovx

a/jiap-

Probably also

17.

(Lu. 11:4).

a4)ioptv

Either an act just (5) The Inchoative or Conative Present. beginning, like ylverai (Mk. 11:23), tvdvs aKavha\l^ovTaL (4:17), Xt^afere

2

10:32),

(Jo.

cf.

2 Cor. 5

Ka^ovaiv (6

may

:

:

(13:6),

vtTrrets

(Gal. 2

11), apayKa^eLS

Indeed Xida^ere

12).

be regarded as conative

:

dLKatovade (5

14),

32)

:

and

This idiom

26:28;

:

4),

viirTeis

dm7-

(13

:

6)

more common

is

Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 82.

in the imperfect.

(Ro.

ciTet

like weideLs (Ac.

(Jo. 10

also.

(13:27),

Trotets

begun but interrupted

:4), or an act

In English

we

have to use "begin" or ''try." These examples are usually aoristic, (e) The Historical Present. but sometimes durative.^ In Mk. 1 12 we have e/c|3dXXei which Cf. i]yeTo in Lu. 4 1 (but Mt. 4:1, ap-^xdri)- So in is durative. Mk. 1 21 elcnropevovTaL is durative. The same thing seems to be true of aKoXovOovaiP in 6:1. Rhetorical deliberative questions (f) The Deliberative Present. may be put by the present ind., but it is rather a rhetorical way of putting a negation than a question of doubt. Cf. ri woLovixep; :

:

:

(Jo. 11:47),

with

'What

Tt iroLuinev (Jo.

are

6

:

we

28)

doing?'

and

plication of the question in Jo.

done.

In Mt. 12

erative question

:

is

34,

ttcos

Cf.

H

11:47

woiweL (Mt. 21:40)

(Ac. 4

tL iroL-qaoipep

:

The im-

Svpaade ayada \a\e7p; a durative delib-

expressed

by means

of 8vpaa9e

Cf. a similar construction with Set in Ac. 16

inf.

16).

that nothing was being

is

and the :

30.^

pres.

Cf. the

same idiom in an indirect question (Col. 4:6; 2 Th. 3 7; 1 Tim. The use of the pres. ind. in a deliberative question is a 15). rare idiom. Blass^ finds parallels in colloquial Latin and an example in Herm., Sim., IX, 9, 1. The examples are not numerous (q) The Periphrastic Present. It is rare in in the LXX." Cf. Num. 14 8; 1 Ki. 18 12, etc. :

3

:

:

1

2

Goodwin, M. and T., p. 11. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 210.

:

'

jb.

"

C. and

S., Sel., p. 68.

:

TENSE (XPONOS) Moulton^ warns us that

the N. T.

881 and

"Ixoiv karl

bkov karl

(with

other impersonal verbs) are both classical and vernacular." In the present tense the idiom is on purely Greek lines, not Semitic.

For

examples see Gildersleeve {Syntax, p. 81). So the ex<^) stand to themselves ^ in support from

classical

impersonal verbs (and

ancient Greek and the

Cf. tarLv exovra (Col. 2 :23); wpe-

kolvt].,

(Mt. 3:15); e^6v {sc. Cf. eariv (Ac. 19:36.

4; 8eov earcos

{Q)

:

3

15), kaTLU irpoaava-

:

and, in particular, explanatory phrases with

24)

:

29 and 2 Cor. 12

Cor. 9:12), karip a\\r]yopov~

Tepiacrevovaa (2

(Mt. 1:23; 27:33;

kariv

Ac. 5

/cat

:

Other examples are

Pet. 1:6).

1

10), earLV Karefixo/JLefr] (Jas.

:

— dXXa

(Gal. 4

ixtva

o

(Ac. 25

el/jLl

TrXrjpovaa

in Ac. 2

kari)

irop tcTTLv

25; Col. 1

6; 3

:

:

Mk. 5:41;

2; 2 Cor. 2

Presents as Perfects.

Cf. further

1:41).

Jo.

17.

:

Here the form

is

that of the present,

but the root has the sense of completion. The action is durative only in the sense of state, not of linear action. This is an old Cf. Lu. 15

use of these roots.^ Cf. e^fjXdou

here').

/cat

77/cco

27, 6 a8€k4>6s

:

(Jo.

8:42).

7?/c€t

('has come,'

'is

So with

See ch. VIII.

(Mt. 3 10), 'the axe lies at the root of the trees' (has been placed there); 6 didaaKoKos irapecrTLv (Jo. 11:28)= 'the Teacher is come.' Sometimes vlkolco is so used (cf. Ro. 12:21; Ketrat

:

Rev. 15 11: 18. 'AStKco

i^rrcoj^rat

(2 Pet. 2

20).

:

Cf. d/co6erat in 1 Cor.

See also d/couerat (1 Cor. 5 1) which is rather iterative. in Mt. 20 13 is durative, but approaches a perfect in :

:

Ac. 25 (t)

So

2).

:

:

11

(cf. TreTrpaxa).

Perfects as Presents.

Some

perfect forms have

though not used as practical durative have seen,' 'I know' from el8ou='I word. Thus oUa presents,

So

(Lu. 8

earijKa

:

20),

As

(1 Cor. 11:2).

ixefjivrjuaL

occurs in the N. T. in the participle (Mt. 10

thing

So

is

true of

^ej3r]Ka,

(Lu. 4

e'iccda

yeyova, 5e8oLKa,

Futuristic Presents.

are durative.^

Propheticum."

The papyri

»

38

Prol., p. 226.

3

:

8).

and the same

6)

in past perfect.

ripc^lea p-ai, eyprjyopa, eot/ca, Ke/cXrj/iai, Ke/CTiy/xai,

These are usually

The absence 120).

of et^t in the

abundantly

punctiliar,

but some

N. T.

this futuristic

is

noticeable.

present (Moul-

Since the pres. ind. occurs for past, pres-

Cf. also Schmid, Atticismus, III, p. 114; K.-G., Bd. ""

ff.

Goodwin, M. and

p. 87.

Mt. 6

(cf.

to aToKoAa that

Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 83) calls this "Praesens

illustrate

ton, Prol., p.

10),

:

which occurs

to be

the same

Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 438.

ireiroLda, xe0i;/ca, TtOvriKa. (k)

:

come

of

T., p. 9; Burton,

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

I,

pp.

p. 204.

N. T. M. and T., p. 10; Gildersl., Synt., * Moulton, Prol., p. 120.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

882

ent and future time

it

is

clear that

"time"

is

secondary even no time at all.

in the ind.

In the other moods

As examples

of the durative present in this sense take irapablboTai

has, of course,

it

(Mt. 26:45), avajSaivofxev (Mk. 10:33), inrayco oKieheLV and epxoMeXXw fxeda (Jo. 21 3), Siepxofiat (1 Cor. 16 6). 5), eav (1 Tun. 4 and the pres. inf. is, of course, a prospective present. This idiom :

:

common

is

very

3

fut.) inf.,

in the

N.

T., 84

though, of course,

:

examples with the pres. (6 aor., not always in the pres. ind.

jueXXco is

Mt. 2:13; 16 27, etc. The Imperfect for Past Time (6 TraparartKos). Here we have the time-element proper, the augment probably being an old adverb for "then," and the action being always durative. "The augment throws linear action into the past."^ The absence of a true imperfect in English makes it hard to translate this Greek Cf.

:

(6)

tense. (a)

Doubtful Imperfects. They are sometimes called "aoristic" This term is not a happy one, as Gildersleeve^ shows

imperfects. in

criticism

his

Stahl

of

for

term

is

shown

that, as already

"synonym-mongering" and

his

The only

"multiplication of categories."

justification for

the

in the discussion of the aorist,

it

whether some forms are aorist ind. or imperf. ind. The same root was used for both forms, as only one form existed and it is hard to tell which tense the form is. A certain amount of obscurity and so of overlapping existed from is

not possible always to

the beginning.^

We

tell

see this difficulty in

INIodern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. Thumb {Th. L.-Z., xxviii, 423) thinks that in the N. T. had begun to be treated as aorist, but Moulton (Prol., p.

conceives of 143). e(})epov

eXeyov, etc., par-

rjv, ecprjv,

commanding,

ticularly in verbs of saying, i»7r^7a, eTrjya

and

etc.*

as aorists

e(j)epa

though he admits the possibility of punctiliar action Mt. 5 24 {ib., p. 247). See also ^kpe koI I'Se, But one must not think that the 0€pe Kol fiake in Jo. 20 27. Greeks did not know how to distinguish between the aorist and the imperfect. They "did not care to use their finest tools on every occasion," » but the line between aorist and imperf. was 129) demurs,

in Tp6a4>epe to bCopov in

:

:

The

usually very sharply drawn.^ Sanskrit.'^

1

»

In modern Greek

it

still

distinction survives,

is

as old as the

though the

differ-

^ Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 394. Moulton, Prol., p. 128. Giles, Man., p. 488; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 4S7; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 46.

Am.

Jour, of Philol.,

*

Gildersl.,

^

Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,

•

Gildersl., Synt., pp. 91, 94.

XXIV,

p. ISO;

XXIX,

p. 4.

p. 17. ^

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p.

201

f.

883

TENSE (XPONOS)

ence between "D^eyev and direv is well-nigh gone/ if it ever existed. The same thing is true of the usage of Achilles Tatius.'* Hence we need not insist that riv (Jo. 1 1) is strictly durative always (im:

may

be sometimes actually aorist also. So as to It perfect). (Mk. 4 21, 24, 26, 30, etc.), etc. Blass, l\tyev 'i4>n (Mt. 4:7); Note fails to make a clear distinction. 192, T. Gk., Gr. of N. p. :

kKkXevov (Ac. 16

22).

:

(0) The Descriptive Tense in Narrative. may be insisted on in the true imperfect.

Though

punktuell." it

less

But the

linear action

It is properly "nicht-

Homer than

frequent in

the

aorist

The imperfect

often ''divides the crown with the aorist."^

moving panorama, a "moving-picture show." preserves this idiom (Thumb, Handb., p. In 1 Cor. 10 3 f. l(t)a'yov and einov give the summary (con121). stative) record, while Ittlvov presents an explanatory description.

is

here a sort of

The modern Greek :

See further TpoarjXdou

Kal

bii^Kovovv

(Mt. 4:11);

kol

iTrtaev

kblbov

Sometimes the change from aorist to imperf. or vice versa in narrative may be due In Mt. 26 59 we have ovx to the desire to avoid monotony. (13:8); epvara^av mt Uadevdov (25:5).

:

tvpov,

Mk. 14 55 ovx ivpLaKov. The The imperfect draws the picture.

in

story.

:

course of the act. history.

It passes before the

aorist

tells

It is the tense of Schilderung.^

Cf

.

elxev to evdvua avrov

3:4), e^ewopeveTo (3:5), epaTTTi^ovTo (3:6). vivid scene at the Jordan is thus sketched. Then :

7).

see the

eye the flowing stream of

(Mt.

verts to the aorist (3

the simple

you to

It helps

Cf. ripxovro in Jo. 19

So

2.

:

The whole Matthew re6s co^eiXej/

(Mt. 18 28) aptly describes a debtor as eirpiyev, the choking in his rage.' See the picture of Jesus in WeupeL (Mk. 12:41). Cf. edewpovv (Lu. 10 18), e^eieyopro (14 7), 7repie/3\e7rero (Mk. 5 32), '

aiiTU)

:

Mt. 8

:

24.

A

cf.

Ac. 2

good example

€di5ou

(Lu.

(Mt. 7:28);

A

58).

16)

tTiOei

;

(Mk. 14:35), the

:

13);

43^5;

a^pl^wp (Mk. 9

probably);

uplXovp wpos aXXrjXovs (24

(2 Cor. 3

:

rjKoKovdeL

:

14)

;

(Ac. 21

:

29)

silent.' So ewXeopep (Ac. 21:3). between past perfect and aorist.

Gk. Gr.,

:

19;

Cf.

scene in Kal

ov8els

k^eirXTjaaovPTO

Kal eKadr^To

= 'kept

16

20).

:

realistic €xe06/xec

splendid example of the descriptive durative

(Mt. 26: 63) hl'^op

:

Cf. Lu. 9

12).

description

(Peter's

15

:

is kKvKltTo

further, eTLxrep Kal irpoarivxeTo

Gethsemane

:

:

:

k^iaTavTo (Lu. 2 :47;

(Mt. 26 is

Note hoCf.

c
p. 436.

»

Moulton,

* 3

Sexauer, Dcr Sprachfii;ebr. d. riim. Schriftst. Achilles Tatius, 1899, p. 29. Gildcrsl., Am. Jour, of Pliilol., 1908, p. 242.

*

Hultsch, Dcr Gcbr. d. crziililenden Zcitf. bei Polyb.

Prol., p. 128.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

:

kaicoira

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

884 (Jo. 11

:

2

36), 5t€ri7pet (Lu.

:

Noah's time in Lu. 17:27. Quite striking

is

See the picture of

19).

:

Cf. ewopevouTo xo-lpopres (Ac. 5 :41).

in Lu. 24 21. See further for the interwoven" in narrative Gildersleeve,

rjXTri^ofxeu

and

"imperfect

Cf. 2

51.

aorist

:

Syntax, p. 91. An artist could describe his work by kToirjffa or Gildersleeve notes {ib., p. 93) that in the inscriptions of eiroiovv.

the fourth cent. B.C. the imperfect

mon

is

absent.

It

becomes com-

again in the imperial time.

Sometimes it is diffiwhether an act is merely descriptive or is a series. ttXovcxlol e(3aK\op (Mk. 12 :41); kirplyovTo (5 13), where

The

(7)

Iterative (Customary) Imperfect.

cult to tell

Cf. TToXKol

:

the separate details are well described

The notion

of repetition

is

this

clearly present in ^pcbra

W.

/3as k^ovXeTo,

In Ac. 24

:

}reiJ.T6fj,epos.

verse oirov

H.);

(Ac. 27

iraprjpei.

45.

in Bapra-

:

:

rmepav

Kad'

(Mk. 6

T]K0V0P

55)

Cf.

6.

:

:

(21

k^(j}ppves

Cf. 4

:

:

34).

18)

;

eluOet.

3

Moulton

:

(15

22); '^ve (5

:

(27:30);

erviTTOP :

3)

;

airtkvev

Mt. 27

aToXvetP op ijdeXop,

kridovp (Ac.

imperfect by the graph

TToXXa

Kar-qyopovp

;

;

(Mt. 26:55);

kKaBe^ojxr^p

vevop (Lu. 1: 62); k^awTL^ep (Jo. ;

<xTov8ai(jos

shown

UavXos -q^lov (15 37 f.), the one opposing the other. 26 repetition is shown in cb/xtXet by irvKvorepop /xeraCf oWol de aXXo rt kweclxjjpovv (21 34) kirvpdapeTO in

irapjiTOvvTO (15

3)

Cf. TapeKciXovp

It is well

9).

:

.

33;

k\erj^xo(jhvr]v

:

:

sary to see any "aoristic" notion here.^ (Lu. 7:4,

vivid imperfect.

(Mk. 7 26). Cf. Jo. 4 31. The modern usage (Thumb, Handh., p. 122). It is not neces-

(Ac. 3:3); iipura avrbv

Greek keeps

by the

:

ov

15); kpe-

18); kdiSoaap (19

3:2); kTiwpaaKOP

/cat

buixepi^ov (2

:

:

{Prol., p. 128) represents the iterative

Cf. Ac. 16

).

(

:

18; 18

:

8;

Mk.

4 33 f. A good example is in Lu. 2 41, kwopevoPTo Kar' eros. Sometimes the imperfect looks (5) The Progressive Imperfect. ahead, even approaching the time of the speaker.- Thus Tt on 3

:

11;

:

k^rfrelrk

:

{xe

(Lu. 2 :49);

fjv

dx^Te

air'

apxv^ (1 Jo. 2:7); kpeKOinbu-qv

This idea is, however, often but without the backward look also. Cf. Jo. 4 47; 6 71, etc. In kKipbhpevop (Lu. 8 23)

(Ro. 15:22); eneXKop (Rev. 3:2).

expressed by

fxeWco,^

Lu. 9 31; 10 1; the verb itself expresses peril or danger. Gildersleeve {Syntax, Cf. the p. 97) calls this idiom "Imperfect of Unity of Time." :

:

:

"progressive" present in

example See also

in

tjp

:

:

(a), (/3).

The

TrdXat to -kKoIop kp ukaui

^p jap

Blass, Gr. of

2

Burton, N. T.

3

Gildersl.,

ttjs

doKaaa-qs

k^ iKaPwv xpovoiv deXwp Idtlp avTOv (Lu.

N. T. Gk., p. 191. Moods and Tenses, Synt., p. 94 f.

1

Text. Recept. gives a good

p. 13

f.

(Mk. 6 23

Goodwin, M. and

:

:47).

8).

T., p. 13.

;

TENSE (XPONOS)?

885

(e) The Inchoative or Conative Imperfect. Here the accent is on the beginning of the action either in contrast to preceding aorists (just begun) or because the action was interrupted (begun, but not completed). The two sorts of inchoative action may be represented by two graphs, thus ( ) for the first, () for the second.^ In Enghsh we have to say "began" for the one, "tried" for the other. The modem Greek maintains this idiom (Thumb, Handb., p. 121). As examples of the first sort where "began" brings out the idea, note ediSaaKe (Mt. 5 2. Cf. Jo. 7 Cf. Lu. 1 64); e/cXatev (14 72); dieprjaaeTo 14); kXaXei (Mk. 7 35. :

:

:

(Lu. 5:6); dceKaXow (6

Note

34.

:

11); avve-Kk-qpovvTO (8

ingressive aorist

ylvwaKov (Ac. 3

yeXKou (13:5);

:

:

e(i)o^r]6r](Tav)

;

:

23)

;

eTk4>w(7Kev

eire
(23

54)

:

;

:

eTre-

10); kK-qpvacnv (9 :20); bteKpivovTo (11 :2); Kar-qy-

:

Wopv^ovv (17:5);

Tapo^^vvero (17:16); aireXoyeiTo (26:1); 'eiroiodPTo (27:18); eXi/ero (27:41). Cf. Lu. 13:13, 17. In kdXoi^j^ (Lu. 1 59) we see both ideas combined. The action :

was begun, but was sharply interrupted by ovxi, aXXa from Elizabeth. Cf. vvv e^TjTovv (Jo. 11:8). A good instance of the interrupted imperf. is Trpoae4)epev in Heb. 11 17. Examples of the :

conative imperfect (action begun, but interrupted) are SLeKoAvev (Mt. 3:14); mSovp (Mk. 15:23, in contrast A^ath ovk eXa^ev); kKoAvofxev

(Ac. 7

:

(Lu. 9:49);

Note

25.

(Ac. 18:4);

eireLdev

Moulton (Prol, 6

e^r)Tovv

ov a-wrJKav)

;

rjuajKa^ov

(Jo.

10:39;

avprjXkaa-aev (7

:

cf.

19:11);

26.

Note

hofxc^eu

ciTrcbcraTo)

(26:11); Trpoae(t)epev (Heb. 11:17). conative pres. avayKa^ovacu (Gal.

p. 247) cites the

12).

:

(f)

The "Negative" Imperfect.

This

is not a very happy piece remark about Stahl's overthe best one can do. "The negative

of nomenclature, to use Gildersleeve's

and yet

refinement,

it

is

commonly denotes resistance to pressure or disappoint* ment."2 As examples note 6 8e ovk i]6e\ei> (followed by 'i^akev, Mt. 18 30) and preceded by irapeKoKei (iterative), ovbels kSidov (Lu. 15 16), OVK ridekev (15 27. Note (hpyladri), OVK eTriaTevev (Jo. 2 24), imperfect

:

:

:

ov

yap

riOeXev (Jo.

:

7:1), ovdeh eroXyua (21

:

12), ovk etuiu (Ac.

19

:

30).

Mt. 22 3. The "Potential" Imperfect. This is a peculiar use of the (77) tense for present time, where the present ind. fails to meet the Cf.

:

requirement of the situation.

Gildersleeve {Sijutax, p. 97) calls

it

"modal" use, Ua, etc. The unfulfilled duty comes as a surprise. This "modal" force of the imperfect ind. appears still in the Moulton,

»

Cf.

2

Gildersl., Syat., p.

Prol., p. 128.

95

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 338.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

886

modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

There are several vap. 128). Verbs of wishing fonn one class of passages. In a case like e^ovKSfxrjv (Ac. 25 22), jSovXonai would be too blunt (cf. 1 Tim. 2 The exact idea is 'I was just on the point of 8). rieties of

it.

:

:

wishing.'

It is freely

In 2 Cor.

1

Phil. 13 f

.

:

15

ent see

1

'I

should wish.'

usual signification.

its

In

Another example is ijdeXov iraptivai Note apTL. For the force of the presCor. 10 20; Col. 2:1; and especially Lu. 19 14, ov 4

:

20).

:

In Jo. 6

deKoixtv.

has

decision).^

apTL (Gal.

ii/jLOLs

could wish' or

'I

(a past preference) is set over against ov8ev

e^ov\6iJ.r]v

qdeXtjaa (a past irpds

rendered

k^ovKbixr\v irporepov

:

:

21,

i]de\ov,

the

usual notion occurs.

An

ex-

ample is found in Ro. 9 3, 7)vx6iJ.r}v, where Paul almost expresses a moral wrong. He holds himself back from the abyss by the :

tense.

He

(Ac. 26

:

has

its

does not say evxanai

29).

Note

(cf.

oh xl^evdonai in

2 Cor. 13

Ro. 9

:

nor

7),

:

ev^aifxrju

av

In Ac. 27: 29 tjuxovto

1.

usual force.

Wishes about the present are naturally unattainable. In the ancient idiom etde or et yap was used with the imperf. ind. or Callimachus, B.C. 260, uses co^eXof with the (b(i>eKov and the inf. ind. The augmentless form 6cf)e\op appears in Herodotus (Moulton, ProL, p. 201). In the N. T. only 64)e\op is used with the imperf. for wishes about the present. Cf. otpeKov aveix^ade (2 Cor. 11:1);

6cf)e\ou ^s

(Rev. 3

:

15).

Verbs of propriety, possibility, obligation or necessity are also used in the imperfect when the obligation, etc., is not lived up to, has not been met, Winer ^ has stated the matter well. The Greeks (and the Latins) start from the past and state the real reader, by comparing that with was not met. The English and tiie Germans start from the present and find trouble with this past statement of a present duty (an unfulfilled duty). A distinction is usually drawn between the present and the aorist infinipossibility or obligation,

and the

facts, notes that the obligation

tives r]u,

when they occur with

KpeLTTou

Tju,

these verbs {kbvvaro,

The

KadrjKeu).

aurJKev,

present

oj4>eL\ov, e5et,

inf.

refers

koXov

more

an action in the past. This however, only by suggestion. Thus in Mt. 18 33, ovk Uei /cat eXerjaaL, note ojs Kaych ae ifXk-qaa. Cf. also Mt. 23 23 ravra rectly to the present, the aorist to

:

:

'ibei

TTOLTJaaL

KaKtLva

fii)

TrpadrjvaL Kal dodrjvai,

a(f)eivaL,

(26

22) ov yap KadrjKev ainov

:

(25

:

24) KaXoj'

^y)v,

(24

:

Burton, N. T.

Mooda and

rjp

e5et ae

avT(2

19) ovs

32) a-rroXeXvaOaL eSvparo (note perf. 1

27)

inf.),

Tenses, p. 15.

^aXeiv, (26

(no

tbet.

:

inf. here),

kirl

(27:21) ^

aov e5et

/xi)

is,

ae bk

9) kbvvaro

(Ac. 22

rrape^vaL,

W.-Th.,

di-

(26

:

:

avayeadai

p. 282.

:

TENSE (XPONOS) KepBrjaai

2

(2 Pet.

re,

:

21) KpelrTOV

rjv

887

avrols

tirtyvuKkvai (pcrf.

fxri

2:3) d0' wv Ibei (xe xatpetJ', (Col. 3 18) cos avrJKev h Kvpiu}. (Cf. Eph. 5 4.) But it must not be supposed that these impcffects cannot be used in the normal expression of a past obligation or possibility that was met. The context makes the matter clear. Cf. Lu. 13 16; 22 7; 24 26; Jo. 4:4, etc. In Lu. 15 32 tdet applies to both the past and present, probably with an implication against the attitude of the elder brother. In Heb. 2 10 eTrpeirev and 2 17 oj^eiXej' have their natural past meaning. Another instance where the imperfect refers to present time is in (2 Cor.

inf.),

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

XIX, Mode).

the second-class conditional sentences (see chapter

When

a condition

is

assumed as unreal and

time, the imperfect tense

refers to present

used both in the protasis and the See apodosis in Mt. 26 24 32 (both quoted above). It is only the tense that is

apodosis in normal constructions.

and

in Ac.

26

:

calls for discussion here.

where

In

11).

Uei

vvp 8e 1

Cor. 5

39) as

:

Cf. Lu. 17: 6.

Cf. ap-apTiau ovx elxoaav (Jo. 15

used to explain the point.

is

— iraOdv, we

(Lu. 7

:

:

10, w4)ei\€Te ixpa

— e^eKdtiv,

only have the apodosis.

So

and Heb. 9

Cf.

:

22, 24),

ovk elxes (Jo. 19

ei

—

rjv

:

25, kivd

'eylvooaKev

av

a type of the more usual construction wih av. In Heb. 11 15 the imperfects describe past time. :

In Indirect Discourse. In general the imperfect in discourse represents an imperfect of the direct discourse. {Q)

indir.

But

sometimes with verbs of perception it is relative time and refers to a time previous to the perception.^ Thus dx^v t6v 'lwavr]v 6tl Trpo(f)riTr]s ^i> (Mk. 11 32); eUov otl ovk rju (Jo. 6 22. Cf. OVK eaTLV :

in verse 24)

(Ac. 3

:

10),

;

:

6tl TpoaaiTrjs

rjv

while in 4:13

(9

8)

rjaav is

—

oKov,

:

;

eireyivcoaKov otl

rjv

6 Kadrjfxevos

rightly antecedent to eTreylvco-

ribtiaav oTL virrjpxev (16:3). In Ac. 3 10 the idiom approaches that in Jo. 1 15, ovtos rjv 6 eiircov (a parenthesis), where the verb is thrown back to past time. Our idiom more natu:

:

rally calls for eaTLV here.

Gildersleeve^ calls this the "imperfect

sudden appreciation of real state of things." (i) The Periphrastic Imperfect. It is easy to see how in the present, and especially in the future, periphrastic forms were felt to be needed to emphasize durative action. But that was the

of

real function of the

imperfect tense.

ing of the durative idea 1

is

Blass, Gr. of

particularly «

N. T. Gk.,

common

Synt., p. 9G

f.

by

rjv

The demand

and the present

for this stress-

participle

p. 192; Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 339. in John.

was

cer-

This imperfect

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

888

NEW TESTAMENT

And yet it is just in the imperfect in the N. T. most frequent. It is not unknown in the ancient Greek.^ Schmid^ finds it rare in the kolvt], especially in the imperfect, where the N. T. is so rich in the idiom. He suggests the Aramaic influence, particularly as that language is fond of Periphrasis is thoroughly Greek, and yet in the this periphrasis. N. T. we have unusual frequency of a usage that the kolvti has not greatly developed except "where Aramaic sources underlie the Greek" (Moulton, Prol, p. 226). Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 124) It gives classical examples from Pindar, Thuc, Isocrates, etc. is true that in the N. T. the pres. participle with rjv occurs chiefly tainly not so great.

that this idiom

Mark

is

but 17 of them in chapmost subject to Aramaic Only 7 occur in Acts 13influence (possible Aramaic sources). 28, and these mainly in the speech in 22 delivered in Aramaic* The LXX* gives abundant illustration of this analytic tendency in

(16 times),

and

ters 1-12),

249) cites rjv

From

Gr., p. 24. ^/jltjv

(30),

Acts

(24,

Cf. Gen. 37: 2;

in the imperfect.

Thackeray,

Luke

just in those portions

Deut. 9: 24; Judg.

Pelagia

For a papyrus

airepxoiJ.evos.

1

Moulton

:

Cf.

7.

(Prol., p.

illustration see 6aa

The idiom

P. Oxy. 115 (ii/A.D.).

Kadi]Kovra,

(p. 18)

itself is

therefore

N. T. is due to the Hebrew and Aramaic. Matthew has it 3 times, Jolm 10, Paul 3.^ The Ph. 2 26) are more like the Pauline examples (Gal. 1 22 f Greek, but the frequency of

it

in the

;

:

:

.

classic

independence of the participle.

It

usually the de-

is

So

scriptive imperfect that uses the periphrastic form.

(Mt. 7:29);

aK(^iv

(Mk. 10:22);

'Ix^v

rjv

^v TrpocrevxoiJ.epou (Lu. 1

32);

sometimes 22);

Tjv

it is

:

KaLOjjLhr}

10);

the iterative imperfect as in

hbacFKwv to Kad'

r]ixkpav

and past perfect occur

In Lu. 23

irpovirrjpxov ovres (cf.

12 note

(Lu. 24

:

32).

biavevoiv

rjv

In Lu. 5

(19 :47).^

phrastic imperfect :

rjv

riv

avajSaipovres

riaav

in the

:

5i5d-

(10:

But

(Lu. 1

:

17 the peri-

same sentence.

Ac. 8:9).

The present perfects of these when compared with other have only an imperfect force. Thus

Past Perfects as Imperfects.

(k)

verbs are merely presents in sense verbs.

So the past perfects

(Mt. 27: 18); elwda (27: 15); IffrijKeL (Jo. 18 The future (c) The Future for Future Time.

pSet

(punctiliar) tive.''

,

:

5).

mainly aoristic but sometimes duraproblem have already been is

as has already been shown,

The broad

lines

1

Cf. K.-G., Bd.

38

f.

*

Atticismus, III, p. 113

f.

'

Moulton,

*

C. and

I,

p.

Prol., p. 227.

S., Sel., p. 69.

of

the 5 <>

^

Moulton, Prol., p. 227. Burton, N. T. M. and T., Moulton, Prol., p. 149.

p. 16.

TENSE (XPONOS)

889

As already shown, the modern Greek has a special duraby means of ^d Xuco (pros. subj.). See Thumb, Handh., A summary statement of the durative future is given. p. 160. (a) The Three Kinds of Action in the Future (futuristic, voliThese occur here also. Thus merely futurtive, deliberative). drawTi.

tive future

are

istic

(Mt.

acbcrei

21); earai (Lu.

12

(Jo.

Kvaco

6:5);

(Gal.

Ac. 7:6.

(common

cepts

(1

xc-PWo/JLai-

14)

:

16

:

;

^acTdaei.

"the progressive future." adiK-qaet with ov p-f] (Lu. 10 19).

Cf.

So

:

6

cf.

:

36); ov

aKoKovdrjaovaiv (Jo. 10

/jlt]

:

fX-

^rjTrjaov-

18);

:

f.);

calls this

(5

:

48), etc. 'I shall.'

4, OVK

N. T.

so often quoted in the

21); ov ixolx^v(JHS (5

:

Cf.

27); ovk e-mopK-qaeiS, oltoSo}-

;

;

:

:

;

.

:

volitive.

may

:

eaeade (5 cf d7a7rare, verse 44) ayairriaeis (5 43 Perhaps olKobop.r](yo3 (Mt. 16:18)='! wall' rather than In 1 Tim. 6 8, tovtols apKeadr^aoneda, the resolution is It is possible that we have the volitive use in Mt.

33)

:

LXX)

in the

(Mt. 5

(lx)vevaeLS

ceLS

:

14;

:

TpoeXevaeraL (1

Examples of the volitive durative future are the legal pre-

5).

4

4

1:6);

(Ph.

Burton^

(Jo.

and

(Ro. 6:2); Kvptevaet (6

^ijaoixtv

;

eTrtreXeaet

(Mt. 3 :11); eXinovaLu (12

/SaTrrio-et

eTnarpeipei

f.);

-Durative also is

dixl/ricreL

fxr]

oi)

32)

:

:21);

1

14

:

(Rev. 9:6).

GLv

ov

1

€7r'

apTU) nbvco

^rjcreTat.

The

6 avOpoiiros.

deliberative future

be durative. Cf. Mt. 18 21, xoo-d/cts anapTrjaei; (merely interrogative) and Lu. 14 34, h tU-l aprvdrjaeTaL; (rhetorical). Cf. also

:

:

aor., pres.

and

Mt. 28

fut. ind. in

(/3)

:

7.

The very

The Periphrastic Future.

of the

failure

future

to express durative action clearly- led to the use of the present

In Lysias

participle with eaofxai.

(2), 13,

note laovTai

more

yevbixevoi

Uke a future punctiliar (or perfect). Cf. Mt. 10 22 and 24 9, 13; Lu. 21 :-17); (Mk. 13 25) '^aovTai ecjea^e /jLiaovixevoi (Mk. 13 :

:

:

:

TTLTTOVTes,

iaovTat

(Lu.

1

:

aXrjOovaat.,

Cf. Gen.

\akovuTes.

frequent use of

ear] :

4

/xeXXco

The

been mentioned. the pres.

20) (21

:

24)

(5

(JLonrQiu,

12, 14;

Deut. 28

and the

10)

:

^o^ypojv,

effrj

(1

Cor. 14

29; Mai. 3

pres. inf. (durative)

fut. of m^XXco itself

:

:

(17 9)

3, etc.

:

35)

eaeaOe

The

has already

occurs (Mt. 24

:

6)

with

inf.

The

Subjunctive and Optative.

2.

:

earat iraTOVnevrj,

rarity of the pres. subj.

(and opt., of course) has already been commented upon. The aorist is used as a matter of course here unless durative action is

A

to be expressed.

6

(Jo.

:

very

junctive

is

There

in the

1

few examples

is

common

Thus suffice. ixm^v (Ro. 5:1).

will

28); eav Ixnre (Mt. 17: 20);

tI iroLcopLtp;

The sub-

indeed, but not in the present tense.

N. T. no instance of a periphrastic present

N. T. M. and

T., p. 32.

"

Cf. Jaim., Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

subj.

p. 444.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

890

John's free use of the pres. subj. has already been noted (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 369 ff.). Cf. kav woLrjre (13 17); ed;' In Col. 1 18 note yhrjTaL Trpurevo^v like eyepero IJLapTVpw (5 31). or optative.

:

:

:

cTiXjSovTa

The

(Mk. 9:3).

present opt. survives in

dvvaiinjv (Ac.

8 :31); exoL (Ac. 17:11); ^ovXolto (Ac. 25:20); OeXot (Ac. 17:18; Lu. 1 62); el'r? (9 46; 15 26; 18 36; 22 23; Ac 10 17). :

:

and the

:

:

The

Imperative.

3.

had to be

aorist subj. in prohibitions

The

nection with the punctiliar-aorist subj. imper. with

set forth in con-

the inchoative or conative or customary

/xi)

(prohibiting a course of conduct) use of the present nrfdevl kinTidei (5 22) as in uri djueXet (1 Tim. 4 14) :

(ih.);

^li,

imper, to forbid what (Jo. 6

:

20)

one

;

Cf.

m'?

with the present

used

is

p.ri

already doing.

is

KOLPc^peL

juTjSe

Cf.

(poiSelade

nrj

^rjKcrt afxaprape (Jo.

5

:

14)

;

fxif

(5:45); jur?/c€ri oKvWe (Lu. 8:49). durative force of the pres. imper. is well seen in KaOevSere

davpLa^ere

The Kal

;

;

noticeable,

is

ypebbeude (Col. 3:9).^

fxii

(Mt. 7:1);

Kplpere

/jltj

18)

:

In general

(Lu. 6:30).

dTratret

:

;

(Eph. 5

fiedvaKeade

was

present imper.

In Paul's frequent use of the

found to be regularly durative. pres.

:

:

contrast between the present imperative

(5:28);

(Mt. 26 :45).

apairaveade

Trpoo-ei'xecr^e,

hoKtlTt

;ui7

ei'

Traprl

Cf. also TaPTore xo-^P^^fj dStaXetTrrcos

evxcLpt-crTelTe

Th. 5

(1

:

A

16-22).

good ex-

ample is seen in Ac. 18 9, Mi) cl>o(3ov, dXXd XdXet Kal p.r] atojirrjcrris, 'He had been afraid, he was to go on speaking, he was not to become silent.' Cf. 2 Tim. 2 16, 22 f. The contrast between aorist and pres. imper. is often drawn in the N. T., as in Jo. 5:9; Mt. 16 24. We note the periphrastic pres. imper. in tV^i evpoojp :

:

:

(Mt. 5

:

25);

'iaOi

19

exoiP (Lu.

:

yp-qyopoip

(Rev. 3:2); 2 Cor. 6

from Pelagia 4.

:

5)^;

:

Moulton

14.

{Prol., p. 249) cites

(p. 26) eao yLPcoaKo^p.

The present inf. can be assumed to be duraThe matter has had some discussion in connection with the

Infinitive.

tive.

aorist inf. (punctiliar),

Cf.

the usage. avTov

(Eph. 5

17); iVre yLPcoaKovres

Cf. Judg. 11: 10; Prov. 3:5; yipov

earcoaap Kaibp-epoL (Lu. 12:35).

(Mk. 12

:

33)

Cf

.

inf.

is

vpTip

(Ro. 7:18); apapTapeip 10

1

Moulton,

2

Blass, Gr. of

:

(1 Jo.

19),

Prol., p.

125

etc. f.

(Ph. 3

:

1)

will illustrate

and

to ayanrdv

Indeed

linear action is obvious.^

so normal as to call for

ov hvpapai. TvoLtlp (Jo. 5

ToD TraTetp (Lu.

3

yp6.4>eLP

where the

the force of the pres. ment.'*

but a few further examples

avra

rd

:

Cf.

30.

Mt. 6

:

little

24)

;

com-

to deXetv

3:9); irpoaevx^adaL (1 Cor. 11 13); For the distinction between the :

Cf. Naylor, CI. Rev., 1906, p. 348.

N. T. Gk., p. 204. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 46.

*

Moulton,

Prol., p. 204.

TENSE and

aorist

pres. inf. see

Ac. 3

aireiv in

:

(XPONO2;)

kfxjSrjvai

— Kal

irpoayeiv

The frequent use

2.

891 (Mt. 14

:

and the

of /xeXXoj

Cf.

22).

pres. inf.

has already been twice mentioned.

In indirect discourse the merely represents the pres. ind. of the direct discourse. Cf. ehai (Mt. 22:23; Ro. 1:22); kK^aWetp (Lu. 11:18), etc. There is no instance in the N. T. of a pres. inf. in indir. discourse pres. inf.

representing an imperfect ind.^

h

Luke has a

periphrastic pres.

which occurs twice (9 18" Cf. 2 Chron. 15 16. 11:1). Only two fut. infs. in the N. T.' seem to be durative (Ac. 11:28; Jo. 21:25). The pres. inf. is most 'natural with h (cf. Lu. 8:40), and is common with 8ta (cf. Mt. 13 5 f.); ds (Ro. 12 2); but not (pres. 3, aor. 9) with wpos (Mk. 13:22). It is used only once with 7rp6 (Jo. 17:5) and is not used with fxera. Cf. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 49 f. 5. Participle. The present participle, like the present inf., is inf.,

Tc3

ahrov

elpaL

wpoaevxoiJ.ei'ov,

:

:

:

:

and durative. The Time of the Present Participle

timeless (a)

from the principal verb.

Thus

Relative.

Cf. TTuiXrjaas ijueyKev in verse 37) the time is past; in

(Mt. 6

:

27) the time

:

18),

6\povTaL tov vlbv

:

34.

nepifjLvcjp SOvarai,

present; in eaeade pLo-ovneuot (Mt. 10

is

(Mt. 6

6 jSXexwi' aTro86:aei

The time comes

in -KiSKovvT^s ^epov (Ac. 4

22),

:

tov avdpooirov epx6~

(24:30) it is future. Cf. Mt. 24:46; Lu. 5:4; ,12:43. Further examples of the pres. part, of coincident action are seen nepov

Mt. 27:41; Mk. 16

in

:

20; Jo.

6:6; 21:19; Ac. 9

:

10:44;

22;

19:9. (h)

Just as the pres. ind. sometimes has a futuristic

Futuristic.

may be used of the future in the sense of purpose (by implication only, however). Cf. euXoyovpra (Ac. 3 26); airayyeWovTas (15 27); haKovwv (Ro. 15 26). In Ac. 18 23, sense, so the pres. part,

:

:

:

the pres. part,

k^ri\Qev btepxoixtvos ttju TaXaTtKrju x<^po-v,

with the verb. ^ojievov

In 21

are futuristic

:

2

(cf.

f.

:

3:26; 15:27).

and

is

coincident

and aTvo(t>opTLBlass compares it with

the pres. parts.

Siairepc^v

epxonevov (1 9). This use of the pres. Thuc. (Gildersleeve, A. J. P., 1908, p. 408). (c) Descriptive. But usually the pres. part, is merely descriptive. Cf. Mk. 1 4; Ac. 20 9; 2 Cor. 3 18; 4 18. There is no notion of purpose in ayovres (Ac. 21 16). In tovs aoj^oixhovs (Ac. 2 47) the idea is probably iterative, but the descriptive durative is certainly all that is true of to us dy la^ofievovs in Heb. 10 14 (cf. 6 kpxofjLevos (Jo. 11

part,

is

common

:

27)

:

in

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

10

:

10). 1

Burton, N. T.

M. and

T., p. 52.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

892

Conative.

(d)

may

It

as in Teldo)v (Ac. 28

be conative

By

Antecedent Time.

(e)

like the pres. or imperf. ind.

23) or tovs dcrepxop.tvov% (Mt. 23

:

14).

:

may

implication also the pres. part,

be used to suggest antecedent time (a sort of "imperfect" part.). So Ti;
:

12

17; Ac. 4

:

34; 10

:

7; Gal. 1

:

:

Cf. 6 ^aTrri^oiv

23.

(Mk. 1:4).

An interesting example of the pres. (/) Indirect Discourse. part, with the object of a verb (a sort of indir. disc, with verbs of sensation)

The

found in

is

pres. part, is

14; 18 (g)

tive

:

20

1;

With

(cf.

:

nva

eldanev

common

Cf. Ac. 19

1, etc.).

The

the Article.

:

Rev. (10

ol

the article sometimes

much

loses

(Eph. 4

fr/roOires (2

8).

(h)

So

in Gal. 4: 27,

Past Action

ov r'lKTovaa,

17

So Mk. 5 N. T. Moods and Tenses, the pres. part.

:

25; Jo. 5

vire(XTpe\l/av ets T-qv

Tojv,

the aorist ind.

:

:

20).

He

28)= 'the rogue.' The part, with

:

cites

Cf.

to.

from the pa-

vTapxovTa (Lu.

ovk wblvovaa.

may

5; Ac. 24

be represented by Cf. Burton, 10. :

"subsequent" action

Blass^ finds :

Avarpav

is

11:

ovaap.

p. 59.

"Subsequent" Action. in the pres. parts, in Ac. 14 (i)

note

17

This

in Progress.

Still

1;

:

of its verbal force (Moulton,

Prol, p. 127; Kuhner-Gerth, I, p. 266). pyri, TOLS yafxovaL, C. P. R. 24 (ii/A.D.). :

13

1;

ttjv ttoXlv

35, yivcccrKeL

6 Kkkirroiv

Cf. 6 KaraUccv (Mt. 27:40);

19

:

present participle has often the itera-

So

pres. ind.) sense.

(Lu. 9 :49).

e/c/SaXXofra baiixovia

after dbov in

and 18

But

in 14

21

f.

—

eTrtarryptf o^res rds \}/vxo-S

"effective"

:

23.

twv

:

21

f.

fxadr]-

and accents the completion

merely coincident with the not a process in the aorist. "effective" stage. The few fut. parts, in the Participles. Future Durative (j) No unless to yev-qaofxepov durative, not punctiliar, be N. T. seem to is pretty clearly example this but durative, be (1 Cor. 15 37)

of the action.

The

pres.

part,

is

It is a point,

:

ingressive punctiliar.

IV. Perfected State of the Action (6 1.

(a)

xAcios

y\

o-vvt€\ik6s).

The Idea of the Perfect. The Present

Perfect.

The

oldest of the perfects.

"The

Such it was in the beginning undoubtedly. The past perfect and future perfect are both built upon the present perfect stem. Both are comparatively rare, The use was at first also confined especially the future perfect. to the indicative. Moulton {Prol, p. 140) calls it the most im-

perfect

is

a present perfect." ^

portant exegetically of the Greek tenses. 1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 198.

2

Gilders!.,

Am.

Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 121

Jour, of Philol., p. 395.

f.

TENSE (XPONOZ) The Intensive

(6)

This use

Perfect.

So

ably the origin of the tense. process

(Jo.

1

11:18);

was an

to the

Cor.

(1

effort to express this intensive or iterative idea.

an action just accomplished,

is

near

m

So

like eyvwv tI

idea to the present perfect, though

More about

a difference.

is

eupaKeu

Reduphcation, though not always

(Ac. 25:11).

(Lu. 16:4),

TroLr]cro)

17),

:

:

ddiKoj

The

fjLe/jLvrjfxaL.

12

The "effective" aoristic present is close kin we have already seen in tjkoj (Lu. 15 27); d/couco

likewise the aorist of

there

Cor.

18).

:

perfect, as

used,

seen in direaTaXKa (2

is

was prob-

(or the iterative)

6XXi;^cat='I perish,' 6XwXa = 'I

Cf. also dvquKW, Tedv-qKa; iXLixvqaKW,

perish utterly.'^ iterative

893

the intensive perfect a

little

later. (c)

The Extensive

This comes to be the usual force

Perfect.

Gildersleeve^ has put the thing finely:

of the tense.

looks at both ends of an action."

present and aorist, since

That

"The

It "unites in itself as

perfect it

were

expresses the continuance of com-

it

both punctiliar and an action as finished, the linear present as durative, but the perfect presents a completed state or condition. When the action was completed the

pleted action."^

The

durative.

is

to say, the perfect

perfect tense does not say.

It is

by speaker or John the Baptist

use of the tense

mouth

the

of

some weeks

still

complete at the time of the In Jo. 1 32 reSea/xai in

writer.

:

refers to the

baptism of Jesus

but he still has the vision. Cf. 1 34, etppaKa where there is a difference of time between the

before,

Kal fj.eiJiapTvpr]Ka,

:

When Andrew

two words.

is

aorist (pmictiliar) represents

said to Peter

evpriKap-ev (1

:

41) his dis-

and vivid. No single graph for the perfect can In some cases the line of coiuiection from therefore be made. the act (punctiliar) to the time of speaking would be very short, covery

is

in others

recent

very long.

This

line of

connection

tion of the perfect tense as distinct

a matter of

fact, in

the perfect

it

is

just the contribu-

As

from aorist and present.

the combination of punctiliar and durative in

begins with the punctiliar and goes on with the

but the emphasis may be now on the In others the two are drawn almost to a point, but not quite. In still others there is a broken continuity thus (A ••••>•••• B).'* It is the perfect of repeated durative thus

punctiliar,

action.

(•

),

now on

the durative.

Cf. Jo. 1:18; 5:37; 2 Cor. 12:17.

and D.'s Handb.,

»

Jebb

2

Synt., p. 99.

Cf. also

»

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

*

Moulton,

in V.

Am.

Prol., p. 144.

p. 327.

Cf. Giles, Man., pp. 449, 491

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 395

p. 198.

f.

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

894

Idea of Time in the Tense.

(d)

NEW TESTAMENT

In the ind.

it

appears in

three forms with the notion of time (past perfect, present per-

future perfect).

fect,

fect occurs,

but

it

In the other modes only the present per-

has no time in

itself

and

and

in the imper.

Often in the N. T., as in the Attic writers/ a sharp distinction is drawn between the perfect and the aorist or the present. Cf. fxapTvpel with aTearaXKev and lueiiapTvprjsubj. is naturally future.

Kev in Jo.

5

:

36

f.

elariyayev

;

Kai OTL eyrjyepTaL (1

— Kal KeKoivooKev (Ac. 21 28); — eKVLarai (Col. 4)

6tl ercKprj,

:

:

;

eKTiadr]

1

:

16)

;

rjaav,

The perfect active is frequently inhas been already shown under Voice. Cf. 'iar-qfiL,

eScoKas, TerripriKas

transitive,^ as

Cor. 15

(Jo. 17:6).

eaTr]Ka, aTroXXu/zt, airoXcoXa, etc.

The

2.

is

Indicative.

The Present Perfect

(a)

not clear

how

tense in the ind. since

say

inf.

and

evearws avvTeKiKos

(6

the notion of present time

conveyed by

It this

absent in the subj. and imper., not to

it is

Gildersleeve suggests that

part.

irapaKelixevos) .

rj

is

it

"comes from the

absence of the augment and from the fact that a completed phenomenon cannot complete itself in the future." But that explanation

is

not very satisfactory.

The

tense does occur some-

times in the future, and the present perfect

on

Perhaps at

is

older than the past

was just the perfect tense (cf. aoristic presents and timeless aorists) and was timeless. By degrees it came to be used only for present time. The rise of The pres. perf. is much more the past perfect made it clear. common in the kolvt] than in the earlier Greek. "The perfect was increasingly used, as the language grew older, for what would formerly have been a narrative aorist" (Moulton, Prol., p. 141). perfect which rests

it.

first it

In particular is this true of the vernacular as the papyri show. (a) The Intensive Present Perfect. Moulton^ calls these "PerThey are Pcrfeda Praesentia. In fects with Present Force." reality they are perfects where the punctiliar force is dropped and only the durative remains (cf. past perfect). Gildersleeve'' distinguishes sharply between the intensive use of emotional verbs and what he calls the "Perfect of Maintenance of Result." But it is

questionable

if

the difference does not

lie

in the nature of the

verb rather than in a special modification of the tense. A real distinction exists in 1 Jo. 4 14 between redeaneda and fxaprvpovBurton^ follows Gildersleeve, but he admits the doubt on p.ev. :

2

Man., p. 493. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 23.

3

Prol., p. 147.

1

Giles,

^

Synt., p. 99

^

N. T. M. and

f.

T., p.

37

f.

;

TENSE (XPONOS) In

the subject.^

punctiHar notion

The list mind is

due to the change

has

perfect

the

lost

meaning of the verbs.^ Homer, particularly where attitude of

rather large in

is

when the

these verbs

it is

895

in

Giles (Man., p. 481) thinks that originally

expressed.^

the perf. was either intensive or iterative like

earriKa,

the notion of recently completed action (extensive)

is

and that

a develop-

ment. These almost purely durative perfects in the N. T. may be illustrated by eoiKa (Jas. 1:6); auecoya (2 Cor. 6: 11); oUa (Mt. 6:8); eVrr^/ca (Rev. 3 20) hearrjKa (2 Th. 2:2); TrkiroLda (Ph. 2 24) ;

:

KUpayev (Jo.

:

which

15)

:

an example

is

and due according to

intensives

Cor. 11

(1

neiJLvr]iJ.aL

1

:

of Gildersleeve's emotional

Blass'' to the "literary

2); redprjKa (Lu.

Most

8 :49).

language,"

of these verbs

have an inchoative or conative or iterative sense in the present. Moulton^ has shown from the LXX and the papyri that KeKpaya is vernacular kolpti and not merely literary. He thinks that, whfle Kpa^co in the LXX is durative, KeKpaya is merely punctiliar. See

The

(6)

It is possible also that ireTnarthKafxev koI

Aoristic Perfect.

It is less open to dispute that 69) belong here. Cf. KeKolnriTaL (Jo. 11:11). KaTa^e^rjKa (Jo. 6 38) is a present state. eyvcoKaiJLev (Jo.

6

:

:

But more doubtful (Ro. 8

7r€7r€io-/xat

:

are ^XwLKa (Jo. 5

38).^

:

45)

;

T]yr]p.aL

But. TerapaKTaL (Jo. 12

:

27)

(Ac. 26 seems to

:

2) fall

under the intensive perfect. Cf. eorcbs elfxl (Ac. 25 10). (/S) The Extensive Present Perfect = a completed state. This act may be durative-punctiliar like ^yytKev (Mt. 3 2) with a :

:

Cf. thus rjywptafxaL, rereXeKa, TerrjprjKa (2 backward look ( •). Tim. 4:7). This consummative effect is seen in TerrjprjKap (Jo. Cf. Heb. 17:6), e\r]\vdev (12:23) and TreTrXr/pwKare (Ac. 5:28).

8 13; 10 14. In Jo. 20 29, 6tl tcjpa/cas fxe TreiricrTevKas, thc^ culmination is just reached a few moments before. But more fre:

:

quently act

is

Jo. 19

it is

:

the punctiliar-durative perfect where the completed

followed :

by a

state of greater or less duration (•

22, o yeypacfta ykypa^a,

we have an example

).

of each.

In Cf.

common

yeypawraL (Mt. 4:7). 'It was written (punctiliar) on record' (durative). Thus is to be explained instances like etprjKev in Heb. 10: 9 (cf. elirou in 10 7). 'The statement is on record.' It is only in appearance that wpoaeprjvoxep and TreTroir}Kev (Heb. 11 This common usage in 17, 28) seem different. Hebrews has been compared to that in Thuc. vol. I, pp. 2, 6, etc. the

and

still

is

:

:

1

Cf. Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 2G9

'

Goodwin, M. and Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

* 6

ProL, p. 147.

T., p. 15. p. 198.

»

Monro,

f.

Iloni. Cr., p. 22.

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 347 lb.;

f.

Bkss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

896

Cf. further Heb. 7:6, 9, 11, 13, 16, 20, 23, where the permanence of the Jewash institutions is discussed. Jo. 6 25 ykyovas :

has punctiUar and durative ideas ('earnest and art here'). Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 347. In Col. 1 15 kKriadr] is merely punc:

while in verse 16 eKTiarai adds the durative idea, whereas

tiliar,

and

in verse 17 again crweaTtjKep has lost the punctiliar

durative.

In

1

Cor. 15

4

:

eyr^yepTaL

only

is

stands between two aorists

because Paul wishes to emphasize the idea that Jesus is still Usually riyepQ-q was sufficient, but not here. Cf. eaTrjpiKTaL risen. (Lu. 16 26). :

Cf. cKjikuvraL (Lu. 5

:

23)

;

34, 41; 5:33, 36

Cf

In chapter 17 the present perfects

ff.

special attention.

Cf.

1

Jo. 1

:

1

John

eKKexvrai (Ro. 5:5).

especially fond of this use of the present perfect.

is

for contrast

.

1

:

32,

call for

between the pres-

ent perfect and the aorist.

The Present Perfect of Broken Continuity. ^ As already exwe here have a series of links rather than a line, a broken graph (••••>••••). Perhaps rerpaxa. rt in Ac. 25 11 is to be so (7)

plained,

:

But

understood.

certainly

it is

true of aTeaToXKa (2 Cor. 12

:

17)

where Paul refers to various missions to the Corinthians. In particular Moulton^ notes the examples with Trcorore, as ovSels €upaK€v

TrcoTTore (Jo.

\evKapLev (8

1

:

18).

Cf. further

(5

fxe/jiapTvprjKev

:

37); SeSou-

33).

:

Here an action (5) The Dramatic Historical Present Perfect. completed in the past is conceived in terms of the present time for the sake of vividness. Burton ^ doubts if any genuine examples of the vivid historical perfect occur in the N. T. (Jo. 1

:

15) is

a vivid

liistorical

tense even

if

Certainly KeKpayev

only intensive in sense.

Cf. /SapTvpei just before. But by the term "historical" it is not meant that this use of the perfect is common in all narrative. But the VecUc Sanskrit has it often in narrative. It is a matter of personal equation after all. Thus Xenophon, who "affects naivete," uses the present perfect much more frequently than Herodotus and Thucydides.'* It is rather the tense of the orator Hence Isocrates and or the dramatist and is often rhetorical.^ Demosthenes surpass Plato in the use of the present perfect. "The nearness of any department of literature to practical life may readily be measured by the perfect."*^ Moulton^ notes how in the papyri there 1

is

an increasing use

of the present perfect just

Cf. Moulton, ProL, p. 144.

2

lb.

3

N. T. M. and

6

Gildersl.,

.

Am.

T., p. 38.

Am.

"

Gildersl.,

«

Thompson,

Jour. Philol., 1908, p. 396.

Jour. Philol.,

XXIX,

p. 396.

Synt., p. 216. '

Prol., p. 141.

TENSE (XPONOS)

897

because it is so largely the language of life. He notes also howSocrates in Plato's Crito uses this vivid present perfect: "reKnaipo/JLUL tK TLVOS kvvTvviov, ewpaKa oXiyov irpoTepov Taurrjs rrjs vvktos,

where point of time the aorist

would have el8ov as inevital:)le as had not Socrates meant to emphasize the

in the past

in English,

is

This vivid perfect

present vividness of the vision."

One only needs

John's Gospel in particular.

nation himself.

So

evpriKafxev

is found in have some imagi-

John still has that vision. would have been prosaic. Cf. also a realistic change. (Cf. 1 19 ff.) So also 35; KeKolpo^Keu in 21 28 and Te-n-ol-qKa in 2 Cor.

Cf. Tedkaixai (1:32).

(1:41).

aTreaToXKare (5

to

33),

:

aireaToXKeu in Ac. 7:

The

aorist

:

:

11 25. A striking instance of it is seen in Rev. 5:7, d\y](j)tv, where John sees Jesus with the book in his hand. It is dull to make tl\r}4>€v here = eXa/3ej'. Another example of this vivid perfect is t(xxy]Kap.tv (2 Cor. 1:9), a dreadful memory to Paul. So with 5. A particularly good instance is yeyoueu (Mt. 25 ecxxTiKev in 7 6), where the present perfect notes the sudden cry (cf. aorist :

:

and imperf.

:

just before).

observed that

Cf.

e'iprjKev

and quite naturally

so, for .the

imagination

to be explained aweX-qXvdev (Jas. 1 sees the

'He has gone

man.

:

24)

ally reported speech." ^ :

Cf.

Mt. 13

In Lu. 9

a.Kr]K6ap.ev

is

:

Blass^ has

9.

at play.

between two

Cf.

off.'

Travra oaa elx^v Kal riyopaaev avTOV.

15

in 2 Cor. 12

occurs sometimes in parables or illustrations,

it

(Ac.

:

:

46,

aorists. a-rvekOoiv

36 edpaKav

6:11, but

is

Thus is James werpaKev

"virtu-

r]Kovaap.ev in

24).

The Gnomic Present Perfect. A few examples of this idiom seem to appear in the N. T. The present was always the more usual tense for customary truths,'' though the aorist and the per(e)

both occur.

fect

39)'*; KeKpLTaL TreirXiipo^Kev

and

(13

:

Cf. rereXetcorat (1 Jo. 2:5); SeSeraL (1 Cor. 7 TreirlaTevKeu (Jo.

8).

Cf. Jo. 5

:

3

:

18); KaraKiKpLtaL (Ro. 14

24; Jas. 2

:

:

:

23);

10.

The Perfect in Indirect Discourse. It is misleading to say, as Blass^ does, that "the perfect is used relatively instead of the pluperfect" in such instances. This is explaining Greek from the German. Blass does not call this construction "indirect discourse," but merely "after verbs of perception"; but see my discussion of Indirect Discourse in ch. XIX. Cf. Lu. 9 36 ovSeul a.irT}yyeCkav ovdev Siv ioipaKav, Ac. 10 45 k^earrjaav otl eK/cexw^ai. (f)

:

:

In

Mk. >

2

*

5

:

33, dSvXa 6 yeyoueu avrfj riXdev, the perfect preserves the

of N. T. Gk., p. 200. Moulton, Prol., p. 144. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 53 C.r.

f.

M. and

"

Burton, N. T.

6

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200.

T., p. 39.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

898

woman's consciousness.

vividness of the

or the aorist could have been used

27: 18; Ac. 19:32). historical perfect.

It is It is

(cf.

not the perfects here that

curs in a futuristic sense, perfect so used also

may

perfect

:

2

f.

earaL

(cf.

phetico-perfect."

demand

discussion.

Since the present so often oc-

not strange 5e56^ao-/xat

and

we

if

find the present

This proleptical use of the

perfect.

be illustrated by

22), TereXeo-rat (19

5

it is

= future

call for expla-

It is rather the occasional

past perfects that

Futuristic Present Perfect.

(77)

:

akin to the reportorial vividness of the

nation from the Greek point of view. aorists, imperfects or

Here the past perfect 15 10; Mt.

Mk. 3:8;

(Jo. 17:10), dedcjKa (17:

and KarlcoTaL in Jas. sometimes called "proIndeed some of the examples classed as gnomic :

28), ae(rr]Tev

/cat (jiayerai).

yeyovev

This use

is

Cf. Jo. 3 18; 5 24; Jas. 2 10; Ro. 13:8; 14 23.i The Present Perfect is {&) The " Aoristic" Present Perfect. here conceived as a mere punctiliar preterit like the aorist ind. We have seen how in some verbs the punctiliar idea drops out and only the durative remains in some present perfect forms (Hke It is not per se unreasonable to suppose that with some oUa). other verbs the durative idea should disappear and the form be merely punctiliar. We seem to have this situation in KeKpaya in

are really proleptical also.

:

:

:

:

the

LXX

(Moulton, ProL,

p. 147).

The

action

itself

took place

though the state following its completion is present. By centering attention on the former, while forgetting the latter, the perfect becomes aoristic. We must distinguish between the We have seen aoristic (punctiliar) and the preterit notions. that originally the tense was probably timeless. Nothing, then, but an appeal to the facts can decide whether in the N. T. the in the past

present perf. ind. ever = the aor. ind.

The

(i.e.

is

preterit punctiliar).

Sanskrit 2 shows a deal of confusion and freedom in the use

of the pres. perf. ind.

forms in Latin

is

The blending

of the perfect

and

aorist

also a point to note in spite of the independence

Greek tense development. E. J. Goodspeed (Am. J. TheoL, X, 102 f.) regards Latin as having some influence on the ultimate confusion in the Greek. There is no doubt of the ultimate confusion in the late Greek^ (from a.d. 300 on) between the perfect and the aorist (see later). The use of -drjKa and ~7]Ka in the aorist pass. ind. in modern Greek illustrates one way confusion could of the

1

2 3

Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 15; Gildersleeve, Synt., Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 296. Jann., liist. Gk. Gr., p. 440; Moulton, Prol., p. 142.

p. 101.

TENSE (XPONOS)

899

(Thumb, Handb., p. 144). Cf. e5oo/ca, 5e5oj/ca. In the modern Greek all other remnants of the old perfect form are gone save in the participle, which has lost its redupUcation, like Senkpos. But had it begun in the older Greek? Jannaris^ answers Yes and ovre Xoyoy pa4>0L cites Thuc. 1, 21, ovre ws TTOtTjrat v/xprjKaaL arise

—

But

^vvedeaav.

this

may

be the dramatic

m

historical

perfect.

Jebb" answers Yes and quotes Demosthenes and Lucian; but these again may be merely the rhetorical dramatic perfect. The grammarians and scholiasts, under the influence of the Latin, did

come

to lose

all

consciousness of any distinction and explained

one tense by the other.^ The present perfect was always more common in every-day life, as we have noted. The papyri prove this abundantly.* Moreover, the present perfect grew in popular use at the expense of the aorist, where the aorist might have been employed. There is thus no strong presumption against the possibility of

such confusion in the N. T.

Besides, "the line between

and perfect is not always easy to draw."^ This is especially true of an event just past which may be described by either Moulton'^ admits that "the LXX and inscriptions show tense. a few examples of a semi-aoristic perfect in the pre-Roman age,

aorist

which, as

Thumb

remarks (Hellenismus, p. was working" thus

idea that Latin influence rightly rejects

tScbi'

on

6 Xaos

early.

But Moulton

32 1) as an Simcox^ says that "no one but likely to deny that in Rev. 5:7;

KexpovLKe M.oovarjs (Ex.

instance (merely oratio obliqua).

a doctrinaire special pleader

153), disposes of the

is

:

8 5, e[Kr](f)ev, and in 7 14, e'iprjKa, are mere preterits in sense." Well, I do deny it as to e[\T](f)ev in Rev. 5 7 and 8 5, where we have the vivid dramatic colloquial historical perfect. The same thing is possible with etprjKa in 7 14, but I waive that for the moment. Burton^ is more cautious. He claims that the N. T. writers "had perfect command of the distinction between the aorist and the perfect," but achnits that "there is clear evidence that the perfect tense was in the N. T. sometimes an aorist in force," though "the idiom is confined within narrow limits." Some of the examples claimed by him for this usage I have exMoulton^ sees that this confusion plained otherwise already. may exist in one writer, though not in another, but he admits a :

:

:

:

:

Gk. Gr.,

p. 439.

1

Hist.

*

V. and D., Handb., p. 328.

»

lb.; Jann., Hist.

*

Moulton,

6

lb.

Gk. Gr.,

Prol., p. 141.

p.

339

f.

«

jh., p. 142.

^

Lang, of the N. T., p. 104. n. T. M. and T., p. 44. Prol., pp. 143 fT.

^ »

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

900

"residuum of genuinely aoristic perfects." He admits ykyova be "perplexing," though in the 45 examples in the ind. in the N. T. "it has obviously present time" and "the aoristic sense is not really proved for any of them." That is certainly true. There are instances in the N. T., as in the later Greek generally/ where yeyova approaches a present in sense, as in 1 Cor. 13: 11, but its use as a mere preterit is not shown, not even by the examples quoted by Moulton^ from the papyri (O. P. 478 and B. U. 136). The first has irpoa^e^rjKhaL yeyovhaL to

—

—

TereKevKevaL, all

three apparently vivid historical

example in Josephus {Apion, 4

:

21)

admit as an

aorist in sense, since

may The

left ei\r]4>a, dpr]Ka, eaxv^a, vrerpa/ca.

perfects.

The

We have Moulton' refuses to

be the same. last

"the distinction

is

very clearly

seen in papyri for some centuries" between TrewpaKa and ijybpaaa.

He

cites O. P.

482

torical

(ii/A.D.), X'^pts S>v

kol ireTrpaKa.

Be-

:

papyri, like ovk e\ovaap.r]v ovk

As

to eaxvKo- the matter

2

13).

:

b.ireypa-\i/ap.r]v

Mt. 13 46 ireirpaKev is in a vivid parable (dramatic hisperfect). Moulton notes the confusion as worse in illiterate

sides in

is

r;Xt^te

more

(=

ryXet/x/xat),

0. P. 528 (ii/A.D.).

plausible in one example (2 Cor.

Blass^ affirms the true present perfect sense for ecxxvKa

elsewhere in the N. T. (Mk. 5

Moulton^

:

15; 2 Cor. 1

:

9; 7

:

Ro. 5

5;

:

2).

"we must, I think, treat all the Pauline But why? He does not claim such uniformity

replies that

passages alike."

any N. T. writer.^ There is some analogy between and WrjKa and cKprJKa, and eaxov may be ingressive, not constative. Moulton (ProL, p. 145) makes a good deal out of the fact that eaxov occurs only 20 times in the N. T. and that thus eaxriiioi may have come to mean 'possessed' (constative), but he for yeyova in ea-xv^o-

admits that this does not suit in Ro. 5 2. He example from B. U. 297 (ii/A.D.) to7s dualav alriav TLVos (A'^.

aiJ.4>L(7J3r}Tr}(jeo:s

ev

rfj

Radermacher kolvyj comes Thackeray (Gr., p. 24)

T. Gr., p. 122) thinks that the perfect in the

within the sphere of the aorist at times. thinks that

e'L\r](i)a

here.

But

ample

(2 Cor.

matical.

here

eaxiKoa-i Kal avev

(=—ots).

yeuofxevovs

vojj.fj

a possible

cites

:

is

Dan.

in

4

:

30^ and

2:13;

The only

cf

.

2 Cor. 7:5),

it

is

:

at least quite proble-

substantial plea for taking eaxvxo- as preterit

the fact that Paul did have »

3 M. 5 20, belong made out from one ex-

eaxTT^o.,

the whole case has to be

if

di^eats

for his spirit after Titus

Cf. Buresch, Fkyouai' (Rh. M., 1891, p. 231 note).

2

Prol., p. 146.

»

lb., p. 142.

6

Prol., p. 145.

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200.

«

jt,.,

p.

UQ,

TENSE (XPONOS) came.

But

it

was a

partial

as the Epistle shows.

iivecns

therefore possible that in 2 Cor. 2

:

901

13

we do have a

It is

present per-

fect = preterit punctiliar (cf.

e^r]\9oi>), possible but not quite cerwished to accent the strain of his anxiety have Paul may tain. of Titus. The aorist would not have arrival the up to the time of not have noted the end of his would imperfect The done that. punctiliar. Only the past perfect plus durative It was anxiety.

and the present perfect could do both. The experience may have seemed too vivid to Paul for the past perfect. Hence he uses the That is certainly a pos(historical dramatic) present perfect. Moulton (Prol., p. 238) in the sible interpretation of his idea. Additional Notes draws back a bit from the preterit use of He had advanced it "with great hesitation" and as "a eaxrjKa.

"The pure

tentative account."

perfect force

irapa (xou 5td

have received and

e'lprjKa left.

Take

/cat

found long after 6/X0X07W kaxw'^vai

x^vo? e^ oIkov xPWi-^ evroKov (B. U. 1015 in the early still possess.' " We have eiXT/^a and

iii/A.D.), 'to

€tXrj0as

is

lOU,

Paul's day: thus in the formula of an

In Rev. 3

elX-qcjia.

rjKovaas Kal rripei,

:

3

ixeTavbrjaov

/cat

we have It

.

is

nvrjuoveve ovv ttws

preceded by

evprjKa

an exhortation about the future. The perfect If ijKovaas had been aKrjKoas no difficulty would exist. would emphasize the permanence of the obligation. It is as easy Both to say that rj/couo-as = a perfect as that etXrj<^as = an aorist. are abstractly possible and neither may be true. The reception may seem more a matter to be emphasized as durative than the Cf. It is a fine point, but it is possible. hearing (punctiliar). Cf. Jo. 3 32. The mere fact 19. TreTol-qKev /cat ekerjaev in Mk. 5 of the use of aorists and perfects side by side does not prove confusion of tenses. It rather argues the other way. It is possible with Blass^ to see the force of each tense in IdopaKev and ^Kovaeu Note also dar^yayev Kal KeKoivooKtv in Jo. 3 32 (cf. 1 Jo. 1 1-3). (Ac. 21 28). Cf. Lu. 4 18 where Nestle puts period after fxe. Moulton 2 does find such confusion in the illiterate documents among the papyri. Simcox (Lang, of the N. T., p. 105) wishes to know what "distinction of sense" exists between eXajSov and Tere"EKajSou 12. It is very simple and very clear. Xelcofxai in Ph. 3

in the proper sense.

This

is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

denies the sufficiency of Paul's past achievement, nies

it

plained etXr70a in Rev. 5

about TTjv

Cf. Ro. 13

as a present reality.

etXrj^a in

neyaXrjv »

/cat

2

:

28.

:

7

and 8

In 11

:

:

5.

:

12.

There

17 again, 6rt

e^aalXevaas, it is

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199.

I is

rereXttojAtat

de-

have already exsurely no trouble

€tX7jc/>es

rriv

dvvaniv

(tov

not etXij^cs (punctiliar-durative, 2

Prol., p.

U2

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

902

NEW TESTAMENT

and still hast') that calls for explanation, but e^atrlwhich may be used to accent the ingressive idea or as a

'receivedst 'Kevaas,

The

practical equivalent of the perfect.

use of

(Rev. 7

etpTj/ca

:

14) and etprjKav (19 3) seems more like a real preterit than anyother examples in the N. T. In 7 14, B reads elirov. I would not labour the point over these two examples. If such a confusion of tenses occurred anywhere in the N. T., the Apocalypse would be the place to expect it. And yet even the Apocalypse is :

:

word in its defence on this point in spite of the fact that Moultoni "frankly yields" these instances and Blass^ says that "the popular intermixture of the two tenses appears undoubtedly in the Apocalypse." It is to be remembered that the

entitled to a

It is just is a series of visions, is intensely dramatic. here that the rhetorical dramatic (historical) perfect so freely granted in the orators would be found. It is wholly possible that "In history the in this use of e'ipriKa we have only this idiom.

ApocaljTDse

no place outside of the speeches and the reflective passages in which the author has his say."^ It is curious how aptly Gildersleeve here describes these very instances of the So I conclude by present perfect which are called "aoristic."

perfect has

saying that the N. T. writers' may be guilty of this idiom," but they have not as yet been proven to be. Cf. kxapvv otl evprjKa in 2 Jo. 4. The distinction between the perf. and pres. is sharply

drawn

in Jas. 3

7, 5a/^aferat Kal bebajxacxTaL.

:

The Periphrastic

(0

For the origin

Perfect.

of this idiom see

The use of triumphant in modern

discussion in cormection with the Past Perfect,

(&),

(??).

exw (so common in later Greek and finally Greek) has a few parallels in the N. T.^ Cf. exe jue TvapriTrip.kvov Cf. exco (Lu. 14 19 f.) with Latin idiom "I have him beaten." 'ixoiv rriv Kdp.eva (Lu. 12 19, pres. part, used as perf.), e^Tipaixixev^v :

:

xelpa

(Mk. 3:1).

Cf.

Mk.

8

:

18;

Heb. 5

—

:

14; Jo. 17

:

13, ex<^atu

of course, predicate, but

Here the perf. part, is, KeTr\t]po:p.kvy]v. the idiom grew out of such examples. The modern Greek uses not only exw befxevo, but also Se/iem, but, if a conjunctive pron. precedes, the part, agrees in gender

So

Ti]v

Passive

exw

Ibcoiihv,

'I

is el/xaL btukvos.

1

Prol., p. 145.

3

Gildersl.,

Am.

have

seen her'

The use

of

and number (cf. French). (Thumb, Handh., p. 162).

-^IvoixaL is

""

Cf. tykvero

limited.

Gr. of N. T.

Gk,

p. 200.

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 396.

« E. J. Goodspeed (Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 102 the ostraoa confirm the pap. in the free use of the perfect. 6 Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 438.

f.)

shows that

.

903

TENSE (XPONOS)

See 10), a mixture of tenses (of. Mk. 9:3). Ex. 17: 12; Ps. 72 14. Peculiar is yeyovare exovres in Heb. 5 12. It is eifML that is commonly used (al)out 40 times in the N. T.) kaKOTcouhr] (Rcv. 16

:

:

:

with the perfect part. Cf. Num. 22:12; Is. 10:20. Burton' notes that the intensive use of the perfect tense (cf. past perfect) As examples of the intenis more common than the extensive. sive (= present) take

TreireLcrfxevos

earip (Lu.

20

:

So Jo. 2

6).

:

17;

For the extensive use (= completed act) note karlv So Jo. 6 31; Heb. 4 2, etc. In Ac. ireTpaynevov (Lu. 23 15). 26 26 the main accent is on the punctiliar aspect (at the begin-

Ac. 2

13, etc.

:

:

:

:

:

ning, as in Jo. 6

:

31).

These examples, like rf/cco, have already been discussed under 1, (a), Tim. 4:8).

Present as Perfect.

(k)

o/xai, KfiixaL,

KtiTai,

(2

(&)

The Past Perfect

(a)

The Double Idea.

irapeLfxt, y]Tra-

Cf. dTro-

(ry).

(6 virepavvT^XiKos)

It

is

the perfect of the past and uses the

form of the present perfect plus special endings and often with augment. The special endings ^ show kinship with the aorist. As the present perfect is a blending in idea of the aoristic (punctiliar)

and the durative present

(a sort of durative aoristic present

combined), so the past perfect is a blend of the aorist and the imperfect in idea.^ It is continuance of the completed state in past time up to a prescribed limit in the past. As in the present perfect, so here the relation

between the punctiliar and the dura-

vary in different verbs. The name vTepawTeXiKos (plus-quam-perfectum) = more than perfect in the sense that it always refers to an antecedent date, "a past prior to another

tive ideas will

past"^

is

not always true.

A

Luxury in Greek. The Greeks cared nothing for relative time, though that was not the only use for the past perfect, Ordinarily the aorist ind. was sufficient for a as just stated.^ narrative unless the durative idea was wanted when the imperfect was ready to hand. Herodotus shows a fondness for the past It disappeared in Greek before the present perfect,^ perfect.^ though in the N. T. it still survives in current, but not common, It was never so frequent in Greek as the past perfect usage.** (0)

1

» *

N. T. M. and T., p. 40. Giles, Man., p. 457. Moulton, Prol., p. 14S.

It is

«

Blass, Gr. of

*

Thompson,

N. T. Gk.,

p. 201.

Synt., p. 217.

absent from the Boeotian

dial.

(Claflin,

Synt., etc., p. 72). «

Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 122.

7

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 441.

»

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 201.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

904 was

The N. T. idiom conforms

in Latin.

to that of the older

language.

Present perfects that had (7) The Intensive Past Perfect. come to be mere presents through accent on the durative idea and loss of emphasis on the aoristic (punctiliar) are virtual imCf. us elo^deL (Mk. 10 1). perfects when turned into the past. :

So

xiSeLv

(Jo. 1

:

31),

l<jT7]Kei(xav

(Jo. 19

:

25;

cf.

Ac.

1

:

10

f.),

kwe-

11:22) and even kyvuKeire (Mt. 12:7)/ for eyuooKa sometimes is used like oUa (1 Jo. 2 4). So with ^p airoXoAo^s (Lu. irolda

(Lu.

:

15

24;

:

cf.

Here we have a mere existing

evpedrj).

state in the

past with the obscuration of the idea of completion (aoristic-

But it is to be noted that the durative sense is usually meaning from the aoristic sense. Cf. oUa from eUov. changed a For this idiom in classic Greek see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 103. Cf. also E. Schwartz, Index to Eus., pp. 214 ff. The past perfect usually pre(5) The Extensive Past Perfect. sents a completed state or fixed condition in past time. As already In said, it is not necessarily "a blend of past and prseterpast."^ Latin the past perfect shows no trace of the Aktionsart of the perThe Greek past fect; the past perfect is just time relatively past. perfect expresses a state following a completed act in past time.^ Sometimes it is made clear by the context that a considerable space of time had intervened, though this is quite incidental with punctiliar).

Take

the Greek. xpos avTovs 6

Jo. 6

:

17,

/cat

The verb

'Iriaovs.

a-KOTia

and the verb following

(descriptive)

time of these imperfects

is,

rj5?j

kyeyoveu Kal ovrco eXrjXWeL

in the sentence before is dceyelpero

of course, past.

is

i]PxoPTo

The

(inchoative).

But the two

interven-

ing past perfects indicate stages in the going (^pxovro) before

Both TJSrj and ovtco help to accent the they reached the shore. between the first darkness and the final appearance of Jesus which is soon expressed by the vivid historical present, decopovaLP (6 Here we have a past behind a past beyond a 19). doubt from the standpoint of the writer, and that is the very reason why John used the past perfect here. In verse 16, cos 5e 6\j/la kyepero Kark^-qaap ol fxadriTal, he had been content with the aorist in both the principal and the subordinate clauses. He had not interval

:

cared there to express relative time, to stress the interval at

The

tenses in Jo. 6

study.

:

1

Moulton,

Brugmann, K. Vergl. ff.

Prol., p. 148.

=

Gilders!.,

Am.

Gr., pp. 5G9, 576. ^

all.

interesting

John'* does, as a matter of fact, use the past perfect

»

120

by the way, form a very

16-21,

more

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 397.

Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., pp.

Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 349.

9 .

TENSE

905

(xpoNo:;)

frequently than do the Synoptists.

He

uses

it

to take the reader

"behind the scenes" and often throws it in by way of parenthesis. Thus in 1 24 the past perfect aTeaToXfxepoL rjaav points back to the aorist airea-TeLXav in 1 19. In 4 8 aTreXrjXvdeLaau is a parenthetical explanation of what the disciples hatl done before this So in 9 22 aweTtdeiVTo has rJ^Tj and incident with the woman. notes a previous agreement. In 11 13 etpTj/cet points to a time The tenses in 11:11-13 are all injust before, but note Uo^av. :

:

:

:

:

teresting

(eiTre,

Xe7€i, el-KOV, dpi]KeL,

K€KoliJ.r]VTai.,

iropevofxai, (Tcodrja-eTaL)

and in 11 30, marked. Cf. also 11 44, TrepLedeSero. In 11 57 dedcoKeLaav points backward as is true of ouSeTrco ovdeh rjv In 3 24 and 7:30; 8 20, the standpoint is TedeLfxevos (19 :41). later than the event described, but none the less it stretches backward though from a relatively future time. But this disCf. Mt. 7 25, TedefieXicoTo, tinction is not confined to John. which points back to verse 24. So in Mk. 14 44 deScoKet refers to In 11

ouTTOJ

19 eX7}\vdeLaav denotes antecedent action,

:

eX-, the interval is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Mk.

Cf. also eK^e^XfjKei. in

Judas' previous arrangement.

16

:

with ect)avr]. The tenses in Mk. 15 6-10 are interesting. The three past perfects all refer to antecedent action. Cf. uKo86fiT]To with i^yayou in Lu. 4 29, and with eiropeveTo in verse 30. In Lu. 16 20 e^e^\r]To suggests that the poor man had been at the door some while. In Ac. 4 22 yeybvei (cf. rCg yeyovbri) does not pre:

:

:

:

cede airekvaav (verse 21) by any great terval

with

is

real

3

(cf.

In 14

k(TTLV 6 Topdrjaas.

27 and 31.

amount

In Ac. 9

1-10).^

:

In 14

23

:

:

21

of time, yet the in-

e\r]\vdeL

cf. ireinaTehKeLaav

26 the reference

contrasted

is

with

irapkdevTO.

the begin-

to

Cf. Ac. 4 In 20 16, neKpiKei, and 20 38, ning of the tour from Antioch. eipr]KeL, the two ends of the action nearly come together, but in, :

:

is

:

:

21:29 the antecedent action dei

— dXX'

come out

rjv

—

well.

SeSchKetaav,

In 11

:

56

f.

In Jo. 11:30,

is clear.

oTTov vTTTjvTrjaev,

oijTrcoe

XtjXu-

the three past tenses of the ind.

tL 5o/cet v/uv; otl ov

jUt)

eX^jj els T-qv eopr-qv;

the three kinds of time (present, future, past) are

employed. cav TO

€TL

But

irpCiTov

in 12

— Tore

:

epvriadrjaav,

all

employed, om e7i'a)though antecedent time is indi-

16 the aorist ind.

is

and TOTe. Here the past perfect would more exactly have marked off to irpoJTov. If the previous time is to be depicted in its course, the past perfect is used (Thumb, Handb., cated by TO

irpoJTOP

p. 163). («)

is

The Past Perfect of Broken Continuity^

true of Lu. 8 1

Blass, Gr. of

:

29, ttoXXoTs

N. T. Gk.,

xpovois

p. 201.

(

awripiraKeL ^

Moulton,

> avTov.

).

It

Prol., p. 148.

This is

an

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

906

iterative past perfect in a series of links instead of a line, like the

present perfect of broken continuity in Jo.

(f)

1

:

Cf. the perf

18.

Ac. 8:11.

inf. in

Past Perfect in Conditional Sentences. Usually the aorist second class determined as

ind. occurs in these conditions of the unfulfilled in relation to the past.

fect appears.

Cf. Jo. 19

ditional Sentences, ch.

:

But sometimes the past

11; Ac. 26

:

32; 1 Jo. 2

:

per-

See Con-

19.

XIX.

The Periphrastic Past Perfect. This construction had already begun in ancient Greek. In the third person plural of liquid and mute verbs it was uniformly done for the sake of euphony. In the modern It was occasionally found also with other verbs. Greek we find elxo. befxkvo, 'I had bound,' tumw defxevo^ or elxa Sedel. "Exco was at first more than a .mere auxiliary, though in Herodotus it appears as a true auxiliary. The dramatists also use it often.2 In the N. T. the examples with elxov are not numerous. Cf avKrjv elx^i' tls irecjiVTevfj.euTju (Lu. 13 6) fjv elxov airo(tj)

^

(Lu. 19

;

:

.

K€L(xhr]v

:

20), really predicative accusative participles

with

But the past perfect with the perfect partic. and rjv is rather common. Cf. Jo. 19 11. Burton^ notes that about two-thirds of them are intensive and only one-third extensive. As examples of the intensive use see Mt. 26 :43, rjaav ^e^apy]iikvoi; Lu. 15 24, Examples of the extensive type Cf. also Lu. 1:7. riv (XTToXcoXcos. exi^-

:

:

are

ricrav

eXrjXvdores (Lu.

5

:

17); riaav TrpoecopaKores (Ac. 21

:

For

29).

examples in the LXX 23, etc. See also ^e^aTTLaneuoL v-Krjpxov (Ac. 8 16). This verb was used as the passive {d) Special Use of eKeifxrjv. = present perfect. So the imperfect present was a of Tid-qixL. The in Jo. 20 12, owov tKeLTo to crQiiJ.a = perfect, as was used as a past see 2 Chron. 18

:

34; Judg. 8

:

11; Ex. 39:

:

:

'

where the body had

See also 19

ojj-odviJ.aBdi'

(c)

'

or

'

had been

placed.'

a periphrastic past perfect in sense.

Kdixevai is Keinevos.

lain

:

The Future Perfect

much need in ancient

in Jo. 2

Perhaps a similar notion

20.

Taprjaav (Ac. 12

So

Cf. Lu. 23

:

is

(6 ^e^^'^i' avvreKLKos).

in the

:

6 v<^av 53,

seen

riv

in

20).

There was never

for this tense, perfect action in future time.*

Greek and

:

LXX

(Thackeray, Gr.,

It is rare

The

p. 194).

only active forms in the N. T. are eldrjaco (Heb. 8:11, LXX, possibly a mere future) and the periphrastic form eaoidai ireirot.dws (Heb. 2

:

13,

LXX also).

Both

of these are intensive.

1

Thumb, Handb.,

^

Jebb in Vine, and Dickson's Handb., p. 329. Am. Jour, of N. T. M. and T., p. 45.

'

Most

of the

MSS.

pp. 161, 165. •»

Philol., 1908, p. 395.

,

907

TENSE (XPONOS) read KeKpa^ovrai in Lu. 19 also intensive

nor by Nestle.

:

KeKpaya),

(cf.

40,

note ea^

I

but

if it is

NBL

have

accepted, as

This

Kpa^ovaiv.

not

it is

(mol /j,eya\r]u x^^P'-tch^ /car[d]

is

W. H.

])y

T€deLfx[e]uo{s)

B. G. U. 596 (a.d, 84). The modern Greek has a fut. perf. in da In ^^ovaiv (Lu. 19 43) we exco defiho (Thumb, Hanclh., p. 1G2). :

For the

have a practical future perfect (intensive).

rest the /m-

turum exadum is expressed only by means of the perfect part, and This idiom is found in the LXX (the active in Gen. 43 8; ei)ut. 44: 32; Is. 58 14, etc. The passive in Gen. 41 36; Ex. 12 6). N. T. examples are ecrrat btbeixhov and earat \e\vixkvov (Mt. 16 :

:

:

:

:

19);

eo-rai

These

XeXu/xem (18:18);

taovTai.

(Lu. 12:52).

haixeixtpLdfikvoi

seem to be extensive. For a sketch of the future perThompson, Sijntax of Attic Greek, p. 225 f. This tense

all

fect see

died before the future did. 3.

The

The Subjunctive and Optative.

not found in the N. T.

It

was always

See Hatzidakis,

early period.

N. T.

perf. subj. in the

(Mt. 9: 6;

Mk.

fect sense

is

2

See

deed, the perf. subj.

The only

219.

Ei7il., p.

is

Greek of the inflected

which occurs a number of times 24, etc.). But in this form the per-

is el8u},

10; Lu. 5

:

gone.

perfect optative

rare in the

:

tva el8iJTe, P.

M.

B.

was always very

1178 (a.d. 194).

rare in Greek.

In-

In the

Sanskrit the perf. tense, outside of the Vedic language, never de-

veloped to any extent except in the ind. and the participle.* In the classic Greek it was in subj. and opt. a mark of the literary style

really belong to the hfe of the people.

and did not

perf. subj. is

absent from the vernacular modern Greek.

A

The little

show how usually there was no demand for a true combining punctiliar and durative, in the subj. Even in

reflection will

perfect,

the literary style of the older Greek,

occur

it

when

was often the periphrastic form

the perf. subj. did

in the active

and nearly

always so in the passive.^ "The perfect of the side-moods is true to the kind of time, completion, intensity, overwhelming finality."^ By "kind of time" Gildersleeve means kind of action, not past,

LXX

also, Is. 8 14; 10 20; 17: 8. Cf. the In Lu. 14 8 there appears to be a conscious change from KXrjOfjs to ixrjTroTe fj KeKX-q/jihos, possibly suggesting a long-standing invitation by the latter. In Jo. 3 27, eav ixi} fj beboixkvov, it is punc-

present or future.

:

:

:

:

tiliar-durative.

consummation 1

2 »

In 16 is

:

24, I'm

fi

ireTrXrjpwuevr] (cf.

1

Jo. 1:4), the

emphasized (durative-punctiliar), extensive per-

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 292. Goodwin, M. and T., p. .31 f. Gildersleeve,

Am.

Cf. Farrar,

Gk. Synt.,

Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 401.

p. 140.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

908

The same thing

feet (completed act). riycaafxhoL, KdTTOL-QKws,

2 Cor. 4.

1

:

and 17 we secm

9, I'm

/ii)

:

true of 17: 19, Iva

to

uicnv

:

ireToidoTes

The Imperative.

the perf.

is

tW ihatu reTekuoiiikvoL. In Jas. 5 15, Kav p have the perfect of "broken continuity." In

23,

oi/jLev,

it is

merely intensive.

What

has been said of the rarity of can be repeated concerning the perf. imper. Out

sul)j.

of 2445 imperatives in the Attic orators the speeches themselves

show only

"The

Attic Orators," A. J. P.,

may

note

k€k\t](jO<j:

Syntax, Part I, p. Limitation of the Imperative in the

perfects (Gildersleeve,

real

eight

Cf. also Miller,

158.

xiii,

In the late Greek

Homer.^

In

1892, pp. 399-436).

The

intensive.

perfect imper.

is

Is.

4:

one

1

common

in

occurred most frequently in the

it

purely intensive perfects or in the third person singular of other

gone from the modern Greek and is nearly dead 1 19 IVre may be imperative (intensive) or ind. See the formula eppo^aOe (Ac. 15 29) and eppwao in Text. Rec. (23 30) .^ The only other example is found in Mk. 4 39, o-tcoTra, Te4>iiJL0jao, where it is also intensive like the others. The durative idea is in both aicowa (linear pres.) and -weciilijioiao, 'keep on being quiet' and 'keep the muzzle on.' The periphrastic perf. imper. occurs in Lu. 12:35, earwaav irepie^waixkvai. (intensive). Cf. KaLo/jLevoL. The time of the perf. imper. and subj. is, of course, verbs.2

But

in the

N. T.

it is

In Jas.

:

:

:

:

really future. 5.

The

inf. (see

Infinitive.

There were originally no tenses

in the

But the Greek common use, and indir.

Sanskrit), as has already been stated.

developed a double use of the

inf. (the

discourse) (a)

Indirect Discourse.

But

in

In

XIX)

indir. discourse (cf. ch.

the

had the element of time, that of the direct. the N. T. there is no instance of the perf. inf. repre-

tenses of the

inf.

senting a past perf. ind.^

but the time

is

The

tense occurs in indir. discourse,

Cf Ac. 14 19 eavpov

not changed.

.

:

e^oj

tto-

ttjs

So eldepai in Lu. 22:34; yeyovhaL (Jo. 12:29); yeyophaL (2 Tim. 2 18). These examples are also all intensive perfects. So with Col. 2 1, 6e\(jo vfids ddeuai. In 1 Tim. 6 17, 7rapa77eXXe v\pr]\o(f)popeLi'

Xeojs, vofxl^oPTes

r/Srj

redvrjKevaL,

(12

:

14) airrj'YyeCKev earavai.

:

:

:

lj.r]8e

rfK-KLKkvai (indir.

In Lu. 10

:

36, boKtt aot yeyovkvai,

story-telling."^ 1

2

3

command), the intensive

Cf. Trexpaxerat (Ac. 25 :25).

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 22. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 23 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200

^ ">

f.

perf. again occurs.

we have "the

vivid present of

On

the whole the

Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 52. Moulton, Prol., p. 146. So Heb. 4

:

1.

909

TENSE (XPONOS)

common

perf. inf. is rather

the N.

T.i

See further Jo. 12

Hob. 11

8;

:

H. Scott) in Ac. 16 27; 27 13; Ro. 15

(44 times, according to :

18;

:

:

:

3.

(6)

Perfect Infinitive not in Indirect Discourse.

(a)

Subject or Object Infinitive.

Cf. 2 Pet. 2

:

21,

fxri

eirtyv(ji-

Ktvai, where the tense accents the climacteric aspect (durativepunctihar) of the act and rather suggests antecedence (extensive)

to

In Ac. 26

r^v.

the obj.

inf.

32, 6.ivoKe\h(jdaL kbvvaro,

:

with imphed antecedence

we have an

In Ac. 19:36

kpyaaiav aTrrjXkax^aL (Lu. 12:58).

a periphrastic form of the subject

virapxeiv is

instance of

Note

(extensive).

also 56s

KaTt(TTa\y.kvov%

In 2 Cor.

inf.

5:11 note 7re(f)avepoiadaL with eXTrtfw. Cf. 1 Pet. 4 3 (with apKeNot very different is the use with cocrre (Ro. 15 19). Tos). Prepositions. At first it may seem surprising that the With (/3) :

:

perfect tense should occur with the articular inf. after preposi-

But the

tions.

inf.

does not lose its verbal character in such cona verbal substantive. It is, of course, only

It is still

structions.

by analogy that the tense function is brought into the infinitive. For the papyri note ewl r(3 yeyovhaL, P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22); virep Tov airoXeXvaOaL ae, P. B.

(Heb. 10

15),

:

the

same

We

find

and

els

force as it

e'iprjKev

(b.C. 168).

also with

els,

in 10

:

See

GvvTtTpl^QaL (extensive).

In 8

2; 27: 9.

:

11

we have

In the N. T. the perf.

and

inf.

Cf. fxera to eiprjKevai

Here the tense has

stands on record as said.

1

8, ets to elShaL (intensive)

It is

So Mk. 5

^lerd.

It

9.

as in Eph.

TO yeyovhaL (Heb. 11:3).

the ace. (causal sense).

6ta, els

M. 42

the only instance with

:

:

most frequent with 4,

olKodoixrjadaL

the perf.

5ta

and

8e8eadat. /cat bieairdcfdai koI

Cf. Ac. 18:

(Lu. 6: 48).

inf. of

"broken continuity."

with prepositions appears only with

/xerd.

The

Participle, The Meaning. The perf. part, either represents a state (intensive) or a completed act (extensive). Examples of the former are KeKOTrm/ccbs (Jo. 4:6); ecTTcos (18 18); to elwdos (Lu. 4 16). Instances of the latter occur in 6 el\r]4>a}s (Mt. 25 24) Trexotr/Kores The perf. part, is quite common in the N. T. and (Jo. 18 18). 6.

(a)

:

:

:

;

:

preserves the usual idea of the tense. (6)

may

The Time of the Tense. It is relative, not absolute. It be coincident with that of the principal verb, usually so in

the intensive use.^

Cf. Jo.

8ov ^Stj TeOvrjKOTa, (Ro.

gestion the act 1

W.-Th.,

may p.

15

:

4:6

14)

KeKoiriaKois

ecrre

—

hade^eTo, (19

ireTrXrfpoifJLevoL.

:

33) el-

But by sug-

be represented as completed before that of 2 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 71. 334.

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

910

NEW TESTAMENT

the principal verb and so antecedent action. TreTrotTjKores yikvriv

may

(Jo. 18

(Lu. 16

:

:

18);

Tvpo(j4>a.Toos

18); elpriKOTos

Thus

kXrfKvBoTa (Ac. 18

(Mt. 26

:

be expressed also by the intensive perfect as in (Jo. 11:44), but dede/xevos is coincident action.

:

14 luariankvov

is

2); dTroXeXii-

6 re-

t^ij'Kdev

in

Mk.

coincident, but rbv kaxv^ora antecedent.

Cf.

6vr)Kc!os

5

—

This antecedent action

75).

:

iaTrjKeiaap

So

Rev. 6 9. The modern Greek keeps the perf. part. (Thumb, Handh., p. 167). (c) The Perfect Tense Occurs with Various Uses of the Participle. The attributive part, has it. Cf. oi aireaTokntvoL (Ac. 10 17). Sometimes a distinction is drawn between the aorist and the perf. part. Cf 6 XaiScof in Mt. 25 20 with 6 eiX7?(/)ws (25 24) 6 /caXeo-as in Lu. 14: 9 with 6 KexXTj/ccb? (14 10). Cf. 2 Cor. 12 21; :

:

.

:

:

:

:

1

Pet. 2

:

46; 6

:

9

dbov

:

1,

18,

The

10.

20

f.;

predicate participle also uses

Jo. 19

TreTTTUiKOTa,

:

33; Ac. 18

:

Heb. 13

2;

compare Lu. 10

:

18,

:

it.

Cf. Lu. 8

23.

With Rev.

:

Wecopow TeaouTa (the

state, the act). (d) The Periphrastic Participle. unusual idiom. Cf. Eph. 4 18 :

1 is

:

21) bvTas airrjWoTpLcoiJLevovs.

thus accented.

Cf.

Heb. 5

There are two examples kaKOTWiikvoi

rfj

The durative aspect :

of this

8Lavola ovres, (Col.

of the perfect

14 for ex" used periphrastically.

CHAPTER XIX MODE For a

Introductory.

and the reasons

CErKAISIS)

brief sketch of the

number of the modes a mode see Conju-

for treating the indicative as

gation of the Verb, chapter VIII, v,

given to the pertinent hterature.

References are there

(a).

The use

of av

treatment below in cormection with the modes. conjunctions

is

divided for logical consistency.

is

given a brief

The The

subject of

Paratactic

Conjunctions belong to the same division with Paratactic Senunder Hypotactic Sen-

tences, while Hypotactic Conjunctions fall

The conjunctions could

tences.

of course be treated in sepa-

rate chapter or as a division of the chapter

on

That

Hysummary treatment

be there done

will

(v, 1) for

potactic Conjunctions will there receive only

and can best be discussed

And

clauses.

Particles (XXI).

Paratactic Conjunctions.

in detail in connection

with subordinate

there are advantages in the present method.

It

needs to be said also that the division of the treatment of modes

Independent and Subordinate Sentences (A and B) There is no real difference in the meaning of a mode in an independent and a dependent sentence. The significance of each mode will be sufficiently discussed under A (Independent Sentences). The inclusion of all the suborcUnate clauses under mode is likewise for the into those of

is

purely arbitrary and for the sake of clearness.

sake of perspicuity.

The the

difficulty of

Voice, tense,

making a

mode thus stand out

modes has already been discussed

A mood

mode

sharply.^

clear distinction in the significance of in

chapter VIII, v,

(6).

an attitude of mind in which the speaker conceives the matter stated.^ Apollonius Dyskolos first described moods as i/'uxt'cat diadeaeLs. That is a correct description of the function of mood as distinct from voice and tense.^ 1

is

a

of statement,

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 44.5

ff.,

has this plan.

I

had abeady made

my

outline before reading his treatment of the subject. 2

Thompson, Synt.

3

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 498; K.-G.,

p. 220.

of Att. Gk., p. 185. I,

p.

200; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt.,

See Sandys, Hist, of Class. Scholarship, HI,

911

p. 458.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

912

The mode

manner

the

is

of the affirmation, while voice

and tense

have to do with the action of the verb (voice with relation of the subject to the action of the verb, tense with the state of the

But even so the matter is not always clear. The mode and away the most difficult theme in Greek syntax. Our modern grammatical nomenclature is never so clumsy as here in the effort to express "the delicate accuracy and beauty of those slight nuances of thought which the Greek reflected in the synthetic and manifold forms of his verb."^ So appeal is made to psychology action).

is

far

" If the

to help us out.

utterance modal? of the soul?

A

moods are \l/vxi.Kal diadeaeLs, why

is

not every

Why

does not every utterance denote a state universal psychology would be a universal syntax." ^

Every utterance does denote a state of the soul. This is one argument for treating the indicative as a mode. The verb is necesBut the term is naturally sarily modal from this point of view. confined to the finite verb and denied to the infinitive and participle. Dionysius Thrax does call the infinitive a mode, but he is not generally followed.^

Gildersleeve

temporal and tenses modal."

and tenses

notes also that

"*

He

sees

that the

the natural sequence in the English

is

"moods are moods

order (cf.

chapter

but he follows the order tenses and moods in his Syntax of Classical Greek, though it is hard to separate them Gildersleeve^ laments also that SLadeais came in actual study. to be applied to voice and eyKKuaLs to mode (cf. enclitic words as to accent), "but after all tone of utterance is not so bad VII,

v),

a description of mood." It is possible that at the begiiming the indicative was used to express all the various moods or tones of the speaker, as the accusative case originally included the whole

of the oblique cases. It was only gradually moods were developed by the side of the indic-

field

that the other

the ind.) to accent certain

ative (thus limiting the scope of

"moods of mind, i.e. various shades of desire,"® more sharply. Thompson calls this development "artificial," since no other race but the Greeks have preserved these

fine distinctions

between

in-

dicative, subjunctive, optative, imperative, not to say injunctive

1

Farrar, Gk. SjTit., p. 136.

2

Gildersl.,

"A

Syntactician

among

the Psychologists,"

Philol., Jan., 1910, p. 74. '

Cf. Steinthal, Gesch. d. Sprachw., pp. 309, 628.

*

Am.

6

lb.,

"

Thompson,

Jom-. of Philol.,

XXX,

XXIII,

p. 127;

XXX,

p. 1; Synt. of Classic. Gk., p. 79.

Synt., p. 510.

p. 1.

Am.

Jour,

of

MODE

913

(ErKAISIs)

and future indicative (almost a mode to itself). But that is too severe a term, for the modes were a gradual evolution. The injunctive was the unaugmented indicative, like \vov, Xveade, Xvaaade, Moulton^ says: "Syntactically it rep'KWrjTe, Xiiere, Xvaare, ax«.^ resented the bare combination of verbal idea with the ending which supplies the subject; and its prevailing use was for prohibitions,

if

we may judge from the Sanskrit, where it still remains The fact that this primitive mood thus

some extent aUve.

to

occupies ground appropriate to the subjunctive, while

it

supplies

the imperative ultimately with nearly all its forms, illustrates the Since the optative also can syntactical nearness of the moods. express prohibition, even in the N. T. (Mk. 11

much common ground Yes, and

by the

shared by

is

indicative also.

all

The

:

14),

we

see

how

the subjective moods."

present indicative

is

often

Originally the subjunctive had the short a practical future. vowel (cf. tofxev in Homer). The distinction between the indicative and subjunctive is not always clear.'^ The subjunctive in Homer is often merely futuristic. The affinity between the subjunctive and the optative is very close. The indicative continued to be used in the volitive sense (past tenses)

Thus the other modes were

(future tense).

guage rather than possessor of the

necessities, while the indicative

As already shown

field.

injunctive survived

in

the

command

was the

original

(chapter VIII, v) the

The

all

the modes

the indicative before the rise of the other modes).

Thus the

fulfil

the function of

may

be merely futuristic, or volitive, or deliberaThe same thing is true of the subjunctive and the optative.

future indicative tive.

Cf.

of

imperative and subjunctive.

future indicative continued to (cf.

and

luxuries of the lan-

Moulton, Prol,

p.

184

f.

Thompson

(Syntax, p. 186) curiously

says that "the indicative, however, assumed some of the functions of the other

have

moods."

He had

it right.

If

he had said "retained," he would would be an

just said properly enough: "It

with regard both to their origin and functions, to regard moods as separate and water-tight compartments." The early process was from simplicity to variety and then from variety to The struggle besimplicity (cf. again the history of the cases). tween the modes has continued till now in the modern Greek we have practically only the indicative and the subjunctive, and they

error,

the

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 105.

Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 510. The injunctive had "a moaning hovering between the imperative, conjunctive and optative." ' Giles, Man., p. 459. ^

lb.

Cf. also

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

914

sound (Thumb, Handh., p. 115 f.). reduced" in use in the modern Greek. The optative has disappeared entirely, and the imperative, outside the second person, and the future indicative are in

The

some instances

subj.

by

are expressed ticiple

the

in

alike in

"considerably

is

It is true that as

Even

periphrasis.

have

kolvj]

a rule

felt

we

the infinitive and the par-

the inroads of the subjunctive.^

see the

modes

to best advantage in

the simple sentence,^ though essentially the meaning in the com-

But it is true, as Gildersleeve^ is the same. "the predominance of parataxis over hypotaxis is a

pound sentence urges, that

matter of style as well as of period. HyjDotaxis holds fast to constructions that parataxis has abandoned. The futural subjunctive abides defiantly in the dependent clause of temporal sentences and dares the future indicative to invade its domain. The modal nature of the future, obscured in the principal sentence,

upon the most superficial observer in the dependent In a broad sense the indicative is the mode of objective statement in contrast with the subjective modes developed

forces itself

clause."

from

it.

But the

in a general sense.

be found to

differ

description needs modification

The N. T. idiom from the

classic

as of the

and

kolvy]

is

only true

in general vnU

Greek idiom here more than

is

The disappearance of the But the effort optative is responsible for part of this change. must now be made to differentiate the four modes in actual usage true of the construction of the

tenses.'*

whatever may be true of the original idea of each. That point The vernacular in all languages is fond will need discussion also. of parataxis.

See

Pfister,

"Die parataktische Darstellungsform

der volkstiimlichen Erzahlung" {Woch.

in

klass. Phil., 1911, pp.

f.

809-813).

INDEPENDENT OR PARATACTIC SENTENCES (HAPATAKTIKA

A.

'AHIHMATA)

The

I.

Indicative

Mode

(Xoyos diTO(j)avTLKds or

r\

opio-xiKT]

c-yKXioTLs).

Meaning of the Indicative Mode.

1.

The name is

It is not distinctive, since all the modes "indicate." not true that the indicative gives "absolute reality,"^ though it

^

Thompson,

down

Synt., p. 494.

in the fight.

495.

In the Sans,

it

was the subjunctive that went

Cf. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 201

Am.

lb., p.

*

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 205. Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt. der griech. Sprache,

*

3

f.

Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. 2.

2

p. 384.

MODE "modus The

the

is

simple."^

It

rectus."

does express "raffirmation pure et

indicative does state a thing as true, but does not

guarantee the reality of the thing. the statement help one

("an is

all

is

The

In the nature of the case only

A

under discussion.

along.

sich").2

915

(efkaisis)

on

clear grip

this point will

indicative has nothing to do with reality

xhe speaker

presents something as true.^

implied, to be sure, but nothing more.'*

Whether

it

Actuality true or

is

no is another matter. Most untruths are told in the indicative mode. The true translation into Latin of oplcttikt] would hefinitus or The indicdefinitus.^ Indicativus is a translation of dTro^ai'Tuos. ative

the most frequent

is

mode

mal mode to use when another mode. The assertion there

is

It is the nor-

in all languages.

no special reason

may

for

employing

be qualified or unqualified.^

This fact does not affect the function of the indicative

make

Cf. Jo. 13

a defhiite, positive assertion.

:

mode

to

8, for instance.

study of the indicative mode is afforded in Jo. 1 1-18, where we have it 38 times, chiefly in independent sentences. The The use of v", h^subjunctive occurs only three times (1 7 f.). etc., has the e8(j)Kev, kdeacrdfxeOa, eXa^ov, wapeh.a^ov, eyvco, V€T0, yfKOev, ovk

A

fine

:

:

note of certitude and confident statement that illustrate finely the indicative mode.

Kinds of Sentences Using the Indicative. The mere declaration (a) Either Declarative or Interrogative. probably (and logically) precedes in use the question.^ But there 2.

essential difference in the significance of the

no

is

This

mode.

extension of the indicative from simple assertion to question is true of all Indo-Germanic tongues. « Cf. Mt. 2 2; Mk. 4 7; Jo. :

1

:

The simple

19.

kirelvaaa TTore

yap

assertion

easily turned

is

eScoKare fioi
e8i\{/r](Ta

:

to question.

Kal eTOTlaaTe

ae dbop,ev ivHvCiVTa Kal edpexpafxev, kt\.

(Mt. 25

:

fxe,

kt\.,

35,-39).

Cf.

and For

the change from question to simple assertion see 7rio-re6ets tovto; 26 f.). Cf. Ac. 26:27. The formula au kyd} TreiriaTevKa (Jo. 11 :

sometimes used for the answer, as in Mt. 27 11; Lu. So also av diras in Mt. 26 25, 64. The 22 70; Jo. 18 37. question without interrogative words is seen in Mt. 11:28; Jo. 13 6; Ac. 21 37; Ro. 2 21-23; 7:7, etc. Sometimes it is diffi'KkyeLs

is

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

Vandacle, L'Optatif Grcc, 1897, p. 111.

»

lb.

*

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 445.

*

Riem. and Goelzcr, Synt., p. 297 Burton, M. and T., p. 73. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 445.

8 '

Der Redendc

stellt

ctwas

«

k.-G., Bd.

I,

p. 201.

als wirklich.

f.

»

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 205.

:

.

whether a sentence

cult to tell

in

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

916

Cor. 1:13; Ro. 8

1

For

make

yLvucTKeLs; (Ac.

Gal. 2 Jer. 4

:

:

declarative or interrogative, as

is

f

Thus apd yt Note the play on the verb).

:

30.

but apa

10),

yLvooaKeis a aua-

plain the question.

8

LXX

It is rare also in the

17.

Luke and

33

very reason the Greek used various interrogatory par-

this

ticles to

:

Paul.

is

common.^

The use

of

9;

:

37

:

:

8;

10;

a slight literary touch in

It is

in a question

el

Cf. Lu. 18

Gen. 18

(cf.

is

It is

elliptical.

a condition with the conclusion not expressed or it indirect question (cf. Mk. 15 :44; Lu. 23 6; Ph. 3 12). really

:

:

an

is

It is

used in the N. T,, as in the LXX quite often (Gen. 17: 17, etc.). This construction with a direct question is unclassical and may be due to the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew H by el as well

by fxr]."^ Cf. Mt. 12 10, Et e^eaTiv rots aa^^aatv depairexxiaL; see also Mt. 19:3; Mk. 8:23; Lu. 13:23; 22:49; Ac. 1 6; 7: 1; 19: 2 21 37 22 25. Note frequency in Luke. In Mk. 10 2 (parallel to Mt. 19 3) the question is indirect. The idiom, though singular, has ''attained to all the rights of a direct interrogative "^ by this time. The idiom may be illustrated by the Latin an which in later writers was used in direct questions. So si, used in the Vulgate to translate this el, became in late Latin a chrect interrogative particle. A similar ellipsis appears in the use of el (cf. Heb. as

:

:

;

:

:

:

;

:

3

11) in the negative sense of a strong

:

The

LXX

also)."* oath (from the 5 B, but not in the

LXX Job 25

ri is found So far the questions are colourless. The use of interrogative pronouns and adverbs is, of course, abundant in the N. T. Thus tIs, either alone as in Mt. 3 7, with 5, with ovv as in Lu. apa. as in Mt. 24 45, with yap as in Mt. 9 Mk. 15 24. For tI in tI rts 10.^ interrogative double the See 3 For the ellipsis 2. 16 Lu. tovto) see of use (predicative TovTo

in the

particle

:

N.T.^

:

:

:

:

:

:

with

I'm Tt (cf. 5ta rt

9

and

4,

:

22).

The

for

t'l

use of

6tl tI in

accusative adverb in

in

Mt. 9

:

note Lu. 2

11; eh ri in :

49

(cf

.

tI

Ac. 12 18 and 13 25 :

:

Mk.

10

accusative occurs in ol8a ae

:

18.

ris

used in direct questions are

el

ttoIos

A

is

Mk.

14

:

4) see

Mt.

yeyovev 6tl in Jo. 14 interesting.

Tt

is

an

sort of prolepsis or double

(Mk. 1:24). Other pronouns (Mk. 11:28), iroaos (Mk. 6 :

1 Viteau, Etude sur le Grec du N. T. Le Verbe, p. 22. Some editors read apa in Gal. 2 17, but see Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 259. See &pa in Mt. 18 1. 2 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 260. * Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 179. 3 W.-Th., p. 509. :

:

Le Verbe,

p. 22.

6

Viteau,

«

Cf. Robertson, Short Gr. of the

Gk. N.

T., p. 178.

MODE (Mt. 8

38), TToraTTos

:

interrogative adverbs

(Mt. 17

TTore

18

:

17);

'The sense

27).

Mk.

puted, as of OTL in

2

:

16; 9

of 6 in Mt. 26 25.i 11, 28; Jo. 8:

:

Cf

frequent.

is

(Lu. 10

ttcos

917

(efkaizis)

(Mt. 25

vrore

.

26); tov (Lu. 8

:

:

use of

38)

:

dis-

is

eojs

;

25); iroaaKLs (Mt.

21).

:

by ^ alone The case of

Alternative questions are expressed 8,

50

:

The

or with

tL

—

ij

Mt. 9

as in

5.

:

as in 1 Cor. 9

:

different

is

tIs

fj

(Mt. 7:9). Exclamations are sometimes expressed by the relative forms, 15, but more frequently by the interlike cos (hpatoL in Ro. 10 :

rogative pronouns like iroaa (Mk. 15 :4);

Trrj\iKos

(Gal. 6

11); rt

:

Mt. 6 an affirmative or negative answer is expected, then that fact is shown by the use of ov for the question expecting the affirmative reply and by ni] for the negative answer. As a matter of fact, any answer may be actually given. It is only the expectation that is presented by ov (Lu. 12

49); iroaaKcs (Mt. 23

:

Positive

(6)

fxrj.

:

12

12

6;

:

16, etc.

may

23; 17

:

This

37).

and Negative.

This use of ov is kirpoHr^haaixev; (Mt. 7

or

:

is

:

17;

the

like the

Surprise

10).

:

18

:

tQ

era)

:

bvojiaTi

:

airoKpiuri ohbkv;

So with

by

:

:

:

The use

classic construction.

indicated :

ov

Mt. 6 25; 13 27; 13 55; Lu. 22). 1 Cor. 9:1; 14 24; Jas. 2 5; Heb. 3

common

(Mk. 14

:

of ov

60.

Cf.

ov irava'u 8La(rTpe<j)uv; (Ac.

ovk apa in Ac. 21

:

38.

Ouxt

is

Ovkovv occurs once in the N. T. (Jo.

39.

The presence

37).

:

is

Cf. Lu. 6

:

So

Latin nonne.

Cf.

ovK aireKpivaTo ov8ev in verse 61).

13

23.

If

suggest indignation as in ovk

common.

Cf. irdaov in

of

//i?

shows that the answer "no" is anwith the indicative in a princi-

ticipated, the only instance of ju^?

Gildersleeve^ calls ov ''the

pal sentence.

and

''the feminine negative."

A117

touch in the use of

m^?

There

by the woman

is

mascuHne negative" certainly a feminine

at Jacob's well

when she

came to the village. She refused to arouse opposition by using Thus ^1771 oCtos kanv 6 excited their curiosity by yii\. oil and XptaTos; (Jo. 4 29).^ The examples in the N. T. are very numerous. The shades of negative expectation and surprise vary very Each context supplies a slightly different tone. Cf. greatly. Mt. 7 9, 16; 12 23; 26 22, 25; Mk. 4 21; Lu. 6 39; Jo. 6 Both ov and ^77 67; 7 26, 35, 47, 51 f.; 21 5; Ro. 9 14; 11 1. may occur in contrast in the same sentence. So m^? '^a™ avdpojirou :

:

:

Tavra XaXco,

39

IJ.T)TL

:

:

:

:

rj

Kal 6 vopos

ravra ov Xeyei; (1 Cor. 9:

bbvarai rv^i^os tv(})\6v oS-qyeiv; ovxl

*

See ch.

2

Am.

:

:

:

:

ap.6Tepoi.

8). tis

Cf. Lu. 6

XV, Pronouns.

Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1910, p. 78.

^

:

^odvvov knirt-

cf. also Jo. 4

:

33.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

918

use of fxrjTL is common (cf. ouxO-^ The combination in the chapter on Particles, but it may be discussed jut) ov will be negative of the verb while /i'7 is the inthe ov is that here noted aovvTai;

The

terrogative particle expecting the answer "no." translates only

The

Greek.

It is

The kinds

Cf. 1

ov.

construction

is

in the

The English

ignores mt and Cor. 9 :4, 5; 11: 22; Ro. 10 18, 19.

translation expects the answer "yes," because

it

:

LXX (Judg.

6

:

13, etc.)

and

in classic

a rhetorical question, not a simple interrogative.^ we have already

of sentences overlap inevitably so that

transgressed into the territory of the next group.

As already shown, the

indicative

is

used indifferently with or

without the negative in either declarative or interrogative senCf., for instance, Jo. 1 2-8. tences. The groups thus overlap. The negative of a declarative independent sentence with the in:

This outright "mascuhne" negative suits the With questions, however, it is different, as has already been shown. Thus it is true that fiij made a "raid" into the in-

dicative

is

ov.

indicative.

dicative, as ov did in the early language into the subjunctive.^ optative uses either ov or (jltj, but that is another story. The

The

makes a pointed denial. Note the progressive abruptness of the Baptist's three denials in Jo. 1 20 f 3. Special Uses of the Indicative.

indicative with ov

:

(a)

Past Tenses.

For Courtesy. It is true that the indicative "is suited by whole character only to positive and negative statements, and

(a)

its

commands or The inThe other modes

not to the expression of contingencies, wishes, other subjective conceptions. "^

mode

That

is perfectly true.

a thing. terms "side moods." I consider, as already explained, the indicative the mode par excellence, and I doubt the value of such language as "the modal uses of the indicative."^ It is not so much that the indicative "encroached upon the other

dicative

is

the normal

for saying

Gildersleeve'^ aptly

moods, and in so doing assumed their functions, especially in dependent sentences,"^ as that the indicative, particularly in dependent sentences, retained to some extent all the functions of It is true, as already said, that the indicative was all the modes. N. T. Gk., p. 254. M. and T., p. 179.

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

Burton, N. T.

3

Cf. Gildersl.,

*

«

Moulton, Prol., p. 199. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 235.

7

Thompson, Synt.

Am.

Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1910, p. 78. ^ Synt. of Classic Gk., Pt.

of Attic Gk., p. 186.

I,

§ 365.

MODE always the most

virile of all

919

(efkaisis)

the

modes and has outlived them

all.

But, after the other modes became fully developed, these less frequent uses of the indicative seemed anomalous. The courteous or polite use of the imperfect indicative

is

the simplest of these spe-

Here the indicative is used for direct assertion, thrown into a past tense, though the present is statement the but time is contemplated. We do this in English when we say: " I was just thinking," "I was on the point of saying," etc. So Ac. 25 Agrippa does not 22, t^ov\6ixr)v Kal avTos rod avQpioirov aKovaai. bluntly say jSoi-Xo/iat (cf. Paul in 1 Tim. 2:8; 5 14) nor ejSouXStJL-qv cial constructions.

:

:

which would suggest unreality, a thing not true. He docs wish. He could have said ^ovKolix-qv av (cf. Ac. 26 29, where Paul uses the optative), but the simple t^ovKbixr]v is better. The optative would have been much weaker.^ In 2 Cor. 1 15 kfiovKbix-qv ivpb-

av,

:

:

repop has its natural reference to past time.

and Phil. N. T. Gk.,

Jo. 12

13, k^ovKbix-qv

,

Cf. k^ov\y]di)v in 2

not 'would have liked' as Blass

In Gal. 4: 20, ride\ov be irapetvai p. 207) has it. Paul is speaking of present time (cf. 6tl airopovfiai.). He puts the statement in the imperfect as a polite idiom. The use of Oekoi is seen in Ro. 16 19. The usual force of the mode and tense appears in ^OeXov in Jo. 6 21. The negative brings out sharply the element of will (cf. Lu. 19 14; Mt. 22 3). In Ro.

(Gr. of Trpos

v/JLOLs

apTL,

:

:

:

:

9

:

3,

r)vxbiji.r]v

yap

avadejxa elvai avTos eyo:

cltto

tov XpLarov, the

same

courteous (even passionate) idiom occurs. It is not euxofxau as in 2 Cor. 13 7 (he does not dare pray such a prayer), nor did he do it (cf. rjvxoPTo Ac. 27: 29). H.e was, however, on the verge of :

example we come close to the use of the indicative for unreahty, the so-called "unreal" indicaSee also chapter on Tense. tive.

doing

(j3)

it,

With

but drew back.

Present

This

is

Propriety

Possibility,

Obligation,

Necessity,

Tenses of the Past.

this

the usual

"potential"

in

indicative.

The imperfect of such verbs does not necessarily refer to the present.^ Thus in Jo. 4 4, eSet avrbv 8t.epx^crdaL 5ta. rrjs Sajuaptas, it :

simply a necessity in past time about a past event. So Set in This use of the imJo. 4 20, 24 expresses a present necessity. present or the ordinary either the from differs thus perfect UeL is

:

imperfect.

The idiom

the statement the necessity XpLCTbv. »

«

is

logical enough.''

may l)e confined

was a necessity and though

So Lu. 24 26, ovxl ravra eSet iraddv Mt. 18 33; 23 23; 25 27; Lu. 11 42; 13 16

still exists.

Cf. also

It

to that phase of the matter,

W.-Th., p. 283. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 204

:

:

f.

:

3

:

Bla.ss,

:

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

:

20(5.

tov (cf.

Ac. 27 21. It is an easy step from this notion to an obUgation which comes over from the past and is not

in verse 14)

del

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

920

that of

:

;

The present non-fulfilment of the obligation is left to. of the reader or hearer. It is not formally stated. inference the to It happens that in the N. T. it is only in the subordinate clauses that the further development of this use of eSet comes, when only Uved up

the present time

"ought"

lish

is

:

So 2 Cor. 2

The same :

19, ovs edet

:

eirl

Our Eng-

form about the present as well as d^' Siv e5et fxe xa^pet^. In Heb. iraBdv, there is an implied condition 3,

:

an apodosis of the second-class condition,

practically

in 2 Cor. 12

in Ac. 24

to be here, but they are not.

26, kwel UeL ahrov xoXXd/cts

and Uei is which see.

Thus

referred to.

likewise a past

about the past.^ 9

is

They ought

(70V irapetvaL.

process

11, kydi Ci<^eLKov

is

seen in the other words. Thus awiaTacrdaL, we have a simple

vjjlwv

vcf)'

past obligation. So in Lu. 7:41; Heb. 2 17. Note common use of the present tense also, as in Ac. 17 29. Cf. 6 bxjte'CKoixev TOLrjaaL the TreTOL-nKafiev (Lu. 17: 10), where the obligation comes on from :

:

But

past.

in 1 Cor. 5

:

10,

eirel

w^etXere apa

k

rod Koaixov k^eKdetv,

present time under consideration and a practical apodosis of a second-class condition implied. I do not agree Avith Moulton^ that av in such instances has been " dropped." It simply was not needed to suggest the unreality or non-realization of the

we have merely

obligation.

The context made

it

Xpi? occurs

clear enough.

only

not found

once in the N. T. (Jas. 3 10), whereas at all, nor e^eaTt (but e^ov) nor e^^v.^ But edhvaro is used of the present time. So Jo. 11 37. Cf. the apodosis in the second-class condition without iiu in Jo. 9 33; Ac. 26 32. The use of us avrJKev TpoarjKeL (Attic) is

:

:

:

:

(Col. 3

18)

:

and

a ovk aprJKev (Eph. 5

in subordinate clauses.

:

4) are

both pertinent, though

in particular oh yap

Note

Kad^rjKev

avTov f rji'

In Mt. 26: 24, koXov riv avrco (Ac. 22 22), 'He is not fit to without av of a condition of apodosis d ovk eyevvr]9r], we have the live.'

:

the second class (determined as unfulfilled). There expressed in 2 Pet. 2 21, KpetrTOV yap rjv avTols p-ri :

is

no condition

kireyvuKevai, Trjv

Moulton^ finds the origin of this idiom in the conditional sentence, but Winer ^ sees in it merely the Greek way itself. of affirming what was necessary, possible or appropriate in (Thumb, idiom this preserves Greek modern The So Gildersleeve.^

68dv

1

TYJs hKaio(jvv7]%.

Our

transl. therefore often fails to distinguish the

Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 2

Prol., p. 200.

3

Blass, Gr. of

<

Prol., p. 200.

144

N. T. Gk.,

f.

two senses

of ehei in

Cf chapter on Tense. .

p. 206.

"

W.-Th., p. 282.

"

Synt., Pt.

I,

p. 144.

Gk.

:

MODE Handb., p. 128).

The use

Rev. 3: 2 approaches this p. 274. For the use Teaeiv in Lu. 16 rather than the indicative see ^

So also

17.

Lpa

and subjunctive as

The use

Verhe, p. 21.

of eneWov in

Thompson, Syntax,

Cf.

potential indicative. of the infinitive

921

(efkaisis)

in Jo. 6

—

:

of 6\lyov or niKpov with

7.

an

Le

Cf. Viteau,

aorist does not

occur in the N. T. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 445. (7) The Apodosis of Conditions of the Second Class.

This

matter has already "been touched on slightly and is treated at length under Conditional Sentences. It can be merely sketched The condition is not always expressed and av usually is here. present. The use of av, however, in the apodosis is not obligaWe know very little about the origin and meaning of av tory.^ anyhow. It seems to have a demonstrative sense (definite, then,

which was shifted to an

in that case)

moods

colour the

indefinite use.

Gildersleeve interprets

TOP, TO. Kal 70.?

of the

Cf. t6v Kal

as a particle

it

Greek language."

"used to

With the past

tenses

independent sentences it is a definite particle. The effort to express unreahty by the indicative was a somewhat In Homer "the unreal imperfect indicative difficult process. always refers to the past."^ So in Heb. 11:15. Nothing but

of the indicative in

show whether these past tenses are used in oppoThe Koivr\ received this idiom of the unreal indicative "from the earlier age as a fully grown and normal usage, which it proceeded to limit in various directions."* In Jo. 15 22 we have a good illustration of this construction.

the context can

sition to the past or the present.

:

We know

that anapTlav ovk

eLxo(rav is in

reality because it is followed

same thing verse 19 av eXkyere av

k4>l\€i

and

24 when

seen in verse

is

is

by

opposition to the present

vvv 8e TpocpaaLv ovk Ixovaiv.

In

In Lu. 17:6

used, the usual construction.

vir-qKovaep 'dp

The

vvv be ewpaKaaip follows.

are used after the protasis

d

exere (first-

So also the marginal This is class condition) after eTrotetre el eare and is fol39 is in 8 Jo. reading in W. H. of Up seems more The absence above). (cf. lowed by pvp 5e fTjretre a mixed condition.

.

:

noticeable in John's Gospel. kpov ovbtplav

idiom.

el

Thus

edcoKare p.0L

Gal. 4

Blass, Gr. of Gildorsl.,

«

1.5 el

:

'

*

:

N. T. Gk.,

Am.

Cf. Jo. 19

bthopkvop

and Ro. 7 7

»

Synt., p. 251

(iri

rjv

Tr]P

(tol

:

11, ovk elx^s k^ovalap Kar'

dpo^Oep.^

bwarop tovs

ap-aprlap ovk eypo:p

p. 205.

=

Paul has the same^

ocfydaXpiOvs el p.r]

vpojp e^opv^avres

bid poixov, ttjv re

GiUlersl., Synt., Pt.

Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. IG.

I,

p.

168

f.

Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist.

f.

^ IToro 5tA n-ad 2x«s. Moulton, Prol., p. 199. But not in Acta. Cf. Blass, Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 20G.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

922

The MSS. vary in the support 6 vofios. where EKLP (and K^'D'') have it. In Jo. does not have av, while in 8 19, D does not have it,

yap eTLdvuldv

ovk ^8eLP

of au as in Gal. 4

18

B

36,

:

:

el

fir]

15,

:

and the other MSS. differ in the position of ixp.^ This particle comes near the beginning of the clause, though not at the beginIt does not precede

ning.

om

(cf.

repeated in successive apodoses

iiv

1

Jo.

Cf. Kiihner-Gerth, Bd.

Lu. 12 :39).

(cf.

of

Gal.

(cf.

in general

see

It is sometimes but not always

10).

:

4

:

I,

10),

On

p. 247.

Thompson, Syntax, pp. 291

ff.

{Doctrina Partic. Linguae Graecae, ed. sec, 1806, p.

mean simply

av

addition of

to

iiv

effect as

we can

(Lu. 19

23)

deheo,

the use-

Hoogeveen 35) makes

"The

a very doubtful interpretation.

an indicative apodosis produced much the same express in writing

by

"^

This emphasis suggests that the condition was not realized. The papyri likewise occasionally show the absence of av.^ The condition is not always expressed. It may be definitely implied in the context or left to inference. So Kayo) eKdoiv avv tokco av ewpa^a avTo :

and /cai eXduv eych Here the condition

25:27).

struction thoroughly classical.

no instance

italicizing

eKoixiaaixriv

av to

kfiov

'if.'

avv tokw (Mt.

implied in the context, a con-

is

But, in principal clauses, there

is

of av with a past tense of the indicative in a frequentIt only survives in relative,

ative sense.^

poral clauses

(cf.

Mk.

6

:

56; Ac. 2

:

45; 4

:

comparative or tem35;

1

Cor. 12

:

2;

Mk.

3:11; 11 19). So D in Mk. 15 6, 6v av fiTovvro. Both the aorist and the imperfect tenses are used thus with av in these subordinate clauses. There was considerable ambiguity in the use of the past tenses for this "unreal" indicative. No hard and fast rule could be laid down. A past tense of the indicative, in a condition without av, naturally meant a simple condition of the first class and described past time (cf. Heb. 12 25). But in certain contexts it was a condition of the second class (as in Jo. 15 22, 24). Even :

:

:

:

with

The

not certain^ whether past or present time is meant. certain application to present time is probably post-

iiv

it is

The imperfect might denote^ a past condition, as in Mt. 23 :30; 24 43 (Lu. 12 :39); Jo. 4 10; 11:21, 32; 1 Jo. 2 Homeric.^

:

:

:

^ Moulton, Pro!., p. 200. N. T. Gk., p. 206. 3 lb. Cf. Moulton, Class. Quart., Apr., 1908, p. 140. Moulton (Prol., p. 200) cites without av O.P. 526 (ii/A.D.) ou irapk^tvov, O.P. 530 (ii/A.O.) iraXiv aoi kireaTakKiiv, Rein. P. 7 (ii/B.c.) OVK aTrear-qL, all apodoses of 2d class conditions. The mod. Gk. here uses the conditional da (Thumb, Handb., p. 19.5). 4 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 207. Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 170 f. 6 Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., § 399. « Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 230 f. ^ Moulton, Prol., p. 201. 1

Blass, Gr. of

MODE Heb. 11

19;

:

15, or, as

923

(etkaisis)

commonly, a present condition

(cf.

Lu. 7:

The aorist would naturally denote past time, as in Mt. 11 The two tenses may come in the same condition and con21. clusion, as in Jo. 14 28. The past perfect is found in the protasis, 39).

:

:

as in Mt. 12

:

7; Jo. 19

:

in the conclusion (1 Jo. 2

Once the

11. :

And

19).

meets us

real past perfect

note av

in Jo. 14

rj^etre

:

7.

These impracticable wishes were introduced in Attic by eWe or d yap, which used also ibcfjekov with the infinitive. From this form a particle was developed '6
(6)

:

:

:

Many

of the MSS. (D'^EFGKL) read and a few do the same in 1 Cor. 4 8. The idiom occurs in the LXX and in the inscriptions. Cf. Schwyzer, The modern Greek expresses such wishes by m or Perg., p. 173. For Upap.ov in Gal. 2: as and imperf. or aorist (Thumb, p. 128). Radermacher {N. T. 2, of unrealized purpose, see Final Clauses. Gr., p. 127) quotes 6(peXov e/xeipas, Achilles Tatius, II, 24, 3, and

the future (Gal. 5

:

12).

ucpeXov in 2 Cor. 11:1,

(j3<j)t\ov

kyw naXXov

kirvpeaaov, Epict., Diss., 22, 12.

The Present.

(&)

lielov Ibetv,

:

In Mt. 12

:

38, StSacr/caXe, OeXopieu airb aov

the present seems rather abrupt.^

strongly that

deXofxev tov 'Irjaovv ibdv, this is felt SO 'Sir,

we

loould see Jesus.'

In Jo. 12

See also Jo. 6

:

it is

:

22 and

d^aipi7]v av in

26

:

Cor. 7

:

also 4)dbop.ai in

.

:

meaning which

now

:

UTraToj dXieuetf (cf. epxcfieda) in Jo.

21

:

assertion.

10

:

22,

fj

The nature Tapa^rjXovfjLev

It

may

The question

the suggestion or hint indicative

is

is

a definite In

1

Cor.

top KvpLov; the indicative notes the fact,

in Jo. 11

be questioned^

escape us.

In a case like

of the case supplies the rest.

while the surprise and indignation

form.

3,

The

in the fact, not in the statement.

translated:

not seem to be

29.

dk\oo in 1

crrj-

21, Kupte,

Cf. e^ovXoixrjv in

67.

There does 7. Cf 7 28. There were probably delicate nuances of sufficiently softened these words, shadings which There is no difficulty about dp/ceT in 2 Cor. 12 9. Ac. 25

the same abruptness in

:

if

Jo. 6: 28), like the Latin

:

come out

in the interrogative

47, tI iroLovnev; is very striking.

the point

is

the same as

Quid fadamus? Lc Vcrbc,

tL TvoLwyitv; (cf.

The subjunctive

1

Cf. Vitcau,

2

Against Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 210.

p. 21.

of de-

^

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

924

liberation suggests

doubt on the whole subject or expresses a Blass' cites the colloquial Latin for paral-

wish to do something. lels for this

idiom.

But we do not need such

inquiry of Caiaphas

parallels here.

The

rather indignant protest against the in-

is

activity of the Sanhedrin than a puzzled

quandary as to what

He they should do. The nothing and knowing and charges them with doing nothing indicative suits exactly his purpose.

makes a definite proposal himself. Winer sees the point clearly. The same use of 9eXco noted above appears in questions of deliberation as in dekets avXke^wjjiev; (Mt. 13 Cf. Lu. 18 :41.

18 :39). pressed in questions also, as in (Jo.

opTes; (Mt. 12

:

:

xcos

bvvaade ayada XaXelv

ri (xe del iroielv Iva awdch;

34);

So ^ovkeaOe a-KokvcFw; duty may be ex-

28).

Possibility or

(Ac. 16

:

30).

irov-qpol

This

is

method rather than trusting to the mode.^ ''It is and more convenient, to show the modal character possible, found of particles, or from the drift of the context, means by clause of a the analytical

without a distinct verbal form."^ (c)

The Future.

The

future indicative

"was

originally a sub-

has a distinct modal development. This fact comes out in the fact that the future tense of the indicative is a rival of the subjunctive, the optative and the imperaLike the subjunctive and optative the future may be tive.''

junctive in the main"^ and

it

merely futuristic (prospective) or deliberative or volitive. This matter has been discussed at length under Tenses, which see. As an example of the merely futuristic note Mt. 11 28, of the volitive see Lu. 13 9, of the deliberative note Jo. 6 68. II. The Subjunctive Mode (t^ viroTaKTiKii e^KXicris). :

:

:

Some

Greek grammarians called it 8i.crTaKTLKrj, some 17 some viroOerLKr]. But no one of the names is happy,

of the

aviJi^ovKevTCKT],

for the

17

17

mode

is

not always subordinate, since it is used freely in is it the only mode used in subordinate

principal clauses, nor

But the best one is 17 biaTaKTiK-q. Relations to Other Modes. The development of the modes was gradual and the differentiation was never absolutely distinct. These (a) The Aorist Subjunctive and the Future Indicative. are closely allied in form and sense. It is quite probable that clauses. 1.

the future indicative Cf.

is

just a variation of the aorist subjunctive.

eSofxaL, TvioiJLaL, cfidyofjiai..

Cf.

Thompson,

1

lb.

2

W.-Th.,

«

Blass, Gr. of

The subjunctive

Synt., p. 187.

p. 284.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 210.

is

always future, in

*

Monro, Horn.

»

Moulton,

«

Thompson,

Gr., p. 235.

Prol., p. 199.

Synt., p. 218.

MODE

925

(efkaisis)

subordinate clauses relatively future. Hence the two forms continued side by side in the language. There is a possible dis-

"The

subjunctive differs from the future indicative in likely to occur, not positively what will thought stating what ^ begirming (cf. Homer) it was probably not in the But occur." pointedly contends that many Gr., (Griech. Brugmann p. 499) so. so-called future indicatives are just "emancipated short-vowel conjunctives." Cf. Giles, Manual, pp. 446—148; Moulton, ProL, tinction.

is

p. 149. (6)

lied.

The Suhjunctive and Indeed, the

skrit,2 is

instead.

first

the Imperative.

These are closely

absent in usage and the subjunctive has to be employed There is a possible instance of the subjunctive as im-

perative in the second person in Sophocles, but the text tain.^

al-

person imperative in Greek, as in San-

The use

of the second

subjunctive

is

of

(x-q

and the

is

uncer-

aorist subjunctive in prohibitions

and third persons

is

also pertinent.

Thus the

in close affinity with the imperative.

The Subjunctive and the Optative. They are really variaof the same mode. In my Short Graynmar of the Greek N. T.^ I have for the sake of clearness grouped them together. I treat them separately here, not because I have changed my view, (c)

tions

but in order to give a more exhaustive discussion. The closeness of the connection between the subjunctive and the optative is manifest in the Sanskrit. "Subjunctive and optative run closely parallel with one another in the oldest language in their use in independent clauses, and are hardly distinguishable in dependent."^

In the Sanskrit the subjunctive disappeared before the It is well known that the

optative save in the imperatival uses.

"Latin subjunctive is syncretistic, and does duty for the Greek conjunctive and optative."^ Delbriick, indeed, insists that the two modes originally had the same form and the same meaning.'' But Delbriick's view has carried the bulk of modern opinion. Giles^ is justified in saying: "The original meaning of these moods and the history of their development is the most difficult of the many vexed questions of comparative syntax." It is true that »

Thompson, Gk.

2

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

3

Cf. Giklersl., Synt., Pt.

*

^

6 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 216. Pp. 129-131. Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., 1907, p. 191. Die Grundl. d. griech. Synt., p. 115 f.

8

Comp.

6

Synt., 1883, p. 133. p. 216.

Philol, p. 502.

I,

p. 149.

926

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

the subjunctive in Greek refers only to the future, while the

But the optative is usually The use of the subjunctive was greater in Homer's time than afterwards. The independent subjunctive in particular was more freely used in Epic than in Attic. In the modern Greek^ the subjunctive has not only displaced the optative, but the future indicative and the infinitive. But even so in modern Greek the subjunctive is relatively reduced and is almost confined to subordinate clauses (Thumb, Handb., pp. 115, 126). The fut. ind. in modern Greek is really 6a (dava) and subj. G. Hamilton* overstates it in saying: "This monarch of the moods, which stands absolute and alone, has all the other moods dependent on it." It is possible that originally these two moods were used indifferently.^ Vandacle^ argues for a radical difference between the two moods, but he does not show what that difference is. There were distinctions developed beyond a doubt in actual use,^ but they are not of a The Iranian, Sanskrit and the Greek are the radical nature. only languages which had both the subjunctive and optative. The Sanskrit dropped the subjunctive and the Greek finally dispensed with the optative as the Latin had done long ago.^ 2. Original Significance of the Subjunctive. Delbriick^ optative

not boiind to any sphere.^

is

relatively 2 future like our "should," "could," etc.

is

clear that "will" is the

fundamental idea of the subjunctive,

while "wish" came to be that of the optative. is

sharply challenged to-day.

Goodwin i°

"to include under one fundamental idea

any mood

in

But

denies that all

Greek except the imperative."

this position it is

possible

the actual uses of

He

admits that the

only fundamental idea always present in the subjunctive

is

that

and claims this as the primitive meaning from the idiom of Homer, Brugmann^^ denies that a single root-idea of the subjunctive can be found. He cuts the Gordian knot by three of futurity

uses of the subjunctive (the

Am.

volitive,

the deliberative, the futur-

Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. 11.

1

Gildersl.,

2

Cf. Baumlein, Unters. iiber griech.

3

Cf. V.

*

Latin of the Latins and Greek of the Greeks, p. 23. Bergaigne, De conjunctivi et optativi in indoeurop. hnguis.

^

and

D., Handb., p. 321

8

L'optatif grec, p.

*

Jolly,

9

Die Grundl.,

(1846, p. 25

d. vergl. Synt.,

116

f.

f.).

'

xxiii.

Ein Kapitel p.

Modi

f.

lb., p.

iii.

Der Konjunktiv und Optativ,

Cf. Synt., II, pp. 349

p. 119.

ff.

" M. and T., App., Relation of the Optative to the Subjunctive and other Moods, p. 371. " Griech. Gr., p. 499.

MODE

(efkaisis)

927

W.

G. Hale^ identifies the deliberative and futuristic uses Sonnenschein^ sees no distinction between volitive and deliberative, to which Moulton^ agrees. "The objection to the term 'deliberative,' and to the separation of the first two classes, appears to be well grounded." He adds: "A command may easily be put in the interrogative tone." That is true. It is also istic).

as identical.

true "that the future indicative has carried off not only the fu-

but also the volitive and deliberative subjunctives." But

turistic

for practical purposes there

Stahl* sees the origin of

The

will.

is

wisdom

in

Brugmann's

division.

the subjunctive uses in the notion of future meaning grows out of the volitive. Mutzbauer^ all

fundamental meaning of the subjunctive to be the attitude of expectation. This was its original idea. All else comes

finds the

out of that.

mood

is

the

With

mood

this Gildersleeve*^ agrees:

"The

subjunctive

draws a sharp

of anticipation," except that he

between "anticipation" and "expectation." "Anticiif it were present." He thinks that is a "deadened imperative."^ But Monro ^ on the whole thinks that the futuristic meaning is older than the volitive. So the grammarians lead us a merry dance with the subjunctive. Baumlein^ denies that the subjunctive is mere possibility. It aims after actuality, "a tendency towards distinction

pation treats the future as the futuristic subjunctive

actuality."

meaning

At any

rate

it is

clear that

we must

seek the true

of the subjunctive in principal clauses, since subordinate

clauses are a later development, though the futuristic idea best

In a sense Hermann's notion come in the modes (Wirklichkeit, MoglichNotwendigkeit) The indicative is Wirklichkeit, the imperais N otwendigkeit, while the subjunctive and the optative

survives in the subordinate clause.^" is

true that three ideas

keit,

tive

.

I have ventured in my Short Grammar'^^ to call the subjunctive and optative the modes of doubtful statement,

are Moglichkeit.

'

I,

The Anticipatory Subjunctive in Gk. and

p. 6.

See discussion of these three uses of

XVI,

2

CI. Rev.,

3

Prol., p. 184.

p. 166.

Lat., Stud. Class. Phil. (Chicago)* fut. ind.

under Tense.

«

Synt., Pt.

7

lb., p. 148.

I,

p. 147.

« Horn. Gr., p. 231. 235 f. Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 8 f. ' Unters. liber die gricch. Modi, p. 35. Cf. Wetzel, De Conjunctivi ct Optativi apud Graecos Usu, p. 7. ^^ Hammerschrnidt, tJber die Grundb. von Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 4. " Pp. 129-131. A3 a matter of fa(!t both Dclbriick and Goodwin fail to establish a sharp distinction between the subjunctive and the optative. Cf. Giles, Man., p. 504. ^

^

Krit.-hist. Synt., p.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

928

while the indicative

is

mode

the

The modes,

way

seen, overlap all along the line, but in a general correct.

is

The subjunctive

Cf. dprjvriv

t6v deov (Ro. 5:1), ri diroo v^xiv; (1 Cor. 11

both positive and negative statements. 12

:

14),

mood

(Txicroj/jLev

iJ.ri

ahrbv,

aWa

Cf

Xaxo^fJ^ev

bihij.ev

.

(Jo.

exco/xeu irpbs

It is

22).

:

as already

this outline

appears in both

in principal sentences

and interrogative sentences.

declarative

and the im-

of positive assertion

commanding statement.

perative that of

rj

19

:

found in

(Mk.

Soj/xev;

fxr]

24).

It is the

of doubt, of hesitation, of proposal, of prohibition, of anti-

cipation, of expectation, of brooding hope, of imperious will.

do best to follow Brugmann. Threefold Usage. The three uses do

We

shall, then, 3.

exist,

whatever their

origin or order of development.^

This idiom

Futuristic.

(a)

ov as in ovde

ISoj/jll,

'I

is

Homer with

seen in

never shall

the negative

an emphatic

It is

see.'

future.^

This emphatic future with the subjunctive is common in Homer with av or Kev and once without. Gildersleeve^ calls this the "Hoit is more than doubtful if the usage was Moulton (ProL, p. 239) quotes P. Giles as does for many dialects what the subjunctive

meric subjunctive," but

Homer.

confined to

saying: "This like

did for Greek, putting a statement in a polite, inoffensive way,

Note the presence

asserting only verisimilitude."

tive in the subordinate clauses with eav

here and there with the subjunctive futuristic sense.

Greek,

Thumb

for ov8ev.

The

and the future This

and the 4

:

is

of the subjunc-

The presence

testifies to

of ov

a feeling for the

See 7/rts ov KaroLKLadfj (Jer. 6:8). In the modern (Handb., p. 195) gives a 8ev TrLarevris, where 8h is practical equivalence of the aorist subjunctive

indicative

particularly those with

8:3).

(et).^

ei,

is

evident in the subordinate clauses,

Iva, 6s

manifest in the

late papyri.^

and

ocrns.

LXX,

Blass^ pronounces

26) "quite impossible" against

Cf. o TrpoaepeyKn (Heb.

the N. T., the inscriptions cos

avdpooTos

^aXy (Mk.

XBDLA. But Moulton''' quotes

redrj from inscriptions 317, 391, 395, 399 al. in Ramsay's Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii, 392. For the papyri, Moulton (Prol, p. 240) notes B. U. 303 (vi/A.D.) Trapaax^='I will furnish,' A. P. 144 (v/a.d.) e\do}='I will come.' The itacisms in -a-p and -o-et prove less, as Moulton notes. The examples in the papyri of itacistic -aet, -an are "innumerable." In Ac. 5 16, W. H.

ov

:

»

Cf. Giles, Man., p. 505.

5

Moulton,

2

Monro, Horn.

^

3

Synt., Pt.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321. Prol., p. 240.

*

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 503.

I,

Gr., p. 198.

p. 153.

?

Prol., p. 240.

MODE print tva

= 7ra;s

—

€7ri
136)

Gr., p.

(B,

some

This

(t)ev^ead€.

better case for

h

to)

Radermacher {N. T.

cursives).

quite prepared to take

is

929

(efkaisis)

(f)vyr)T€ (Mt. 23 33) probably deliberative, but he makes a ^rjpco tI yevrjraL (Lu. 23 Blass^ notes 31). ttcos

:

is

:

that "the mixture of the fut. ind. and aorist conj. has, in comparison with the classical language,

made

considerable progress."

He refers to Sophocles, Lexicon, p. 45, where etTro) aoL is quoted as = epw o-ot.2 In a principal clause in Clem., Horn. XL 3, we have Kal ovTws

—

auTols

8vvr]dfj,

and Blass has noted

We

afxapTia.

rj

also in Is. 33

24

:

cannot, indeed, trace the idiom

yap

acpedfi

all

the

way

from Homer. "But the root-ideas of the subjunctive changed remarkably little in the millennium or so separating Homer from the Gospels; and the mood which was more and more winning back its old domain from the future tense may well have come to be used again as a 'gnomic future' without any knowledge of the It was certainly primitive in its simwas not the most primitive idiom. The use of ov with the subj. did continue here and there after Homer's day. We find it in the LXX, as in Jer. 6 8 (above) and in the Phrygian In fact, in certain constructions it is common, inscription (above) Cf. 2 Cor. 12 20 as in /xt) ov after verbs of fearing and caution. and MSS. in Mt. 25 9 (/U17 Trore ovk apKeay). It is even possible that

antiquity of such a usage." ^ plicity^

even

if it

:

.

:

:

Gildersleeve^ remarks might even seem easier to make ov belong to al(xxvv9ui, thus combining objective and subjective negatives, but it must be remembered that ov with the'subjunctive had died out

the idiom ov

on

iii]

is

to be thus explained.

this point: " It

(except in

ixi]

ov)

before this construction

came

in."

The vernacu-

lar may, however, have preserved ov with the subj. for quite a while. Jannaris^ confidently connects ov in this idiom with the

subj.

and explains

explanations

is

fxij

as an abbreviation of

nrjv.

If either of these

true, the N. T. would then preserve in negative

Burton^ is with ov ni} in subjunctive is used "the aorist clear that anyhow The ancient Greek indicative." emphatic future the sense of an this sense, but subjunctive in present the employed sometimes the N. T. does not use it. But the LXX has it, as in Jer. 1 19. So in Is. 11: 9 we find oh uri KaKowoirjcrovcrLV ov8^ fxrj Svpcovrai. The future ind. with ov txi] is rare in the N. T., but oh fxr] with the aorist principal sentences the purely futuristic subjunctive.

:

1

2 8

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 208. See also Hatz., Einl., p. 218.

"

Justin Martyr, p. 169.

'

Moulton, Prol., p. 186. Goodwin, M. and T., pp.

»

Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 449. N. T. M. and T., p. 78.

2,

372.

«

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

930

W. H.

subj. appears in the

the origin of this ou

problem

states the

firj

text 71 times. ^

cannot be said that

It

Goodwin ^

construction has been solved.

The two negatives ought

well.

to neutralize

each other, being simplex, but they do not (cf. /x?) ou). The examples are partly futuristic and partly prohibitory. Ellipsis is not satisfactory nor complete separation (Gildersleeve) of the two Perhaps ov expresses the emphatic denial and mi? the negatives. prohibition which come to be blended into the one construction.

At any

rate

proper to cite the examples of emphatic denial

it is

as instances of the futuristic subjunctive. Thus ov fxrj ae avw, ovb' ov iii] (76 eTKaraXtTTCo (Heb. 13 5); ov nij awo'Kecrj] (Mk. 9 41); omeTi :

:

ov

(XT]

cipal

(Mk. 14

Trio:

:

25). Cf.

Lu. 6: 37

and subordinate clauses

in

See ov

etc.

Mk.

13

in

both prin-

See also Tense.

2.

:

ii-q

a rhetorical question in Lu. 18 7 (note also fxaKpoOv/iet) rather than a deliberative one. In Rev. 15 4 we have the aor. subj. and the fut. ind. side by side in a rhetorical question, tIs ov It is

:

:

firi



KVpie, Kal So^aaeL to ovoixa; irpos

Kai TTopevcreTaL

avrbv — Kol

See also the etTT]

rts e^ vp.wv

avrQ; (Lu. 11:5).

e^et

It IS

here anything very "deliberative" aljout eixj/ as It may be merely the rhetorical use of the distinct from e^ei. Have the grammars been correct futuristic subj. in a question. difficult to sec

these subjunctives in questions as "deliberative"? Certainly the future ind. is very common in rhetorical and other

in explaining

all

questions in the N. T.

no doubt about the presence of the volitive subjunctive in the N. T. The personal equation undoubtedly cuts some figure in the shades of meaning in the moods, here as Gildersleeve'* would indeed make this "imperative elsewhere.3 sense" the only meaning of the mood in the standard language (b)

There

Volitive.

is

He does this because the deliberative subjuncimperative answer. But, as already seen, that an tive expects Brugmann^ takes pains to remark that question. is a mooted the volitive subjunctive belongs to the "will" in of the element It is purely a matter of the addressed. one the to not speaker, It occurs in both positive and negative sentences and context. The usage is common in Homer. the negative is always after

Homer.

(jltj.

Monro 1

interprets

Moulton,

ton names 74. -

M. and

3

Giles,

*

Synt., Pt.

Prol.,

it

3d

ed.,

He had

T., pp.

Man., I,

389

"what the speaker

as expressing p.

190.

But

given 78 in the ff.

in the

first

Germ,

resolves or in-

ed.,

p. 300,

Moul-

Engl. ed.

See also pp. 101-105.

p. 505.

'

p. 148.

«

Griech. Gr., p. 500.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 197.

:

MODE

931

(efkaisis)

is the same as was a necessity for the first person, Moulton^ ventures to since the imperative was deficient there.

sists

In principle the hortatory subjunctive

upon."

the prohibitive use with

It

nr].

treat this hortatory use of the first person subj under the imperative, since the Sanskrit grammars give the Vedic subjunctive of .

The other first person as an ordinary part of the imperative. persons of the Sanskrit subj. are obsolete in the epic period. Thus hharama, hharata, bharaniu are compared with

(Attic for

4>epbvTwv

Moulton- appeals and second persons in con(Mk. 14:42). This example illus-

Koivi]

combination of the

also to the

structions like eyelpeade iiyoipev

(jjepeTcoaap)

The

trates well the volitive idea in ayuixev.^

TMnev

Kai

Cf. Lu. 9 8,

:

Cor.

(1

text); 4>povCinev (Ph. 3

:

plural

the person

is

Cf. also ayoopev (Jo. 11:7);

usually found in this construction. (t)ay(j)p.ev

.

first

15:32);

5:1, correct Th. 5:6).

(Ro-

excoM^^'

15); yp-qyopQipiev Kai vr]4>o)H€v (1

33 in particular (infinitive and subj.). In 1 Cor. 5 the subjunctive is hortatory and chare is an :

eopTCL^copev,

c!}(TTe

Cf further Heb. 12 1 1 Jo. 4 7. As examples with pri see prj cx'-^^wpev (Jo. 19: 24); p-q KadevScopev (1 Th. 5:6). The construction continued to flourish in all stages of the language.** We have SeDre airoKTdvwpev (Mk. 12 7. Cf. 5e0re In a^es the sinUere, Mt. 28 6) and ac^es Uwpev (Mt. 27:49). gular has become stereotyped.^ This use of a^es was finally shortened into ds in the modern Greek and came to be universal with the hortatory subjunctive of the first person and even for

inferential particle.

:

;

:

.

:

:

the third person imperative in the vernacular (as as Ixxi for In the N. T. a^es is not yet a mere auxiliary as is our exerco).

"let" and the modern Greek Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 9, 15.

Sevpo

ds.

It

is

more

134) quotes

like

d(/)es

"do

let

me

person singular the N. T. always has

In the first with the hortatory

1

Prol., p. 175.

'

See

*

Jann., Hist.

6

Blass, Gr. of

1

Cor. 10

subjunctive."'^

Thus ==

7-9 for the change from

:

first

Gk. Gr., p. 447. N. T, Gk., p. 208. But see

KD

here read

&<j>es.

*

Moulton,

Prol., p. 170.

go."^

Epict.

Sel^copev,

a(t>es

I,

or

d^es k/SaXco (Mt. 7

lb.

to second persons.

fit^ere Ucjfxep

(Mk. 15

:

36),

Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 44S) derives

though fis

from

eacre (iaffov), acre. ^ It was rare in Goodwin, M. and

classic

Gk. not to have a7e or

T., p. 88;


Gildcrsl., Synt., Ft.

I,

or p.

some such word. 148

f.

The

Cf.

volitive

is common in mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb., p. 126) both for exhortations, commands, prohibitions and wishes. It oticurs in the late pap. for wish, as

eubj.

KaTa^Lwffji,

P.Oxy.

I,

128, 9.

So

in the hiscr. roiavra

7rdf)fj,

Poutioa III, 62, S

^

Lu. 6 :42 and 8evpo

4);

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

932

7:34, LXX). Moulton^ from 0. P. 413 (Roman period). We

airoaTelXio (Ac.

cites a<^es eyC} avTrju dp-qvqao)

do not have to suppose the In Jo. 12 7, d^es

auxiliary.

ellipsis of

ha

Iva,

for d^es

avT-qv Iva TT/jprjay, it is

:

is just the hardly prob-

though in the modern Greek, as used with the third person. In the second person we have only the negative construction in prohibitions with the aorist subjunctive, a very old idiom able that

just auxiliary, 2

is

already stated, ds

is

"The

(see Tenses, Aorist).

them

future and the imperative between

carried off the old jussive use of the subjunctive in positive

commands

2d and 3d person. The old rule which in ('Anglimade sileas an entirely grammatical retort dis-

of

Latin

cistic')

courteous to the Public Orator's sileamf" (Moulton, ProL, p. 177). This example reinforces the idiom in the dialect of Elis which "produced such phrases as kTnfxeKeLav -iroLrjdTai. NLKoSpofxop, 'let Nicodromus attend to it,' has no place in classical or later Greek, unless in Soph., Phil., 300 (see Jebb). ''"•

8 (iii/B.c), Tb.P. 414

LXX,

In the

Jer. 18

note

8,

(Thumb, Handb.,

is

p. 127).

135) finds the subj. for wish in late

LXX, Ruth

even in the

1

:

LI. P. 1, vs.

See Moulton, Prol,

p. 178.

with airoarpahave wishes for the fu-

Kal eTnaTpa4)fj, parallel

ture in the subj., since the opt. forbid'

Add doubtfully

In the modern Greek we

in 18: 11.

(}>r]Too

:

(ii/A.D.)."

So 6 6e6s (t>v\a^'[i, 'God Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. papyri and inscriptions. It is dead.

9, Swtj kvplos vficcv Kal euprire avcnvavaiv,

In the Veda the prohibitive md is found only with the conjunctive, thus seeming to show that the imperative was originally used only in positive sentences. This idiom beside the optative.

person.

aorist subj. held its own steadily in the second This point has been discussed at some length under

Tenses.

Take

of

/X97

20);

and the

nil vop.iaT}Te

opoLTe

with

as illustrations the following: (5: 17);

and the

fxij

^ii?

aorist subj

.

is

are examples of asyndeton just like elTrns

the'

(Mk.

verb

5) opare

With

1

:

44;

-n-oLriaris

ixrjBeis

jSXeTrere

cf.

is

Mt. 8:4).

is

So also 6pa

not expressed.

ycvwaKeTw (Mt. 9 it

fxi]

(fyo^rjOfis

(Mt.

1

:

The use of 6pa and to be noted. Some of these d0es. Thus 6pa p.r]bevl p-qdeu

eiaevejKjis (6: 13).

:

30),

not always clear

fir]

(Rev. 22

Cf. also 6pa

TroL-fjaeLs

:

9)

where

(Heb. 8

:

and bpaT€ piT} dpoetade (24 6). whether we have asyndeton :

(parataxis) or a subordinate clause (hypotaxis). (Anderson-Cumont-Gregoire). Radermacher (N.T. Gk., Acta Thoraae, p. 129.

liy]dd7]<jav Kal ykvuiPTat, 1

Prol., p. 175.

»

Delbnick, Synt., p. 120; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 240.

2

lb.

In Lu. 21:8,

p. 128) cites alao crwr

;

MODE we seem

/3X€7r€T€ Ml? Tr\avr]dr}Te,

Heb. 12 25, :

/SXeTrere

have parataxis as

to

vnds

(Mt. 24

IcxTai

parataxis

subj. occurs with

16

:

11);

Trarijo-Tj

Th. 5

1

:

alone as in

/jltj

15, opSre

Th. 2

:

15.

12

tls

clptl

{fxr}

/ca/coD

third person aorist

dvai (2 Cor. 11 16); m^? tls vfids e^aElsewhere fxrj and the aorist imperative

Ml? TLS lie do^ji a(j)pova

(2

KaKov

:

:

/jltj

avTov k^ovdevrjay (1 Cor.

tls ovv

ixrj

Cor. 10

1 tls

jx-q

But the

probable.

is

also, as /SXeTrere

But, per contra, see

4).

In

in Col. 2:8).

TLvl awoSco,

:

possible^ in

:

These forms occur with the third person irXavrjaji

is

Cf. Ac. 13 40; Gal. 5

wapaLTr]ar]<xde.

ixri

933

(efkaizis)

3).

:

occur in the third person. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 134) 3d person aor. subj. from kolvt] writers, inscr. and ixt] and papyri. Careless writers even use fxij ovv aXXcos toltjs, B. G. U. Ill,

quotes

Even Epictetus

824, 17.

has

(II, 22, 24)

/jltj

avTodev

dTro^aii/rj.

No

an example with oh fxri, like ov nij kaeXdrjTe (Mt. 5 20), which is prohibitive. So ov mi? i't'/'?7s (Jo. 13 8); ov ni] Trlri (Lu. fxia Kepala ov }xr\ 1:15). There is an element of will in icora eu In Mt. 25 9, fx-q Trore 18) in the third person. TrapeXdii (Mt. 5 ov uri dpKeaji rifuv Kal vfxtv, the subj. is probably futuristic (or de-

less volitive is

:

:

r)

:

:

In a late papyrus, O. P. 1150, 6 (vI/a.d.), note del^ov where the 3d pers. subj = imperative like

liberative). Triv 8vvap.lv

aov kol e^eXdxi

.

There are examples in the N. T. where tva seems to be merely an introductory expletive with the volitive subjunctive. Thus Iva kirLdrjs (Mk. 5 23); I'm ava^Xepw (10 51); I'm TepLaaevrjTe Note present tense) (2 Cor. 8:7); I'm pvqpovevoopev (Gal. 2 10. Latin.

:

:

:

'iva (j)o^rJTaL

(Eph. 5

33) parallel

:

margin of W. H., Eph. (B. U. 48, ii/iii A.d.) eav

1

with

Cf. I'm

dyaTrdrco.,

Moulton^

17.

:

—

Scotj

(Sw)

finds in the papyri

So and 'iva The modern Greek nr]di Tibv TOKoov d^Ljuip-qa-ys (Cicero, Att. vi. 5). uses m and subj. as imperative for both second and third persons (Thumb, Handh., p. 127 f.). Note also pri 'iva avaaTaTcoarjs Moulton (ProL, p. 248) iipds, B. G. U. 1079 (a.d, 41), not I'm pq. also he cites

avTOV

e'iva

quotes Epict., IV, ek\oi

'iva

(cf.

Mk.

1,

6

:

dva^fjs

ttj

eoprfj

Ml? 8v(TO0Tr]ar]S,

41,

'iva prj

25; 10

:

pcopds

'iva

bpbae yevcopeOa.

F. P. 112 (99 A.D.),

fi,

35; Jo. 17

dXX' :

'iva

padrj.

The use

of

24) preceded this idiom.

Moulton^ even suggests that irpoaevxeade 'iva pi] eXd-qTe els weLpaapov (Mk. 14 38) is as much parataxis as opaTe Kal ^vXaaaeode (Lu. 12 This "innovation" in the kolvt] takes the place of ottcos and 15). :

:

the future ind. kpels,

Moulton (ProL,

p.

177 note) cites ottws poL

tell me,' where O7rcos='in which case.' words of caution and apprehension is probably

Plato, 337 B, 'don't

The use

of

pi]

after

1

But Blass

2

Prol., p. 179.

pij

(Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 278) holds the opposite view. "

lb., p. 178.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

934

NEW TESTAMENT

Moulton^ notes the use

paratactic in origin.^

with expressions of warning as well as the 12

15, kinaKOTodvTes

:

of the present subj.

But

tls pi^a TLKpLas hox^fj.

firj

Thus

aorist.

in

Heb.

this construc-

on subordinate clauses, if not clear over be best discussed there. Subordinate clauses show many examples of the volitive subjunctive (as clauses of design, probably paratactic in origin, Moulton, Prol., p. 185). See 81 rjs Xarpevcoixev (Heb. 12:28); oirou 4>a.'yw (Lu. 22: 11). See discussion of Sub. Clauses. tion borders so closely

the

line,

that

it

will

(c) Deliberative. There is no great amount of difference between the hortatory (volitive) subjunctive and the deliberative.

The

volitive

Tt atTi7(Tcojuat;

Tt

interrogative^

a quasi-imperative.

is

possible that

or

pi]

pi]

we have

(W. H. marg. just

pi]

ov

Mk.

12

this

ov)

14, bihpev

:

apKeay

r)

KOi vplv.

i]pl.v

This

is

pi] 8u>pev;

indicative

(Ro. 9

:

Lu. 14

:

28,

:

t'l

So also ov pi] as in Jo. 18 The aorist 7; Rev. 15 4.

:

:

:

:

:

10,

ovv TOLi]ao:pev;

t'l

11:47 and the future

The question may be

14).

34; Jo. 6

but a step to

is

so Xeyw in Heb. 11

roLo^pev;

tI roiovpev; in Jo.

It

68; Ro. 10

:

is

ov

either positive or negative,

or the present tense occurs as in Lu. 3 in Jo. 6

f .,

of hesitating half-

:

Cf. also Lu. 18

11, ov pi] TTiw avTo;

and

24

and the present subjunctive." It construction in Mt. 25 9, pi] Tore

the deliberative question.^ as in

:

Gildersleeve^ notes in

"number

Plato (rare elsewhere in Attic) a questions with

6

Thus TroLriawixev, 'suppose we do it,' and we to (must we) do?' do not vary much.

bOis.

'what are

TroLr](Tcj)(xep;

The

Mk.

connected with the deliberative in

is

6k\w IVa

:

32.

t'l

Cf. the

ovv epovpev

Mt. 26 54 Mt. 6 The kinship between

rhetorical

(cf.

:

14) or interrogative (cf.

18:21; Mk. 12:14; Lu. 22:49).« and delib. fut. ind. is seen in Mk. 6 37, ayopaaoopev Kai Sdoaopev; The first person is the one of most frequent occurrence (cf. Ro. 6:1), t'l ahijacopaL (Mk. 6 24). But examples are not wanting for the second and third persons. Thus ttcos <^vyy]Te 31;

delib. subj.

:

:

a-Ko T7JS Kp'Laecos Trjs yehvtjs;

See further Mt. 26

:

(Mt. 23

14; Ro. 10

:

33);

14.

:

t'l

It is

y'tvqTaL;

(Lu. 23

:

31).

sometimes uncertain

whether we have the subjunctive or the indicative, as in 'hepov TpoadoKupev; (Mt. 11:3) and kiraLveaco vpa^; (1 Cor. 11 22). But note t'l eiTTco vplv; in the last passage. In Lu. 11:5 we have both :

»

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2

Prol., p. 178.

*

Synt., Pt.

6

Blass, Gr. of

6

Burton, N. T.

I,

N. T. Gk.,

p.

212

f.

»

p. 152.

Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. and T., p. 92.

Cf. Goodwin,' M.

N. T. Gk., p. 211. Moods and Tenses,

p. 77.

199, 229.

MODE tIs e^et

and

eliry.

So

(Mk. 8

tL 8ol

935

(ErKAisis)

:

ACD

37,

5coo-ct)

may

be com-

This ambiguity appears in tI Koiriaw; and lyvoi rl iroL-qaco in Lu. 16 3 f. The dehberative subj. Cf. Mt. 6:31 with Mt. 6 25. is retained in indirect questions,

pared with

tL 5cbo-€t

(Mt. 16

:

26).^

:

:

kinship between the dehberative subj. in indirect questions and the imperative and the vohtive subjunctive is seen in Lu.

The 12

:

The

4

f., fxi] (j)0^r]d^Te

—

VTrodel^oo 8e hyuv

rlva

(fjo^TjdrJTe' (t>o^T]Or]Te

ktX.

deliberative subj., hke the vohtive, has various introductory

These become set words which make asyndeton (parataxis). Thus tov OeKeLs iTOLnao-coixev; (Mt. 26 17), plirases hke a4>es, 6pa. In Lu. 18 41 we have ri col 0eXets 0eXets e'LTconev; (Lu. 9 :54). But the I'ra was not neTTOL-qaw; and tva dj^a/SXei/'co as the reply. 28. In Jo. 18 39, jSovXeade ovv Cf. further Mt. 13 cessary. Some MSS. have cnroXvcrco, we probably have the subj. also. :

:

:

:

ei

22

in Lu.

Trard^o^ixep;

sion of the

sul^j.

:

49."

We may

leave further discus-

to the subordinate clauses.

We

have no ex-

with the subj. in independent sentences (but see kc and the subj. in Homer). In subordinate clauses av (Cf. is very common, though not necessary, as will be seen.^ discussion of d, oorts.) But Jannaris^ gives instances of av with

amples in the N. T. of

iiv

the subj. in principal clauses (futuristic) in Polybius, Philo, PluWith the disappearance of the fut. ind., the tarch, Galen, etc.

and the imper., the subj. has the field as the "prospective mood." It is found in the modern Greek as in tI va yLP-p (Thumb, opt.

Handh.,

p. 126).

The Optative Mode {r\ €\;ktikt| e'-yKXio-is). It has already been shown that the optative does not differ radically from the III.

Jannaris^ calls the optative the "secondary sub-

subjunctive. junctive."

For the facts see chapter on 1. History of the Optative. Conjugation of the Verb. It is an interesting history and is well outhned by Jannaris'' in his Appendix V, "The Moods Chiefly It retreated first from deSince A. (Ancient Greek) Times." pendent clauses and held on longest in the use for wish in independent sentences like jevoLTo. But even here it finally went down before the fut. ind. and subj. The optative was a luxury 1

Blass, Gr. of

2

lb.

'

Cf. Paley,

N. T. Gk.,

The Gk.

p. 210.

Cf. K.-G., TI.

Particles, p. 5.

Gk.

Hist.

6

lb., p.

Gr., p. 564.

450.

On

p. 221.

See Koppin, Beitr. zu Entwick. und

Wiird. der Idcen iibcr die Grundb. d. griech. *

I,

Modi

(1880).

the subj. see further Earle, CI. Papers, p. 221. « lb., pp. 360-367.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

936

of the language

Certainly

lar.

NEW TESTAMENT

and was probably never common it is

and papyri). march of the subj. tions

very rare in the vernacular It is a literary

mood

in the vernacu-

kolptj

(both inscrip-

that faded before the

In a hundred pages of the Memorabilia of

occurs 350 times. He had a "hyperorthodox love of the mood."^ Plato's Phaedo shows it 250 times in a corresponding space, but Strabo has it only 76, Polybius 37, Diodorus Siculus 13 times in a hundred pages. ^ The 67 examples in the N. T. are in harmony with the kolptj usage. Gildersleeve pithily says: "The optative, which starts life as a wish of the speaker, becomes a notion of the speaker, then a notion of somebody else, and finally a gnomon of obliquity" (A. J. of Phil., 1908, In the LXX the optative is rare, but not so rare as in p. 264). the N. T., though even in the LXX it is replaced by the subj. (Thackeray, Gr., p. 193) as in the late papyri and inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. 128, 135). There is no definite distinction between 2. Significance. the subjunctive and the optative in the Sanskrit.^ The Latin put all the burden on the subj., as the Greek finally did. The Sanskrit finally made the optative do most of the work. In a word, the optative is a sort of weaker subjunctive.* Some writers make the opt. timeless and used definitely of the past.^ It is rather a "softened future"^ sometimes flung back into the past for a Standpunkt. We do not' know "whether the opt. originally expressed wish or supposition." The name does not signify anything. It "was invented by grammarians long after the usages of the language were settled."^ They just gave it the name evKriK-f] because at that time the only use it had without av was that of wishing. The name is no proof that wishing was the primitive or the only function or the real meaning of the mode. We have

Xenophon the optative

precisely the

same

difficulty as in the subjunctive.

Indeed, the

* Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Phil., Jan., 1909, p. 19. According to Vandacle (L'Optatif Grec, p. 251) Plato et Xen. "ont donne k I'optatif la plus grande extension possible; Xenophon marque I'apogee." The optative he also de-

"un instrument d'une dclicatesse infinie." See further Kupff, Der Gebr. d. Opt. bei Diod. Sic. (1903); Reik, Der Opt. bei Polyb. und Philo(1907). 2 Schmid, Der Gebr. des Optativs bei Diod. Sic, 1903, p. 2. ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., In the original speech there was no clear p. 218.

scribes as

distinction

between the subj. and the opt. (Curtius, Temp, und Modi, 1846,

p. 266). *

Goodwin, M. and

6

Biiumlein, Griech. Modi, p. 177.

^

lb., p. 231.

«

Monro, Horn.

»

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 384.

Gr., p. 229.

T., p. 375.

MODE

937

(efkaisis)

optative has three values, just Hke the subjunctive, viz. the futuristic (potential), the volitivc (wishes) and the deliberative.^ In the first and third kinds av is usually present, but not always. deliberative as

Brugmann^ notes only two, omitting the discourse, but this

and may be

some

He

does reckon a third use in indirect merely the opt. in subordinate sentences

scholars do for the subj. is

either of the three

normal usages.

The

rare fut.

opt. in indirect discourse illustrates the point (not in the N. T.). There is no doubt of the distinction between the futuristic (po-

with negative ov (cf. futuristic subj. in Homer) and the volitive use with /xr] (cf. subj. again) .^ But there was also a "neutral sense" that can hardly be classed either as futuristic or volitive." Gildersleeve^ calls this the "optative in questions," usually tential)

with

is

the deliberative use.

The Three

(a)

the

This

6.V.

3.

Uses.

Futuristic or Potential.

first

the future

The

begin with this whether

use of the negative ov here shows

(cf. fut.

and

ind.

not always present in

aorist subj. in

Homer

mood

of the fancy."

«

its

kinship with

Homer). ^

The

iiv

was

and it is not the av that gives the In poetry the use without av con-

potential idea to the mode. tinued. " The optative is the ideal

the

it is

Delbriick^ has taken several positions on

in time or not.

this point.

We

mood

Moulton^ puts

of the it

Greek language, "It was used

clearly:

and to express a request in from Epictetus, II, 23, 1, Radermacher deferential style." clearly that the opt. showing aKovaeL, paov av tls av ridiov avayvurj (ProL, p. 194) Moulton parallel. somew^hat and the fut. ind. are alternate in ind. fut. and opt. the where cites Dcut. 28 24 ff., Radermacher with agree not do I Hebrew. translating the same (N. T. Gr., p. 128) in seeing in rjOeKov Tvapeivai (Gal. 4 20) a mere

to express a future in a milder form,

cites

—

:

:

See imperfect ind. The presence of av equivalent i° to the verb and makes one think meaning" contingent gives "a the fourth-class condition. The of protasis unexpressed of the of dtKoip-i av.

Man.,

p. 510.

1

Giles,

2

Griech. Gr., pp. 504

ff.

^

Goodwin, M. and

*

lb., p. 4.

T., p. 375.

Stahl (Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 236 f.) notes a "concessive I, p. 154. which is an ovcrrefinement. It is merely a weakened form of wish (K.-G., Bd. I, p. 228) or of the potential use. « Cf. his Konjunktiv und Optativ, Syntaktische Forschungen, Att.-indische Synt. In the last of these he suggests that the potential and wishing functions 6

Synt., Ft.

opt.,"

are distinct in origin. ^

Monro, Horn.

8

Gildersl., Synt., Ft.

Gr., p. 219. I,

p. 153.

»

"

Frol., p. 197. lb., p. 100.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

938

idiom has vanished as a Hving form from the vernacular kolpt] in the N. T. times.^ It appears only in Luke's writings in the N. T. and is an evident literary touch. The LXX shows it only 19 times outside of 4 Maccabees and 30 with it.^ Moulton^ notes one papyrus which does not have iiv (cf. Homer), though he would suspect the text and read as Mahaffy does oWev a[v] eTretTrat^ti, Par. P. 63 (ii/fi.c). But curiously enough Luke has only one instance of'this "softened assertion" apart from questions. That is in Ac. 26 29 (critical text) ev^alixr^v av. This fact shows how obsolete the idiom is in the kolvt). The use of av here avoids the passion:

ateness of the mere optative (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 157). other examples in Luke's writings are all in questions and

The

may

be compared with the subj. in deliberative questions. Only two examples appear of the opt. with av in direct questions. They are ttcos 7a/3 av bvva'iiJ.r]v kav fxi] tls 68-qyqaei, iJ.e; (Ac. 8 31. The only instance of a protasis in connection with an optative apodosis in the N. T.) and tL av OeXot. 6 (jirepixoKb-yos ovTos XeyeLv; (Ac. :

Both

17: 18).

and the second has a detI av Bekoi. Moulton from Job 31:31 and holds that it

are rhetorical questions

liberative tone; see

(c).

In Ac. 2

{Prol., p. 198) cites rts av

8(hi]

:

12,

E has

from tIs 8(hr] elsewhere (Num. 11 29). The other instances of av and the opt. are all in indirect questions, but the construction is not due to the indirect question. It is merely retained from the direct. The use of the optative in an indirect docs not

differ

question

when the

junctive

is

:

direct

not the point.

would have the indicative or the subThis

modes

in indirect questions.

Lu. 22

:

is

merely the

See Lu. 8

sequence of

classic

So adds iiv and MSS. vary with some of the other examples (cf. Lu. 18 36). So av is correct in Lu. 15 26. Moulton (ProL, p. 198) cites Esth. 13 3 irvOo/xevov ttcos a;^ axOel-q and inscr. Magnes. 215 (I/a.D.) eirepcoTq, t'l av iroLrjaas d5ecos ^tareXotr?. Moulton 23

(cf. So/ceT

in 24).

Cf. Ac. 21

:

:

:

9, eTrr^pcorcoj/ tIs

33.

In Lu.

1

:

29,

etr].

D

:

—

:

—

{Prol.,

p.

198)

argues for "a

minimum

difference" in the

of

examples of indirect questions with and without av. ence is in the direct question. The examples with text)

Ac. 5

in indirect questions are Lu. :

24; 10

1

Moulton,

^

lb., p. 198.

pap.

a;' is

129). *

:

17.*

In

all of

The cii'

differ-

(W. H.'s

1 62; 6 11; 9 46; 15 26; these instances the deliberative ele:

:

:

:

= Prol., p. 197. 197 f.; Blass, Gr. of N.T. Gk., p. 220. notes also 4 Mace. 5 13, avyyvcoatitv without av. In the usually present with the potential opt. (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p.

Prol., p.

He

:

Sometimes lo-cos occurs with the opt., as lo-cos — aTrop-qcruev in Joh. Philop. M. and T., p. 80; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 220.

Burton,

MODE ment

is

Lu. 3

:

undoubtedly present; see (c). The same thing is true of in 15 (/ii? TTore), Ac. 17: 27 (d), but Ac. 25 16 (irplv r\

:

indirect discourse for subj. of the direct) (6)

939

(efkaisis)

Moulton^

VoUtive.

calls this

is

futuristic.

use the "Optative Proper," a

curious concession to the mere name.

has been the most per-

It

and

independent clauses) N. T. come under this category.^ Fifteen of the thirty-eight instances belong to juiy ykvoLTo, once in Lu. 20 16, and the other fourteen in Paul's sistent construction of the optative,

(in

thirty-eight of the sixty -seven examples of the

:

Romans,

Epistles (10 in

the rare use of

1 in 1

Thumb

Cor., 3 in Gal.).

considers

yhoiTo in modern Greek (the only

ixi}

relic of

the optative) a literary phenomenon, but Moulton^ notes that Pallis retains

it

in Lu. 20

:

Moulton compares the persistence "be it so," "so be it," "be

16.

of the English optative in the phrase

never so humble," etc*

it

prayers and wishes.^

526

evoxoi d-qjxtv, O. P. COL,

B.

M.

So he notes

it

O. P. 240 (I/a.d.)

21 (ii/B.c.)

x^tpots, L.

(ii/A.D.)

crol

8e

in the papyri for oaths,

ev drj,

yhoLTo.

O. P. 715

Pb.

(ii/B.c.)

(ii/A.D.) os bibolr]

The N. T. examples are all One is a 6va[ixr}v.

in the third person except Phil. 20, eyco aov

curse

iJLr]KeTL /xTjSets (f)ayoL

perative.

"There

is

(Mk.

11

:

14)

and

is

equivalent to the im-

a strong inclination to use the imperative

instead of the optative, not only in requests, where the imperative has a legitimate place in classical

imprecations, where Gal.

iipadttxa ecrrw,

1

Greek as

well,

but also in

takes the place of the classical optative: Cf. 1 Cor. 16 22."6 Only in Mk. 11 8 f it

:

.

:

:

do we have the optative in imprecations in the N. T. The opt. comes very near the imper. in ancient Greek sometimes (Gilderslceve, p. 155). Cf. In Ac. 1 20, where the LXX (Ps. yipoLTo, P. Par. 26 (b.c. 163). 109 8) has Xd/3ot, Luke gives Xa/Serco.'^ There are only 23 examples of the volitive optative in independent clauses outside of prj yhoLTo. Paul has 15 of this 23 "(Ro. 15: 5, 13; Phil. 20; 2 Tim. 1 16, 18; 4 16, and the rest in 1 and 2 Th.), while Mark, Luke, Acts, Hebrews, 1 Peter and 2 Peter have one apiece, and Jude two."^ They are all examples of the aorist optative excej^t th(> present in Ac. 8 20. The negative is /x?7 and ap is not used. In 14 and Ac. 8

:

20, to apyhpibv aov avv aol

elrj,

:

:

:

:

:

'

Prol., p. 194.

2

Burton, N. T.

»

lb., p. 240.

<

Cf. Sweet,

6

Moulton,

8

Blass, Cr. of N. T. C.k., p. 220.

M. and

New

T., p. 79;

Moulton,

Eng. Gr.: Synt., pp. 107

Prol., p.

195

f.

Prol., p. 194.

ff. '

lb.

«

Moulton,

Prol., p. 195.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

940 2 Th. 3

16

:

not the subj.

opt.,

is

ddcrf

context shows that irepLaaehaai

The

middle imperative).^

In

Soj^.

Th. 3

1

12 the

:

aor. inf. nor aor.

opt. (not

is

rare use of the vohtive opt. with

d

N. T., but four belong to indirect questions), If Iva bw-q is the will be discussed under Conditional Sentences. correct text in Eph. 1 17, we probably have a volitive optative, the Iva being merely introductory (cf. examples with the subj.).^ (twelve cases in the

:

with the optative. Blass^ reads In modern Greek Dr. Rouse finds people saying not jut) ykvoiro, but 6 debs va. (pvXa^rj (Moulton, Prol., p. 249), though va is not here necessary (Thumb, Handh., p. 127). The ancient idiom with eWe and el yap is not found in the N. T.,

a case of

It is hardly

5(3

final Iva

here subj. after B.

as stated already several times.

occurs for a future wish (Gal. 5 (c)

There

Deliberative.

gives instances of

tLs

:

with the future ind.

"04)e\ov 12).

more to add here. The LXX^ (Num. 11 29; Judg. 9 29; 2 Sam. in Homer, where a deliberative subj.

is little

8uri;

:

:

without av as would be admissible. See also Ps. 120 (119) 3, tL bodely] aoi koI t'l In Lu. 6:11 Moulton^ remarks that tI av rotr]irpoaTedelr] aot; aaiev in the indirect question is "the hesitating substitute for the Why not rather suppose a "hesitating" direct t'l iroL-qaonev;'' 18

:

33, etc.)

:

(deliberative) direct question like tI av BeKoi 6 (nrepiiokbyos oSros

As already remarked, the context shows 17 18). doubt and perplexity in the indirect questions which have av and the opt. in the N. T. (Lu. 1:62; 6: 11; 9:46; 15:26; Ac. 5:24;

Xkyeiv; (Ac.

10

:

:

The verbs {evkvevov, show this

17).

bLeXaXow, elarjXOev state of mind.

Bavero, dLrjTTopovv) all el

^ovKoLTo in Ac. 25

TOTe avTos

elt]

:

20 after It

6 Xptcrros.

unduly to find remnants

and

airopohixevos.

undoubtedly occurs

liberative opt.

diaXoyLaiJLOs,

.

in Lu. 3

eirvv-

One may note also Cf 27 39. The de:

:

15, bLaXoyc^oiievcov

jiij

not therefore pressing the optative

is

of the deliberative use for

it (cf.

subj.

fut. indicative).

1 They are all exx. of the third person save Phil. 20. Here is the list (with Burton's errors corrected by H. Scott): Mk. 11 14; Lu. 1 38; 20 11; 15 1, 16; Ac. 8 20; Ro. 3 4, 6, 31; 6 2, 15; 7 7, 13; 9 14; 11 :

:

:

5,

13; 1 Cor. 6

17 bis; 3

bis;

2 Th. 2

13

21; 1 Pet. 1

:

:

15; Gal. 2

:

:

:

:

:

5,

:

17; 3

16;

2; 2 Pet. 1

2

Moulton,

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211.

*

Moulton,

^

lb., p. 198.

:

:

21; 6

2 Tim.

1

:

:

Th. 3

:

14;

1

:

16,

18;

4

:

:

:

:

:

11,

16;

12 bis; 5

Phil. 20;

:

23

Heb.

2; Ju. 2, 9.

Prol., p. 196.

Prol., p. 194.

Konj. und Opt.,

On

the "development principle" of the opt. see Mutzbauer,

p. 155.

MODE The Imperative

IV.

(r\

941

(etkaizis)

Trpoo-raTiKTi t'-yKXto-is).

Origin of the Imperative. See chapter on Conjugation of the Verb for discussion of the various devices used by this 1.

Giles/ after latest of the modes in order to get a foothold. giving the history of the imperative forms (five separate strata), curtly dismisses it as not properly a mode and declines to discuss

under syntax. So Radermacher passes it by in his TV. T. Gr. Moulton/ on the other hand, takes it up "first among the moods"

it

the simplest possible form of the verb." It is the 'simplest in one of its forms like the interjectional a-ye, but it is also the latest of the modes and is without a distinct set of end-

because "it

is

never dislodged the aorist subj. from the second person in prohibitions and finally gave up the fight all along the The modes were slower than the tenses in making sharp disline. Besides,

ings.

it

anyhow, and in the Sanskrit "no distinction of meaning has been established between the modes of the present-system and those (in the older language) of the perfect- and aorist-systems."^

tinctions

of the imperative persists in the second person

The ambiguity plural present

where only the context can decide the mode. Thus 5

epavvare (Jo.

:

39)

;

iriaTeveTe (14

oiKohonetadt (2:5); rtXeTre (Ro. '^Jo.

12

-the

same

:

The

19.

perfect form

:

1);

13:6);

Ure

a-yaWiaade (1 Pet. 1:6); /ca^ifere (1

(Jas. 1

:

19;

Cor. 6:4);

Heb. 12

:

17)

cf.

shows

situation.

In its original significance it will be shown, it was not But, as was demand-* or exhortation. the notion of command Besides, confined to this simple idea. ways before the imperavarious in (or prohibition) was expressed modes continued to other the of uses tive was developed. These

Meaning of the Imperative.

2.

exist side

by

side with the imperative

till

the

N. T. time.

Ex-

amples of this will be given directly. The imperative itself was extended to include various shades of the future ind., the subj. and the opt. There is a general sense in which the imperative is distinct, as is seen in d7a7rare to us exdpoi's viiO^v (Mt. 5 :44), but this idea of hiroWviJieda

command

(Mt. 8

:

easily softens to appeal as in Kvpit, aSiaov,

25).

Disappearance of the Imperative Forms. It was the It followed the optative into obto get on its feet. last livion save in the second person (Thumb, Handb., p. 154). There 3.

mode

the forms held on in the main, but the present subjunctive with present imper., and nr] came also into use instead of fxi] and the »

Man., pp. 464-473, 502.

"

2

Prol., p. 171.

*

Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 220. Delbruck, Die Gruudl., p. 120.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

942

NEW TESTAMENT

finally the hortatory (positive) subj. also

appeared as imper. In the third person (both positive and negative with fxi]) as and the subj. drove out the imperative. Thus the imperative forms in

modern Greek present a wreck, if indeed they were ever much The imperative, like the subjunctive, is always future

else.^

though

in time,

may

it

apply to the immediate future as in

"quit that." 4. Alternatives for the Imperative. These, under all the circumstances, can be logically treated before the imperative itself. Indeed, they have already been discussed in the preceding

remarks on tense and mode, so that little in addition is required. (a) The Future Indicative. See ch. XVIII, Tense, where it is .

shown that the Volitive Future is the equivalent of the imperative. The fut. ind,, like the subj. and the opt., may be merely futuristic or volitive, or deliberative. The volitive future is a matter of context and tone of voice, to be sure, but that is true also of the subj. and opt., and, in truth, of the real imperative. But more of the "tone of the imperative" further on. English, as well as Greek, continues to use this volitive future. Both positive and negative (ov) commands are given by the fut. ind. The negative /xi)

So also fxij

sometimes

is

/xtj

as in

/i?)

(Demosthenes),

(3ov\r]aeade dbkvai

(B. U. 197, i/A.D.), iirjSha m.ai](jeTt (Clem.,

k^ecTrai

ov

fxT]

with the fut. ind.

earai col tovto

commonest

(Mt. 16

:

is

Hom., Ill, 69).^ sometimes prohibition, as in ov

But

Cf. also Gal. 4: 30.

22).

in the simple future like av orpy (Mt. 27

(Lu. 13

om

:

4)

;

it is ifxels

(Mt. 6:5), etc. It is true that this use of ov proves the origin of this idiom to be "a purely futuristic form,"^ as is the case with the question ov irava-Q 8iaaTpe(t)wv; (Ac. 13 10), but the tone of this future is volitive (imperatival). The Latin use of the volitive future coincides with that of the Greek. Gildersleeve^ says: "It is not a milder 6\Jyea6e

(27: 24);

kKoi/^ets

:

9)

;

eaeade

:

A

or gentler imperative. cold

or

prediction

compulsion

indifference,

may

or

imply

resistless

concession."

power

The exact

shade of idea in this volitive future must be watched as closely as in the imperative itself. Cf. kaXeo-ets (Mt. 1 21) with av oypxi (Mt. 27 4). Blass^ denies that this is a " classical" idiom (against :

:

»

322

Cf. Jann., Hist. f.;

Gk.

Thumb, Handb.,

Gr., pp. 449, 451, 555

»

Moulton, Moulton,

*

Synt., Ft.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2U9.

2

Prol., p. 177.

p. IIG.

V. and D., Handb. (Jebb), p.

Cf. Gildorsl., Synt., p. 117.

Prol., p. 177. I,

ff.;

p. 127.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 31G.

MODE

943

(EFKAISIi:)

and rather minimizes its use in the N. T. Many do come from the 0. T. (LXX) legal language.

Gildcrsleeve)

of the examples

Certainly in the

LXX

the fut. ind. often replaces the imperative

under the influence of the Hebrew (Thackeray, Gr., p. 194), But examples occur where the two are equivalent. Cf. ayairrjcxtis in Mt. 5 43, with a-yaTvare in 5 44, epetre in Mt. 21 3, with' etTrare Some MSS. have 'iaroi rather than ecrrat in Mt. in Mk. 11:3. :

:

20

:

26.

:

point.

The Subjunctive. The volitive subjunctive is quite to the In the first person this use of the subj. held its own al-

ways

in lieu of the imperative.

(6)

It

is

needless to repeat the dis-

cussion of this matter (see Subjunctive in this chapter). of (6

'iva :

with the subj, in an imperatival sense

25)

;

Eph. 5 33

is

:

ax'i-fTconev

avrov,

dXXd

Cf

19

:

The use Mk. 5 23 :

Let nii 24) serve as an example. So

there discussed also,

\axoofjLev (Jo.

seen in

is .

Tit, 2

:

4.

in the second person the aorist subj. held its place in prohibitions

times to the practical exclusion of the aor, imper, with constructions existed in the KOLv-q side by side with

past

KOLvi]

fxri.

The two

Thus

the third person. (1

Cor, 16

:

/jltj

Cf, 56s

11).

yvwro: (Mt, 6

and

/xri

:

3)

airoaTpa(l)f]s

and /X17 ns k^ovdevrjay The in Mt. 5 42. :

triumph of the subj. over the imperative (save in the second person) has been shown. Cf, the fate of the opt. before the subj. There is only one example, nrjKeri fj.r]5eis (t)a.yoi (c) The Optative. (Mk. 11 14), in the N. T. The distinction between a curse and a prohibition is not very great. The parallel passage in Mt. 21

final

:

:

19 has^ ou (d)

The

fjLr]KeTL

€K

aov Kapvos yevrjraL (volitive Subj.).

Infinitive.

The idiom

is

very frequent in Homer,^

The command

occurs chiefly after an imperative.

by the

infinitive.

There

is

no need

tion, since the probability is that

the Latin legimini, Homeric is

is

carried

It

on

for surprise in this construc-

imperative forms like

'Keye-fxevai.)

SeT^at (like

are infinitive in origin.^

It

true that the accent of the editors for the aorist active optative

from the aorist active inf. in forms like Karevdvpai, wepLaaevaat (1 Th, 3:11 f.), but the MSS, had no accent. We could properly print the infinitive if we wished,^ So as to irapaKoKeaaL (2 Th, 2 17) where the accent is the same for both infinitive and optative (the imper. form aor. mid. sec. singl. is irapaKaXeo-at), Cf, ^aiTTcaai and jSaTrrto-at, one and the same form. The idiom is less frequent in the Attic ^ outside of laws and maxims, is

different

:

1

2 »

Moulton, Prol., p. 179. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 162, Giles, Man., p. 468,

*

Moulton,

«

Blass, Gr. of

Prol., p. 179.

N, T, Gk.,

p. 222.

f

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

944

but happens to be the one

infinitive construction that

is ahve in Moulton^ expresses surprise at the use of the inf. in the N. T., since it is common in Cf. I^eimt, nL(jdu>aaL, A. P. 86 (i/A.D.). Moulton

the Pontic dialect to-day. i rarity of this

the papyri.

(Prol, p. 248) notes that Burkitt {Evang. da-Mepharr.

reads raDra

5e

KCLKelva

iroLrjaaL

in

acpelvaL

fxij

notes also a revival of the simple

Mt. 23

:

ii,

and

or the accusative

inf.

252

f.)

Blass^

23.

in-

language in legal phraseology. He explains the idiom as an ellipsis, but Moulton is undoubtedly correct in rejecting this theory. There is no need of a verb of command understood in view of the etjTnology of a form like /3d7rTto-at. The use of xaipeti' as greeting in epistles (with the nominative) is ex-

finitive in. the later

C f.Ac. J 5

plained in the same way.

the absolute use of the

is

in the papyri,

.

as UoXvKpaTrjs

tQil

So Moulton {Prol,

(iii/B.c).

a verb of

ellipsis of

:23; 23 :26

as imperative.

inf.

warpl

xaipeti',

Jas. 1:1.

:

It

very

common

P. Petr.

II, xi, 1

It is

p. 180) denies the necessity of the

command. In Ro. 12 15 xo-lpetv and Kkaitiv mi firi KaTapdade. So in Ph. 3 :16 :

are clearly parallel with evXayeire to be

(TTOLxeiv is

compared with the hortatory emend the text in 2 Tim. 2

needlessly wishes to

read

(l)pov€)fxeu, :

14, so as

Blass*

not to

Xoyo/jiaxelv. This use of the inf. occurs also in Tit. 2 9. probably have the same construction in fxri avmvafxlywadai Th. 3 14), though it may be explained as purpose. In 1 Cor. iJLri

:

We (2

5

:

:

12

KplueLu is

the subject

command).

rect Lua

fxrjSev

W.H.

aipcoaLv,

has

yUTj

In Lu. 9

3 after elwev the quochanged to fxr] re exetp (indiIn Mk. 6 8 f both forms are indirect (one with the other with fxfi kvdvaaadai) The marg. in inf.

tation begins with MrjSev aipere :

and

:

is

.

.

The MSS.

kvbv(jr}ade.

often vary between the middle

and imper. or subj. Winer^ thinks that expositors have been unduly anxious to find this use of the infinitive in the N.T. But inf.

it is

See further chapter

there.

XX,

Verbal Nouns.

Winer ^ found much difficulty in the absolute use of the participle in the N. T. The so-called genitive absolute is common enough and the participle in indirect discourse representing a finite verb. It would seem but a simple step to use the participle, like the infinitive, in an independent sentence without direct dependence on a verb. Winer admits that Greek (e)

The

Participle.

prose writers have this construction, though "seldom."

Thumb,

1

Hatz., Einl., p. 192.

2

Prol., p.

3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 222.

«

W.-Th.,

*

lb.

6

lb.,

179

Cf.

Hellen., p. 130

f.

f.

p. 316.

pp. 350

ff.

He

ex-

MODE plains

it

on the ground of

945

(efkaizis)

ellipsis of

the copula as

is

so

common

with adjectives (cf. Mt. 5 3-11). He passes the poets by (often the truest index of the vernacular) and admits "the Byzantine use of participles simply for finite verbs." T. S. Green* says: :

"The

absolute use of the participle as an imperative

feature of the language of the N. T."

He

is

a marked

an "Aramaism." To this W. F. Moulton^ expresses surprise and admits only "the participial anacoluthon," which, by the way, is very much the same thing. But J. H. Moulton^ has found a number of examples in the papyri where the participle is fairly common for the indicative.

The

explains

it

as

instances in the papyri of the participle

in the sense of the imperative are not numerous, but one of

seems very

clear.

Thus Tb. 59

€TLTa.(T(TovTes fxoL TpodvixoTepov.

It is

h

them

ols eav TpoaSk-rjade

nov

preceded by a genitive abso-

Moulton gives another equally so: G. 35 (i/B.c.) eTZLixekbixevoi Moulton^ cites also the Latin form sequiminl (=

lute. Lv'

(i/B.c.)

vyLaLV7]Te.

middle plural present indicative. The imperative has an infinitive form sequiminl similar looking shown. See chapter XX, Verbal Nouns, for origin, as already further discussion. On the whole, therefore, and other examples there is no reason that per se why the N. T. admit we must tirbiievoi)

for the second

writers should not use the participle in lieu of the imperative. is and anacobut it is not the mark of an uneducated person. In the papyrus example given above Grenfell and Hunt call the Moulton^ also transwriter "an official of some importance." lates Thumb ^ concerning the "hanging nominative" (common in classical and kolvt] Greek) as saying that the usage "is the precursor of the process which ends in modern Greek with the disappearance of the old participial construction, only an absolute form in -ovras being left." In the ellipsis of the copula it is not always clear whether the indicative or the imperative is to be Shall we supply Cf. evXoyrjTos 6 deos (2 Cor. 1:3). supplied. eaTLv or t)tco (earco) as we have it in 1 Cor. 16 22? In a case like 8 f. it is plain that the unexpressed eare would be im1 Pet. 3 perative, but Moulton notes the curious fact that eare (imperative) does not appear in the N. T. at all, though we have ladi. five There are intimes, iarct} or ^tcj fourteen, and eaTooaav twice.''

It

is,

luthon

of course, a loose construction, as ellipsis is,

:

:

dr., p. ISO.

2

* lb. W.-Moulton, p. 732, n. 5. Mr. H. Soott, notes the absence of tare

^

in

Prol., p. 223.

1

V(!it(;h,

in

'

"

lb., p. 225.

«

IlcUen., p. 131.

R. Cone, of the LXX, In Cood^poiHl's Kuhner-Bl., May.ser, Ilelbin^, Tliackeray. in

iho

II.

946

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

stances

more or

5:7), which is Moulton^ now admits. He

less doubtful, as kTnpl\pavTes (1 Pet.

naturally taken with

as

Taxet.vco9r]Te

evidently reacted too strongly against Winer. participle should not be appealed to

This use of the

the principal verb

if

is

pres-

Sometimes it is a matter of puncwhere W. H. give in the margin

ent in the immediate context.

Lu. 24

tuation as in

:

47,

ap^ajitvoL airo 'lepovaaXrifj. vfiels /JLapTvpes tovtoov, instead of 'lepovaaXrjfj.'

The marginal punctuation takes the participle as an imThe MSS. sometimes vary, as when ^{C give hdei^aade 2 Cor. 8 24, while B, etc., have evbeLKvvjxevoL? But a num-

vne2s.

perative. in

:

ber of unmistakable examples appear both in Paul and Peter,

though "Paul was not so fond of

Thus

apostle."^

this construction as his brother

exovTt^ (1 Pet. 2

must be

12)

:

so explained or

So viroraaadnevoL (1 Pet. 2 taken as anacoluthon (cf. aTrkx^adai) 18; 3 1) reminds one of Eph. 5 22, an "echo" according to Moulton. Other examples occur in 1 Pet. 3:7, 9, possibly 16 .

also;

:

:

:

4 8 :

ff.

(5

Ro. 12

16

:

9

f.,

and (XTrovba^ovTes (Eph. 4 2 f.) and Paul the most outstanding example is in These participles occur in the midst of impera-

Besides

viroTaaffOjjLevoL

2

:

f.

avexbixevoi

:

in

f .)

tives or infinitives as imperatives (12

15).

:

The asyndeton makes

impossible to connect with any verb.

it

In verse 6 exopres apMoulton^ adds to these 2 Cor.

pears as a practical indicative.

See also Heb. 13 5. But Lightfoot^ 9 11 f. and Col. 3 16. put in a word of caution when he said: "The absolute participle, :

:

:

being (so far as regards mood) neutral in

itself,

takes

its

colour

from the general complexion of the sentence," The participle is not technically either indicative, subjunctive, optative or imperative.

The context must

In

decide.

non-finite (non-modal) like the infinitive,

itself

the participle

though

it

is

was some-

times drawn out into the modal sphere.

Uses of the Imperative.

5. (a)

Command

or Exhortation.

In general the imperative keeps

within the same limits observed in the classical language, but that

is

not a narrow groove.^

one's will

Index Pat. he finds

He

finds

Napht. 3

it :

It is the

over another or the

it

only in

also in Test.

2 and

in Ign.

XII

1

Clem. 45

1,

:

Pat. Reub. G

Eph. 10 2. former view

mood

of the assertion of

one to exert his

call of

:

will.

and the accent is doubtful here. It could have been used in

1.

:

in Expositor, VI, x. 450.

1

Prol., p. 181, against his

2

lb.

3

lb.

«

On

<

lb.

«

Blass, Gr. of

Col. 3

:

16

Thus

f.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 221.

MODE d7a7rarc to us exdpovs

(Mt. 5

vfxoiv

TravTore

irpoaev^aL (6:6);

947

(etkaisis)

:

xo-lp^re

44) (1

eiaeXOe

;

Th. 5

to Ta/iietof aov Kal

els

Moulton^

16).

:

finds

the imperatives "normal in royal edicts, in letters to inferiors, and among equals when the tone is urgent, or the writer indis-

posed to multiply words." The imperatives in Rev. 22 11 are probably hortatory. This is just a negative command and differs (b) Prohibition. :

no respect save the presence of the negative

in

Thus

nr}.

/x?)

/cpt-

(Mt. 7 :l), fxr] (po^elcrde (Jo. 6 20). Often the presence of the imperative in the midst of indicatives is shown by as in /xi) indeed, have with We do, ov the Cor. imperairXavdaOe (1 6:9). vere

:

ij,r]

tive in

marked

contrast,

where the force of the negative

to that rather than to the mode.

—

Koafios,

dXX' 6 Kpuirrds

tion applies to ov

Thus

Pet. 3

1

— dXXd Kal in

1

is

3, earco

:

given ovx o

The same explana-

KapSias avOpwiros.

rrjs

p.bvov

in

Pet. 2

but

18,

:

uri ixbvov is

because of the absence of dXXd. In dXXd (with participles and imperacases of contrast with oh tives) the reason for ov is thus apparent (H. Scott). In Mt. regular in Jas.

1

:

22, etc.,

—

5

:

37

oi)

ov (like rat rat)

the negative

of

is

the predicate (like a substantive), not

In 2 Tim. 2

eo-rco.

parenthetical expression of

ix-q

:

14

€7r'

ovbh xPWi-f^ov (a

Xoyo/xaxelv used as

an imperative),

the negative goes specifically with the single word xPWi-P^ov. Cf. also 1 Cor. 5 10. The upshot is that ^ut) remains the negative :

of the imperative. (c)

Entreaty.

Cf.

ixi]

p.oi.

A command

kotovs Trdpexe (Lu. 11 easily shades off

The tone

certain circumstances.

of the

7).

:

into petition in

demand

is

softened to

Moulton^ notes that the imperative has a decided "The grammarian Hermogenes asserted harshtone about it. ness to be a feature of the imperative and the sophist Protagoras even blamed Homer for addressing the Muse at the beginning of the Iliad with an imperative."'* The N. T. shows a sharp de-

pleading.2

;

parture in the use of the imperative in petitions (rare in the older in the kolvt]) The prophet pleads with the imperative, not with potential optative or future indicative. Jesus spoke with authority and not as the scribes.'' "Moreover, even in the

Greek and

.

language of prayer the imperative is at home, and that in its most urgent form, the aorist. Gildersleeve observes (on Justin Martyr, p. 137), 'As in the Lord's Prayer, so in the ancient Greek liturgies the aorist imper.

is

»

Pro!., p. 173.

2

Gildersl., Synt., Pt.

3

Prol., p. 172.

I,

almost exclusively used.

p. 158.

*

lb.

"

Mt. 7

:

29.

It is the

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

948

true term for instant prayer.' "^

NEW TESTAMENT

Gildersleeve^ denies that the

N. T. shows "the absolute indifference that some scholars have considered to be characteristic of Hellenistic Greek" in the use of the imperative. He credits Mr. Mozley with the observation that "the aorist imperative is regularly used in biblical Greek when the deity is addressed; and following out this generalization Herr Krieckers, a pupil of Thumb's, has made a statistical study of the occurrences of the two tenses in Homer, Hesiod, Sappho, ^schylos, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes, with the result that in prayers addressed by men to men both present and aorist are often used, whereas in prayers addressed by men to gods the

Examples^

aorist largely predominates."

Mk.

petitions appear in

Permission.

(d)

good

22,

:

(So-qdrjaov

h

(Jo. 17: 11) Triprjaop aureus

rifXLV TriffTiv,

A

9

All this

illustration

is

of the imperative in

rifj.7v,

tQ

(Lu. 17

:

wpdades

5)

ouofxaTi aov.

in strict line with the ancient Greek.^

is

seen in Mt. 26

:

45, KadevBere Xolttop Kal dra-

not a question nor necessarily irony. It is too late to do Christ any good by keeping awake. He withdraws his This

Taveade.

is

There

plea for watchfulness.

though

permission

is

(14

our 'Let

it

irony in

struck in eX^drco and

the fut. ind. in Lu. 10 ayuoe'LTO)

is

TrXrjpcbo-are

(Mt. 23

:

be

See further

6.

:

W. H.

38,

Ixto-rpa^iyTco

:

32),

The note

the permissive use of the imperative.

it is

(Mt. 10

x'^ptf^cr^co (1

:

of

Of.

13).

Cor. 7: 15);

In 2 Cor. 12 16 earcc 8e is like or 'Granted.' In Mt. 8 31 aroareiXov is en-

so'

marg.).

:

:

treaty, while vrayeTe

In

permissive.

is

1

Cor. 11:6 KeLpaadoj

is

probably hortatory. (e)

Concession or Condition.

This also

sion to concession.

h

rov vabv tovtov, Kal

same

as kav XmrjTe.

taxis with Kal, but

an easy step from permisTake Jo. 2 19, Xmare

It is

is classical.^

:

Tpicrlu rnxepaLs eyepco aiirbv.

It is not a strict it is

This

command.

is

We

much

equivalent in idea to hypotaxis with

So with

avTlartjTe tc3 5ia/36Xa), Kal (jiev^erac a4>' vpQiv (Jas.

avaara

tC)v veKpcov

e/c

See also

/xi)

Kplvere, Kal oh

KaTadiKaadrJTe'

(Lu. 6 37 :

(LXX),

f.).

awoXveTe,

Moulton,

2

Am.

s

Cf. Burton, N. T.

*

Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt.

KpLdfJTe'

paKpodvp-qaov

eir'

Kal

:

(Eph. 5

Kal pi] KaradLKa^eTe, dldore,

4

/cat

kav.

7 :

f .)

14).

ov

p-q

dodrjaerai vplv

epol, Kal irdvTa aTrodcoaco

Prol., p. 173.

Jour, of Philol., Apr., 1909, p. 235.

in the Attic Orators, »

p-rj

Kal aTvoKvdrjaeaOe

Then again

1

Kal kTrL(f)avaeL aoL 6 XpiaTos

the

have para-

Cf. K.-G., Bd.

I,

M. and

Am.

I,

T., p. 80.

p. 158; Miller,

The Limitation

of the Imperative

Jour, of Philol., 1892, pp. 399-436. p. 236.

MODE (Mt. 18

(joi

So also tovto

26).

:

949

(efkaisis) (Lu. 10

ttoUl Kai ^naxi

(Mt. 4

:

28)

'ipx^oQf^

;

Sometimes

o^ecr0e(Jo. 1:39). Cf. SeDre mi two imperatives are connected by /cat when the first suggests conThus Eph. 4 26, opylteade Kai jui? anapTavere. So also cession. 7roii7<^co

Acat

:

19).

:

epavPTjaov Kai

Cf. epxov Kai

7:52).

(Jo.

tSe

This

(Jo. 1:46).

'i8e

seems simple enough. It is a regular classic idiom ^ to have aye, (/) In Asyndeton. "A7e with KXavaare (Jas. 5:1) is imperative. 4)epe with another 21) and SeOre tSere p,oL (Mt. 19 aKoKoWei 8evpo an interjection like More Rev. 19 17. 21 4 12; Jo. 29; also (Mt. 28 6). See imperative. So uTraTe another with virkyiTe and common is viraye See airayyeiXaTe 10). virayere (28 (Mt. 5 :24); KpuiTOv dcaXKayridt, :

:

:

:

:

:

further Mt. 8

4; 18

:

:

15; 21

:

28; 27

:

Mk.

65;

1

:

44; 6

:

38, etc.

Cf. also Lu. 12

15. In Mt. 16 opare Opoetade. So opare 24 fir] in Mt. 6, occurs But asyndeton In Mt. 9 30 the persons and numbers are 15). iSXeTrere (Mk. 8 In Rev. 19 10, opa prj, the verb yLvwaKero). opare fxrjSels different, For 6pa Tronyo-ets see also Heb. 8 5 expressed. not is with fir] (LXX). The simplest form of asyndeton is seen in Ph. 3 2, :

6

we have

opSre Kai irpoaex^re.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

/SXeTrere,

jSXexcre, jSXtTrere.

(g)

ject here is that

it is

for treating this sub-

The reason

In Subordinate Clauses.

may

so rare that one

not catch

it

in the dis-

It is well established, though cussion of subordinate clauses. rare, in Demosthenes, Lysias, Plato, Thucydides and the tragic

The

poets.2

case of coare at the beginning of a clause is not pertiit is a mere inferential conjunction, as, for in-

nent, for there stance,

Cor. 3

1

:

in 2

Th. 3

(xdai, prjde

Neither

In

yevrfraL after tva,-

1

W.

1

:

1

Pet. 3

:

on

vfilv,

31 there

not a

el tls

oh QeKet epya^e-

probably an

is

ellipsis of

Kavxacrdo} is in the direct quol:Q,epu) ayaWLaaOe (probably H. begin a new sentence, but w points back di-

In

1 Pet.

rectly to KaipQi as its antecedent. in

is

and the imperative

tation after yeypairraL.

imperative),

Cor.

coo-re

the recitative 6rt in point, as

is

10, rovro Kapr]yyeWofiev

:

eaduToo.

Here

21, chare fiv^els Kavxaadco.

hypotactic conjunction.

3 with

./^v

The same

situation occurs

In both examples the imperative

earw.

appears with the relative. Two other instances of this construcThey tion are found in 1 Peter (a peculiarity of this Epistle). are

c5

avriarrjre (5

Heb. 13

:7, cov

—

:

9)

and

fiifielade,

els

w

and

ar^re (5

in 2

Tim. 4

12).

:

:

We

see

it

also in

15, 6v Kai cv (f)v\a(raov.

(ii/A.D.), OOP dkfxa KaBapop aird ivaproiP apadoru).

Cf. 0. P. 1125, 19 1

Gildorsl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 162.

2

lb., p. 107.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

950

NEW TESTAMENT

was hardly felt as a relabut see 1 Cor. 14 13, 8l6 Trpoaevxtodw} This matter received adequate discussion (h) The Tenses. under Tenses. It may simply be noted here that in positive sentences the aorist imperative is naturally common, especially Ato at the beginning of the sentence

tive (inferential particle),

frequent in the N. T. distinction

:

crov Kal irepLiraTeL

As an example

8.

exwj' (Lu.

19

:

The

17).

(Mk. 4:39).

7re4)ifj.ooao

Cf. eiaeXOe

— wpoaev^ai.

between the present and the

Tov Kpa^aTTov

Ac. 12

:

(Jo.

aorist

5:8).

The

(Mt. 6:6),

well seen in apov

is

See also Jo. 2

:

16

of the periphrastic present note

and 'iadi,

almost non-existent, but note The present imper. second person alone perfect

is

occurs in prohibitions which are forbidden as in course of action or as a present fact ('quit doing

it')." Cf. Ro. 6 13 for sharp between nrj irapLaTaveTe (course of action) and once and for all). In the third person a prohibi:

diiferences in idea TrapaaTTjaare (at

may

tion

be either in the aorist imperative or the aorist subj. mode for further remarks concerning the failure of

See the subj.

the second person imperative aorist in prohibitions.

This subject will receive adequate (i) In Indirect Discourse. treatment under this head (see below). All that is attempted here is to indicate that, when the imperative is not quoted directly (cf. 2 Th. 3 10), it may be expressed in an indirect :

command

by the

either

jreptTrareLv in

Ac. 21

infinitive (cf. Xe7coj'

21) or

:

by a conjunction

irepiTenvetv

fji-qd^

like 'ba as in

Mk.

n-q

6:8, or thrown into a deliberative question as 4>oPT]diJTe

(Lu. 12

:

in uTroSel^oo rlpa

5).

DEPENDENT OR HYPOTACTIC SENTENCES (YHOTAKTIKA

B.

'AHIilMATA) Introductory.

Use of Modes in Subordinate Sentences.

(a)

tial difference in

from the

significance in independent sentences.

made on

not

the basis of the modes at

imperative because of

modes occur

three

There

is

no essen-

the meaning of the modes in subordinate clauses

its

all.

The

division

is

Leaving out the

rarity in subordinate sentences, all other

The

in almost all the suborctinate clauses.

same mode-ideas are to be sought here as there. The subordinate clauses make no change in the meaning of mode, voice or tense.

Burton^ does say: "Others, however, give to the mood or

1

Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 511.

2

Gildersl., Synt., Ft.

»

N. T. M. and

I,

p. 164.

T., p. 81.

See also Thompson, Synt., p. 190

f.

MODE

(etkaizis)

951

tense a force different from that which they usually have in prin-

Hence

cipal clauses.

moods and

the

arises the necessity for special

tenses in subordinate clauses."

I

this as the reason for the separate treatment.

direct discourse after secondary tenses there

modes

treatment of cannot agree to

Sometimes

may

in in-

be a sequence

Greek with final clauses after secbut that is so slight a matter that it bears no sort of proportion to the subordinate clauses as a whole. Gildersleeve (A. J. of Phil, XXXIII, 4, p. 489) regards the subordinate sentence as "the Ararat in the flood of change" and parataxis and hypotaxis as largely a matter of style. Some of the modal uses have survived better in the subordinate clauses, as, for instance, of

ondary

(true also in ancient

tenses),

the futuristic aorist subj.

(cf. octls apvqaTjTat in Mt. 10 33), but the subordinate clause did not create the idiom. Originally there were no subordinate sentences.^ "In dependent clauses the :

choice of the

mood

case "2 as

true also of independent sentences.

is

is

determined by the nature of each individual

made above about

tion

tional

and

is

The

Luke.

the sequence of

The qualificamodes was always op-

absent from the N. T. except a few examples in

great wealth of subordinate clauses in Greek with

various nuances

demand

separate discussion.

But we approach

the matter with views of the modes already attained. (6)

ter

The Use of Conjunctions in Subordinate Clauses. In chapParticles, full space will be given to the conjunctions

XXI,

(co-ordinating, disjunctive, inferential, subordinating).

Here

it is

only pertinent to note the large part played in the Greek language by the subordinating conjunctions. It must be admitted that the line of cleavage

were

on the

The

not absolute.

is

paratactic conjunctions

Popular speech has always had a fondness for parataxis.* In the modern Greek vernacular "the propensity for parataxis has considerably reduced the ancient Greek wealth of dependent constructions" (Thumb, Handb., p. 185). Hence long periods are rare. So the Hebrew used both as paratactic and hypotactic. In the Greek Kal we see a partial parallel.-' In Mt. 26 15, tL deXerk /xot Sovvai Kay
field.^

"]

:

—

:

Kal

clause

is

(like 6tl) the logical subject of tykvtTo.

use of the recitative

'6tl

The common

illustrates well the close connection be-

tween subordinate and independent sentences. »

Brug., Grioch. Gr., p. 552.

<

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 452.

^

*

Brug., Griecli. Gr., p. 552.

The

6tl

shows

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 451. Cf. Monro, Horn, Gr., p. 194.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

952

that the clause is

NEW TESTAMENT

the object of the preceding verb, but the clause

is

preserved in the direct (co-ordinate) form. 10

a4)r]ixeh (Jo.

:

36).

Cf. Xkyere 6tl jSXa-

Thus again a subordinate

clause

may

be so

loosely connected with the principal clause as to be virtually in-

dependent.^

Thus the

relative, as in Latin, often introduces

a

oh (Lu. 12 1) and avd' Siv (12 3). But, on the whole, we can draw a pretty clear line between the independent and the dependent clause by means of the conjunctions. The case of asyndeton, treated elsewhere (cf. The Sentence), concerns chiefly parataxis, but some HTev tls (Lu. examples occur in hypotaxis, as in koI eyevero 11:1) where the elwh tls clause is the logical subject of eykvero. principal sentence, a paragraph, forsooth, as kv

:

:

—

Logical Varieties of Subordinate Clauses.

(c)

Each subordinate

clause sustains a syntactical relation to the principal clause after

The normal complete senEach of these may receive chapter X, The Sentence). The pred-

the analogy of the case-relations.

tence has subject, predicate, object. further amplification (see

may have a substantive (as stantive may be described by an icate

This subadverb may be

subject or object).

An

adjective.

used with predicate, adjective or substantive. Thus the sentence is built up around the predicate. In the same way each subordinate sentence

an

like

This

is

6tl clause),

is

either a substantive (subject or object

an adjective

like 6
an adverb

like owou.

therefore a point to note about each subordinate clause

in order to get its exact syntactical relation to the principal clause.

It

may

be related to the predicate as subject or object,

or to the subject or object as adjective, or to either as adverb.

A

may be now substantive, now adjective and In simple truth most of the conjunctions have their origin as relative or demonstrative pronouns. In Kiihner-Gerth^ the subordinate clauses are all discussed from this standpoint relative clause

now

adverb.

alone.

Thumb

questions the

(Handb., pp.

wisdom

of this

186

ff.)

follows this plan.

method, though in

One

itself scientific

Burton^ has carefully worked out all the subordinate though he does not adopt it. Then, again, one may divide these clauses according to their form or their meaning.^ Viteau^ combines both ideas and the result is rather confusion than clarification. There may be a series of subordinate clauses, one dependent on the other. So in 1 Cor.

enough.

clauses from this standpoint,

1

Monro, Horn.

2

Tl. II, 2. Bd., pp. 354-459.

'

Le Verbe: Syntaxe des

Gr., p. 194.

» "

N. T. M. and Monro, Horn.

Propositions, pp. 41-144.

T., p. 82.

Gr., p. 194

f.

.

MODE 1

:

14,

oti ovSeva

evxo.pi.crT(Jj

TLS etTT^

(jLT]

OTL €ts TO

and section 10

vfxoiiv

k/jLov

953

(efkaisis) e/SaTTTicra et

/ii)

ovofia k^aiTTiaOriTe.

in this chapter.

The

^piairov koI Vaiov, Iva

See also

infinitive

Mk.

and the

6

:

55

participle

are used also in subordinate clauses, but they do not directly con-

modes save in indirect discourse. They and partake of the functions of both noun and

cern the problem of the are so important

verb to such an extent that they demand a separate chapter

— XX.

Relative Sentences.

1.

(a)

Relative Sentences Originally Paratactic.

The

relative

6s,

an anaphoric substantive pronoun.' At first the relative clause was paratactic, a principal sentence like the other. ^ Cf. os yap in Homer, where 6s may be taken ^ as demonstrative or relative. In its simplest form the relative was unnecessary and was not even a connective. It was just a rep"The relative force arises where etition of the substantive.* Indeed, the OS (and its congeners) connects and complements."^ relative sentence is probably the oldest form of parataxis.^ It is as

is

well

known, was

first

only by degrees that the relative clause came to be regarded as a subordinate clause.^ As a matter of fact, that was not always the case, as has been seen in such examples as h oh, av6' Siv (Lu. 12 1, 3). But it is not true that this subordination is due to the :

use of the subjunctive mode.^ The effect of case-assimilation (cf. gender and number) and of incorporation of the antecedent was to link the relative clause very close to the principal sentence.^

Heb. 13 11. This is true (6) Most Subordinate Clauses Relative in Origin. of 6, but accusative forms'" and which are of ore merely on not also of other adverbs, like the ablative cos, oxcos, ews. These subordinating conjunctions therefore are mostly of relative origin." Cf.

:

1

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 556.

'

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 186.

the relative sentence *

is

^

lb., p. 559.

Stahl, HLst.-krit. Synt., p. 523, points out that

either "synthetic or parathetic."

Schmitt, tJber den Ursprung des Subatantivsatzes mit Relativpartik. im

Griech., 1889, p. 12. 6

Thompson, Synt.

8

Frenzel, Die Entwick. des relat. Satzb.

'

8

Thompson, Synt., p. 383. Baron, Le Pronom Relat.

9

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 557.

Herod, or Thuc. Prosa, p. 30 f 10

of Attic Gk., p. 383.

Cf. Reisert,

im Griech., 1889,

p. 4.

et la Conj. en Grec, 1892, p. 61. It was not ahvays done (attraction) either in Zur Attralvtion dcr Relativsiitze in der griech.

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 561.

" Thompson,

Synt., p. 384.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

954

Cf. ha, oTore

and perhaps

Thus the subordinate

Upiv,

el.

axph

e-n-ei,

are not relative.

yikxpt

Burton/ indeed, includes

clauses overlap.

under relative sentences.

That is not necessary, since thus the subordinate clauses would properly be treated as relative sentences. See the relative origin of various conjunctions ecos

nearly

all

worked out by Schmitt,^ Weber ^ and Christ.'* These clauses are mainly adverbial, though objective (and subject-clause also) well

on

(indirect discourse)

in

Homer with

is substantive simply. The word cos occurs the three values of demonstrative, relative and conjunction (cf. English "that").^ But here we pass by these

conjunctions from relative or demonstrative roots.^ The relative pronoun alone, apart from the adverbial uses, introduces the most frequent subordinate clause, probably almost equal in some

authors to

the other classes put together.

all

tive construction

At any

rate

it is

is

very common.

an instance the period oh,

in Ac. 1

See also

participles.

occur and

X67W

tIvl

is

Note

1-2.

Relative Clauses

by Kiihner-Gerth.^

:

9

:

37; Ac. 16 well

is

(Eph. 6

The

12.

in

1

:

17, aKoiretv tovs

Sidaxw v^ unlets jectival, but in

are so classed

perfectly consistent.

is

fxe

(Lu. 9 :48).

:

tov

16.

Truev/jLaros 6

The

by the use

ecmv

Here the

N. T. M. andT., pp. 12Gff.

*

Entwickelungsgesch. der x^bsichtsiitze.

*

Der Substantivs. und das Rel. ws. Baron, Le Pronom Rel. et la Conjonction en Grec, p. 130. Frenzel, Die J.

8

Bd.

Entw. des

rel.

Satzb. im Griech., p.

pp. 420

ff.

is

in ttjv

ad-

iroLovvTas.

im Griech.

4.

Classen, Beob. iiber don honierischcn Sprachgeb., 1867, p. 6. II,

it

xapd

relative clause

a mere incident between to6s and

tJber den Ursprung des Substantivsatzes mit Relativpartik.

^

deov

prjixa

of the article with

1

8

So

Cf. also

adjectival use of the

2

^

original

was preceded by the

SixocTTacrlas Kal to. aK6.v8a\a

e/xd^ere TvoLovuras.

itself

They

descriptive character of the relative

Tim. 3

tols

:

of the relative clause as subject

T-qv iib.xo-1-pa.v

Cf. 6s in

17).

:

:

shown

relative sentence is accented

Ro. 16

itself

8e^r]TaL Sexerat tou aTroaTeiXavTa

kfie

relatives

Cf. further Ro. 9

use followed the

descriptive

or object like 6 and the participle

clause

as

be repeated indefinitely with or

Usually Adjectival.

The

Thus the use

demonstrative.

Mk.

:

Take

h

where four

1-2,

:

substantive idiom just as the relative

av

wv, axpi

a relative.

like

may

.

05

Peter the rela21-24.

6-12; 2

of periodic structure.^

Cor. 15

1

almost

The relative sentence 4f without Kal. (c)

1 :

wha-s, om, the subordinate clauses in the sentence except infinitive

all

and

means

the chief

In

Cf. 1 Pet. 1

MODE The

clause

comes to be 12

:

simply adjectival with

is

its

955

(ETKAISIZi)

6s in

ttSs

Lu. 12

So with

most usual character.

8l'

:

That

8.

in

rjs

Heb.

28.

Modes

(d)

There

in Relative Sentences.

is

nothing in the rela-

tive pronoun or the construction of the clause per se to have any effect on the use of the mode.^ The relative, as a matter of fact,

has no construction of its own.^ In general in dependent clauses the choice of the mode is determined by the nature of the individual case.3 Outside of relative clauses the choice in the N. T. is

and the subjunctive.

practically confined to the indicative

The optative holds on in one or two examples. With the relative some examples of the imperative occur, as has already been shown. Cf. 1 Cor. 14

13 at

:

all

:

13; Tit. 1

:

13; 2

Tim. 4

Cf. 69ev KaTavorjaaTe (Heb. 3:1).

7.

:

15; 1 Pet. 5

But the mode

:

9;

is

In a word, the relative occurs with

to the relative.

constructions possible to an independent sentence.*

The

Heb.

not due all

the

indica-

if one wishes to make Thus ov8eis tanv 6s a(f)rJKev riju Cf. Jo. 10 12. The various uses of the subolKiav (Mk. 10 29). junctive occur with the relative. The dehberative subj. is seen

tive

is,

of course, the natural tense to use

a direct and clear-cut assertion. :

:

in irov tdTLV TO KaToKvua 4>ayw;

(Mk. 14

:

oirov to iraaxo- iJL^Ta

[xov

Lu. 22

14;

:

11).^

twv

ixadr]T(hv

^lov

Earle, in a fine paper

Prof.

on "The Subj. of Purpose in Relative Clauses in Greek" {Class. Papers, 1912, pp. 213 ff.) shows how Xenophon, Soph., Eurip., Plato and other Attic writers use the idiom. Cf. Xen., Anab., II, See also Tarbell, Class. Re4, 20, ovx e^ovcTLV eKetuot otol (pvycoaiv. view, July, 1892,

The

"The

Deliberative Subj. in Relative Clauses in

may

be volitive as in Ac. 21 IG, ayovTes Trap' and in Heb. 8 3, odev auajKalov ex^LV tl (J In Heb. 12 Kal TOVTOu 6 TrpoaeveyKii (cf. 6 irpo(7(f)epeL in Heb. 9:7). 28, 8l' ^s \arpevo)fxev, the subj. may be conceived as either volitive (hortatory) or merely futuristic, more probably volitive like ixo^Greek."

^epiadibfxtv

subj.

Mvacrwvi

:

tlvl,

:

:

Clearly futuristic

fiev.

is

the subj. in Mt. 16

:

28,

otrtj/es

ov

fiij

These examples appear isolated. The subj. with ware may be noted as in 1 Cor. 5 8, ware lopTa^oijx^v (deliberative). But the futuristic subj., so rare in the independent sentence after Homer, is very common in the relative clause with

yevao^vTai QavaTov.

:

1

2 » "

Le Pronom Rcl. et la Conjonction en Grec, pp. 61 ff. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 189. " Thoini)son, Synt., p. 383. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 452. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217, explains this subj. as due to a "final mean-

See, per contra, Baron,

ing."

D

in

Mk.

reads

(pdyofjiai.

. :

and sometimes without

av

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

956

(Mk. 8

OS 5' av cLToKeaii

AKLP

read

:

Cf.

Thus

av.

Cf. oans

35).

(itacism).

rriprjaet.

not the av that determines

It is

av.

the subj., but the subj. usually has

two forms being

See also

:

sense.

In such

Cf. os av

and

and

though

common, the

also very

6aTt,s oixoKoyrjaeL

deX^i

10),

38.

:

is

form and

closely allied in 8).

:

yap kav

Mt. 10 33 and

relative sentences the future indicative

\oyriaet (Lu. 12

6s

(Jas. 2

Trjp-qa-p

6fxo-

oorts apvqarjTat,

(Mt. 10:32f.).

and

Definite

(e)

made popular

Goodwin^ has

Indefinite Relative Sentences.

the custom of calling some relative sentences " con-

He

ditional relatives."

has been followed by Burton.^

Jannaris^

considers conditional relative clauses "virtually condensed clauses

Almost any

capable of being changed into conditional protases." sentence

capable of being changed into some other form as a

is

The

practical equivalent.

may

relative clause

indeed have the

resultant effect of cause, condition, purpose or result, but in self it

expresses none of these things.

it-

It is like the participle in

One must not read into it more than is there. Cf. (Mk. 4: 9) and 6 exo:v SiTa (Mt. 13 9). Cf. d tls in Mk. 4 23. One might as well say that 6 \aix^aviiiv (Jo. 13 20) is the same thing as 6s \afxl3aveL (cf. Mt. 10 38). There is a change from participle to relative clause in Mt. 10 37 f., 41 f. Cf. Mt. 12 30, 32; Lu. 9 50. So then av TLva t€ijl\{/oi} (Jo. 13 20) is a conditional clause.* It is true that 6v nva does not occur in the N. T., but €t rts and oo-rts differ in conception after all, though the point The MSS. sometimes vary between el tls and oorts is a fine one. this respect. 05 exet (Sra

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

as in

Mk.

6

:

22

6 Kexo-pLcrpai

note

e'i

TLS deXeL

el'

8

f.;

and and

OTi av alT7]a7]Te

:

34; 1 Cor. 7

tl KexapLa/xaL

— 6s

:

in 2 Cor. 2

What

eav 6e\y.

In Jo. 14

13.

is

13

note

f.

10. is

that the relative

It is

not a question of

:

true

sentences are either definite or indefinite.

mode nor

:

between In Mk. 8 34 f

Note the

eav tl airrjarjTe.

distinction

:

but merely whether the relative describes a definite antecedent or is used in an indefinite sense. The definite relative is well illustrated by 2 Th. 3 3, ttio-tos 8e of the use of av,

:

eaTLV 6 KvpLOs 6s aTrjpl^eL, or TTjv

bbbv

p.ov.

So also

Mk.

x^-pi-v 8l'

1

:

tjs

2, tov ayyeXov

jjlov

KaTaaKevaaeL

6s

\aTpevoinev (Heb. 12

:

28).

Cf. 6

(Heb. 8:3). But indefinite is os exet, SoOrjaeTaL avTco (Mk. 4 25). In the same verse Kal 6s ovk ex" is indefinite, but nal

TrpoaeveyKj] :

6 exei is definite. 1

«

*

Indefinite also

is ocrot fjyl/avTo

Moods and Tenses, p. 197. N. T. M. and T., p. 119. Cf. Robertson, Short Gr. of the

»

Hist.

Gk. N.

(Mt. 14 36) and

Gk. Gr.,

T., p. 169.

:

p. 470.

MODE oaoL av rixpavTo

and

(Mk. 6

^r]TWV (17: 33) and

That

av

OS

So also with

56).

otTToXeo-et

os 5' av airoKkaH.

(Mk. 8

:

10

in Lu. 12 :

32

:

:

Cf. Ac. 7: 3, 7; Gal. 5

edj/

17.

:

:

The use

from the sense of

ris

of

otrris is

pertinent.

from the sense of Tts='any one' or

= somebody

in particular,' as in

'

:

of the definite use of

28; 22

:

may

oo-rts

The

2; 27: 55, 62, etc.

Lu.

:

12),

seen in

ttSs

:

The

indefinite use of oarts with the subj.

rather frequent, as in

oo-rts kav y

12

17.

50).

is

(Mt. 7:24), oaTis €xet (Mt. 13 12), ocrTts vxpcoaeL (Mt. but apparently no instance of oans av and the future

ind. occurs.

:

be seen in Mt. 7: 26;

indefinite use

oaris OLKOvet

23

:

10)

30, avSpes 8vo avveXaXow avT(2 otrives rjaav Mcomrjs Kal 'HXeias.

Examples 16

:

but in Lu. 8 18 os av yap exv SodrjaeraL avrQ.^ 8 we have ttSs os av ofxoXoyrjaeL ev kfj.oi, but in Mt.

It is either indefinite, as here,

9

(Lu. 12

mode is thus clear. Cf. os tav d'ekxi Thus note in Mk. 4 25 os yap

Tras oarts bixo\oyi)(jei ev efxoL

definite

7ras os epeZ

35).

ex^L 5odr]aeTaL avTw,

So

957

Cf. os eorat (17: 31) with os

8).

:

not a question of

it is

with

:

av o/jioXoyqaei (12

ttSs 6s

(efkaisis)

Cf. Col. 3

:

33),

oo-rts T7]pi]arj (Jas.

1).

In 2 Cor. 8

:

12,

Tos, ov Kado ovK ex€L,

ei

We

2 ri

there

also find

and

10)

:

(Gal. 5

:

ocrrts apv-na-nrai.

otrtves ov

ixi]

yevaoovTai

irpodvixla xpoKetrat, Kado eav exj?,

is

and

10), oo-rts av iroLrjay

av

is

(Mt.

(Mt. 10

:

(Mk. 9

:

evTpoadeK-

a pointed distinction between the sub-

junctive and the indicative modes.^

Thus the

indicative occurs

with either the definite or the indefinite and the subjunctive likewise, though usually the subjunctive comes with the indefinite relative.

definite either.

The

One may make a

positive statement about either a

or an indefinite relative or a doubtful assertion about

The

lines

thus cross, but the matter can be kept distinct.

clearly perceived by Dawson Walker.' The subjunctive with the indefinite relative, like that with orav and

distinction

is

kav, is futuristic (cf.

also future indicative).

argues that, since

186)

this subj.

is

Moulton (Prol., p. and the aorist

futuristic

describes completed action, the aorist subj. here

"Thus Mt. 5 committed murder.' " But ture perfect.

:

21, 6s av

4>ovevaxi,

is

'the

really a fu-

man who

has

seems rather like an effort to introduce the Latin idiom into the Greek and is very questionable. This is the place for (/) The Use of av in Relative Clauses. more discussion of av, though, sooth to say, the matter is not perfectly clear. See also Conditions. It is probably kin to the Latin an and the Gothic an, and had apparently two meanings, this

•

»

Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 139.

2

Cf. W.-Th., p. 307. Elcm. Gk. Synt., 1897,

»

p. 7.

Cf. Biluinlcin, Untcra. etc., p. 315.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

958 'else'

and

mary

use of

NEW TESTAMENT

Monro ^ argues that the priwith particular and definite examples.

'in that case rather.' iiu

and

Keu is

Moulton (ProL, p. 166) translates Homeric eyoi dk Ktv avTds eXco/xai by the Scotch 'I'll jist tak her mysel'.' There was thus a limitation by circumstance or condition. The use of ap with relative, temporal and conditional clauses "ties them up to particular occurrences" (Moulton, Prol., p. 186). It is not always quite so easy as that. This use of modal au appears rarely in modern

Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 188). "It is a kind of leaven in a Greek sentence; itself untranslatable, it may transform the meaning of a clause in which it is inserted" (Moulton, Prol., p. That is putting it a bit strong. I should rather say that it 165). was an interpreter of the sentence, not a transformer. Moulton counts 172 instances of modal av (eav) in the N. T. (p. 166). Matthew leads with 55, then Mark 30, Gospel of Luke 28 and Acts only 10, Paul's Epistles 27, the Johannine writings only 20, Hebrews 1, James 1. Mr. H. Scott fears that these figures are not The MSS. vary very correct, but they are approximately so. ind. Moulton finds examples occur with or sul)j. These much. iiv in the LXX (Hatch and Redpath). Of modal 739 cases of ind. aorist, with aorist), with 6 are opt. 56 these 40 (41 (26 ind.), the with subj. Raderfut. rest plup., 1 pres., 7 imp., 1 macher {N. T. Gr., p. 165) finds modal av in the kolpt] decreasing and unessential with ind., subj. or opt. in relative, temporal, final or conditional clauses.

The use with

indefinite or general

statements was rare in Homer, but gradually came to be more frequent. But in the N. T. some examples of the definite use

So in Rev. 8:1, (Mk. 11:25) may be general. There is doubt also about orap d\pe eyhero (11 19). But in Mk. 6 56, oaoL ap r/xpaPTo, the construction is rendered more definite by ap, though ottou ap elaeiropeueTo in the same verse is indefinite. In Mt. 14 36 we have 6aoL rixJ/aPTo, which is not more definite than Mark's construction.^ In Rev. 14 4, 6wov ap vwayei, the construction is indefinite. In Ac. 2 45 and 4 35, Kadon ap ns etxei', we have repetition and so a general statement to that extent. In Mk. 3:11, orap avrop kOecopovp, it is general. In most instances in the N. T., therefore, the use of ap is clearly in indefinite It relative clauses whether with the indicative or subjunctive.^ of ap survive especially in temporal clauses.

oTav

ripoi^tv.

But

orap

arrjKeTe

:

:

:

:

:

p^^ contra see W.-Th., p. 306. ai' awTtkkaovaiv from an inscr. in

1

Horn. Gr., p. 263

'

Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217) quotes as

Viereck's

^

f.

Sermo Graecus,

p. 38.

:

MODE

959

(etkaizis)

cannot be said that av is necessary with the indefinite relative indicative. It does not occur in the N. T. with oaris and the future ind., but we have both oo-rts ofioKoyqaeL (Mt. 10 32)

and the

:

and

airokkaeL

(Mk. 8

Sermone

Pis., p. 38.

As already

21.

ecs fjv

fut. ind. see (A^.

MSS. do not have TYiprjar]

— TTalar}

shown

(cf.

this period.

av

:

av /SouXTjrat (10:22).

^

os

av

Compernass, De

T. Gr., p. 145) cites os 174,

N. 223,

seen, the relative with the subj. usually has av,

av ttoKlv tlakpxricfde (Lu. 10

Cf.

35).

OS

For os av and Radermacher

35).

ap abiK-qati, Inscr. Petersen-Luschan, Reisen, p.

8'

as

:

and

(Lu. 12 :8); 6s earai (Lu. 17:31)

OS av duoXoyrjaeL

as in oaris

av,

2

8e (Jas.

:

8); ort av TpoaSairavqarfs (10

;

:

The

10).

:

In a few examples the best apvy)<jr]TaL (Mt. 10 33) oaris use of eav like av has been

Orthography) to be very common with relatives at It is immaterial which is found. So 6s eav \uari and (Mt. 5

iroLr]<jri

:

19).

The MSS.

often vary between eav and

14; Ac. 7:7. So also ocra eav OeXrjTe (Mt. 7: 12) But in the N. T., as in the av and 6aa airriariTe (Mt. 21:22).

av, as in Mt. 10

papyri, eav

is

:

more common

T. Gr., p. 145) quotes 6aoL

and

OS

avaaTapa^r] (or av dcrx.)

Radermacher

in relative clauses.

(A^.

I.

— eyXlirwaL, Gr. XII,

1,

Inscr. Perg. 249, 2G,

Moulton

671.

{Prol.,

C.P.R. 237 (II/a.D.), ocra ahr^ TpocrreK-qTac. He (lb., quotes oa' dv xdo-xfre F.P, 136 (iv/A.D.), 6aa eav wapep. 168) The av is not repeated with the 'Ka^6pr]v B.M. 331 (ii/A.D.). second verb. So 6s di' TOLrjari Kal 5t5d^r; (Mt. 5 19). There is no instance of av in a relative clause with an optative in the N. T. But in Gen. 33 10 the LXX has ws av tls Uol Trpbawirov deou. So Raderols eav TvxoL, F.P. (see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32). macher {N. T., Gr., p. 131) cites Kad' 6 dv p-epos (XTpecfyoLTo from Philo. There is one instance of dv with the infinitive in the N. T. (2 Cor. 10: 9), iW prj So^u cbs dv eK4>o^eZv i)/xas, but dv is here probably the same as eav and cos dv='as if.' The upshot of it all

p. 169) cites

:

:

is

that dv has no peculiar construction of

its

own.

It

is

more

frequent with the subjunctive than with the indicative in relais not absolutely essential with either mode.* In the Attic the subj. is invariable with dv, l)ut "in the less cultured Hellenistic writers" (Moulton, Prol., p. 166) it occurs with Curiously in the Gospel of John di^ occurs with the ind. also.

tive sentences, but

oarts

only in the neuter (Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 304). in the N. T. on 'edv='6TL dv unless in Mk. 6 23 the correct

Always text (cf.

is '6tl 6

:

edv as in

margin of W. H.

Lu. 10 :35; Ac. 3 1

:

The

text

23, etc.).

Cf. K.-G., U(l.

11,

pp. 421, 42

1.

is

probably correct

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

960 (g)

clause

Special Uses of Relative Clauses. As in Latin/ the relative may imply cause, purpose, result, concession or condition,

though the sentence

does not say this much.

itself

This

due

is

The sense glides from to the logical relation in the sentence. mere explanation to ground or reason, as in 6 Kal kawovdaaa avro TovTo

(Gal. 2

TTOLijaaL

:

there

vfiels,

clearly true^ in

Ro. 6

See Gal. 5

wioiiev avrOi.

qui,

A

quippe qui. &v (Lu.

avd'

20; Col. 3

:

5.

construction.^

qui = ut

o'lTLves.

This

rfj

aixapTla,

TToJs

1

41, olrLves

:

good example

:

ev

vofxco

seen in Ro. 8

is

Only the Purpose is

and the com-

ind.

mode

1 25, 32; Ph. 2 the N. T. in this occurs in

also

found

in relative clauses (cf.

Cf. Ac. 10

20).

Cf. Latin

32, 6s ye tov

:

2)

:

is

en

avpe-

(rvvecj)ayofxev Kal

buaiovade.

Cf. also a e/jLeWov (Rev. 3

iSiov vlov ouK h4>dffaTo.

mon

in

areddponev

4, o'lrLves

:

17, 6 vads tov deov ajLos

:

an argument

o'iTLves

2,

:

Cor. 3

1

is

Cf. also Ac. 10

kv avrfj;

^fjCTOiJiev

In

10).

kaTLv oLTLves hare

47; Ro.

:

:

:

Latin used for this

Either the future ind. or the subj. When the subj. occurs it is probably volitive."* So Burton 5 would explain all the cases of subj. of purpose with rela14 is analogous to the tives, but wrongly. The use in Mk. 14 is

is).

construction.

:

retention of the subj. of deliberation in an indirect question. Cf. the subj. of purpose with relative clause in Attic Greek.^

Homeric (like Latin also). The Attic idiom is the future ind., and the future ind. also appears in the N. T. So OS KaTa<jK€vb.aei (Mk. 1 2; Mt. 11 10; Lu. 7:27), with OS vixas avaixv-qaei (1 Cor. 4 17) which may be contrasted the same *in t'^kvov eortv ixov the merely explanatory relative 6s

But the

subj. construction is

:

:

:

So

sentence.

otrLves airodwaovaLV

avrt^

(Mt. 21:41);

:

:

:

—

'iva

p.e

KoXa(f)l^ri,

(Jo. 5

I'm TTLarevaco els ainbv.

aerai,

with

Mk. 4

:

7) ovk exco avdpoiirov tva /3dX7?

Cf. Gal.

kingly compares Mt. 10

The

:

:

22, kav

4:5; Rev. 19

I'm
variety of construction with

(Lu. 21

:

6), OS oh KaraXvdrjaeTaL,

os

is

» 4

Moulton, ProL,

7

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. See Vitcau, Le Verba, p. 135.

8

p. 185.

and

«

:

fioi /xe,

aKoXoxp (9

Viteau^

15.

and

:

36)

stri-

o oh yvuiadr}-

tva eXdri eis 4)avepbv.

illustrated

and Mk. 13

Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 527. Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 118. 6 N. T. Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 421.

1

2

:

26, 6 ovk aivoKa\v4>Bi]a erai /xi)

irpoiropev-

ot

11:6) where occurs where a

ovk exco 6 Trapaer]
40; Ex. 32 1) the Attic Greek would ^ have 6tl. Sometimes I'm relative might have been used. So 2 Cor. 12 7 e86dr] GovTai (Ac. 7

;

by Mt. 24 2 :

2, os oh

M. and T., Goodwin, M. and

p.'

jut)

KaTaXudfj.

126.

T., p. 217.

MODE The

(efkaisis)

idiom preferred the

classic

fut.

ind.

relative (Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 621),

has

e(/)'

for the

oh

^tXon/iTj^coo-tj'.

KOLVT]

Siv ki,k\u(xi.v;

Purpose

N.

for purpose with the but Isocrates (IV, 44)

Radermacher (V.

T. Gr., p. 138) cites

— aveXri; XIV, — XAjSp, etc.

Diod. XI, 21, 3, 8l' ov rpowov Ach. Tatius, IV, 16, 13, 6aov

8, 3, 8l'

often contemplated result so that the consecutive

is

Only the

idea follows naturally that of design. in the

961

T., unless

one follows Blass^ in taking

ind. future is 6 irpoaevkyKri

used

(Heb.

A

good instance of the future ind. is in Lu. 7 4, which may be profitably compared^ with the ^ non-final use of IVa in Jo. 1 27, Sl^los I'm Xmco. Burton^ prefers to call this a "complementary limitation of the principal clause," 8

:

3) as result.

a^Los €<JTLV

:

Tape^y,

:

a sort of secondary purpose.

But the notion

is

rather that of

contemplated result. The relative denotes a kind of consequence from a particular quality or state.^ See also Ph. 2 20 ovdha ptepLpLvqcreL, Mk. 10 29 ovbeh tcmv 6s acfyrJKev exco iaoxf/vxov octtls Cf. 2 Th. 3 3 rriP oiKLav, Lu. 7 49 tLs ovtos eanv 6s /cat afiaprias^ TicTTOS OS with 1 Jo. 1:9 Trtcrros 'Iva. An example^ of the concessive use of oirLves is seen in Jas. 4 14, :

—

:

:

:

:

olVti^es

The

ovK eiriaTaade

rijs

avpiov ivola

i]

^urj vp-cbv.

conditional use of the relative clause

is

only true in a

The relative 6s and oans, whether with or without av, does not mean rts or eav tls, though the two constructions are very much alike. There is a similarity between el tls deXei (Mk. 9 35) and 6s av deXn (10 :43). But I modified sense, as already shown.

e'i

:

do not agree to the notion of Goodwin^ and Burton^ that in the relative clauses we have a full-fledged set of conditional sentences on a par with the scheme with the conditional particles. That procedure is entirely too forced and artificial for the Greek freedom and for the facts. There is a general sort of parallel at some points, but it is confusion in syntax to try to overdo it with careful detail as Viteau^ does. "Ap is not confined to the relative and conditional sentences, but occurs with ews, Tplv, ws, tva, owcos (temporal and final clauses). The indefinite relative like 6s eav 32) is quite similar deXi^ (Mk. 8 35) or oans opoXoyrjaeL (Mt. 10 in idea to a conditional clause with kdv tls or el tls. But, after all, it is not a conditional sentence any more than the so-called :

:

1

2 » « 5

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. Blass, ib., cites also Uapds Xvaai in

N. T. M. and T., p. 126. Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 422. Burton, N. T. M. and T.,

Mk.

1 » '

p. 118.

»

:

7.

m. and T., pp. 195 ff. N. T. M. and T., pp. Le Vcrbo,

pp. 13(5

fT.

119

fT.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

962

causal, final, consecutive relativte clauses are really so.

by the context that one

All that

of the relative.

any

inferentially gets

It

by any treatment

only

true about the indefinite relative

is

clauses has already been explained under that discussion. fore pass

is

of these ideas out

there-

I

of the kinds of conditional sentences

in connection with the relative clauses.

Negatives in Relative Clauses.

(h)

negative

Mk. 13 we have XanjSdvtL

as in

is m'7,

2,

:

ov

OS ov

9);

15

fjiii

29.

:

onoXoyeL (1 Jo. 4

Moulton

:

is

IxrjTe

:

3)

;

c5

mi? ^^t

fj-fj

gives also

as in

6s ob

50).

Oc-

:

ravra (2 Pet.

irapecrTiv

use of

fx-lj

B.U. 114 (U/a.d.) jui)

1

:

D in Ac.

So also

a survival of

some papyri examples

C.P.R. 19 (Iv/a.D.) d

bbvarai \a^dv,

(Lu. 9

vjjlwv

(Tit. 1:11).

(Prol., p. 171) calls this

He

is oh,

indefinite the subjective negative

So

a

in relative clauses:

jujj

18),

indicative the negative

relative

literary construction.

239) of

:

38); 6s yap ovk eort Kad'

:

when the

the subj. occurs the

but ob fxt) is found in So in Mk. 9:1 and Mt. 16 28

KaraXvdf}.

occurs with the indicative.

JU17

When

Ixv (Lu. 8

jxri

With the

fxi].

(Mt. 10

casionally

fiii

av

ds

{ib.,

p.

awodeSoiKev abrca

^j^

The

avpe(f)Oi)pr]aa.

use of

more common in the kolvt] than in the clasHe cites examples sic Greek (Radermacher, N. T.Gr., p. 171). from late Greek writers. There is nothing gained by explaining in relative clauses is

fxrj

ov in relative clauses after the fashion of

ob in conditional sen-

el

done by Burton.^ 2. Causal Sentences. These do not properly be(a) Paratactic Causal Sentences. long here, but there are so many of them that they compel The common inferential particle yap introduces an innotice. dependent, not a dependent, sentence. Paul uses it usually to introduce a separate sentence as in Ro. 2:28; 1 Cor. 15:9. In It will be treated in the 17 both 6tl and yap occur. 1 Cor. 10 chapter on Particles. Phrases like av9' cjv (Lu. 12 3), 8l6 (Mt.

tences as

is

:

:

27:8),

didTvep

(1

Cor. 8:13), 6deu (Ac. 26:19),

5t'

aiTlav (2

ifjv

Tim. 1:6, 12), ov x^-P'-v (Lu. 7:47) are not always regarded as formally causal. The construction is sometimes paratactic. Indeed, the subordination of the loose.^

Thus there

the sentence with also

h-Ktibr)

biOTi in

in 1

Ro. 3

:

:

is

W.

22.

20; 8

very H.) in

1

:

7.

1

N. T. M. and

T., p. 180.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

The

Stort

clauses

1

:

6tl in

causal sentence

p. 274.

is

often rather

between 25 and yap in 2 Cor. 4 6; 7

difference

Cor.

See further

2

p. 98,

on and

little

:

is

Cf. also Burton,

(begins

6tl 1 :

:

26.

8, 14,

Cf.

and

primarily para-

N. T. M.

and. T.,

:

MODE See Mt. 6

tactic.

The subordinate

Lu. 11

5;

:

relative

963

(efkaisis)

:

32; 1 Cor. 15

:

29; Heb. 10

:

2.

a later development.^

is

One may say at once always the indicative. There is no complication that arises save with exei when the apodosis of a condition of the second class is used without the protasis as in Heb. 10 2, kirel ovk av eirauaauTo. Here the construction is not due at all to kirel. In the same way we explain ewel Uet in Heb. With Siihordinating Conjunctions.

{b)

mode

that in the N. T. the

is

:

9

26 and

:

dxpeiXeTe

eirei

apa in

in the rhetorical question in in Ac. 5

38

:

Jo. 14

:

5

18, OTL

:

OTL

10,

:

non

is

/XT]

ov

kirel tL

is

fw

{eav

But and ei,

it

may

be said

Kai u/xeTs ^rjaeTe.

usually ov as in IJo. 2 ireTriaTevKev,

we have

:

jui?,

16.

Once

but

ov is seen in 1 Jo.

in the

N. T.,

''The former states the charge, quod

TreiriaTevKep.

simple

the latter the

crediderit,

In a word,

6rt.

also

is ellipsis

TOLrjaovatv;

used precisely as in the paratactic sentences.

19, oTt eyd}

The negative Jo. 3

29,

:

two complete conditional sentences

f.

that the indicative .

There

10.

:

Cor. 15

and apodosis) occur with

protasis

Cf

Cor. 5

1

1

quod nan credidit"

fact,

(Moulton, Prol, p. 171). Cf. on fxi] Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 162, 535. 5, 8-9.

in Epictetus IV, 4, 11; IV,

The

distinction

is

In Heb. 9 17, eTret subtle, /X17 In B. G. U. 530 jir]. meet likewise /X17 TOTe (or M'? T^oTe) laxvet, we ae, note kirl (et) tireyi^m xpos ovk on (I/a.D.), CTTt nil avT€ypa\j/as avT^ being more subjective and

ideal.

:

—

OTL OVK with true distinction.

and

/U17

tive fact, with

M17

With

the element of blame

we have

ov

((iefj.cl)eTaL)

the objec-

"The

appears.

comparison of Plutarch with the N. T. shows a great advance in the use of 6tl iirj'' (Moulton, Prol, p. 239). Cf. also E. L. Green, Gildersleeve Studies, pp.

He

cites

on

nri excts,

471

ff.;

Radermacher, N. T.

Epictetus IV, 10, 34.

It

is

Gr., p. 171.

making inroads on

OTL ov.

We 20, is

sometimes have

and that

So also

practically causal.

Cor. 5:4; Ph. 4:10.

The

classical

avd' oiv in

a truly causal sense as in Lu. 1 Mt. 14 7. In Heb. 2 18 fi' a)

true also of odev in

is

e<^' cS

re

Cf.

k'

:

:

e^'

w

causal in Ro. 5

is

Scbaet,

a)

Oxy. 38

P.

does not occur in the N. T.

See

12; 2

:

(a.d. e0'

w

'on condition that he give,' P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). Then cos has almost the force of a causal particle in Mk. 9 Jo. 19 33; Mt. 6 12 (cf. Lu. 11 4, Kal yap) 2 Tim. 1 3.

same thing Heb. 7 20 :

Lu. 19 9 :

'

:

:

:

true of

is

(9

(cf.

:

27)

1:7).

and

KaOcos in Jo. e<^'

oaov in

In Ac. 17 31

Cf. Nilsson, Die Kaiisalsiitzo

:

:

;

17

:

2.

Mt. 25

HLP.

Ka^' :

6(top is

40, 45.

read

8l6tl.

iin (iriecli. bis Arist.

I,

So

49).

Sdjcret,

:

21;

The

causal in KadoTL in

None

of these

Die Pocsie.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

964

NEW TESTAMENT

but they come to be so used in cerWe have cos 6tl in 2 Cor. 5 19; cos OTt deds rjv ev Xptcrrco Koaixov KaTaWaaaiov eaurcp (cf. our "since that"). Here the Vulgate has quoniam. But in 2 Cor. 11:21 the Vulgate renders cbs on by quasi, as in 2 Th. 2:2, cos on kuecrTrjKev. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321 f. It is found also in Esther 4 14 and is post-classical.^ Alotl is found in the Lucan writings, the Pauhne Epistles, Hebrews, James and 1 Peter. In the modern Greek^ it takes the form yLari. Once (Ro. 8 21) some MSS. (W. H. read on) have 8l6tl in the sense of objective 6tl ('that') as in later Greek (cf. late Latin quia = quod). Instances of causal 5t6n may be seen in Lu. 1 13; Ro. 1 19, etc. It is compounded of 5td and on (cf. English "for that"). In Ph. 2 26 8l6tl is causal and 6tl is declarative. In modern Greek 5t6n survives in 17 Kadapevovaa. The vernacular has a(j)ov, ew€L8r}, yLari (Thumb, Handh., p. 194). particles are strictly causal,

tain contexts in the later Greek.

:

:

:

:

:

:

But

other causal particles are insignificant beside 6tl which

all

grew steadily In

tactic*

1

in use.^

accusative neuter 6tl

more common

is

It

was

Jo. 4: 3 note 6 (cf. 6tl

originally merely relative

— 6tl

and

and para-

Ro. 4: 21. It is av TpoaSaTavrjays in Lu. 10 35) and 6tl

in

:

as the objective particle in indirect discourse

(subject or object clause) than as a causal conjunction. Jo.

5:9

occurs

OTL

twice, once

as causal

In

1

and once as objec-

In 2 Th. 3 7 f exegesis alone can determine the In Jo. 3:19 Chrysostom takes on = because.' Cf. also Jo. 16 8-11 (see Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 158). The English "the reason that" (vernacular "the reason why") is similar. It is very common in 1 John in both senses. In Jo. 1:15 ff. tive particle.

nature of

:

.

otl.

'

:

causal OTL occurs three times in succession. Xvofiep avTov otl ovk a.Ko'KovdeL fied' rjixdv,

otl ovk r]Ko\oWeL.

5

:

8.

9

:

17,

is

:

49, kco-

used because

In Mk. 9 38 W. H. good example of causal otl is seen in Ro. The precise idea conveyed by otl varies greatly. In Jo.

of a sort of implied

read

In Lu. 9

the present

t'l

(XV

indirect discourse.

:

A

\kyeLS irepl avTOV, otl rjveu^ep aov tous 6<^^aX/iOLis; the use

between objective and causal. Cf. also Mk. 6 17. But we need not appeal to the Hebrew^ for a justification of this balancing of two ideas by otl. So in Jo. 2 18, rt (xripLetov 8hKvvH^ rjfuv, OTL TavTa xotets; Akin to this construction is that in of OTL wavers

:

:

Le Verbe,

»

Viteau,

2

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 454.

*

As Viteau does

1 Kl. 1

:

8, xi

tan

in

aot,

p. 98.

Le Verbe,

otl (cXatets;

'

lb.

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 189. The LXX does show the idiom, as *

p. 100.

in

1; :

MODE Jo. 14

which

22, TL yeyopev otl,

:

965

(efkaisis) is

shortened into

rl otl in

Ac. 5

a correspondence sometimes between 5td tovto and Oux on may be OTL (Jo. 10 17); ovrm and on (Ro. 9 31 f.). In either objective or causal as in Ph. 4 11, 17; 2 Th. 3:9.

There

4.

is

:

:

:

meant 'not only do I say that, but I also But in the N. T. it either means 'I say this not because' do not mean to say that,' and usually the latter according

the ancient Greek say.'

or 'I

it

to Abbott.i

We

must have a word about

of fact

kivei-br]-Tcep

only in Lu.

1

:

1

:

all

in

read by

'EireLbi] is is

Cf. Lu. 11:6;

.

W. H.

Acts)

un-

is

Lu. 7:

and Paul

Cor.

1

in

Eight other

put in the margin.

Luke (Gospel and

and Philippians)

rinthians

This

(Luke's classical introduction).

doubtedly a literary touch.^ and Ac. 13 46, but exet be

examples remain,

As a matter

kird, eTeid-f], kireibriTcep.

(note the composition) appears in the N. T.

1

21

:

f.

Co-

(1

'Eird,

is almost confined to Luke, Paul, Elsewhere in Matthew, Mark and John. Two of these are examples of the temporal use (Mk. 15:42; Lu. 7 1 W. H. marg.). The ordinary causal sense is well illustrated in Mt. 21 46, eiret ds ir po4>i]Tr]v elxov. The classical idiom of the ellipsis with eireL has already been mentioned and is relatively fre-

obsolescent in the late Greek,^

the author of Hebrews.

:

:

quent in the N. T. Heb. 9 26; 10 2. (Ro. 3 it is

av

:

Cf. Ro. 3

6)

and

:

6; 11

:

22; 1 Cor. 14

It occurs in the simplest

:

:

kird ri (1

Cor. 15

:

In

29).

1

Cor. 14

equivalent to 'otherwise' and in Ro. 11:22 to

The apodosis

€/c/co7n7
curs in

1

Cor. 5

:

10;

:

form :

16; 15

in

:

eTrei

29; iru>s

16, kird kdv,

'else,' eiret koL

of a condition of the second class oc-

Heb. 9

:

26; 10

:

2.

Greek sometimes used el (conceived as an hypothesis) rather than otl (a direct reason).* The N. T. shows examples of davjxa^co el in this sense (Mk. 15 44; 1 Jo. 3 13), though davjid^oi otl is found also* (Lu. 11: 38; Gal. 1 "On is the N. T. construction^ with dyavaKTeco (Lu. 13 14); 6). e^op.o\oyeotiaL (Mt. 11 25); evxapLaTeco (Lu. 18 11); fxeXeL (Mk. 4 Cf. 5n and e4>' 4i in 23). 20); xoXaco (Jo. 7 38); xatpco (Lu. 10 Ph. 4 10. On the possible causal use of ore and oTav see article by Sheppard, The CI Rev., Sept., 1913. Verbs of emotion in

classical

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

This matter received (c) Relative Clauses. under Relative Clauses. For examples of Viteau,

»

Job. Gr. p. 162.

»

Jann., Hiat. Gk. Gr., p. 454.

*

Cf. ib.

•i

Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 101.

«

sufficient discussion 6s

Le Verbe,

take Ro. 8 p. 101.

:

32

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

966

For oam note Mt. 7:15; Ro. 6:2. See also ov and 8l' riv alriav (8 47). The construction is common in (d) Ata TO and the Infinitive. the N. T., occurring thirty-two times according to Votaw^ as compared with thirty-five for the 0. T. and twenty-six for the Apocrypha. It is particularly frequent in Luke.^ Cf. Lu. 2:4; 8 6; Ac. 4 2; 8 11, etc. It is not in John except in 2 24, 5ta TO avTov jLvuaKeLv. Blass^ rejects it here because the Lewis MS. and Nonnus do not have the passage. Here note that 6tl is used side by side with 5td to. So in Jas. 4 2 f we have 5id to /it) alTeiadaL vfj-as and Stort /ca/ccos aiTeiade on a parity. Cf Ph. 1 7, In Mk. 5 4, 5td to bebkadai Kai dLeairaadai, /cat Kad(j:s and 5td to. (TvvTeTpi4>daL, note the perfect tense and the repetition of the inBurton^ thinks that here 5id gives rather the evidence finitive. than the reason. Why not both? There is one example of the Feb. 12:6.

xapLv (Lu. 7 47) :

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

:

.

:

instrumental use of the infinitive to express cause, (2 Cor. 2

The

13).

:

2 Chron. 28

(cf.

:

text of

B

tc3

ebpetv

firj

No

22, tc3 OXl^t^vul avTov).

jie

LXX^

has six examples in the

examples of

eTri

t<3

occur.* (e)

The Participle.

We

do not have

Greek, to give the real reason. ciple as in SiKatos is

:

But

21.

cos

in

first cos

Mt. 7

:

deXcov avT-qv

28

f., cos

:

Cf. Jas. 2

Prol., p. 234).

:

be the real one or mere assumption. cos ol

ypannaTeis, the

gives the ostensible (and true ground) of the astonishment

of the people.

Cf. also Lu. 16

tov \a6v, Pilate does

Jesus to be true.

So also with

:

1;

cos

2. But in Lu. 23 14, not believe the charge against

Ac. 2

:

:

fxeWovTuv in Ac. 27 30.

Comparative Clauses. The

mar^ forms the basis are

given simply by the partibuy fiaTlaaL (Mt. 1 19). It

e^ovalav exoov Kai ovx

cos airo(jTpkcf)ovTa

3.

aTe, olov, ola, as in classical

occurs with the participle to give the al-

may

leged reason, which

Thus

fir]

is

common" (Moulton,

"exceedingly

25; Ac. 4

cov Kal

That

:

discussion in

my

Short Gram-

The conjunctions employed but the construction deserves separate

of this section.

all of relative origin,

treatment.

The Relative octos. This is a classic idiom and occurs only Hebrews, except once in Mark. In Heb. 1 4 the correlative expressed and the comparative form of the adjective is found

(a)

in is

:

1

The Use

aor. 1 (Mt. 2 * "

24

of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

7 times. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 236. Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 101. :

12), perf

Mr. H. Scott notes

pres. 24,

.

"

N. T. M. and

T., p. 161.

p. 29. ^

Chapter XXVIII.

MODE Both

both clauses.

in

aureus

are present in 8

:

and

correlative

instrumental case, roaovTco KpdrTwv (f)Op<j}Tepov Trap'

967

(efkaisis)

relative are here in the

yevofxevos Toiv a/yyekoiv

KeK\r]pov6p.r]Kev 'dvop-a.

save that the correlative

6,

5ia-

6(rix)

The same phenomena In 10

absent.

is

:

25

there is no comparative in the relative clause. The others are examples of koB' oaov. In 3 3 there is no correlative, but the comparative appears in both clauses. In 7 20 f the correlative is Kara touovto, but there is no comparative in the relative clause. :

:

.

This is probal)ly causal in idea, as is true of Kad' oaov in 9 27, where there is no comparative, though we have the correlative The example in Mk. 7 36, oaov be avrols Steo-TeXXero ouTcos Kal. avTol paXXov TrepLaaorepov eKrjpvaeov, lacks the correlative and has no comparative with the relative, but has a double comparison in :

:

In Jo. 6

the principal clause.

:

11

and Rev. 21 16, 6aou is simplycausal and temporal uses of :

The

not a conjunction.

relative,

oaov are discussed elsewhere. (6)

The

Relative 6s with Kara.

Ro. 8

:

26 Kadb

1

SeT,

Pet. 4

singular Kadb

found only in

is

and 2 Cor. 8 12 where a good distinction

13 Kadd KOLvuveire,

:

KaBo iav exd evrpocrdeKTOs, oh Kadd ova exet,

:

drawn between the subjunctive and the indicative. Cf. 0. P. The construction with eav is ixLffdol pepos. The like that of the indefinite relative with eav (av) and the subj. plural Kada is found only once in the N. T. (Mt. 27 10). Ka^dTrep, however, is found seventeen times (three doubtful as compared with Kadoos, Ro. 9 13; 10 15; 2 Cor. 3 18) and all in Paul's It is thoroughly writings save in Heb. 4:2 (without verl)). Attic and a shght literary touch. Cf. 1 Cor. 10 10. The mode

is

1125, 14 (ii/A.D.) KaOo

:

:

:

:

:

always indicative, but cf Kada apeaKri in Gen. 19 8. In Ro. 12 4 the correlative is ourcos. It occurs only twice (Ac. (c) 'KadoTL in a Comparative Sense. 2 45 4 35) and the same idiom precisely each time, KadoTL av tls xpdav elxev. Here av seems to particularize each case from time to time (note imperfect tense), the iterative use of av (Moulton,

is

:

.

:

:

;

:

ProL, p. 167). This usage approaches the temporal in idea. The classic idiom of the aorist ind. with av no longer appears with these conjunctions.

Compounds. These are the most common comparative particles. The most frequent of all is cos itself which has various other uses as exclamatory (
'fis

and

its

:

15), declarative like

(Lu. 12 particle

:

58), (cbs

bn

(Ac. 10

:

28), causal (Mt. 6

:

12),

temporal

with the infinitive (Lu. 9 52; Hel). 7: 9), as a final Ac. 20 24, W. H. text), with superlative :

reXeiwaco,

:

: ;

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

968

with the sense of 'about,' as cos participles (cos iieXKuu, Ac. 23 The richness of this particle is thus illustrated. But the 20). comparative relative adverb is the origin of them all. In Heb.

adverbs (ws

3

4

11;

:

3

:

Ac. 17:

rdxio-Ta,

(Mk. 5

SicrxtXiot

:

may

cos

15),

and with

13)

:

be consecutive 'so,' but cos is more often comelse. Usually cos has a correlative. Thus

parative than anything

—

oiircos

Cor. 7

:

cos

(1

14)

;

Cor. 4

—

cos

1)

:

cibs

;

—

(Ac. 8

ourcos

(Gal. 1:9); tVos

/cat

—

cbs

:

32)

cos

;

—

(2

oiJtcos /cat

(Ac. 11

/cat

:

17)

—

/cat

;

(Mt. 18 :33). But often no correlative is expressed (cf. 13).^ The verb is not always expressed. Thus cos oi viroKpi.This predicate use of cbs is very extensive. Cf. rai (Mt. 6:5). The mode is usually the indicative, as in COS Kat (1 Cor. 7:7).

cos

/cat

Mt. 8

Mk.

:

10

but the subj. occurs in Mk. 4

1,

:

(cf. cbs oi'K

26,

:

avdpwTos ^aXji

cbs

Blass^ considers this "quite impossible," but

oUev).

Some

MSS. add

it is

and others read orav, but surely eav (av) is not "indispensable" to the subj. (cf. Mt. 10 33). In Gal. 6:10, cbs Kaipov ex^o/xej', the temporal cbs is likewise minus av. See Relative Clauses and discussion of av which is by no means necessary in these subj. clauses. Cf. Radermacher, N. T. read by }«{BD.

late

eav

:

In

Gr., p. 164.

Th. 2

1

we do have kav, but

7, cbs kav Tpo4>6^ daXirri

:

the construction in

Mark

reKva,

eavrrjs

to.

not lawless.

is

Ka^cbs

comes next to cbs in frequency (chiefly with Luke and Paul). It sometimes has the correlative. So ourcos /ca^cbs (Lu. 24 24) :

— ovTus

/Calebs

— ourcos

Kat

(Jo. 15

:

9)

The

30.

Col.

1

:

Ka^cbs

pressed as in

1

58).

In the N. T.

;

/cat

(Lu. 17

:

oi5rcos

28),

/cat

(2 Cor.

(Ro.

Kat

1

:

read only once in

signification in Ac. 7: 17.

:

16;

Mt. 3

:

18 (text

Mk.

9

occurs with the participle (had

Lu

in

9

Cf. also Ro. 6 :

is

in

unex-

The word, 1

:

28).

It

as

may

It occurs in indirect

14,

has no verb 36).

So

6).

and is epexegetical in 3 Jo. 3. Ka0cbo-7rep is the N. T. (Heb. 5:4), though W. H. put it in :

the margin in 2 Cor. 3

:

avra in verse

Sometimes the principal clause

occurs only with the indicative.

it

question in Ac. 15

it

to.

/ca^cbs

— Kat

Ka^cbs

;

Tim. 1:3, or only ov occurs, as ov KaQws (1 Jo. 3 It is a late word but is aJ3undant in the papyri.

have a temporal

9

13)

and note Kara

already noted, sometimes has a causal sense (Ro.

(cf.

8:6);

not always expressed (Mt. 21:

is

Kat.

— — Ka^cbs

Ka^cbs

;

13)

:

oMotcos Ka^cbs

;

:

14)

:

(Col. 3

/cat

correlative

6,

12; Jo. 6

(Jo. 3

14, 28, etc.

:

It

13. is

It is

Kadairep). :

but though exovra -n-oifxha (Mt.

'ficret

is classical,

26, etc.) in the

Trpo/Sara uri

N.

T.,

used in the sense of 'about' as

commonest

1

In general correlatives are rare in the

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321.

in the

LXX.

Gospels and Acts.

Viteau,

Le Verbe,

p. 142.

:

MODE

969

(ErKAisis)

we have d)s av eK(l)o^tLv (here alone in the N, T. "Qairep occurs with the in=' as if to frighten.' with infinitive) 14 6:2. In Mt. 25 a paralile is thus introMt. dicative as in But have the correlative in correlative. we with no but duced, In 2 Cor. 10

:

9

:

Ro. 5

19 (6 :4),

:

(Mt. 25

cbcraiiTcos

(hairep :

— ovtcos

14-18);

cbairep

So Jo. 5

Kai.

— ourcos

(13

:

So

21.

We

40).

:

cbairep

—

find cbarep

Often the verb is wholly (cf. Ac. 2:2). wanting as in Mt. 6 7. We meet cbcrxepet only once (1 Cor. 15 8) and that without a verb. These are all relative adverbial sentences 4. Local Clauses. and are usually treated with relative sentences, but they are worthy of a separate note. The adverbs (conjunctions) used are With odev only the indicative is found as in Lu, odev, ov, oTTOv. 11: 24, odep t^rjKOop. More common than od^v is ov as in Mt. 2 Cf. past perfect in Ac. 20 8. It occurs mainly 9, OX) rjv TO Tvaiblov. in Luke's writings and always with the indicative save once in Here the indefinite relative natu1 Cor. 16 6, ov kav TropevwfxaL. OS is used with verbs of motion rally has av and the subjunctive. also with the participle

:

:

:

:

:

Cf. also Lu.

as well as with those of rest as this passage shows.

10

1,

:

But

o5 TJiieWev avrds epxec^daL.

oirov is

the usual local con-

junction in the N. T., particularly in Matthew, Mark and John It occurs with verbs of rest as in Mk. (Gospel and Revelation).

2

4, oirov

:

rjv,

indicative

is

and

of

motion as in Jo. 7

the usual mode.

Once,

:

Mk.

34, oirov uTrdyco.

6

:

56,

oirov

The

av eiaeTo-

emphasize the notion of repetition in the imCf. oirov i]6eX€s (Jo. 21 is not necessary. Note the emphatic negative in 6tov ov 0eXcts (ih.). Cf. also 18). oTov av U7rd7ets (Rev. 14 4) where av occurs with the present ind. (indefinite relative). In ottou cfydyu} (Mk. 14 14; Lu. 22 11), as already explained, the subj is prol^ably deliberative, answering to pevero,

we

find av to

perfect tense, but this

:

:

:

.

TTOV 4>aycjo

(Lu. 9 57)

is

Mt. 8 14

:

:

the :

in the direct question.

58).

common

Cf. ovk exet irov

rriv Ke(i)a\r]v kXIvj]

subj. with eav in otov kav airepxv (Lu. 9

futuristic subj.

See further Mt. 24

19.

9, 14.

But the

Curiously enough

all

:

So in the 28; 26

:

13;

:

parallel passage in

Mk.

6

:

10; 9

:

18;

the N. T. instances of otov with

the subj. are found in the Synoptic Gospels. There is ellipsis of the copula in Rev. 2 13, as is not infrequent with relatives. :

used also in metaphorical relations, as in Heb. 9 16. The correlative adverb exet occasionally appears with oirov as in Lu. 12:34; 17:37; Jo. 12:26. Kal is a correlative in Jo. 17:24. "Oirov is

The

use of

:

Greek is confined to indefinite senN. T. shows a frequent use (especially in John)

oirov in classical

tences, but the

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

970

where there 5.

(a)

a definite antecedent.*

is

42; 10 :40; 12

Cf. Jo. 1

:

28; 4 :46; 7:

1, etc.

:

Temporal Clauses. Kin to Relative Clauses

Origin and

in

Idiom.

Blass^

bluntly says that temporal clauses introduced byj^re and orav

"are generally only a special class of relative sentence, and ex-

The same

same constructions."

hibit the

thing

is

true of local

Burton^ carries this conception to such a point that

sentences.

he has no separate treatment of temporal sentences at all. This Thompson'* sees the matter rightly when is surely going too far. original relative import becomes specialized." "The vague he says: find both definite and indefinite temporal expect Hence we to Definite tem-

clauses as with other relative (and local) clauses.

poral clauses

may

be illustrated by Mt. 7 28,

oTe tTektcev 6

:

'Itj-

The indefinite is shown in Jo. 15 26, orav eXdri 6 Trapd/cXTjros. The temporal clause may be indefinite in its futurity, frequency and duration.^ Indefinite futurity is the most common, indefinite duration the least common. The modes used in temporal clauses in the N. T. are aovs

roiis

\6yovs tovtovs, e^eTrXrjaaoPTo

ol

oxXot.

:

These uses conform to the development of the two modes. There is one example of the optative in a temporal clause (Ac. 25 16, vpds ovs aiveKpithe indicative and the suljjunctive. historical

:

drjv OTL oi'K ecFTLV

Wos

Kara

"Pco/xatots xc-Ptr^cr^oit riva

irpoacoTrou

exoL tovs

Xd|8ot Trept Tov eyK\r]paTos).

Here, as

yopovfjLeuos

avOpwirov ivplv

Karr^ybpovs is

tottop

r)

av exv Te

XajSri)

t)

6 KaTt)-

airoXoyias

evident, the optative

to indirect discourse, not to the temporal clause. tive with av {irplv

re

is

due

The subjunc-

occurs rather than the opta-

This sequence was optional N. T. only in Luke's retained in the indicative. This

tive according to sequence of modes.

and a

classic idiom,

writings.

sentence

and so

Observe that is

is

found

eaTLP is

in the

a fine illustration of the Greek subordinate clauses.

In the context in Acts cede the Tp\v

r?

it is

seen that four dependent clauses pre-

clause in the long sentence.

in temporal clauses has very

much

The

use of ap or kav

the same history as in other

The usage varies with different conjunctions be noted in each instance. The point of time in the temporal clause may be either past, present or future. It is a rather complicated matter, the Greek temporal clause, but not so much so as the Latin cum clause, "in which the Latin lanrelative clauses.

and

will

1

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 152

f.

*

Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 329.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. N. T. M. and T., pp. 118, 126

^

lb., p. 328.

»

ff.

MODE

971

(etkaisis)

guage is without a parallel."* The different constructions may be conveniently grouped for discussion. Just as the optative with temporal clauses vanished, so there came a retreat of vaAs a result in the later Greek the rious temporal conjunctions. construction

is

much

simpler.^

Conjunctions Meaning

(6)

The

When.'

'

use of the op-

classic

tative for repetition with such clauses has .been effectually side-

tracked in the vernacular

Only the

ind.

and

subj.

kolvti

(Radermacher, N. T.

modes occur

vanished^ in this sense, save in Lu. 7

W. H. and

Gr., p. 130).

in these clauses.

where

1

:

has

'ETret

a variant (mar-

it is

Curiously temporal use of kireLbri It is a definite point of time in in the N. T., cTrttSi) eTrXrjpc^aev. the past and naturally the indicative occurs. There are three

gin in

enough

Nestle) for

eirtihi],

the correct text.

this is also the only instance of the

examples of eTav with the subjunctive (Mt. 2:8, e-n-ap evprire; Lu. 11:22, eirap vLK-nay; 11:34, eirav fl where it is parallel with There are only two instances of rivlKa (2 Cor. 3 15, orav fi). :

16, "qviKa av avayuwaKrjTaL, fjulKa eap

nite idea as

nite also

Note

the subjunctive shows.

and with notion

It

eTrL(TTpe\f/ri).

au

is

and

eav (indefi-

(AEH)

Nestle

of repetition).

the indefi-

reads

but W. H. and Souter (}>{BCD) have ore. 'OrdTav does not occur in the N. T. "Ore and orau are both common and in all parts of the N. T. The conneceireipaaev

oTT^re

tion between

Homeric

ore

Lu. 6

in

:

3,

ore (cf. 6-dep,

and

6s

re

Brugmann,

(Monro, Ho7n.

Griech. Gr., p.

254) and

Gr., p. 191) is disputed.^

from 6s and on from oo-rts. Homer used a causal conjunction like on. Only the indicative (see below) mode appears with ore in the N. T., but it occurs with past, present and future. Usually the events are definite, as in Mt. Cf. the conjunction 6 ore as

21

:

ore riyyiaap ds 'lepocroXujua.

1,

ore ykyopa api]p in 1 Cor. 13

:

The present

11; ore

in

ffj

tense

Hcb. 9

:

is rare,

17.

In

as in

Mk.

11:1 kyyl^ovaiv is the historic present. The great bulk of the examples are in the past with the aorist indicative, though the imperfect occurs for custom or repetition, as in Jo. 21: 18; Col. 3:7. The future indicative is naturally indefinite even when oTt is 16.

preceded by a word Incorporated in

W.

like copa (Jo.

H.).

1

W.

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 4GG.

G. Hale, Stud,

4

:

21, 23) or

in Class. Thilol.,

The Cum

'Eirtf

«

Cf.

Goelzer, Synt., p. 411

f.

W.

(Ro. 2

:

H.) has

Constructions, 1SS7, p. 259.

Monro, Horn. Gr:, p. 226. was rare in Homer. Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. ISO ff.; Brug., Grioch. Gr.,

»

y]txkpa

Souier's Rev. Text (so

p.

501; Riem. and

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

972

in Lu. 13

eojs eiTrr]Te

The

text

is

in

but Nestle

35,

:

much

reads ews ^^et ore elwnTe.

still

confusion, but at

any rate here

evidence for the subjunctive with ore without mony with what we saw was true of 6s and

well-known Homeric idiom.^ cites 6t€ ap^TjTat (Vettius, pp.

Radermacher

is manuscript This is in har-

av.

It is also

oo-rts.

"Orav naturally occurs

106, 36).

more frequently with the subjunctive for indefinite future It is usually the aorist tense, as in Mt. 24 33, orav U-qre.

time.

:

present subj. does occur

Mt. 15

as in

of duration

:

2,

when the notion

orav aprov iaeiwuLv.

seems manifest

(Jo. 9

Cf.

a

T. Gr., p. 164)

(A''.

of repetition

Mt. 6

orav kv rw

:

2.

is

The

implied,

Once the idea

but usunot necessary to take the common aorist subj. here as the Latin futurum exactum? Cf orav Trapabdl in Mk. 4 29. The av {ore av) is always present :

5,

ally it is future uncertainty simply.

.

It

Koafjiw &),

is

:

save in the doubtful ore

of Lu. 13 35. "Ore with the subj. found in poetry and in the Byzantine writers.^ So Test. XII Pat. Levi 2 10 ore aveXdrjs eKtt. On the other hand a number of examples occur of orav with the indicative (cf. eav and 6tov av with the indicative). Homer, Iliad, 20, 335, has oTe Kev ^vfjL(3\i]elirriTe

:

is

:

So in Rev. 4 9 we find orav 86:aov(nv. The close affinform and meaning of the aorist subj. with the future indicative should cause no surprise at this idiom. In Lu. 13 28 BD read orav bxpeaOe, though W. H. put 6\}/r}ade in the text. A good many manuscripts Hkewise have orav with the future ind. in Mt. 10 19 and 1 Tim. 5:11. Cf. brav 'iarac in Clem., aeai avrco.

:

ity in

:

:

Cor. 2, 12,

Moulton (ProL,

p. 168) notes in the papyri only a small number of examples of dv with temporal clauses and the

Thus

ind.

B. U. 424

orav e^i^pev in Par. P. 26 (ii/B.c); eirav

(ii/iii

common

is

1.

a.d.); biroTav avaipovvTat in

in the

LXX,

Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 463; {Cit.

and

B.,

ii,

B. U. 607

Polybius, Strabo, etc.

Radermacher,

TV.

It

See Jannaris,

Ramsay

T. Gr., p. 164.

p. 477, no. 343) gives orav efcov

in

kTrvdop.-i)v

(ii/A.D.).

eyw a ''curious

A

anti-Christian inscription" (Moulton, Prol., p. 239). few instances occur of orav with the present indicative. So orav arrjKere in Mk. 11 25. Here^ some MSS. have the subj., as in Ro. :

2 14 some read orav TroteT. Cf also various readings in Mk. 13 4, 7. This construction is not unknown in earlier writers, though more common in the kolvt]. Cf. Ex. 1 16; Ps. 101 3; :

.

:

:

1

» » *

Cf. Mutzbauer, Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 97. W.-M., p. 387. Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 125. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Cf. W.-M., p. 388.

:

Gr., p. 463.

MODE Prov.

1

:

22; Josephus, Ant.,

126.

In 2 Cor. 12

subj.

Cf. 1 Th. 3

:

:

(efkaisiz)

xii, 2, 3;

10, orav aadevib, 8, eav aTrjKeTe.

973

Strabo,

I,

1,

7; Act. Apocr.,

we probably have the present The examples of orav with the

more numerous. In Thucydand diroTe indefinite.^ "Orav with the optative appears in Xenophon.^ The Atticists have kwtibav and biroTav {sic) with the opt. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 1G5). In the KOLVT] the field of orav is widened, as already shown. Agaaorist or imperfect indicative are

ides ore

was always

definite

thias uses orav with the aorist indicative.^ It is common in the Septuagint to have orav with past tenses (Gen. 38 1 1 1 Sam. 17:34, orav ^pxero; Ps. 119:7, orav kXakovv; Num. 11:9; Ps. 118 32; Dan. 3:7).'' The usual notion is that of indefinite re:

;

:

petition.

Thus we note

kyeveTO to

b'eov.

Strabo

In Tobit 7: 11 observe

in Polybius 4, 32, 5, orav ixh ovtol rjaav,

it I,

7 has oTav

1,

ovrore

avTov Weiopovv, -wpoakinirTOV avrw.

But the

56.

kolv-t]

Cf. also 13, 7, 10.

(prjalf.

Mk.

In

eap.

3

11

:

Cf owov av and

we have orav av in Mk. 6

ocrot

.

:

writers used oTav with the aorist indicative for

This is common in the Byzantine^ writers. In the modern Greek oTav is freely used with the indicative.^ See

a definite occurrence.

Philo II, 112, 23, OTav

els

Blass^ calls this quite in-

evoLa rjXOev.

though the LXX has cos au 'e^rjXOev 'la/cw/S (Gen. 27:30; cf. 6:4) of "a single definite past action.^" There are two examples in the N. T., Mk. 11 19, otuu d^pe kyeveTO, e^eTopevovTo e^w TTJs TToXecos (possible to understand it as repetition), and Rev, 8 correct,

:

:

OTav TqvoL^tv

1,

Tr]v

acppayiSa

But, as Moulton

ttjv i^b6p.r]v.

p. 248) observes, it is possible to regard e^eiropevovTo in

{Prol.,

Mk.

11

:

19 as pictorial rather than iterative and the papyri examples of OTav, as seen above, allow either usage. Simcox^ explains this

"lapse" on the ground that

Mark and

the t^uthor of the Apoca-

lypse are the least correct of the N. T. writers.

belonged to the vernacular fxev

— OTav

kolvt).

See Ex. 16

:

But the idiom

3, 6(f)e\ov airedavo-

eKadiaa/jLev eirl toov XejSrjTwv Kal ri(T6iop.ev ixpTovs.

'Ocrd/cis is

only used with the notion of indefinite repetition. *

It

occurs

Winifred Warren, A Study of Conjunctional Temp. Clauses in Thucydi
1897, p. 73.

reads ^

oirore.

Biiumlein, Unters. iiber die griech.

Modi und

die Piirtik. Kkv

und

df, 1S46,

p. 322. '

Reffel,

*

Viteau,

»

W.-M.,

*

lb.;

'

Uber den Sprachgebr. dcs Agathias, Lc Verbe, p. 123; W.-M., p. 388 f.

p. 24.

p. 389.

Mullach, Vulg., p. 368. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218.

»

W.-M.,

»

Lang, of the N. T.,

p. 389. p. 111.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

974

NEW TESTAMENT

three times in the N. T. (1 Cor. 11 25 f.; Rev. 11:6), each time with eav and the subjunctive. These points are all obvious. :

common

N. T. as a temporal conjunction. adverb from 6s and occurs in a variety of constructions. The temporal use is closely allied to the comparative. Cf. cos eXdXet -qixlv hv rrj 68Q (Lu. 24 32). So Jo. 12 36. The temporal aspect is sharp in Mk. 9 21 where cos means 'since.' The examples in the N. T. are usually in the aorist is

'fis

It

rather

in the

originally a relative

is

:

:

:

or imperfect indicative as in Jo. 6

In

refer to definite incidents.

1

:

12, 16;

Cor. 12

:

Ac. 8

2, dis

:

36 and chiefly

the imperfect ind. with av for the notion of repetition

So

wc have

av i]yeade,

(cf. orap).

cos av rjv^avro. In modern Greek aav (from used for 'when' (Thumb, Handh., p. 192). The use of

in Aristeas 7, 34,

cos

av) is

cos

ai'='as if

is

that of conditional, not modal,

common

in the papyri

inally

ai'='as soon as').

cos

Rhein. Mus., 1901, Gr., p. 164) gives aiJieLvov edo^ev,

p. 206;

cos

av

Cf.

I,

But

once without av (Gal. 6

Greek

Radermacher

44, 45.

cos is

10),

:

very

(A^.

Dion. Hal. and Dio Chrys.,

cos

cos

T. av

used a few times with the

subjunctive, thrice with av (Ro. 15:24; 23),

is

See Conditions.

cos av=6Tav (origRadermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 164;

Hib. P.

olfxai,

Luc. Alex. 22.

and

av,

(Moulton, Prol., p. 167). As early as i/B.c. the papyri show examples of

1

Cor. 11:34; Ph. 2:

In classical

Kaipov 'Ix^ixev.

would have av (Moulton, Prol., p. construction compare Mk. 4 26. In the

this futuristic subj.

248 f.). With the last temporal use cos av is not TToo-os xpoj^os

—

:

common

In Ac. 17

COS.

of the rather frequent use of

15

:

cos

in Attic.

we have

cos

Mk.

In

9

:

21 note

a remnant

rdxto^ra,

with superlative adverbs.

possible that Kadcos has a temporal sense in Ac. 7

:

17

(cf.

It is

2 Mace.

1:31).

The Group Meaning 'Until' ('While'). The words in this have a more complex history than those in the preceding one. They are axpt, ^expt, ecos and Tpiv. "Axpt (twice in the N. T., cixpts. Gal. 3 19 and Heb. 3 13) is more frequently a preposition (cf. dxpt Kaipov, Lu. 4 13) than a conjunction. It is rare in Greek prose and dxpt o.v only in poetry.^ But Philo (I, 166, 20) (c)

list

:

:

:

—

has dxpis av a(3ea€Le. But the simple conjunction is less frequent than the compound form (preposition and relative), as axpt ov (Lu. 21:24) and dxpt v^ rinepas (Mt. 24:38). Sometimes the MSS. vary between axpi, p^exph and ecos, as in Mt. 13 30 (preposition). Cf. Ac. 1 22. Past tenses of the indicative are used of an actual historical event. No example of the simple cixpt ap:

:

'

Meisterh.-Schwyzer, Gr. d. attisch. Inschr., p. 251.

MODE

975

(ErKAiz:i2)

pears in this construction in the N. T., but (Ac. 7:18)

and dxpt

^s

instance of the present ind. KaXetrat.

Here the meaning

The more common

ecos).

axpi ou afkcrr]

:

The only

13, axpts ou to arjiiepov

'so long' (linear) or 'while' (cf.

is

use

Heb. 3

in

is

we have

(Lu. 17:27).

elarjXdev

rffxkpas

is

with reference to the indefinite

In two instances (Rev. 17:17, axpt reXecrdriaovTai, and 2 25, axpt ov au t/^co. This latter could be aorist subj.) the future Elsewhere we meet the sul)junctive, either indicative is read. future. :

without

(iv

(axpt

in

(j^ypayldwixev

Rev. 7

:

3 and axpt TeXeadfj in

20:3, 5; axpi- ou eXdy in 1 Cor. 11:26; cixpt ^s rin'epas yevrjTat in Lu. 1 20) or with iiv (axpts au l\dii in Gal. 3 19, though W. H. :

:

Here the time is relatively future to the principal verb TrpoaereOri, though it is secondary. The subj. is retained instead of the optative on the principle of indirect discourse. As a matter of fact av occurs only twice, the other put just axpis

ou in

the margin).

instance being Rev. 2

25 above.

:

Cf. axpi-s orav

Mk. 13:30;

MkxpLs (so twice,

1107, 3 (v/a.d.).

TrXripwdrj.

Gal. 4

:

O. P.

and

19,

once (xexph Eph. 4 13) occurs only three times as a conjuncIn Eph. 4 13 it is iJ-expt- simply, in the other examples tion. In all three instances the aorist subj. is used without IJLexpLs ou. :

:

ixu

12

The

for the indefinite future.

Cf. /xexpt 'lo^auov (Lu. 16

frequent. :

4).

It

means 'up

use as a preposition :

16)

and

The

to the point of.'^

a rather varied use of

(cf.

Aiexpt

m^XP^s kolvti

more

is

a'C/jLaros

(Heb.

writers

show

Diodorus, Strabo, Polybius,

They, like the papyri, have /xexpt with and without av (Radermacher, A^. T. Gr.,

Josephus, Justin Martyr).

and

tikxpi-s

140).

p.

ou

"Ecos

preposition

prepositional use

The

much more

is

(cf. ews is

ovpavou,

frequent in the N. T. both as

Mt.

11: 23)

and as conjunction.

The

illustrated also in ews rod eXdelv (Ac. 8 :40).

prepositional use

(more frequent than the conjunctional)

goes back as far as Aristotle and denotes the terminus ad quern. "Ecos is Attic for

nkxPh we

Homeric

and Doric

rjos

As with

as.-

and

axpi-

find ews alone as a conjunction (Mt.

2:9), ecus ou (Mt. 14 22) and cws otou (5 25) It is used both with the indicative and the sul)junctive. When an actual event is recorded in the past only the aorist indicative is used. This is the usual classic idiom.^ So ecos rjXdev (Mt. 24:39). ecos ou ereKev (1 When the present ind. appears 18). 25), ecos OTOU e(t)6iPT](rav (Jo. 9 with ecos the notion is 'while,' not 'until,' and it is either a contemporaneous event, as in ecos aOros awoXuet Tov oxXov (Mk. 6 45. :

:

.

:

:

:

1

Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 563.

2

lb., p. 200.

8

Goodwin, M. ami

T., p. 235.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

976

Note dependence on

NEW TESTAMENT

rjuajKaaev, like indirect discourse), or

proleptic future in terms of the present, as in

a lively irpoaexe

ecos 'ipxoiiai

Tim. 4 13) and in Jo. 21 22 f. It is possible to Indeed some MSS. 45 as this proleptic future.^ take Mk. 6 22 the reading (in the In Mt. 14 and -et. here give also airoXvari avaypo^aec (1

rfi

:

:

:

:

parallel passage)

Latin dum.

In Lu. 19

ecos 'ipxofiaL.

Instead of

W. H.

13

:

ecos rip,epa

though keeping

in the margin,

genuine,

Cf. the construction with the

is ecos ou aToXvarj.

it is

h

read

^

earlv (Jo. 9

ecos

Ipxoixai :

4)

is

W.

H. read in the text

cos,

not

We

ecos.

cos

in text (as does Nestle).

clearly 'while,' not 'until.'

ecos

instead of

W. H. have In Jo. 12

have, besides,

:

If

35

otov

ecos

f.

d

in Mt. 5 25. Most of the examples of ecos deal with the future and have only the subj. after the classic idiom.- The future, being identical in form with the aorist subj., is possible in the cases of ecos o5 dmTre/ii/'co (Ac. 25 21) and ecos otov aKa^^cxj (Lu. 13 8), but In Lu. 13:35 some the regular subj. is the probable idiom. MSS. have ecos rf^et (see (6)), but W. H. reject i]^et ore. Both ecos So ecos ov ov and ecos otov are common, but always without av. With 16). aveXcoatu (Ac. 23 21) and ecos otov irXripwdfj (Lu. 22 simple ecos it is more common to have au. So ecos av airoSuis (Mt. :

:

:

:

:

5

26),

:

but note

construction.

ecos

the notion

Trpoaev^o)fj.aL,

(10

e\9ri

Cf. Lu. 12

:

is

14: 22; 26: 36; Lu. 17: 8.

subjunctive. ocjieLXofxevov,

In Mt. 18

the subj.

is

:

23).

:

59; 15

(cf. TTplv),

Tb. 6 papyri

But the note 30, e^aXev avTov

as in Lu. 22:34.

as in the N. T.,

"Ecos

'until.'

the subj.

common

34.

In

Mk.

14

:

32,

Cf.

e'cos

Mt.

of expectancy suits the els

(j)vXaKr]v ecos

dxo5c3 to

G. H. 38 is

occurs after negative verbs

Moulton {Prol, (i/B.C.)

ecos

quotes In the

p. 169)

KaTa(3fjs.

often absent from these conjunctions

Radermacher {N. T.

meaning

not essential in this

is :

retained after secondary tense of the in-

(ii/B.C.) ecos p-hooaLV, av,

"Av

4; 22

rather 'while' than 'until.'

dicative as in indirect discourse. also

:

Gr., p. 140) finds

in the papyri, the inscrs.

and the

kolvt]

ecos

and

writers.

Blass^ thinks he sees a certain affinity with final sentences in the

At any good Attic and should cause no trouble. The kolvt] fully agrees with the ancient idiom. It is, of course, a matter of taste with the writer whether he will regard a future event as a present reality or a future uncertainty to be hoped for and attained. Upiv is a comparative form (cf superlative 7rpco-ros) like the Latin subj. with these conjunctions for the future indefinite.

rate

it is

.

1

Burton, N. T.

M. and

T., p. 128.

better as an expression of the fact. 2

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 235.

But the proper sense

Radermacher, N. T. Gr., ' Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

of the indie, p. 140. p. 219.

is

MODE prius}

It

is

(efkaisis)

977

the neuter accusative singular.

osition with the ablative

irplv c6pas

It is really the

Pindar uses

in idea as irporepov, 'before,' 'formerly.'

= 7rp6

copas.

The

same

as a prep-

it

original con-

was the infinitive, though the subj. and the optative occur with it in Homer.- Homer has it 81 times with the infinitive, 6 with the subj., once with the opt. and not at all with the indicative.^ The word developed so much importance in the later Greek that Goodwin in his Moods and Tenses gives it a separate extensive discussion (pp. 240-254). In the N. T. there are only thirteen examples of it and all of them in the Gospels and Acts. Eleven of the thirteen are with the infinitive (cf. Homer). struction with

Cf.

irp'iu

irplv airodavetv (Jo.

times

we have

wplp

r/,

4

49), irplv

:

as in

Mt.

1

'

k^paap, yevkffdat (8: 58).

Luke alone

18.

:

Five

uses the clas-

idiom of Tpiv with the subj. or opt. after negative sentences. In both instances it is only relative future after secondary tenses, but in Lu. 2 26, ^ti) ISeLV Bavarov -wplv [r/] av 'idy tov Xplcttov Kvplov, the subj. is retained according to the usual rule in indirect dissic

:

kolvt] (so often in the Attic). In Ac. 25 16, as alXd/Sot after a-KtKpidriv 6tl ready explained heretofore, Tplv ^ txoL ovK earcv is changed from the subj. to the opt. as is possible in indirect discourse, a neat classic idiom found in Luke alone in the

course in the

:

—

N. T.

Some

€ws av here.

MSS. do not have ap in Lu. 2 26 and i< reads few MSS. have Tplv in Lu, 22 34.* The papyri

of the

A

:

rj

:

show the same consistency as Luke in the use of But note p.i]Te StSorco — irplv avT(Jo eTnaTeK\r]TaL, O. P. 34

writers do not irplv .^

(ii/A.D.).

For

'until'

ecos

kept the

field.

Indeed

we

in Lu. 22:34, ov

eojs where Tplv would usually come (Radermacher, A''. T. Gr., p. 164). Very early irpb TOV and inf. also began to displace irplv (see Verbal Nouns). In the modern Greek irplv holds its place (also irpl va, 6ao, irpoTov) with ind. and subj. (Thumb, Handb., p. 193). The N. T. does not have eare, but the papyri show it. Cf. ear' iiv, Amh. P. II, See also Job 13 22 k^. 81, 11 (iii/A.D.). (d) Some Nomiyial and Prepositional Phrases. We have already seen in the case of axPh p.'f^xp'- and ecos how they occur with relative pronouns as conjunctional phrases. The same thing occurs with a number of temporal phrases. Thus d0' ov. In Lu. 13 7 d(/)' ov is preceded by rpta cttj as the terminus a quo. It 4>(j}vr]ffeL

ar]fjLepov

dXe/crcop

ecos

rpis airapv-qcrri,

see

:

:

1 Cf. Sturm, Goschichtl. Entw. der Konstr. mit -n-plv, 1882, p. Die Entw. der Siitzo mit TrptV, 1896, p. 12. 2 Sturm, ib., p. 145. < Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ck., 3 lb., p. G. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 169 note.

4; Frenzel,

p. 219.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

978

means

Cf. rplTiqv ravTrjv inxkpav ayei d0' ov in Lu. 24:21.

'since.'

In Rev. 16

18

:

the simple equivalent of

it is

oltto

tovtov ore as in

the Attic Greek and Herodotus.

In these examples the indicative occurs, but in Lu. 13 25, d0' ov av ey^P^v, the construction of cojs is used for the uncertain future, the subj. with av. The con:

ception of

ciTro

TOVTOV 6t€ lias to bc appealed to, 'from that

ment when,' 'when

once' the steward arises.

In

see d^' ^s used for 'since' in Lu. 7:45; Ac. 24

In Col.

1

:

we have

9

6,

always temporal.

It

the form d0' ^s

may

:

like

momanner we

11; 2 Pet. 3

rjnepas.

'Ev

is

a)

:

4.

not

be merely local (Ro. 2:1), instrumen8:3). The temporal use is much

tal (Ro. 14: 21) or causal (Ro.

hke

21

in Jo.

h

but

Mk.

ews in the sense of 'while,' as in

Cf. Jo. 5

vvix4>L0^ I1€t' avToov kcTiv.

In Lu. 19

22.

:

(3

ej'

2

:

19 (Lu. 5: 34)

epxojjLaL

with

the Text. Rec. has

13

:

the true reading.

7,

:

eojs

ecos

ei^

w

6

epxopat epxofJiaL,

l:Qevu) has its antecedent expressed in the preceding sentence and means 'wherein.' In Mk. 2 19 we see 6aou xpovov for duration of time. In Mt. 9 15 the shorter k4>' oaov occurs, while in Hcb. 10 37 note oaov oaov (a Hebraism from the LXX, though paralleled in the papyri). In Ro. 7 1 we read 10' oaov xpovov, the fullest form of all. Moulton if

is

In

1 Pet.

:

:

:

:

{ProL, p. 169) cites C.P.R. 24, 25 (ii/A.D.) €0' bv

sence of

fi

xpovov (note ab-

av).

The Temporal Use of the Infinitive. There are nine examples and the infinitive. In the LXX there are 35 examples (Votaw, The Infinitive in Bibl. Gk., p. 20). These examples all have (e)

of wpo Tov

the accusative with the infinitive, as in wpd tov

(Mt. 6:8.

Cf. Lu. 2:21;

15; Gal. 2

even here Jo. 17

:

:

Jo.

12; 3:23), except Jo. 13

it

is

The

implied.

The

5.

22:15;

sense

is

tense

is

:

v/jlols

alTrjaaL avTov

l:48f.; 17:5; Ac. 23: 19, 7rp6 tov yeveaOai, but

aorist except a present -in

(see before). The inshow scattered examples of vrpo tQ as 'when' or 'while' is much more

quite like

irpiv

scriptions (Moulton, ProL, p. 214)

TOV

and

The use

inf.

common. Xenophon

of ev

It occurs only 6 times in

Thucydides, Plato 26 times,

But it is very common in the Septuagint as a translation of the Hebrew ^ and the infinitive construct. Moulton- admits a Hebraism here in the sense of 'during,' a meaning not found in the vernacular kolvt] so far. The construction

is,

N. T.

16 times.^

however, very

writers,

and

common

in

Luke, the most literary of the It is found both in Usually it is the present tense

in all parts of the Gospel.

the sense of 'while' and 'when.'

that has the notion of 'while' and the aorist that of 'when.' »

Moulton, ProL,

p. 215.

^

xb., p. 249.

So

MODE ill

Lu.

1

:

8 note

ep

rw

979

(efkaizis)

ItpaTihtiv avrou, (2

The examples

:

h

27)

T(2

ehayayeip tovs

numerous (55 in the N. T.), but the LXX shows 500 instances/ undoubted proof of the influence of the Hebrew there, where it is nearly as common

yopeh t6

as

all

iraiblov '\7](rovv.

are

other prepositions with the infinitive. This use of In Lu. 12 15 infinitive is not always temporal.

and the

:

tv tc3 it

is

rather the content than the time that is meant. In Lu. 1 21 it may be causal. Mera to and the infinitive we find fifteen times :

LXX

the construction appears 222 times N. T. In the according to Votaw.^ It has the resultant meaning of 'after' and always has the aorist infinitive except the perfect in Heb.

in the

found in Luke, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Hebrews, Luke. A good example is found in ^tera to airoSee also Ac. 7:4; 10 :41. Mention should KTetvat (Lu. 12 5). also be made of tcos tov k\9elv in Ac. 8 :'40, as in the LXX (Judith 1:10; 11:19). It occurs 52 times in the O. T. and 16 in the Apocrypha. But note ixkxpi tov irXetp, P. B. M. 854 (I/a.d.). On prepositions and inf. see Verlml Nouns. This subject will demand (/) Temporal Use of the Participle. 10

:

and

15.

It is

chiefly in

:

more extended treatment under the head Nouns). Here it may be noted that the self

We may in translation render the participle by a

express time.

temporal clause with the Latin cum.^

of the Participle (Verbal

participle does not of it-

As

'as,' 'while,' 'since,'

a rule the

enough to bring out the idea.

'when,' 'after,'

unadorned participle

The

participle

in translation with the principal verb

may be

by the use

etc., like

in English

is

co-ordinated

of 'and.'

The

merely descriptive and contemporaneous, as The aorist participle has either simula-jrodprjaKUP (Heb. 11 21). (Ac. 25 13), or antecedent, as e/xaaTraaafiepoi as action, taneous ^aPTa (Mt. 13 :2). The wealth of participles gave the Greek a great advantage over the Latin in this matter. In the flourishing period of the language the temporal participle vied with the conIn the kolptj junctions in the expression of temporal relations. this use of the participle is still quite live, as almost any page of the N. T. shows, though it has manifestly in places shrunk before the analytic tendency to use conjunctions and finite verbs. This present participle

is

:

:

tendency to use conjunctions

is still

more noticeable

in

modern

Greek.^ '

Votaw, The

3

Moiilton, Prol., p. 230.

Inf. in Bibl.

it would overdo the emphasis." and D.'s Ilandb., p. 333.

to represent these, as *

Jebb

in V.

» lb. Gk., p. 20. should not usually put a tenii)oral clause

"Wc

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

980

NEW TESTAMENT

Final and Consecutive Clauses.

6.

matter to correlate properly these all have relative adverbs as Often the same conjunction is used indifferently conjunctions. in a number of different kinds of clauses. So cbj in comparative, (a)

Kinship.

It

is

a

difficult

They

subordinate clauses.

nearly

declarative, causal, temporal, final, consecutive, indirect

In

rogative, exclamatory.

the Latin

Cf.

consecutive. tory.

ut,

which

like is

The English

ottcos

comparative,

inter-

has a varied use. apprehensive,

final,

and German da£ have a like histreats "final and object-clauses" toobject-clauses with verbs of care and

that

Goodwin,^ therefore,

gether as pure final clauses, effort, clauses

manner

with verbs of fearing. He gives a separate discusBurton^ practically follows Good-

sion of consecutive clauses.^

win.

Viteau* blends them

all

into one.

Winer

practically ignores

consecutive clauses.' Jannaris^ pointedly says that the popular

speech "avoids the consecutive construction" and uses the infinitive for either final or consecutive

(cf.

and

coo-re

Latin ut and Eng-

"thus confounding consecutive with final clauses." It that. As a matter of fact the various points of view shade off into one another very easily and sometimes quite imperceptibly. It is not always easy to distinguish purpose and result in the mind of the writer or speaker. The very word finis may be the end aimed at (purpose) or attained (result). My colleague. Prof. W. O. Carver, D.D., has suggested grouping these ideas all under result, either contemplated, feared or attained. Some such idea is near the true analysis and synthesis. The later Greek showed a tendency to gather most of these ideas under IVa.^ It seems clear that these final clauses (6) Origin in Parataxis. had their origin in parataxis, not hypotaxis. The conjunctions, when used, were an after-development. The step from parataxis to hypotaxis has already been taken when we meet the Greek of Homer,^ though the paratactic construction continued side by lish that)

was not quite

Examples

side in isolated instances. ^ovKeffde (XTroXucrco; (Jo.

18

:

1

2 » ' ^

Cf. also the possible origin of ov

42),

ixi}

:

as ov-

nrj.

M. and

T., pp. 105-137. > Le Verbe, pp. 217-233. pp. 71-95. ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455. N. T. M. and T., pp. 83-100. lb., p. 458. Thus onus and cos gradually disappear. lb.,

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 555.

:

(Mk. 14 12) are idiom rather than of a mere

probably instances of this original ellipsis of tva.^

like a^es k/SaXw (Lu. 6

39), ^eXets eTOLfxaaoo/JLev

»

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 109.

This

MODE

981

(ErKAi:2I2)

disconnected idiom was felt to be especially bare in the positive form, but the negative paratactic construction with ni] with Gildersleeve^ quaintly is present in Homer.^ which used to be thrust into the background, has come forward and claimed its rights." This grammatical sage, barring the infinitive and participle, adds: "Nihil est in hypotaxi quod non prius fuerit in parataxi." The subjunctive, therefore, in final clauses is merely the volitive subj of parataxis.' It was natural that the parataxis should be plainer in negative sentences, for alongside of ixri (originally the mere negative in para-

verbs of fearing

says: "Parataxis,

.

and the negative conjunction

taxis

oTTcos

fir],

The whole matter

ixT].^

is

came tva worked out by Weber*

in hypotaxis) there

carefully

with careful discussion of each construction in the various writers during the long course of Greek linguistic history from Homer

through the Attic writers. Here conscious purpose is expressed. (c) Pure Final Clauses. This class constitutes the bulk of the examples and they are the easiest to understand.

The Greek

rich

is

con-

in variety of

We

can deal only with the idioms in the N. T. "0(t)pa, for instance, is not in the N. T., nor is the idiom of oTTcos with the future indicative after verbs of striving. The etymology of I'm is not certain. A fragment^ of (a) "Iva. Perhaps IV-a is derived from this form. Hesiod has tv avrca. struction for this idea.

But at any rate in Homer tVa=k€t in Iliad, 10, 127. After Homer, especially in the poets, it has the meaning 'where,' The exact connection between this *in what place,' 'whither.'^ demonstrative

local (ut)

-not

is

Latin

ut,

of the

clear.^

English

and relative sense and the final But we have a similar transition

that,

Roman and

German

Byzantine

to three, viz. the pure

the

Sophocles in his Lexicon

daU.

Periods

tva for the Greek of that era.

'that' in

gives

They may

all

nineteen

uses of

be whittled

down

the object-clauses or sub-final, the

final,

There is no doubt that tva came to be used in all Byzantine period. In the kolvt] of the N. T. these ways abundantly shown. The ecbatic or conare first two time the But each in its order. secutive use is debatable in the N. T. consecutive.

in the

Curioushtiiioit ..gh the Attic inscriptions

make a very

sparing use

lb., p. 108.

'

IMoulton, Prol., p. 185.

2

Am.

"

Goodwin, M. and

'

Entwickclungsgcschichte der Absichtsiitze (1SS4, 1885).

«

Dyroff, Gesch. dea

'

Cf. Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 5GG.

J

Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 419.

Pronomcn

rcflexivum, 1892, p. 71. »

lb.

T., p. 107.

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

982 of I'm,

much

poetry

tva is

preferring ottcos and oircos av.^ So in epic and lyric overshadowed by o(/)pa and in tragedy by cos, though Aristophanes uses it in three-fourths of his final sentences and Plato and the Attic orators use it almost exclusively (Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 109). The original use of I'ra, after the demonstrative and the relative stage, was the pure final. It is so in Homer, though Monro admits one instance of the object-clause .^ Only the subj. occurs with it in Homer in this construction. This is

mode

the natural

for the expectant note in clauses of purpose.^

must not be overlooked that IVa in no way controls the mode, for the idiom is at bottom paratactic in origin.* But the indicative had a use also as well as the optative, as will presently be shown. A word further is needed concerning the tremendous

But

it

development as often as

Thucydides used

in the use of IVa.

I'm,

and

cos

oircos

three times

Xenophon

as a final particle only twice.

in

one and a half times as often as I'm, and cos nearly as often as I'm. But Polybius (books I-V) uses I'm exclusively, and the N. T. has I'm about twelve times as often as ottcos, and cos perhaps once. It is thus the

first

three books of the Anabasis has

ottcos

and

but it gradually comes to be almost the exclusive means of expressing purpose, and in the modern Greek vernacular every phase of the subj. and the old future No, is used ind. can be expressed by m (I'm) and the subj.^ also with the ind. The intention in modern Greek is brought out a bit more sharply by 710, m (Thumb, Handh., p. 197). But the All in all it is one of the most distinction is sometimes faint. remarkable developments in the Greek tongue. The eight and a half pages of examples in Moulton and Geden's Concordance bear eloquent testimony to the triumph of ha in the N. T. Nearly a page and a half of these examples are in the Gospel of John. But

not simply that

usurped the

we

are

Here

now

final

displaced

I'm

specifically

I'm is in

ottcos

use of the infinitive also.

concerned with the pure

Iva is really

is

final

use of

the accusative case of general reference.

k\r]\v9a tva iiadoo (cf. veni ut discam, 'I

learn.'

cos,

It

a demonstrative.

The conjunction

in apposition with

is

ixadoo.

predominant mode, as

*I

am come

am come

that I

may

as to this,' viz. 'I

may

supplied to avoid the asyndeton and

As already

explained,

V

>ftpabj. is

in tovto 8e 6\op y'eyovev Iva irXrjpwdfj

Horn. Gr., p. 207.

Meisterh.-Schw., p. 253

Mutzbauer, Konj. und Opt., p. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 107; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 416 f.; Jebb in V. and D., pp. 319-323.

f.

Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 479;

2

the

(Mt.

»

»

in

learn')

* *

I'm.

Thus

76.

1

MODE Cf. Ph. 3

22).

KpLdrjTe

983

(efkaizis)

The negative with iVa is nrj, as The aorist subj. is the normal tense,

in Iva

8.

:

(Mt. 7:1).

(iri

of course,

as in I'm n€Ta8u) (Ro. 1: 11), though the present occurs to denote

a continuous action, as in

'iva

dSfjs (1

5: 13).

Tim. 3 Cf.

subj.

is

tm

15);

(jOfxev)

Xva

;

Cf, Iva yvaire

19).

:

perfect subj. occurs in

Cor. 2

eiocbuev (1

17: 19, 23;

also Jo.

ireTTOLdoTes

nil

:

-maTevrjTe (Jo. 13

The

Kal jLvcoaKTjTe (Jo. 10: 38).

Cor.

1

irapeaKevaafievoL

1

:

:

12); I'm

10;

as I'm

tlSC),

eldrjTe (1

2 Cor.

^re (2 Cor.

1

:9

Jo. (I'm

The

9:3).

regularly retained after a secondary tense of the indica-

tive as in

dvel^T]

'iva

'idy

Mk.

(Lu. 19

:

4)

eireTiiJLrjaev

;

'iva

fj.T]8evl

eiircoaLV

There is no instance in the N. T. of the optative used with I'm after a secondary tense of the indicative. It is true that W. H. read I'm 8uir] in the text of Eph. 1 17 (I'm 8coT] or 8u) in the margin), but this is after a primary tense, ov jravofxaL. It is the volitive use of the optative and is not due to Iva. It is like the optative in a future wish.^ This use of the opt. with I'm after a wish is not unknown to classic Greek.^ It is the subj., not the opt., that is seen in I'm tXtjpoIs (Col. 4 17), iva Trapa8ol (Mk. 14: 10) and in the sub-final I'm yvoX (Mk. 9 30).^ (Mt. 16

:

20).

Cf.

8

:

6.

:

:

:

Homer and

In

the early writers generally the rule was to use the

opt. with the final clauses after secondary tenses, l^ut in the Attic

two modes (subj. and opt.) are on a par in such a conThucydides prefers the subj., though Xenophon is just the reverse.^ In the N. T. the optative in final clauses after secondary tenses is non-existent. In 2 Tim. 2 25 /xTy xore 8wr] is after a primary tense as in Eph. 1 17, and here again the text is uncertain (cf. Scot? in margin and avavr]\J/oi)aLv in text.) The Attiorators the

struction, while

:

:

cists

(Arrian, Appian, Herodian, 4th

Mace,

Plutarch)

made a

point of the opt. with I'm as "the hall-mark of a pretty Attic style" (Moulton, Prol, p. 197).

Diodorus and Polybius, of

this

»

fail

The N. T.

*'to rival

resuscitated elegance."

Cf. W.-H., vol. II, App., p. 1G8.

more

writers,

like

the litterateurs in the use

Moulton speaks 2

W.-M.,

also

of

"the

p. 3G3.

On the sparing use of the opt. with final sentences in late Cik. see the tables Diel, De enuntiatis finalibus apud Graeearum rerum seriptores posterioris

'

in

aetatis, 1894, pp.

20

(Prol., p. 197) notes

See also Radermacher, N. T. Gr.,

ff.

how

p. 132.

the Atticists revelled in the opt. with

Moulton

VVa, ottojs, ojs.

Josephus has 32 per cent, opts., Plut. 49 (Lives), Arrian 82, Appian 87! Polyb. has only 7, Diodorus 5. These are true Koifi] literati. Moulton finds only one pap. of this period with opt. with tva, O.P. 237 (late ii/A.D.), IVa SvvriOtlrjv. In iii/A.D. he notes L.Pw., tlrji in primary sequence. Tb. 1 (ii/B.c.) actually has Tj^iuiaa xP'?MO'''"''^i7o^otTo.

—

W—

*

Weber, Entwickclungsgeschichtc dcr Al)sichtsatze,

p.

2

13.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

984

On the riot of optatives" in the artificial Byzantine writers. whole subject of final clauses see Gildersleeve on "The Final Sentence in Greek," 1883, p. 419, A. J. of Philol, IV, pp. 416 ff., VI, pp. 53 ff. There is no trouble to find in the papyri, inscr. and KOLVT] writers generally abundant examples of I'm and the subj. in pure design (Radermacher, A^. T.Gr., p. 138). But while the subj. is the normal construction, the indicative is also present. In classical Greek IW was not used with the future ind.'^ It was not com-

mon

even with

ottws,

and

tbs

The

fir].

sense (not to mention itacism of

-??

and

similarity in

-et)

made

form and

the change very

easy and, indeed, the text is not always certain as between the and the future ind. Thus in 1 Cor. 13:3 I'm Kavx'f]-

aorist subj.

supported by {^pr]Te Kal yevrjade (yevrjaeade in margin of W. H.); Eph. 6 3, I'm ykvrjraL Kal aio/xaL is (xofxaL

by

:

:

:

:

But the idiom is well established in the N. T., especially in the Apocalypse. Thus 'iva decoprfaovcnv (Jo. 7:3); 'iva ^vp-rjaovraL 'ia-Q.

(Ac. 21:24); 8(j)(T0vaLV

rai (1 Pet. ri^ovaiv

I'm kpel (Lu.

(Lu. 20

:

10);

'iva

14

:

I'm a4>a^ovaLv

3:1);

— yvQ>GLV (3 may

:

9);

10); I'm

Ktvcoaei.

'iva ecrrat

Orjaco

Cor. 9

(1

Cor. 9

(1

15);

:

(Rev. 6:4);

'iva

Scixret

'iva

Kal daekdcocnv (22

:

:

18); I'm

Kepb-qQriaov-

(8:3);

'iva

This

14), etc.

In some of these examples the In Mk. 6 56 and subj. and ind. future occur side by side. of with 'iva in the N. T.). instances 'av Ac. 5 15 note I'm Kav (only = even Kal (Jannaris, Hist. K'dv as This is not modal 'dv, but In Rev. Prol, 13 15 the 167). p. Gk. Or., p. 165; Moulton,

example

last

be non-final.

:

:

'

'

:

MSS. vary between SoJffLV

and

I'm

(rotet

Scocret

TroL-qari

I'm

'earat 'iva

'eay).^

But

:

6

and

'iva

and

-et,

sub-final).

firm foundation in the N. T. in Lev. 10

and

16 between

in

The usage

It is in the

LXX

in other writers of the

kolvtj

is

also. (Iren.,

occurs also with the present ind.

a rare construction in the N. T. and

is

I'm

thus on a

See

I'm

584 A,

This

not a classic idiom.

is

It

Thayer calls it "a solecism and Byzantine writers." It is too common in the late writers to change the text in the N. T.^ Thus 1 Cor. 4 6 I'm )ui7 4>v(jLova6ej Gal. 4 17 I'm fryXoDre and 1 Jo. 5 20 The first two are possible subjunctives. W. H. 'iva yivuaKOfxev. read 'iva fxrjTLs SyvaraL in the margin of Rev. 13 17, and various occurs only three times in the N. T.

frequent in the

eccl.

:

:

:

:

1

2

Goodwin, M. and T., p. Approved by Blass, Gr.

115. of

N. T. Gk.,

'

p. 212.

"

Moulton, Prol., W.-M., p. 362.

p. 35.

MODE

the present ind. with I'm in Jo. 4

MSS. support Gal. 6:12;.

3;

985

(efkaisiz)

15; 5:20; 17: Pet. 1:10; Rev. 12:6.^ 4:13; Tit. 2:4; 2

ITh.

In the earher Greek writers we do find

iVa

:

used with past tenses

show that the purpose was of the indicative.2 unattained action. But this or wish unfulfilled dependent on an except in two examples T. in the N. appear refinement does not tva in Western Helextension of wide the all With TTws. with

The idea was

to

fjLT]

lenistic,^ at

the heart of

it

the imperative in 1 Cor. 1

there :

31

is

the pure telic idiom.

"Im with

due, of course, to the quotation.

is

In Jo. 11 37, iroLrjaai 7. the Latin facere ut of reminded tva Kal ovTos fir] gives a list of all the f.) 342 {Hebrews, Westcott p. (sub-final). ottojs. Only two of Epistle the in (20). 'ipa of examples "Ira is

repeated three times in 2 Cor. 12 arodavy,

(/3)

6

It is

"Ottcos.

and the

:

adverb

which."

:

of the neuter accusative -relative It occurs in indirect questions

rcbs.'*

20 in the sense of 'how.'

and the interrogative as

:

is

compounded

indefinite

as in Lu. 24

one

in to

ttcos

One notes

also the article

Enghsh "the

(Lu. 22:2) like

between the Thucydides and Xenophon to ha, and Aristotle has tVa only a few times (W.

"Ottws in a sense is the connecting link

various kinds of final sentences.^ preferred oxcos

Schmid, Aiticismus, III, p. 87). Polybius does not use ottcos at all in books I-V. The N. T. has I'm 493 times, ottcos 52 (Jannaris, p. 417) as far as Colossians. I figure Iva 661 times in text of W. H., Thumb does not not "including 6 of I'm ri and 53 of ottcos. OTTCOS as a final particle in modern Greek {Handb., p. 197). Even in later Greek ottcos was a sign of literary affectation.^ As already noted, in the fourth and fifth centuries b.c. ottcos

give

was quite the rule in the Attic inscriptions.'' It and never has Ke or av in pure final clauses language.^

This idiom with

iiv

first,

is

rare in

in

Homer

the Homeric

appears in ^schylus.

In

the great Attic writers and the Attic inscriptions the subjunctive, the future indicative and the optative after secondary tenses, are found.

all

The

future indicative occurred chiefly with verbs of

The negative in pure final clauses.^ with this future indicative was ^i? (ottcos fj-rj), though no example striving,

though sometimes

See further Meyer on 1 Cor. 4 6. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 120. The Mod. Gk. has va with past tenses of the ind. (Thumb, Handb., p. 198). » Moulton, Prol., pp. 41, 205, 211. * Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 56.5; Delbriick, Konj. und Opt., p. 61. 1

Cf. W.-H., App., pp. 167, 1G9, 171.

2

Cf.

6 «

Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 417.

7

Mcisterh.-Schw., p.

2.53

f.

:

p. 348. «

Goodwin, M. and

»

lb., p. 11:5

f.

T., p. 111.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

986

Moulton

occurs in the N. T.

papyri a few survivals of

ottws

177 note) finds in the

(Prol., p.

and the

fxr]

though mostly

fut. ind.,

ousted by Im fii]. Cf. Hb. P. 45, 60, 168 (iii/B.c), Tb. P. 414 Stahl {Syntax, p. 360) calls ottcos fxrj and fut. ind. Attic. (ii/A.D.).

In the N. T. the optative does not occur in this construction. In The fut. ind. with ottws it is revived as with I'm.^

the Atticists in

pure

final clauses

The

has practically vanished from the N. T.

one example Ro. 3 4, ottcos cLp dLKaLcodjjs Kal viKrjaeLs, is a quothe LXX (Ps. 51: 6), but changed from subj. there. from tation But OTTCOS OavaToiaovuLv is a variant reading in Mt. 26 59, and in

:

:

the future ind.

possible in

is

Mt. 2

TpoaKwrjaw, though

Other variant readings where the

probably the aorist subj. is supported with

it is

8, ottcos

:

future ind.

are

ottcos

Cor.

1

1

29, KavxweTai,

:

and Mk. 5: 23, ottcos ^Tjaerai (here W. H. read i'ra fijo-??). But at any rate the use of the future ind. with ottcos in pure final clauses is not quite dead in the N. T. period, though surely dying. Elsewhere the aorist subj. alone occurs save in Lu. 16:26 {his), 28 and Mt. 6 4. "Ottcos no longer^ has av in final clauses save in the quotation from Ps. 51 6 (Ro. 3 4) and three passages in :

:

:

Luke's writings (Lu. 2 35 :

av

OTTCOS

Amos in

'i\Bo)(nv

(so A,

Mt. 6

(A^.

:

— koI

a.TroaTeiX'p,

15

B

but

:

o.TTOKa\v4)do)(jLv

17

ottcos

Ac. 3

eK^rjT-qawaLV

cii'

:

19

f.

from

without av) 9 12). "Av is a variant reading found very often in the LXX. Radermacher 158) finds Sttcos &v in Diodorus XIV, 80, 8, Aris-

5 and

T. Gr., p.

av

ottcos

:

is

teas, § 239, inscr. of Halicarnassus (iii/B.c), Jahrh. d. Ost. Inst.

But it is rare and ottcos steps into the background beThe revival of ottcos in the third and fourth cent. a.d. was Atticistic and did not affect the vernacular. The inscriptions and the papyri for the first century a.d. show the prevalence of tva over OTTCOS (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 157 note). The negative is, of course, always fxrj, as in Ac. 20 16, ottcos fxi] yev-qrat. The XI, 56.

fore tva.

:

subj. OTTCOS

used indifferently after primary tenses (Mt. 6 2, TrotoOcrtj/ Bo^aadQiaLv) and secondary tenses (Ac. 9 34, TraperrjpovvTo

is

:

:

Cf. Ro. 9

oTTws avTov aveXoiaLv).

in the

N. T.

writings.

idiom, but

:

The literary flavour we do not look for

The one example {'Iva iJLrjvva^, ottcos

as in I'm yevrjraL

17.

It

interesting to note that

is

almost confined to Matthew and Luke's

is

ottcos

of

Luke

explains his use of the

literary ear-marks in

John (11:57) occurs TLaacoaiv) and may be used in

ottcos

yevrjTaL (2

»

Moulton,

2

Blass, Gr. of

Cor. 8

:

p. 211.

by

Matthew.

side with

'Iva

for the sake of variety

14).

Prol., p. 197; Jann., Hist.

N. T. Gk.,

side

Cf. also Lu. 16:28;

Gk. Gr.,

p. 417.

MODE 1

Cor.

1

:

29; 2 Th.

1

:

12,

(efkaisis)

though

tva

—

987 'iva

appear

in

1

Cor.

4:6; Gal. 4 5.* In 1 Cor. 1 17 note IVa ^77 and ottws /hij in 1 29. But Iva has "invaded the territory of ottcos, as with (^povriiitLv and o-TTouSafeti-" (Moulton, Prol., p. 206). In modern Greek ottcos has lost all telic force (Thumb, Handb., p. 198). Sometimes OTTCOS represents the main purpose and the infinitive the subordinate purpose, a construction amply illustrated in the papyri .^ :

:

:

So then, though ottcos as a pure final conjunction is disappearing N. T., it yet occurs with the same concept on the whole. It was not a favourite final particle with Thucydides (7) 'fis. (only twice), though Xenophon used it nearly as much as ha. It is not surprising to find only one instance of it in the N. T. and that one not certain. J
in the

:

:

or aorist subj.

Radermacher

(A'^.

T. Gr., p. 158) finds final

cb$

merely a reminiscence in the kolvt], but it is needless to cite Mk. 4: 26 f., cos avdpcoTTos iSaXr/, since this is not final at all, but comparison. On cos av in final sentences see Schmidt, Joseph, eloc, Radermacher quotes F. P. 118 (110 a.d.), p. 409, for statistics. Topevov ecos tov e/cet eKaioJva TTortcT/s, where tcos is used as final cos. Per contra in modern Greek, Moulton {Prol., p. 249) notes that cos takes the meaning of ecos as well as its own. Negative purpose is expressed by 'iva (5) Mr], fir] TTore, nr] ttcos. ixi], OTTCOS fir] also, but originally it was done merely by /197 in a paraIn Homer and the early writers fii] is far in tactic sentence.^ excess of ha p.i], ottcos fxi], but in Aristophanes and Herodotus the

—

reverse

true, while in Plato

is

junction has about gone.

and Xenophon

It is rare in

ixi]

as a final con-

the Attic historians and

Originally a negative adverb (subjective negaalso as a conjunction. Cf. Latin ne. The be used tive) it to idiom /X17 oh appears in Homer in a few final clauses, and after Homer ju?) oh is used with verbs of fearing.^ In the N. T. ha fi-q (1 Cor. 1 17) and ottcos /xr] (I: 29) have the run over the conOnly the sul)j. is used, though in Ac. 27:42 ni] tls junction fxr].

orators generally."*

came

:

is a variant reading, but 8La(f)vyj] is correct after the secondary tense of the ind. In Mk. 13 36, ait) evpj], a primary tense occurs in the principal verb. In Col. 2 4 W. H. read ha fxr]5eis

6ta0i)7ot

:

:

1

lb.

»

Goodwin, M. and

«

lb., p. 112.

="

Moulton,

Prol., p. 220.

T., pp. 107, 112. 6

lb., p. 107.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

988

Trapa\oyi^r]TaL instead of

^117

tls

(the variant reading).

See also

/jlt]

and fxr] ttojs are preserved as Both final conjunctions in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 198). M17 ttcos irore and ^117 ttws is practically the same. The use of appears with the subj. both after secondary and primary tenses. So eTrefxxpa ^^^7 ttcos KaTai(JX<JvQu:yLev (2 Cor. 9 3 f Note also Iva y.i} in 9 3, 4) and /X57 ttcos yhcofxai (1 Cor. 9 27). In Gal. 2:2 (/X17 ttcos eSpaiJLov) and 1 Th. 3:5 (mi? ttcos eTrelpaaev) we have a difficult conOne view is to take it as an indirect question. This struction. Even in Gal. 5. 2, but not in 1 Th. 3 is possible in Gal. 2 2 2 there would be an ellipsis of a participle like f tjtcoj' nadelv. Moulton {ProL, p. 201) suggests that Upaiiov as an "after-thought" in Gal. 2 2 has plenty of classical parallels. Of. Goodwin, Mooch and Tenses, §333. In 1 Th. 3:5 we have p.r] ttcos kirelpaa-ev Kal It is better therefore to take rpexco in Gal. ykvy]Tai side by side. 2:2 as subj. also. Thus in both examples we have the subj. and the aorist ind. This is in accord with the ancient idiom where in pure final sentences a past tense of the ind. was used if it is distinctly implied that the purpose was not attained.^ That is precisely the case here. Paul did not run in vain. The Cor. 12

TLs \oyi(jr]TaL (2

:

6).

/jlt]

(jltj

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

tempter did not succeed with the Thessalonians. It is thus unpurpose that Paul neatly expresses in accord with the Attic diction. Mij ttotc loses the notion of time in ttotc and has rather the idea of contingency, but perchance rather than lest at fulfilled

'

'

Radermacher

'

T. Gr., p. 158) thinks that Tore

any

time.'

TTcbs

often distinguish deliberative (dubitative) from final

a

(iV.

strictly final particle it occurs either

ind.,

though the

Mt. 7 :Q

iJ,r}

TTore

sul)j. is

KaracFvpri Kal

M17 TTore

occur in Mt. 13 Is.

6

:

10).

fect subj.)

:

Mk.

14

:

2

with the subj or the future For the fut. ind. note .

:

27)

T^ore earaL.

Both fx-q

subj.

fir]

wore avTLKa\eao)aLi>.

fi

aorist

In Lu. 12:58 note

and

wore Ibuiaiv

So also in Lu. 14: 8 f., m^ Trore Kal epel (cf. tm epet in verse 10). :

though the

(correct text,

jui?

aTodcccreL.

15 (Ac. 28

seen in Lu. 14 12,

and As

more common.^

KaTairaTr]crov(ni'

subj. has support),

/jlt].

—

fut. ind. likewise /cat

laaop.ai

K^KK-qiikvos

(LXX,

(note per-

The normal subj. is The opt. in the N. T.

wanting in final sentences as in cases of repetition (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 131). W. H. read fxr] Tore Scot? (opt.) in 2 Tim. 2 25. But even so, if true, it is not a pure final clause but a kind of indirect question as in Lu. 3 15, only in 2 Tim. 2 25 the opt. occurs after a primary tense. It is hardly just to say is

:

:

1

2

Goodwin, M. and T., p. 120 f. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 86.

:

MODE

989

(efkaisis)

with Moulton^ that here Paul "misused an obsolete idiom," since the opt. after primary tenses occurs occasionally with I'm in the papyri.^

Oxy.

aov, P.

Cf.

n-q irore

argues, that in 2 Tim. 2

undoubtedly

\pcoaLP

yvwri,

Clem., Paed., Ill,

xp^'i-o-

yevoLTO, eudeoos avrous e^eXa-

more than

it is

we should read The epic Sdcri

p. 193.)

the future ind.

The N.

T. follows the Attic use of the fut. ind.

8oo(Tov(TLv

(Mt. 21:41);

due to

See

'Lva.

(Mk. 14

ottov (fiaycj

(Ac. 21: 16); 6 irpoaevkyKr) (Heb. 8

Radermacher {N. T. evpou yeopybv

e^k\w(n

TO.

6

ovs Karaar-qaonev (Ac.

:

3).

Cf. oiTives inro-

See

1

Cor. 4

:

Blass^ explains the occasional return to the

OS avafivrjaeL.

subj. as

since kvavi]-

had either the subj. or the opt. The Attic added which largely displaced the subj. and the opt.'

like the Latin,

17,

Scot/,

supported by kav

is

(Moulton, Prol.,

1.

Moulton

likely, as

subj.

This construction in the earlier Greek,

Relative Clauses.

(e)

25

:

subj.

is

avTuiv

But

118, 38.

I,

t'ls

(=

Gr., p. 138) 6s)

avra

:

14); Trap'

c3

^evLadoonev

quotes B. U. Ill, 822 Diodorus, XIV,

eX/cucrrj,

The N. T. hardly

relxv-

:

3); 8l' ^s Xarpthwixev (12

28).

:

(ii/A.D.)

8, 3, 8l' Siv

uses the relative clause of

purpose as freely as the Attic Greek.

The

(i")

Infinitive.

A

brief

statement

is

alone necessary here,

since the infinitive receives full discussion in the next chapter. Suffice

it

to say that the infinitive

is

exceedingly

common

in the

pure purpose. Votaw^ counts some 1,285 such instances of the simple infinitive of purpose in "biblical

N. T.

for the notion of

Greek."

He

He

does not give the figures for the N. T. alone.

notes that "this use of the infinitive

is

second only to that of

general object in order of relative frequency of occurrence."

Moulton

common

notes that the

{Prol., p. 205)

inf.

of purpose

N. T. than in Attic, and he agrees with

in the

is

more

Thumb

(Theol. Lit., 1903, p. 421) in the theory that this frequency of the inf. of

purpose in the

kolvt] is

due to the Ionic

dialect.

It has sur-

vived in the Pontic dialect of modern Greek, though elsewhere displaced

by

va

and the

subj.

Cf. hoLiiaaointv

(j)ayelp

(Mt. 26

:

17)

(Mk. 14 12). The tclic inf. is common in the kolpt} writers generally (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 152). Cf. Xenophon of Eph., 393, 28, eXriXWet. Trpoaev^aadaL. It is commonest with ver])s of movement (Moulton, Prol., p. 205), as in eav ava^ui Ka.y
and

eTOLfxaawiJLev lva (f)ayris

:

1

Prol., p. 194.

»

2

lb., p. 197.

»

»

Goodwin, M. and

T., pp.

216

ff.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217. The Iiif. in Bibl. Gk., p. 10.

21

3, virayoj aXLeveiv, '1

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

990

go a-fishing

; '

Mt. 2

:

2, rikdontv TrpoaKwrjaaL,

easy to see the purpose

'we went up for worshipping.'^ form of irpoaKwrjaaL, but less clear in the locative Moulton" suggests that oXieveLv (probably due to syncretism). result and gradually sort of designed originally a the locative was forms as was true between the two vanished the line of cleavage clear is in all burden of making purpose "The of Lva (and ut). and cannot be said that any the context; it thrown on these cases places." This idiom minimum of in a except results, difficulty in writers and is than Attic Homer range in wider much has a .^ in the Attic A few exthan in the T. prevalent N. more again dXXd irX-qpoxrai. (Mt. Karakvaai, 5 ovk suffice: rfKdov must 17); amples It

is

in the dative

:

—

6 'Irjaovs avrjxdv

rod Sia^oKov (4:1); ovk rjSBov Ka-

TreipacxdrjvaL viro

(Mk. 2 17); irapecy iiev aKomai (Ac. 10 33). Cf. Lu. 11 Ac. 25; 12 13; 13 44, etc. Less frequent is the inf. 18 10; with rov for the idea of purpose. Votaw^ notes but 33 such examples of direct purpose in the N. T., though the 0. T. shows

Xecrai diKalovs

:

:

:

:

:

:

These 33 are almost confined to Matthew, Luke and Acts. Cf Tov airoXeaaL (Mt. 2 13) rod cnreipaL (Lu. 8:5); roD alrdv (Ac. 3:2). See both together in Lu. 1 76 f., 79; 2 22, 24, TrapaaTrjaaL For a full discussion see "Articular Infinitive" /cat TOV SoDmt. (Verbal Nouns). Paul seems to avoid it as a rule. But see Ro. 6:6; Ph. 3 10. The use of coo-re and the inf. for pure purpose is rare in the N. T., some half-dozen instances.^ Only indisputable examples should be claimed. Thus ibare k/SdXXetj^ (Mt. 10 1). Cf. Mt. 15 33; 24 24; 27 1; Lu. 4 29; 20 20. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 160) cites P. Oxy. I, 52, 7 (325 a.d.), kwiaraXevTos coare For further examples of telic ri]v 8iade
:

.

;

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

It is more frequent in the LXX. Radermacher even cites a case of final ware with the subj. in a late papjTUS, B.G.U. Ill, 874, yeypa4>r]Ka vjxlv coare Tre^ti^Tjre. There are two examples of cos in W. H., cos hoinaaan (Lu. 9 52, other editors cocrre) and cos cttos direlv (Heb. 7:9). In Ac. 20:24 most editors have cos Ttkeiwaai, but not W. H. The articular infinitive with prepositions is very common in the N. T. as in the LXX, about one-half of all the examples of the articular infinitive.^ For a discussion of prepositions with the inf. see Verbal Nouns. Both

vationes granmiaticae, p. 20.

:

ets

and

TO

irpbs

TO occur with the inf. in the papyri, the latter

1

Moulton,

2

lb., p. 207.

»

Blass, Gr. of

Prol., p. 204.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 223.

*

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 21.

*

lb., p. 10.

«

lb., p. 19.

MODE

991

(efkaiziz)

They both seem "to carry the thought of a Moulton cites (Moulton, Prol, p. 220.) purpose." remoter irpos to Tvyj-V, O. P. B. U. 226 (i/A.D.) oTTOJs eiSfj irapecreaTaL (=5ai) The paeyTuxo-veiv. Trpos TO fiij 237 (ii/A.D.) oTTOJs (i)povTi(Jxis

more

frequently.

—

—

pyri have

to kv n-qbevi

els

—

fie/jLcliOfjvat,

as a "recurrent formula."

Cf.

Moulton gives numerous papyri refThe examples with eis to are the most to. erences for telic common of all in the N. T. (72 instances). As a rule these indicate purpose more or less strong, though not always. It is P. Fi. 2 (iii/A.D.) 4 times.

m

common

So eis to aT-qTh. 3:5; Eph. 1: 12; Ph. 1 10). The instances of -Kpbs to are few (12) and chiefly Cf irpbs to deaOrjpai (Mt. 6:1); xpos to bbvaadai in Luke and Paul. particularly

pixOvvaL (Ro. 1:11),

in

eis

Paul (50

exx.,

H.

t6 elvai (8:29).

Scott).

Cf.

1

:

.

(Eph. 6 (d)

:

The

n)} Participle.

The

future participle, so

common

in this

construction in the Attic Greek, has nearly vanished from the N. T. as from the rest of the KOLvq. A few remnants survive like

and iroiqawv So also the present participle Thus dxeordX/caoccasionally occurs where purpose is implied.

epxeTai 'HXetas adoauv (Mt. 27:49), ave^rjv TrpoaKvprjaoiV

(Ac. 24:11, 17).

liev

Cf. Ac. 8:27.

airayyeWovTas (Ac. 15

VII, 26,

9).2

Cf. also

:

27).

Cf.

26, aireaTeikev avTou evXoyovPTa.

eirep.\l/av

ayyeXXovTas (Thuc.

A

Mk. 3:31.

good example is Ac. 3: See Participle (Verbal Nouns) and

for further remarks. Sub-Final Clauses (really object or subject clauses like 6tl clauses ). There are a considerable number of clauses which are

Tense (d)

not pure purpose and yet are not in

They are the bridge, They are found with verbs

result.

a sense, between the two extremes.

commanding, fearing. In some instances the clause is hardly more than an object-clause. The same conjunctions are here used in general, and this shows that no hard and fast line was drawn in the matter. Various divisions are made of these verbs.* Burton* calls them object-clauses of exhorting, of striving, of fearing, of subject and predicate, of complementary and epexegetic clauses, of conceived result. But even

of striving, beseeching,

and run into one another. Here again the main conjunction is ira. All these (a) "Ira. varieties noted by Burton arc seen with tVa save with verbs of

so they overlap

N. T. M. und T., p. 101 N. T. Gk., p. 198. Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 122 ff. N. T. M. and T., p. 83.

1

Cf. Burton,

2

Blass, Or. of

8 *

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

992

As we have seen,^ there were two tendencies in the One was the spread of the Ionic use of the inf. of purpose, the other was the wide extension of I'm in Western Hellenistic. So the iVa in the non-final or sub-final sense, once rare,^ now comes to be exceedingly common. The development came on soon after the close of the classical age.^ But Thackeray (Gr., pp. 24, 194) finds it rare in the LXX. It came to be used in almost fearing. Koivrj.

any sense that the infinitive bore and finally displaced it. This weakened use of tva is one of the characteristics of the kolvti and is richly illustrated in the N. T., particularly in the writings of John. Thus in Mt. 5 29, auju^epet ha airoX-qTat, the ha clause is the subject of avfjicfyepeL and is a subject-clause in the nominative case. There is a great variety of phrases ^ which thus use ha. So :

10 25; 18 6). Cf. 1 Pet. 4 3 (inf.). See also kavos ha (Mt. 8:8), though elsewhere inf.; a^Los ha (Jo. 1 27), but inf. in 1 Cor. 16 4, as often; avvqdeLa vpuv ha (Jo. apK€Tdv tva yeprirai (Mt.

:

:

:

:

:

18 :39);

kXrjXvOev copa

Cor. 4:3);

(1

ha

efxdv /3pco/^d

(Jo.

12 :23);

eanv ha

eis

e/Jiol

4

(Jo.

:

ha

kXaxLarbv eanv

34); Xuo-treXet

— ha

(Lu.

ha e\6rj (Lu. 1 43) ^TjTetTaL ha (1 Cor. 4:2); xo-po-v ha Thus the ha clause is seen to be either nom. or ace,

17:2); tovto, (Ph. 2:2).

:

;

simply, or in apposition with a substantive. sitional use is

So

very frequent.

ha

avr-q

In John^ the appo-

(Jo. 17: 3); ixd^ova rah-

ha{lb 13, ablative); hv tovtw, ha (15 8, locative); x^-pi-v, ha John 4, accusative). Cf. Jo. 6: 39; 1 Jo. 3 1, 11, 23; 4 21; 2 Jo. 6; 1 Cor. 9 18; Rev. 2 21. In Jo. 15 12 ha ayaTare 71}%,

:

:

(3

:

:

:

Some

(subj.) is in apposition \vith hroXr].

mentary or epexegetic

:

:

of these are comple-

In the subject and object (or appositive) clauses the subjunctive is usually found, though occaclauses.

sionally the fut. ind., as in kppedrj

ha

14

:

13 (especially

we have

common

See

abuijaovaLv (Rev. 9:4).

further examples of the fut. ind. in Rev.

3:9; 6

in the Apocalypse).

:

11;

13

:

In Rev. 9

12; :

5

ha cnroKTeivcoaLV aiiTOvs, dXX' ha ^aaavLadrjaovrai. In Jo. 17 3 some MSS. read ha yivioaKovaLV (read by Treg. and Tisch.). Object-clauses with ha after verbs of striving, beseechebbdy]

/jltj

:

ing, etc., largely displace ottws.

Many

of these verbs use also the

and a few retain ottcos.^ Blass'' gives a careful list of the construction in the N. T. with each of these verbs. See also infinitive

1 '^

3 *

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 205.

Demosthenes (IV, 28). Jebb in V. and D.'s Handb., p. 320. « Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Cf Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 228. It is seen as early as

.

W.-Th., p. 338

f.

^

lb.

p.

225

f.

MODE Thayer under Tov rkKvov

virep

Cf. Acta Pauli

I'm (2).

Theclae, 29, rpocxev^ai

et

With these verbs iW

Iva ^rjaerai,.

fxov,

993

(ErKAisis)

gives the

purport or object rather than the purpose. This use of 'iva is very rare^ in classic Greek, though in itself not out of harmony with

The

the Greek genius.

parallel

between

sense

i'm in this

and

oti

Per contra see 1 Jo. 5: Cf. also on in Mt. 13 13 with IVa in Lu. 13 for distinction. 8 10. It is worth repeating that in the modern Greek (except seen in Jo. 11:50; 1 Jo. 5:3,

is

11.

9,

:

:

in the Pontic dialect)

and

inf.

Handb., to give 32)

It

ottcos.

common

The examples in a complete list. But note 8

56)

:

1:9); d7ra77eXXw (Mt. 28 areXXco (Ac. 16

and

SiaaTeWofxaL

in

H.); k^opKL^o^ (Mt. 26

and

Xe7a; (Ac.

19:4);

f77X60; (1 Cor. 14

;

fxepLixvaoi

20);

(1

7rot€co

Cor. 7 (Jo.

Mt. 16

(Mk. 13:34);

3)

14)

So (Mk. 11

10.

:

36)

:

Mk.

7rapa77eXXco, :

20)

10); ypacf^o:

;

5eoAtat

:

:

1)

34)

11:37);

;

dk\oi

(Mk. 6

fTjr^co (1

(Lu. 9

40)

;

12);

5t5a;jut

:

:

:

25)

;

Utlv ^eX^a (Mt. 18

Cor. 4:2);

ivpoaevxop-ai

:

10);

:

11 57 (13 :34; (Mt. 12:16; 16:20, (Mk. 7: 26); dirov (Mt. 4

wapaKoKea} (Mt. 14

;

(Mk. 9

dTTO:

kirLTLixaw

63); epcordo;

:

6:8);

16); (SovXevofiaL (Jo. 12 :

:

atreo/xat (Col.

;

kvroKriv SiSco^t {Xan^avoi), as in Jo.

hrkWofjiat.

W. ;

after ayyapevo} (Mt. 27

'iva

4); ^Xevrco (1 Cor. 16

:

(many MSS.

(Mk. 10 :37);

:

(Thumb,

the N. T. are too numerous

ay^vl^oixai (Jo. 18

;

36); d0tr7Mt

(Mt. 26

<7UM/3.

15:12);

:

to the exclusion of the

(i^d)

after verbs of saying

p. 189).

ayaXKiaofJiai (Jo.

;

universal

it is

is

K-nphaao: :

36)

;

(Mk. 14:35);

:

(Mk. 6:12);

Treldo}

(Mt. 27

:

awTideyLai (Jo.

9:22 and

inf.); Tidwi (Jo. 15:16); (^vKaaaoixai (2 Pet. 3:17). a most interesting list. Kiilker {Questiones de elocutione Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 20) has shown how Polyhiana, 1880. Polybius favours 'iva with verbs of commanding like alTeofiai,, iraNo real distinction in sense can here be drawai payykWcj}, etc. between the inf. and IVa. The later kolvti (and so the N. T.) carried this use of 'iva much further than did Polybius, who had more There is no need to appeal affinity with the old literary Greek.

This

is

to Latin influence for this sub-final use of

'iva,

as

Moulton

(p.

208)

abundantly shows from the papyri. So 0. P. 744 (I/b.c.) epcorw ere 'iva fxri ayuviaa^s, N. P. 7 (i/A.D.) 'eypaxj/a 'iva col (j)v\axd cbai, B. LT. 531

(ii/A.D.) TrapaKa\ct3 ae

e'iva

doiawatv.

Moulton

'iva

Karacrxv^j

C).

P. 121 (iii/A.D.)

subj. as sufficient explanation of this use of I'm.

{Rh. M., LVI, 203) and

Thumb

(Hellen., p. 159)

against the Latin influence theory.

De

Polyhii EL, pp. 17 1

It is

found

in

etTrd trot

{Prol., pp. 177, 208) recalls the old jussive

£f.;

Horn.

Radermachcr

support Moulton

Per contra see Goetzeler,

Kalker, Quest.; Viereck, Sermo GraeCf.

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 128.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

994

Moulton

cus, p. 67.

scores his point

was not driven out by

inf.

(ii/A.D.), epcoTco

155

afxeXelv

fxr]

and observes

the papyri, see

I'm in

The

inscriptions.

subj.

Cf. A. P. 135 Gr., p.

of non-final Iva in papyri

mode employed even

the usual

is

also that the

(e).

Radermacher (N. T.

juou.

numerous other examples

gives

f.)

and

o-e

NEW TESTAMENT

Thus e^ovXevaavro Iva airoKTeivucTcv (Jo. after secondary tenses. ^de\ev 'iva tls yvoi, we have still the om 9 Mk. 30, In 12 10). noted, 'iva dco-q in Eph. 1:17 is already As opt. the not subj., tense. It is here also the primary after a wish of optative an Moulton^ points out how Cf. Phil. 14; Col. 4 12. subfinal 'iva. :

:

:

closely akin are irpoaevx^ade

(Lu. 12

Kai (pvXaaaeade

struction is 'iva c. c.

oTTcos

Moulton

fut. indie." 2

abrupt use of

this

5)

:

and

38)

dpare

con-

'iva

a moderate number of exSo F. P. 112 (99

in the papyri.

e'iva

avTOV

dvacjoir-qays,

fxi]

letter of

ovv, wpoJTOV ixkv, 'iva Tvavra acbfrjraf Bevrepov

tokwv dXiycopwris, B. U. 48

tojv

juTjS^

ravra

cites

'iva

Zw'CKwl kol

{=oov)

eirexov

'iva

:

"An

thus well illustrated.

Cicero {Alt. 6 8e,

(Mk. 14

paratactic origin of the

innovation in Hellenistic subj. in commands, which takes the place of the classic is

amples of A.D.)

'eKdrjTe

ixi]

The

15).

:

'iva

(ii/iii

A.D.)

6p.6ae

'iva

There is a doubtful ex. of this sense of 'iva in Soph., It appears in Arrian and Oed. C. 155, though oxws was so used.^ In the modern Greek the va clause sometimes "apEpictetus.

yevoiixeda.

proaches the nature of a principal sentence" (Thumb, Handh., But this eUiptical imperative is undoubted in the N. T. p. 198). Cf. Mk. 5 :23, 'iva k\dCov 'eTndfjs. So also Mt. 20 :32; 1 Cor. 7: 7; Eph. 4: 29; 5: 33. With this construction compare the asyndeton without 'iva in Mk. 10 36, H deKere iroL-qaco As already explained, this may be mere parataxis (two vfjLlv; Cf. 'iva in Mk. 10 35 and Gal. 5 17.^ questions).

29; 2 Cor. 8

:

:

:

:

(|3)

"Ottws.

It is

much

rarer in the

N. T.

in these constructions.

no longer occurs with the future ind. after verbs of striving. The papyri show ottcos occasionally in this sense also. Moulton It

{Prol, p. 208) cites B. "d|tco

vav

TO.

all

(ii/B.c.) rj^'Maa ae ottojs aivobod^,

Radermacher

quotes Theoph. ad Autolycum,

f.)

rov Oeov

ecppovTiaev ottoos

are

21

occurs in the same papyrus."

c. infin.

Gr., p. 141

M.

ottcos

34

T.

aoc kptv-

from Magn., 90, 12 (ii/B.c.) The few examples in the N. T.

inscr.

dwrjcreL,

— awoKaraaTcJaLv.

in the subj.

2,

eo-rco

while

(A^.

Burton notes only three (Mt. 12

:

14; 22

:

15;

The

3:6), and all three after avu^ovXiov clause thus partakes of the nature of an indirect deliberative eXajSov

Mk.

1

Prol., p. 178.

«

See

art.

by

2

lb.

»

W.-M.,

{k8l8ovv).

p. 396.

Jann., Expositor, ser. V, vol. IX, p. 296.

MODE question

(cf.

Mk. 11:18,

995

(efkaiziz:)

They

ttws)-

are

secondary-

after

all

There are some instances in the N. T. of ottoos after verbs of beseeching, though many verbs that in Attic had this idiom no longer have it. Thus ottws and the subj. occur with 5eo/iat (Mt. 9 38), atreo/xat (Ac. 25 3), cpcordw (Lu. 7: 3), TrapaKaXeco (Mt. 8 tenses.

:

:

:

34), irpoaevxoiJ.aL (Ac. 8 M17,

(7)

:

15).

The

xcos, nr} Tore.

/X17

usual construction in the nega-

tive sub-final clauses is tua n-q, but a small list of verbs commonly have fir) as the conjunction. This is true of verbs meaning 'to take heed,' 'to care for,' 'fear.'^ It is a much narrower range than the sub-final use of 'Iva. In the N. T. the subj. always oc-

curs with TLs

jLiT?

except in Col. 2 8 ^Xewere

upas

ir\avr](Txi

in 2 Cor. 12

/SXeTTw

(Mt. 24

but

21,

(Mk. 13

:

:

4).

Nestle rightly have

Heb. 12

pres. subj. occurs in

we have

5); opao)

:

10);

10 some

:

:

/SXeTrere

Tairuvoia-Q (cf.

15 eTnaKOTrovvTe^

Thus

only the aor. subj.

(Mt. 18

In Ac. 23

nai (Ac. 27: 17).

Thus

tls eo-rat.

Treg. and Tisch. read the fut. ind.

W, H. and

Elsewhere

epox>^v-

nil

:

The

verse 20).

(jltj

:

fjLTi

o-kottcco

(Gal. 6:1);

MSS. have

after (t>o^eo-

evXa^eofim,

but

This construction with (po^eofiaL is rare in the N. T. (Luke, Paul and Hebrews) and is apparently a literary touch. Cf. Ac. 27 29. In Ac. 5 26, €0o/3o9j^ro yap t6v \a6v XLOaadCxTLv (note subj. after secondary tense), there is a prolepsis correct.

is


of Tov Xaov.^

M17

/jltj

:

:

TTOJs is

found after /SXexw with the

aor. subj. (1 Cor.

2 in 6, (c), 20). Cf. Gal. 2 9) and cpol^kofiac (2 Cor. 11 3; 12 in the object about an fear is the If Clauses. Final Pure (5) present or past, the indicative is used. Thus in Lu. 11:35, earlv, and in Gal. 4:11, ^o^ovp.ai vp.a.'i fxij ttws eUfj (T/coTret firi

8

:

:

:

:

—

K€KOTrlaKa

els

This

vfias.

in strict

is

accord with Attic idiom.^

So Par. P. 49 N. P. 17 (iii/A.D.) xx^o^povixe p.ri apa hdpoxTKOiv eXaOev v8aTL. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 141) adds examples of fut. ind., as Enoch 6:3, o^ovp.aL p.r} oh 6e\r]aeTe; Dio

The papyri show (ii/B.c.)

aycovioj

it

p.T)

also (Moulton, Prol, p. 193).

Tore dppcoareT,

Chrys., xxxiv, 44, ov yap taTi arepoL do^ere. /X17

TTOJs

to

fxri.

ovx

o'lovs 6e\co eupco

Cf. Col. 2 :S,

ij-tj

MaXXcorcii' ecropevcov aadtvt-

in

:

—

implied, though not expressed

fearing

is

and

/ir}).

ira

1X7]

kIv8vvos,

such a clause is ov. Thus 0oi3o?pai This is to show contrast (2 Cor. 12 20). Sometimes a verb of Kal ov. TLS earaL

The negative

Thus Ac.

explanation of

pi? irore

5 ov

:

(cf.

elliptical

evped^re.

39,

mi? Trore

fxri

apKkaxi (or

p.y]

This

TTore

»

Burton, N. T. M. and T., pp. 88, 95 Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 95.

»

Goodwin, M. and

1

T., p. 133.

is

om) in f.

use of

'Iva

a possible Mt. 25 9 :

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK

996

and

(note negatives)

wore

nr]

with the aorist subj. after (Lu. 3

TrpoaSoKCLO}

(3

:

:

:

used

is 1),

(j)o^eonai

These clauses are also

12).

Mrj irore

25).

:

21: 34; Heb. 2

with (Heb. 4:1), with a pres. opt. after 15, indirect question), with a fut. ind. after

a present subj. after /3X€7rco

Tim. 2

(2

Scot?

Trpocrexw (Lu.

of paratactic origin.^

This

paratactic construction survives in the use of 6pa with the im30; 24 6), but even so the clause may be dependent in actual use as in Mt. 18 10; 1 Th. 5 15. Some doubt^ arises concerning the clauses with /SXeTrco which have a paratactic origin, but are practically dependent. Those in the third person are clearly so (Mk. 13 5; Ac. 13 40, etc.). This argues for a like usage in Lu. 21 8; Gal. 5 15; Heb. 12 25. It is a classic idiom for complemen(8) The Relative Clause. tary relative clauses to be used in a sub-final sense.^ As examples of this idiom in the N. T. note a^tos eariu u> Trape^rj (Lu, 7:4); ovk

perative (Mt. 9

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

exw 6 ax"^

Trapadrjaoo (11

t'<-

:

6);

ypo4'w (Ac. 25

macher {N. T.

:

ovdha

The

(e)

(Ph. 2

jj.epLp.i'rjcreL

ypaxpaL ovk exw

tI

Cf.

20).

:

Rader-

(ib.).

16, 3,

KCiKelvr] Xa^rj.

With verbs

Infinitive.

:

quotes from Achilles Tatius, IV,

Gr., p. 138)

aToyevao/jLai toctovtov baov

exco octtls

and

26)

:

of exhorting, beseeching, etc.,

the infinitive was the normal idiom in the ancient Greek.

In the

occurs twice as often as I'm and

Some

N. T.

it still

of these verbs acTKew,

have only the

/SouXo/xat,

KeXevo),

ooKecc,

4)povTL^(j), (t>o(3eoiJ.aL

Many Thus

Idco,

-Kapaivew,

OKveoo,

\v(T(jo

airovda^co,

(Jo. 1

27)

:

.

(Mk.

Cf.

1

:

:

5 the

clause to express an epexegetic or

a rather

may have

So also

17).

cl^los XOcrai

In 2 Cor. 9

eTrtxetpeco,

and compounds,

raaao:

be afraid to do' (Mt. 2

in the sense of 'to

upas yeveadaL

iroLrjao)

eTLTpewo},

kinTrodeoo,

kindviikoi,

of the verbs that use sub-final i'm

TrpoaevxofJiaL, Xe7co, etc.

together.^

the N. T., as atcrxwojuat, d^tow,

inf. in

Teipaco,

ottcos

:

20).

inf. also.

fiovKehop.aL, alTeoixaL,

(Ac. 13 inf. is

the

and

25)

ci^tos

'iva

used after the

'im

:

complementary purpose

common

(ravTriv

usage. Cf. in 1 Cor. 9 15 both broken sentence. Moulton^ argues that in Paul the majority of cases of tov with the inf. are epexegetic (Ro. 1:24; 7:3; 8: 12; 1 Cor. 10 13) or adnominal (Ro. 15 eToifxrjv

I'm

dvai),

and the

inf.

:

in a

:

23; 1 Cor. 9

:

10; 16

construction (Ro. 15

Lu. 17:

Mt. 21 1 2 3

1 is :

:

4; 2 Cor.

:

8:11; Ph. 3

:

21) or the ablative

22; 2 Cor. 1:8). Certainly tov not purpose, nor tov elaeXddv in Ac. 10 25.

/jltj

:

32, tov iriaTevaaL.

:

Luke uses

Moulton, Prol., pp. 185, 248. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 89. Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 217.

tov

and the

*

Burton, N. T.

*

ppoi_^ p,

2I8

f.

inf.

eXdelv in

Cf. also

more than

M. and

T., p. 87.

MODE

(efkaisis)

997

any other N. T. writer. In Lu. 18 1, irpb^ to bttv is not final. Eis TO and the inf. we find chiefly in Paul (44 examples, Moulton, Prol., p. 218. Mr. H. Scott makes 50 by counting the verbs :

The construction is always final in But Paul has non-final uses, as in The papyri show this non-final use of tov

instead of the preposition).

the other N. T. writers.

Th. 2

1

M. (rt

(Moulton, Prol, p. 219 TOV woLrjaaL, B. U. 164 (ii/iii inf.

(ppourjaop

B.

23

(ii/B.C.) irpoadeofxevov

El and on.

(TKavSaXlaiJ,

et=6rt in aixTTrjpos el,

made

4:9.

12;

:

and the

fj.ov

In Lu. 17 2 :

So B. U. 1031

f.).

A.D.)

tov

Tretcrat

(ii/A.D.)

avrou tov eXOdv,

irepLwocrjcrat..

we have

d

XvaiTeXel

epptTrrat

fi

I'm

where d and ha introduce subject-clauses. Cf. also Mk. 9 42. In Lu. 19:21, e0o/3o 6^1771' o-e on avdpwTos :

the rare use of on with

easier

by the

proleptic use of

(polSkofiaL is

to be noted.

The usual

o-e.

It is

object-clause

with 3n belongs to indirect discourse. (e)

Consecutive Clauses.

"Im. It is debatable whether I'm has the ecbatic use in the N. T. There is in itself no reason why it should not have it, since undoubtedly it was so used in the later Greek.^ It occurs also in modern Greek, as ttmt va x^o-j? Kavels to /jlvoXo tov, that is for one to lose his reason' (Thumb, Handb., p. 197). The parallel of the Latin ut may have had some influence on this late Greek. The development, however, was in the vernacular, and out of the subfinal use of I'm, and the Latin influence was not needed. There is not space to follow the long debate in the grammars and commentaries on this subject. Kiihner^ held that I'm had the ecbatic sense, but Thayer^ boldly accepts the verdict of Fritzsche and Winer who " have clearly shown that in all the.passages adduced from the N. T. to prove the usage the telic (or final) force prevails." W. F. Moulton^ agreed with Winer as against Fritzsche (a)

'

in the admission of the sub-final use of I'm,

consecutive idea. is

"But

it

generally equivalent to

still

cio-re:

this use of I'm

is

rather, as

we can

perceive in most cases, an extension of eo consilio ut."

most

in

but he balked at the does not follow that the weakened i'm

cases,

beyond a doubt.

I

Yes,

once had just this feeling and

stood against^ the admission of the consecutive force of I'm. J. H. Moulton^ confesses to a similar development of opinion on this subject. He had once'' committed himself against the ec1

' * 6

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455.

Lexicon, p. 304. W.-M., p. 421.

Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

=

Gr., § 555, 2,

Anm.

3.

p. 381, hold.s to the strict use of tva.

Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., pp. 153, 155.

6

Prol., p. 20G.

^

Intr. to

N. T. Gr.,

p. 217.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

998 batic

but now he confesses himself "troubled with unsettling He boldly advocates^ the freedom of commentators to

I'm,

doubts."

interpret Iva as the context

had defended

demands

(final, sub-final,

consecutive).

and he is the most severely grammatical of commentators. The commentator must have grammar, but he needs the grammar of the author on whose work he is making comments. So also Sanday and Headlam on Ellicott^

Ro. 11:11 "'iva

just this principle,

pointedly interpret

iTCTaiaav Iva ireawcTLv;)

{(JLTi

expresses the contemplated result."

it

They appeal

thus:

to Elli-

and Evans in support of this laxer use of tva as Winer and the Germans. They also (p. 143) quote Chry-

cott, Lightfoot

against

sostom's exposition of

tva in

Xoyias ttoXlv ctXX' eKJSaaec^s

Ro. 5

:

20: to 8e

'Iva

evravda

om

aiTio-

Lightfoot admits the consecutive

kcxTiv.

Th. 5 4. He is correct in both In Jo. 16:2, 'tpx^Tai wpa 'lva bb^rj, It is argued that, where 'iva seems to be it is almost temporal. used in a consecutive clause, it is the divine purpose that is to be considered. But certainly no such explanation is possible in Ro. There is such a thing as the divine purpose and it is 11: 11. atadcovTaL seen^ in Lu. 9 45, riv ivapaKeKaXvixjxkvov cltt' avroov 'iva Cf also Mt. 1 22, 'iva T'Xrjpcodyj. But surel}^ no such puravTo. pose'* appears in Jo. 6 7, ovk apKovcnv ai'Tols 'iva 'eKaaros ^paxv XajS;/. Here we have contemplated result, it is true, but it is result just the same. It is probably just out of this idiom (conceived result) that the use of 'iva for actual result came. Burton^ admits this conceived result as in Heb. 10 36, and seeks to explain Jo. 9 2, But the effort is not successful. 'iva tv4)\6s yevvrjdfj; Tts rip-aprev force of

in Gal. 5

'Lva

instances.

:

17;

1

:

See also Lu. 1:43.

/jlt]

:

:

.

:

:

:

—

He

denies that there

is

a certain, "scarcely a probable, instance

N. T. of a clause denoting actual result conceived as He considers^ Rev. 13 13, Trotei ar]pe7a jue7dXa, 'iva Kal Tvp Tov ovpavov Kara^aiveLv, as the most probable instance of in the

such."*^ toltj

:

But

noting actual result. clearer. rias.

Thus

1 Jo. 1

:

Blass^ places this beside

With

HeTev6r]aav,

'iva p-i)

this

Moulton^

TpocrKvvrjaovaLV,

'iva

grew out

agrees.

with

'iva

if

not

rds ap.ap-

ck^tj

(Heb. 6

clSlkos kirCkadkadaL

thinks that the consecutive use of

that sense.

de-

there are others just as plain,

9, tkttos eariv Kal Skatos,

:

10)

Cf. also Rev. 9

ov perevorjaav dovvaL

:

20, ob

avrQ 86^av

1

Prol., p. 209.

«

On Eph.

^

lb.

»

Moulton,

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.

*

Blass, Gr. of

^

Prol., p. 210.

6

:

17.

Prol., p. 210.

N. T. Gk., p. 228. N. T. M. an4 T., p. 92 f.

and

of the infinitive in

2

1

e/c-

'iva

lb., p. 94.

MODE Note

in 16: 9.

accents the ecbatic force of

Mk.

9 36; :

dXX'

(cf.

11

28.

used

'iva)

In

consecutive

2

:

:

:

1,

where the clause

This use

Iva.

Mk. 4

22, kav

and the

like cotrre

Mk.

In

Gk., p. 218).

The

:

IJo. 3

in particular

999

(etkaisis)

iir\

is

'iva 4>avtpoidri,

we have N.

'iva.

Blass, Gr. of

T.

means 'on condition

that.'

inf. (cf.

10 I'm almost

Kal kanev

possible also in Jo.

appears outside of the N. T. as in Arrian rjv, 'iva %. Sophocles in his

'iva

{Diss. Epict., II, 2, 16) ovtco nojpos

Lexicon gives a quite extensive

fjL-q

list

of passages in the

kolvt]

writers

where I'm has the consecutive sense. He has probably claimed too many, but some of them are real instances. Even Josephus has I'm in the sense of conceived result.'^ Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 156) cites Epictetus, IV, 3, 9, eXevdepos

deov

'iv'

uses

we conclude

So, then,

tetus.

tov

d/xL Kal 4>i\os

that I'm has in the N. T.

sub-final, consecutive),

(final,

yap

Several other examples occur in Epic-

eKojv Tret^co/xat avru).

and thus runs a

all

three

close parallel

with the infinitive which it finally displaced .^ Sophocles cites several examples of consecutive I'm from the LXX. One of these* is

certainly pertinent,

Wisdom

of Sol. 13

:

9, for I'm 8vv(j:vTaL fol-

lows ToaovTov and 'iva has the force of axrre. "^aT€. This conjunction is merely cos and re^'and so.' In (jS) Homer ws is both a demonstrative and a relative. Either idea may appear in wcrre. It is really a comparative particle.^ In the early writers the

Thus

was more common than the

inf.

in Euripides the inf. occurs 130 times to

ind.

with

coo-re.

In

20 indicatives.

144 to 82, but in Plato it is 253 to 240. The consecutive sentence began with the inf. and was extended to the In late Greek it returned to the inf. construction. finite verb."*

Thucydides

it

is

Cf. Green, Diodorus

the 83 instances

=^

and

the

Peloponnesian War, 1899, p. 21. Of N. T. probably 30 do not come

of coore in the

up for discussion under either final or consecutive clauses. The word in these examples is merely an introductory inferential parThe structure is wholly paratactic. In this sense ticle like ovv. of 'therefore' the particle occurs with the ind. twenty-one times.

Cf.

Mt. 12

:

'e^ecTTiv. Once the subj. appears, 1 Cor. 5 Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 161) even quotes 27(ii/B.c.), coo-r' av tovto ae 0eXco jivcoaKeLv, and there

12, coo-re

:

8, coo-re eopTa^conev.

P.Oxy. IV, 743,

are other instances like

it.

The

1

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

3

Cf. Gildersl.,

The Consec.

*

Cf. Berdolt,

Der Konsckutivsatz

other eleven instances have the

p. 224.

^

Sent, in Gk.,

Am.

Moulton,

in der alt
pp. 21-27. 6

Mr.

II.

Prol., p. 210.

Jour, of Philol., 1SS6, p. 1G7.

Scott makes 95 times by counting the verbs.

1S9G,

1

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1000

NEW TESTAMENT

Cf. ware (SXexerco (1 Cor. 10

imperative.

12).

:

See

Cor. 3

1

21;

:

Of the hypotactic examples 62 have the infinitive and only two the indicative. In the Attic Greek actual result was expressed by cbare and the indicative, while ajcrre and the inf. (' so as to ') denoted a result naturally or necessarily following the preceding cause.^ In the N. T. there are only two instances 11

33, etc.

:

They

of the ind. with oxTre (as a hypotactic conjunction). Jo. 3

:

16, ouTOJS

'lovdaiOL ihare Kal

actual result

is

rjjaTrrjaev 6

and Gal. 2

edooKep,

(xoPoyePTJ

yap

:

avpVTreKpidrjffap

/cat

Bappa^as avpaivqxdr] avrOiP 16

:

avTui

XolttoI

oi

Here the

viroKpiaH.

ttj

are

top vlop top

Blass^ on the flimsiest grounds

distinctly accented.

seeks to oust wore in Jo. 3

2

13,

:

top Koajdov chare

Beds

by

otl

and to put the

inf. in

13, so as to get rid of this construction entirely in the

Gal.

N. T.

Moulton^ rightly shows small patience with such "summary" methods in textual criticism. The construction with the ind. is

LXX

it is not quite obsolete in the vernacular KOLpi], but in the almost absent. This classic idiom stands, therefore, in the N. T., but only to make the contrast sharper. Of the 62 instances of

with the

coo-re

not

final

with

and

N. T. they are nearly

in the

inf.

Even

nor even sub-final.

coare in

(ii/A.D.).

it

inf.

Cf ware — awoXeXvadaL, a distinct encroachment on the

grew rapidly.

This

is

.

old idiom and has a wider range than in Attic. ^

note ovTWS

consecutive,

Greek the

the sense of actual result was displacing^ the ind.

in the vernacular

B. G. U. 27

all

in the classical

See Mt. 13 32 were ekdelp

ojcrre.

:

Kal KaTa(XKT]Po2p ep rots kXclBols avTov,

TO tXoIop, (Ac. 15

:

39) ware

(Mk. 4

d7roxcop(.(T0J7i'at

tian took chaTe consecutive in Lu. 4

:

In Ac. 14

37) coore

avTovs aw'

:

rod ovpapov

TO, Treretra

ijdr]

yefii^eadat

aXK-fi\o)p.

Ta-

29 (Moulton, Prol., p. 249). too common in the inscriptions and :

Consecutive coo-re and inf. is papyri for Radermacher to mention {N. T. Gr., p. 160). We do not have coo-re after a comparative (^ coare) in the N. T. There is

no example (7)

of

c6o-re

In Gal. 2

that.'

'fis.

:

nor of

94

:

1

11)

wre in the sense of 'on condition

Thayer considers that

the consecutive use of

and

ecf)'

9 tpa has practically that idea.

is

possible,

cos.

in

Heb. 3:11 and 4

a quotation from the

It is

though the simple

Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 223 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.

:

3

we have

LXX

'as' is sufiicient.^

(Ps.

But

ff.

M. and T., p. 99. N. T. Gk., p. 224. ^ In Xen. us rather than ibare occurs both with the inf. and the modes. Cf. Wehmann, De CbaTe particulae usu Heroditeo Thucydideo Xenophonteo, 1891, 2 3

Pro!., p. 209.

p. 40.

*

Burton, N. T.

5

Blass, Gr. of

MODE has kept

cos

macher,

A^.

place as a consecutive particle in the

its

There

is

e7w

no doubt about the consecutive use of find it in the LXX, as in Ex. 3:11,

ort

The

in-

We

in the later Greek.^ djxi

(Rader-

koivt]

T. Gr., p. 160).

"Ort.

(5)

1001

(eFKAISIs)

Cf. also 2 Ki. 8

oTL Topevaonai. irpos ^apacb;

13.

:

tLs

stances in the N. T. are not numerous, but they are very clear. Thus Mk. 4:41, tIs apa. ovtos eaTiv otl Kal 6 ave/xos /cat 17 daXaaaa

In Mt. 8

viraKoveL avTco;

Heb. 2:6

also

:

27 note

(Ps. 8:5);

Toh anvoh

in Theocritus

:

crov,

otl

fcoi^j'

25 M^Tas

ix,

Abbott {J oh.

Tov OTL.

Jo. 14

Gr.,

Moulton

OTL VTTO yvvaLKos iKLvi]Qr](jav.

diSois

See

Radermacher (A^ T.

quotes Acta Christophori, 68, 18, tolovtol yap

p. 160) vixcov

TroraTros otl (cf. ourcos coare).

Lu. 4:36.

22,

t'l

p.

6tl

deol

ot

It OCCUrs

alwvLOv exovcTLv; Pelagkl, 20.

— ToaovTov

Gr.,

yeyovev otl

elaiv

{Prol., p. 249) gives rl

—

SLeKoxpa, x,

14

es Tocrov-

534) takes otl as consecutive in

Abbott

rnxiv /xeXXets €fjL(j)api^€Lp;

finds

no

instance of consecutive otl in the Egyptian papyri. The idiom Akin to it is the modern Greek use is common in the late Greek. of TToO as consecutive is

(Thumb, Handh.,

found in Jo. 7 35. This (e) The Relative.

The same

p. 197).

idea

:

is

common

a

The mode

classic idiom.

the ind. and the negative ov.^ In Latin the subj. is the mode with qui. The tense is usually the fut. ind., though the conis

struction

is

rare^ in the

Mt. 10 26 and :

But one may note

kolvt].

in particular

24

:

2, ov nr]

a(f)edfj

in the

wSe Xldos

N.

eiri

T.,

\Wov

See also Lu. 8 17; 1 Cor. 6:5; Ro. 8 32. In Jo. 5 7, avdpojirov ovk ex" tva ^a\y, we see i'm usurping this province of the relative. Cf. Rev. 19 15. See "Relative" under OS ov KaToKvdrjaeTaL.

:

:

:

:

Sub-final.

The Infinitive. The inf. with ware has been discussed, but we have left the simple inf., the articular (tov) inf., els to and the There are apparently examples of each construction in the inf. N. T. Thus the simple inf. of result is seen in Lu. 1 54, di/reXdjSero 'la-parjX 7rat56s avTov iJi,vr]adrjvaL e\eovs; at any rate it is used here (f)

:

very

freely.

But

"quite incoherently."

in Ac. 5

tive idea, as has hinXaekaBaL in

5

:

5 and bovvaL in 16:9.

Heb. 6

Cf. Lu.

originally the dative -at in the 1

72 used 1 has a consecu-

Blass* considers the infinitives in Lu.

1

:

:

:

3 xpevaaadaL 10.

76, 78

inf.,

:

See also avol^aL in Rev. f. It is probable that

So^erat as

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455; Moulton, Prol., p. 249.

opposed to

bbp.ev,

Cf. Compernass, § 38.

See Sophocles' Lexicon. 2 "

Goodwin, M. and T., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,

p.

218

p. 468.

f. *

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1002

expressed "designed result" (Moulton, Prol., pp. 204, 207), but This idiom is found in the this idea shrank into the background. papyri,^ as in O. P. 526 (ii/A.D.), ovk

Meyer on Ro.

ireiv.

never expresses

inf.

evidence

is

7

tov

3,

:

pevecrOaL,

as

as consecutive.

true of rod and

is

chiefly to the

LXX

I

Radermacher {N T.

result. 10,

fxi]

The idiom

is

and Byzantine

Gr.,

.

/Stdo-p

Bappa^av tov

common

not

(Moulton, Prol.,

inf.

But the

once held.^

See Infinitive for distinction be-

resist.

tween actual and hypothetical p. 154) quotes Acta Barnabae,

aXoycos ae aTroKei-

argues that tov and the

a position which

result,

too strong to

TJurjv airadris

elvai,

p.y]

writers,

in the

nrj

tto-

papyri

It belongs

p. 220).

and Moulton puts

it

"the higher stratum of education in the main." The epexedeadai, 0. P. tov getic use occurs, as in C. P. R. 156 k^ovaiav 275 TOV cnroaTraadrjpaL eir'LTeLp.ov. This construction {tov and the inf.) had a very wide development in the N. T. in opposition to the encroachments of Iva. See Lu. 17 1 and Ac. 10 25, where tov and the inf. is practically the subject of the verb (cf. original dative and locative cases). Luke has two-thirds of the examples of tov and the inf. in the N. T. Only half of these (in Gospel and Acts) seem clearly final according to Moulton.^ He holds that of the 13 examples in Paul none are unmistakably final, though Ro. 6 6 and Ph. 3 10 are probably so. In both instances tov and the inf. is epexegetic of a 'iva clause (Moulton, Prol., p. 218). In Paul so as to' will usually express his idea with tov and the inf. A in

—

—

:

:

:

:

'

clear instance in

Luke

seen in Ac. 7

is

tov 7rot€Tv='so as to make.' (1 Ki.

17

:

20), av

e/cdKcocras

instances are Gen. 3

7:3 18

:

is

very

:

clear, tov

23

signification is sult

is

:

20.

22; 19 fxi]

:

21;

dvat.

So with

eis

Is.

idea.

14.

:

The

LXX LXX

case in Ro.

Lu. 9 :51; Ac.

Cf. tov kpcoTrjaaL

and ottcos KaTamost natural

and the

to

Meyer

elvai avTovs dvairoXoyrjTovs, insists

5

Other

aiiTtjs.

It is possible in

aim or purpose, but,

sometimes the

19, eKaaoiaev tovs Trarepas

tov davaToocai tov vlov

10; 20:3; 27: 1; Ro. 1:24.

yayris in Ac.

:

Blass^ cites a parallel from the

inf.

Its

just as with

Iva,

on Ro. that the meaning of in his note

so here re1

:

eis

20, to

eis

to

is al-

In this particular instance divine purpose is probably the idea, though result is a possible conception. See Sanday and Headlam in loco. Ellicott on 1 Th. 2 12, eis to

ways purpose.

:

admits the sub-final use of eis exhorting (cf. 1 Th. 3 of after verbs 10), though TO (cf. Iva) and that on But it is only a step to go ecbatic use. the denying irepiTvaTelv (after TrapaKa\ovvTes ktX.),

:

1

2

Moulton, Prol., p. 210. Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 156.

'

Prol., p. 217.

"

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 236.

MODE the N. T. writers took.

4

•

as in 2 Cor. 8

sought Titus.' tings,

and

See the epexegetic use of eh to in

Winer admitted the consecutive use

9.

:

1003

(efkaisis)

1

:

to irapaKoXecrat.

ets

6,

This idiom

of

eis

T'ltov,

i7/xas

to

1

Th.

and the

inf.

we

be-

'so that

not present in the Johannine wrivery frequent in Paul's writings (especially Ro.

though it is Th.) and Hebrews.

TO XaXTjcrai (Jas. 1

19).

:

is

Notice Taxi's ds to aKovaat, ^pa8vs ds In Heb. 11:3, els to yeyovevai, we have Note the perfect tense with notion of

a clear example of result. permanence.^ See also cf)pove7v els to aoocppovelv (Ro. 12 3), where purpose is impossible. Cf. Gal. 3 17. As to irpos to and the inf. Purpose is undoubtedly present as in the point is not clear. Mt. 6:1; Eph. 6:11, and there is total absence of purpose in Lu. 18 1, wpos TO betv. It is not certain, in spite of Blass' comment,^ :

:

:

that in the N. T. eiridvurjaaL,

7rp6s to

In Mt, 5

expresses result.

either purpose or result

is

possible.

W.

:

F.

28, irpos to

Moulton^

denies that the idiom ever conveys mere result, but admits that

may have

it

subjective purpose as in

ton^ holds that this

is

the idea in

all

Th. 2:9.

1

J.

H. Moul-

the four examples in Paul's

See further 2 Th. 3 8; 2 Cor. 3 13. Wishes. The use of the optative for a future wish like ayiaaai (1 Th. 5 23), p.ri y'evoLTo (Gal. 6 14), is not a h3''potactic construction. This is pure parataxis and has already been discussed under the Optative.^ See Optative Mode. The only hypowritings.

:

:

7.

:

:

tactic sentence for the expression of a wish in the

with

64>e\ov,

ticle.

which comes

Even here

is

it

paratactic, but note

el

in the late

N. T. is that Greek to be used as a par-

possible to regard the construction as

yap and

eWe.

It is the

second aorist ind.

augment. "O(f)e\ov with the inf. occurs in Herodotus, and the form is thus probably lonic.'^ For kolvt] parallels see "Impossible Wishes" under Indicative Mode. Cf. w^ei\ov avviffTaadaL in 2 Cor. 12 11. It is found in the LXX^ as a

of b^e'Ckw without the

:

conjunction, as in Ex. 16

20

:

1

3.

:

3,

b^e\ov airedavoixev.

Moulton^ suggests that

W.-M., p. 413 f. Moulton, Prol., p. 219.

its

Cf.

Num.

14

:

2;

application to the second and 3

Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 23G.

W.-M.,

p. 414 note. Soo further Ogden, De infinitivi finalis vol con.secutivi construolionc apud priscos poetus Graooos, 1913. " See eh. on " Wishes" in my Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 157. 2

^

Prol., p. 218.

'

Moulton,

<

Pro!., p. 201.

In W.-Sch., p. 29, reference is made to el 6<j)t\ov itpvXa^a^ in Job 14 13 and yap 6e\oi' was not felt to be sufli^

€1

:

:

cient alone. 9

Prol., p. 201.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1004

due to the meaning 'I would' rather than 'thou shouldst.' As a matter of fact its use in the N. T. is very Hmited, though eWe and ei yap are wanting as particles of wishing. For a wish about the past we have the aorist ind. So 6(^tK6v ye k^acnCf. Ps. 118 (119) 5. For a wish about 8). \e{j
is

:

:

aveixecrde, 6(t)e\ov

and Rev. 3

e'iris,

but

it is

for a future wish.

:

15, 64>i\ov

The

rjs.

Text. Rec. here has

However, we do

baseless.

So Gal. 5

find the fut. ind.

Wishes as

12, 6eKov airoKoxJ/ovTai.

:

a separate idiom are vanishing in the N. T. But 64>e\ov appears in Lucian, Athenagoras, Greg. Naz., Socrates. Cf. Sophocles'

To compensate

Lexicon.

ations with ov nv (Mt. 13

(Mk. 8

:

12;

Heb. 4

ciple like the

:

3),

Hebrew

:

14),

et ixrjp

inf.

we have

for this loss

the use of

(Heb. 6

:

el

14),

absolute (Mt. 13

:

the strong assever-

hke the Hebrew

ti»

the use of the parti14).

The

distinction

between wish and supposition with et was sometimes hard to make The relation between wishes and conditions is not in Homer.^ clear.

Conditional Sentences.

8. (a)

this.

Types. No hypotactic clause is more important than For some reason the Greek conditional sentence has been

Two

In truth the difficult for the students to understand. doctors have disagreed themselves and the rest have not known how to go. The theory of Hermann, followed by most Germans

very

(Winer ,2 Blass^), is the one that I learned from Broadus and have expounded in my Short Grammar.'^ It is also that of Gildersleeve.^ This theory in brief is that there are four classes of conditions which fall into two groups or types. The two types are The point in "deterthe determined and the undetermined. mined" is that the premise or condition is assumed to be true (or untrue).

A

positive statement

is

made

in either case

conclusion follows logically from this premise. the one used for this type (the

first

and second

The

and the

indicative

is

class conditions,

and unreal, or fulfilled and unfulfilled). The other type is the undetermined condition. Naturally the indicative is not allowed here. The element of uncertainty calls for the subj. or the optative. The difference therefore between the third and second class conditions is just that between the subj. and the opt. They are both modes of doubtful, hesitating affirmation, but the optative real

1 2 »

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 227. Cf W.-M., pp. 363ff. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 213 f.

.

Gildersl.,

Am.

"

Pp. 161

^

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 14.

ff.

Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 435

ff.

MODE

1005

(efkaisis)

more remote than the subj. In this type the premise is not assumed to be either true or untrue. The point is in the air and the cloud gathers round it. But there is less mist over the subj.

is

than the opt.

In broad outline this

conditional sentences which

I

is

the classification of the

hold to he true.

surely right in saying that no division can claim

than that of convenience and

intelligibility,

Thompson any higher

except that

I

^

is

right

should

add that the exposition should be in harmony with the facts of the historical development of the Greek language. There is no nobler achievement in syntax than the Greek conditional sentence before it broke down from the loss of the optative and In the modern Greek it is therefore a the future indicative. wreck, and there is corresponding obscurity between the various like to

classes of conditions, as in English, in spite of special develop-

In broad outline these ReaUty, Unreality, termed four classes of conditions may be is, however, too ProbabiUty word Probability, Possibility. The the subj.). La and {lav condition strong a term for the third-class 3 prefers "objektive Moglichkeit" class and third for the Roche the opt.). and (el class fourth the for "subjective Moglichkeit" and possibihty" "objective Winer,^ of language This is also the Possibility, words the prefers Farrar^ "subjektive possibility." Radermacher Impossibihty, Slight Probability, Uncertainty.

ments to make atonement

for the loss.^

el with ind. "objektiv," eav with subj. with opt. "subjektiv," el with past tenses

(N. T. Gr., p. 142) calls

"an

sich objektiv,"

of ind. "Irrealitat."

el

So

it

goes.

Radermacher thinks

also that,

to understand the Greek conditions, we must distinguish sharply between the vernacular and the kolvt] ("so miissen wir scharf

scheiden zwischen Volkssprache und der Koin^"), a mistaken view in my judgment. It is best to use kolvt] for both the vernacular and literary language. This brings us face to face with

the other theory, the one adopted by Farrar. It was expounded by Goodwin^ and has had quite a vogue in America and EngThis theory calls for "particular" and "general" supposiland.'^ tions as a fundamental element. 1

2 3

Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 296. Jebb, V. and D.'s Ilundb., pp.

This

,3.3011.;

is

a false step in

Thumb,

Beitr. zur griech. Gr., 1893, pp. 14, 18.

He

itself.

As

ITandb., p. 194 f. uses "WirkUchkeit" and

"Irrealitat" (pp. 8, 28) for the others. ^ Gk. Synt., p. 150 f. p. 364. See Proc. of the Am. Acad., vol. VI; Jour, of Thilol., V, pp. 186-205, VIII, pp. 13-38; M. and T., pp. 145 ff. ' Adopted by Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 290.

*

«

W.-M.,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1006

NEW TESTAMENT

Gildersleeve^ shows, each of the four classes of conditions particular or general.

may

be

That point has no bearing on the quality

of the condition. Goodwin's past general supposition, where alone a show of distinct structure is made, is a mixed condition (see later under fourth class condition). But the point on which I wish to attack Goodwin's scheme is chiefly in his definition of the first and second class conditions. That involves the third also, as will be seen.

Goodwin confuses the "fact" with the "statement"

fact.

He

describes the

condition thus:

first

"When

of the

the protasis

simply states a present or past particular supposition, implying nothing as to the fulfilment of the condition, it takes a present or et." The words to which I ob"implying nothing as to the fulfilThis condition pointedly implies the

past tense of the indicative with ject, besides "particular," are

ment

of the

condition."

fulfilment of the condition.

It is the condition of actuality, real-

and not mere "possibility" as Farrar has it (see Goodwin. This is the crux of the whole matter.

ity, Wirklichkeit,

above) d

la

Once

see that the first class condition with the ind. implies the reality of the premise, all else follows naturally. In the discussion of the second class condition

Goodwin^ properly

says:

"When

the

protasis states a present or past supposition, implying that the

condition

is not

or

was not

of unreality as the other

course, used with both. fall

fulfilled, etc." This is the condition that of reality and the indicative is, of Hence the subj. and the opt. conditions

is

apart to themselves as undetermined.

the four classes to note

The

point about

all

that the form of the condition has to do only with the statement, not with the absolute truth or certainty of the matter. Examples will be given directly to show that is

the second class condition just the opposite. tion.

We

and the

must

sometimes used where the fact

is

The same

thing

is

true of the

first class

is

condi-

distinguish always therefore between the fact

The conditional sentence deals only with the statement. This point is clearly seen in KiihnerGerth, II, p. 465, except that the third class is lost sight of and merged with the first. Burton ^ follows Goodwin through all his 1

Am.

statement of the fact.

Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 4.35

ff.

Gildersl.

still

objects to the distinc-

and "general" suppositions which Goodwin brought into fashion. That merely depends on the character of the apodosis. Cf. Am. 2 M. and Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 10. T., p. 147. » N. T. M. and T., pp. 100 ff. FarneU (Gk. Conditional and Rel. Sent., 1892) also follows Goodwin, as does R. H. Smith (The Theory of Cond. Sent, in Gk. and Lat., 1894). tion of "particular"

MODE

A

ramifications.

word further

is

demanded by way

One must not try to explain the Greek or German translation. The English is ous, while the

Greek

perspicuous

is

1007

(efkaisis)

of warning.

condition by the English often hopelessly ambigu-

one

if

will

only give

it

a

chance to speak for itself. The by the approach from the Greek standpoint. And that is by the 'Eav is nothing but d av. The av is not mode, not by d or kav. or apodosis. Homer^ used d with the protasis essential to either The Attic Greek^ sometimes has av. or Ke subj. with or without used el av with the past ind. Demosthenes and d av with the opt. Joh. Philop. De ceterniquotes T. Gr., Radermacher {N p. 127) true explanation

is

only possible

.

—

He gives also (p. 163) kSlv rjBvvaTo iiv. tate 430, 28 (iii/A.D.) el The pvaaiTo, Diod. I, 77, 3. (3or]doir], Diod. XI, 37, 3; eav fxii (Thumb, the ind. of tense any with ixv (for eav) uses Greek modern There is no principle involved in av, simply Handh., p. 194).

—

—

is used, of course, more freely and the opt. have vanished.^ Jolly holds that the ind. was a later development with conditional sentences in Greek and that the first attempt was made with the subj. and the opt. He thinks that the use of the ind. was the result of a

custom.

In modern Greek the subj.

since the fut. ind.

clearer conception of the logical possibilities of the conditional clause.

The

was more common

subj.

the Zend and the Here as always iiv is

in

Sanskrit (and Latin) than in the Greek.*

"Now it has a Sometimes the reference

difficult to explain.

definite reference,

indefinite.

is

now

it is

supplied by the context,

See The Use of av in Relative Sentences in this chapter. We shall first examine the standard forms of the conditional sentence and then note the variations

sometimes by the opposite."^

and

modifications.

(h)

Four Classes.

(a)

Determined as

This class of condition assumes

Fidfilled.

the condition to be a reality and the conclusion follows logically and naturally from that assumption. Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of PhiloL, 1882, p. 435) observes that this in

argument: "It

is

is

the favourite condition

the favourite condition

fair,

the favourite condition

The

construction

is el

when one

(sometimes

eav)^

is

when one wishes

and any tense

Monro, Horn.

»

Cf. Jann., Hist.

*

Cf. Jolly, Ein Kapitel vcrgl. Synt., 1872, p. 122 Gildersl.,

^

The

Am.

origin of

210 Gk. Gr.,

"

f.

p. 463;

of the in-

Baunilein, Unters., pp. 352

1

Gr., p.

Thumb,

to be

sure of the premises."

Ilandb., p. 194

ff.

f.

f.

Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 449.

d

ia

uucertuin.

Ei

ia

the

same

as al in

Homer

(and Doric).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1008

The apodosis

dicative in the protasis. all

depends on what one

command,

diction,

after,

is

varies very greatly. It whether mere statement, pre-

Hence the

prohibition, suggestion, question.

may

be in the indicative (any tense) or the subjunctive There is no necessary correspondence in or the imperative. apodosis

The

tense between protasis and apodosis.

mode

variation in the

on the force of the conThis condition, therefore, taken at its face value, assumes no

of the apodosis has dition.

essential bearing

the condition to be true.

mine the actual

situation.

but since the protasis

The context or other light must deterThe apodosis is the principal clause, the premise, the protasis usually pre-

is

The apodosis may be

cedes the apodosis.

declarative or inter-

rogatory, positive or negative.

This condition

the N. T. that no exhaustive

can be given, but representative

examples must

suffice.

list

Thus

in

Mt. 12

:

27,

ei

so frequent in

is

Beefe/SouX

kv

ctoj

a good 5:11) to begin with, since the assumption is untrue in fact, though assumed to be true by Jesus for the sake of argument. The question is a redudio ad absurdum. In verse €K|8dXXco TO. haijxbvLa, ol viol vfxoju hv tIvi eKJSoKKovcnv ;

example

26,

6

el

This

is

also Gal.

(cf.

Sarams

tou "^aravav k'/3a,XXet,

eavrov

€'

there

eixeplcrOT],

is

the adchtional point of change of tense in the apodosis. He was already divided against himself, in that case, before he casts himBut the tense may be merely due to a quick change self out.

This

of view-point as accomplished (timeless aorist in reality).

point comes out well in verse 28, TO,

apa

baijxbvLa,

e(f)daaev

For the past

aorist.

ec})'

v/xSs

ind. in

el de ev 17

eyu

xvevfxaTL deov

k/3aXXc<j

Note apa with the

/SacrtXeta.

both clauses see Ac. 11

17

:

(el

UwKev,

Rev. 20 15 {el tls ovx evpedrj, e^\r]dt]). For the present ind. in both clauses note Mt. 19 10 {el ovtws earlp The presence ov (rvfj.4)epeL) Ro. 8 9; Jo. 15 18; 1 Cor. 15 10. Tts rimv)', 1

Cor. 15

:

2;

:

—

:

:

:

;

of the perfect in protasis (15

does not vary the point.

The

the perfect. Cf.

Cor. 3

:

14

Mk. f.

:

14, 17, 19) or

In 2 Cor. 2

:

5,

14

:

apodosis (15

the perfect

is

may, though Mt. 26 33 {el aKavdaXLadrjaouTai, rarely in the

fut. ind.

in both clauses, as in aop-ai).

:

:

29; Lu. 19

But such

:

40;

1

Cor. 3

little niceties

:

N.

(jKavbaKLadi}-

:

:

Lange (Der hom. Gebr. tier Partikel Ei) makes (The Orig. of Subj. and Opt. Cond. in Gk., Harv. is

it

as a demonstrative in the

more probable.

locative

:

12; 1

cut no figure in this con-

There is perfect hberty to mix the tenses ad So past and present (Lu. 19 :8f.; 11 20; 2 Cor. 7 8,

This

by

T., occur

15; 2 Tim. 2

struction.

treats

13, 16)

:

followed

it

exclamatory.

libitum.

14;

Ro.

But Hale

Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901)

case,

meaning

'in

that case.'

.

MODE 4:2; 15 Lu. 16 Ac. 5

27; 1 Jo. 4

:

39; 19

:

past and future (Jo. 13

11),

:

:

32; 15

present and future (Mt. 17:4; Jo. 5 :47;

11),

:

1009

(EFKAISli;)

39; Ro. 8

:

In

11).

:

1

Cor.

9:11

12;

:

eaireipanev

ei

20:

:

11

and

occur side by side. Examples of the imperative in the apodosis occur as in Mk. 4 23 e'i ns ex^L oora aKobeiv, oLKoveTco. Cf Mt. 5 :29; 8 :31; Lu. 4 :3; Ac. 16 15; Jo. 7:4; 18 23. In Lu. el Oeplcrofiev

:

:

:

4

3, €t vlos el

:

Tov

deov,

The

class condition.

eiir'e,

we have a good example would

devil

of the first

not, of course, use the second

(assumed to be untrue), for that would be an affront to The third and fourth classes would throw doubt on the point. The temptation, to have force, must be assumed as true. The devil knew it to be true. He accepts that fact as a working class

Christ.

He

hypothesis in the temptation.

anxious to get Jesus to

is

needed proof for Christ's own satisfaction and If the devil used Aramaic, then we have for his reception. Christ's own translation of it or that of the Evangelist. In Jo. 18 23 (et /ca/cws eXoKrjaa, jxapTvp-qaov irepi tov KaKov), however, the assumption is not a fact, though Christ treats it as such for argument's sake. Cf. Lu. 23 35, 37. In Jo. 20 15 note the aorist as

-prove it,

if

it

:

:

:

ind.

takes

p. 215)

25,

:

Mt. 17

:

the late

4.

Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., to be like the French s'il

{elire).

kolvt]

For the

subj. in the apodosis note Gal.

^wp-ev irpevpan, TvevparL Kal aroix^l^^v-

el

the ind.

is

rather

"a mere

to be

dekeLs in

el

Cf.

vous plait. 5

and the imper.

e^aaracras)

{el

Phrygia

more frequent

in the late

In the

literary alternative."^

with the aorist

eav occurs

ind.,

future ind. as well as with the subj.^

unmistakable, as eav

546 (Byz.), eav (ii/A.D.),

(A''.

Eum.

O. P. 1150, 2

for ^

is

like eav

are

U.

eav

8'

elalv

O. P.

(vI/a.D.), eav paxovaiv Par.

Radermacher from the papyri and in-

Par. P. 62 (ii/B.c.).^ cites others

30,

eavirep

p. 137, eav 8e tls

evopxv^

earlv.

d-qa-ei;

Perhaps ex-

are not to be counted as instances, since

rjv

ijv

In general, the difference between el considerably lessened in the Koivi], though it must be

sometimes

eav is

244,

came and and the el

in Pisidia

the pres. ind.

(ii/A.D.j, f.

Koivi]

(ii/B.c), eav ol8ev B.

Tb. P. 58

A. P. 93

of eav with

Finally

The papyri examples

So Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen,

Hippiatr., p.

amples

in

eKirXr] puaovcnv

T. Gr., pp. 83, 163)

scriptions.

and

(t)alveTat.

eav KeXeveis

P. 18, eavirep

Set

The use

Koivi].

subj."*

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 420.

^

Coinpcrnass,

*

lb.,

De

Scrinone, p. 35

LXX see Sterenberg, The Use tateuch, 1908.

of

Moulton, Pro!., p. 168. For the us:iji;e of the the Alex. Version of the Pen*

f.

XVIII, Cond. Sent,

pp. 49, 16S, 187; CI. Rev.,

p. 108.

in

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1010

remembered that kav was never confined to the subj. nor el to the 'Ed^ riada occurs in Job 22 3, and Moulton^ quotes ind. and opt. Cf. also eav rjaav it from Hb. P. 78 (iii/B.c.) as "certainly subj." Tb. P. 333 (iii/A.D.), and a number of undoubted examples of kav with past, present and future tenses of the ind. from kolvt] writers Thayer calls it "a are given in Sophocles' Lexicon under kav. somewhat negligent use, met with from the time of Aristotle on." It was just a normal development in the kolvt] till in the modern Greek av is used indifferently with either ind. or subj. So av to '/caves, 'if you did so,' av dLxpaa-Qs, 'if you thirst' (Thumb, Handb., Theophylact in his Proem to Luke has kav p.i] kdappei, p. 194 f.). In the N. T. we note kav o'iSanev (1 Jo. 5 15); kav aTrjKeTe (1 Th. 3:8), where no mistake is possible between the two modes (ind. and subj.). In 1 Th. 3 8 ^{D have aTrjKTjTe, but in Lu. 6 34 :

:

:

there

in

aTto6vr](XKoiJ.tv

It

YeXiferai.

31; 8 kav

:

:

considerable support for kav

is

Ro. 14:

is

in Ac. 8

31,

:

is

undue scepticism on

fut. ind.

vided, but there

is

no

It is true that the

real

edi' 68r]y7]aeL,

room

is

there

is

no room

(FGKM 2

have

22 kav

:

fii]

:

for

few MSS. read

kav 6i'a7-

MS.

W. H.

are generally di-

read kav

Mt. 18:19

:

40

:

NBCE That

-rj.

jieTavoi](jigs.

kav avix4>covr]aov(TLv,

W. H. and

Nestle

nor in Rev.

kav aLcoir-qaovaiv,

In Mt. 18

neravo-qaovcnv.

willing to follow the

MSS.

although rejected by

-uaiv), nor in Lu. 19

:

Blass' part^ concerning

doubt about following

5 where

for itacism in

J
supported by

for kav re

is

except for possible itacism with

possible also in Rev. 2

But

as there

possible to treat kav fxaprvpui as pres. ind., Jo. 5

There

14.

and the

1:8a

In Gal.

8.

8avell;eTe,

19 the editors seem un-

evidence for the fut. ind.

tradition to feel that kav has to have the subj.

It is

Besides,

Hermas, Mand. V,

mere

we have

2 and Vis. There is at any rate no great difference in the resultant sense between the fut. ind. and the aor. subj. and it was a very natural development. Cf. Homer's use of /ce with both. But, when all is said, as a matter of fact, in the N. T. as in the kolvt] generally, the rule In 1 Cor. is for el to appear with the ind. and kav with the subj. 7 5 we have el htjtl av (bracketed by W. H.) without a verb. It KaraXtTro;, Thus B. U. 326 el tl kav is matched by the papyri.^ O. P. 105 (ii/A.D.) el TL aWo alav (e)xa;, B. M. 233 (Iv/a.D.) el tl av ava\uays, Tb. P. 28 (ii/B.c.) el kclv SvvaTaL. In these the modal av (kav) is separated from el and used as if with 6s, 6tov. Raderkav

ear]

and V.

I, 3. 2,

1.

kav firfKen Trpoadriaw in

In Lev. 22

:

9

we

1

.

find kav ^e^-nXcoaovaLv.

:

—

—

1

Pro!., p. 168.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 215.

»

Moulton,

Prol., p. 169.

MODE macher 85,

19,

(A^".

d

1011

(ErKAI2;i2)

T. Gr., p. 162) cites also Joh. Philop., De cetern., p. Dcissman^ sees no analysis of eav /xt? virapxv-

ovK av

—

though Moulton contends for this explanation. The irepiKHTaL in Mk. 9 42 in the sense of on Blass {Gr. of

TL in this,

use of

ei

N. T. Gk.,

:

215)

p.

Note the irony

not "classic."

He means

"quite incorrect."

calls

in 1

Cor. 14:38,

et

it

is

ayvoei,

tls

ayvoeLTai.

The negative

of the protasis in

the

first

condition

class

is

practically always ov in the N. T. We have ei ov as a rule, not In the classic Greek the rule was to use ei nrj, and ei ov ei fXT].

appeared only where the ov coalesced with a single word (the verb generally) or for sharp antithesis or emphasis.^ But in the

N. T., as in the kolvt] generally and occasionally in the Attic,' we meet ei ov in the condition of the first class. Jannaris'* notes 34 examples of ei ov in the N. T., but Moulton^ finds only 31 of this class of condition. There is only one in the second, so that there a slight discrepancy. In truth ei fit] occurs only five times with the simple logical condition, and the examples are not quite normal except the one in Mk. & 5, ovk edhvaro ei uri eOepairevaev (a is

:

—m

and in 1 Tim. 6 3, et tls instance from the "abnormal" an this (Blass calls see 1 Cor. 15 But "abnormal"). not surely It is

simple past condition),

tiKji

:

eTnaremaTe, 2 Cor. 13

Tives eiaiv.

:

5

et

p.riTL

Elsewhere the negative

the meaning of

01;

and the

ind.

2 kros

:

aboKipol eare, Gal. 1

This

is oh.

mode.

irpoaevxeraL

literary style.

The

is

in

:

7

ei

p.i\

et

/X17

harmony with

definite negative goes

the condition of supposed reality and et ov is the natural combination. In general Blass^ is correct of the other in saying that oh is the negative of the ind. and modes including the inf. and part. This, of course, was not the

with the definite mode.

This

is

m

Attic standard, but that

was hopelessly gone even

for the Atti-

In the modern Greek b'ev (from ohbev) supplants oh with the ind. and p.i]{v) goes with the subj. That is the goal, as Moulton observes,^ which is not yet reached in the N. T., for p.i] occurs in questions of dou])t with the ind. and et p.7] still holds on. Even in cists.'^

the modern Greek, Thumb (Hayidh., p. 195) gives 8h with subj. or ind. in conditions as a Sep inaTevys and a d^v Trr]yaLPa. Rader204.

*

lb.

p. 477.

*

Prol., p. 171.

1

B.

2

W.-Th.,

»

.lann., Hist.

'

8

S., p.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Of. Gildorwl., Atn. Jour, of Philol., ISSO, first copy. Cf. P. Thouvc'uiu, Lcs N6gations dans Ic Nouvcau TestaTrol., p. 170.

ment, Revue de

Gk. Gr.,

p. 429.

Philol., 1894, p. 229.

«

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1012

NEW TESTAMENT

macher (N. T. Gr., p. 172) cites Pap. Wess. xxvi, el oh blboTai. But the point to get clear is that in the first class condition the normal negative in the Kotvi) is el oh. Moulton counts the idiom 6 times in Luke, 3 in John, 16 in Paul, 2 in James, and one each As examples in Matthew, Hebrews, 2 Peter and Revelation. take Lu. 18 4 el koI tov and Jo. 1 25 el ah ohK el

deov oh 4>o^oviJ.aL ohbe avdpoLnrov evrpeTTOixai

:

tive

So in

very emphatic.

is

Lu. 12

:

26; 16

:

In the latter case the nega-

6 XpLcrTos.

:

11, 31; Jo. 3

Jo. 5 :

47

:

et

Cf. further

oh TLarevere.

Ro. 11 21;

12;

:

1

Cor. 15

:

15-

13,

Th. 3:10. Sometimes oh practically coalesces with the verb, as in Lu. 14 26; 1 Cor. 7 9; 11 6; 16 22; 1 Tim. 5:8; Rev. 20 15. The notion of contrast is seen in Jo. 10 37 el oh Note also kclv ix-q TrtcrreuryTe. So in 5 46 f el iriTTOLU), el 8e TTOtco. See further Lu. 11:8; Jas. 2 11; 2 oh TnaTevere. CTevere, el 8e 17; 2

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

.

—

:

2:4. In Mt. 26 42 note el oh hhvaTai tovto wapeXdelu eau firj In Ro. 11:21, el ohK kipelcraTO, ohde aov 4>elaeTaL, it is hardly TTico. possible to translate el oh by 'unless.' The same thing is true in Pet.

1

:

Cor. 9 (13)

:

2 and 15

:

Cf.

29.

'ed.u

Determined as Unfulfilled.

in 9 16. In this somewhat

mi?

:

dition only past tenses of the ind. occur.

The

difficult

The premise

con-

is

as-

may

be true, but it is treated as untrue. Here again the condition has only to do with the statement, not with the actual fact. A good illustration is found in Lu. 7 39 ovtos el tjv 6 Kpo4>r]rr]s, eylucoa-Kev. The Pharisee here assumes that Jesus is not a prophet because he al-

sumed

to be contrary to fact.

thing in

itself

:

lowed the sinful woman to wash his feet. Jesus is therefore bound to be ignorant of her true character. The form of the condition reveals the state of mind of the Pharisee, not the truth about Jesus' nature and powers. As a matter of fact it is the Pharisee who is ignorant. For this reason I cannot agree with Moulton's statement^ that the ind. of contingencies, wishes, tions.

On

p.

is

commands

not suited to the expression or other subjective concep-

201 Moulton recovers himself by saying that "these

sentences of unfulfilled condition state nothing necessarily unreal in their apodosis," and "the sentence itself only makes it untrue

under the circumstances."

I

should add "as conceived by the

speaker or writer." Surely the ind. is the mode for positive and negative statements, for directness of statement and clarity of But one must emphasize the words "statement" expression. and "expression." The ind. does not go behind the face value of the record. 1

Pro!., p. 199.

Most untruths

are told in the ind. mode.

Goodwin, M. and

T. (p. 147), sees clearly

on

The

this point.

MODE

(eFKAISIS)

1013

statement of unreality here from the standpoint of the speaker or writer,

is

and positive as that

as clear cut

The term "unreal"

class condition.

of reality in the first

as applied to this use of the

To him

ind. properly belongs only to the standpoint of the user.

the case effect

impossible and he

is

with the ind.

Whether

it

By the

fulfilled

is

makes a

ind.

mode

positive statement to that

the condition

or unfulfilled

is

a more

is

determined. matter.

difficult

This idea has to be conveyed by suggestion. It is not a question of positive or negative, but of definite assumption of unreality. The "unreality" does not come from the ind. That in its origin is a matter wholly of the context. Take Mk. 6 5, for instance, :

ovK kbvvaro tell

el nrj

which

class of condition

we know.

second,

In the abstract

kdepcnrevaev.

If

we have

the writer

it is

here.

It

not possible to either first or

is

talking about

is

the present

time in terms of past time, then it is a second class condition determined as unfulfilled. The Greek fell upon the use of the past

An

tenses of the ind. as a device to help in this matter. filled

condition about present time

point

is

was expressed

unful-

terms of the imperfect ind. An unfulfilled condition about past time was expressed in terms of the aorist or the past perfect ind. There is the analogy of wishes to justify it, if, indeed, wishes did not come out of this construction (eWe, el yap). The origin of this precise obscure.!

Mk.

In

6

:

context one must seek for light and help.

jj^ ^j^g

5 {ovk ebvvaro

appu}(TTOLs eTidels

in

e/cet

7rotr/o"at

ovdeixiav bvvaiJ.LV,

rds x^tpas edepawevaev)

it

is

el nrj

oXiyoLS

clear that a definite

past event is chronicled. So it is a condition of the first termined as fulfilled. But in Jo. 15 22 (and 24) el

/jltj

:

class,

de-

rfKdov Kal

how is it? Is it a simple hisabout a past situation? Is it a hypothesis about the present time in terms of past time to suggest its unreality? Fortunately here the context shows. The very next words are cXaXr/cra avTols, afj,apTiav ovk etxocrav,

torical narrative

vvv 5^ Trp64>a(nv ovk exovaLV

The

in verse 24). is

made

This

is

irepl rrjs afxaprias

avTwv.

In Jo. 9

in plain terms.

:

41

we have

vvv be

not always done in the context and one

his wits or av

we have

el eK

is

(Cf. also vvv be

contrast with the present and actual situation

added to the apodosis.

tov Koap-ov

rJTe,

is

even after

dz^.

either left to

In verse 18 of John 15

6 Koa/jLos av to Ibtov

e(f)l\ei.

"The

addi-

an indicative hypothesis produced much the same as we can express in writing by italicising 'if "^ or by add-

tion of av to effect '

Cf. Wilhehnus,

longer has 2

tliia

Moulton,

De Modo

idiom.

It uses

Prol., p. 200.

Vooatur, ISSl, p. 3. Mod. Ck. no with the past ind. and 66. in the apodosis for 6.i>.

Irroali qvii

ai^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1014

NEW TESTAMENT

ing to the apodosis 'in that case.'

But

This is the definite use of au. a mistake to say, as some writers^ do, that av in the apodessential to the second class condition. Even Moulton^

it is

osis is

"The dropping

says:

of

in the apodosis of unfulfilled conditions

iiv

was classical with phrases like edei, expw> naXov ^p." The absence was so undoubtedly, but was av ever really necessary with these

When

verbs?

ixv

was used with them, there was a

change

slight

The N. T. is in perfect accord with ancient idiom has koXov rjv d ovk eyewridri (Mt. 26 24) kSvvaTO el uri kire-

of meaning.

when

it

;

:

KkK\r]To (Ac.

26

32);

:

el

33), not to menMt. 25: 27; Lu. 19 23; Ac. 22: 22; 27: rjv,

ixr\

tion the apodosis alone in

21; 2 Cor. 2 aov irapeivai

:

3; 12

:

:

:

11; 2 Pet. 2

KaTrjyopelv

/cat

OVK kbvvaTo (Jo. 9

In Ac. 24

21.

:

rt exoiev irpos

el

:

it is

e/xe,

19, oOs eSei

kirl

a mixed cond.

(protasis in fourth class) and the apodosis is itself a relative clause. But the idiom goes further than these verbs of propriety and possibility and obligation, as is seen in Gal. 4 15, ei bwarov, kbco:

Kark

7

Jo. 15

:

22, 24; 19

7, OVK eyvoiv ei

:

5

(jlol;

10,

:

/jlt]

5td

11, ovk elxf^s,

:

and

vo/jlov

ovk ySeLV

ei

p.r]

In

'eKeyev.

Cor.

1

we have the apodosis of this condition. Moul200 note) cites O. P. 526 (ii/A.D.) el /cat /xi) avejSepe, Tapej3epop; O. P. 530 (ii/A.D.) ei Trape/cetro, aweaToXKeLp;

eirel

u4)ei\eTe,

ton

(Prol., p.

€7cb

ov

Rein. P. 7

—

(ii/fi.c.) ovk a-rreaTrji, ei

(jltj

But

ijpayKaae.

in

most cases

the av regularly appears in the apodosis, though not as the

Thus el eyevoPTO, TrdXat au fxeTevorjaav (Mt. 11 21). 14 f. we have the second and first class conditions

word. 18

:

side,

av

:

el /xep rjp dSt/CTy/xd rt

Tov KaQ'

v/jids,

own impatience by his own opinion by av

fj

pabi.ohpyr]fxa iroprjpop,

apecxxop-flP vijlQiV el 8e ^rjrrjiJLaTa

v6p.ov

is

Ro.

aoi beooixevov]

ei nrj rjp

avroi.

6\peade

the

first

ecxTiP

:

sage in Lu. 12

W. H. have

43), :

39

el

it

fjdei,

ovk av in the

is

/cat

by

opohcltwp

/cat

justifies his

condition (second class) and shows

the second condition

but

\6yov

side

Kara \6yov

'lovSatoL,

Here Gallio neatly

repeated with two verbs as in

daaev (Mt". 24

irepl

oo

first

In Ac.

el fi8eL,

(first class).

Sometimes

eypr]y6pr]aep ap

/cat

ovk

Slp

not repeated in the parallel pas-

eyprjyop-qaev av

margin.

"Av

is

/cat

ovk capTJKev,

though

repeated also in Jo.

4 :10. simplest form of this condition is when the imperfect occurs both clauses or the aorist in both. In the former case present time is generally meant, as in Lu. 7: 39 et ^v, eyivcoaKep ap; Jo. 5 46 ei einaTeveTe, eiriaTeveTe ap. So also Jo. 8 42; 9 :41; 15 19;

The

in

:

:

1

Bamberg, Hauptregeln der griech. Synt., 1890, p. 45.; Conditional Clauses Anonymous Pamphlet in Bodleian Library.

in Gk., p. 2, 2

:

Prol., p. 200.

:

MODE 18

d

:

36;

^deLTe

Cor. 11

1

— dv

:

ydetre,

31; Gal.

(eTKAISIS) 1

Heb. 8

10;

:

we have the same

— elxov

av,

4,

1}

In Jo. 8

In Heb. 11:

however, the reference

context makes clear.

:

:

19,

construction, for this past

perfect has the sense of the imperfect. fxovevov

1015

is

15,

el

efxvr]-

to past time as the

an unreal hypothesis in they had kept on remembering, they would have kept on having.' This is a classical idiom, It is descriptive of

the past of a continuous nature.

though uncommon.

'

If

Another example

is

seen in Mt. 23

:

30,

el

Only the context can help one tell the kind of condition in 1 Cor. 12 19 and Heb. 7: 11, for the apodosis appears in the form of a question without dv and the verb. The other normal condition of this class is where the aorist ind. occurs in both clauses, as in Mt. 1 1 ^fieOa ev rats rjixepais

rdv Tarepcov

ovk dv rjneda.

i]iiu)v,

:

:

21

Mk.

eyevovTO, TrdXat dv (/.erevorjaav,

el

13

:

20

el

eKokb^oxrev,

/jlt]

This refers to past time.

Cf. Mt. 25: 27; 1 Cor. 2: Heb. 10 2 (only apodosis). Sometimes one tense occurs in one clause, another in the other: The standpoint is shifted. Thus in Jo. 14:28 el rjyairdTe, exdprjre dv, Gal. 3 21 el eSodf], dv rjv, Heb. 4 8 et KaTewavaev, ovk dv eXdXet. Cf. also Jo. 15 22, 24. It is not always certain that the present reference of ^v can be insisted on, since there was no separate aorist form of Sometimes rjv is aorist. So as to Jo. 11 21, 32, el ^s, ovk dv elfxi. OVK dv kaudr}.

8; Jo. 14

:

2;

:

:

:

:

:

diredavev.

30, 24.

el

rjv

But the point

Cf. also

10,

:

Mt. 24

:

el

ydeis, ovk

43.

In Ac. 18

eoTLv, oxpeade (first class).

in the apodosis

dv

In

1

is

certainly

made

Cf. also Ac. 18

ovk dv Tape8coKaiJ,ev.

TToicov,

In Jo. 4

of difference

firrjaa^,

we have

:

the

Mt. 26 same thing.

14 note in the next verse

:

Jo. 2

el rjaav, fxefxevriKeiaav

:

19

dv,

we have

eyvwKeLre, ovk dv KaTebiKdaare

this as a "real

past perfect

el firj

the solitar}^ example.^

imperfect" like

we

find in Jo.

Moulton'' has given a

list

19

:

.fibeiv :

:

eTeKeKXrjro Kaicrapa.

(Mt. 12

7),

:

el

be

the past perfect

the past perfect occurs in the protasis as in Ac. 26 \va6aL ebhvaTO, 6 dvOpcoiros ovtos

in Jo. 18

14;

But

32, dTroXe-

Cf. also

el

though Westcott^ takes

above.

11 ovk elxes,

The el

fxrj

periphrastic ^v bebofxevov.

of the times that dv appears in the apod-

the N. T. with the ind. imperf. (17 times), the ind. aor. and the past perfect (1). In Lu. 17:6 we have the pres. (24) ind. and the imperf. combined, el exere, eXeyere dv. This is really a mixed condition (first and second classes). Cf. Jo. 8:39, el osis in

'

Cf. Wcstcott on Ileb., pp. Ill

ff.,

for

an excellent euniniary of the second

class conditions. 2

Moulton,

3

On

Prol., p. 201.

IIcl)., ]K

113.

*

Prol., p. IGG.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1016

kark, kroLtLTe (the

margin

W.

of

Radermacher

H.).

e^rjcrev

T. Gr.,

(A^.

—

kKoAvatv Zeus quotes P. Oxy. IV, 729 (137 a.d.) kav 8e with aorist ind. like the eau modern Greek av, where note

p. 163)

/jltj

(Thumb, Handb.,

ap TO il^evpa

p. 195).

The negative of the second class condition is in the N. T. always fxr] except once, Mt. 26 24 (Mk. 14 21) koXov rjv avrQ el :

:

Here the ov is very emphatic. Elsewhere we have ovK kyevvrjdrj. in protasis, ov in apodosis) Jo. 24 22 (note in Mt. et ni} as /jlt]

:

9

33; 15

:

et

is

fir]

:

22, 24; 18

30; 19

:

common

three times as

examples of

of the five

el

jxi]

;

11; Ac. 26

:

:

32; Ro. 7:7.

N. T. as

in the

el ov,

In

itself

but outside above

in the first class conditions

in the third class (Lu. 9 13) el fxi] is confined to the second class condition and to the elliptical use like irXrjv in the sense of 'except' or the phrase el 8^ nr] meaning 'otherwise' without a verb (cf. el ixi] thus in Mt. 12: 4; Lu. 4: 26; el be /xi? in Jo.

and one

14

:

:

See a bit later on this point. As already noted, modern bev in this condition (Thumb, Handb., p. 195).

11).^

Greek uses av

Undetermined,

(7)

This with Prospect of Determination. mode of expectation (Er-

but

class uses in the condition clause the

wartung), the subj.

It is

not determined as

true of the

is

and

first

second class conditions. But the subj. mode brings the expectation within the horizon of a lively hope in spite of the cloud of hovering doubt. W. G. Hale- considers that the subj. in this condition

due "to a fusion

is

Monro^ thinks

subj." subj.).

He

tions)

proves

it is

this.

But Moulton*

from trespassed here from the

this

futuristic subj. in

fxr)

with the subj.

replies that

is

(cf.

prohibi-

"the negative

division of the subjunctive,

earliest times."

subj. with eav (as with orav)

and the anticipatory

the quasi-imperative sense (volitive

argues that the use of

originally excluded

The

of volitive subj.

/X17,

has

So he urges that the

the futuristic, not the volitive, use.

Homer may have

with but usually el ov with the subj.

ov,

ijlt]

the subj. in conditions, and yet some cases of

occur in

Homer when

Iliad 3. 289,

el

ov KaroLKiadfj in B.

this subj.

point

is

is

with the verb as

ov coalesces

el

ovk edeXcocnp,

In Jer. 6 8 we still have vtls The truth probably is that in some instances

ovk elojatp, 20. 139.

:

futuristic, in others volitive or deliberative.

a fine one as one can readily

see.

The

Gildersleeve^ finds the

»

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254; Moulton, Prol., p. 171.

2

The

Origin of Subj. and Opt. Conditions in Gk. and Lat., Harv. Stu. in

Class. Philol., 1901, p. 115. 3

Horn. Gr.,

*

Prol., p. 185.

p. 230.

Stahl, Griech. histor. Synt., p. 390, ^

Am.

makes

it futuristic.

Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 11.

MODE

1017

(ErKAISIs)

prevalence of the subj. in conditional (as in temporal) clauses due to the greater exactness of the subj. here. It enables one, since

has a "tendency to realization" {Tendenz zur Wirklichkeit) ,^ to make a difference between the indicative and the optative conditions, though it has more affinity with the optative, except

it

in the case of

some future

come very and sense ^ of a rather fine one

indicative conditions which

The

close to the subj. idea.

kinship

in

origin

the aorist subj. and fut. ind. makes the line between ei and the fut. ind. and iav and the subj.

Indeed, as

we

and the fut. ind. in the first class condition, so we occasionally meet el and the subj. in the third class condition. Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 162) notes ei and subj. at sometimes have

kav

as a "vulgarism," but surely the classic usage answers that. aorist subj. he finds.

first

The inscriptions have usually only eav and But he finds also] abundant instances of and

274,

tius,

11

ei

Demetrius, De vSpevcovraL. ei

So Epictetus,

late writers.

iiri

So

dLepiJLT]vevri,

XoyiarjTaL,

be tls

11

eloc. 21,

in Lu. 9

Ph. 3

:

:

et utitl

ei

11

ei ei

and fxr]

subj. in

kolvtj

tls e^a\ei\l/ji,

Hippiatr., 177, 2

yevrjTai.,

ei

13

12

II, 18,

Pausanias,

ayopaaw/JLev, 1

ei

Vet-

irpoaaxv^,

3

II, 35,

tt

—

Cor. 14 5 kros

KaraM^co (possibly also

:

et irois

Karav-

Rev. 11:5 ei tls deX-nay (text of W. H., but margin deXeL or deXrjaeL). In Ro. 11:14, ei ttojs TrapafTjXcoo-oj Kal In 1 Th. 5 10 we the aorist subj. (TWO-CO, we may also have have e'ire ypr\yopwp.ev e'ire KaOevdwjjLev. It is in the midst of a final in verse 11),

rriaoi

:

In 1 Cor. 9:11 some MSS. read ei deplawnev. This construction occurs occasionally in classical Greek. It was frequent in Homer and in the Attic poets, but is rare in our normalized texts of Attic prose, though a few examples occur in sentence with IW.

Thuc,

Plato, Xenophon.3

like oTe,

This "laxity" increased till finally ei, {av) which is used indiscriminately In is a mere "Uterary alternative."

vanishes before kav

with ind. or subj., while ei modern Greek av has driven

out of the vernacular. In Deut. 8:5 AF have ei tls iraLdevajj. Cf. Judg. 11:9. Moulton^ finds the same construction in the papyri as does Deissmann,^

1

Baumlein, Griech. Modi, p. 177.

2

Gildersl.

(Am. Jour,

of Philol.,

ei

XXXIII,

is

(et and fut. promulgated it in 1876. » Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 420, 4(34. 4 Prol., p. 187. Cf. Goodwin, M. and

dition

^

B.

4, p.

490) complains that in

given to his distinction between the minatory conind.) and monitory condition (tdr and the subj.). lie first

Germany no standing

S., p.

118.

T., p. 107.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1018 though

rare

is

it

the

in

early

Moulton {ProL,

papyri.^

p.

though he^ seems As curiously unwilling to admit the examples in the N. T. to kros et fir] in 1 Cor. 15 2, we have the ind. with this combination. Deissmann (B. S., p. 118) cites inscr. kros el nrj eav It is true that in the N. T. as a rule el goes with the ind. deXrjan. and eav with the subj It is mainly in the future conditions that the line is breaking down. In Mt. 12 29 we have eap fxr{ 8r]aji and then hiapTraaei, but W.'H. break the sentence into two. Besides the normal eav and the occasional el in this condition we have also av (shortened form of eav, not the modal av). Thus Jo. 12 32 av i)i/'6J0co, 13 20 av TLva irefvpiii, 16 23 av tl alTTfarjTe. It occurs in the N. T. only six times (cf. av firj in Jo. 5 19) and all in John. Cf. Ac. 9 2 J<. But note Lu. 12 38, Kav—Kav eXdif] Kal evpri (contraction of Kal-]- eav). Cf. Mt. 21 21 Lu. 13 9. It is absent from the O. P. 496

cites

187)

(ii/A.D.)

^v (=^),

5e

el

:

—

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

;

:

:

modern Greek. It is not clear why eav disappeared thus in modern Greek. The Ionic form The future conditions are naturally the most frequent of all. is i]v.^ Just as the second class condition was debarred from the fu-

Attic inscriptions, but supplants eav in

ture, so the third class condition is confined to the future (from

the standpoint of the speaker or writer) covers past, present and future. /caXeT

and

eav tls

distinction

is

In Ac. 5

e'iirr}.

preserved.

:

The

.

first class

Cor. 10

1

38, eav

fj

and

:

—

el

condition

27 note ecrriv,

el

tls

a real

Gamaliel gives the benefit of the doubt

He assumes

to Christianity.

In

puts the alternative that

it is

that Christianity of

men

is

of

God and This

in the third class.

does not, of course, show that Gamaliel was a Christian or an inquirer. He was merely willing to score a point against the Here, indeed, the supposition is about a present Sadducees. situation,

but

eav

(turn out to be). 'Eav OeXys in

and the subj. contemplate the future result So eav exvTe in 1 Cor. 4 15; edj' ^ in Mt. 6 22. :

2

is

future in conception.

fiapTvpoo (possibly pres. ind.),

bear witness.'

may

:

:

Mt. 8 Cf.

also 8

:

In Jo. 5

the idea would be 14.

'if

:

31, eav

perchance

I

In such instances the matter

be looked at as a present reality (so

el

aKavbaki^ei

Mt. 5

:

29)

The Phrygian

Cf. Ramsay, Cities and Bish. of inscr. show similar exx. Burton (N. T. M. and T., p. 105) admits that it is an overrefinement to rule out d and the subj. Cf. Moulton, Pro!., p. 240. 1

Phrygia,

II,

292.

2

ProL, p. 187.

'

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 43; Meisterh.-Schw., p. 225

both uses of av (conditional and modal). In Tuv iixaTiwu, not a repetition of modal av, but a

Mk

5

In Jo. 5: 19 we have 28 note kav a
f. :

particle Kav

= '

even.'

MODE or a future possibility (so kav

Mt. 5

1019

(efkai:;!::;;)

Mk.

(jKaphaKlaxi,

9 :43).

Cf. also

46 with el ayairaTe in Lu. 6 32 (in verse In Jo. 13 17 note et ravra otdare, ixaKapioi 33, edj' ajadoiroLrJTe) .^ Here we have the first and third class contare eav TroLrJTe avra. Jesus assumes ditions happily combined with clear distinction. the knowledge as a fact, but the performance is doubtful. The tense is usually the aorist, though sometimes the pros. subj. Thus eau cLKovan (Mt. 18 15); eau bi^a (Jo. 7: 37). In 2 occurs. tav ayairriarjTe in

:

:

:

:

Tim. 2

5 note kav be koI aOXfj

:

rts,

ou aTe(i)avovTai eav

vo/JLLfxcos

fxi]

where the distinction is drawn between the two tenses. I doubt the propriety, however, of reading a future perfect sense a la Latin into this aorist subj. as Moulton^ does. He cites Mt. 5 47, eav aaTraarjade, but surely the simple aorist conception is sufJohn's fondness (see Tenses) for the pres. subj. with eav ficient. has been discussed.^ In Jo. 3 27 we have the periphrastic perThe bebojxkvov. Cf. also Jas. 5:15, kolv y TeTOitjKios. fect, eav (i-q conclusion of this condition is naturally most frequently the adXrjaji,

:

:

fj

Thus Mt. 9 21

future ind. TTopevdu},

28

:

5:38

Ac.

14; Jo. 7: 17; 12

apodosis :

In

Mk.

14

:

iiri

eav

26; 14

:

by no means

is

7 after eav

16

kav

:

Tre/xi/'co;

31 note ob

:

ai/'co/xat,

15; Ro. 2

:

26.

:

:

7 eav

So Mt. 5:13; But this normal

Thus note

See also Jo. 8

ov

in Jo.

'ekdy

/jL-q

Cf. Ac. 13

51.

:

So

15, eav afxapT-fjar), U7ra7e eXey^ov.

:

41.

The imperative may occur

uri airapv-qao/jiaL.

Mt. 18

Jo. 16

(TCjo6T]<70fj.ai;

KaraXvOycreTaL.

universal.

airekdoi.

in the apodosis as in

y,

But 42; Ro. 12 20; 13 4; Ph. 2 1. Mt. 10 13, 18 the present either as in terms of is stated conclusion ofttimes the the future (futuristic into projection vivid or a hope a present :

:

present).

So

17; 26

:

in 2 Cor. 5

:

:

:

I,

is

Paul of the

The

eav KaTaXvdfj, exofxev.

future in conception, but the conclusion confident

:

bliss of

heaven.

condition

a present

is

Cf.

Mt. 18

:

In 18

13.

12 both the fut. and the pres. ind. appear in the apodosis. lively sense of present

need

A

seen in Mt. 8:2.

is

is

reality, so :

A

practical turn

given by the pointed question in Mt. 5 47. In Ro. 14 8 note A maxim often has the pres. ind. in the apodosis. eav re eav re. is

:

:

—

Thus 8

:

oi)

bvvaraL ovbels

16, 54; 11

perf.

is

:

9; 12

:

— eav

24;

1

irpwTOV brjay

jxi}

likewise so used, as in Ro. 14

4)ayji KaraKeKpLTai.

(Mk. 3

Cor. 7: 39,40; 2 Tim. 2

So Jo. 20

:

23; Ro. 2

:

:

27). 5.

Cf. Jo.

The

pres.

:

23, 6 be biaKpLvonevos

:

25; 7

:

2.

eav

]\Iore difficult

seems the aorist ind. in the apodosis. The aor. ind. is sometimes timeless as is always true of the other modes (see chapter on 1

Cf. Blasa, Gr. of

2

Prol., p. 186.

N. T. Gk., 3

p. 215.

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 371.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1020

That may be the

Tenses where papyri parallels are given).

It is possible also to explain

planation here.

The

standpoint.

it

protasis looks to the future, while the apodosis

Such vivid changes in language are due See Mt. 18 15, kav aKoixxn,

turns back to the past.

to the swift revolution in thought. tKepbrjdas; Jo. (cf

kdo^aadt]

.

'Lva

:

6, kav

/jltj

eav yrnirj

The

17

ovx

Kal :

k^-qpavBt]

28, eav Kal

riixaprev.

For a

Polycarp 5:2.

to

p. 247) cites Epict., dv nev arpaTivawixaL, airriWayriv.

use of

and

oh

ei

eav

In

pi]

el

ov bbvarai tovto jrapeXde'tv eav

37,

el

ov

and

Mk.

:

we Mk.

30, kau m^ Xa^l7,

by

side

avTO

Trtco.

side pi]

10

Cf. also eav

6s pr}.

42,

TTOtco

irapdevos,

e^co

Cor. 7

1

;

Romans 8:3;

to

See also Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 586. have eav p-i] almost in the sense of 4: 22.

e^\r]dr]

e/JLoi,

the future)

similar idiom see Ignatius, Ep.

Moulton {ProL,

:

tls iievri kv

^epTjre also of

riiiapTer Kal

ovx

yafx-naris,

15

ex-

as a change of

is

p-q

lva in

seen in Mt. 26

:

Cf. also Jo. 10

:

kclv pi) inaTevrjTe.

Hale^ attributes "the (5) Remote Prospect of Detemiinalion. Greek optative assumption to a fusion of the true opt. and the potential opt."

The

use of the opt. in the protasis of this condi-

probably voHtive, since the negative^ is pi]. That is certainly true of the optative in wishes with el or el yap (eWe).^ But the deliberative use occurs a few times with el in indirect questions. The potential opt. in the apodosis with a;' is more difficult to explain. It is certainly not volitive any more, not more than

tion

is

mere fancy

(Vorstellung), the optative of opinion,^

and apparently

This fourth class condition is undetermined with less likelihood of determination than is true of the third class with the subj. The difference between the third and fourth classes is well So Jesus draws the distinction in illustrated in 1 Pet. 3 13 f. Lu. 22 67. The use of the opt. in both apodosis and protasis accents the remoteness of the hypothesis. And yet it is not in It floats in a the category of unreahty as in the second class. mirage, but does not slip quite away. It is thus suitable not

futuristic.

:

:

merely for real doubt, but courteous address.

It

paratively infrequent.

is

it

also fits well the polite

evident

It is

temper of be com-

that this condition will

an ornament

of the cultured class

used by the masses save in a few set phrases (or It is not strange, therefore, that no complete example wishes). of this fourth class condition appears in the LXX, the N. T. or the papyri so far as examined.^ Radermacher (iV. T. Gr., pp.

and was

1 2

»

little

Origin of Subj. and Opt. Cond., Harv. Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901, p. 115.

Moulton, Pro!., p. 196. Cf. Monro, Horn. Or., p. 227.

Am.

J. of Philol.,

*

Gildersl.,

*

Moulton, ProL,

p. 196.

1909, p. 7.

MODE

1021

(eTKAISIS)

no example of the opt. In the current kolvyj. in the conclusion and condition both in modern Greek it has disappeared completely. In the N. T., as in the LXX, the instances of the protasis are very few. Moultoni notes only 13 in the LXX apart from the Atticistic 4 Maccabees. 133, 143) with all his diligence produces

Of these he observes that 2 are wishes, 5 are cases of ioaiirep) d There are in the N. T. only 11 TLs and 2 are indirect questions. examples. el

Some

The

course.

Thus

of these are indirect questions.

^ovKoLTo TTopeveffdaL (Ac. 25

was

direct

27 39, e^ovKevovTo :

el

bbvatro

el

we have the The same ^ov\n. :

20)

to ifKolov.

e/ccrcoo-at

indirect discourse or purpose

the

(cf.

thing

is

There

is

use of

<3lassic

in eXeyov

opt. of ind. dis-

el

true of

implied for pur-

So we see aim in 'Ac. 17: 27, ^y}Telv el apa ye ypr]'ka(l)T]aeLav and 20 16, eairevbev el Swarov etrj. In 27 12, el bvvaivTo, we have both purpose and implied indirect discourse.

pose) .^

avTOV Kai evpoiev, TTws

:

:

In 24 19, el n exotev, the protasis is more nearly that of the proper fourth class condition, but even so it is a mixed condition, Blass^ vensince the apodosis Uei belongs to the second class. :

tures to suggest

more

exovaLv as

ei tl

But

correct.

it is

needless

These examples are all in Acts, one of the more literary books of the N. T. Paul has only the stereotyped phrase el rvxoi (1 Cor. 14 10; 15 37), which is a true example of this protasis, "if it should happen." The two other examples are in 1 Pet. 3 14 et /cat TaaxoLre Slo. 8tKaL0(XVvr]v, p.aKapiOL, and 3 17 to change the text.

:

:

:

:

KpelTTOV ayadoiroLOVi'Tas,

idiom €t 7 dp

is

a mere torso, as

eiTLiievoiev, ttXtjOos

to deXrifxa tov deov,

OeXoL

el

is

iracrx^i-v.

The

In 0. P. 1106, 7 (vI/a.d.), arpaTLUTLKOv, we have a mixed

evident.

einaTriaeTaL

condition.

The apodosis with

av (the less definite

is

'6.v)

more frequent and Since the potential

occurs both in direct and indirect discourse. opt, in the N. T. never occurs in connection with the protasis,

under The Optative Mode This poiii, 3, (6)). protasis. unexpressed an of apodosis tential opt. is practically the the Twice (Ac. 26 29). save one But the exx. occur in questions the matter

was discussed

sufficiently

in Independent Sentences (see this chapter,

:

questions are direct (Ac. 8:31; (opt. preserved as in the direct).

So Lu. 6

5 :24

Tt

some

of these questions

17.

av yevoiTo.

The MSS. vary

in

is

11.

Cf. Lu.

The

1

:

rest are

62

rt

indirect

av deKoi, Ac.

deliberative element in

well illustrated in Lu. 9 :46; Ac. 10

some 2

:

The

17:18).

:

cases about the presence of av, as

Monro, Horn.

1

lb.

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 221.

Gr., p. 228

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1022

NEW TESTAMENT

The examples are all in Luke's writings. In Ac. have a protasis, but not of the fourth class. indeed 8 31 we do The disappearance of this opt. condicondition. mixed It is a In of the first and third classes. enlarged use the to tion led in Lu. 18

:

36.

:

Ro. 3

:

6 and

1

Cor. 15

(c)

Special Points.

(a)

Mixed

work

:

35 the

fut. ind. is

used where the po-

would have suited the Attic idiom.^

tential opt.

The human mind does not always however excellent they are. Gram-

Conditions.

in stereotyped forms,

matical construction

merely the expression of the mental con-

is

Freedom must be acknowledged without any apology. I say these somewhat commonplace things because of the bill of "exceptions" which meet us in so many grammars at this point. It would have been a miracle if the four classes of conditions were

ception.

never "mixed," that is, if the protasis did not belong to one In P. Goodsp. 4 (ii/B.c), class, while the apodosis fell in another. et eppojo-ai, el'rj iiv, we have the protasis of the first class and the apodosis of the fourth. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 132) quotes

IX,

Pastor Hermae, Si7n.

Theoph. el

Ad Autolycum

text of

XdjSot

The same thing

W. H.

in Jo. 8

:

is

39,

of the fourth class

asis

elcreXevcreTaL

Thus

d

Xd/3ot,

/jltj

in Lu. 17

first class

:

6,

(determined

of the second (determined as unful-

true of the marginal reading in the ei ecrre, eTrotetre.

crov irapelvai koI KaT-qyopelv

kiri

ov8eis

— eKKamei.

protasis of the

and the apodosis

as fulfilled)

4

12,

yap

we have a

exere, eXeyere av,

filled).

ei

d

In Ac. 24

tl exotev Trpos e/xe,

we

:

19, ovs UeL

find a prot-

with an apodosis of the second

class.

tls odrjyrjcreL pe; Then again in Ac. 8 31, xcos yap av 8vmlpr]v eav we have a protasis of the first class (barring itacism) and an apodosis of the fourth. The examples hke 1 Cor. 7:28 do not amount p.r]

:

it is merely a question of the standpoint though this apodosis does more naturally go with the first class condition. There may be two protases, as in 1 Cor. 9 11, and both of the same class, or the two may belong

to

mixed condition,

since

in time of the apodosis,

:

to different classes, as in Jo. 13

:

17.

hnplied Conditions. Sometimes the apodosis is expressed, while the protasis is merely implied by a participle, an imperaIn such examples one must not think that tive or a question. (/3)

Thus in Ro. 2:27 rethe participle, for instance, means 'if.' a condition of either the first or the

XoOo-a ^vith KpLve2 suggests

third class according as one conceives at,

not stated.

The same .

1

thing

Blass, Gr. of

is

it.

The

condition

is

true of \ap^avbpevov in

N. T. Gk.,

p. 220.

hinted 1

Tim.

MODE

1023

(ErKAI2:iz)

4 :4 and neraTideuhr]^ in Hob. 7: 12. Cf. also Heb. 2 3; 1 Cor. This use of the participle is still very fre11 29; Gal. 6 9. quent* in the N. T. In Mt. 16 26 we have eav Kep8ricr-[i, while in :

:

:

:

Lu. 9 25 note KepS-fjaas. In Lu. 19 23, koljoj ekQdiv avv t6ku) av avrd eirpa^a, the apodosis calls for a condition of the second class (con:

:

The imperative is used where a protasis might have been Thus in Mk. 1:17, Sedre oTriaco p.ov, kol iroLriaoi. The

text).

employed.

has the force of an imperative.

There is an implied So also 11:24, TTLaTevere Kal earaL. Cf. Mt. 7: 7; 11:29; 19:21; Lu. 7:7; Jo. 2:19; 14:16; Jas. 4:7. The imp. may be (Jas. 1 5) the apodosis of an expressed condition and the implied protasis of another conclusion.- In Eph. 5 26, opyi^eade Kal p.r] anapTavere, two imperatives together practically answer as protasis and apodosis. In Mt. 7 10, Kal IxQvv alT-qatt p.r] 64>Lv ewLdcoaeL auT<2; the two questions do the same thing in a rough sort of way (anacoluthon). Cf. 1 Pet. 1 24. In Mt. 26 15, H adverb

bevrt

condition here.

:

:

—

rj

:

:

deXere

/jlol

:

Bovvai Kayco vp.lv TrapaScocrco ai'Tov; the question takes the

Here

place of the protasis.

but in Jas. 5 sentences.

:

the two parts of the sentence,

Kal joins

we have question and imperative

13

These devices are

Cf. also 1 Cor. 7: 21.

in separate

found in

all

the classic idiom.^ Elliptical Conditions.

(7)

An

species of ellipsis or aposiopesis Ellipsis of the asis (Ro.

8

is

copula in the apodosis

common Cor. 12

(1

That

not the point.

17) is

:

incomplete condition

and

is,

is

really

a

to all languages.^ :

19) or the prot-

of course,

common.

So Ro. 4 14; 8 17; 11 16; 1 Cor. 7 5; 1 Pet. 3 14; 2 Cor. 11 16. There may be the absence of either protasis or apodosis. The apodosis is wanting in some instances. The suppression of the apodosis in Lu. 13 9, kclp pep irot-rjar] Kapwop eis TO peWov amounts to aposiopesis.^ See also 19 42, el eypcos Kal av. Cf. further Mk. 7 11 Jo. 6 62; Ac. 23 9. In Lu. 22 42 the aposiopesis disappears from the text of W. H. (wapepeyKe, not TrapepeyKelp). In 2 Th. 2 3, kap p-q ekdri, we have a mere anacoluthon as in Ph. 1 22. These protases belong to either the first, second or :

:

:

:

:

:

—

:

:

;

:

:

:

:

:

:

third classes.

above

(cf. 1

The

Pet. 3

of anacoluthon.

lonely protases of :

14, 17)

The

come

th(i

fourth class discussed

in here also.

We

structure of the sentence

that the corresponding apodosis does not follow. »

^ * "^

have a species changed so

is

In the same

Moulton, Pro!., p. 2m. ' Jann., Hist. Gk. Or., Burttjn, N. T. M. and T., p. 110. Robertson, Short O. of the Gk. N. T., p. 160. W.-Th., p. 000.

p. 401.

way

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1024

is to be explained the use of et like solemn oaths or questions. The apodSod-qaeraL TTj yevea ravry arjueiov (Mk. 8 11). This is 3, 5) eUXeuaoj/rat (Ps. 94-95

(suppression of apodosis)

us in the So el osis is wanting. 11 Heb. 3 (4 12). So

sense of 'not,' in

:

The

aposiopesis.

:

:

:

expression

full

seen in Gen. 14

is

23;

:

Num.

Sam. 14 45. It is an apparent imitation of the Hebrew 14 not un-Greek in itself. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., though idiom, idiom in Mk. 8 12 as due to translation from this treats p. 184) the Hebrew (Aramaic). Analogous to this is ei ixiiv in Heb. 6 14, :

30; 1

:

:

:

not really ri changed by itacism (cf. Ezek. 33 27; 34 8). Hort^ holds to the difference between d fx-qv and rj nqp and would take ei in Heb. 6 14 as the true ei. But Moulton^ makes out a good case from the papyri and the inscriptions for taking it as

if et is

:

:

:

merely a variation of r} fx-qp. He finds eleven papyri examples of Particularly clear is the Messenian el ix-t]v from ii/B.c. to I/a.d. Mysteries inscr., Michel 694, el nav e^eLv. If so, it does not come in

But the use

here.

ot acotdfxevoL;

of

ei

in questions

is

:

23).

Cf.

Ac. 17:27; 19 2. questions = ^ as in Lu. 22 49. :

Thus

pertinent.

Mt. 12 Radermacher {N. T.

(Lu. 13

:

10; Lu. 12

:

et

6X1701

36; 22 :49;

Gr., p. 136) takes

ei

in

on grounds of itacism, but it does not entitle Radermacher to say "werden muB." The use of the condition in the sense of 'to see if borders on this elliptical construction. Something has to be supplied before This

:

is

possible

the protasis in order to make the idea clear. The apodosis is It is a classic ^ idiom and virtually contained in the protasis. reappears in the papyri.** So 0. P. 743, oXos hairovoviia.L ei "E. xaX-

The

Kovs aToXeaev.

condition as in

et

protasis here exei

may conform

(Lu. 14 28) :

;

et

xws

to the first class

rjSr]

wore

XdjSco,

:

the fourth class,

But

in Ac. 27

of

in the indirect question, as in

et

evoSoidrjaofxaL

So Mk. 11:13; Ac. 8:22. In Ph. 3 12, e^ mUarawe have the third class and possibly also in Ro. 11:14.

(Ro. 1:10).

:

12

it is

sponds closely with the preceding. thing

is

true of

et

in the sense of

6rt,

Mk.

et ttojs

3

:

2,

The use

bbvaivTo.

eepairevaeL, corre-

et

Cf. also 11:13.

as in Ac. 26

:

The same This

23.

is

also

true of et with verbs of wonder, as in Mk. 15 44; Ac. 26 8. The protasis itself is sometimes abbreviated almost to the van:

:

without a verb, in the sense of except' (Mt. 5 13). Here et and fi-q seem to coalesce into one word like ttXij/'. Cf. 11:27, oLiSets ewLyLv6)aKeL top vlop el ix-q 6 iraTrjp. This is very

ishing point, as in

'

et fxi]

:

common

Sometimes we have

as in classic Greek. 1

App., p. 151.

*

'^

Prol., p. 46.

*

et /117 l^-ovov

Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 180 ff. Moulton, Prol., p. 194.

as in

;

MODE

(efkaisis)

1025

Mt. 21 19. The origin of this use of el /xri was the fact that the verb was identical with the preceding one in the apodosis and so was not repeated. From this elhpsis the usage spread to mere exceptions to the previous statement, a limitation simply. Et fxrj may make exception to a preceding negative as in Gal. 1 19 :

:

d

trepov 8i tcop airoaToKwv ovk ddov effect here is to

make

el

Mt. 12

For

eav

Cf.

In

4.

:

fir}

seem adversative instead

/jltj

The

'laKujSov tov adeXcpou.

of exceptive.

in this construction see Gal. 2

firj

16.

:

has the sense of 'only' and is not to be construed with TepLTaTeLToo. The use of el jut? occurs in questions expecting a negative answer, as in Mk. 2 7, tLs bbvaraL a4>Levai a/j.ap1

Cor. 7: 17

el

fxrj

:

[av], we have tl (cf. et added and possibly also av. B here omits av, possibly to "ease a difficulty" as Moulton^ suggests. If genuine, it would be a sort of analysis of eav into el av that occurs in the illiterate papyri. For examples see under 8, (&), (a). For el jjltjtl with the ind. pres. see 2 Cor. 13 5 and the subj. aorist. See Lu. 9 13. The use of Iktos el ixi] probably comes by analogy from exros el (cf. Latin nisi), but it occurs in the N. T. without verbs only in 1 Tim. 5 19. Elliptical also are el iiri Iva (Jo. 10 10) et 1X7] on (2 Cor, 12 In Jo. 14 11 13); d /xt) oTav (Mk. 9:9).

Ttas el

iirj

eh

Mt. 18

TL in

In

6 deos; :

1

Cor. 7:5,

el p.y}TL

28)

:

:

:

:

:

note

el be

/xi?

21; Rev. 2:5, 16. el

used

:

in the sense of 'but

For

elliptically are

be

el

et

/jLrjye

not,' 'otherwise.'

if

see Lu. 5

xep (Rq. 3

:

Cf.

Mk.

2

:

Other forms of 30); wcret (Mt. 3 16); uawebe fxr] ye became such fixed :

36.

:

and et phrases 2 that they occur even when the preceding sentence is negative (Mt. 9 17) or where eav would be more natural (Lu. 10 6, where the phrase answers to eav y). Cf. Lu. 13 9. In pel

(1

Cor. 15

Et

8).

:

be

ixr\

/jltj

:

:

:

Jo. 14

:

2, et be

In 2 Cor. 10

fj.r],

:

9

elirov av,

the conclusion

we have

common to have etVe —

cbs

etVe (1

is

expressed.

av without a

verb='as

Cor. 8

:

5)

if.'

It is

The use

without the verb.

of Kav without the verb least.' et

be

K&v

:

fjLT]

—

is also found in the sense of 'if only,' 'at So in Mk. 5 28; 6 56. In 2 Cor. 11 16 we have both ye and kolv (be^rjade to be supplied). In Lu. 12 38 note :

:

:

KOLV.

The suppression

of the protasis occurs in

all

the ex-

amples of the potential opt. already discussed, as in Ac. 26 29. Even in the deliberative questions of the opt. with av the same thing is true. Cf. Ac. 17: 18 (direct); Lu. 1:62 (indirect). The protasis is also suppressed sometimes with cTret. Cf. 1 Cor. 15 29, eTret ti iroLrjaovaLv; Here a protasis of the first or (more probably) of the third class must be supplied. So in Ro. 3:6; 11:6, :

:

1

Prol., p. 169.

2

Burton, N. T.

M. and

T., p.

HI.

:

In

22.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1026

Cor. 14

1

occurs in spite of

16,

:

eav.

apa in

wcfyeiXeTe

Uei,

and 10

10.

:

In 7

:

class, as is

14,

:

still

2, ewel ovk

erret

ixpa

first class.

These

Clauses.

Concessive

(5)

the ellipsis

epet,

ttcos

eirel

Cor. 5

1

the protasis would be of the

kaTLu,

26,

:

would belong to the second

av kiravaavTo, the protasis

true also of exet

eav evXoyfjs

kirel

In Heb. 9

are

really

conditional^

just

and Kal eau {kHv) the sense is 'even if and is chmacteric. Burton- seeks to draw quite a distinction between concessive and conditional clauses. He cites Mt. 26 33, el Tavres aKavdoKLaOrjaoPTai ev aol, e7cb ovdeiroTe aKav8a\t(r9T](70fj.aL, as an instance of the concessive idea without clauses with the addition of

In

Kal.

Kal

el

:

It is possible that

Kal.

we may read

the idea into this passage

because in the parallel passage in Mk. 14 29 we read Cf also kolv 8er] in Mt. 26 35 with eav dey in dXX' eycb. .

The

31.

el

bottom no

at

is

:

use of

{eav) in

Mk.

—

14

the sense of 'though' shows that there

The

essential difference.

the same as the

Kal

el

:

conditional

structure

They

sentence.

is

are,

precisely

to repeat,

nothing but conditional sentences of a special tone or emphasis.

The use With Kal

of Kal Kal

was

to sharpen this emphasis either

the supposition

el

1

el

Cor. 8

1

:

:

W.

Mk.

21

also Gal. :

14

:

21; 26

:

— [dXX]

29 the true text

is el Kal,

:

35.

:

See Jo. 10

:

38,

and the subj. Sometimes^ Kal el and

With

an extreme case. In we have an in-

rifxlv els deos,

not Kal

So in the N. T. we have Kal eav 8. For kHv see Jo. 8 14, Kav

1

or down.

stoutly affirmed in the

In late Greek

el.

clauses with eav tions.

is

It is rhetorically

elirep elalv

H. read simply

Kal av (eav).*

So

yap

5, Kal

In

stance.

3

is

the truth of the principal sentence

face of this one objection.

up

considered improbable.''

Kal

el.

In

Kplvo: (Jo.

8

:

16).

So Mt.

yuaprupco.

be ttoioo, kolv ep.ol Tria Teh-qre.

el

Pet.

1

vanishes before

el

The

are, of course, third class condi-

Kav

can hardly^ be considered as

They may be resolved into 'and if.' So Mt. 11 14; Lu. 6 32; Mk. 16 18; Jo. 8 55; Rev. 11 5. Much more common is el Kal. This phrase means 'if also.'

strong as 'even :

if.'

:

:

:

:

Here the protasis is treated as a matter of indifference. If there a conflict, it makes no real difficulty. There is sometimes a tone of contempt in el Kal. The matter is behttled. There is often some particle in the conclusion in this construction as in

is

Lu. 18

:

4,

el

Kal Tov Qebv oh (f)oj3ovp.aL ov8e avdpcoTrov evTpeirofiat,

TO irapexeiv, kt\. 1 « «

Note 76

as in 11

N. T. Gk., p. 215. N. T. M. and T., p. 112 Paley, Gk. Part., p. 31.

Blass, Gr. of

.

*

:

8.

Cf. Col. 2

:

5, el Kal

8t.a

ye

— dXXa.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 465.

»

Thayer's Lexicon.

«

Cf. Burton,

N. T. M. and

T., p. 114.

:

MODE

There is considerable variety with el have a condition of the first class while in

1

Pet. 3

1

than

:

'also' (cf.

and

13.)

:

:

we

we

In Mt. 18

:

we

2 Cor. 7 8 :

the

find, of course,

Tim. 2

Cf. 2 is

'if

:

5.

even' rather

17 note eav wapaKovaji

irapaKovaji

— eav

There

.

nothing

is

(Cf.

re airodv-qcrKwuev.

with the ind.

etre

in

Lu. 11:8; 18:4, etc.), have one instance of the

subj.

8, eav re ^Cinev

—

Cf. etre

(so

the notion

e/cKXrjatas

ttjs

Thus

Kal.

rrpo\7]iJ.4)dfj.

yafxifajis,

tav yniirj).

/cat

eav 8e Kal

peculiar about Ro. 14

Ex. 19

kau Kal

1,

Cor. 7:28, kap Kal

avTUiP

and the

eav Kal

So Gal. 6

third class.

In

el /cat Traaxot-re,

14,

:

With

fourth class.

1027

(etkaisis)

(1

Cor. 3

23) or the

:

Th. 5 10). The use of the participle for concession (see For Kalwep o}v, Heb. 5 8) will be treated under the Participle. 28. the use of kHv even after eav see Mk. 5 These have no effect on (e) Other Particles with el and eav. they modify the precise though the condition as a distinct class, subj. (1

:

:

:

This point

idea in various ways.

But note

under Particles. (Eph. 4 21); el apa ye (Ac. 17: 27

opt.);

:

hk fxifye

(Lu. 5

:

36);

30); eavirep (Heb. 3

27

:

12,

el

14; 6

:

In

the opt.).

(Mt. 6

olv :

Mk.

3);

8

:

be treated more exactly

will

apa (Mk. 11

el

:

Kal (2

23; Heb. 7:

et ttcos

23

13; Ac. 8

:

dye

(Ro.

et rt is

1

:

11);

22);

:

Cor. 5

ye

e'i

:

3);

et

(Ro. 3

el-irep

10, the fut. ind.;

:

Ac.

in direct question.

Indirect Discourse (Oratio Ohliqua).

9.

Direct quotation

is

more

frequent in primitive language, in the vernacular, and in

all

vivid

(a)

Recitative "Ort in Oratio Recta.

dramatic method of reporting Homer, in the Old Testament and in the Gospels, in Aristophanes and in Shakespeare, and in Uncle Remus. The prolonged indirect discourse in Thucydides and in Livy, in Xenophon and Cgesar, is more or less artificial. In the LXX little use is made of indirect discourse. The direct quotation may not be as verbally exact as the indirect,^ but it is more lively and interesting. As a rule the direct discourse is simply introduced with a word of saying or thinking. The ancients had no quotation-marks nor our modern colon. But sometimes 6rt was used before the It is the

picturesque narrative.

speech.

It is natural in

direct quotation merely to indicate that the find this idiom occasionally with ort,

Attic writers.2

It

is

more

very rare^ in the

words are quoted. sc^ldom with

LXX,

sinc(> tiie

cb?,

We

in the

Hebrew

so

frequently has a special participle like 'saying.' But see Gon. 28 16. In the N. T. Jannaris^ counts 120 instances of recitative on. »

Burton, N. T.

^

Vitcau,

p. 114.

M. and

Le Vcrbc,

^ Goodwin, M. and T., p. 285. but see on the other hand Con. and Stock, Sel., * Hist. Gk. C!r., p. 472.

T., p. 130.

p. 50;

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1028

NEW TESTAMENT

See Mt. 7 23, chiefly in the historical books. on ovSerroTe eyvo^v v/jids. This particular instance can be looked upon as indirect discourse, since the person is the same in both clauses and the tense and mode are unaffected. It is probable that indirect declarative clauses grew out of constructions of But in Mt. 27 43, elwev 6tl deov dju vlbs, there is this nature.^ no doubt at all. See 26 74, bjxvveLv otl ovk ol8a top avOpoiirov, and 26 75, elprjKOTOS on irplv aXeKTopa (t)u>vrjaaL Tpls airapprjari pie. So Mk. 1:37; 2 12, 16; 4:21; 8 :28; Jo. 10 :36; Ac. 25 8; Ro. 4 17. In Mt. 16 7 we have (W. H., but R. V. marg. has cau-

The idiom appears

:

oiJLoXoyriao:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

sal)

recitative otl (6tl aprovs ovk eXa^opev); while in verse 8 the

In Mk. 6 23 (W. H. marg.) we have a direct quotation with on, in Mt. 14 7 the same thing appears as indirect discourse without 6tl. In Jo. ovk ecmv yeypapphov otl kyco etTra deoi ecrre, note 10 34, cnreKpidr] a treble direct quotation, once with on and twice without. In Jo. 1 50 the first 6tl is recitative, the second is indirect discourse. The on in the beginning of Jo. 20 29 is causal. In Jo. 20 18 It is doubtful whether (cf 3 18) on is recitative and declarative. In Ro. 3 8, on TOLrjacopeu 17. it is recitative or causal in Jo. 21 So in 2 Th. 3 10 on (hortatory subj.), on is also recitative. indirect (probably causal) use, 6tl dprous ovk exere;

:

:

—

:

:

:

.

:

:

:

:

:

occurs wdth the imperative

The

eo-^terco.

tion without OTL are very numerous.

instances of direct quota-

Mt. 8

Cf.

:

3;

26 25. :

Some-

times the same thing is reported with 6tl (Mt. 19 9) or without on (Mk. 10 4). For single words quoted without agreement with the word with which they are in apposition note 6 5t5ao-KaXos and :

:

6 KvpLos in Jo. 13

:

13.

W. H.

seek to indicate the presence of reci-

tative OTL by beginning the quotation with a capital letter as in Cf. Jo. 9 9. This redundant on may occur all their quotations. :

before direct questions as in

Mk. 4

:

21

;

8

:

It continues

4.

common

in the kolutj and the modern Greek uses ttws in this idiom. Sometimes this (h) Change of Person in Indirect Discovirse. in 43. So 16 27 in Mt. 18, Kay
:

:

:

:

:

:

1

2

TTcos

Schmitt, tJber den Urspr. des Substantivsatzes, 1889, p. 66. Thumb, Handb., p. 192. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 472. Kat rdres dire Ae aov to '\eya tyu] 'then he said, Didn't I

tell

you

so?'

:: :

MODE The person may be both ways 4,

irap-qyyeLXev —

1029

(efkaisis)

same sentence, as

in the

eirayyeKlav tov irarpos

-KepiixeveLV T-qv

rjv

in Ac. 1

rjKOvaaTe ixov.

See further under Mixture. (c)

Change

Tense

of

in Indirect Discourse.

Mr. H. Scott objects

to the wide scope here given to the term "uidirect discourse" to cover "object clauses" after bpaw, kt\., but I conceive the principle to be the same. After primary tenses there is, of course, no Cf. Mt. 16 18; 27 43 above. See also on eXa^ere Kai eorat vfxlv. It is only after secondary tenses that any change occurs. Usually even then there Thus owov riKovov 6tl earcv (Mk. 6 is no change of tense in Greek.

change in mode or tense.

Mk.

55)

.

11

:

24,

:

:

TTtcTTeueTe

So with aKOvaa^

—

otl jSaaiKemL

^on€v 6tl avT6s kaTiv (Lu. 24

e<j)0^r]dr]

(Mt. 2

:

22)

So

.

^Xtti-

See also Mt. 21 45; Mk. 6 14; Cf. Gal. 2: 14, eUov 6tl ovk dpdoirodov-

21).

:

Lu. 1: 22; Jo. 2:17; 6: 24. CLV. So Jo. 11 13. In Jo. 21

:

:

:

19 the future ind.

is

:

retained after

Mt. 20: 10. So in Lu. 5 19 the aorist subj. In Mk. 2 16 we have on kadlH twice, the first in ind. occurs. discourse and the second with recitative otl. But sometimes the

direv

Cf.

o-rj/xaij'cov.

:

:

ancient Greek, even the Attic,^ used a past tense of the indicative in ind. discourse where the direct had the tenses of present time.

The N. T. shows like Jo. 1

:

Cf 9

direct.

.

:

on dbbv

9

dpwTTixi,

tfxtWev

So as to the imperfect riu and aorist In Mt. 27 18, f/Set also Lu. 13 2. avTov, the aorist is used for antecedent

Cf

18,

:

OTL 5td cl)d6pop -KapkhoiKav

:

.

Cf. irapabebo^KHcxav in

But

OTL OVK €LTev.

lu Jo. 2

:

TTOLetv (6 :

:

6)

51; 12

;

:

16, 33; 18: 32.

have the present

was no longer

we have

perfect.

living,

just seen.

2; 1 Pet. 1

:

Kai OTL avTbv

12. rjv

See also Mt. 16

10.

:

eaTLv,

not

riv.

rju

t'l

In Ac. 16

may

though

Cf.

Mk.

In Ac. 22 SebeKojs,

Goodwin, M. and

In

we

:

:

:

12,

kv rc3 av-

So with

fjSet tI :

27).

Ac. 19: 32, ovk ribeLaau tLvos

past perfect stands

avTov vTTJpxev, the imperfect

Cf.

15

ovk eyvooa-au otl tov waTepa avTo7s eXeyev (8

eveKa avvtXriXvduaav, the

1

Mk.

:

25, avTOS yap eyiuo^aKeu

the direct form^ would have

Cf. also 11

In a case

the aorist tense belonged to the

ae,

30, 32, 35.

hvk^XexPeu in Jo.

action.

same construction.

occasionally the

50, dirbv aoi

when

the direct would

3, fibaaav otl "'E.XX-qv 6 rrari^p

indicate that Timothcus' father

not the necessary moaning, as 11 32; Jo. 6 22-24; 16 19; Ac. 22 it is

:

:

29,

e^o/Siy^??

:

eirLyvovs otl Twixolos koTiv

see both constructions combined.

In

T., p. 2G3.

As a matter

of fact, the primitive very change of tense as in Eng. We have it more frequently in Horn, than the change of mode or the graphic retention of teuae. Cf. Thomi)son, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 402. 2

Cf. Robertson, Short Gr., p. 181.

method

in oratio obliqua

was probably

this

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1030 Jo. 11

:

40, ovK

NEW TESTAMENT

elirov gol otl eav TLcrTevajis

fut. ind. are retained after

the subj. and the

oypii,

secondary tense, unless on

is

recitative.

This preservation of the original tense appears in clauses not In Lu. 9 33, elwev etScbs 6 Xe7et, strictly in indirect discourse.

—

:

the present tense

in the causal clause in 9 tiixCiv.

In Jo. 21 25, :

:

49,

x^piyo-eti^,

e/ccoXyo/zei'

avrdv 6tl ovk oKoKovdel

the future

inf.

In Lu. 20

:

it is iu.e6'

stands for the future

ind. in the direct, as TedprjKevai does in Ac. 14

ind.

fjLrj

retained in the relative clause 6 \eyeL, as

is

:

19 for the perfect

6 etmt really represents the imperfect indicative

of the direct.

The rule with the (d) Change of Mode in Indirect Discourse. Greek was not to change the tense. The mode after past tenses, with more freedom, was either retained or changed to the corresponding tense of the optative mode. The optative, as the most remote in standpoint of the modes, suited this idiom very The imperfect and past perfect indicative were, however, well. retained, though even here the optative sometimes appeared.^ When the aorist optative represented an aorist indicative of the ^

direct discourse the opt. represented past time.^

Usually the op-

and subjunctive are future as to time. We have the optative in the N. T. in indirect discourse only in Luke. It was in the kolvt] a mark of literary care, almost Atticism, quite beyond the usual vernacular. And with Luke the idiom is almost Luke never has the opt. after confined to indirect questions. Once (Ac. 25 16) in a subordinate temporal clause OTL or
:

:

—

r)

change to the optative in the indirect. Similar to this is the use d and the optative with dependent single clause either as protasis with implied apodosis or purpose like el \pr}\a4>r)(xeLav (Ac. 17: Here after 27); et bvvaTov eir] (20:16); el ttcos bvvaLVTo (27:12). primary tenses we should have kav and the subj. or et and the future ind. Cf. Ph. 3 12; Ro. 1 10. Cf. tI Tpai/^co in Ac. 25 26. As already explained also, the indirect questions with el and the of

:

:

:

1 In archaic Lat. the ind. was used in indirect discourse as in Gk. Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 460.

2

3 *

Goodwin, M. and Madvig, Bemerk. Goodwin, M. and

Cf.

T., p. 263. iiber einige

T., p. 273.

Punkte der

griech. Wortfiig. 1848, p. 23.

:

MODE optative (Ac. 25

would be used

:

20; 27

(22

:

— boKtl

39) are instances

Even

in the direct.

mode

usually keeps the TO TLS

:

(Lu. 22

:

1031

(ErKAIZIs)

Luke

So the indicative as

of the direct.

24), the

where the indicative

in indirect questions

subjunctive as in to

4) or the optative as in to tI av 6k\oi (1

The

62).

:

ttcjs

—

in

clttoocj

indicative

never changed to a subjunctive as in Latin. When the subj. in Greek occurs in an indirect question it does so because it was the is

subj. in the direct.

Mt. 6:25,

31, tL

Thus

4>a.y'nTf,

oh

tL

yap

airoKptOfj (Mk. 9:0). Cf. So Lu. 22:2, 4; Ac. 4:21.

r/Stt tI

4>a-yi^^ix€v.

Cf. subj. with Iva after secondary tenses (Ro.

The

We

course was a Greek development.

Homer. The text,

1

13; 1 Pet. 4:6).

:

use of the optative (as distinct from subj.) in indir. dis-

margin

36,

:

it

in

W. H.

an indirect question where the direct had the drj in 1 29. So 8:9, kirrjpojTcov tIs dr]. kirwdaveTO t'ls elrj Kal tL kaTLV TrevrotTj/ccos, both con-

av) in

Cf. TroTairbs

indicative.

see the beginning of

optative, however, does occur in Lu. (18

In Ac. 21 33, structions occur side by :

:

side.

The

variation here in the

mode

(retention of the ind.) gives a certain vividness to this part of

See Optative in Paratactic Sentences where the In ylvoLTO KpaTdlv iraarjs rjs av aiprjade given.

the question. KOLvrj

parallels are

Par. 26 (b.c. 163), there is no sequence of mode. The with the indefinite relative and the opt. is a wish. It has

xcbpas, P.

subj.

is

been already (under Optative) shown that av and the opt. in an indirect question is there because it was in the direct (cf. Ac. 17 Sometimes, one 62, to tI av deXot. 18, Tt av OeXoL; with Lu. 1 must admit, the difference between the two is reduced to a minimum, as in the papyri occasionally.^ So in Lu. 9 46, to tLs av See also Lu. 15 26; Ac. 10 17. 23). dri (cf. TO tIs dt] m Lu. 22 The manuscripts redifference. shade of But there is always a ind. and opt. as in between variations flect this haziness in the In Lu. 2 3 Ac. 12). 15, tii] Trore drj, we Lu. 18 36; 22 23; :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

also have the opt. in an indir. question. p. 165) quotes Diod. used it often.

I,

:

75, 5, kireLdav

Radermacher

— irpoaOoLTo.

(A''.

The

T. Gr.,

Atticists

It is not always easy to (e) The Limits of Indirect Discourse. draw the line between indirect discourse and other constructions. Thus Jannaris^ uses it only for declarative clauses with on or cos. Burton-'' confines it to indirect assertions and indirect questions, but admits that it also covers indirect commands and promises. Take Mt. 14 7, ufxaXoy-qaev avT^ dovvai 8 edi^ aLTrjariTai. The in:

1

3

Moulton, Prol., p. 198. N. T. M. and T., p. 131.

^

Hist.

So most

Gk. Gr.,

p.

471

of the Rraimnars.

f.

^

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1032

the direct object of the verb and does not seem

finitive Sovvai is

Mk.

to be in indir. discourse, for in

But, after

5cb(Tw.

all, it is

6

:

23 the direct form has

practical indir. discourse, though the

analogy of tense construction breaks down in this instance. But note fut. infinitive with cbnoaev in Heb. 3 18, according to the principle of indirect discourse. On the whole it is best to consider three classes or kinds of indirect discourse: declarative clauses, :

indirect questions, indirect (/) Declarative

"On and

(a)

commands.

Clauses (Indirect Assertions).

There is no was common

the Indicative.

this sense in the

N. T.

Just as final

retreated before

ottcos

It

clear instance of

so declarative

I'm,

cbs

in

in the ancient Greek.

did before

cos

In late Greek I'm monopolized the field as a final particle and divided it with 6tl as a declarative conjunction. We do have cos in indirect questions a few times as will be shown. This is more likely the meaning even in Ac. 10 28, eTriaraade cos adeixirov. Reeb^ points out that Demosthenes uses cbs for what is false and 6rt.2

:

The German wie is used like cos with verbs With these verbs cbs is more than just 6tl ('that')- "On expresses the thing itself and cbs the mode or quality of the thing (Thaj^er). With this explanation it is possible to consider it as declarative, though really meanOTL for

what

true.

is

of reading, narrating, testifying.

Cf. Lu. 24: 6, npriadr]Te

ing 'how.'

with d7ra77eXXco, 23 55 after 20: 20 with

OTL

12

and

W. H.

TTcbs.

26 and

:

kiviaTafxaL,

Ro. 1:9 with

The manuscripts vary

1:8).

passages

6tl in

it is

bracket

Jude

5,

cbs

Mk.

26),

7 after

12 :41 after

the later Greek

Gradually

Greek

it

KOLVT]

ttcos

:

cbs

Mt. 12 4 :

retained in

In

Mk.

in

all

these

of

on on

ttcos

Mk.

Mk.

5

:

16 after

13 after d7ra77€XXco (so

hriYeoyiaL, 1

:

Lu. 14

:

Th. 1:9).

In Ro. 10

:

15; 11:33,

and the papyri show

1

Goodwin, M. and

'

De

*

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 230

"

Hatz., Einl., p. 19.

T., p. 258. 6tl et ws

this ^

6tl till in

particle.

cbs

is

same

the

See

In otl.^

modern

Thumb, The

exclamatory. retreat of

cbs

before

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 571.

apud Demosthenum Usu, 1890, f.

is

12

comes gradually to be equivalent to

ttcos

Particulorum

7.^

after avayivccaKco (and

became the regular declarative

writers

Th.

and

as the 'how' of indirect ques-

gained the ascendency over

p. 190.

1 cbs

Ph. 1:8;

(so

The encroachment

^ec^peco,

Ac. 11

ewexoov,

Handb.,

Cf.

fjiaprvs

:

possible to regard

47

:

some passages between in Lu. 6 4 and read ttcos cbs is

:

Ac. 10 38 after oUa, Ac.

in

though

tion rather than declarative. to be noticed also.

So in Lu. 8

eXaXrjaeu.

cbs

^edoyuat,

:

p. 38.

.

MODE and the inroad

OTL

Cf. B. U.,

of

37 (51

I,

6tl

appears in the

it

— xpvt^i-, and

Gr., p. 159).

Epictetus often

however, no doubt of the use of

is,

cos

6tl in

an unclassical combination, (Esther 4 14) and in the kolvy] writers.^

the declarative sense='that.'

but

(Radermachcr, N. T.

A.D.), oUa.'i Tcos

There

after opaco.

on

ttcos

1033

(ErKAIZIs)

LXX

It is

:

hke the Latin quasi in the Vulgate. The late papyri (fourth cent. A.D.) show that cbs otl came in the vernacular to mean simply 'that.' 2 Moulton cites also two Attic inscriptions from the first century b.c. which have cos on. in the sense of cos or otl alone. The editors have removed 6tl from cos on in Xenophon's It

is

Hellen. Ill,

14,

ii,

his use of

won

its

finitive.

on

eliroju cbs

on

stigma of "unclassical"

in 2 Cor. 5

it

The use

use of on

is

of the inf. in indir.

the

it

N. T. N. T.

writers.^

occurs in the N. T.

The

classic causal sense of bibn prevailed.

sometimes doubtful whether on

is

as in Ac. 22

came

:

The context must

29.

There arose also 5t6rt in but no example

late Latin quia = quod),

(cf.

TTcbs

Th. 2:2. But on has but also over the indiscourse^ takes quite a subcbs,

Luke alone uses it to any extent. of making a declaration in inThe periphrasis with on has super-

in nearly all the

the declarative sense ^

It

to Blass'

support for

common way

direct discourse in the

seded

kolvj]

19; 11:21; 2

:

place in the N. T. not only over

ordinate place in the N. T.

The

Moulton agrees

okvolt].

on, but Paul has

cbs

causal or

is

declarative

Finally, as noted,

decide.

to be the normal declarative conjunction in the veras over

and on) as the

nacular (over the

inf.

peared from

The only mode used with on in the In Ro. 3 8 (subj.) on is recitative. At bottom

N. T.

is

the ind.

OTL is just 6

sense (and

Cf.

6).

after

Indeed,

otl

Homer sometimes used 6 re in otl me together in 1 Coi. 12: 2.

:

19); X670S (Jo. 15

:

25); napTvpia (1 Jo. 5:

11); (jLapTvs (2 Cor. 1:23); irapprjaia (1 Jo. 5 (j)a.(TLs

(Ac. 21:31).

(Mk. 9:41). '

We

see

It

is

(Prol., p. 212) gives

iiviiJieXelq. cos

:

14);

ws.

otl

(1

(Ac. 22

:

bvoptaTL

Jo. 3:16).

Some-

Cf. Jann., Hist.

C.P.R. 19 (iv/A.D.)

(j)wvr]

h

in apposition also

also hv tovtco

See Sophocles' Lexicon under

Moulton

the declarative

which otl is used in the N. T. cover a wide comes also after substantives like ayytKla (1

Jo. 1:5); KplaLs (Jo. 3

14);

infinitive disap-

:

n, and

The verbs range.

cbs

indir. discourse.^

-n-purjv

with

Gk. Gr.,

p.

413.

fii0\la kiriSiSoiKa T^ ffg

otl 't0ov\r)d7\v

2

Moulton,

3

Blass, Gr. of

*

Mitsotakis, Praktischc Gr. dcr neugriechischen Schrift-

Prol., p. 212.

N. T. Gk.,

sprache, 1891, p. 235.

p. 231.

<

Moulton,

^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 413.

Prol., p. 211.

und Umgangs-

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1034

OTL itself seems to imply h tovtco (Ro. 5:8) or -rrepl tovtov (Mk. 1:34) or eis eKetuo (Jo. 2 18). Cf. tovto 6tl (Rev. 2:6). Another irregularity of construction is the prolepsis of the sub-

times

:

stantive before 6tl (and change of case) as in

idiom

49; Ac. 9

:

Cor. 15

:

27

common

It is a rather

20.

See especially Jo. 8 1

Cor. 16

1

sometimes called the epexegetic use of

is

In Ro. 9

is

6 note ovx olop

8e is

:

This

15.

Mt. 25

Cf.

almost adverliial, but that

54.

:

on

8rj\ov

idiom.

:

Cf. Lu. 9

6tl.

:

:

24.

In

6tl.

not true

Heb. 7 14. The elliptical tI 6tl (Lu. 2 49) be compared with ri yeyopev on in Jo. 14 22. The elliptical ovx OTL (cf. Jo. 6 46) is like the corresponding English 'not that.' The OTL clause may be in the nominative (subject clause) as in Mk. 4 38, ov /xkXeL ool 6tl airoWv^xeda; More usually it is, of of Trp68r]\op OTL in

:

:

may

:

:

:

course, in the accusative (object clause) as in Jo. 11:27, irewiGTevKa OTL. tive as in

The otl clause may Mk. 9 41. In Gal.

a solemn oath as in 14

:

11). 1

1

:

20,

aXrjdeLa 6tl (2

Cor. 15

:

1

:

23)

;

:

18);

1 13 we either we have one 6ti

In Jas.

12, Xptoros K-qpvaaeTaL OTL.

In Jo. 4

may

:

1

:

be repeated in parallel

22 29; 1 Cor. 15 3. In 1 Jo. 9 we have two examples of otl, but one is causal. In Jo. 1

clauses as in Jo. 6 :

10); tlcttos otl (1

:

otl

bjivvo^

have recitative otl or oratio variata. clause dependent on another. "On 5

we have

hcoirLov 6eov otl,

15011

Cor. 11

(Rev. 10:6); f to kyw, otl (Ro. Sometimes the personal construction occurs with on, Cor.

fxapTvs OTL (2

as in

also be in apposition with the loca-

:

:

22; Ac. 17

:

3;

:

:

:

the three are

15

ff.

in

much

In Jo. 11

causal.

all

the same sense.

Not

so

1

Jo. 5

:

50 we have

:

otl

Cf. I'm in

13.

and

I'm

Jo. 5

1

:

3 with OTL in 5:11.

The verbs ous.

A

'Icoaprjv

that use declarative 6tl in the N. T. are very numer-

few have only OTL 7rpo0i7rr/s

Latinism

6tl.

(note

tjp

^i').

Cf. also

like haheo.

So also

sical construction.

Thus Mk. 11:32, v-iroXaiJL^apcc

XaAeco

airavTes

dxov

Blass^ calls this use of 6tl

(Heb. 11

:

t6v

ex<^

a

(Lu. 7:43), a clas18); aviu^L^a'^o: (Ac.

16:10); acfypayl^w (Jo. 3:33); ypcopi^oo (1 Cor. 12:3); kucpa(Heb. 11:14); e^onoXoyeo: (Ph. 2:11); KaT-qx^cji (Ac. 21: p'l'^oo 21); Kripvaaco (1 Cor. 15 :12); aTro8eiKPviJ.L (2 Th. 2:4); pL-qpvo} (Lu. 20:37); aTroKoKviTTco d-rjfXL

(Ac.

(1

vTo8eiKPviJLL

Pet.

17:3);

1

:

(Ac. 20:35); 4>avep6oixai (2 Cor. 3:3); 12);

Trpo^Tjreuco

7rapa5t5cojut

(Jo.

(1

11:51).

Cor.

The

15 :3);

irapaTl-

great mass of

the verbs of perceiving, showing (contrary to Attic), knowing, believing, hoping, thinking, saying, declaring,

replying,

testify-

ing, etc., use either the declarative otl or the infinitive.

In Lu.

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.

23L

:

MODE 9

18

:

with

f.

we have

\kyo}

also in Ac. 14

:

22 with

course in the N. T.

the

and on

inf.

So

side.

the infinitive in indir. dis-

irapaKoXeoo

Luke and Paul

confined to the writings of

is

by

side

Outside of Xeyco and aPTtKeyo}

Trapa/caXew.

and

KaraKplvoi

eTniJLapTvpku,

1035

(efkaisis)

and Hebrews according to Viteau/ "comme vestige de la langue But even with Luke and Paul the rule is to use on. litteraire." Blass2 has a careful list of the uses of these verbs. In margin of W. H. in Jo. 5 15 we have avayyeKXc^ with 6tl, but the text has (LTov. But see 6tl also in Ro. 2 4 (ayvokco), Mt. 12 5 {avayLPu:
:

:

37 (d7ra77eXXco) Ac. 25 IG {aT:oKp[vop.aL) 1 Jo. 2: 22 {apvko5 {ypacpoS), Mt. fiai), Ac. 17 6 (/Sodw), 1 Pet. 2 3 (yeijo/xat), Ro. 10 Ac. {hajiapTvpoiiai), 16: 21 {SeLKvvco), 1 Cor. 1 11 (StjXoco), Ac. 10: 42 9:27 (5oKeco), Ac. 17 :3 {btavolyJ), Mk. 8 31 (5t5d(T/cw), Mt. 6 7 Lu. 18

,

:

,

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Lu. 24 21 (eXxtfw), Mt. 6 26 (tM/SXerco), 1 Cor. 11:2 32 {tvayyeKl^oixaC), Lu. 18 11 (euxapicrreco) Rev. (exaiJ'eco), Ac 13 2 4 (exw Kara, tlvos), Lu. 11 38 (Oavnai'w), Jo. 6 5 (deaofiai.) Ac. 4 13 {KaTaXap^avoixat), Lu. 12:24 (Karavoew), 2 Cor. 5 14 (/cpti'co), 2 {bi-nykotiai),

:

:

:

:

,

:

:

:

:

,

:

23 {ixapTvpa Tov {p-aprvpopai),

2 Th. 3

cf.

18

:

74

{opvvoS), Jas.

10 (xapaTTeXXw)

:

:

14

34

:

:

7

,

:

:

18

:

2 Cor. 13 ,

{iiavdavo:)

{paprvpecS),

17

{o'Lopai),

(irvpda.i'opaL)

Ro. 8

(avfx^ovXevoo) ,

1

Mt. 5

Heb. 13

,

(TrXr/po^opeo))

Gal. 5: 21), Ac. 23 :

(pLfjivijaKo:),

:

27

:

Heb. 7: 8

deov €7rt/caXoO/xat),

Ro. 4 21

o-reiico),

:

Mt. 27 63

Mt. 26

(voeoS),

(Xe7w), Ac. 23

Mt. 3 9

Pet. 3:5 (\av9avo:),

{popl^co),

Ro. 9

:

1

2 Cor. 1:

,

Ac. 20

:

26

Mt. 15

:

17

(ou xpehhopai),

Jo. 6

(rei^o/xat),

:

69

(tti-

2 {irpodpriKa Koi irpoXeyu),

:

Lu. 15

:

6,

9 (avyxalpo:) Jo. ,

16 {avppapTvpeco), Mt. 16

:

12 {awlrjpi),

19 (
Ju. 5

(vTOfntxvi]
Cor. 10

:

:

:

a fairly clear idea of the advances made by 6tl on the classic infinSome verbs still share the participle with on, but itive idiom. not verbs of showing. These no longer appear in the N. T. with the participle.3 16

:

:

Cf. Ac. 19

4).

7 37)

;

go with :

26,

note

6tl

decopkoo

kxlarapaL (Ac. 15

:

7)

;

(SXexco

and

(Heb. 3:19); deupeu (Mk.

So

aKovoj.

ei»pio-»cco

also kinyLvcoaKco (Lu.

(Ro. 7:21);

pvit]povevw

(Ac. 20

Besides some verbs appear with either 6tl, 31); opdco Thus d/coi;co (Mt. 5 21; Jo. 12 18; participle. the or infinitive the Heb. 10 34; Lu. 8 46) \oyi^opai 21 (Mt. 45; yivuiaKoi 4 Lu. 23) and part.); oUa (Ac. 16 3; Lu. inf. 2 both 10 2 Cor. (Ro. 8 18;

(Mk. 2

:

16).

:

:

:

:

:

:

;

;

:

:

:

4 :41; 2 Cor. 12

:

2); bpoKoykoi (Mt. 7

>

Le Vcrbe,

»

lb., p. 233.

p. 51.

^

:

23 unless recitative

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 231

f.

on',

;

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1036

we

on used with the inBut it is just the classic mingling of two constructions seen in the more usual form in Ac. 14 22, where a change is made from the inf. to 6tl and 6ei. Different verbs had varying histories in the matter of 6tl. It was not a mere alternative with many. With clkovoo, for instance, on The same thing is true with awoKplvo/iaL, 711/0)is the usual idiom. But with 077/xt, in classical (TKco, /3odco, olda, Xeyoo, vofxl^o:, TLarevo). Tit. 1

:

finitive

In Ac. 27

16; 2 Jo. 7).

:

"quite irregularly" Blass^

10

calls

find

it.

:

Greek almost always with the OTL (1

28

Cor. 10

8

:

I

Th. 3

The

f. :

:

19; 15

:

6tl

with the

on

(N. T. Gr., p. 159) cites

we

8),

inf.

see

— uTrdpxetv

twice have

Mk.

see

inf.

shown in Ac. 27 10. Radermacher from Proklus' /ri rem puhl.,

substantive nature of the 6tl clause

For

6.

infinitive (Ro. 3

For on and then the

50).

:

is

well

:

225, 22.

II,

{(3)

The

With some verbs we have only

Infinitive.

single in-

stances of the infinitive of indir. discourse in the N. T. /3odw (Ac.

25);

25

:

24); jLvooaKOi

(Ph. 3:8);

riyeofiai

only twice (Lu. 20

:

(Heb. 10

voeo)

:

(Heb. 11:3).

Ac. 25 :4).

7;

34);

/caTaXa,u/3di'o/xat '

So with (Ac. 25

has

AiroKplvoixai

:

it

See also d7ra77€XXco (Ac. 12

:

22:34); 8uaxvpi^oiJ.aL (Ac. 12:15); SryXow (Heb. 9:8); kirayyeWoidaL (Mk. 14:11; Ac. 7:5); ewLnapTvpofxaL (1 Pet. 5:12); KaraKplpo: (Mk. 14:64); fxaprvpkoo (Ac. 10:43); 14);

(Lu.

a.irapveoiJ.aL

irpoaLTLa.oiJ.aL

(Ro. 3:9); TpoKarayyeWo} (Ac. 3:18); cqixaivw (Ac.

28); xpwaTtfco (Lu. 2 26). Some of these are words that are not used with any construction very often, some occur only wdth

II

:

:

the infinitive, like

eTrtSet/ci'uco

20

6); vwoKplvofxaL (Lu.

:

(Ac. 18

28); irpoadoKao} (Ac. 3

:

20); viropoeco (Ac. 13

25; 27

:

besides, the inf. with /SouXoyuat, deXco, KeXevoo, etc.,

is,

the simple object inf.

are in the

like apvkoiiaL

list

:

:

27).

28 There

5;

:

more exactly

Other verbs that have occasionally the given under (a), those with either on or the inf. inf.

(Heb. 11

:

'24)

;

7pd
(Ac. 18

:

27)

;

beLKvvw (Ac. 10

:

28)

hbaoKw (Lu. 11 1); biaixapTvpoixaL (Ac. 18 5) biavolycji (Ac. 16 14. Cf. Tov in Lu. 24 45); evayyeXi^opLaL (Ac. 14 15), avu^ovXevco (Rev. 3 18). In Luke and Paul the inf. of indir. discourse is fairly :

;

:

:

:

:

:

common 23)

with

and with

Xe7'«^

vopii^cx}

(Lu. 9 (Lu. 2

In the old Greek the

:

:

inf.

18, 20, etc.

44; Ac. 7

:

Cf.

Mt. 11

:

24;

Mk.

was the favourite construction

The Latin had

3

:

25, etc.).

in in-

but the gradual disappearance of the inf. from late Greek made it wither away. Indeed, it was a comparatively late development in Greek direct discourse.^

it

in all its glory,

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

2

Cf.

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 267.

MODE

1037

(efkaisis)

anyhow and is rare in Homer. It is not easy to draw the Hne between ^ovXanaL and /ceXeuco with the inf. on the one hand and Xe7co and vo/jlI^oo with the inf. on the other .^ At bottom the con^

struction

is

the same.

The question

or adjective used with this

inf. is

of the case of the substantive

not vital to the idiom.

It

is

misnomer to call it "the accusative and infinitive." That fact, more frequently the case found with this inf., but it is

really a is,

in

not because the idiom calls for it per se, but simply because the infinitive can have no subject, not being a finite verb (cf. the participle). Hence when a noun (not the object) occurs with the

so,

it is put in the accusative of general referno word in the sentence in another case for it This matter was disnaturally to agree with by apposition. cussed under Cases, but will bear some repetition at this point Clyde ^ correctly sees that, since it is so often misunderstood. since the inf. itself is in a case and is non-finite, it cannot have a

inf. in indir.

ence,

if

discourse

there

is

Monro ^

subject.

thinks that the accusative was a late develop-

to assist the "virtual" predication of the later inf.

ment

times this ace.

itself is

Some-

the direct object of the principal verb (so

Gildersleeve has a pertinent word: "I look etc.). with amazement at the retention [by Cauer in his Grammatica

verbs of asking,

Militans] of Curtius' utterly unsatisfactory, utterly inorganic explanation of the ace. c. inf. in oratio obliqua, against which I

protested years ago (A. J. P., XVII, 1896, 517):

Kvpos Kri(Tep

ei't/CTjcre

becomes

= vLKrj
on

riyyeLKav tov Is.vpov

(A. J. P.,

XXXIII,

i]y'YeL\au 6tl 6

evUrjaev,

but

To go no

4, p. 489).

Gildersleeve shows that the 6tl construction

later

is

ort

than the

But the grammarians went astray and called accusative the "subject" of the inf., and, when some other ace.

c.

hi-

further,

inf.

this

case

an " exception" to the rules of the grammarians, though in perfect harmony with the genius of the Greek inf. Even Moulton^ says: "In classical Greek, as any fifth-form boy forgets at his peril, the nominative is used regularly instead appears with the

inf., it is

of the accusative as subject to the infinitive

the

main verb

is

Now,

the same."

there

presence of the nominative in such an

"instead of the accusative"?

is

when

the subj(>ct of

no doubt about the

instance.

The nominative

is

But why say normal and

This construction probably, almost certainly, antedated the accusative with the inf."^ We still natural in such a construction.

1

2 »

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. Goodwin, M. and T., Gk. Synt., p. 139.

162.

"

Horn. Gr.,

p. 269.

^

Prol., p. 212.

«

Monro,

p. 1G2.

lloni. Gr., p. 102.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1038

meet the

in the

it

The

N. T.

as in Lu. 24

inf.,

:

was

have no noun with

to

23, rfKdav Xkyovaai Kal bivTaalav ayyeKwv ecopa-

The context makes

KepaL.

oldest idiom

NEW TESTAMENT

perfectly clear that the

it

the object of iajpaKhai and the rest

word

oirTaaiau

matter of easy inference. Cf. Ac. 26 9 (with 8elp); Jas. 2 14; 1 Jo. 2:6, 9; Tit. 1 16. In the majority of cases in the N. T. the noun is not repeated or referred to in the predicate. So in Lu. 20 7 we have aireKpldrjaap firj eldevai, but in Ac. 25 4 ^ijaros aireKpidrj rripttadaL top Hav\op eis Kataaplap, eavTOP 8e (xeWeLP. It is easy to see why HavXov has to be in the ace. if expressed at all. We could have had avTos rather than eavrop which probably is just co-ordinated with is

:

is

:

:

:

:

Cf.

Ilav\op.

Ph. 4

:

KptTTjs

elpat

15; Mt. 19 21 reXetos etmt, where the principle is the same,

in Ac. 18

11 enadop avTapK7]s ehai,

:

:

though not technically indirect discourse; it is the predicate nominative. So with /SouXo^tat, ^eXco, fryreco, etc. The personal construction is a good illustration of the nominative. Cf. Heb. The nominative occurs also in 11:4, kpLapTvp7]dr] eipaL Skatos. Ro. 1 22, (j)daKoPTes dvac ao4>oL See further Ro. 9 3; 1 Cor. 3 18; 8:2; 14 37; 2 Cor. 10 2; Heb. 5 11; Jas. 1 26; Jo. 7:4 (W. H. text). In a case like Lu. 20 20 SLKalovs upat is inevitable because of v-KOKpiPOjikpovs. But there are a good many examples in the N. T. where the nominative could have been properly retained and where the accusative has crept in, perhaps owing to a tendency towards uniformity rather than to any special Latin influence as Blass supposed. Moulton^ notes the same tendency :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

^

in the

kolvt]

Moulton

outside of Latin influence.

(Pro!., p. 249)

268 f., with the note of Sykes and WynneWilson, and to Adam's note on Plato, ApoL, 36 B., for classical examples of ace. with inf. where nom. could have occurred. Cf. Ro. refers to JEschylus, P. V.

6:11, vpeh Xoyi'^eade eavrovs elpat peKpovs. It is rare in the classical Greek for the accusative to occur in such sentences.^ The N. T. undoubtedly shows an increase of the ace. where the nominative was the rule for the older Greek. So Ro. 2 19, Trewoidas aeavrdv 68r]y6p elpai TvcpXcop, where avros (cf Ro. 9 3) would have been suf:

.

ficient.

3

:

Cf. also Ac. 5

:

36

(cf.

8

:

:

9) \eyccp

ehai

nm

eavrop, (Ph.

13) ey(h e/JLavrop oinrco Xoyi^ofxai KaTeL\r]4>epaL, (Hel). 10

:

34) ywb:-

4 22) airodtadai vpa^ (some distance from the verb ebibaxd-qre) See also Ac. 21 1; Ro. 1 20 f Blass thinks that in 2 Cor. 7:11 the classical Greek would have had oPTa?, not thai. Even so, but the N. T. has cKOPTes

exetJ'

eavrovs Kpeiacropa virap^LP, (Eph.

:

.

:

.

:

1

Gr. of the Gk. N. T.,

»

Prol., p.

212

f.

p. »

238

f.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 237.

.

MODE An example

1039

(efkaizis)

20 (see above) is hardly pertinent, inf. depends is itself in the accuIn Ac. 25 21, rod UavXau kinKaXeaafxevov Cf. Lu. 6 4.1 sative. T-qpdadat avTov, the pronoun could have been assimilated to the elvaL.

Lu. 20

like

:

on which the

since the participle

:

:

So

case of IlauXou {avTov).

lack of assimilation in Ac. 22

—

order in 3

irefxiropTa

:

1

:

74

riixlv

puadhras, 5

:

15

:

W.

H.)

1

rijxlv yevo/JiePOLS

.

jxe

1:3; 9

:

:

:

59; 2 Pet. 2 :

Contrast Uo^k

21.

:

The same

9.

the

Cf.

ixoi

of Lu.

situation applies

Mt. 26

:

32, /zard to

:

:

See further Lu.

1

;

57; 2 :21; 24

easy to show from this use of the articular

3.

It is

inf.

has no proper "subject."

Take Lu. 2

reasons.

So also margin of

not necessary and avrbs could

/xe is

:

airobwaoi aoi.

lie

of the

of case as in Ac. 16:21,

So with Lu. 2 4, 5td to dpat avrop. The avTop is Heb. 7 24.^ Cf. Lu. 10 35, €70) h tw twap'tpx^-

have been used.

18

The Greek

ofiodvnadop eK\e^aiJ,ePOLS {-ovs

Here the

Trpod^w.

superfluous, as in adai

:

—

to the cases with the articular infinitive. eyepdrjpai

:

:

7 ^terexots eXdopras.

3 with Iho^a ifxavTw of Ac. 26

:

same

in 25

accusative retained in verse 22, €K\e^anepovs)

(cf.

TentJ/aL

Cf. also Lu.

and

/xe,

Tvapabexecrdai ov5e woLetp "Pwjuatots ouaip.

rjfxtp

25, eSo^ev

Xeyovruv

to^v

find the

27 In 2 Pet. 3 3, (cf 1 20) as with airkxioOai aTeWofievoi (2 Cor. 8 20). So fiov

N. T. did sometimes have assimilation d ovK e^eaTLP

We

.

— — — 10 avr^ ayayovra.

:

Lu.

9)

:

/xot

17,

:

and in Heb. 2 yLp6}aKovTes is due to anacoluthon exovTes (1 Pet. 2 11 f.) and with not.

Rev. 2:9; 3:9,

also in

'lovdaLovs elvaL eavTovs (different

The

accusative

:

30; Ac.

inf.

that

due to other

is

27, ep rw elaayayelp tovs yopels to waLdlop

:

where the context makes plain that iraLdiop is the object of elaayayelp and yopeU the ace. of general reference. The article 'Irjaovp,

must be considered

Tc3

Cf. Lu. 18

in explaining this instance.

:

3; 27 4; Heb. 5 12 (three accusatives in W. H.'s text). The ace. with the inf. was normal when the substantive with the Cf. Ro. inf. was different from the subject of the principal verb. 5; Ac. 1

3

8, (paalp TLPes

:

:

:

:

fiij.as

Xeyetp otl (note inf. after

4>rini,

and on

after

In Lu. 24 23, Xeyovaip avTop ^rjp, we see Xe7co with the ace. and inf. Typical examples are seen in Mt. 17 4, KaXop eaTLv was oide elpai, Ac. 12 14; 14 19; 16 13; 24 15; 1 Pet. 3 17; 5 12; 1 Cor. 14 5; Heb. 9 8. See further

Xeyco,

but

it is

recitative on).

:

:

:

:

:

:

Verbal Aspects of

The

Inf., (d), in

tense of the original

case like

Mt. 14

^

See also Lu. 23

^

Moulton,

:

:

7, 2,

is

preserved in the

Xkyovra avrov

avTfj

dovvat.

inf.

as a rule.

o eap alT-qarjTaL,

A

may

elvai.

Cf. Zcitlin,

Ivindred Constr. in Eng. (1908).

:

next chapter.

(hiJLo\6yrio-ep

Prol., p. 212.

:

:

:

The Accusative with

Inf.

and some

1040

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

seem a

bit disconcerting since in the direct discourse in

we

find

Swo-oj,

But the future

is

NEW TESTAMENT

aoristic

Mk. 6 23 The fine be-

anyhow.

:

tween indir. discourse and the simple object inf. is not sharplydrawn. Cf. Ac. 23 12. In Lu. 20 6, Treirei(Tnevos yap karLv 'IcodV7]v iTpo(i)y]Triv dvai, the inf. represents riv of the direct. There was no help for this, since there is no imperfect inf. The future inf. in indir. discourse is rare, but see Jo. 21 25; Ac. 23 30 (see TenExamples of the perfect inf. in this idiom occur in Ac. ses). 12 14; 14 19; 16 27; 25 25; Heb. 9 8. Cf. bixoXo-vei d\ricj>kvaL, P. Oxy. 37 (a.d. 49). There is little more to say. The use of tov and the inf. as subject has already been commented on. See tov e\de7p, Lu. 17 1, where rd aKavdaXa is the ace. of general reference while this genitive inf. is itself in the nominative case. See also Ac. 10 25. We do not have av with the inf. in indir. discourse. In 2 Cor. 10 9, ha fXT] 86^00 d)s ap eKcpo^etv, we have cos dz^='as if.' It is not the CLP in apodosis. Nestle in his N. T. gives at 1 Pet. 5 8 ^rjrcbp TLPa Karatnelp, but surely tlvo. is the correct accent. W. H. places even this in the margin. Souter prints Tiva, departing from R, V. which has ripa. But Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 147) cites CalHnicus in Vita Hypatii, 57, 12, wov evpetp, and 113, 11, ri TOifjaaL (cf. German Was tun?). It may be worth while to add that sometimes we meet an inf. dependent on an inf. (cf. inf. on part, in Lu. 20 20). I have noticed the idiom only in Luke and Paul. Cf. Lu. 6 12, e^eXMv avTOP eis to opos wpoaev^aadaL, where the first is in indirect discourse, and Ac. 18 2, 5td to Stareraxerat KXaudiop x^P'-^f'^So.'- TraPTas tovs 'lovdaiovs, where the second is indirect discourse (indir. command). Cf. Ro. 15:8. Middleton^ suggests that the use of the (7) The Participle. participle in incUr. discourse is older than the inf. This may be true, since in the Sanskrit it developed much more rapidly than the inf. But there were cross-currents at work in indirect discourse. Just as the inf. was circumscribed by the declarative otl, so the participle was limited by 6tl or the infinitive. Thus verbs of showing (de'iKvvfXL, 8r]\6cJ) and of manifesting (cpapepooS) no longer occur with the participle in the N. T. However, we have the participle with 4)alpop.ai ('appear'), as in Mt. 6 16. Besides, the participle has disappeared from use with aladaponaL, pavdapoo, pepp-qpai, (Tvuirjpi. The participles ^vith papdapu in 1 Tim. 5 13 are :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

additional statements, as the Revised Version correctly translates. With the inf. papdapw means 'to learn how,' not 'to learn that.' '

Analogy

in Synt., p. 64.

MODE 4 11; Tit. 3 have the participle in Cf. Ph.

:

:

1041

(eFKAISIs)

But some verbs in the N. T. still They are verbs of percep-

14.

indir. discourse.

by the senses (hearing, seeing, knowing). In the ancient Greek the nominative was used when the participle referred to the subject of the verb. Thus opco rmapTrjKoos meant 'I see that I have sinned.' In the N. T., however, we have declarative on in such clauses (Mk. 5 29; 1 Jo. 3 14). Viteau^ rightly insists on a real difference between the participial conception and the detion

:

^

:

clarative oTi or the inf.

If

the idea

is

one of intellectual apprewe have opco 6rt (Jas.

hension merely, an opinion or judgment, 2

:

24).

8

:

24,

If it is cbs

a real experience, the participle occurs as in Mk. So in Ac. 8 23, eis avvSeafiov

8ev8pa opco TepiTarodpTas.

:

There is something in this distinction. Cf. Skkiroi OTL (Jas. 2 22), but the participle in Heb. 2 9, 'l-qaovv earecfiavcoIn Mk. 8 24 we have on with /SXeTrco and the part, with li'evov. opco. The realistic quality of the part, is finely brought out in opco ae bvTa. :

:

:

Mk.

9

:

av

1, ecos

fiaaCKelav rov deov eXrjXvOvlav tv bwajxei.

'i8o)aLV Trjv

—

Note the tense as in Lu. 10 18, Weo^pow t6v ^aravav Teaovra. Cf. 9:49; 21:20; Ac. 11:13; 17:16. See Jo. 19:33, cbs eUov The tense of the direct is preserved. See i]87] avTou TedvTjKora. for decopkoi), Mk. 16 :4 and Lu. 24:39, Ka^cos l/^e dewpeire Ixovra. For kTvlaraixai take Ac. 15 7 and 24 10. Cf. also fjLvrjixovevo: with OTL (Ac. 20 31) and the part. (2 Tim. 2:8). It is very clear in €vp[(XKod (see OTL in Ro. 7 21) which, as in classic Greek, is commonly used with the participle. See Mt. 1 18; 12 44; Lu. 23: In Mt. 1:18 we have the personal construction 2; Ac. 9:2. :

:

:

:

:

:

:

€vpk.dr}

In Lu. 23

'ixovaa.

the N. T. has only the

8

:

So with

22).

n'evov

(Lu. 14

:

r]y'top.aL

18).

:

2

inf.

k

find three participles.

(Ph. 2

:

1

:

28)

6; 3

:

and the

AoKi/idfco in

participle (2 Cor.

Cf. also exe ne

7).

In 2 Jo. 7 note the part, with

verse 4, TreptTraroDvras with

with

we

(Ro.

irapriTr]-

In

dfjioXoyeoj.

the case agrees only in sense

evpiaKoo,

rkKVbiv.

The

part,

clear (2 Cor. 12: 2),

between 6tl with ol8a (Ac. 23 though this is the only instance of the part, with this verb. It prefers on, but may have the inf. (Lu. 4 41). The difference is even clearer in yivdcaKo:. See otl in Mt. 21 45, the inf. in Heb. 10 34. The usual idiom is 6tl, but note Lu. 8 46, 'iyvwv 8vvap.Lv k^ekrfKvdvlav air' epov, where Christ thus graphically describes the terrible nervous loss from his healing work. He felt the power "gone" out of him. In our vernacular we speak of a sense of "goneness." See also Ac. 19 35; Heb. 13 23. But see Mk. 5 29, eyvcj) rco o-cb^an otl XaTaL. In 5)

rcoi'

and the

is

difference

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

:

Bla^s, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 246.

"

Lc Verbe,

p.

53

f.

Mk.

5

:

30

has the attributive participle after

eiTLyivcoaKCjo

on (Mt. 5

'Akouw also occurs with declarative

the

12

inf. (Jo.

9; 3 Jo. 4; 2

sative

when

18; 1 Cor. 11

:

Th. 3

:

the thing

is

occur in

6

:

it.

21; so usually), :

12; 14

:

These examples have the accu-

understood.

Blass^ curiously calls the

9:4; 26 14. The genitive with (jxnivrj does 11:7; 22:7. Blass has an overrefinement on this

As with the

point.

:

18) or the part. (Ac. 7

:

11, etc.).

ace. incorrect in Ac.

most

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1042

:

with d/couco, so found in the Acts. So 2:6; But see also Mk. 12 28, aKomas avruv crv^-qace. construction of the part,

of the genitive examples are

11; 14

9, etc.

:

So 14

TOVVT03V.

:

58; Lu. 18

:

:

36; Jo.

1

:

The

37.

this construction is seen in Lu. 8 :46; Jo. 19

aorist see Lu. 10

:

In

18.

sentence starts with

i'ra

Mk.

6

:

8

we have

:

perfect part, in

33, etc.

For the

oratio variata.

and concludes with the

inf.

The

Hence the

See the ace. part, in is construed with the inf. Rev. 4 4 as explained by eUov in verse 1, though l8ov and the nominative have come between. One hardly knows whether to treat this con(5) Kat kyhero. struction as indirect discourse or not. It is a clear imitation of the Hebrew "^niii and is common in the LXX with two constructions. It is either Kal eyevero Kal with finite verb (or eyhero 8e) as in Gen. 24 30; 29 13; Josh. 5 1, etc.), or we have asyndeton, For eyevero Kal eyhero plus finite verb (Gen. 22 1; 24 45, etc.). we often find eyeprjdr] (1 Sam. 4:1; 11 1, etc.). This asyndeton is also common in the future as Kal earat with finite verb (Is. 9 16; 10 20, 27, etc.). This Kat earai construction is quoted a few times in the N. T. (Ac. 2 17, 21; Ro. 9 26) from the LXX. For Kat eo-rat Kat see Ex. 13 11 f. W. F. Moulton^ has pointed out that the idiom occurs when the principal sentence has some note of time. J. H. Moulton^ quotes Driver (Tenses, § 78) as describing the '^rr;'! construction in a similar fashion, "a clause specifying the circumstances under which an action takes place." All the examples of these two constructions in Luke fit this description. Luke has in the Gospel eleven of the Kat eyevero Kal examples and twenty-two of the Kai eyevero type. For Kat eyevero Kal see Lu. 17 11; without the second Kat 17 14. See in particular Lu. 8 and 9. It is frequently the case that Luke has ev rcc and the Kat inf. with the idiom. So 9 51, eyevero 8e ev rw avidTrXrjpovadaL avros earrjpLaev. Here Kat is almost equivalent to 6rt. So Kat eye^ etTrei' rts (11 vero ev tc3 elvai We have Kal eyevero Kal also in 1). part. viro8e8enkvovs :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

—

:

—

:

•

Gr. of N. T. Ck.,

»

W.-M.,

p. 24G.

p. 760, n. 2.

^

prcJ., p. 16.

MODE

1043

(efkaisis)

Mt. 9 10. The form Kal kyhero Moulton* counts outside of Luke only twice in Mark and five times in Matthew with the phrase eykpero ore ereXeaev. Cf. Mt. 7 28. Moulton is concerned to show against Dalman that the idiom is not Semitic. He ad:

:

but doubts as to Kai eyhero (asyndeton). But surely the LXX has left its mark in this point The LXX does not have eyhero (or ylveTai) and the infinialso. In the N. T. we TiTpoiaKeadai). tive (but cf. 2 Mace. 3 16 tjv and seventeen Luke in five times find it in Mt. 18 13; Mk. 2 15; mits the Hebraism in

Kal

eyhero

—

:

:

:

Cf.

times in Acts.

Kal,

yivoLTo Kparelv, P. Par.

vixtv

26

(b.c.

163-2).

The other two constructions are absent from the Acts, showing that in the Gospel Luke was more directly using Semitic sources on the point. But even so inf. with eyevero or imitating the

LXX

not ancient Greek, which used ffwe^rj. We do have crvve^r] and the inf. in Ac. 21 35. The modern Athenian vernacular has Moulton finds avpk^T] OTL while the country districts^ use ervxe va. in the vernacurightly sees and papyri in the the inf. with ylveTai is

:

lar KOLvi] the origin of this idiom.

There

is

no

essential difference

with ylverai and kyevero. Cf. Ac. 6:1; 16 16; Outside of Luke (Gospel and Acts) 11 26, etc. 9 32, 37, 43; confined to Mk. 2 23, which Moulton calls is kyevero with the inf. Lu. 6:1." See Ac. 10:25, eyeof assimilation primitive "a

between the

inf.

:

:

:

:

This

vero rov elaeXdelv.

tainly

more

these constructions.^

all

Moulton's presentation, which

is

just than the

ylverai or eyevero in the

is

cer-

mere description of "Hebraism" for We do not have the otl clause with

N. T.

(g) Indirect Questions.

See (c) under Indirect Discourse. It may here be (a) Tense. simply stated that when the principal verb is primary no change in tense occurs. When it is secondary, still no change appears as

a

rule,

though occasionally one does see

as in Jo. 2

it,

:

25; 6

:

6;

But note eirwdavero TTOV yevvdrai (Mt. 2:4); edeojpovv irov Cf. Ac. 10 18. Note difference between T'edeirai (Mk. 15 :47). present perfect in Mk. 15 44 and the aorist in the same verse. 18

:

32.

:

:

For the future ind. see Jo. 21 19; Mk. 11 13. It is only necessary to say that as a rule the same (i8) Mode. mode is retained in the indirect question that was in the direct. Thus see Mk. 5 14; 15 47; Lu. 8 36; 23 55; Ac. 10 29, where :

as primary tenses. lb.

»

As

We

This

is

have the the "

in liurton,

:

:

:

:

:

the indicative occurs.

1

:

ind. after secondary as well

common

idiom in the N. T. as in

lb., p. 17.

N. T. M.

iind T., p.

142

f.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1044

NEW TESTAMENT

instances where a subj. appears in this condue to the fact that the subj. would have been present in the direct (deliberative subj.). Note ri 4)a.y(jiiJ.tv; in Mt. 6 31 and tI 4)ayr]Te (6 25). See also ttov ixevets; of Jo. 1 38 and tlbav TTOV ixevei of verse 39 for the retention of the indicative. The Latin changed the ind. to the subj. in indirect questions, but the Greek did not. This deliberative subj. occurs after primary tenses as in Lu. 9 58, ovk ex^i ttoO ttiv Ke4)aKriv kXIvt], and after secondary tenses also as in Mk. 9 6, ou yap fiSeL tL aTOKpidfj. Cf. also Mk. 6 36; Lu. 5 19; 12 36. So also the optative occurs a few times where it was in the direct. This is the construction with av which has already been discussed twice. See Ac. 17 18, ri av deXoL, for the direct form, and Lu. 1 62, tI av dkXoi, for the indirect. Cf. Lu. 9 46; Ac. 5 24. In 2 Tim. 2 25, ixi, wore 8(hr] (W. H. have SuT] in margin), we have the optative without au after a primary tense if Swt? be correct. Moulton^ considers the subj. here a "syntactical necessity." We need not moralize, therefore, on this instance of the optative even if it is genuine. Radermacher (Neut. Gr., p. 132) shows that the Atticists frequently used the opt. after a primary tense, as copyists often fail to catch the spirit of a thing. The papj^i (jib.) have some illustrations of the same idiom. The other examples of the opt. in indirect questions are all after secondary tenses and the change is made from an indicative or a subj. to the optative. These examples all occur in Luke. As instances of the opt. where the direct had the ind. see Lu. 1 29; 3 15; 18 36. See Ac. 21 33 for both modes. In Ac. 17

the

In

KOLPr].

struction

all

is

it

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

27,

et

:

apaye

:

a primary tense.

:

the opt. represents a subj. with kdv after

xpTjXacfjTjaeLav,

So in Ac. 27

:

12.

In no instance where the

opt. wdthout av occurs in the indirect discourse

In

all

is it

necessary.

these examples the indicative or the subj. could have been

retained.

The

but not by

infinitive

W. H.

with

or Souter.

(y) Interrogative

rlva in 1 Pet.

See under

5

:

8

is

read by Nestle,

(/), {^).

Pronouns and Conjunctions Used.

One notes

at once the absence of oans in this construction, the

We

common

do have on once in Ac. 9 6, XaXrjOrj&eTai aoL oTL <xe del iroulv. Elsewhere the most usual pronoun is tLs and tL as in Ac. 10 29; 21 33. We even have ris ri apn in Mk. 15 24 classic idiom.

:

:

:

:

Tischendorf reads

(double interrogative).

but

W. H. have

older Greek.2

only

As a

ri.

tLs

tL in

Lu. 19

:

15,

This doul^le use appears rarely in the

rule the distinction Cf. Burton,

1

Prol., pp. 55, 193.

^

Viteau, Le Vorbe, p. G8.

between

N. T. M. and

ris

and

T., p. 134.

6s is

pre-

9

MODE

1045

(ErKAiz:i2)

served in indirect questions, as in Jo. 13 24 (cf. 13 12). The occasional confusion between tLs and 6s was discussed under Pronouns. See 1 Tim. 1 7 and Jas. 3 13. Now and then the sim:

:

:

:

pronoun or adverb is used in an indirect question, as was true of classical Greek also. So Mk. 5 19 f. 6aa, Lu. 8 47 14 /ca^cbs, 1 Th. 1 5 oloi, and the various dl riv aiTlau, Ac. 15 ple relative

:

:

:

:

examples of
:

.

:

:

2

:

TTodev (Jo.

4),

(Lu. 8 1

:

:

:

are

6,

:

(Rev. 3

14), irotos

:

:

:

11), irdaos

3), irore

(Lu. 12

(Mt. 16

:

36),

:

ttcos

woraTros (Lu.

9),

correlative words, besides the lone instance of 6rt

The

29).

in Ac. 9

14

8

36), tttiXIkos (Gal. 6

14 (Lu. 22

:

(Lu. 24

ottcos

11) tov

:

Th. 1:9).

20), dwoXos (1

— 6tov ^cfyw;

some

Mk.

In

writers take the oirov

clause as an indirect question with the deliberative subj., but There are plenty of init may be the volitive subj. simply.

in

Mk.

15

:

44 after

31 after

(f)i^w;

14

opaco;

Mk.

:

in indirect questions (see Conditional Sentences) as

d

stances of

3

Ph. 3 :

:

:

:

:

18 after irwdavofxai; 19

:

25 after

:

Th. 2 20; 27

:

besides,

27; 25

trouble.

:

We

12.

:

find

This

is all

19 :

those

13; Eph. 3:2;

:

See also the optative with

15.

:

:

2 after d/couw; 2 Cor. 2

13:5 after Tretpdfco. There are, where a word is suppressed, hke Mk. 11

12; 2

Ac. 4

ol8a;

ytvc^aKw;

passages^ 17

(3ov\evo fxai;

and eTrepcordco; Lu. 14 28 after \p7]Mt. 26 63 after elwov; 27 49 after

2 after irapaT-qpew; Jo. 9

:

after Kpivw; 10 after

davfxa^oj

el

in Ac.

quite classical and gives no

likewise used in an indirect question after

jui?

with the indicative (Lu. 11 35) and ni] wore after SLoXoyiIn Jo. 7 17 an alternative indi15). fo/iat with the opt. (Lu. 3 The only other alternative f). rect question occurs with iroTepov cKoirkoo

:

:

:

—

construction in an indirect question is in 2 Cor. 12 In all these points the N. T. eire. and is etre

—

with the

KOLVT].

The

future ind. (Ac. 25

:

2

f.

after ol8a,

in

harmony

(Mk. 6 36) or the may be compared with

use of ri with the subj.

26 possibly subj. aor.)

:

is

:

In Col. 4 6 ttcos after eidhai is to be 58. of the inf. after oUa ('know how to the use from distinguished 2 In Mk. 24, t8e tL ttolovctlv; the i5e is prob11 13). do.' Cf. Lu. 25 25. For the ace. and the in as Mt. interjection the ably just

TToD after ex^^ in Lu. 9

:

:

:

:

:

ind. question side (5)

by

side see

Mt. 16

:

9.

The Article with Indirect Questions. '

Cf. Viteiui,

Lo Vcrbe,

This classical idiom

p. 02.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1046

appears in Luke and Paul. See to tL (Lu. 1 62), to tI$ (9 46), t6 So Paul has to ttojs in 1 Th. 4 1 and to tL in Ro. xcis (22 4). 8:26 (cf. tL to in 8:27). See also Lu. 22:23f.; Ac. 4:21; :

:

:

:

22

:

is

The

30.

shown

substantive nature of the indirect question

also in Jo.

4

Cf. Lu. 24

10.

:

19

:

is

well

f.

As already explained, this construction (h) Indirect Command. somewhat vague and the line is hard to draw between this and

other idioms. Deliberative

(a)

A

Question.

command may

direct

be turned

into a deliberative question in the indirect with the subjunctive.

The

volitive idea of the imperative thus glides into the delibera-.

In Lu. 12 5, virodel^w 8e vtxtv Tlva (f)o0y]OriTe (f)ol3r]6T]Te top, kt\., we have the point illustrated both in the direct (unperative) and Here the only difference bethe indirect (deliberative subj.). tive.

:

tween the two forms is the accent. Cf. uri cfyojS-qOfjTe in verse 4. In Mt. 10 28 we have 4)o^e"La9e. Obviously this is a natural, though :

not very frequent, turn for the

command

from the

clearly

may be used after This idiom does not differ

might Iva

suffice,

sub-final construction.

but note the following: Mt. 16 20 eireTLiJ.T](Teu

fxrjdep aipoicnv,

atv,

2 Th. 3

XpLaTU)

—

'iva

ecr^tcocrii',

Ac. 25 3 :

Mt. 8 34; Lu. 16

further

:

:

Kal

a species of purpose

is

:

rots iJ.adr]Tdls

:

12 irapayykWoixev

:

It

The examples there given Mk. 6 8 irapriyyeCKev avTols

See Final Clauses).

(or sub-final.

to take.

These

(0) The Co}ij unctions Iva and ottoos. verbs of commanding and l^eseeching.

'Iva

{jirjdevl

irapaKaXoviiev ev Kvpic^

eiTrw-

'Irjaov

See

alTOVjJLevoL ottcos iJ.eTaTreiJL\l/r]TaL.

27; 1 Cor.

1

:

10.

In Lu. 16

:

27

we

f.

and 'Iva which are subordinate to the first 'iva after epwrco. But we cannot follow this use of 'iva after ^eXco and such verbs where it is more or less purely objective. The recitative ort with the imperative in 2 Th. 3 10 is not an instance of indirect command, but simply the direct have the purely

final idea in

both

ottcos

:

command The

(7)

in the

course,

preserved. It seems more obvious and is still common though retreating before 'iva. The negative is, of This use of the infinitive must not be confounded

Infinitive.

koivt), ixi).

with the idiom for indirect assertion (declarative) as in Mk. 12 Note Ac. 21 21, \ky(jiv p.ri 18, o'lTivts XkyovaLV avaaTaaiv p-i] dvai. irepLTtpveLV avTOvs to. TtKva p.r]8e rots WeaLV irepiiraTeLV, where we have

:

:

two accusatives) (same verb as above). So also 23 12, \kyovTes pLrjTe ireiv. Cf. 21 4. Simple enough is the construction

prohibition, not assertion (note incidentally the

with

Xe7coi'

(payetv

p.i)Te

after elira in Lu. 9

:

:

:

54, etircopev irvp KaTa^rjvai;

See also

Mk.

8

:

:

MODE In Mt. 16

7.

:

1047

(efkaisis)

12, avvrJKav 6tl ovk elwev irpoakx^'-v (of. Tpoaex^re in

and 11), we have the declarative on and the indicative followed by the inf. in indirect command. In Lu. 2 26, rjv avrQ verses 6

:

command, but the

direct

See the direct

infinitive.

by

indirect

dom

(Mt. 14:

dovvai

Sojo-co

Mk.

in

There

7).

is

24, ^ocovres

:

6

:

that of in-

23 reproduced in the

the

In Ac. 18

inf. is

26

:

:

2, 5td

dependent on

command

inf. in indir.

5tLV avrbv ^rju,

fxri

like

a certain amount of free-

x^P'-t^^^^o.'- Trdiras,

Other instances of the

inf.

Ac. 25

is

sense comes nearer to the mere object

taken in such transference to the indirect.

TO 5iaT6Tax€i'at K\av8Lov

an

the construction

idelv davarov,

KexP^fJ^o.T'-f^lJ-'^vov fxri

are seen in

20, airrjyyeWov neTavoelv.

6 we have TapayyeWonev aTeXXeaOai, while in verse we have iVa. In verse 10 the direct quotation follows this same verb. In Mk. 6 8 f we have both iVa fii] a'ipoaLv and fxij hdvaaadai (marg. of W. H., Mi) hdvarjade) after wapriyyeLXev. Luke

In 2 Th. 3

:

12

.

:

(9

3-5) gives

:

ar)iJL€Lova6e,

all in

it

mand, but rather the the imperative. But

is

inf.

(cf.

(jwavaiilyvv

jir)

command.

The

also, Oratio Variata,

on

Sentence), but

We have mixture of several sorts as In Ac. 19 1 f., UavXov k\Bt1v Kal ebpelv, :

and the

/cat

—

OTL

In Ro. 3

:

5et,

side.

and the

Cf. Ac. 4

:

:

:

6rt

is

f.

for

19

we

kjufxheLU

inf.

into

dependent on the

inf.

27, dtrjyriaaPTO

Kvpiov Kal OTL ekoK-qaev avTui, Kal ttws ktX.,

5

construction side by

6tl

the construction glides from the

In Ac. 9

:

So in Lu. 9

In Ac. 14 22, irapaKoXovpres

elirav.

8 the recitative

X€7etJ' after ^acri;/.

by

indicative.

infinitive construction

TTto-rtt /cat

OTL.

€ypa\pa vp-lv

indirect

finite clause elrev re side

side after airoKpLdePTes TTJ

5:11,

the infinitive (object-clause subject of eyhero)

followed by

have the

com-

called for here.

we have

and the

14, tovtov

used in the direct as the equivalent of

in 1 Cor.

in the classic Greek. elirkv re,

:

Strictly this point belongs to the chapter

Mixture.

Figures of Speech

a word

inf.

we do have

cdaL (so also verse 9), (i)

In 2 Th. 3

the direct form.

avvavaixiyvvadaL avrcp, the inf. is not in indirect

p.ri

ttcos

eu

rfj

oSco elSev

we have a change from

tov

ind.

question to indirect assertion and then back again to indirect

The change may be from the

question.

as in Ac.

1

Cf. also 23

Mk.

4, TrepijikveLV T-qv :

22.

fjv

rjKOvaaTe

jjlov.

This change appears in But the change may hSvarjcrde.

See also Jo. 12

:

29.

the true text is be just the reverse, from the direct to the indirect, as in Ac. 23 In 27: 10 ort OCCUrs KTr}vr] re irapaaTrjaaL. 23, eLTrev 'Erot/xdcraTe 6

:

8

:

indirect to the direct

kirayyeKlav tov vaTpos

f., if

—

with the

inf.,

a mixture of the

in indirect assertions.

ort

and the

infinitive constructions

This use of on with

tlie

inf.

appears in

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1048

Xen., Cyr.,

classic Attic (cf.

Moulton

Gk. Gr., p. 570.

O. P. 237

NEW TESTAMENT

(ii/A.D.), 87]\a3V 6tl

a papyrus example,

ei to. aXrjOrj (jyaveir] iirjde

See further Winer-Moulton,

TO irpaytia.

See Jannaris, Hist.

18, etc.).

\, 6,

(Prol., p. 213) gives

KpLcreus bdladai.

p. 426.

Subordinate Clause. A complex sentence may be (j) The quoted in indirect discourse as readily as the simple sentence. This principal clause follows the usual laws already discussed. Secondary tenses of the indicative in the subordinate clause suffer no change at all in mood or tense. ^ This is obviously true after primary tenses, as in Gal. 4 15, /jLapTvpoi vplv 6tl d dwarov Here the copula rjv is suppressed. In Lu. 19 15 eScoKare ijloi. So after primary tenses the prinote elirev 4)covr}dr]vaL oh 5e5co/cei. mary tense follows, as in Mk. 11 23, Xtyw on 6s av dirrj eorcw avrQ. Cf. Ac. 25 14 f. But even after secondary tenses the rule is to retain the tense and mode of the direct much more than in the Attic where the mode was quite optional.^ See Lu. 9 33, elirtv Another example of the relative clause appears in uri ei8(hs 6 XkyeL. irpadrjvaL — /cat oaa ex^i. Even after a conMt. 18 25, eKeXevaev dition of the second class the primary tense may be retained, as in Lu. 7 39, eyivuaKev av ris Kal iroTawrj rj yvpi] r;rts aTrrerat avrov For a causal sentence see kK<x)kvop.ev avrov 6tl OTL d/iaprcoXos ecmv. A temporal clause with the ovK aKo\ovBd fxeO' rmcov (Lu. 9 :49). subjunctive appears in Mt. 14 22, rjvayKaaev irpoayeLv ecoj ov See also Ac. 23 12, avede/jLarLaav ecos ov aTroKTeivojaiV. CLToXvaxi. In 25 16, however, we have the optative in the subordinate clause of time with Trplv (exot, Xd/3ot) after cnreKpidrjv, the sole example. It is in Luke, as one would expect. The change here is from the subj. to the opt. In Lu. 7 43, 6tl w, only the subordinate :

—

:

—

—

:

:

:

—

:

•

:

—

:

—

—

:

:

ri

:

relative clause

is

given.

Series of Subordinate Clauses. It is interesting to observe how rich the Greek language is in subordinate clauses and how they dovetail into each other. It is almost like an endThe series may run on ad infinitum and yet all be in less chain. I have colperfect conformity to the genius of the language. lected quite a number of examples to illustrate this complexity of A typical one is Mk. structure, some of which are here given. 11 23. After Xe7co 6tl we have 6s av etwri which has oratio recta, but the relative clause proceeds with Kal prj dcaKpidfj dXXd TnaTevji 10.

:

OTL 6 XaXet ylveraL.

The

relative 6 XaXet

subordinate clauses after Xeyw.

multiplicity of subordinate clauses 1

Goodwin, M. and

is

the fourth involution of

Cf. also Jo. 17:24.

T., p. 273.

is

A

found in Ac. 25 "

lb., p. 272.

similar :

14-16.

.

MODE After avkOero Xeycov Trept ov

The complications

riiias

19 :

ff.

(wpos to

13 there are

are not, of course, always

—

:

:

So also Mk. 6

\eyeLV otl, ktX.

Utlv

In Ac. 11

:

In Lu. 7 39 the oratio recta has a series of three (rts See the threefold series in Ro. 3 8, /ca^cbs 4)a
many.

—

the rela-

is

r?

Cf. also Ac. 3

6v Set bk^aaQai, uv).

ottcos ap,

five involutions.

T^Tts

—

rj

€^a\L(f)9y]vaL,

so

step

eve(l)avLaav,

involution in the oratio recta.

fifth

The first

oratio recta.

on which hangs irpos ovs aweKpldrjv, turn is followed by 6tl ovk eanv and that by xaptfea^at, clause is the XajSot. The irpiu exot again by Tplf

tive clause

which in and this

we have

—

1049

(efkaisis)

:

55, Kepi(f)kpHV oirov tjkovov oti

So again

(infinitive, relative, declarative).

Here

1

Cor. 11

:

23

f

appo{otl, fi, eLTvev and (inf., In Ac. IW, tL). Cf. Lu. 19 15 clause. sition with the OTL have forms of otl, kt\., we two a8e\cj)ovs (TwihaL tovs 7 25, hofXL^ev dependent on the other. then 6rt), one inf., (the indirect assertion So also OTL follows 5td, to XkyeadaL in Lu. 9 7 f In Ph. 4 10 we have the 6tl clause and then the articular inf. In Jo; 6 24 the In 1 Jo. 5 9 we have OTL clause is subordinate to the ore clause. In Jo. 4 1 we have ojs clause. on otl dependent a clause a OTL In Mt. 16 20 the sequence is 'iva—oTL. So Jo. 16: OTL OTL. 4; 17: 23. In Mk. 14 14 we have two cases of oratio recta, one oratio recta).

also the 6 clause

in

is

:

:

:

.

:

:

:

—

:

—

:

:

dependent on the other. In Lu. 24 14. In Col. 1 9 the 'iva in Gal 3

:

7

it is cos

—

otl.

Cf. tva

—

and the infinitive parallel. The instances are numerous where TrepLiraTTJaaL are Thus e^eXOelv one infinitive is dependent on another infinitive. :

:

irpaev^aadaL (Lu. 6 X^crdaL

(18

(Ac. 18

:

Slol

1);

:

2)

;

/jlol

discourse

In Heb. 9

12)

;

SodrjvaL cjiayeiv (8

eis

:

the perfect

:

9)

to ytyovkvai

eirL^ovXyjs els top

is

:

;

yeyevrjadaL

(Heb. 11

;

rpos to detv irpoaev-

:

els

to jSejSaLoJaaL (Ro. 15

3).

In Ac. 23

:

30,

:

jirivv-

avSpa eaeadaL, the future inf. in indirect

dependent on the participle in the genitive absolute. 8, tovto 8r]\ovPTOS tov TTPev/jiaTOS tov ayiov irecpapepojadaL, inf.

follows the genitive absolute.

These are given as are called for about the using of a series other combinations.

The presence shows the

55)

to Terax^vaL KXavdLOU xwpifea^at, after eXrjXvOoTa

detu TrpS^ai (26

8); KarrjpTiadaL deiarfs

:

I'm clause

of so

many

of

There are various

illustrations.

No

rules

of subordinate clauses.

them in Luke,. Paul and Hebrews more periodic structure.

literary quality of a

CHAPTER XX VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS)

Verb), has

The now been

grammar

allows.

I.

Kinship.

finite

verb, verbum finitum

(das

bestimmte

discussed as adequately as the space in this

Originally there

was no

difference

between

But gradually there was developed a difference. It was done largely by the help of the pronouns which were added to the verb-stems. Nouns also had their own inflection. But a considerable body of words partook of the nature of both verb and noun and yet did not cut loose from either. In a sense therefore the finite verb is a combination of verb and pronoun while the non-finite verb combines verb and noun. These verbal nouns are the non-finite verb, verbum infinitum (das unbestimmte Verb).^ They failed to add the personal pronominal endings of the finite verb and so did not become limited to a subject (finite). And yet they developed tense and voice and were used with the same cases as the finite verb. In so far they are true verbs. On the other hand they are themselves always in a case like other nouns. The verbal sub-

verb and noun (see Conjugation of the Verb).

stantive comes to drop

verbal adjective

is

its inflection (fixed

case-form) while the

and plural These verbal

regularly inflected in the singular

of all three genders just like

any other

adjective.

nouns may be regarded either as hybrids or as cases of arrested development, more properly deflected development, for they continued to develop in a very wonderful way. The Greek of the Attic period would be barren indeed if robbed of the infinitives and the participles. The names are not distinctive, since both are participles^ (partake of the nature of both verb and noun) and both are non-finite or infinitives (are not limited to a subject by personal endings). The root-difference between these lies not 1

K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 4.

^

In K.-G. (Bd.

dem

Infinitiv

II, p. 1)

und dem

the ch. begins thus: "Lehre von den Partizipialen;

Partizipe."

Both are "participles" and both are

"infinitives."

1050

.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1051

"PIIMATOZ;)

between both are nouns, but one is a substantive and the other is an adjective. These general remarks may help one to understand the history and usage of in the verbal idea,

but in the noun.

both

infinitive

The

II.

and

It is the difference

Both are

substantive and adjective.

verl^als,

participle.

Infinitive

(t>

dTrap€|X(})aTOS e^KXio-is or

to

d'n-ap€|i<})aTov

pftJia) 1.

on

Origin.

There is no real ground however much scholars

this subject,

for difference of opinion

may

argue as to the

sig-

In the Sanskrit the infinitive did not

nificance of the infinitive.^

have tense nor voice. The root used was that of a substantive closely connected with a verb.^ But it is verbal in Sanskrit also in the notion of action, nomina adionis. In the Veda and Brahmana the number of these verbal nouns is very large. They are used with cases, the cases corresponding to the verb, but that phenomenon appears in Latin and Greek. In Plautus "we even find the abstract noun tactio in the nominative governing its case just as if it were tangere. Classical Greek has a few well-

known examples

of a

noun

or adjective governing the case ap-

propriate to the verb with which

same thing occurs

in the

N. T.

it is

closely connected." ^

also.

Cf. KOLvuvia

4>cot'l

The

(2 Cor.

These substantives have enough In the old Sancases.^ "govern" "verbal consciousness" to in any case (except the occur skrit these verbal substantives has only Sanskrit later The real case). vocative, which is not a

6

14).

:

See chapter on Cases.

one such case-ending so used, the accusative in -tuni or -itum But for the developments in other lan(cf. the Latin supine).* guages, especiall}^ in the Greek and Latin, these Sanskrit verbal

substantives would not have been called infinitives. But they show beyond controversy the true origin of the infinitive before

They were originally substantives used as fixed case-forms (cf. adverbs) which were in any which had a verbal idea (action), and which were made on verbal The Latin shows three cases used in this way: the locaroots. tive as in regere, the dative as in regi and the accusative as in the supine rectum.^ The Greek infinitive shows only two case-

tense and voice were added. case,

endings, the dative -ai as in \vaaL

Sanskrit davdne; Homeric 1

2 s

Fibixtvai

(cf.

also boFkvat, bovvai, with

with Sanskrit vidmdm) or the

' lb., i>. 203. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 297. * Whitney, Sans. Or., pp. 347 iT. Moulton, Prol., p. 202. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 202; Giles, Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 409; Vogrinz,

Gr. d. horn. Dial., 18S9, p. 139.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1052

Thus

locative in \v€lv}

in the

Greek and Latin

cases that were used to form the infinitives.^

substantive that the infinitive makes Sanskrit ddvdne vdsundm

aspect 2

is

We

its start.

only oblique

It is

then as a

see this in the

This substantive ^fji/ in Heb.

tQ>v a-yadOiv.^

clearly seen in the use of TavTos with rod

The

15.

:

= Sovpai

it is

firsf*

struction dovvai

TO.

step towards the verbal idea

Moulton^

ayadd.

was

in the con-

illustrates the border-land of

inf. by the sentence: "He went out to work again." we read "hard work" we have a substantive; but if we read "work hard," we have a verbal notion. Strictly speaking, 5oumt

the Enghsh If

= 'for

TO d7a0d

giving the good things,' while

makes

rd d7a0a

= 'in

This was the original etymological sense See further chapter on Conjugation

seeing the good things.'

as the Sanskrit

ISeiv

clear.

of Verb.

In the Sanskrit we see the primitive inwithout tense or voice. In the modern Greek the inoutside of the Pontic dialect, has disappeared save with

Development.

2.

finitive finitive,

auxiliary verbs, 6e\eL

Xuet,

and even so

rJ^eXa

Sedel,

it

is

exco

in a mutilated state, as

remnants of the ancient

8eaeL,

with infini-

dedijvat, bkaai (Thumb, Handb., pp. 162, 167). Between these two extremes comes the history of the rise and fall of the

tives Xvetv,

Greek

infinitive.

We may

sketch that history in five periods.^

The Prehistoric Period. The infinitive is simply a substantive with the strict sense of the dative or locative case. Cf. the Sanskrit. We may infer also that there was no tense nor voice. This original epexegetical use of the inf. as the dative of limitation has survived with verbs, substantives and adjectives. So Cf. our "a wonder to behold." 6 xpovos Tov TeKeZv (Lu. 1:57). (a)

See dvparai 8ov\€veLV (Mt. 6

:

24),

v^plaai (Ac. 14:5), iKavds

op/iri

(Mk. 1:7).

See also Jas. 1: 19, raxus TO reproduces the dative idea.

Xvcrai eis

The

(6)

Earliest Historic Period.

cative) begins to lose its significance. still

of wishing,

to aKovaai,

The case-form In

the usual one for the infinitive, in

With verbs

els

Homer

(dative or lo-

the dative idea

harmony with the

is

probably the original explanation of and

*

Cf. Giles (Man., p. 470) for \v-tLv

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 515.

*

lb.

'

lb.

6

Prol., p. 203.

«

Burton, N. T.

^

is

form.^

commanding, expecting, beginning, being

able, etc., the dative idea

M. and T., p. Gk. N. T., p. 188. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154.

of the

where

its

relation to the Sans, -san-i.

143, has four.

But

see Robertson, Short Gr.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ)

1053

'knows how to give' 5' for 'going.' But ie>'at=' stepped' has Homer ^ri (for 'giving'). is getting the case-form signs that are there already in Homer Cf. otSare didovai (Mt. 7: 11),

the idiom.

It occurs as apparent subject with obscured or stereotyped. the logical object of verbs of saying in and as verbs impersonal of -n-plv with the inf. is common also use The discourse.^ indirect naturally be used with the ablative, like would Ilpii' Homer. in

purd and the infinitive in Sanskrit,^ and so the Greek idiom must have arisen after the dative or locative idea of the inf. in Greek was beginning to fade.^ In Homer the inf. is already a fixed case-form. The disappearance of -at as a distinct case-ending in Greek may have made men forget that the usual inf. was dative. This dative inf. was probably a survival of the old and once common dative of purpose. Gradually the inf. passed from being merely a word of limitation (epexegetic) to being subject or object. We see the beginning of this process in Homer, though there is only* one instance of the article with the inf.,

But even Odyssey (20. 52), to (f)v\a(xcrav. be demonstrative.^ But in Homer the inf. has tense and voice, a tremendous advance over the Sanskrit inf. This advance marks a distinct access of the verbal aspect of the inf. But there was no notion of time in the tense of the inf. except in indir. discourse where analogy plays a part and the inf. represents a finite mode.^ This use of the inf., afterwards so common in Latin, seems to have been developed first in the Greek.^ But it was the loss of the dative force as an essential factor that allowed

and that here to

is

in the

may

As it came to be, it inf. to become distinctly verbalized.* was an imperfect instrument of language. As a verb it lacked As a person, number and time except in indirect discourse. the

substantive

came

it

lacked inflection (without case or number) after it two cases. Even after the case-idea van-

to be limited to

ished and

it

was used

in various cases

it

was

still

indeclinable.^

^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., § 983. seems a bit odd to find Radormachor (N. T. Gr., p. 145) saying of the inf.: "in seiner urspninglichcn Bcdcutung The inf. is not a mode and the original use was substantival, als Modus."

pp. 157, 159.

1

lb.,

s

Monro, Horn. Gr.,

p. 158.

It

not verbal. *

Monro,

5

Birklein, Entwickelungsgesch. des substantivierten Infin., 1888, p. 2

« '

Monro, Horn. Gk., pp. 158 ff. Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,

8

Gildersl.,

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 568.

ib., p.

Am.

179.

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 515. p. 299.

Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 195.

f.

^

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1054

The addition

of tense and voice to the fixed case-form of the substantive with verbal root was possible just because of the obscuration of the case-idea.

The Classic Period from Pindar on. The articular infinioften used and there is renewed accent on its substantival aspects. The inf. is freely used with or without the article in any case (except vocative) without any regard to the dative or locative ending. Pindar first uses the neuter article to with the inf. as the subject.^ "By the assumption of the article it was substantivized again with a decided increment of its power." It is to be remembered, however, that the article itself is a development from the demonstrative and was very rare in Homer with anything. Hence too much must not be made of the later use of the article with the inf. Hesiod shows two examples of the article with the inf. Pindar has nine and one in the accusative.^ The absence or ambiguous character of the article in early Greek makes it necessary to be slow in denying the substantival aspect (c)

tive

is

Homeric period.^ Hence it is best more freely with the inf. as made its onward way. The greatly

or character of the inf. in the

to think of the article as being used

with other nouns as the article

increased use of the article with the

inf. did serve to restore the balance between the substantival and verbal aspects of the inf. now that tense and voice had come in. The enlarged verb-force

was retained along with the fresh access of substantival force. "The Greek infinitive has a life of its own, and a richer and more subtle development than can be found in any of the cognate languages."^ The infinitive, thus enriched on both sides, has a great career in the classic period of the language, especially the Orators, Xenophon and Plato. It has a

in Thucydides,

In general, however,

great variety of uses.

the

inf.

was not

style for the very reason that it

KOLVT]

period that the

it

The

inf.

KoLvri Period.

M. and

began to disappear.^

The

inf.

begins to disappear before I'm

Burton, N. T.

2

Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 195. Birklein, Entw. d. subst. Infinitivs, p. 4 f.

'

be said that

was synthetic rather than analytic, But it was not till the

1

^

may

lacked clearness and emphasis.^

that

(d)

it

as popular in the vernacular as in the literary

Gilders!.,

T., p. 14.3.

Am.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 576.

Hesseling (Essai hist, sur

I'infinitif grec,

1892, p. 5) puts the matter too strongly.

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 195.

5

Gildersl.,

«

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 569.

^

lb., p. 480.

1055

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS)

on the one hand and on on the other. Jannaris^ outhnes the two chief functions of the inf. in its developed state to be prospedive (purpose hke tva) and declarative (subject or object Hke The fondness for analysis rather oTL, and 'iva ultimately also). than synthesis, particularly in the vernacular, gradually pushed the inf. to the wall. The process was slow, but sure. There is indeed a counter tendency in the enlarged use of rod and the inf. in the kolvt], particularly in the LXX under the influence of the Hebrew infinitive construct, and so to some extent in the N. T. So from Polybius on there is seen an increase of rod and the inf. side by side with the enlarged use of 'iva and 6tl. The two contradictory tendencies work at the same time.^ On the whole in the kolvt] the inf. has all the main idioms of the classic age (with the marked absence of e^' w re) and the new turn given to Tov and kv tw. The Hebrew did not use the inf. as much as the Greek and never with the article. Certainly the inf. is far less frequent in the LXX than in the comparatively free Greek of the N. T., about half as often (2.5 to the page in the LXX, 4.2 in the N. T.).^ But the Hebrew has not, even in the LXX, introduced any

new

uses of the

inf. in

The Hebrew

the Greek.

and was thus unlike rod and the infinitives in the N. T., according

no number of to Votaw,* is 2,276. The number of anarthrous infs. is 1,957, of articular 319. The inroad of tva and on is thus manifest as compared with the Attic writers. The writings of Luke show

inf.

construct had

The

inf.

article

total

the largest and most varied use of the writings have the fewest.^ Paul's use

'

inf.,

while the Johannine

very uneven. Votaw^ the apocryphal books. of case in the inequality same the finds The papyri show a similar situation. Different writers vary greatly, but on the whole the inf. is dying save in the use with auxiliary verbs,

use of Iva with

we

and

the N. T.

find i'm with jSouXojuat

later

kolvt]

going even there as

it is

deXoi in

and

As the

writers.^

is

Of.

ShvafiaL in inf.

Mk.

9

is :

seen from the

30.

In the

Polybius, the

kolvt]

LXX

and

disappears in the later Greek

strange combinations appear, as in Malalas and Theophanes

Gk. Gr.,

p. 5G8.

1

Hist.

2

Kiilker, Quostiones

8

we

de Elocutione Polyb., 1880, p. 302. Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., 189G, p. 55.

*

lb., p. 50.

6

11).,

'

Thompson, Synt.

p. .52.

«

of Attic

for hst of verbs with iVa in late

lb.

Gk., p. 248.

Gk.

Cf. Jann., Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 574,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1056 meet

irpb

tov with the subjunctive {irpo tov

The

kTnppl\poi<jLv,

irpb

tov

never had a monopoly of any construction save as the complement of certain verbs like /3ou\o/xat, dekw, etc. This was probably the original use of the inf. with verbs and it €V(jiB(h(TLv)}

inf.

was true to the dative case-idea.^ It was here alone that the inf. was able to make a partial stand to avoid complete obliteration. (e) The Later Period. Outside of the Pontic dialect the inf. is dead, both anarthrous and articular, save with the auxiliary verbs.^ The use of 0eXco as a mere auxiliary is common enough in Herodotus and probably was frequent in the vernacular then as it was later.* " The fortunes of the infinitive were determined by its nature."^ The increased use of abstract nouns made it less needed for that purpose, as the fondness for I'm and 6tl made it less necessary as a verb. The N. T. is mid-stream in this current and also midway between the rise and the end of this river. The writers will use the inf. and I'm side by side or the inf. and OTL parallel.

Even

we

in the classical Attic

find

ottcos

after xei-

As ottcos disappeared I'm stepped into its place. In Latin ut was likcAvise often used when the inf. could have occurred. The blending of Iva and 6tl in the kolvy] helped pao/jLac

(Xenophon).^

on the process. In the N. T. the exclusive province of the inf. is a rather narrow^ one. It still occurs alone with Sum/xat and yueXXco. It has a wide extension of territory with tov. But on the whole it has

made

The

distinct retreat since the Attic period.

story

is

one of

the most interesting in the history of language.

we have

seen, the infinitive

was a substantive, but a verbal substantive.

This set case of an

Significance.

3.

Originally, as

abstract substantive has related itself closely to the verb.^ Stoic

grammarians^

Tos eyKKiCTLs.

called

it

a verb,

Apollonius Dyskolos^" called

it

the later grammarians followed his error.

grammarians actually took

^

Rueger, Beitr. zur Monro, Horn. Gr.,

'

Jebb

^

in V.

hist.

The

airapeixcpaTou prjixa, airapefKpa-

infinitivus

a

''fifth

Some

in the

mode" and

of the

sense

Roman

perfectus,

Synt. d. griech. Sprache, 1895, p. 11.

p. 154.

and D.'s Handb.,

p. 324.

G. Meyer (Essays und Studien, 1885, p. 101) says that the Albanians are the only Slavic folk "dem ein Infinitiv abgeht." It is due to the mod. Gk. *

lb., p. 326.

^

Thompson, Synt.

6

Blass, Gr. of

8

Curtius, Erlaut., p. 296.

9

Jolly,

of the Attic Gk., p. 247.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 221.

Gesch. des Inf. im Indoger., 1873,

v

p. 16.

i"

Jb., p. 222.

lb., p. 22.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT THMATOz)

1057

they mistranslated yevLKr] by genitivus.^ Bopp^ rightly perceived that the inf. has a nominal origin and was later adjusted to the verb in Greek. It is not a real verb in the very height of its glory .^ And yet the consciousness of the nominal The origin was partially obscured even in the time of Homer.

just as

is so far forgotten that this dative may appear nominative and the accusative. The tenses and voices have developed. But Brugmann^ seems to go too far in saying that already the inf. was "only" a verb in the popular feeling. Moulton,^ indeed, harks back to ApoUonius Dyskolos: "The mention of 'The Verb' has been omitted in the heading of this

original case-form in the

chapter, in deference to the susceptibilities of grammarians

who

wax warm when Xveiv or \vaas is attached the noun. But having thus done homage

pro-

to the verb instead of

to orthodoxy,

we

ceed to treat these two categories almost exclusively as if they were mere verbal moods, as for most practical purposes they are."

He

origin

and part

that

all

is

states, it

is

every schoolboy knows that in

true, that

of the use the inf. is a substantive,

distinctive

verbal."^

is

It is not a

overstating the case.

I

but "nearly

venture to say that this

mere question

is

of the notion of

The

the user of the infinitive in this passage or that.

history

is

development of the inf. we see the blending In this or that example the of both substantive and verb. substantival or the verbal aspect of the hybrid form may be dominant, but the inf. in the historical period is always both substantive and verb. It is not just a substantive, nor just a verb, but both at the same time. The form itself shows this. The usage conforms to the facts of etymology. It is not true that the article makes the inf. a substantive as Winer ^ has it. As a matter of fact, therefore, the inf. is to be classed neither with the noun nor with the verb, but with the participle, and both stand apart as

as

it is.

In the

verbal nouns.

full

The

article did enlarge^ the

French

le

in Arabic.

savoir like the

As a matter

the least capable of pp. 31

1

lb.,

3

Cf. Schroeder,

Greek

to yvuivai.

all

is

und Lateinischen,

just

There

is

no

infinitive

better off with the adjective endings)

parts of speech of 2

ff.

Uber

inf.

das Trinken and

of fact, the inf. because of its lack of end-

ings (here the participle is

scope of the

The Germans can say

as the use of tense did.

fulfilling its functions.^

Vergl. Gr., p. 3.

die formelle Untersch. der Redet.

im Gricchischen

p. 10.

*

Griech. Gr., p. 515.

«

lb.

6

Prol., p. 202.

>

W.-M.,

«

p. 406.

"

Goodwin, M. ard W.-M., p. 399.

T., p. 298.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1058

NEW TESTAMENT

In its very nature it is supplementary. It is either declarative or prospective/ but always a verbal substantive. There is a difference between t6 irpaaaeiv and 17 irpd^Ls. Both have verbal stems

and both are

The

abstract.

But

voice of Trpaaaeiv.

difference^ lies in the tense

wpaaffeLV

has

all

that

is

and

in irpa^Ls plus tense

to divide the infinitive into the popular in the grammars. These anarthrous and articular uses so represent two uses of the inf. in simply uses do exist, but they the verbal side of not affect They do its substantival aspects. under its subproperly be discussed inf. may the inf. at all. The

and

I decline, therefore,

voice.

stantival

and

its

But even

verbal aspects.

so a

number

of uses

cross over as indirect discourse, for instance, or the inf. to express

purpose (with or without the article). We must look at both sides of the inf. every time to get a total idea of its value. A number of points of a special nature will require treatment. 4. (a)

Substantival Aspects of the Infinitive. Case {Subject or Object Infinitive). Here I mean the cases

As a substantive the most part, all notion

this

case.

it

expressions has the

Thus note 9

The

inf. is always in a have to dismiss, for of the ending (dative or locative) and treat as an indeclinable substantive. A whole series of impersonal

of the inf. itself, not the cases

inf.

Cor. 9

1

:

rat eupeiv ahrb,

(3

avve^r] ^aara^eaOaL,

15)

:

irperov

(Lu. 6

CTrjvai.,

(Heb. 9

(Ac. 2

24)

:

^eiv OVK oKvqpbv.

enough.

The

:

rjv

We

:

fxaWov

/xol

ecrrlv

(Heb. 4

aivodavelv,

(Mt. 18

ixira^ airodaveiv,

:

(Ac. 21

irXrjpooaai,

rip.1v

:

14)

avfjL4>epeL

5) ovK ecTTLV vvv 'XeyeLV,

16; 2 Pet. 2

:

articular inf.

is

:

6;

:

35)

:

25) tvKO-

arodapelv,

(Mt. 22 17)

(Ac. 27

24) 8e2 wapa-

bwarbv KpareXadai, (Ph. 3:1)

So Ac. 20

:

13) tav yevr]-

12) eyevero e^eXdelu avrbv, (18

TTwrepov ecFTLV eiaeXOeLV, (Jo. 18

e^tuTLV bovvai,

it.

obvious.

as subject besides the ordinary verbs.

15 koKov

27) awoKeiTaL roTs avdp6)TroLs

:

used with

is

21.

:

:

avra ypa-

to.

All this

simple

is

likewise found in the nominative

as in Mk. 9 10, t'l eanu to €k veKpwv avaaTrjuai. Here the article is not far removed from the original demonstrative. Cf. 10 40, to KadiaaL ovk laTiv hp.bv hovvai, where bovvai is probably the original :

:

One naturally feels that the articular inf. more substantival than the anarthrous, as in Ro. 7 18, Tb de-

dative 'for giving.' is

:

but that is not correct. The subject-inf. occurs freely both with and without the article in the N. T. as in the KOLvr] generally. See Mt. 15 20 to 4)aydv, (Mk. 12 33) to

Xetj/

irapaKeLTai

jjlol,

:

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 568

Philologie Comparee, vol. 2

Monro, Horn.

XX,

Gr., p. 153.

f.

ii.

Cf. Henry,

:

Revue de Linguistique de

la

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) ayawau, (Ro. 7

:

and

18) to deXeiv

to KaTepya^eadai.

1059

Add

Cor.

1

7:26; 11:6; 2 Cor. 9:1; Ph. 1:21, 24,29; Heb. 10:31; Ro. 14: 21. The origin of this nominative or subject is probably due to its use with impersonal expressions. Moulton^ illustrates it by the Latin humanum est errare, where the force of the locative form errare may be seen by translating: 'There is something human in erring.' This may have been the original idiom, but it has gone beyond that to mean: 'Erring is human.' English students often forget that 'erring'

here infinitive, not partia step further in the N. T. to see Tov and the inf. used as subject nominative. Cf. Lu. 17 In 2 Cor. 7 11 the substantival as1; Ac. 10 25; 1 Cor. 16: 4.

both in sense and history.

ciple,

is

It is

:

:

pect of the

shown by the use

inf. is

of the

pronoun avTo tovto

to

nominative with KaTeLpyaaaro. Cf. the inf. in the predicate nom. with tovto in Ro. 1 12, tovto 8e kaTiv awirapaKKrjdrjvaL. So in Ro. 13 11, ccpa i]8r] Vfj,a.s e^ vttvov eyepdrjvai, where in the

\vTrr]drjvaL

:

:

the

in predicate apposition

with c6pa. Originally it Th. 4 6 we have both anarthrous and articular inf. in apposition with tovto. Cf. the appositive inf. in Ac. 15 :28; Jas. 1 :27; 1 Th. 4:3; 4:13. inf.

is

doubtless

'

time for

In

arising.'

1

was the

:

also

Ro.

The object-infinitive in the accusative is even more common both with and, particularly, without the article. In the N. T. more than half of the instances of the inf. come in here, the object-inf. with verbs of various sorts.^ In the LXX, however, it is

The accusative

rare in proportion to the other uses.

to us

more manifest when the

apirayp.6v rjyrjaaTo to elpac laa 177770-070.

Kol TO kvepyelv.

Cf. Ac. 25

further

1

Cor. 14

:

Oeco,

So

direct object of

:

in 2

the ace.

tainly in 1 Th.

3:3,

may be

:

2, SkofiaL TO

In Ph. 4

10.

:

:

this is true.

In Ro. 14

13 to

:

aii)

the ablative with

more numerous. that have the

bkoixai.

A

fairly

inf. in

The

we should list

indirect discourse

1

Prol., p. 210.

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 234.

(/), (/3)). 2

Cer-

Blass^ calls n^erai

is

it

in ap-

In 2 Cor.

naturally look for

instances without the article are

complete

on Modes (Indirect Discourse,

See

10, dfe^dXere t6

that of general reference.

irapchu dappfjaai,

jj.r\

is

ovx

:

position with the accusative tovto, as in 2 Cor. 2:1.

10

6,

where the articular inf. is the 13, with 6 hepywv koI to dekeiv

to aalveadai,

here "quite superfluous."

case :

11, ob TrapatroO^iat to airodavelv.

39; 2 Cor. 8

virlp e/ioD (l)poveiv,

See Ph. 2

article occurs.

Votaw,

N. T. was given in the chapter These infs. are in the ace, of the verbs in the

Inf. in Bihl. Gk., p. 57.

Cf. 2 Esd. G

:

8

r
KarapynOwat.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1060

may

though some of them

possibly preserve the original dative

But the

or locative idea.

with the

ace.

reference, while the inf. itself

is

inf.

that of general

is

in the ace. case, the object of the

verb of saying or thinking. Cf. Lu. 2 44, voiiiaavTes avrov dvai. The occasional use of the nom. predicate, as in Ph. 4 11, efxadov :

:

accents the ace. character of the object-inf.

avTapKTjs elvai,

point

noun

or pronoun

Cor. 5

and the

in the dative

is

the

in the ace, as in 1

inf.

The

11, eypa\f/a vyuv nrj avvavafxiyvvadai.

:

This

commands where

clear also in the case of indirect

is

illustrations are

numerous and need not be multiplied (see list under Indirect Discourse). With ^ovXaiiaL, bvvajiai, deXu the dative makes a good idea and was probably so understood in the beginning.^ It may be questioned, however, the ace. Xa/SeiJ',

(Lu. 18 Tpos,

Mt.

Cf.

(5 :

:

1

19

:

if

usage this idiom

in actual

k^ovXrjdr] dxoXOo-at, (1

34) X€7co vpXv

p.r]

(16

bp.baaL,

(both

1) Trpos TO Selv Trpoaeuxeo-^at

Ac. 27:

ToXiJirjaaL,

(1

Th. 4:11)

qavxa^^LV Kal Trpaaativ

TapaKaXovp.ei> Ibia Kal

to.

See further

of these infs.).

18; Ro. 14: 2; Gal. 3: 2;

1

But the

22

inf.

:

Mk.

^T]p)',

eveKa (2

The

:

(Jas.

clvt'l

4

Cor. 7: 12);

genitive

to.

:

:

15)

ecos

^iXort/xetcr^at

cis

:

(Ro. 1:11); 5id (Ac. 8

:

28).

;

(Heb. 2

5td

(Ac. 8 :40).

infinitive

may

ottio-co

Xcyco

8)

12; Lu. 16: 3; Jo. 5: In the ace. also are the

in It

the N. T.

was

to avTov

Cf.

15,

:

5td

The only

more

is

Heb. 2 15, Greek Plato, Rep. :

TrpaTTeiv,

be found with eTn\avdavoixaL as in

in Ph. 3

:

13).

tov

iraPTos

instance of

rare in classic

14, eireXadovTO Xa^etp (cf. kirCKadkadai tov epyov in

But we have

:

2) Xo7tfo/xat

genitive, for instance, appears with the

and confined to pronouns. 8

Cor. 10:

irepiacreveLV /cat

13.

:

except in apposition with tovto.

The

the ace, one with

occurs in the other oblique cases also with

an attribute with the

433.

13), (2

Tapa-

Trpocrexeii',

(Ro. 15

Selj^),

5: 28; 12

Cor. 10

20); wpos (Mt. 5

or less frequency. prepositions

ovk elirev

infs. in

not also

is

uri 4>o^r]9fjs

epya^eadaL (note the interrelation

articular infs. with prepositions like 11); M€rd (Lu.

20)

12)

:

the other general reference with

XpLffTOV bib-Kovov yeyevrjadaL (cf.

:

At any

Heb. 6

Mk. :

rate in Lu. 1

10. :

9,

we have an undoubted genitive. Cf. also peTepeXridrjTe TOV TTLaTevaaL (Mt. 21:32). The very common use of tov with the inf. must also be noted. Most of these are genitives, as in tov airoXkaaL (Mt. 2 13). The free use eXaxe tov dvpaaaaL

(cf.

1

Sam. 14

:

47),

:

with the inf. where the case is not genitive will be discussed under a special section under the article with the inf. Cf., for instance, Lu. 17: 1; Ac. 10 :25; 20 3; 27: 1. The gen. occurs of TOV

:

1

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 154.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1061

'PIIMATO2)

with substantives just as other substantives are used. This is a See Ac. 27 20 eXTrts iraaa tov aoi^eaOai, fairly common idiom. rod nerexeLV, (10 13) tw U^aaiv tov bbvaeXTrtSt evr' 9 Cor. 10) (1 adaL VTrevejKeLV (acc), (1 Pet, 4 17) /catpos tov ap^acrdaL, (Heb. 5 :

:

:

:

:

12)

avTols 6 Beds

TOV

irvevfj.a

where the

nil aKoveLv,

Lu.

1

57, 74; 2

:

Ph. 3

:

21, Kara

:

Note, in particular, Ro. 11:8, Uo^Ktv KaTavv^ew, 6(j)da\fjL0VS tov nij iSXeTeiv, Kai UTa

rod bihaoKeiv.

xpetaj^

6; 10

T-qu

are parallel with

infs.

19; 21

22; 22

:

:

illustrate well

regarded as a real substantive.

Cf.

/cara^u^ecos.

Note

6, etc.

euepyeLav tov 6vvaadaL avTOV

They

these suffice.

:

/cat

especially

Let

viroTa^ai.

how the inf. continued to be The genitive occurs also with

adjectives as in QpaSels tov wLaTevaaL (Lu. 24 25) eTOLp.ol kap.ev TOV aveXelv (Ac. 23 15). The genitive is found with d^tos (the :

;

:

19, 21, cl^los KX-qdrjpaL (cf. Rev. 5 4 tov iropeveadai, may be due to a^Lov, but is probably used as subj. nominative in a rather loose way. The inf. in the genitive is specially common in Luke and also in Paul.^ The ablative illustrations are not very numerous, but they are Thus we have the abl. with verbs of hindering as in Mt. clear.

anarthrous

In

4, 9).

19

14,

:

TOV

nil

fxri

as in Lu. 15

inf.)

1

Cor. 16

:

:

:

and Lu. 4 Greek had also

KcoXuere aura kXdelu wpos

The

TopeveadaL.

classical

[xe,

:

42, KaTtlxov avTOV

to

and the

as

inf.,

in 1 Cor. 14 39, and to nn after verbs of hindering, which last does not occur in the N. T., so that it is probable that an inf. without the art. as in Mt. 19 14 is in the abl., though not cer:

:

tain.

Moulton

{Prol., p. 220) illustrates

19 by B. U. 1031 (ii/A.D.) (fypovriaov tov (Lycaonian inscription) tQ bLxoTonwavTi

Lu. 4

TvoLfjaaL,

(ii/iii

(jTvdpuv.

avTOU, Ac.

:

10

:

22; 2 Cor.

47

bvvaTai dvetv.

pii

^7}v,

B. U.

(iii/A.D.) Ko^XvovTes tov

N. P. 16 See further Lu. 24:16 eKpaTOVvTO tov

KaTeiravaav tov :

J.

42 and Ac. 12 H. S., 1902, 369

tov to Xoe-Kov

A.D.) tov ^riv peTaaTiiaat,

36 ixri

15

p.^

:

KoiKvaai tls tov

/xi)

pii

eirL'yvwvai

14

jSaxrto-^rjrat,

:

18

Cf. also Ac. 20:20, 27; Ro. 11:10;

1:8; Heb. 7

:

23; 1 Pet. 3

:

10.

Cf. in the

LXX,

Gen. 16:2; 20:6; Ps. 38:2; 68:24 (quoted in Ro. 11 10); Is. 24: 10; 1 Sam. 8 7; Jer. 7: IO.2 The abl. occurs also with prepositions as e/c in 2 Cor. 8:11, e/c tov execv and Trp6, in Mt. 6:8 :

:

In Ac. 15 28, TOVTo^v Twv eTravajKes, a-Kkx^aOai, the inf. is in the abl., in apposition with the preceding words. The only instance of the inf. in the instrumental in the N. T. occurs in 2 Cor. 2 13, tc? pii evpeTu pe TLtov. The inf. is not found

TTpo tov aiTTJaai.

:

:

with (xvv in the N. T. Votaw {Inf. in Biblical Greek, p. 29) notes six examples of the instrumental t^ and the inf. in the LXX text 1

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 234.

«

cf. Vitcau,

Le Vcibc^

p. 172.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1062

B

of

(2

Chron. 28

:

22; Eccl.

But other MSS.

21).

(ii/B.c), aXXcos ^6

1

:

NEW TESTAMENT

16; Is. 56

:

Moulton {ProL,

vary.

4 Mace. 17: 20, Pb.

6;

p. 220) cites L.

T(3 pLTjdev' ex^LV.

h as in h rw evXoyetu (Lu. 24 51). extremely frequent in the N. T., especially in Luke. The possible Hebraistic aspect of the idiom comes up under Prepositions with the Inf. There remains, of course, a possible locThe

locative occurs with

:

It is

ative use of a form like \veLv.

idea

is

which

preserved in the N. T.^ is

But one doubts if this original Mt. 16 3, yivco<xKeTe haKpiveLv,

Cf.

more naturally explained

:

as a dative: 'ye have knowl-

edge for discerning,' though 'in discerning' makes sense. But with the dative it is different. There is no instance of the dative inf. with a preposition, but the original dative is clear in all examples of purpose without rov or a preposition. Thus Mt. 5 18, :

ovK fjXdov KaraXDcrat,

for fulfilling.'

dXXd

ir'KrjpciaaL, '1

So Lu. 12

:

came not

for destroying,

but

58, dds epjaalav airr^WaxQaL, 'give dili-

gence for being reconciled.' Cf. Mt. 7: 11; 16 3 with oUa and yivdaKO). See further Mt. 2 2, TjXdofxev rpoaKwrjaaL, 'we came for worshipping'; Jo. 21:3, i;7rd7w aXieveiv, 'I go a-fishing.' So Ro. 3 15, o^els €Kxeat al/xa, 'swift for shedding blood.' The substantive also has the dative inf. in Ro. 9 21, k^ovaiav iroLrjaaL, 'power for making.' See further 1 Pet. 4:3, KareLpydadai, 'for having wrought'; Gal. 5:3, 6
:

:

:

11

15, Kaipov avaKapypai,

:

idiom and, with

inal

substantive, the

inf.

'time for returning.'

all

This was the orig-

the rich later development as verbal

did not wholly get

away from the

dative

idea.

We have to cross our tracks fre(6) The Articular Infinitive. quently in discussing the inf. in a lucid fashion. Numerous examples of the articular inf. have already been given in treating the cases of the inf. But the matter is so important that it calls for special investigation. If we pass by the doubtful articular TO (t>v\aaaeLv, in the Odyssey,^

inf.,

a few examples

in the oldest

we

still

Greek (two

find (as already

shown)

in Hesiod, nine in Pin-

The use of the article with the inf. grew with the growth of the article itself. But it is not to be overlooked that in Homer the anarthrous inf. had already developed nearly dar, nine in the Lyrics).^

1

Moulton,

Pro!., p. 210.

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 179. Gildersl. (Am. Jour, 488) gave this name ("articular infinitive") to the idiom. 2

Cf.

with a benevolent detachment." Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichte, p. 91.

of mj' httle things *

of Philol., 1912, p.

"I watch the fate

VERBAL NOTJNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) all

the constructions of this verbal substantive.^

the article

made no

essential

change

in the inf.

both substantive and verb.

But the use

larged the range of the

It

inf.

The

with prepositions.

article

The

1063

addition of

was already

It

of the article greatly en-

extended to new uses, especially was first used with the nom., then

is

The use of tov and tQ with In the Dramatists and Herodotus it is still chiefly in the nom. and ace, though we do find tov and tQ, and we see the inf. used with prepositions also.^ In Thucydides the articular inf. suddenly jumps to great prominence, occurring 298 times,^ especially in the speeches. Of these 163 occur with prepositions.^ He even uses to with the future inf. and with av and the inf. The orators likewise use the art. inf. the ace. and then the other cases.

the

inf. is

wholly post-Homeric. ^

very freely. It was especially in Demosthenes that ''the power of taking dependent clauses" was fully developed.^ Only the Pontic dialects, as already noted, keep the inf. as a living form, and a few substantives preserve a mutilated form, like to (i)ayi ('

eating')

Handh.,

= TO

(i)ayetv,

p. 117).

to

('kissing')

cf)LXL

In the N. T.

we

see

= to

all this

(Thumb,

^tXetz'

power

still

retained

with the further development in the use of tov. The inf. itself, as we have seen, is retreating in the N. T., but it still possesses the full range of its varied uses. The articular inf. has all the main uses of the anarthrous

inf.

Votaw (The

finds 22 uses of the inf. (19 anarthrous,

of these overlap

and are

artificial.

Inf. in Bihl. Gk., p. 51) 1.5

articular),

Moulton (ProL,

but some

p. 214) con-

cludes from a study of the inscriptions that the articular

only invaded the dialects as the essential difference in idea,

inf.

was starting. There is no and the mere presence or absence of kolvt]

the article is not to be pressed too far. Jannaris^ admits that sometimes the verbal character is completely obscured. On that point I am more than sceptical, since the inf. continues to have the adjuncts of the verb and is used with any voice or tense. Jannaris^ thinks that in late Greek the substantival aspect grew at the expense of the verbal and the articular inf. had an increasing popularity. I admit the popularity, but doubt the dis1

2

Goodwin, M. and T., p. 315. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 164.

Goodwin, M. and

»

*

Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichtc, p. 91.

^

Gildersl., Contrib. to the Hist, of the Inf.,

T., p. 315.

Transac. of the

Am.

Philol.

Asso., 1878, pp. 5-19. '

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 315.

Hypereides, he adds, even exceeds

thenes. '

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 576.

a

jb.^ p, 577.

Demos-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1064

NEW TESTAMENT

Jannaris makes the mistake of

appearance of the verbal aspect.

taking "substantival inf." as coextensive with "articular inf." Blass^ questions if the article always has its proper force with the

and suggests that perhaps sometimes it merely occurs to show Here again I am sceptical. Why does the inf. case of the inf. need to be shown any more than other indeclinable substantives? In Mt. 1 the article does serve to distinguish I have never seen an articular inf. where object from subject. the article did not seem in place. Moulton^ considers the use of the article "the most characteristic feature of the Greek infinitive

inf.

the case of the

Blass' seems puzzled over the frein post-Homeric language." quency of the articular inf. in the N. T., since it is chiefly "confined to Luke and Paul, whose writings have most affinity with the literary language.

Jannaris^ notes

how

scarce

it is

in the writings

and inscriptions, doubtful in the mediaeval period, and absent from the modern vernacular. "The articular infinitive, therefore, could not resist any longer the tendency of the -time, whether it was conceived as a noun or as a verb."^ The analytic tendency drove it out finally. Moulton^ has made some researches on the use of the articular inf. in the of

John and

in unlearned papyri

dialect inscriptions. field's

Elis,

He

does not find a single instance in LarHe finds one from Lesbos, one from

Boeotian inscriptions.

one from Delphi, a few from Messene, etc. He notes the Meisterhans on the subject. The conclusion seems to

silence of

be inevitable that the articular

was common

as rare in the Attic ver-

inf. is

It is "mainly a Herodotus and the tragedians, and matured by Attic rhetoric." Aristophanes uses it less than

nacular as

it

in the Attic orators.

literary use, starting in Pindar,

and Aristophanes gives the Attic vernacular. And yet it is not absent from the papyri. Moulton^ counts 41 instances in vol. I of B. U. The N. T. uses it about as half as often as Sophocles

often to the page as Plato. He scores a point against Kretschmer's view that the Attic contributed no more to the kolutj than

any one

of the other dialects, since

from the

literary Attic

"the

articular inf. passed into daily speech of the least cultured people Polybius^ deserves to rank with in the later Hellenist world." ^ his use of the inf. He employs the of wealth Demosthenes in the lb.

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

»

2

Prol., p. 213.

«

Prol., pp.

s

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

^

lb., p.

4

Hist.

*

lb., p. 215.

9

Allen,

Gk.

Gr., p. 579.

The

Inf. in Polyb.

Compared with the

213

ff.

213.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 47.

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOs)

1065

11,265 times, an average of 7.95 to the page. He has the articular inf. 1,901 times, an average of 1.35 to the page. In the N. T. the inf. occurs 2,276 times, an average of 4.2 times to a page. The articular inf. is found in the N. T. 319 times, an inf. in all

The N. T. shows fewer uses, in than the O. T. or the Apocrypha. Of the 303 (Moulton) instances, 120 are in Luke's writings and 106 in Paul's Epistles. But Votaw^ counts 319 in all. The MSS. vary in a number of instances and explain the difference. Moulton^ gives the figures for all the N. T. books thus: James 7, Hebrews 23, Gospel of Luke 71, Paul 106, Acts 49, 1 Peter The other 4, Matthew 24, Mark 13 (14), John 4, Revelation 1. has all. Luke the most varied use at have it N. T. books do not

average of

.6

times to a page.

proportion, of the articular

of the articular

inf.,

inf.

and Paul's

is

somewhat uneven.^

The use

of the articular inf. in the various cases has already been suf-

In general one may agree with Moulton^ of the articular infin. in N. T. Greek does appUcation that "the what is found in Attic writers." The beyond not in principle go inf. with prepositions is reserved for articular the of special use is little doubt that the first use of There discussion. separate as it was with everything.^ demonstrative was inf. TO with the the article is almost avaaTrjvai, veKpchv eanu TO eK tI In Mk. 9 10,

ficiently discussed.

:

demonstrative, certainly anaphoric is true of 10

:

40 where to

(cf.

verse

9).

The same thing

Kadlaat refers to Kadlawixev in verse 37.

not necessary to give in detail many examples of the articuN. T. I merely wish to repeat that, when the article does occur with the inf., it should have its real force. It

is

lar inf. in the

Often this

will

make extremely awkward

kv TcS daa'ya'yeLv tovs youels to TraLdlov.

English, as in Lu. 2

:

27,

But the Greek has no con-

cern about the English or German. It is simply slovenliness not to try to see the thing from the Greek standpoint. But we are

not to

make a

slavish rendering.

Translation should be idio-

hardly worth while to warn the inept that there is no connection between the article to and the English to in a sentence like Ph. 1 21, e/JLol yap to ^tjv XpLaros /cat to airoOauelp /cep5os. Here the article to has just the effect that the Greek article has matic.

It

is

:

with any abstract substantive, that of distinction or contrast. Life and death (living and dying) are set over against each other. See further Mt. 24 45; Lu. 24 29; Ac. 3 12; 10 25; 16 9; 21 :

:

1

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., pp.

2

Prol., p. 216.

8

Votaw,

50

IT.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 52.

:

:

"

Prol., p. 215.

^

Monro, Horn.

:

Gr., p. 164.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1066

25:11; Ro. 4:11,

12;

9 :1; Ph. 1:23, 29; 2

Some

special

13, 16, 18;

6;

:

4

:

10; 1

We

cussion.

:

words are needed about rod and the

inf.

The

may

question of purpose or result

be deferred for separate disthe genitive inf. with rod occurs with

have seen how

substantives, adjectives

verbs,

13:8; 14:21; 2 Cor. 8:10f.; Th. 3 2 f.

and

The

prepositions.

ablative

with Tov is found with verbs and prepositions. The ablative use is not here under discussion, since it involves no special difficulties save the redundant /X17. We may note that in Critias tov was very common with the inf.^ We see it also in Polybius in inf.

named

an Attic idiom that became and Byzantine Greek.^ Cf. jui) d/ieXjycTTjs tov ewx^'Jo-at Qoivico, O. P. 1159, 11-13 (iii/A.D.). There is no special difficulty with tov and the inf. with verbs as object except in a case like Mt. 21 32 where tov TrtcrreDo-ai ''gives rather various uses

very

common

above.^

It is

in the postclassical

:

the content than the purpose of

The

fxeTefxeX-qdyjTe.'^'^

instances with substantives like Ac. 14

awdrjvai,

:

9, exet

give no trouble on the score of the article.

(objective genitive) that has to be noted.

As

hepyeiav tov dvvaadai.

doubtful

in 1 Cor. 16

if

to be taken with

:

iriaTLv tov

It is the case

So with Ph. 3:21,

to adjectives, as already noted, 4, kav Be a^Lov

fj

tov

Ka/j,^

iropeveaOaL,

Tr}v

it

is

the

Moulton^ so regards it, But there is a use of tov and the inf. that calls for comment. It is a loose construction of which the most extreme instance is seen inf. is

but

in

it

may

Rev. 12

cl^lov

as genitive.

be a loose nominative, as we shall see directly.

:

7, eyeveTO TroXe/ios kv tc3 ohpavQ, 6 Mlxo-tiX

/cat oi

ayyeXot.

This inf. (note the nom. with it) is in explanatory apposition with iroKefios. Moulton^ cleverly illustrates it with the English: "There will be a cricket avTOv TOV

match

iroXe/xrjaaL fxeTo.

tov dpaKOVTos.

—

the champions to play the rest." It is a long jump to from a case like Ac. 21 12, TrapaKoKovixev tov /xi) ava^alvetv avTov, where the simple object-inf. is natural (cf. 1 Th. 4 10 f.). this

:

:

Cf. also Ac. 23

:

20,

avpedevTO tov

epojTrjaaL

ae

oxcos

KaTayay-QS.

"This loose inf. of design" is found twelve times in Thucydides, Demosthenes and five in Xenophon.^ These writers prefer the prepositions with tov and the inf. Polybius in his first five books has this simple tov and the inf. only six times, all negative.^ six in

1

Birklein, Entwick., p. 9.

2

Allen,

3

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 578. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 578.

7 *

The

Jann., ib.

Inf. in Polyb., pp.

29

ff.

^

Moulton,

^

jb.

«

lb., p. 218.

Prol., p. 216.

Cf. Birklein, Entwick., p. 101.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT The normal

use of rod with the

But many Luke (Gospel

final as it

in the

is still its

of the examples are not final nor consecu-

chief use.^

It is only in

tive.

was undoubtedly N. T. that

inf.

was developed by Thucydides, and

1067

'PIIMATOs)

Tov with the

Acts 21) and Paul

23,

(without prepositions)

inf.

is

(13) that

They have

common.^

And Luke has himself two-thirds of Matthew has six. John avoids it. Moul-

five-sixths of the examples.^

the total in the N. T., ton* shows that of Paul's "thirteen" examples two (Ro. 6 6; Ph. 3 10) may be either final or consecutive, two (Ro. 15: 22; 2 :

:

Cor. 1

1

:

Cor. 9

(Ro.

1

:

are ablative, five occur with substantives (Ro. 15

8) :

10; 16

24; 7

not

final.

We

find

:

:

4; 2 Cor. 8

3; 8

:

:

11; Ph. 3

12; 1 Cor. 10

:

:

:

23;

21), four are epexegetic

In Luke about half are

13).

It is this loose epexegetical inf. that calls for notice.

LXX

Gen. 3 22; 19 19; 31 20; 47: 29, very common idiom in the LXX is due to the Hebrew ^. It does not occur in Polybius.^ In the LXX also we see tov and the inf. used as the subject of a finite verb in complete forgetfulness of the case of tov. Cf. 2 Chron. 6

:

7,

it

in the

eyeveTO

eTrl

1

2

18; Eccl. 3

the

:

:

KapSiav Aavel5 tov Trarpoj

Sam. 12:23;

So :

(cf.

:

It is possible that this

etc.).^

inf.

:

1

12; 1 Esd. 5

had already

/xov

tov

OLKoSoiJirjaaL oIkov.

Ki. 8: 18; 16:31; Ps. 91:3; :

67.^

lost for the

One must

most part the

dative ending -ai and the locative -t

Is.

49:6;

Jer.

recall the fact that

significance of the

Now

{-eLv).

the genitive

both obscured and the combination is used as subject nominative. We have this curious construction tov

1

«

and the dative

-at are

Moulton, Prol., p. 216. Mr. H. Scott gives the following

^

list

for tov

ib., p. 217.

and the

inf.:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1068

in Lu. 17:

See also Ac. 10: 25, kyeCf. further 20: naturally rarer in the N. T. than in the LXX. Moul1,

avkvbeKrbp eaTiv tov

and 27:

vero TOV daiKdeiv,

It is

3.

ton (ProL,

htj ekOetv.

tov axoirXeLv.

kKpldr}

1,

a papyrus example closely allied to it, See Winer-Moulton, p. 411, for numerous examples in LXX. But closely allied to it is the use of tov as object-inf., with ei^reXXoAtat in Lu. 4:10 (Ps. 90 p. 220) gives

0. P. 86 (Iv/a.d.) Wos tov Trapaax^drjvaL.

:

11); KaTavevcAi in 5

7: 19; 20.

:

eTrto-reXXoj in

Cf. also

7; o-rrjptfo) in 9

15

tTOLfjLos

:

:

51;

20; irapaKoXeco in 21

TOV in Ac. 23

departure from classical Greek." ^

harmony with the genius and

It

:

12; a-vvTideixai in 23

This

15.

:

in Ac. 3:12; KaKoco in

Troteco

surely

is

however, after

is,

history of the

inf.,

:

"a wide in

all

though the

nominative use of tov comes from the LXX. The vernacular papyri show a few examples of tov and the inf. It is found in the inscriptions of Pisidia and Phrygia. Cf. Compernass, p. 40. Moulton^ illustrates Lu. 1 9 with aneXeiv :

tov ypcKpeiv, B. U. 665 (i/A.D.) ext TOV TTcoXeLv,

— QkaOai, C.

;

Mt. 18 25 and :

B. U. 830 (i/A.D.);

P. R. 156; Lu. 22

1

Cor. 9

:

Jo. 5

:

7

(exco)

with

6 with e^ovalav

ip'

— TOV

—

6 with emaiplas tov evpe7v, B. U. concludes that the usage is not common in the papyri and holds that the plentiful testimony from the concurs with the N. T. usage to the effect "that it belongs to the higher stratum of education in the main." This conclu-

46

(ii/A.D.).

:

He

LXX

N. T. and the papyri, but not as to the Hebrew inf. construct had a considerMoulton seems reluctant to admit this obvious

sion holds as to the

LXX, where

obviously the

able influence.

Hebraism. (c) Prepositions. We are not here discussing the inf. as purpose or result, as temporal or causal, but merely the fact of the

prepositional usage. classical

writers

The idiom cannot be

said to be unusual in

Greek.

show

Jannaris^ agrees with Birklein^ that classical some 2,000 instances of this prepositional construc-

The

writers (classic and later) who use the idiom most frequently are Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius, Diodorus, Dionysius, Josephus, Plutarch, Dio Cassius. The most prolific user of tion.

the construction (651 times) .^ 1

If

Burton, N. T.

came

is Polybius (1,053 instances) and Josephus next the prepositional adverbs be added to the strict

M. and

T., p. 159.

In late Gk. this use of rod and the

to displace the circumstantial participle

die itself in time. ^

ProL, p. 219

3

Hist.

Cf. Jann., Hist. f.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 576.

Gk.

and even

finite clauses,

inf.

only to

Gr., p. 483.

*

Entwickelungsgesch., p. 103.

»

Krapp, Der substantivierte

Inf., 1892, p. 1.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) list

1069

number is very much enlarged, especially who has 90 with x'^P^v, 115 with a/xa, 504 with 5ta,

of prepositions, the

in Polybius,

160 with Trpos, 74 with eis, 24 with h>, 90 with ext, 33 with /xerd, 41 with Trept, only one with Trapd.^ The idiom was here again later

than the articular

But

literary.

it is

inf.

and was

itself

common

also in the

It is rare in the papyri, according to

ing to Granit.^

save in the recurrent formula, tU to larly in the case of Trpos to. Trpds TO

firi

Votaw^

tv \xr\htvi fxefx4)dr]vaL,

Moulton,^

and particu-

Cf. xpos to tvxIv, B. U. 226 (I/a.d.)

— evTvyxo-veiv, O. P. 237 the prepositional

finds

also Attic in origin and Greek inscriptions accord-

(I/a.d.) inf.

;

rpos to

—

;

Seridijvai (ib.).

almost one-half of

all

the

Apocrypha and the N. T., the proportion being about the same in each section of the Greek Bible. articular infs. in the O. T., the

Not

quite

all

the prepositions were used with the

Greek, the exception^ being dm.

'Ajj-cjii

had

inf. in

ancient

only with the geni-

it

irapd with the ace, Trept with the with ace. and loc, v-rrep with the ablative, utto with the ablative.^ It was not therefore freely used with all the usual cases with the different prepositions. As a rule the article was essential if a preposition occurred with an inf. The reason

tive, KaTo.

ace.

and

with the accusative,

gen., Trpos

between words. It inf. from that of composition of preposition with the verb if the two came in conjunction. Cf. di^Tt toD XeyeLv in Jas. 4 15. A few instances are found without the article. Thus di^Tt 8e apx^cydai (note presence of 8e between) in Herodotus I, 210. 2. It appears thus three times in Herodotus. So also in ^Eschines, Eum. 737, we have TrXiyi/ yafjLov TvxelvJ So Soph., Ph., 100. Winer ^ finds two in Theodoret (cf. IV, 851, Trapd avyKXoodeadaL). The papyri give us CIS jSdi^at, 0. P. 36 (i/A.D.), and the common vernacular phrase^ ets Moulton^o Cf. 56s juot Tetv in Jo. 4 10. Treij' ('for drinking'). D, and one 256 cites also an example of axpi from Plutarch, p. Michel 370) kirl from an inscription of iii/B.c. (O. G. I. S. 41,

was due to the absence was otherwise almost impossible

for this

of division

to

tell this

use of the

:

:

—

Xaii^aveip.

Moulton

The

instances without the article are clearly very few.

(Prol., p. 81) suggests

The

that the significant frequency of

Inf. in Polyb., p. 33.

1

Allen,

2

De

3

Prol., p. 220.

"

Goodwin, M. and

"

Cf. Birklein, Entwi(!kelung8gcsch., p. 104.

Inf. et Part, in Inscr. Dialect.

Grace. Quostiones Synt., 1892, p. 73. " Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 19.

T., p. 320.

These preps, "retain

this dis-

qualification in the N. T." (Moulton, Prol., p. 21G). ^

8

Thompson, Synt. W.-M., p. 413.

of Attic Gk., p. 240.

»

"

Moulton, lb.

Prol., p. 216.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1070

in the papyri

eis iretv

is

due to Ionic

several instances of anarthrous

2 Esd. 22 :24;

(cf.

kKdeiv in 1

3 :3); throus

Mace. 16

:

9;

tcos

inf. in

:

The

LXX furnishes

els eKcfyvyelv

in Judg. 6 :11

influence.

els,

as

27; Judith 4

:

15).

o5 oiKTeipTJaai in Ps.

Tob. 11:

ov e77t(Tat in

fj-expt-s

The

38

Sir.

NEW TESTAMENT

Cf. also

1.

Note 122

also

^cos

Ruth

2 (so

:

with anar-

ttXtjv

Polybius, etc.

tenses have their full force in this prepositional construc-

tion, as in

Mk.

5

:

4, 5td to

— dedeadat

/cat

BuairaadaL Kal

— avvreTpi-

Naturally some tenses suit certain prepositions better, as

(pOai.

h

with the present tense.^ The principles of indirect discourse apply also to the inf. with prepositions. Cf. neTo. to kyepdrjval p-e Trpod^w (Mk. 14: 28). In the N. T. the accusative seems to occur always

even when the nominative predicate would be possible,^ as in 5td TO pkvHv avTop (Heb. 7 24). So also Lu. 11:8. But note Xen., :

Cyr.,

It is

not necessary for the article to come next to the

Mt. 13

in

to ^tXo/xa^?)? elpai.

I, 4. 3, 6td

Several words

25.

:

may

inf.

as

intervene and the clause

be one of considerable extent. Cf. Mk. 5:4; Ac. 8:11; Heb. 2. But the N. T. does not have such extended 1 Pet. 4 clauses of this nature as the ancient Greek, and the adverbs usually follow the inf.^ The English "split inf." is not quite parallel. In the 0. T. there are 22 prepositions used with the inf. and the Apocrypha has 18, while the N. T. shows only 10.^ Of these

may

11:3;

:

only eight are the strict prepositions

{clvtI,

5td,

h, k,

els,

peTo.,

and two the prepositional adverbs evena and e'ojs. It remains now to examine each in detail. 'AvtI tov is not rare with the inf. and is chiefly found in the Greek orators.^ But we have it in Thucydidcs, Xenophon and Tp6, Trpos)

Herodotus^ has only 11 instances of the preposition with but 5 of them are with avTl. It does not occur in Polybius. In the N. T. we have only one instance, Jas. 4 15, clvtI TOV Xeyeiv. Votaw gives one for the LXX, Ps. 108 4, clvtI tov Plato.

the

inf.,

:

:

ayairav.

but one (genitive, Heb. Mr. H. Scott reports the 33 exx. thus: Paul 1, Jas. 1, Heb. 4, Mk. 5, Mt. 3, Lu. 9, Ac. 9, Jo. 1. The 0. T. has it with the inf. 35 times and the Aid has 33 instances in the N. T.,

2

:

15,

Slo.

TavTos TOV

^rjv)

all

in the accusative.

M. and

»

Burton, N. T.

"

*

W.-M., Votaw,

6

Birklein, Entwick., p. 104.

*

Helbing, Die Priipositionen bei Herod., p. 148.

T., p. 50.

p. 415.

'

lb., p.

413.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) Apocrypha

26,'

so frequent in

stands as 2 to

oTi it

The idiom

with the accusative.

all

Xenophon and Thucydides In later Greek

3.^

comes to displace even 5td va. in modern Greek

and

I'm

is

and Byzantine)

{koivi]

it

finally shifting to

English "for that")-''

(cf.

to

5ta

that as compared with

though

ovrws,

1071

not sur-

It is

N. T. with comparative frequency. It is most frequent in Luke's writings, and once in Paul's Epistles, and rare in the other N. T. writers.'* It is usually the cause that is given by 5ta to, as in Mt. 13 5 f., 5ta to It is not merely the practical equivalent of on and 8l6tl, exetv. but is used side by side with them. Cf. Jas. 4 2 f 5ta to alTtlprising therefore to find

it

in the

/jlt]

:

:

crdaL v/jids

U

7;

8l6tl

2:4; 19

discourse, as in Lu.

The

It

atretcr^e.

/ca/ccos

may

11.

:

Note two

fj.ri

In Mk. 5:4 6:48; Ac. 8 11; 27:9. than the reason that is given.^ Blass :

unnecessarily rejects Jo. 2

common

'is

sense from

evrt

to

:

it

aces, in Ac.

Mk.

perfect tense occurs seven times, as in

Ets TO

.,

stand alone, as in Lu. 9

:

or with the accusative of general reference as in indirect

8,

:

—

5 :4

4

(ter);

:

2.

Lu.

rather the evidence

is

(Gr. of

N. T.

Gk., p. 236)

24.

without much difference in with the inf.^ But the N. T. does

also with the inf.

and

irpbs to

not use €xt with the inf. There is no doubt about the final use of eis TO whatever is true of the consecutive idea. In the late Greek Jannaris^ notes a tendency to use eh to (cf. /3pa5us tt's to \a\rjaaL in Jas. 1 19) rather than the simple inf. Cf. 1 Th. 4 9. But this tendency finally gave way to I'm. The 0. T. has eh to 124, the :

:

Apocrypha 28 and the N. T. 72 times.^ In the N. T. it is more common than any other preposition with the inf., h coming next with 55 examples. Moulton^ counts only 62 instances of els to in the N. T., but Votaw is right with 72. Paul has it 50 times. There are 8 in Hebrews and only one each in Luke and Acts, a rather surprising situation. The papyri '" show scattered examples of

it.

Cf.

Pet. 4:1,

els

els

TO kv to

—

ij.r]8evl iJieix(f)dr]vaL,

that in the N. T.

els

the classic notion of 1

11,

:

ets

TO aTrjpLxOrjvoLL.

Ro. 3:26; 7: 4; 8

:

note the long clause.

This

29; Eph.

1

Votaw,

2

Birklein, Entwick., p. 107.

'

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 375 Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 165.

* 6

is still

1

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

Burton, N. T.

P. Fi. 2 (iii/A.D.) 4 times.

There

In

1

no doubt to has broken away to some extent from purpose. That idea still occurs as in Ro.

l3i.u>aaL,

M. and

f.

T., p. 101.

is

the usual construction.

:12; Ph. 1: 10; 1

Th. 3

:

Cf.

5; Jas.

«

Birklein, Entwick., p. 107.

^

Hist.

« «

"

Gk. Gr., p. 487. Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Prol., p. 218. lb., p.

220.

p. 20.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1072 1

3:7; Heb. 2

18; 1 Pet.

:

Heb., to go no further.

Ph.

1

and

in Jas.

23, kindviilav

:

1:19

it

:

mand 2

Cf. also

there final

:

1

10; 2

we

Th. 2

Cor. 8

:

:

sometimes, so

8:6; Gal. 3

:

as the object of verbs of

it

epcoroo/xev

2,

(cf.

:

raxeojs

ixi]

19; 26

2;

:

1

comTh.

1

aakevdrivai.

Cor. 11

:

22

Just as ha came to be non-

eis to.

was with

it

to

els

which seems to express con-

ets to,

tov also) as in Ro. 1

:

20; 12

3; 2 Cor.

:

Cf. the double use of (boTe for 'aim' or 'result.'^

17.

perfect tense can be used with

and Heb. 11

elb'evai.

In

substantive

the content of the verb as in

So in Mt. 20

10.

ceived or actual result

The

find

a really dative idea in

is

Mt. and

in

usages.

occurs with the adjectives raxus and ^paSvs.

or entreaty giving

12; 3

:

Besides,

9.

to avaXvaaL,

els

we notice other we have it with a

also with the verbal adjective deodidaKTOL in 1

It is epexegetic

Th. 4

and other examples

17,

:

In Paul

:

3

the present or aorist

usual.

is

ets

Eph.

to as in

1

:

18

to jeyovevai, the only instances.

ets

occur to some extent in the

ets

to

But

These developed uses of ets to (1 Ki. 22 8; 1 Esd. 2 24;

LXX

:

:

8:84). 'Ev

Tc3

appears in the tragedies.^

cydides, 16 in

Xenophon, 26

the classical writers did not use

tQi

found 6 times in Thu-

But

Blass^ observes that

the temporal sense of

kv 7c3 in

Moulton^ sought to minimize the

'while' or 'during.' in the O. T. ev

It is

in Plato.^

fact that

occurs 455 times (45 in the Apocrypha) and

Hebrew a and held that it did not go beyond what we find in Attic writers. But he took that back in the second edition^ under the suggestion of Dr. E. A. Abbott that we must find Attic parallels for 'during.' So he now calls this "possible but unidiomatic Greek." In the N. T. we have ev tQ and the inf. 55 times and 3/4 in Luke. In the Greek Bible as a whole it is nearly as frequent as all the other prepositions with the inf.'' The Semitic influence is undoubted in the O. T. and seems clear in Luke, due probably to his reading the LXX or to his Aramaic sources.^ Cf. Lu. 1: 8; Jan8 5 (ej; rc3 cnreipeLv); 24 51; Ac. 3 26; 4 30; 9 3, etc. naris^ sees here a tendency also to displace the participle. The that

it

exactly translates the

in principle

:

:

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

M. and 2

N. T. Gk.,

:

p. 236;

:

:

Moulton,

Prol., p. 219;

Burton, N. T.

T., p. 161.

Birklein, Entwick., p. 108.

3

Moulton,

* ^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237. Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

*

But Dalman, Worte

»

Hist.

Gk.

Prol., p. 215.

Jesu, p. 26

Gr., p. 379.

f.,

^

PfoL, p. 215.

«

P. 249.

denies that

it is

an Aramaean constr.

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOS) idiom

not confined to Luke't writings.

is

Mk. 4:4; Heb.

2

8; 3

:

:

12, etc

as in Mt. 13 4; Lu. 8:5; Ac. 3 would have the present participle. :

the aorist

inf.

as in 2

:

h

27

it is

:

4; 13

the present

tQ elaayayttv, (3

21) kv

:

to) ^aTTTLadrj-

One

questions, however, whether the matter so

much

tQ occurs only 12 times in the N. T.^

of simultaneous

Gen. 32

8;

made 13

:

:

mean with

to

4; 27

:

temporal.

:

ception

is

context, like the aorist par-

is

:

40; 9

In Ac. 3

:

26

:

The

29.

Jer. 11

(cf.

idea

13, kv rco \kyeLv, the

notion

not wholly temporal in

Mk,

cf.

kiri TU)

k/jLal

irapafxevLV,

"Ev€Kev Tov appears in

is

4

17),

:

sees content in Lu.

12

kv

Heb. 2

rw should be

:

:

Cf.

30, it is

15;

6 48; Lu. :

inf. In

O. P. 1122, 9

f.

Mt.

not always strictly

more

like

12.

In

Heb. 3

rather causal.

is

preposition occurs in the N. T. with the

But

that

all

either the present or the aorist.

12; Lu. 8

Votaw^

means. Heb. 8

This

19, kv tu) evpetv.

It

Cf. ev tQ virora^at. in

action.

to be

thus presented, leaving the

is

by the

precise relation to be defined

is

The aorist inf. with kv is more correctly just

finesse as that.

the simple action of the verb which ticiple

(cf.

or a temporal conjunction with the aorist in-

'l-qaov ^aTTTLadhros)

dicative.

25; inf.

But

mt, where Blass^ sees the equivalent of the aorist participle

worked out with

:

where the Attic writers in Luke we have also

26,

:

Mt. 13

Cf.

Ordinarily

.

1073

1

:

21.^

:

The con-

No

other

the locative case.

(a.D. 407).

Xenophon, Plato and Demosthenes, usu-

ally as final, but also causal.^ Sophocles in his Lexicon quotes the construction also from Diodorus and Apophth. There is

only one instance of pwdrjvat

in the

it

airovSriv vjxwv,

T-fjv

preceding participles,

where

N.

T., 2 Cor. 7: 12,

it is

tveKtv tov

aSLKrjcravTos,

eveKev

The

part.).

is,

:

inf.

and the

of course, the genitive.

likewise, appears in the

'E/c tov,

(2 Cor. S

case

two

tov adurjOevTOS

good passage to note the distinction between the

(a

tov ^ave-

'iveKev

clearly causal as with the

11, kK tov exeiv),

N. T. only once with the

but the case

is

ablative.

inf.

Its usual

is that of outcome or result.^ Votaw^ gives no from the 0. T., but three from the Apocrypha. Blass* 2 Cor. 8:11, to be equivalent to Kadd av 'ixv- More

idea in Attic prose illustration

takes

1 2

'

it

in

» Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237. p. 20. " Blass, Gr. Qf N. T. Gk., Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 50. p. 237. Birklein, Entwick., p. 106. It is found in Polyb. also. Cf. Kiilker, Ques-

tiones, p. 302; Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 35.

Att. Rcdn., 1891, p. 18) finds

it

«

Birklein, Entwick., p. 105.

7

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

Lutz (Die Casus-Adverbicn bei

"zucrst bei Antiphon." «

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREP.K

1074

likely it is

meant

NEW TESTAMENT

to accent the ab'iity growing

"out of" the posIn Polybius k rod with the inf. has a more varied use (departure, source of knowledge, source of advantage).^ He uses it 25 times. "Ecos Tov, hkewise, occurs but once (Ac. 8 40, ews tov kXdelv), and with the genitive. Birklein does not find any instances of session of property, whatever

may

it

be.

:

and the inf. in the classic writers, though he does note and less frequently axpc rov.^ Cf. nexpi rod wXelv, P. B. M. 854 (i/ii a.d.). But in the 0. T. Votaw^ observes 52 instances of ews TOV and 16 in the Apocrypha. Cf. Gen. 24 33; Judith 8 34. We have already noted the anarthrous use of ecos kXdetu in Cf. Gen. 10 19, 30, etc. 1 Mace. 16 9 A. So also ews o5 and )uexpt(s) ov and the inf., 1 Esd. 1 49, and Tob. 11 1 B. It is rather surprising therefore that we find only one instance in the N. T. and that in the Acts. The construction is probably due to the analogy of irplp and the inf. Merd to is found only a few times in Herodotus, Plato and €ws TOV

/xexpt TOV

:

:

:

:

:

Demosthenes.^

It appears,

and usually with the

:

however, thirty-three times in Polyb-

The idea is temporal and a practical equivalent for the aorist participle. In the O. T. Votaw" finds it 99 times and only 9 in the Apocrypha. ius

the aorist

aorist tense.^

is

There are 15 examples in the N. T. and the case is the accusative always. Merd to vanished with the inf. in modern Greek.^ The aorist is always used in the N. T. save one perfect (Heb. 10 15). :

See

Mk.

14; 14

28, ^erd to kyepdfjual

Eight of the examples occur in Luke's writings (Lu. 12 5; 22 20; Ac. 1:3; 7:4; 10 41; 15 13; 19 21; 20 1). See also Mt. 26 32; Mk. 16 19; 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 10 15, 26. 1

:

:

ixe.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

IIpo TOV in the ancient writers

the temporal sense. ^

was used much

like Tvplv

and

It gradually

in

invaded the province of irplv, though in the N. T. we only meet it 9 times. It is not common in the papyri nor the inscriptions.^ See Delphian inscr. 220, irpb TOV irapafxeivai. Polybius has it 12 times. ^° In the O. T. we find it 46 times, but only 5 in the Apocrypha." The tense is always the aorist save one present (Jo. 17 5). Cf. Gal. 3 23, irpo TOV ekdtiv ttjv ttI(jtlv. There is no essential differ:

:

34

^

Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p.

2

Entwick., p. 105. Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20. Birklein, Entwick., p. lOS.

3

< «

Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 41.

6

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

f.

? s »

i"

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 386. Birklein, Entwick., p. 105.

Moulton,

Prol., p. 214.

Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 33.

" Votaw,

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOs)

1075

ence in construction and idea between Trpiv and the The use of irpiu with the inf. was irpo Tov and the inf.

and

inf.

common

was used with the inf. The usage and the article never intervened. But the inf. with both rpiv and rpo is in the ablative case. Cf. ablative^ inf. with purd in Sanskrit. Ilpti' was never used as a preposition in com-

Homer

in

became

before the article

fixed

position,

but there

just as

is

much

reason for treating wplv as a

prepositional adverb with the ablative sidering 9)

The

.

TOV,

ecos

not to say

use of the article

ecos

is

the

as there

inf.

alone as in

common

tcos

for so con-

is

Mace. 16

tKOelv (1

The

idiom.

fact of

:

Trplv

and the inf. held back the development of wpo rod. In modern Greek Tpd rod as irpoTov occurs with the subj. (Thumb, Handb., In the N. T. irplv is still ahead with 13 examples. The p. 193). instances of irpd tov are Mt. 6:8; Lu. 2 21; 22 15; Jo. 1 48; :

13

:

19; 17

:

5; Ac. 23

Ilpos TO is

15; Gal. 2

:

12; 3

much

'with a view

the same sense as

The idiom

to.'-

is

:

:

23.

:

the remaining idiom for discussion.

the ancients in to,'

:

els

to

very

It

and

was used by

eiri

common

'looking

to,

in Polybius,^

150 examples, and there are 10 of irpos tw. But in the O. T. we have only 14 examples and 12 in the Apocrypha.^ The N. T. shows 12 also. Some of the LXX examples are of 7rp6s rcS (Ex. In 1 16; 2 Mace. 7: 14), but in the N. T. they are all irpos to. the papyri Moulton^ finds wpos to rather more common than eh In the N. T. Matthew has it five times (5 28; 6 1; 13 30; t6. 23 5; 26 12). These express aim unless 5 28 is explanatory :

:

:

of pXeTcov.^

KB, 3

Mark

where wpos

1,

:

Eph. 6

has

to belv

:

11,

DEFG

"subjective purpose."^ times) tenses occur. (d)

The

once, 13

it

means 'with

MSS. read

while other

13;

:

:

:

:

els).''

els; 1

:

Luke has

22.

it

twice (18

reference to'; Ac. 3

19 only

:

Paul's four examples (2 Cor.

Th. 2

:

Both present

9; 2

:

8) all

and Mt. 6:1.

give the (6

Numerous examples

of

Cf. irpbs to deadrjvai in

Infinitive with Substantives.

Th. 3 times)

aorist

(3

with substantives were given in the discussion of the cases of the inf. The matter calls for only a short treatment at this The use of the inf. with substantives was ancient and point. natural, first in the dative or locative and then in the genitive the

inf.

**

1 Whitney, Sans. Gr., § 983; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 158. with the inf. after both positive and negative clauses. « lb., p. 218. 2 Birklein, Entwick., p. 107.

3

Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 33.

<

Votaw,

6

Prol., p. 220.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

">

» '

.

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

W.-M., Monro,

p.

Homer

N. T. Gk.,

414 note.

Iloni. Gr., p. 154.

used

irpif

p. 236.

, :

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1076 with

is

was always common

It

rod.

usage

NEW TESTAMENT

in the classic Greek. ^ The with both the anarthrous and the The same thing is true of the O. T. and the Apocso frequent as not to call for illustration. The

common

articular inf.^

rypha.'

It is

meaning

is

in Polybius

that of complement and the inf. most frequently occurs with words of time, fitness, power, authority, need, etc. It

is

abundantly used in the N. T. both with and without the article. are (Mt. 3 14) xp^'i-o-i' iSaTTTLadfjvaL, (Lu.

Some anarthrous examples 2

:

Wos

dojfxa

1)

aTroypa(j)eadaL,

€VTa4>La^€LV, (Ac.

(Gal. 5

drjvai,

:

LXX.

:

21)

TOV

Tri(TTi.v

common 1

:

23 note

(Heb. 7

rod

:

:

(19

40)

:

11) copa eyep-

5) €VToKy]v airobeKaTotv

(27

:

eTndviJ.iav

eh to avoKvaaL.

and the

inf.,

Cf. (Lu. 1

(10

irepLTeixelv,

aojdrjvaL,

e^ovaiav yeueadai,

These are all real datives and enough in the N. T., more so than

genitive.

is

12)

KptdijuaL, etc.

In Ph.

course, the case TOV

:

15) eXrtSa ^ueXXetj', (Ro. 13

same substantives may have r]p.kpai

1

3) 6(/)etXer7?s TOLrjaaL,

(Rev. 11: 18) Kaipos the construction is in the

24

:

(Jo.

20)

:

57) xpopos tov reKelv, (2

19) e^ovalav

:

eXTrts

eight times in Luke's writings

tov

and nine

The

though now, of

tov iraTetv, (Ac. 14:9)

aco^eadat,

etc.

occurs

It

in Paul's Epistles.

It is

about as common in proportion as in the LXX.^ See further Lu. 1 74; 2 6; 21 22; 22 6; Ac. 20 3; Ro. 1 24; 8 12; 11 8; 15:23; 1 Cor. 9 10; 10:13; 2 Cor. 8: 11; Ph. 3 :21; 1 Pet. 4: 17; Heb. 5 12, etc. Since the inf. is a substantive, the genitive relation with other substantives is obvious and natural. (e) The Infinitive with Adjectives. This idiom is likewise classical and is common from Homer on.^ As already shown, the case varies with different adjectives. This inf. is complementary as with substantives. It is natural with adjectives as any other :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

on longest with Swards, Uavos, but other began to give way to els ro (cf. Jas. 1 19, Taxi's els TO aKovaai, ^pa8vs els to XaXijaai.) rather than the simple inf. and finally this disappeared before IW (cf. Mt. 8 8, kavos Iva).^ In the LXX and the N. T. the inf. with adjectives is less frequent than with substantives. We have it with both the anarthrous and the articular inf. See (Mt. 3:11) Uavos /Sacrrdo-ai, (Mk. 10:40) eixbv hovvai, (Lu. 15 19) a^tos KXrjdfjpaL, (Jas. 3 2) Svsubstantive

is.

It held

adjectives in late

kolvt]

:

:

:

vaTOs xo-^i-vaycoyrjaaL, (1 Cor. 7 dvaepix-qvevTOS XeyeLV, (1 »

2 6

Pet. 4

:

39) eXevdepa yaniqdrivaL, (Heb. :

3) apKerds KaretpyaaOaL, etc.

» Votaw, Inf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 301. * lb., p. 27. AUen, Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 155 f For Polyb. see Allen, Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 487. .

6

:

5:11) It

is

in Bibl. Gk., pp. 15, 26. Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs)

1077

more common with a^ios, Swaros, havos. The only adjective that often has roO and the inf. in the O. T. is eTOL/ios.^ We find it also with adverbs as in Ac. 21 Cor. 12

:

The

14).

(Lu. 24 25)

/SpaSeTs rod

:

Some would add

1

13, deOrjpat awodauelu eroi/xoos

:

ex'«^

TTLaTevetu,

Cor. 16

:

(Ac. 23

:

15)

eTOLfioi.

4, a^iov tov iroptveadai.,

(so

2

But note

articular examples are less frequent.

tov avtkeiv.

but see Cases

of the Inf. (/)

The

This usage came to be, of course, a dative or locative, then

Infinitive with Verbs.

the most frequent of

It started as

all.

a sort of accusative of reference,^ then the object of verbs with whatever case the verb used. It is both anarthrous and articular.

It

is

not necessary to go over again (see Cases of the Inf.) inf. with verbs, whether the object of verbs

the varied uses of the

of saying or thinking in indirect discourse, verbs of

or promising, the direct object of verbs (auxiliary hindering,^ etc.

As a matter

ever the case (ace, gen.,

they are

of fact

abl., dat., instr.).

commanding

inf.),

verbs of

all object-infs.

what-

Votaw'' notes that in

the N. T. this use of the inf. is four times as common as any other. It is usually the anarthrous inf., but not always. Even bbvajxai

and

naris^ has

apxafxat.

made a

came

to be used with tov

careful

list

and the

inf.

Jan-

of the verbs that continued for a

while in late Greek to use the

inf.

Radermacher (N. T.

argues that in general the N. T.

Gr., p. 150)

against the inroads of

'Iva.

with verbs is like that of the Koivrj. The inf. XaXrjaai Th. 2; 2) is not a Hebraism, but a Hellenism. But surely it is not necessary to call this usage an Atticism. In the discussion of Iva (see chapter on Modes) the displacement use of the

with

inf.

kirapprjcFLadaiJieda (1

of the inf.

by

Iva

Schmid'' "shows

even after verbs

how

Aristotle onwards."^

like deXco

was

In the N. T.

it is

sufficiently treated. its

way from

chiefly in the

Gospel of

this 'Infinitivsurrogat'

made

John that we find this use of I'm. "The strong volitive flavour which clung to 'iva would perhaps commend it to a writer of John's temperament."^ But after all, the inf. with verbs has not quite disappeared from John's Gospel. Jannaris^ has worked out the situation in John's Gospel as between this use of the inf. and tva. Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 27. * Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 7. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154. ' ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 574 f. » See Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 487. « Atticismus, Bd. IV, p. 81. Cf. also Hatz., Einl., p. 215. ^ jb, " Moulton, Prol., p. 211. 9 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 572 f. For an extended li.st of the verbs in the N. T. used with the complementary inf. see Vitcau, Le Vorbc, pp. 157 ff. 1

2

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1078

He

NEW TESTAMENT

'iva about 125 times and the inf. with verbs about 129 Of these 57 belong to bbva^xai (37) and d'tko^ (20). There are besides, 10 with Set and 12 each with ^Tjrew and with nkWw.

finds

times.

The

rest

airku,

are scattered with apxoixai,

epuTCLCio,

SlScoyui,

€x«,

So/cew,

6(})€i\co,

d0t?;/it,

It is clear, therefore, that the inf.

etc.

by no means dead in the N. T., though the shadow As illustrations of the great wealth of verbs with the inf. in the N. T. note (Mt. 11 20) ^p^aro oveLbl^eiv, (27:58) €Kk\ev(rev awoSodrjvaL, (Mk. 12:12) e^rjrovv Kparrjaai, (Lu. Almost any verb 16 3) crKairTHu om lax^oi, k-JvaLTetv alax^vop-aL. with verbs of Lva

is

across its path.

is

:

:

that can be used with a substantive can be used with the

The use

with

of the inf.

See Lu. 20

13.

:

12, irpoakdero

It is the

do' or 'do again.'

Josephus.

much

TrpoarideixaL is

Cf. also Lu. 20

:

12); eTrta-retXat

It

Tre^i/'ttt.

means

one Hebraism that

11

But note

less frequent.

TrapaLTovfxai to a.ivodavttv (Ac.

3

:

a Hebraism.

25

The

f.

:

'to go

Thumb

finds in

20); Karelxov tov

is

(Ro. 13:8);

6(t>ei\co

11); roD TrepLiraTelp after :

'

:

on and

articular inf. with verbs

rd ayairav after

rod awexco^daL (15

inf.

Cf. Ex. 14

/jlti

Troteco

(Ac.

iropeveadaL

(Lu. 4 42). In 1 Ki. 13 16 we have rod ewLarpexJ/aL with Sura^uat. These are just a few specimens. See Cases of the Inf. The grammars draw a dis(g) The Appositional Infinitive. tinction here, but it is more apparent than real as Votaw^ well :

:

The

inf. in apposition is that with nouns; the epexegetical used with verbs. But at bottom the two uses are one. They are both limitative. With nouns the appositional inf. restricts or describes it. It is a common enough idiom in classical Greek ^ and is found also in the LXX. In the N. T. observe Ac.

says.

inf. is

15

:

28

7rX?7J'

TOVTwv

TLCV

—

eiravayKes,

airex^cydciL,

(Jas. 1

:

27) dpyjaKeia

Cf further Ac. 26 16; 2 Cor. 10 13; Eph. 3 6, 8; 4 17; 1 Th. 4 3 f.; Heb. 9 8; 1 Pet. 2 15 (ourcos). The articular inf. may also be appositional as in Ro. 14 13, tovto Kpivare /jLoXKov, TO ixrj TidevaL. So also 2 Cor. 2:1; 7:11; Ro. 4 13; 1 Th. 4 6 his. In the N. T. and Kadapa Kal a/xlavTos :

ewLaKeiTTeadaL.

eariv,

avrrj

:

:

.

:

:

:

:

:

:

the Apocrypha

it is

:

only to (in the articular use) that

is

apposi-

but in the 0. T. 15 out of the 17 insitances have tov without any reference to the case of the noun.^ It is worth noting that I'm is common also in appositional clauses (cf. Lu. 1:43; 1 Cor. 9 18), especially in the writings of John (Jo. 4 34; 15 8; tional,

:

:

Cf. Moulton, Pro!., p. 233.

1

Hellen., p. 125.

2

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 17.

3

Cf.

*

Hadley and Allen, § 950; Goodwin, Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 29.

§

1517.

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 17:3; 1 Jo. 3:11,23; 4 :21; 5:3, 2:3;3:16).i

Verbal Aspects of the

5.

ing that the

same

inf. is

does not, of course, have

each

inf.

We find

etc.).

1079

'PnMATO:s)

Infinitive.

on

It is

also in

IJo.

worth repeat-

Each

substantive as well as verb.

inf.

the substantival and verbal uses, but has both substantival and verbal aspects. The uses all

vary with each exaniple. The verbal aspects do not exclude the substantival, though some^ writers say so. Per contra, Jannaris' holds that "the verbal nature of the substantival infinitive was sometimes completely lost sight of." This I do not concede. After tenses came to the verbal substantive

was

fixed.

But, as already shown, the

inf.

its

dual character

did not

come

to the

rank of a mode. (a)

The Sanskrit

Voice.

inf.

already has the voices, so that

had no

In

voice.

Homer

the

inf.

speculative as to the origin.

it is

Greek inf. had no voice. This is an Greek is concerned, but a justifiable one. well by Suwros davixacrai, 'capable for won-

It is possible that the original

inference so far as the

Moulton^ illustrates it dering,' and a^tos OavfxaaaL, 'worthy for wondering,' when the first means 'able to wonder' and the second 'deserving to be wondered at.' They are both active in form, but not in sense. "The middle and passive infinitives in Greek and Latin are merely adaptations of certain forms, out of a mass of units which had lost their individuality, to express a relation made prominent by the closer connection of such nouns with the verb."^ There was so much freedom in the Greek inf. that the Sanskrit -turn did not develop in the Greek as we see it in the Latin supine. Gradually by analogy the inf. forms came to be associated with the voices in the modes. Practically, therefore, the Greek inf. came to be used as if the voices had distinctive endings (cf. the history of the imper. endings)." Thus in Lu. 12 58, 56s kpyaalav aT-qWaxdaL air' avTov, it is clear that the passive voice is meant whatever the origin of the form -adaL. The reduplication shows the tense also. The same remark applies to Mk. 5 4, Slo. to be^kadai /cat duairaadai. :

:

vir'

avTOV ras

See also 5

dXucrets.

special voice significance

See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

^

As, for instance, Szczurat,

the Horn.

inf.

came

Gk. Gr.,

3

Hist.

*

In Ac. 26

:

28,

43,

etirev SoOrjvai avrfj (j)ayelv.

manifest in

is

1

:

cpayetv,

which

No

is like

our

He claims

that

p. 229.

De

Inf.

Horn. Usu, 1002,

p. 17.

to serve ahnost all the ideas of the finite verb.

p. 57G. -n-ddeis

strict voice in woiriaai.

*

XpLcmavov

But

it is

Prol., p. 203. woirjaai.,

^

lb.

one notes a possible absence of the

a hard passage.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1080

and

'eating'

turn

is

the ace, of general reference with

the direct object of

is

But

elirep.

8odrjvaL

which

in

has the passive force

8odr]i>aL

Ac. 26 32 and In general, therefore, after the inf. is fully developed, the voice in the inf. appears exactly as in the modes. So tov airex^adat (Ac. 15 20) a-n-oypaipaadai. (Lu. 2:5); kirCKadkuOai (Heb. 6 10); yajJL-qdijvaL (1 Cor. 7: 39); KXrjdrjvai vtos (Lu. 15 19). Cf. deaaaadai. (Lu. 7 24) and deaOfjvaL (Mt. 6:1). See chapter on Tenses for adequate discussion of (6) Tense. Some general remarks must here suffice. As the this point. Sanskrit inf. had no voice, so it had no tense. In the original

beyond a doubt. Cf further .

eveKev rod 4>avepoodT]paL in

airoXeXvadat. edvvaro in

2 Cor. 7

:

:

12.

;

:

:

:

:

Greek there was possibly no tense in the inf., but in Homer the There is no time-element in the inf. (cf. is in full force.^ subj., opt. and imperative) except as the future inf. echoes the tense

expectation of a verb like eXTrlfw (or neWco) or as the

repre-

inf.

sents a fut. ind. in indirect discourse (see Indirect Discourse under

Modes).

It is

probably true that originally there was no distinc-

tion between aorist (punctiliar)

and present

(linear) action in

the

In Sanskrit and Latin the infinitives and supines have no necessary connection with the present stem (cf. supine tactum and inf.

inf. tangere).^

"The

a in XDcrat has only accidental similarity to

with that in eXuo-a."^ Moulton^ tersely adds: "But when once these noun-forms had established their close contact with the verb, accidental resemblances and other more or less caprilink

it

cious causes encouraged

an association that rapidly grew,

till all

the tenses, as well as the three voices, were equipped with

infini-

But even

so at

tives appropriated to their exclusive service." first

the tense of the

inf.

had only to do with the kind

(punctiliar, linear, state of completion), not

of action

with time.

In general, as with the subj., opt. and imper., the aorist inf. came to be the naturaP one unless some reason for the present Cf KaTa^^vai (Lu. 9 54) iradetv (Lu. 24 or perf or fut. existed. .

.

46); KaToKmai (Mt. 5

:

;

:

17); irpoaev^aaOaL (Lu. 18

:

:

10); aKovaat (Ac.

10:33); kxeat (Ro. 3:15), etc. Sometimes, as in e5et TOLrjaaL (Mt. 23 23), the inf. was used to suggest antecedent action. But the timeless aorist may point to what is future, as in Lu. 24 :

:

46 above. neither.

Cf. also Lu. 2

:

26; Ac. 3

Cf. /leXXco with aor. inf.

So

:

18.

Essentially,

/xeXXo^'ra epeyK[eL]p, P.

it

does

Grenf.,

^ ib. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 160. « jb. Moulton, Prol., p. 204 5 Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 59, notes 5,484 aorists and 3,.327 presents the Gk. Bible. In the N. T. the ratio is 4 3, in the O. T. 2 1. 1

2

:

:

in

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOZ)

1081

In indirect assertions the aorist inf. represents the aor. indicative, but the N. T. seems to show no instance like this.^ However, that is a mere accident, for note ev tw elaayaye'ti'

ii,

77

Toiis

(iii/A.D.).

yoveis to iraLdlop rod

principle applies.

Ac. 26

where the same and ireldeLs in XpLffTov, we have

27)

:

TOLrjaai

In Lu. 24 46, TeYpaTrrat wadelv TOP

28.

:

avrovs (Lu. 2

iroLrja-aL

Contrast the tense of :

the timeless aorist in indirect discourse.

with some verbs would accent linear action Some inf. would not draw the point sharply. and the can see One present.^ the for fondness a writers have

The

present

inf.

with others the

force of linear action in

kpyd^eaOaL (Jo. 9

5eT

rifxas

:

and

4)

in to

In 1 prominent (cf. Jo. 3 ^teXXco, with with normal quite is also It verse in 6) atxaprapeL ovx which it occurs 84 times in the N. T. to 6 of the aorist. See Mt. 14 22 for both aorist eMiS^rat and present irpoayeLP in same sentence. Cf. also Ac. 15 37 f. The usual tense-distinction may be

ayaircip avrov

(Mk. 12

:

Cf. also aroLxelu in Ph. 3

33).

9, oy SvvaraL aixaprapetp

:

the linear notion

,

:

16.

is

.

:

:

assumed point

is

though in a case

to exist,

represents the

same tense

like Xeyeip

The present

not to be stressed.

Mt. 22

of the direct, as in

Rarely the present tive as in Lu. 20 6.

:

:

11) the

assertion

23; Lu. 11

represents an imperfect indica-

inf.

18, etc.

(Heb. 5

inf. in indirect

:

The

perfect

same tense

for the 19; 16

inf. is

This

27.

:

common

also in indirect discourse to stand

of the direct, as in Jo. 12

natural enough.

is

:

But the

29; Ac. 12 perfect

:

14; 14

inf. is

:

found

complementary inf. as in Ac. 26 32, XeKvadai edvparo. Note Lu. 12 58, 56s epyaalap dTrr/XXdx^at. But we also find the perfect tense with the articular inf. (so aorist and present) as in Mk. 5 4; Lu. 6 48; Ac. 27 9. In the N. T. there are in all 31 perfect infs. and the same number in the O. T.^ Of the N. T. examples 23 are anarthrous, 8 articular. The papyri show the also in the

:

:

:

:

:

Cf. ewl

articular perf. inf. iiTrep

Tov aToXeXmOaL

ere,

to)

P. Br.

yeyophai, P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22);

M. 42

(b.C. 168).

Thucydides even used to with the future inf. The same construction is found in Polybius.* But in the koipt] the future inf. is weakening rapidly. This disappearance of the fut. inf. is partly due to the retreat of the fu-

The

future

inf. is

1

Burton, N. T.

2

Gildersl.,

einigc

Am.

increasingly rare.

M. and

T., p. 53.

Madvig, BemerkunKcn iibor shows how the inf. has only the time

Jour, of Thilol., 1,SS2, p. 193.

Punkte des Gricch., 1848,

p. 321,

of the principal verb. 3

Votaw,

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 59.

••

Alien, Inf. in Polyb., p. 48.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1082

NEW TESTAMENT

ture tense in general ^ and partly to the apparent kinship between the future and aorist forms. In the papyri Moulton^ notes that aorist or

inf. is sometimes used in the kolvt] as equivalent to the even the present, since the sense of the future was van-

ishing.

Cf. x^PW^i-^ in Jo. 21

the future

MSS.

give

25 (KBC), while the other later In the O. T. the fut. inf. (anarthrous always)

xcopjjcrat.

:

occurs only 14 times and only 6 in the N. T.

The Apocrypha

but almost all in 2 and 3 Maccabees.^ Three examples are with ^eXXw (Ac. 11 28; 24 15; 27 10). of the N. T. Another is in Ac. 23 30 and is dependent on a participle after a past indicative. In Ac. 26 7 the margin of W. H. (after B) has KaTavT-qaeLV (text -rjaai.) with eXTrtfei. In Heb. 3 18 note oj/xwaev elaeXevcreadaL (LXX). Another example is in Jo. 21:25, after 1X7) has, however, 54,

:

:

:

:

:

:

ol/jLat.

Moulton

XPV tToiixdaeiv, B. U. 830 (I/a.d.). In general the inf. uses the same

{Prol., p. 219) cites

Cases with the Infinitive.

(c)

So the genitive in Heb. 6 10 1 Cor. 7 39 cS deXei yaiJ.r]dr}vaL,

case that the finite verb does.

:

einXadeaOai rod epyov, the dative in

the ace. in Ac. 23 dpliTTOLs

x^P"'^''

:

15 roD aveXeLv, the instrum. in Mt. 15

:

(jiayelv,

the locative in Ac. 21

21

:

20 to

:

rots eOeacv

fj.r)8e

20 rod dirkxicrBo-i- rcbv oKLayrjixdnominative in Ac. 17 18 KUTayyeXevs dvai, the predicate accusative in Ro. 2 19 irkiroLdas aeavrou dSrjydu dvai, or the ablative in Ac. 15

TrepLiraTeLv,

:

Tuv, the predicate

:

:

the ace. of general reference in ind. discourse in

Mk.

12

this brings us again to the ace. in indirect assertion, a

:

But

18.

matter

al-

ready treated at some length. (See Accusative Case, Indirect Discourse, and the next section.) But the thing to note is the real verbal nature of the inf. in the matter of cases. Note the three accusatives with roD diSaaKeLv in Heb. 5 11 f., two objects, one of The cognate neuter plural is seen in ttoXXo, general reference. :

Tradeiv (d)

(Mt. 16:21).

The

Infinitive in

Indirect

scuration of the cases with the

Discourse.

some additional remarks besides those

The

not

inf. is

finite

clears to

do

so.

The

so,

but

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 486, 552 Prol., p.

3

Votaw,

*

Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Tl. II, p. 460.

f.

we have

it

By

beclouds more than the

is

ff.

Cf. Hatz., Einl., pp. 142, 190; Kalker, Quest., p. 281.

Inf. in Bibl.

Gk., p. 59.

takes the ace. as originally the obj. of the verb. as

on Modes.

case of the predicate^ with the inf.

2

204

discourse justifies

in the chapter

and, like the participle, has no subject.

courtesy the grammars often say it

The frequent ob-

inf. in indirect

seen in Indirect Discourse.

Brug. (Griech. Gr.,

p. 518)

That was not always

true,

^

1083

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs)

Cor. 10

:

2, Seo/xat to

14

:

with the

21,

See also 2

deXets reXetos elvau

el

where the nominative oc-

But note

of the accusative articular inf.

28, ixera to eyepOi^val inf.

:

irapchv Oappriaai,

(xri

domain

curs within the

Mk.

Mt. 19

Cf.

place to start.

ixe

The

irpoa^oi.

true nature of the ace.

as being merely that of general reference comes out

well in the articular

inf.,

as in Jas. 4

:

2, ovk exere 5td to

ixri

alTelaQai

go over again the steps taken under Modes, but simply to insist on the true nature of the accusative with the inf. It stands, indeed, in the place of a finite verb of the direct statement, but does not thereby become finite with a subject. From the syntactical standpoint the construction is true to both the substantival and verbal aspects of the

vfxas.

It is not necessary here to

subject of the finite verb, when thrown into the ace, takes this turn because of the limitations of the inf. When it is retained in the nominative, it is by apposition with the subject

The

inf.

of the principal verb or

by

attraction

if

Draeger

in the predicate.

matter in Latin than in Greek. frequent more much is where the ace. with the inf. King and Cookson.^ misnomer," say a "The name is confessedly the makes ace. with the and clearly matter Schmid^ also sees the track is taken beaten usual The reference. general inf. the ace. of win. Schmitt* will and its way making is by Jolly,** but the truth admits that the ace. is not the grammatical subject, but only the But why call it "subject" at all? Schroeder^ logical subject. sees this point clearly in his treatment of the

properly likens bibaaKoi avTov

like

the

Enghsh inf.

to the double accusative with diddaKo:, as in

it

TrepnraTfTiv.

"if

The

late Sanskrit

you wish me to

shows a few examples

The

live."^

use of the ace. with

early reached a state of perfection in

Schhcher* notes 130 instances of against 15 with ws, on. We see

it

in

Greek and Latin.

Homer with

(i>T]ixl

alone as

hke Latin. Voin Caesar and in Greek Thucydides and Xenophon the while the 0. T., in construction the of rarity the notes taw^ Apocrypha and the N. T. have some 46 verbs which use the idiom. But even in the N. T., as compared with the ancient Greek, the construction Bd.

is

it

in its glory in historians

pp. 380, 446.

'

Ubcr den

Gr., 1890, p. 214.

*

Gesch. dcs

1

Hist. Synt.,

2

Introd. to

» «

tibor den Urspr. dcs Substantivsatzcs, p. 5. t)bor die forincUc Untersch. dcr Iledet., p. 28.

^

Wilhelmius,

II,

Comp.

De

particular

Infinitiv, p. 40. Inf., p.

247.

Inf. linguaruin Sanscritao, Beoticao, Porsicae, Graecae,

Oscae, Vnibricac, Latinae, Goticae 8 Moods of Indirect Quotation, »

The

greatly narrowed.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 9.

Forma et Vsv, 1873, Am. Jour, of Theol.,

p. 65.

Jan., 1905.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1084

may

verbs in the N. T. which

use the ace. and the

A

Modes.

assertion were given under

NEW TESTAMENT inf. in indirect

general view of the matter

a rather wide range still. But the idiom, being largelyfound in Luke, Paul and Hebrews. The other writers prefer 6tl. Luke, in fact, is the one who makes the most constant use of the idiom, and he quickly passes over to the direct statement. There is with most of them flexibility as was shown. Blass^ has a sensible summary of the situation in the N. T. There discloses

literary, is chiefly

no

in truth,

is,

whether the pl^ero tX^iv,

Greek construction,

difference in the

essential

without a substantive, as in Ac. 12 15 Suax^ovTO)s ex^i-v, with the acc, Ac. 24 9 4>a(TK0vre% ravTa oOrcos or with the nom. Ro. 1 22
:

:

:

17: 30;

Pet. 3

1

:

Words

17.

may

like Set, avayKrj

be followed by

no substantive (Mt. 23 23; Ro. 13 5). Cf. Lu. 2 26. In 1 Pet. 2 11, we have only the predicate cos TrapoUovs airexeadaL. Freedom also exists. In Mk. 9 47 we have KaXov ae kanv jxovb(pdaXfxov elaeXdeLV, while in Mt. 18 8 we read koXou aol katLV /jlopo:

:

:

—

:

:

:

Even

eiaeXdeXv.

(t)da\iJ.ov

though amples

it

in

Matthew the

might have been dative, as

of the predicate dative

seen in Lu.

1

:

3; 9

59; Ac. 27

:

predicate adj.

in Ac. 16

:

when an accusative 3 (KAB) 2 Pet. 2

:

is acc, Further ex-

21.

;

is :

possible are

21.

But

see

Heb. 2 10. Impersonal constructions may also use the acc. with the inf. There are besides verbs of wiUing, desiring, allowing, making, asking, beseeching, exhorting, some verbs of commanding, the inf. with Tpiv, ware, ro, rod, prepositions and the articular infinitive. With all these the acc. may occur. Ac. 15

A

:

22, 25;

occurs in Ac. 26

difficult inf.

Is

TTOLTJaaL.

'try

fj.€

:

the object of

by persuasion'?

contamination of iroLTiaeLs

h

Prof.

oXlyu)

:

W.

28,

h

dXiyo}

or of

irddus Xpianavov

Can

Tveldets

XptarLavdv dvai

differ.

and

is

be a

kv oXiyco ne

always

KeXeuco, for instance,

while the dative comes with Taaaw (Ac.

inf.,

(Mk. 6 39), and verbs like and impersonal expressions like aiaxpov, etc. As shown above, KaXov

10), iTTtrdcro-co

fxe

Trotrjo-at?

Petersen suggests that this

Teideus

But verbs

XpiuTLavov.

has the acc. and the

22

jue

:

Teideis

:

hreXXofxaL, tTTLrptiru,

wapayyeXXco,

(xvix4>epu,

ade/jLLTou,

eaTLv is

Wos eariv, used either

with the acc. or the dative, as is true of XeTco (cf. Mt. 5 34, 39 with Ac. 21 21; 22 24). Blass^ adds also Ac. 5 9, avve4>wvr]dj) :

:

vplv Treipaaai.

(Ac.

15

:

and

10 2).

:

He

48) as

Even

e^eiTTLu 1

:

notes also that Tpoaraaaco occurs with the acc. eTrtrdo-a-co (Mk. 6 27) and raaaco (Ac. appears with the acc. and inf. (Jo. 18 14)

true of

is

aviJ.4>epeL

(Lu. 6

:

:

4,

:

:

where

D

Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 239-241.

has the dative, as 2

lb., p.

240.

is

true of

Mt.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 12

:

With

4).

yeveadai

9

:

(Ac. 22

fie

:

Ac. 20

to' one, as in

The

17).

and the dative

32)

how ckimsy

eyevero Blass^ observes

:

ace.

and

inf.

also in the sense of

In Ac. 22

16.

:

the two constructions are combined.

<j)C}s,

eyevero

is

fioi

—

occurs with kyevero (Ac. it 'befell'

eyhero

6,

1085

"PIIMATOs)

(xol

or 'happened

—

Treptacrrpat/'at

Blass^ further observes

the independence of the inf. in adding an ace. of general reference besides the ace. with a verb of asking, as in Ac. 13 28 fiTrjaavro :

UeLKdrov avaiptdrfvai avTOV, (1 Th. 5

In Ac. 21

T^v einaToKr]P.

ds

'lepovaaX-qiJL,

which

is itself

is

opKL^o)

— tov

/jlt]

dpa^aipeLP avTOP

acc. of general reference with the inf.,

though the no instance in the N. T. of the

is

we

ordinate clause unless

dpayvojadrjvaL

vfj.ds

in the genitive as to form,

There

the verb.

27)

12, TrapeKaKovfj.ev

:

the avrop

:

follow Nestle in

1

Pet. 5

real object of inf. in :

a sub-

8, ^rjToop ripa

There are sporadic examples of such a construction due to analogy of the inf. in the main clause.^ Cf. O. P. 1125, 14

KCLTaTTLelp.

(ii/A.D.), ovs Kal Kvpieueip tojp Kapircbp.

Many verbs and Personal Construction with the Infinitive. personal the impersonal conthe or either adjectives allowed (e)

The Greek developed much more Latin, which was more limited the matter than freedom in the In the N. T. the impersonal conimpersonal.^ the in the use of like Set, Ac. 25 fixed verbs with occurs 24, ^ocopres txri struction as is cominf. dependent on note inf. where ^ijp yurj/cert, avTOP help Heb. Mk. Lu. 7 5 43; 26 5 Ac. 23; (Lu. 34; 6 12; mon 9; impersonal cone^ecrnv, The with etc. also So 8 Lu. 6 12; 55). struction is seen also in Lu. 2: 26; 16: 22; Ph. 3 1; Heb. 9:26, struction with the infinitive.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

with impersonal verbs is somewhat more frequent in etc. the N. T. than in the LXX. On the whole the personal construction with the inf. is rare in the N. T.^ But in the N. T. SoKew has the personal construction, as in Ac. 17: 18, 8oKet KarayyeXevs elpai (cf. Jas. 1 26; Gal. 2: 9, etc.), but we find Uo^k p.oL in Lu. 1 3

The

inf.

:

(cf.

Ac. 15

The

KOLPT]

:

:

28, etc.)

seems to use

Radermacher do^eL

—

and even it

less

ebo^a epLavrus delp rpa^ai (Ac.

(1

x)Trdpxt<-v avTr)P

Th. 2

:4)

kixapTvpi^Ori

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 241.

*

Cf. Middlcton,

* 6

9).

frequently than the ancient Greek.

r-qp a'tpeaip.

and

I

clause.

:

T. Gr., p. 148) quotes Vett. Valcns, p. 277, 19,

(A^.

We

have

SedoKLiidafxeda

(Heb. 11:4). compare the personal construction with 6tl (1 Cor. 15

drjpai.

26

Analogy

2

in Synt., p. 9.

Dtirr, Sprachl. Unters., p. 43.

Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 239. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 239.

Maximus

iriaTev-

One may

etpaL

:

12; 2 Cor.

j^.

of

Tyre has

it in

a

rrl.

'

3

3; 1 Jo. 2

:

:

(Heb. 7:26). 11

The personal construction occurs with Trpewti The impersonal has the ace. and the inf. (1 Cor.

19).

both the dative and Winer-Moulton, p. The love of the passive impersonal appears in Ac. 13 the dative and the

13),

:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

108G

the ace. (Heb. 2 402.

:

inf.

W.

Cf.

10).

(Mt. 3

F.

:

15),

Moulton

in

:

28, fjTr]crauTo HeiXaTOv, avaiptOrivai ahrbv, and in axSfjvaL avTovs (Radcrmacher, N. T. Gr., p. 148).

predicate with the

noted

and the nom.

inf.

5

:

21, aTrkaTeCKav

The nominative

in indirect discourse

is

to be

also.

As already remarked, there is no between the appositional and the epexegetical use of the infinitive. The epexegetical inf. is added to a clause more or less complete in itself, while the merely appositional is (/)

Epexegetical Infinitive.

essential difference

simple.^ It is common in the dramatists. This use is probably adnominaP in origin, but it drifts into the verbal aspect We see a free use of the limitative^ inf. in cbs cttos divfTiv, also. which only occurs once in the N. T. (Heb. 7:9). Brugmann does not agree with Griinewald that this is the original epexegetical or

more

limitative

inf.,

though

it is

kin to

merely to the appositional

inf.

Blass^ applies " epexegetical

it.

It is in the epexegetical

'

that

inf.

from the original substantive It is hard to draw the line between bbypa. to the verbal idea. 1) and 7rape5ccKe^ avTOVS eis aTroypa(f)eadaL iraaav r-qv o'iKOViJ.ei'riv (Lu. 2 The first is appoaboKiyiov vovv, iroielv to. fir] KaOijKovTa (Ro. 1 28). instance of the epexegetsitional, the latter epexegetical. A good elvat
we

more

see

clearly the transition

:

:

:

is

often the case.

Vi-

frequent in the Epistles.

Cf.

subsidiary to the I'm clause preceding, as

teau^ notes that the construction

Eph.

1

KTJaat.),

:

is

16-18 (tVa —

els

t6 dbkvai), 3

10 (I'm

—

TrepLiraTrjaaL)

Col. 1

:

54

:

16

4

,

:

is

— /cparaico^Tjmt, kutolFurther 3 (I'm — f.

(I'm

XaXJyo-ai).

72 Ac. 17 27

iroirjaaL /cat /jlvt]examples occur in Lu. 1 ^rjre'iv, 2 Pet. 3 KarevdvvaL, rod 79 e7rt0amt odrjvai, 1 instances of the frequent rather shows LXX^ The 2 pLvqadfjvaL. Ps. Judg. (cf. 8:33; Gen. 3:22; sense in this articular inf. only finds Votaw Indeed, few. very shows The T. N. 77: 18). :

purjadrjuai,

:

:

:

:

one, that in Gal. 3 yeypapp-hoLS

1

ev

rw

:

10, eTTLKaTaparos ttSs bs

jSijSXtw

tov vbp.ov tov

oiiK

TroirjaaL

efx/xeveL

avra.

But

xScrij'

1

Thomspon, Synt.

2

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 517. Griinewald, Der freie formelhafte Inf. der Limit, im Griech., p. 21

'

4 6

rots

certainly

of Attic Gk., p. 239.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 229. Le Verbe, p. 161.

^

Votaw,

f.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 26.

:

1087

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) Tov aTLfia^eaOaL (Ro.

1

:

24) after -KapkboiKev

ical as is Koiitv in verse

28 after

is

iraptdwKep.

just as truly epexeget-

So also Ro. 7:3; 8

looks at the cpoxcgetical

12; 1 Cor. 10 13. Burton ^ indirect object," as in Lu. 10 :40, :

17

dSeX^i? fxov

inf.

:

"an

as

KaTeKenrtv

p-bv-qv jie

haKoveiv. There is no doubt that in such instances the inf. is in the original dative case with the dative idea. See further Mk. 4:23; 6:31; Lu.7:40; 12:4; Ac. 4 14; 7:42; 17:21; 23:17, :

18, 19; Tit. 2

:

8, etc.

but a step from the explanatory or epexegetical inf. to that of design. Indeed, the epexegetical inf. sometimes is final, a secondary purpose after I'm, as in Eph. 1 18; 3 Purpose.

{g)

It is

:

17; Col.

1

:

sub-final or objective use of the inf.

The

10, etc.

is

also a step on the way. This use was very common in the ancient Greek, but was partially taken up by I'm in the N. T.^ But many verbs, as we have seen, retain the sub-final inf. in the N. T. as in the rest of the kolvt]. Blass' careful lists and those of Viteau were given under Indirect Discourse. This notion of purpose is

the direct meaning of the dative case which is retained. It is the usual meaning of the inf. in Homer,^ that of purpose. It goes

Indo-Germanic stock.* It was always more in prose. The close connection between than common that of purpose is seen in Mk. 7 4, a and inf. epexegetical the 'to keep')- So Mt. 27 33, Ua)Kau keeping,' ('for Kparelu irapeXa^ov So Mt. 25 35, eScb'to drink'). drinking,' ('for olvov ine'Lv avTco Kare (xol (iya-^dv. The inf. with the notion of purpose is exceedingly frequent in the LXX, second only to that of the object-inf. with

back to the

original

in poetry

:

:

:

H ^as abundant in Herodotus." Hence Thumb ^ thinks abundant use in the Koti/17 is due to the influence of the Ionic dialect. Moulton^ agrees with this opinion. This is true both of the simple inf. of purpose and tov and the inf. The Pontic dialect still preserves the inf. of purpose after verbs hke ava^alvw, It is noteworthy that the inf. was not admitted into Latin etc. except with a verb of motion. Moulton {Prol, p. 205) cites Par.

verbs.5 its

P. 49 (ii/B.c.) eav ava^w

koltco

irpoaKwrjaaL, as parallel to

1

N. T. M. and

2

Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255

Lu. 18

:

T., p. 147.

Congress of Arts and Sciences, 1904, ' Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154.

f.;

Humphreys, The Problems

vol. Ill, pp. 171

ff.

*

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 510; Delbriick, Grundr., IV, pp. 463

5

Votaw,

8

Thompson, Synt.

7

Theol. Lit., 1903, p. 421.

8

Prol., p. 205.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 10.

of Attic Gk., p. 240.

ff.

of Greek,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1088

NEW TESTAMENT

— irpoaev^aadat..

Moulton^ notes this correspondence between the ancient and the modern vernacular and agrees with Thumb's verdict again that the result is due to the two conflicting tendencies, one the universahzing of Iva, which prevailed in Western Hellenism and resulted in the disappearance of the inf. in 10, avklSrjaav

modern Greece, while the

localizing of the inf. in

of purpose includes the simple

the

ample

of

e
Thus Mt. 2:2

(20

dXXd

rjXdov KaraXvaaL,

(11:7) :

3

:

(Lu. 18

jrero Idelv;

mon

no

is

:

epyjp,ov

ex-

in the original

Homer than

in the

(5:17)

5) 5ta/3Xei/'ets eK^aXetP to Kap-

deaaaaOaL (so verse 8, iSeXv); :

32)

Trepte/SXe-

33) Tapea/xev aKovam; (2 Cor. 11:2)

:

— irapaaTrjaai;

in the

inf., all

and

to

ets

10) ave^-qaav Trpoaev^aadai.; (Jo. 4: 15) Stepx^/iat

:

ixerevbriaav bovvai.

of the inf.

There

inf.

14) airoaTeWri avTovs KrjpvaaeLv; (5

hdaSe aprXelu; (Ac. 10 aap.riv v/jLas

rrjp

inf.,

^Xdofxev irpoaKw^aaL aura);

irXrjpooaai; (7

tI e^rjXdaiTe els

Mk.

28;

and the

This use had a wider range in

dative case.

(f)Os;

inf., cio-re

and the

First note the simple

re.

4?

Attic writers. oi'K

and the

to

inf., irpos

rod

inf.,

Pontus serves

The N. T. use

to illustrate to-day the N. T. idiom.

(Rev. 5

:

5) eviK-qaev

These examples

N. T.

— avol^ai;

will suffice.

It is

(16

ripfjLo:

9) oh

very com-

It is not necessary to multiply illustrations of

The O. T. shows the idiom abundance, though the construction is classic. It was used especially by Thucydides.^ This was a normal use. We have already noticed that Paul makes Httle, if any, use of this idiom.3 It is possible in Ro. 6 6; Ph."3 10. Indeed, Votaw'' notes only 33 instances of tov and inf. of purpose in the N. T., Tov after all the previous discussion.

in great

:

and these are

Matthew, Luke and Acts.

chiefly in

13) ^r}Te1v tov airoXeaaL, (13

tov

irXTjcrdfjuaL Travra,

31; 26

18;

:

of tov

p.i]

p.y]KeTL

bovXevetv

oai,

and

is,

:

:

rj/xas.

1

6:1,

irpos TO deadrjvaL.

:

5, eirefi\pa

els

:

10;

(Lu. 21

See further Ac. 3

Heb. 10

:

7, etc.

same construction.

:

:

:

22)

2; 5

:

The use

Cf. Ro. 6 6, tov In Lu. 2 22 note TapaarTJPurpose is also expressed by eh to

Cf. Ac. 21

in verse 24 tov bovvai.

Th. 3

as in

p-elvaL.

13; Gal. 3

of course, the

Note (Mt. 2

e^rfKdev tov airelpeLV,

3)

(24: 29) tov

Cor. 10

1

:

:

12.

to yvojvai,

:

:

and by wpos

to as in

Mt.

In the N. T. coore with the inf. of purpose is rare. Originally purpose was the idea with cio-re, or conceived result. Actual result with coo-re was expressed by the indicative. ^

only

Prol., p. 205. TOV, uxrre,

Allen gives no ex. of the simple

ec^' 4' re.

inf. of

purpose in Polyb.,

Cf. Inf. in Polyb., p. 22.

2 Moulton, Prol., p. 216. Thuc. was the first to use tov and the inf. for purpose (Berklein, Entwickelungsgesch., p. 58). » lb., p. 217 f. " Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 21.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT In the

LXX

the notion of purpose

is still

1089

'PHMAT02;)

common,

especially in

the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus. ^

In the N. T. there are Ac. 20 leaving out according instances, 24, to W. H., and only 7 only 6 if we follow W. H. in Lu. 9 52. See Mt. 10 1, ibo^Kev avHere the notion of cicrre (=c<;j, re, ToTs k^ovcriav chcrre e/c/SdXXeti'. 'and so') is simply 'so as,' not 'so that.' See also Lu. 4 29, ware KaTaKpvfJiPicaL. Cf. further Mt. 15 33; 27 1; Lu. 20 20. Burton^ :

:

:

:

:

thinks that in Mt. 27

:

1

:

:

wore gives rather content than pur-

One must not confuse with tov and the inf. of purpose the somewhat analogous construction of ro d and rod fxr] a fter pose.

This is in reality, as was shown, the ablav erb^ of hinderingCf. Lu. tive and the regular object- inf. (su bstantival aspect). 4 :42; ^^0720 •'277Ro. 15 22. Votaw^ notes 22 verbs in the LXX and the N. T. that use this idiom. The only common one See further Final Clauses in chapter on Modes for is KcoXiio). .

:

papyri examples. (h)

Result.

Purpose

is

only "intended result," as Burton^ ar-

Radermacher (N. T. between purpose and result

gues.

Gr., p. 153) says that the difference

in the inf.

is

often only in the

subjective or objective colouring of the thought.

more

hard to

It is

between conceived result and intended result. Blass^ of examples as result that I have put above under Purpose, as Rev. 5 5; 16 9. It is largely a matter of standpoint. The line of distinction is often very faint, if not wholly gone. Take Rev. 5 5, for instance, hkyjaev 6 Xewu avot^aL. The lion had opened the book and so it was actual result. So

draw a

line

explains a

number

:

:

:

also Ac. 5

:

3, 5ta tI eirXripwaev b

aaravas

TrjP

Kapblav aov, xpevaaadai

Ananias had actually lied. In the ancient Greek also the distinction between purpose and result was not sharply drawn.^ The inf. may represent merely the content^ and not clearly either result or purpose, as in Eph. 3 6, elmt rd Wvrj. Cf also 4 22, dTroThis is not a Hebraistic (Burton) idiom, but falls in nadeadaL. ae.

:

turally with the freer use of the inf. in the

15

:

10 iinQetvaL ^v^bv, (Hel). 5

clearly result, ical is

it

may

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 10.

Votaw,

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 24.

«

^

8

Where it is The hypothet-

The N. T. shows but 12

the natural or conceived result.

1

Cf.

2

W.-M.,

N. T. M. and T., p. 148. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224. W.-M., p. 400. Soe Burton, N. T. Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 21.

See also Ac.

kolvt].

5) yevrjQyjmL dpxtepea.

be actual or hypothetical.**

3

•

:

:

.

n. T. M. and

T., p. 150.

p. 409.

»

Bauinloin, Modi, p. 339.

M. and

T., p. 150

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1090

instances of the simple

In the 0. T.

Votaw.^

with the notion of

inf. it is

result,

The

common.

quite

according to

12 examples in

the N. T. are usually hypothetical, not actual. So Ro. 1 10 eiio17) KpaTaLcodrjvaL, KaTOLKrjaai., (6 8o:dr](TOfjLai eXdeTv irpos U/uSs, (Eph. 3 :

:

:

4

19) yviiiplcraL, (Col.

:

3) XaX^aat, (4

It is here that the kinship

BkaBau

6) eldhai,

:

(Heb. 6

with purpose

:

10) eriXa-

Cf.

so strong.

is

do occur, as in Lu. Rev. 16:9. But some examples have actual result T.^ we In the 0. 10 40; Ac. 5 3; Rev. 5:5. the in examples occur N. T. Not no inf., but with Tov and the the inf. in Luke, who and of tov examples the of more than one-half of actual result

:

:

gives two-thirds of the N. T. instances, are

Some

final.^

of these

are examples of hypothetical result. See discussion of Result in chapter on Mode for further discussion and papyri examples. It is rather common in the 0. T., though not so frequent in the

N.

It

T."^

There

is

is

possible to regard

Mt. 21

:

32, neTefxeXrjdt^Te tou Tnarev-

in reality it is rather the content of the verb.^

though

aai, thus,

similar ambiguit}^ in Ac. 7

the point seems clear in Ac. 18

:

:

But

19, kdKcoae// tov iroLelv.

10, ovSeis eind-qaeTai aoi tov KaKccaai

If TOV can be ociioLxo.\l8o.. prepared to surrender the point as to ets TO if necessary. It is usually purpose, but there is ambiguity here also, as in Mt. 26 2; 1 Cor. 11 22, where the purpose shades off toward hypothetical result. In Ac. 7 19 we seem to ^woyoveZadaL. So also Ro. 6 12, have hypothetical result, ds to

and

ae,

in

Ro. 7

3, tov

:

dvai avT-qv

ixi]

casionally used for result, one

is

:

:

:

/jlt]

TO viraKoveLv.

els

It

See further Ro. 12 for actual result in is

hard to deny

it

may

3; 2 Cor.

:

Ro.

:

be true also of Heb. 11:3, 1

:

20,

8:6; Gal. 3 els

:

17.«

els

to •yeyovtvai..

Votaw^ argues

to elvac avTovs avairoXoy-qTovs.

in this passage.

But

it is cio-re

and the

inf.

It

that

the usual N. T, construction for this idea with the inf. As already shown (see Mode) nearly all of the 51 examples of waTe and the inf. in the N. T. have the notion of result. Once Votaw* notes an instance of hypothetical result in the N. T., 1 Cor. 13 is

:

2,

Kav exoi iraaav

Tr]v ttIctlv oxjTe opt] yLedicTTaveiv.

ther and includes in this category these debatable examples are in 1

2 fioi's

3 *

6

Burton^ goes fur-

Mt. 10 1; 2 Cor. 2 7. But harmony with the usual am:

:

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 13.

Votaw, (TOV

Cf. Ruth 2 10, rl on tvpov x^pi-" See also 2 Chron. 33 9; 1 Mace. 14 36.

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 25.

rod eiTLyvSival

/le;

:

Moulton, Prol., p. 217. ^ Moulton, Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 25. Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 161; Moulton, Prol.,

'

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 21.

8

lb., p. 14.

9

«" o4>eaX-

:

:

Prol., p. 216. p. 219.

N. T. M. and

T., p. 149.

1091

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOZ)

no doubt about the

biguity as to result and purpose.

There

examples of actual result with

Thus Mt. 13 54 kbibaaKev (Mk. 9 26) ojo-re tovs ttoXXous

avTOVs ware eKT^rjaaeadaL Kai Xeyetv,

(Lu. 12

"KeyeLV,

:

1) chare

is

coare.

:

:

TrepnraTelv aX\r]\ovs, (Ac. 5

:

15) ooaTe k
See also Ac. 15 39; Ro. 7 6; 2 Cor. 7:7; Ph. 1 13, etc. There is one instance in the text of W. H. where cos occurs Here hypothetical result with the inf., Lu. 9 52, cos eroLfxaaat. or purpose is possible. Cf. cos ax^lv O. P. 1120, 19 f. (iii/A.D.). The use of cos eTros eiiretu (Heb. 7:9) is the absolute idea, as peiv.

:

:

:

:

already shown. 'as

A

if.'

oCtcos

—

Different also

is cbs

cii'

:

9)=

1,

50,

Cor. 10

UcpolSeiv (2

clear case of result occurs in Epictetus, IV, airohvpaadai.

(xri

There is only one example in the N. T. of the articular inf. without a preposition in this sense. That is in 2 Cor. evpelu, and it is in the instr. case as already shown. 2 13, Tco The LXX shows a half-dozen examples, but all with variant But it is common with 5td to to have the causal sense, readings. some 32 times in the N. T.^ See Prepositions and Substantival (i)

Cause.

:

tJ.ri

1

Aspects of the Infinitive. Cf. Mt. 13 5 f.; Mk. 5 4; Lu. 6 48; There is one instance of eveKev rod in 2 Cor. 7 12. Jas. 4 2 f Temporal relations are only vaguely expressed by (j) Time. the inf. See Tense in this chapter for the absence of the time:

:

:

:

.

:

element in the tenses of the inf. except in indirect discourse. Elsewhere it is only by prepositions and irplv (an adverbial preposition in reality) that the temporal idea is conveyed by the inf.

Antecedent time Mt. 6 8; Lu. 2

is

expressed by wpiv or

-rrpo

tov.

For Tpo

rod, see

Uplv or Tplv v (so in Mt. 1 18; 21, etc. 14 30; Ac. 7 2; W. H. have irplv r) in the margin in Ac. 2 occurs with the inf. 11 times in the N. T. (all in Gospels :

:

:

:

:

Mk. :

20)

and

We

have it only twice with finite verb after negative sentences, once with the subj. (Lu. 2 26), once with the opt. (Ac. 25 16), both in Luke (literary style). See, for the inf.,^ Mt. 26 34 Tph aXUropa ^covriaai, (Jo. 4 49) irplv airodavelv. See further Mt. 26 75; Mk. 14 72; Lu. 22 61 (five of the instances In Heare pr^ictically identical); Jo. 8 58; 14 29; Ac. 2 20. Acts).

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

rodotus, under the influence of indirect discourse, the inf. occurs with oKcos, txei, eireidr}, el, 8l6tl and the relative pronouns.'* Con1

Votaw,

Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 29.

Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. IGl, mentions only 23. 3 The inf. with Trpiv is common in Ilom. See Monro, p. 15S. * lienard, Formes verbales en C.rec; d'apres le Texte d'llerodote, ISOO, p. 196. See also Sturm, Die Entwick. der Konstrukt. niit npLv, 18S3, p. 3. 2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1092

temporaneous action Cf. Lu. 1:21,

h

further remarks.

Mt. 26

kv tQ, especially in Luke. See Prepositions with Infinitive for

Subsequent action is set forth by fieTo. to as in In Ac. 8 40, ews tov k\ddv, we have 5, etc.

32; Lu. 12

:

described by

is

tQ xpovl^eLv.

:

:

the prospective future.

The Absolute

{k)

Homer,

This idiom is very common in an imperative and in the midst of impera-

Infinitive.

especially as

R. Wagner 2 notes that in Homer this use of the inf. ocThe papyri still show examples like 6 belva rOi 8e2va xatpeti^.^ Gerhard'* holds that in such cases there is ellipsis of \eyeL. The Attic inscriptions^ frequently have the absolute infinitive as imperative. Deissmann (Light from the Ana. East,

tives.^

curs with the nom.

German,

common

in edicts and nomodern French. He quotes from the ''Limestone Block from the Temple of Herod at p. 75) notes that, as in

it

is

Cf. imperatival use of infinitive in

tices.

Jerusalem" (early imperial period): M-qdha aWoyevrj elaTropeveadai evTos rod irepl to lepov rpvipaKTov /cat irepi^oKov, Let no foreigner enter '

See also Epictetus, IV, 10, 18, Iva

within,' etc.

an

TavTa

8e

The imperatival

oh ixLKpa de^aadac ov8^ fiLKpccv o.ttotvx^'lv.

ykvy}Tai,

use was

Indo-Germanic idiom.*' It flourishes in the Greek Burton^ and Votaw^ admit one instance of the imperatival inf. in the N. T., Ph. 3 16, t<2 avTui aToix^lv. But original

prose

writers.''

:

Moulton^'' rightly objects to this needless fear of this use of the It is clearly present in

inf.

of Lu. 9

:

3

is

Ro. 12 where

15, xatpetv, KkaUiv.

:

The

case

comes in between Moulton himself objects on this point that

also pertinent

iii]

re Ix^lv

two imperatives. this inf. is due to a mixture of indirect with direct discourse. That is true, but it was a very easy lapse, since the inf. itself has this there

imperatival use.

accent. to prove that tive

In

1

Th. 3:11; 2 Th. 2:17;

infinitive.

See

we have the optative, not the aorist acMode for further discussion. Moulton ^^

quotes Burkitt as favouring the mere

Mt. 23

:

23, raOra bk TroLrjaaL KaKetva

Syriac MS., and also KavxaaOai 1

* ^

*

not Uei, in

infinitive,

after the

cL(f)e7i>at.,

p.rf

— in 2 Cor.

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 162. Der Gebr. des imper. Inf. im Griech., 1891,

12

:

1

after

}<{.

Lewis

The

p. 12.

Reinach, Pap. grecs et demotiques, 1905. Unters. zur Gesch. des griech. Briefes, Phil. Zeitschr., 1905, p. 56.

5

Meisterh., p. 244.

6

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 516.

7

W.-M., p. 397. N. T. M. and T.,

8

3:5

the nominative case and the whole context besides the

is

p. 146.

"

Inf. in Bibl.

Gk., p. 18.

"

Prol., p. 179.

"

lb., p.

248.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1093

'PUMATOZ;)

inf. was common in laws and maxims and So A. P. 86 (i/A.D.) e^elvai,, fxiadojaai. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 146) quotes Theo, Progymn., p. 128, 12, <j)ep€ ^riTeZv, where the inf. is used as a deliberative subj would be.

imperatival use of the recurs in the papyri.^

.

He

gives also the Hellenistic formula,

Inscr. Pergam.,

Pontic dialect this construction

common

is

The nom.

xalpeiv.

where

in the papyri.

xo-ipeLv is

p. 146) notes

with the absolute

It

inf.

See Ac. 15

:

is

23; 23

:

26; Jas.

inf. 1

:

1,

Cf. 2 Jo. 10,

Radermacher {N. T.

Gr.,

language the ace. comes to be used as in C. Inscr. lat. V. 8733, bowe avTO)v =

in the later inf.,

It is just in this absolute inf. that

dovpaL avTov.

epistolary inf.

the absolute

the nominative absolute also.

is

the object of Xkyere.

how

The

still exists.

has the same origin as the imperatival

This

kfiriv,

Hatzidakis^ notes that in the

13, 34.

13, 31;

dvai t^v

bbva^xLv

els

gradual acquirement of verbal aspects by the

The

the oldest verbal use of the inf .^

inf.

we It

best see the is

probably

construction in Heb. 7

:

9,

but a step further on the way. There is but one instance of this sort with cos in the N. T.^ Cf. roO TroXejurJo-at in

ws

€7ros

tnrdv,

Rev. 12

:

7,

is

where

an independent parenthesis.

it is

The ancient Greek used

jui? chiefly with the inf. except in indirect assertion where oh of the direct was retained.

{I)

Negatives.

But we mer, itself

see oh with the inf. after verbs of saying as early as

(/)77s

ohx

v/ith

Iliad,

viro/jLeLvaL,

the

inf.,

but

XVII,

many

174.

Thus

oh

verbs retained

But

swearing, hoping, promising, etc.

won a /x??

Ho-

place for

as verbs of

have anywhere and strong contrast or emphasis would justify oh.^ Votaw^ finds 354 instances in the Greek Bible where the inf. itself is modified by the negative. Of these 330 have fxi] and the rest have compounds of The anarthrous inf. with iirj he notes 59 times in the 0. T., 32 in the Apocrypha and 47 in the N. T., special phrases could

oh

fx-f].

139 in all. The articular inf. with he finds in the 0. T. 136 times (tov 99, to 37), in the Apocrypha 21 times (roD 10, to 11), in the N. T. 35 times (tov 15, to 20), 192 in all (tov 124, to 68). With the anarthrous inf. the negative more frequently occurs with the fjLrj

principal verb as in oh

OkXoi.

We

do have

as will be shown, but in general directly

is

always negatived by

»

lb., p. 179.

*

For the variety of uses

2

Kii^i^

M. andT., ^ «

uri

it

oh in infinitival clauses,

true to say that the

N. T.

in the

p 192.

s

This

is

inf.

true of

jviotilton, Prol., p. 203.

of the absolute inf. in ancient

pp. 31011". Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 414. Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 58.

is

Gk. see Goodwin,

riv

avToU

has

likewise

have

it

elvai

avaaraaiv

:

4, eis to

negative

/xiy

14,

Q'trt

The

1.

:

object-inf.

Kapdiats

tols

kv

vixdv

ixyyeXov

ixrjre

vimv

We

irvevixa.

have

8, XeyovaLv

/xi)

with tov

fxr]

it

and with prepositions as in 2 Cor. auyaaai. With verbs of hindering and denying the not necessary, but it was often used by the ancients

17, rod

:

fj.r]Te

:

fxij

13.

:

:

as in Jas. 5

4

:

in indirect assertion as in Ac. 23

and

ofioaai,

in Lu. 21

as Kpeir-

iir],

both the anarthrous

21),

For the articular accusative with ni] see Ro. 14 with indirect commands as in Mt. 5 34, Xkyio

Tpo/jLeXerav.

We

:

as in Lu. 17

articular

as

ni],

TJiSTAMENT

subject-inf. uses

Pet. 2

tTveyvoiKkvaL (2

fi-q

as above and the

fjLT]

So the

of uses of the inf.

all sorts

Tov

NEW

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1094

fxri

is

uri

^pe^at,

as a redundant negative repeating the negative notion of the verb, just as double negatives carried on the force of the first

negative.

When

was not always used.

It

negatived, then

was

itself

But we do not

ov could follow.^

/xtj

the verb

find this

idiom in the N. T. Examples of the N. T. idiom have already been given in this chapter. The variety in the N. T. may be illustrated. See Lu. 23' 2 KoiKhovra (popovs KaiaapL bibbvai, (Ac. 4 17) :

:

aurots

a-n-eCK-qaiiixeda

deia

weldeadaL,

fir)

KaTeixov avTov tov jrpos

(1

ixe,

XaKetv, (Gal. 5

;uT?Kert

(Ro. 15

(Mt. 19

Topeveadat,

ixt]

:

22) eveKOTVTbp.r]v

:

Cor. 14:39) to Xakelv

p-rj

:

7)

tIs iimSs eveKoxl^ev dX??-

tov eXOeiv, (Lu. 4

14)

(Ac. 14:18)

/ccoXuere,

dveiv avTols, (Ac. 8

36)

KaTtiravaav tovs oxXous tov

jxi]

to u5cop hbvaTai KwKma'i tls tov

47)

p.y]TL

42)

:

/xoXis

tL KwXuet fie

^a-KTiadrivai, (10

:

:

KcoXuere avTO. k^delv

jui)

p.r)

^air-

Rader20) ovUv virecrTeiXaprjv Tiadrivai, (20 prj with the to Pauline "the illustrates macher (A''. T. Gr., p. 149) and holpa, /SXereti^ prj re to infinitive" by Sophocles' Electra, 1078, tov

:

p-q

avayyelXai.

the inscr. (Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen in Kilikien, 170, 2), to pr]bkv We may note also Ac. 4 20, ov Swapeda pri eTretaevevKeLV. aWov

—

:

not redundant. Cf. also Jo. 5 19, second negative is redundant, but the where ov bvvaTai. iroieiv ovbkv, have a redundant negative pi] with MSS. Some it repeats the ov. after otl) and with wpoaTed^22 2 (cf. 1 Jo. 34 dbkvai in Lu. 22

XaXetv, where the negative

is

:

:

:

AP

read avTi.\eyovT€^ in Lu. 20 27. vai in Heb. 12 the same negative is repeated, as in discourse indirect Even in Here ovdev ov TeWopaL oWeu. tovtwv avTov Xavdaveiv Ac. 26 26, :

So

19.

:

:

strictly goes

but

ov is

with Xavdaveiv in spite of

construed with

py]dh or pri8h.

But

in

ireldopai,

Mk.

7

:

its

position after

and so oWev

is

24, ov8eva i]9e\ep

ireldopai,

used rather than yvoiPai, it is not

best to explain ovSha with the inf. in this fashion. This looks like the retention of the old classic use of ov with the inf. which 1

See Thompson, Synt., pp. 425

ff.

1095

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ)

the grammars are not willing to allow in the N. T.^ Epictetus inf. as in IV, 10, 18, ov ixiKpa dk^aadat ov8i fxiKpcov

uses ov with the cLTTOTvx^'iv-

As a matter

with the

too

of fact

many

of

oi)

is

the case in Heb. 7: 11,

inf.,

erepov apiaraadai

/cat

we have a number

of other

examples There

to rule out without ceremony.

tLs

tn XPeta Kara

Tr]v

ra^iv MeXxto^eScK

It is true that ou

ov Kara. Tqv Ta^iv 'KeyeaduL;

comes just before Kara r-qv TCL^LP, but it is rather forced to deny it any connection with XeyecrdaL. See also Ro. 8 12, o^etXerat ov rfj :

aapd Tov Kara aapKa ^rjp, where, however, oii occurs outside of rod and is directly concerned with rfj aapd. Other examples of sharp contrast by means of oh are found, as in Ac. 10 40 f., UoiKev avTov ep.(f)avrj yeveaOai, ov iravTl tco Xac3 dXXd ^udprucrt; Ro. 7:6, coore 8ov\eveLV h KaivoTriTL TTPev/jLaTOs Kal ov iraXaLOT-qTL ypaiJip.aTOs; Heb. 13 9, In fie^aiovadaL oi) l3p6)iJLa(nv (but here no contrast is expressed). :

:

Ro. 4

:

12, 16,

with

els to,

we

find ov ixbvov

(m) "Av with the hifinitive.

from the N. T. save is

This

in 2 Cor. 10

:

— dXXd

classic

9, cos

av kK<^o^€tv.

not a clear case, since kK^o^etv depends on

in as a parenthetical clause, 'as if ('as

The treatment twists

Kal.

idiom has vanished

it

56^aj

its

here

it

av

comes

a good

many

cos

were')-

of the infinitive has thus required

and turns due to

Even

and

double nature.

^

The Participle (f |i€TOXil). /'^/r^-A^^r^x*/ - -me-^ 2'^"^^^^ uAMU.s»f^(/k a /»*-< These verbals are not ex- ^"^ 1. The Verbals in -to? and -xeo?. actly participles inasmuch as they have no tense nor voice. They are formed from verb-stems, not from tense-stems, and hence III.

In the broadest sense, are properly called verbal adjectives.^ however, these verbals are participles, since they partake of both

verb and adjective.

Originally the infinitive

had no tense nor For con-

and the same thing was we have limited the term participle to the verbal adThe verbal in -tos goes back to jectives with voice and tense. the original Indo-Germanic time and had a sort of perfect passive Cf. jvojtos, notiis; ayvcoidea.^ This form is hke the Latin -tus. Strictly this this point. overdo But we must not Tos, ignotus. came to have never tense and it nor pro-ethnic -tos has no voice Latin and in it did Greek as in the connections intimate verbal not correspond, hanv do ayarrrjTos est and amatus English.^ Thus true of the participle.

voice,

venience

nor, in truth, does 'he

Latin, a word

is

loved' square with either.

like tacitus illustrates the

N. T. Gk.,

J

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2

Thompson, Synt.

8

Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 200.

"Even

p. 255.

of Attic Gk., p. 2G2. *

in

absence of both tense

Moulton,

Prol., p. 221.

'^*'*'"y-

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1096

and voice from the adjective in its primary use."^ Already in the Sanskrit voice and tense appear with some of the participles, but "the division-line between participial and ordinary adjectives is less strictly drawn in Sanskrit than in the other IndoEuropean languages. "2 The ambiguity due to the absence of voice in the verbal in -tos was inherited from the original IndoGermanic time.^ It becomes, therefore, a lexical, not a syntactical problem to decide in a given instance whether the verbal is "active" or "passive" in signification.

In

itself it is neither.

A

compound adjectives like deo-naxoi, (Ac. 5 39), 'fighting God.' In modern Greek the verbal in -tos is rare and is little more than an adjective (Thumb, Handb., p. 151), though the new formation in -dros has more verbal force. problem

similar

is

raised in

:

This ambiguity appears in Blass^ overstates

language.*

Homer and it when he

through the Greek

all

that in the N. T.

saj^s

"the verbal adjective has practically disappeared, with the exception of forms like Swards, which have become stereotyped as adjectives." As a matter of fact the verbal in -tos is still common in the N. T. as in the kolvt] in general. Take, for instance, ajairriTds, Tos, *•'**''

ixyvwros, adwaros, aKarayvc^Tos

,

avaiJ.apTr]TOs, aveKTOs, aop-q-

airo^XrjTos, apearbs, apKeros, yevvrjTos, ypairros, dtdaKTOs,

aTTtcTTos,

dwaros, (vXoyrjTos,

fecrTos, davfj-aaros, dvrjTOS, deoTrvevaros

tendency

is

we have

But

this also

abbvarov

in

Mt. 19

is :

26;

Mk.

10

:

'impossibility' of the law.''

vo/jlov is

There

is

:

:

Ro. 15:

8;

is

'impossible,' as

3,

therefore, it

it

In Ro. 8

27, etc.

point to note

In Ac. 14

'incapable,' whereas usually

doubtful whether to abbvarov tov

was true at the

The

just seen in the Sanskrit.

that the verbal does not denote voice.

1,

oparos, TaOr]-

rather to accent the adjectival aspect at the expense

is

of the verbal idea of these words. start, as

,

It is true^ that the

Tos, TrapelcraKTos, tlcttos, (jiOapTos, xp'?o't6s, etc.

is

the 'impotency' or the

no notion of tense nor of

Aktionsart in these verbals in -tos and so ayawt^T&s does not distinguish^ between

ayaircciJievos,

ayairrjOels

and

Moul-

rjyairrjijLevos.

ton thus properly notes the fact that in Mt. 25 41 we have KaTTfpafxevoL, 'having become the subjects of a curse,' not Kardpa:

TOL,

'cursed.'

^aa/jievy

1 2

It is interesting to note

in 1 Pet.

1

:

8,

but here

Moulton, Prol., p. 221. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 347.

is

Kal 5e5o-

active in sense,

*

Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 761.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 37.

'

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 200.

^

Cf. Viteau, Essai sur la Synt. des Voix,

'

Moulton,

Prol., p. 221.

xc^P9- aP€K\aXr]TU)

di'e/cXdXrjTos

»

lb.

Revue de

Philol., p. 41.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT THMATOS) The ambiguity comes also alpbixevov in Mk. 2

'inexpressible.'

used for

ciple 'borne'

:

1097

in our English parti-

and the

3,

punctiliar

'brought' used for hexdelaau in 2 Pet. 1: 18. With these Moultoni contrasts vpidepov ('taken away') in Jo. 20 1. It is worth while to study a few more examples from the lexical point of :

In general^ the passive sense

view.

(Mt. 3

Tos

Tim. 3

(2

(XTos

is

more common,

as in ay awrj-

17); eWeros (Lu. 9 :62); 5t5a/
:

:

Th. 4:9);

16); deodldaKTos (1

ypairros

and

kpvttos

used just hke a substantive (neuter adjective in plural). But feo-ros (Rev. 3 15) next is active in sense as is aavveTo
:

15

f.).^

Here (Ro. 2: 15

f.)

KpvirTa is

to.

:

:

is made from the middle (TvvTidep.ai ('covesometimes passive in sense in the old Greek, is always active in the N. T., as in Mt. 11 25, but dvrjTos (Ro. 6 12) is 'liable to death,' not 'dying,' as Tra^j^ros (Ac. 26 23) is 'capable of suffering.' Cf. the Latin adjectives in -hilis. The verbal in -reos is later than that in -ros and does not oc-

to

(paronomasia)

it

^vveTos,

nant').*

:

:

:

probably a modification of the verbal -ros to express the idea of the predicate-infinitive, like this is not to eat It is really a gerundive and is used in the per(to be eaten).' ^ cur in Homer.

It is

'

sonal or impersonal construction, more commonly the latter.^ The personal is always passive in sense, while the impersonal active

is

verbs.''

mon

and may be formed from

transitive or intransitive

It expresses the idea of necessity.

and more

as the verbal in -ros

though not frequent.

It

is

is

It

was never

not unknown

like the

as

com-

in the papyri,^

verb (and participle) than

the verbal in -ros in one respect, that it often uses the cases of the regular verb.^ This is seen in the one example in the N. T. (Lu. 5 38) olvov v'eov eis aaKoiis ^X-qreov. It is the impersonal construc:

This example of Viteau, "Essai -reov in Luke is See Theo, Philologie, 38). Revue de p. sur la Syntaxe des Voix," tion,

though the agent

is

not here expressed.

a survival of the literary style

Progymn.,

1

p. 128, 12,

el

(cf.

yan-qreou.

lb., p. 222.

Riem. and Goelzer, Synt.,

^

p. 707.

In Sans, the verbal adjs. in -td are sometimes called passive participles (Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 340). This form does not belong to the tense »

system. «

Moulton,

6

Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 184, 525. Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 707.

6

Prol., p. 222. '

»

Goodwin, M. and T., p. 368 Moulton, Prol., p. 222.

• But even with -ros this sometimes appears as in 5i8aKTol where we have the ablative. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 522.

f.

dtov (Jo. 6

:

45)

a grammar of the greek

1098 2.

new testament

History of the Participle.

The Sayiskrit Participle. This was more advanced in its development than the Sanskrit infinitive, which had no voice nor tense. In the Veda the aorist, present, perfect and future tenses have participles.^ The distinction in the structure of the participle as compared with the other verbal adjectives lies just in The mere verbal is formed on the verb-stem, while this point. the participle is formed on the tense-stem.- In the Sanskrit also both voices (active and middle) show these participles. Thus already in the original Indo-Germanic tongue it appears prob(a)

able that the participle existed with voice, tense, Aktionsart

government

of cases.^

pro-ethnic participle

-^os-

and The Greek participle is thus rooted in this as seen by the very suffixes -ni-, -7neno~,

(-Ms).^

Homer^s Time. Already in Homer and Hesiod the participle occurs as a fully developed part of speech. It occurs on an average of 8} times per page of 30 lines.^ In Hesiod the parti(6)

ciple is chiefly attributive, while the predicate participle

common than

is

less

Homer.^

This use of the participle as the practical equivalent of the hypotactic clause is a purely Greek development (copied by the Latin to some extent) within historical times.'

The

in

participle

is

writers of culture

the Greek

"a

a literary device, and flourished best with

who were

(/)tXo/xeroxoi.^

Broadus used to

call

participle-loving language," and, taken as a whole,

this is true. Certainly the participle had its most perfect development in the Greek. The aorist participle died in the Sanskrit and did not appear in the Latin. It is the aorist active participle which made the participle so powerful in Greek. The English, like the Sanskrit and the Greek, is rich in participles, though the German is comparatively poor. "We gain a certain grandeur and terseness by the construction, a certain sweep, a certain Trept/80X57, such as Hermogenes recognises as lying in the participle."' This wealth of participles gives flexibility and swing to the lan-

guage. (c)

The Attic Period.

In Herodotus the participle jumps to

1

Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

'

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 521

*

Brug., Indoger. Forsch., V, pp. 89

p. 202.

2

Thompson, Synt.

of Attic Gk., p. 262.

f.

ff.;

Giles,

Man.,

p. 473;

Moulton,

Prol.,

p. 221.

The Part, in the Book of Acts, 1909, p. 7. The Part, in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., 1897,

s

Williams,

6

Boiling,

7

lb.

9

GildersL, Stylistic Effect of the Gk. Part.,

8

III, p. 423.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 505.

Am.

Jour, of Philol., 1888, p. 142.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1099

"PUMATOi:)

times per page of 30 lines.' But Sophocles has it only 9 Williams^ runs the parallel on with 13

17|^

times on the same scale.

12f for Xenophon, 10^ for Plato, 10| for Deand orators and not the

for Thucydides,

It is thus in the historians

mosthenes. poets, that (d)

The

we

see the participle in its glory.

KoLvr].

styles of writing.

Here we note a sharp-difference in The Atticists like Josephus with

Maccabees with 232, ^^^^ They go beyond them in KOLvr]

the- several

and 2

20,

^^ conscious imitation of the ancients.

But the

fact.

writers of the literary

follow close behind, as Polybius with 17|, Strabo with 13|-

and Plutarch with 14. Certainly there is no sign of decay here. But in the LXX, Exodus, Deuteronomy and Judges give only This confirms the judgment 6 1 while ^ the papyri show 6|. that the vernacular was not fond of the participle and found it Jannaris* quotes striking passages from Thucydides, clumsy. Plato and Demosthenes which illustrate well the clumsiness and ambiguity of the participle in long, involved sentences.

Even

in

the older Greek in unconventional or unscholarly composition the

The

clearer and easier was used instead.^ In the N. T. we see the participle used on the whole more frequently than in the LXX and the papyri. The Hebrew had a In certain restraining influence on the participle in the LXX. the vernacular papyri the participle was held back on the prinIt is Luke who makes most frequent ciple just stated above. use of the participle with 16f in the Gospel and 17 g in the Acts per page of 30 lines.® But 1 Peter follows close behind with 15f and Hebrews with 14. In the other Gospels Matthew has it 12 J, Mark llf and John lOf.'^ James has it 10 per page, while in the Epistles and Revelation it drops back to 8 and 9. On the whole it is much as one would expect. The more literary books

accumulation of participles

is

shunned.

analysis of co-ordinate or subordinate clauses

lead (after Paul with only 9 per page average in Gal.,

Cor.,

1

and Rom.).^ The historical books surpass the Epistles, while Hebrews here reveals its hortatory, sermonic character. For a succession of participles see Ac. 12 25; 23 27; Heb. 1 13 f.; Mk. 5 15. The details of the N. T. situation will come later. The participle more and more came to be (e) Modern Greek. :

:

:

:

>

Williams,

'

II).,

»

lb.

The

Part, in Acts, p. 7.

p. 10.

"

Gk. Cr.,

*

Hist.

8

lb., p. 22.

p. 504.

lb., p. fjOf).

«

Williams, Part, in Acts, p. 23.

^

jb.

Williams did not count 2 Cor. ami the

oilier

Pauline Epistles.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1100

scholastic and dropped out of the vernacular.^ In particular was this true of the circumstantial participle. The classic Greek by means of the participle developed the periodic style (Xe^is KaTtdTpaixu'evii]) and is seen at its highest in Isocrates. See, for

example, the "Ciceronian period" in Isocrates, p. 82. Jebb^ contrasts this with Xe^ts dpojxkvr], simply tacking clause to clause as in

Mt. 7 27 and the colloquial repetition of finite verbs as in Jo. 1 But ^Xeirere, /SXcTrere, /SXcTrere (Ph. 3 2) has rhetorical effect. In the vernacular modern Greek, therefore, we see a retreat :

47; 7 4.

:

:

of the participle all along the line.

It is

not dead as the

infinitive,

some vernacular writers are bringing back the use of the participle for literary purposes (Thumb, Handb., The analytic tendency of modern language is against p. 168). dying, though

but

is

it.

See Jebb's remarks for the various devices used instead of

The only

the participle.

modern Greek are the gerund in Latin), some or -afxevos and perfect pasA few are made from aorist

participles left in

indeclinable present active in -ofras

middle (or passive) parts, in

-ovfxevos

sives like 8efxevos (no reduplication) .^

(cf.

(Thumb, Handb., p. 150). The use of the part, modern Greek is very limited indeed. 3. Significance of the Partici^'le. The infinitive was originally a sub(a) Originally an Adjective.

stems

like ibuiixhos

in the

stantive, as

we have

In the Sanskrit

seen.

it

did not acquire

had the verbal idea of action. The participle, as we have seen, had made more progress in the Sanskrit, but it was also- originally an adjective. It never got away from this original adjectival idea.^ But we are not left to history and logic to prove this point. It so happens that some participles in form never became participles in fact. They are merely adjectives. Homer shows a number of such words. ^ Cf. ac-iievos. We see remnants of this usage in the N. T. like tKwv (Ro. 8 20), aKiJiv (1 Cor. 9 Other participles come in certain uses to be 17). only substantives (adjectives, then substantives), though the true voice and tense, though

it

:

:

Cf. apxc^v, 'a ruler' (Mt.

participial use occurs also. qyovijievos,

'a governor' (Ac. 7

ings' (Lu. 12

:

33).

:

10);

to.

vTapxovra

vficov,

In general "the adjective represents a qual-

ity at rest, the participle represents a quality in 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 505.

3

Thumb, Handb.,

«

Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 522.

5

Monro, Horn.

«

Boiling,

The

20:25);

'your belong-

p. 167.

Gr., p. 54.

^

motion."^

V. and D., Handb.,

But

p. 333.

Cf. also Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242. Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 681.

Part, in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., 1897, III, p. 422.

1101

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) not

all

The mere

verbs express motion.

adjectival notion

is

more

common in the Latin, as in prceteritus, quietus, tacitus, etc. Mt. 17 17, yepea aTTLffTos Kal StecTTpantihr], the verbal adjective :

In

and

participle occur together.

The Addition of

(6)

tense, voice

These functions are There was originally no no-

the Verbal Functions.

and case-government.

tion of time in the tense, nor does the tense in the participle ever express time absolutely. It only gives relative time by sug-

by the use of temporal adverbs or conjunctions.^ The verbal idea in the participle thus expands the adjectival notion of the word.2 But the addition of these verbal functions does not make the participle a real verb, since, like the infinitive, it does gestion or

not have subject.^ (c) The Double Aspect of

The very name partiThe word is part adjective,

the Participle.

ciple {pars, capio) indicates this fact.

Voss calls it mules, which is part horse and part ass.* Dionysius Thrax says: Meroxri e
part verb.

are to look for both the adjectival and the verbal aspects, as in the infinitive we have the substantival and the verbal. The emphasis will vary in certain instances. Now the adjectival will be to the fore as in the attributive articular participle like 6 the verbal side is stressed as in the circumstantial KoXoJv.^

more

Now

participle.

But the

adjectival notion never quite disappears in

the one as the verbal always remains in the other (barring a few One must, therefore, explain in each incases noted above). stance both the adjectival and verbal functions of the participle

he has set forth only one side of the subject. It is true that the verbal functions are usually more complicated and interesting,6 but the adjectival must not be neglected. else

(d)

Relation between Participle and Infinitive.

As already

ex-

though different in origin. both are participial. infinitival; Both are verbal nouns; both are

plained, they are closely allied in use,

But the

participle so-called

so-called has lost its proper

is

inflected always, while the infinitive

inflection.

The

infinitive, besides, ex-

presses^ the action in relation to the verb, while the participle expresses the action in relation to the subject or the object of the »

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 522.

*

2

lb.

*

3

Monro, Horn.

'

lilasH,

M. and

Gr., p. 53.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242.

T., p. 357.

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 1G9. Brug., Griooh. Gr., p. 522.

« Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 163. In general, on this point, see Goodwin,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1102

verb (or some other substantive or pronoun). ^

between the participle and the

Thus

portant.

in Lu. 16

:

The

distinction

thus becomes quite im-

infinitive

3, eTratreTv aiaxvvofjiaL,

the idea

is

'

am

I

and do not do it,' while kiraiTobv alaxvvofxaL would be 'I beg and am ashamed of it.'^ Cf. the analytic expression In Xenophon, Mem., 2, 6, 39, we have alaxovoin 2 Tim. 1 12. /jiaL \eyoiu. So apxoixaL in Attic Greek took the infinitive as a rule, linking the infinitive with the verb. But sometimes the participle occurred, linking the action to the subject (or object) and so contrasting the beginning with the end.^ In the N. T. all the examples have the inf., there being no occasion for the point of In Lu. 3 23, apxofj.evos wael krCiv TpiaKovra, we have distinction.

ashamed

to beg

:

:

Cf. Lu. 14

neither with apxonevos.

macher {N. T.

:

Rader-

30, fip^aro olKoboixtlv.

compares

Or., p. 169)

ap^a.p.evos e^eTtdero

(Ac. 11

:

—

with ap^aixevT] Karexofxai (Xen. of Eph., p. 388, 31). On the other hand, in the N. T. xauoyuat occurs only with the participle, as in Lu. 5 4, tTavaaro XaXwj'. Cf. Ac. 5 42; 6 13; Eph. 1 16; Col. 1:9; Heb. 10 2. But in Ac. 14 18 note Kareiravcrav rod iii] dvHv, which well illustrates the difference between the inf. and 4)

:

:

:

:

:

:

The use of kreXeaep biaTaacruv (Mt. 11: 1) Blass^ calls The part, alone occurs with emaKeo} (Gal. 6 :9; 2 Note also eTrkjievov kpwTOiVTes (spurious passage in 13).

the part.

unclassical.

Th. 3

:

Jo. 8:7),

Ac. 12

:

but

16,

aaiTOL

kire/jLevev

(Ac. 27:33) without

SiareXeZre

Kpovuv,

Radermacher {N. T.

and Lu. 7

the part, with

Gr., p. 169) finds

in "vulgar literature."

He

Cf.

ovres.

45, ov bLeKnrev /cara^tXoOcra.

:

observes that

many

kTnp.kvoo

of these neater

classical idioms with the part, do not appear in the N. T. Contrast with this the inf. in Ac. 20 20, 22, oh yap virecFTeLkanTiv Tov ixr] avayyelXaL. There is no example of the inf. with 4>a'Lvop.aL in the N. T., but the part, occurs in Mt. 6 16, 18 {vrjaTevo^v). :

:

The 7

adjective alone It

13.

:

is

in spite of

is

seen in Mt. 23

:

27, 28.

Cf.

also

hardly on a par with the participle in Mt. 6

Ro. :

17

Thoroughly classical also are (Mt. 17 25) and eXadov ^evLcravTes (Heb. 13

Blass's insistence.^

Tpo€4>9a(7ev avrov 'Keycov

:

specimens of literary occurs in Clem., Cor., II,

2),

:

style. 8,

2.

The The

with TrpocpOavo^ part, with rvyxavoo does

infinitive

In the later kolvt] the inf. takes the not occur in the N. T. place of the participle with Xavdavcc, Tvavoixat and 4>davw (Rader-

macher,

A'^.

T. Gr., p.

169).

part,

is

found with

Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, 1862,

1

Cf.

2

Robertson, Short Gr., p. 194. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 245.

"

The

^

II).

^

lb.

inrapxoi p. 34.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT (Ac. 8

:

and xpouxapxw (Lu. 23

16)

participle belongs to the verb in

:

It

12).

Tim. 5

1

is

dou])tfiil

if

the

13, apyai ixavdavovcnv

:

not to be understood as

TepLefixofieuaL, l)ut, if so, it is

1103

THMATO::;)

like the inf.^

Tim. 5 4, the inf. occurs with fxapdavo} according 11; to classic idiom. At any rate, if TeptepxoiJLevat, (1 Tim. 5 13) is a circumstantial part., something has to be supplied with apyai. The part, in 1 Tim. 1 12, -wLarbv /xe rjyriaaTo dtixevos, is certainly circumstantial. The distinction between the inf. and the part, comes out sharply in indirect discourse also. The inf. is more In Ph. 4

1

:

:

:

:

Thus note rjKovaav tovto and aKovopev yap nuas

objective.

avTov

weTOLrjKhaL

to

crrjuelov

Th. 3 11). The participle is a descriptive adjective even though in indirect discourse (cf. Lu. 4 23; Ac. 7 12). See 1 Cor. 11 18 for the inf. again. In Mt. 7:11, ol'Sare dopara dya^d 5t56mt, the inf. with (Jo.

12

18)

:

:

ol8a

TrepnraTovi'Tas (2

:

:

:

means 4vnow how to give.' But in Lu. 4 :41, fibaaav elvai, it is mere indirect discourse. For the part,

XpLaTou avTop

2 Cor. 12 3

:

9 note

:

2, olba

— apirayevTa top tolovtop

(cf.

Mk.

6

.'

In Ac.

20).

Here we have the same

el8ep avTop irepLiraTovpTa.

top

see

root,

though a different sense. OUa is common with otl. But yiPwaKij) occurs both with the inf. as in Heb. 10 34, yiPoxjKOPTes exeiv iavToiis Kpeiaaopa virap^LP, and the participle as in Heb. 13 23, ytpo::

:

aKeTC TOP a8eX4>6p

rjpuip

Cf. Lu. 8

Tipodeop awoXeXvpepov.

46, 67w

:

where the tense and participle both acof the experience. But note the inf. in Mt.

eypoip bvpapip e^eXrjXvdv'iap,

cent the vivid reality 16

:

The same

13.

bpoXoyovcTLP eidepai, (cf.

2 Jo.

true of opoXoyeoo as in Tit.

is

1 Jo.

4

:

2, 6

dpoXoyel

1

:

16, dtop

'Irjaovp ep aapKl kXrjXvdoTa

and between

Cf. also Ac. 24: 10 6vTa ae KpiT-qv kincrTdpevos

7).

doKLpd^oo in 1

thing

and

Th. 2

:

4 and 2 Cor. 8 22. :

Note

difference

Ipa evpcoffLV KaTrjyopeip avTOV (Lu. 6 7) and evplaKei avTovs KadevSopras (Mk. 14 :37). Cf. Indirect Discourse. Further examples of the supplementary participle come later. These sufficiently illustrate the difference between the use of inf. and part. The hybrid character of (e) Method of Treating the Participle. :

the participle has led to a great deal of diversity in

its treat-

ment in the grammars. Prof. Williams ^ gives an interesting summary in his monograph. None of them are satisfactory because they do not follow a consistent plan.

Part of the divisions

are from the adjectival, part from the verbal point of view. are not parallel.

Thus we have

Goodwin's attributive, circumstansupplementary; Burton's adjectival, adver])ial, substantival;

utive, adverbial participles; tial,

They

Kiihner's complementary, attrib-

1

W.-M.,

p. 4:36.

2

The

P;irt. in Acts, i)p.

I

IT.

1104

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

Jannaris'

additional

NEW TESTAMENT

and adverbial; Blass' attributive and in Hadley and Allen's attributive and predi-

adjectival clause;

cate; Delbriick-Brugmann's external, objective, adverbial. Then Williams 1 adds another that is no better, ascriptive, adverbial,

complementary. Thompson ^ gives the attributive and the supplementary participle after saying that the nominal and the verbal classification is

more

The only way

elastic.

the treatment of the participle

is

symmetry

to get

in

to follow the line of its double

nature (adjectival and verbal) and discuss the adjectival functions and the verbal functions separately. See the discussion of the

That is to say, each participle must be considered as both adjectival and verbal. Not all the adjectival aspects will be true of any one participle nor all of the verbal, but each one will have some adjectival and some verbal functions. Thus alone can one get a clear statement of the many participial combinations and permutations. As an adjective the participle is attributive (anarthrous or articular) or predicate. It may even be substantival, especially with 6. It is always declinable. As a verb there is always voice and tense and there may be cases. But any given anarthrous predicate participle may be either supplementary (complementary) or circumstantial (additional) or wholly independent (as indicative or imperative). The articular participle is ruled out of this three-fold alternative, though it still has voice, tense and governs cases. The articular participle is always atinfinitive.

The lines thus cross and recross in But a clear statement of all the essential facts can be made by taking the adjectival and the verbal aspects separately. In any given instance there is thus a double problem. Both sides of the given participle must be noted. 4. Adjectival Aspects op the Participle. (a) Declension. The free declension of the participle in number and gender and case (cf. per contra the infinitive) makes the tributive (or substantival).

the nature of the case.

task of noting the adjectival aspects comparatively simple. There are anomalies of agreement in these three points as with other adjectives. TTjs

of

Kaivrjs

Thus 'lep.

in

Rev. 3

:

12

17

Kara^aluovaa in apposition with

does not conform in case.

both case and gender in

ireTvpcjofxhrjs

in

There Rev. 1

is :

a difficulty

15.

See also

where the number and gender both vary. In Mk. 4:31 note 6s du TrdvTwv twv aTepnarcou where 6v takes the gender of c-kkpixa. Cf. also tjv Kad-qnevai (Mt. 27:61). irXrjdos

Kpa^oPTes (Ac. 21

:

36)

—

1

The

2

Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 249.

Part, in Acts, p. 5.

VEEBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT But

1105

"PIIMATOS)

these matters are discussed adequately in chapter on

The

Sentence. Attributive Participle.

(6)

The article is not of course necessary with the attributive participle any more than with any other attributive adjective. Thus we have vdcop ^ojv (Jo. 4 10), hving water/ Anarthrous.

(a)

'

:

which

just as really attributive as to uScop to ^aiv (Jo. 4 11). the article is used there is no doubt about the participle is

When

:

being attributive.

When

absent,

it is

xaX/cos

throus attributive) participle,!

o^^fi^

(hairep

rixos

also 1 Cor. 13

:

^lalas (Ac. 2

tti/ojjs

1,

as the other uses of the

^^^ wholly absent from the N. T.

yg^^ j^ jg

^epo/xej/rys

common

not so

is

Note

This construction (the anar-

V Kv/jL^aXov aXaXa^ov.

rjxoji'

an open question to

it is

be examined in the hght of the context.

:

2)

and

dvpa

See

•qveuyfikvr\

(Rev. 4:1). It is not always easy to draw the line between the anarthrous attributive participle and the predicate participle of additional statement.

ticiples,

Cf. av-qp

ivoKu Tamxi (Ac. 22

Ijihos 8e kv Trj

we should have the but in 10

pevos IleTpos,

If 6

TapaQ, amTedpa/x-

kv

yeyevv7]fj.epos

3).

occurred before these par-

articular-attributive participle

So

equivalent to a relative.^

is

:

in Ac. 10: 18,

we have

which

6 eTrt/caXou-

Cf. Lu. 6 48, with Mt. 7 24, audpl oaTLS o}Ko86pT](T€v avTov Trjv oUiav. See also Lu. 6 49. Cf. Ro. 8 24, eXTTis ^Xewophr] ovk eaTiv eXwis. Cf Mt. 27 33. The problem is op-OLOS k(XTLV

32, os eiviKoXeLTaL Herpos.

:

avdpcoTCi} OLKobopovvTi

oldav,

:

:

:

.

particularly real in

Mk.

5

:

:

:

W. H.

25, 27.

indicate

by the comma

after ekdovaa that they regard the participles with ywr] (oma, iradovaa, 8aTavr]aaaa, w4>e\r]detaa, ekdovaa)

They

woman who

up

to that point as attribu-

Then the sentence proceeds with the predicate-circumstantial participles {aKovcraaa, tive.

describe the

comes.

eXdovaa) before T]\J/aTo. Luke (8 43) makes the matter plainer by putting a relative clause after the first participle. The anarthrous attributive participle is closely bound to the substantive :

or

pronoun even when

12

:

25, iraaa

it

is

an additional statement.

^aaCkeia pepiaOelaa

Kad'

eavTrjs

eprjpovTai.

See Mt.

See also

Lu. 6 40; 2 Th. 2:4; Rev. 2 15. In Mt. 13 19, iraPTos clkovovwe probably have the genitive absolute and so predicate circumstantial, but even here avTov occurs, though remote. Cf. Tras 6 aKovoiv (Mt. 7: 26) and ttSs- oo-rts d/couet (7: 24), where we see how :

:

:

Tos,

nearly these constructions approach each other.^ 1

Goodwin, M. and

This use of U, p. GOSf. 3

ttos

T'.,

p. 330.

without

art.

But the anar-

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242. occurs occasionally in class. Gk. Sec K.-G., «

;

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1106

throus indefinite participle ovv KoXdv TTOietv Kal

may throw some

light

XkyoPTos,

Trpo4)i]Tov

is

found

clearly

on Mt. 12

:

25.

we probably have

in Jas. 4: 17, eiSoTL

This passage In Mt. 13 35, otd rod

avT<2

ttoiovptl, afiapria

ixr]

eanv.

:

the articular attributive

Greeks did not always place the attributive between the article and the substantive.^ The use of 1, el8ov d77eXoys eTrrd exovras irX-qyas. exoiv is interesting in Rev. 15 The anarthrous indefinite participle is seen also in a few constructions like TpoaeridevTO wLcrTevoPTes rw Kvplco (Ac. 5 14), where the participle means 'believing men' and has TXrjdr] in apposition with it. See also 4)uvfj ^oojptos (Mk. 1 3, LXX), e^eXeuo-erat 1770U/xevos (Mt. 2: 6, LXX), ovk eanv avviwv and ovk tariv eK^riTOJV (Ro. 3 11, LXX) where 6 is more common, exeis eKel KparovpTas (Rev. 2 14). It is worth noting in this connection also the fact that occasionally a preposition occurs with an anarthrous participle So x'^^P^s KrjpmaouTos (Ro. 10 14). Here the (cf. infinitive). preaching,' but 'without one preaching,' 'without is not idea 'without a preacher.' For 'without preaching' we must have participle, since the

participle

:

:

:

:

:

:

See once more xo-'-P^'-v fJ-^To. X'^'-povTCjov, KKaleLV (12:15) and kwl TOLovPTas (1 Pet. 3:12). In 1 27, kros tov viroTa^aPTos, we have the usual articular

Tov K-qphaaeiv.

Xcopts p.€Ta

KXaLOPTcov

Cor. 15

:

construction.

The articular participle occurs a few times in ((3) Articular. Homer.2 In general the Book of Acts has the articular participle All in about the same proportion as the great Attic writers.^ But the matter articular participles are, of course, attributive. has some points of interest and cannot be dismissed with this general statement. The examples are very numerous. The substantives may be expressed as in ttjp r]TOLp.a(jp.kvr]v vp.lp ^acnXelap (Mt. 25 34) ol ypanixarels ol airo 'lepocFoKvyLOiP KaTa(3aPTes (Mk. 3 :

;

:

22).

Like other articular adjectives, the participle

may come

be-

tween the article aud the substantive, as in rf) vyLaLPovay 5t5acr/caTim. 1 10); rod (f)aLPop.epov aarepos (Mt. 2 7); Trjs TpoKeLu'epyj^ The substantive may preavTU) xapas (Heb. 12 2). Cf. Jude 3. cede and the -article may be repeated, as to uScop to ^ojp (Jo. 4 11) Xta (1

:

:

:

:

TO

(Tojfxa

57).

TO ykpTjabjiepop (1 Cor. 15

Cf.

Mt. 26 :28; 27:44;

the article

is

rcS OeQi tQ> 8l86ptl (1

Jas. 5 :1; Ro. 2 :11.

40 (apposition) coimnon anacoluthon

repeated as in 12

inative reminds us of the

37);

:

Goodwin, M. and

:

m

T., p. 330.

Cf.

2

Vogrinz, Gr. des hom. Dialektes, 18S9, p. 184.

*

Williams,

Part, in the

Book

:

Mk. 12:38 when the nomIn

1

The

Cor. 15

of Acts, p. 46.

Revelation.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOS) With proper names note

Cf.

18).

:

(Mt. 1: 16); Tim. 1

6 Xeyonevos Xptaros

'l-qaovs

Uerpos (Ac. 10

6 eTTLKoXovfjLevos

1

Th.

1

—

:

1107

10; 2

:

For a long passage see 6 bibdaKo^v (Ac. 21 28). The order of the words is not insisted on and in long passages the participle 8

f.

may

:

follow without the repetition of the article, as in

TOP xoprop Tov

ay pod

arjfxepou ovto. koI avpiov els

Mt. 6

:

30,

Kki^avov fia\\bp.evov.

See also Ac. 12 10; 13 :32; 26 4, 6; Heb. 2 2; Heb. 12 3, where in the long clause the participle with ToiavT-qv comes in between rbv and vironeixevriKbTa and a good distance from avTCkoylav. Sometimes the article is used with the participle, but not with :

:

the substantive, as in 32)

xpv'^'-ov

;

TOV

4:12); toXvs

apid/xos

note the with the

3)

avOpojiroL ol

;

series of participles

ol

Particularly in

Mt.

16.

:

mon, as

Tras

The use

24).

aae^els parallel

articular parti-

:

9)

;

(Col.

av 6 Kpivwv (Jas. 4

12);

(Mt. 11

6 epxonevos

rts 6 crvXaycoyoJp

:

:

2:8);

12);

nvh

:

:

:

1

Ac. 9

:

(Mt. 5 22) ttSs 6 clkovwv (Mt. 7:26), equal to the relative clause ttSs oo-ris ;

:

is

was 6 :

Kplvcov is

Here

21.

used with

also 6 Topdrjaas

avdpoowe. is

Cf.

continued

were a relative clause. The articular partisometimes occurs where it is followed by an infinitive. Here still further complicated, but it is clear. See Tijv neXKovaav

Kal e\r]\WeL as if it

ciple it is

86^av airoKa\v4>dfivaL (Ro. 8

12

ol

where

The

7.

:

:

This

In Ro. 2

TCLVTes ol cLKovovTes in

b^

4,

25 (but note dative in 6 24); Ac. 2 of the articular participle with xSs is com-

6 dpyi^ofjLevos

Tras 6 \eyociv (7: 21).

(Mt. 7:

tXclpol

(Jude

ttoXXoi

7: 23; 27: 40; Lu. 6

14; 13

ttoXXoi

and one adjective

18 :

:

ol (j)popovuTes (Ph. 3 1:7); 18 f.). address do we find the articular participle, as in

(Gal.

Tapacraovres

11:21);

with pronouns,^ as in av

avTo7s Tots TriaTebovaiv (Jo. 1

(Lu. 7

Kadrjjxkvois

— apvov/xevoL

Cf. also 1 Cor. 2

TLvas Tovs TeiroLdoTas (Lu.

;

ayopa

kv

:

Pet. 1:7); ovona TO btbopikvov (Ac.

TcaTevaas (Ac.

6

participles).

ciple also occurs

rots

7rat5tots

a-K6Kkvjj.'evov (1

o/jLoXoyovvTes (2 Jo. 7)

(xij

:

:

18)

:

Cf. also 2 Pet. 3

22).

special remark.

In Ac. 13

:

2.

;

to.

boKovvTa

The use

1, /card ttjv

:

fjieXr]

of 6

—

chv

VTrapx^i-P (1

Cor.

in Acts calls for

ovaav eKKXrjalav,

we

see this

idiom, which Moulton^ translates 'the local church.'

D, TOV

optos Atos IIpoTroXecos (or Trpo TroXecos).

Cf.

Note 14: 13 Ramsay's remark

Rom. Emp., p. 52, quoting J. A. Robinson), that in Acts 6 cjp "introduces some technical phrase, or some term which it marks out as having a technical sense (cf. 5 :17; 13 :1; 28 :17), and (Ch. in

is

almost equivalent to tov

opopa^o/jLtpov."

An

ingenious person

might apply this in Eph. 1 1 to the text with h 'Ecfyeaip absent; but the usual view needs no defence against such an alternative. :

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 243.

*

Prol., p. 228.

:

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1108

With

al ovaai in

Ro. 13

€0' lepeo^v Kal UpeioJv

Tov ovTos

reads

17

Moulton loco) in

well

and 28

a'ipecris,

agrees,

taking

we may compare

1

The passage

we may

6 cbv

kirt

known, the

17 has tous ovras

:

:

(iii/A.D.)

in Ac. 5

:

17

tusv 'lovbalcov Tpwirovs.

Sanday and Heacilam

note, with

-KavTwv (Ro. 9

Par. P. 5 (ii/B.c),

So N. P. 49

ovtcjov Kal ovaoov.

'the cuFreiit month.'

iJLT]v6s

ovaa

:

tuv

NEW TESTAMENT

5) as referring

{in

As

to Jesus.

difficulty here is

a matter of exegesis and the punctuation of the editor will be made according to his theology. But it may be said in brief that the natural way to take 6 (bv and is

apposition to 6 Xpcaros. It is a very common thing in the N. T., as already noted, to have 6 and the participle where a relative clause is possible. But this idiom is common in the older Greek. See Ac. 10 18, 32, and chapter on Article. It remains 0e6s is in

:

then to speak of the frequent use of the articular participle without a substantive or pronoun. This idiom is too common for exhaustive treatment, but some examples are given. Cf. Mt. 10: 40, 6 dexojJievos

v/JLcis

Note

kp.e

dex^rai, Kal 6

efj.e

dexoiJ-evos Sexerat tov airoaTel-

and the next verse and 6s au TTOTian in verse 42. See further Mt. 10 37; Ac. 10: 35; Rev. 1 The question of the tense is interesting in some of these ex3. amples, as in 6 evpuv ttiv ^pvxw olvtov airoXeaeL avrrju in Mt. 10 39, but that will be discussed a bit later. Like a relative clause, the \aPTa.

fxe.

also 6 8ex6p.epos

:

:

may

suggest ^ the notion of cause, condition, as in Mt. 10 37, 39, 40, 41; Lu. 14: 11; Ro. 3:5.

articular participle

purpose,

But (c)

etc.,

:

this notion is

very

indefinite.

Predicate Participle.

From

the adjectival standpoint

all

participles that are not attributive are predicate.

This aspect of

the participle must be elucidated further.

verbal aspegt

comes into

The

prominence with all the predicate participles. They will be touched very lightly here and receive full discussion under Verbal Aspects. It may be said at once that all the supplementary and circumstantial participles are predicate. One must special

not confuse the articular participle in the predicate like av el 6 7 19) with the real predicate participle. Cf. Lu. 16 15; 22 28.^ The predicate participle is simply the adjective

kpxoixevos (Lu. :

:

:

in the predicate position.

are obviously

many

That

is, it

is

not attributive.

varieties of the predicate participle.

predicate adjective has had adequate treatment.

Twevou (Lu. 14 (d)

The

:

18).

Cf. also

:

14; Ac. 9

Cf. exe :

Burton, N. T.

M. and

is

p.e

Tapy-

21.

The adjective, though a sometimes used as a substantive

Participle as a Substantive.

variation from the substantive, 1

Heb. 5

There

But the

T., p. 167.

«

lb., p. 169.

^

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT It

as in t6 ayadop.

not strange, therefore, that the parti-

is

shows substantival

ciple also

throus, as in iipx^^v (Mt. 9

TO,

virdpxovTa

(1 Cor. 7: 35)

virepkxou

irpds to

Cf. further 2

(Heb. 12

oj'Tt,

many examples where Kos).

The

:

27 to tWiankvov tov

avTOJV crvfx4>epou, (Ph.

3

:

5td to

8)

20) to Trepiaaevou toop Kkaanaruv, (Ro.

:

There are also the used without a subst. or

11) irpds to irapov, etc.

:

and the

6

part,

is

:

use of the neuter participle as an abstract substantive

common

TO yeyopos (Lu. 8

Cor.

1

:

N. T. as

in the

kpx6fj.eva (Jo.

(1

33,

:

Mt. 10 39, 6 evp6}v and 6 awoXeaas (cf. 6 ayados, 6 /caThe substantive use of the participle is a classic idiom.

pron., as in

so

V{jlQip

(Mt. 14

TTjs yvi}
7: 23) Tw

Cf. Lu. 12

articular.

is

where the genitive shows the substantival

vnoof,

character of this participle. po/jLOV,

These are sometimes anar(Mt. 2:6). But, as a

uses.

18), rjyoviJLepos

:

a substantive

rule, the participle as

1109

'PIIMATOS)

16

56),

:

to.

yLvbjxeva (9

28), to aUKovp.evov (14

:

7), to airoXooXos

:

13), to vvv txov (Ac.

:

But

in the ancient Greek.^

7), to

24:25),

to.

(19

:

6vTa,

p.i]

not

is

see further

dedo^aa/xhov (2 Cor. 3

10), to. :

to.

6vTa

10

f.),

In Lu. 22 49 note to kaonepop. One is not to confuse with this idiom the so-called "substantive participle" of some grammars, which is a term used for the substantivizing of the verbal force of the participle, not the adjectival. t6 doKovp

(Heb. 12

Thus Burton^ Ac. 5

:

10), etc.

:

:

the supplementary participle like that in

calls

and

42, ovk kiravopTo 8L8a(TKOPTes,

t^eKriKvdvLap aw' epov,

in Lu. 8

:

46, eypwp bvpap.iv

the "substantive participle."

I confess

that

nothing to be gained by applying "substantive" to the purely verbal aspects of the participle. Confusion of thought is I see

See

the inevitable result. (e)

The

from participles

is

(d),

5,

due to

its

The formation

adjectival function.

11:32), dpo'Koyovpepojs (1 Tim. 3 23).

(5).

as an Adverb.

Participle

:

Besides, the participle itself

sometimes has an adverbial

16), virep^aWopToos (cf.

of adverbs

Cf. optoos

(Mk.

(2 Cor. 11

neuter adjective

:

iroXv, etc.)

In particular note tvx6p(1 (Mk. 14:72). This obscure participle expresses coincident action (cf. Moulton, ProL, Cor. 16:6). 131).

p.

See also

Cf. rfKdap

force.

eTr<.0a\wp eKkaiep

airemaPTes (Lu. 2

:

16),

airevaas KaTa^r}di

and

We

cannot always draw a distinction between this use and the circumstantial participle of manner. The verbal and the adjectival standpoints come together. A number of the grammars apply the term "adverbial" to all the circumstantial participles.'* But it is more than doubtful if airevcras KaTe^r]

1

2

(19

:

5

f.).

Goodwin, M. and T., p. 331. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 244.

" *

N. T. M. and T., p. 175 f. So Burton, N. T. M. and T.,

p. 169

f.

;

1110

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

one gains as much as he loses thereby. It is true that logically a sort of adverbial relation may be worked out, an adverbial addition to the sentence.^ But it does not help much from the syntactical point of view to insist on this fact in the exposition of the circumstantial participle. As to form the circumstantial participle is still adjectival.

There

The adverbial notion is inferential and something, however, to be said for the

purely logical. adverbial aspect of the redundant participle in ^Xeirovres (SXeTrere (Mt. 13:14, LXX), which is on a par with aKofj aKomere. Both is

are attempts to translate the

Hebrew

Moulton^

absolute.

inf.

has found the idiom in ^schylus and Herodotus, but the N. T. usage is clearly due to the LXX, where it is very common. Cf. also iBoiv eUou (Ac. 7:34), ev\oyciv evXojwco (Heb. 6:14), from the

LXX

Blass {Gr. of the N. T. Gk., p. 251) calls this There are other pleonastic

again.

construction "thoroughly un-Greek."

(Mt. 3 15) which is says" (Moulton and ups somewhat Xtyei (Jo. 21: elirihu tovto 19), dTreX^wj/ also Cf. f.). 15 Prol, p. also avaaTo.^ sold.' So and gone has 'he 13:46), (Mt. irkirpaKtv \a^ovaa note again Once came.' and arose 'he 15: (Lu. 20), fiXdep This idiom is more kveKpvypeu (Mt. 13 33), 'she took and hid.' participles like the like

common

dxoKpt^eh

the vernacular:

etirev

:

"He

:

Aramaic than Hebraic and is at any rate picturesque vernacular. But it is also Greek. Pleonasm belongs to all tongues. Rader-

macher {N. T. VI, 68,

5, e^r?

Gr., p. 179)

—

quotes Herod. VI, 67, 10, elite <^ds; finds in the Bantu

Mr. Dan Crawford

XcTcoj'.

language "dying he died" for the irrevocableness of death. We turn to the verbal aspects of the participle, which are more

now

complex. 5.

Verbal Aspects of the Participle.

Voice. There is nothing of a distinctive nature to say about the voice of the participle in addition to what has already been The voices run in the participles presaid (see ch. on Voice). (a)

verb itself. We find the voice in the earliest Greek as in the Sanskrit. All the nuances of the voices appear in the participle. Cf. the active in hbaoKoiv (Lu. 13 10), fcov (Jo. 4 10) the middle in xpoadexofjievoLs (Lu._ 12 :36), eTLKoXeaanevos (Ac. 22 cisely as in the

:

:

:

16), (xiraffaixevos

22),

(Mk. 14:47); the passive

Trjv aTOKeKpvfJLuepriv

kTrLels

in particular

(Mt. 10

:

1

(1

(Mk. 5:30),

22)

exe

and

/xe

Cor. 2:7), KcoXvdevTes

Trap-QTrjpievov

in \virovnevos

airo\e'\vi^evov

(Ac. 16:6).

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 523.

(Heb. 13

We may

(Lu. 14:18f.), eaeade

eaeade \a\ovvTes (1 Cor. 14 ^

:

9).

(Mt. 19

In

23),

note

p.L
Mk.

Prol., pp. 14, 76.

:

:

5

:

26,

'

1111

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) TroWdv

TvaOovaa virb

the active participle has the construc-

larpcoj',

tion of the passive, but this

Cf

voice.

.

also Gal.

4

:

is

due to the verb

iraax^, not to the

9, yvopres dedv jjcdWov 8e yvooadepres viro deov.

Tense.

(6)

Timelessness of the Participle. It may be said at once that the participle has tense in the same sense that the subjunctive, optative and imperative have, giving the state of the action (a)

In the beginning

as punctiliar, linear, completed.

^

this

was

all

that tense meant in the participle. The participle was timeless. Indeed the participle in itself continued timeless, as is well shown

by the it is

articular participle.^

not present time that

is

Thus

in

Mk.

here given

6

by

:

14, 'lo^apris 6 /3a7rrif coj^,

this tense,

but the gen-

John as the Baptizer without regard to time. Cf. ol fryroOires (Mt. It is actually used of him after his death. 2 20). In Mt. 10 39, 6 evpojv aToXeaei, the principal verb is future

eral description of

:

:

but the aorist tense does not mean So in Mt. 25 20 and 24 6 Xa^oop and 6 eiXr;But us have no notion of time but only the state of the action. the tenses of the participle may be used for relative time. In relation to the principal verb there may be suggested time. Thus while the participle

is aorist,

past or future time.

6 evpojv

which verb

oLTToXeo-et

is

is

:

above implies that In Ac. 24

future.

:

past, but the participle

lutely past.

the indicative

evpcop is

antecedent to

airoXeaei

11, avej3r]p -irpoaKvvrjaojp, the principal

relatively future,

is

The relative time mode and is able

of the participle

though absoapproximates

to suggest antecedent (aorist,

and

present, perfect tenses) simultaneous (aorist, present tenses) ,

subsequent (present, future tenses) action. The participle must be studied with this distinction in mind. But this notion of relative time "is deeply imbedded in the nature of Certainly this notion the participle and the use is universal." tenses of the

'^

of relative time

the Greek

more obvious in the modern languages.'* is

participle

than in

In the chapter on Tense the Latin or in completeness, reasonable with the participial tenses were treated point. A word this necessary at but some further remarks are

needs to be said about the idiom ovtos rjv 6 eixcbj/ (Jo. 1 15), KaOrjixevos (Ac. 3:10), where the principal verb is ovTos riv 6 :

—

thrown into the

past.

1

BruK., Grioch. Gr., p. 522.

^

Movilton, Prol., p. 126.

IIo notes

Hob. 10

:

14, tovs ayia^onii'ovs, as

ex. of the tiiiK^lcssness of the part. '

Gil(ler.sl.,

«

W.-M.,

Synt. of Class. Gk., Pt.

p. 427.

I,

p. 139.

a good

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1112

The

(jS)

The

Aorist.

Aktionsart of the aorist participle

ficiently illustrated in the discussion of the aorist tense.

of course,

no reason

for not

Schaefer^ argues that in most

cases the participle uses the effective aorist. is

is,

having the constative, ingressive or

effective aorist in the participle.^

though there

suf-

is

There

That may be

nothing in the nature of the participle

true,

to Blass^ thinks that the aorist participle contains the idea of completion, but even so that notion may be merely constative

cause

itself

it.

Goodwin^ holds that the

or ingressive.

aorist participle generally

represents the action as antecedent to the principal verb.

ton^ has ticiple

it

more nearly

correct

when he

insists that

Bur-

the aorist par-

conceives of the event indefinitely or simply.

So Blass^

denies that the aorist tense implies antecedent action.

It is usu-

assumed that the proper use of the aorist participle is antecedent action and that only certain verbs (as exceptions) may ally

But

occasionally express simultaneous action.

hension of the real situation.

this

is

a misappre-

It is doubtless true, as

notes that the antecedent use furnishes the largest

Burton'

number

of in-

stances, but that fact does not prove priority nor originality of

"The

conception.

aorist participle of antecedent action does

not denote antecedence;

it

is

used of antecedent action, where

by the aorist tense as a tense, but in some other way."^ Moulton^ is equally explicit: "The connotation of past time was largely fastened on this participle, through antecedence

is

implied, not

the idiomatic use in which qualify

its action.

it

stands before an aorist indicative to

As point action

is

always completed action,

except in the ingressive, the participle naturally came to involve past time relative to that of the

main verb." It was that

the original use of the aorist participle

From

action.

this

was developed quite

:

2)

probable that

of simultaneous

naturally,

of the various cases, the antecedent notion.

(Mt. 4

is

by the nature

Cf. vrjcrTevaas k-rcdvaaev

where the fasting expressed by the participle

is

given

by the principal verb. For further examples of antecedent action see Mt. 2 14; 2 16; 27: 3; 1 Cor. 6 16. For the articular aorist see Mt. 10 39; Lu. 12 47; Jo. 5 15. While this came to be the more common idiom as the reason for the hungering expressed

:

:

:

:

:

:

^

Schaefer,

2

lb.

*

Das

Partizip des Aoristes bei den Tragikeni, 1894, p. 5. 3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197.

6

M. and T., p. N. T. M. and

«

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197.

»

lb.

'

N. T. M. and

«

Prol., p. 130.

48.

So Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 48.

T., p. 59.

T., p. 61.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOz) from the nature of the

1113

case, the original use of the aorist participle

One has no ground for asa necessary or an actual fact with the aorist participle.^ The aorist participle of simultaneous action is in perfect accord with the genius and history of the Greek participle. For numerous examples of both uses see the chapter on Tense. A good instance is seen in Mt. 27 3, 7)/xapTov Trapadovs alfia aOQov. So also hivoKa^div elurev (Lu. 10 30). See Ac. 2 23, tovtou TrpoeTrj^avTes avelXare, where the slaying was manifestly done by the impaling on the cross. The two actions for simultaneous action continued.

suming that antecedent action

is

:

:

:

are identical per

Moulton

se.

{Prol., p. 131)

the verb precedes the aorist participle

530

(ii/A.D.), e^ Siv Swcrets

— Xurpcoaaad

that the N. T. shows a great 15

:

30

Kara^as, (Lu. 2

(Tuiaop

fcaXcos eTTOiTjcras irapayepofxepos. lJLeTaTreiJL(()6e'Ls,

is

He

coincident action.

participle of

the participle

is

number :

it

is

observes that

when

nearly always the

{Prol., p.

132) cites O. P.

ixov to. lixaria.

It SO

of such examples.

happens See

16) rjXOav aTr^vaavTes , (Ac. 10

Mt. 26:

Mk. 33)

:

In Ac. 10: 29, rjXdov antecedent in idea. Acts, however,

Cf.

75-

particularly rich in examples of the coincident aorist participle

See 10:39; 11:30; 13 :33; 15:8, 9; 25 13; 26 10. It is in point of fact a characteristic of Luke's style to use frequently the coincident participle (both aorist and present) placed after the principal verb. This fact completely takes away the point of Sir W. M. Ramsay's argument^ for the aorist of subsequent action in Ac. 16 6, where, however, it is more probably antecedent action, as The argument made against it under 22. is possible in Ac. 23

which follows the verb. 19

:

23

2;

:

22, 25, 30;

:

:

:

:

Tense need not be repeated here.'' Burton assents^ to the notion of the aorist of "subsequent" action in the participle, but no I have examined in detail the N. T. examples adduced and shown the lack of conclusiveness about them all. See chapter on Tense. It is even claimed that subsequent

real parallels are given.

action

is

shown by the

participles (present as well as aorist) in

22; 17 26; 18 23; 28 14, but with no more evidence of reality. Actual examination of each' passage shows the a(!tion to be either simultaneous or antecedent. See also Lu. 1 9, eXa^e rod QvyaaaaL elae\du:v els top paop, where it The same thing is true of Heb. 11 27, is obviously coincident. Cf. also Ac. 7 35 op rjppijcaPTO KareXLirep klyvirTOV, fxri ^o^i^deis.

Ac. 5

:

36; 6

:

11; 8

:

10, 18; 14

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

» s

4

^ gt. P:iul tho Traveller, p. 212. Moulton, Prol., p. i;U. See Hallc^ntine, Bibliothcca Sacra, 1SS4, p. 787, for discussion of N. T. exx. N. T. M. and T., p. G5.

^

1114 eiirovres,

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (13

A

22) elTev iiapTvprjaas.

:

case like 1 Pet.

1

:

20

f.

is

However, the common use of the aorist participle in indirect discourse (as with all the supplementary participles) without any notion of time is to the point. So Ac. 9 12, eldep av8pa elcreKdoPTa /cat kindePTa. So Wtoipovp top ^arapav ireaoPTa (Lu. 10 The action is purely punctiliar with no 18). not, of course, pertinent.

:

:

notion of time at

It is true that the articular participle is

all.

occasionally used (see chapter on Tense) for time past tot he time of the writer, but future to the time of the principal verb. As a matter of fact this aorist participle is timeless, as is shown by the use of 6 irapaSovs in Mt. 10 4 and 6 wapadLSovs in 26 25. So :

5

6 elircop in Jo.

:

12; 6 iroLrjaas 5

action alone that

performance.

:

15;

:

aXelxpaaa 11:2.

17

It is the

under consideration, not the time

is

— Kal

See, per contra, 6 ypovs

aas SaprjaeraL (Lu. 12

:

47)

where the

simple action with a future verb.

fxri

eroifxaaas

of its ttoitj-

rj

aorist participle gives the

Cf. Lu. 6

aorist part, with the present indicative.

:

49 for the articular ^ feels the weak-

Burton

ness of his contention for ''subsequent" action in the aorist participle when he explains that it is "perhaps due to Aramaic

There

influence."

no need

is

since the fact does not exist. ticiple that

any contention

for

an appeal to that explanation,

It is only in the circumstantial par-

made

is

for this notion.

It is certainly

gratuitous to find subsequent action in Ro. 4 :19, /jltj aadep-rjaas rfj irlcTei. Kareporjaep, not to mention 4 :21; Ph. 2:7; Heb. 9 12. Burton reluctantly admits that, though in 1 Pet. 3 18 ^coottolt]:

:

is "clearly subsequent to airedapep,'' yet it "is probably to be taken together with dapaTcodeis as defining the whole of the preceding clause." This latter view is, of course, true, since the order

6ds

of the participles aorist participle

is OapaTccdeis, ^cooiroLtjdels. is

well

Xarpelap Tpoaipepeip

shown dew.

tc3

in Jo. IG

:

The

timelessness of the

2, 6 airoKTeipas

Cf. also ayayovra

—

[v/jlcLs]

reXetcio-at

86^ri

(Heb.

2 10). This coincident use of the aorist participle is by no means so rare in the ancient Greek as is sometimes alleged. The action was specially likely to be coincident if the principal .verb was also aorist.^ Like the other articular participles, the :

aorist participle

So

in Lu. 12

by

side.

:

8

may

f . 6s

be the practical equivalent of the

ap ofxoXoyriaeL

2

N. T. M. and T., p. 66. See Leo Meyer, Griech. Aor.,

3

GildersL, Synt., Pt.

'

Part., Trans.

Am.

6 apprjaa/jLepos are

relative.

used side

p. 125.

See Seymour, The Use of the Gk. Aorist Assoc, XII, p. 88 f.

I,

Philol.

and

p. 140.

:

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT aorist participle

so the present participle

is

timeless

is

timeless

and

and punc-

The

diirative.

ahead of the present indicawhich does not distinguish between punctiliar and durative

participle tive,

As the

The Present.

(7) tiliar,

1115

"rUMATO^;)

A

action.

thus, like the infinitive,

is

careful treatment of the force of the present participle

has been given under Tense. The real timelessness of this participle is shown in the fact that it is used indiscriminately with

e(t)epov

(Heb. 5:8);

TrpoaeTidei tovs

(Mt. 10 40)

So

Kpvcpaico airodwaeL

participle also.

(Mt. 6

:

shows the

especially

doKovvres ovdev TpoaavWevro (Gal.

(Ac. 2

:

47)

6

;

uiv

27); eaeaOe XaXoDj/-

SexoAtews Uyuas

TrapaTideneva (Lu. 10:8); 6

to.

c/xe

jSXeTrcoi/

2:6); Sexerat kv

ra3

There will be Aktionsart in this Some of these words are really punctiliar (8exo(Mt. 6

:

18).

But, in general, the present participle gives

for instance).

The present

linear action.

dvvaraL

articular present

ol

cro:^op.evous

eadiere

;

:

fxepLfxvoJv

The

Cor. 14:9).

absence of time.

fiaL,

TrwXoOj'res

(Ac. 4:34); awodvqcrKCOV evKoyrjaev (Heb. 11:21); Kalirep

vlbs ep.adep

res (1

So

tenses of the indicative.

past, present or future

participle

may have

relative

time.

This This relative time is be this relative time may Sometimes, however, is only natural. this idiom were Examples of idiom. ^ antecedent action, a classic given under Tense, but add Jo. 9:8, ol deo^povvTes to -wpbrepov, where the adverb of time helps to throw the participle back of tktyov, as apTL with /SXeTrco makes the verb later than TV(t>X6s wi' in 9 25. Cf also Gal. 1 23, 6 Stw/ccov rinas irore vvv evayyeXl^eTac, where usually simultaneous or coincident.

:

.

and verb have adverbs of time by way of contrast. both hke these see Mt. 9 20; Mk. 5 25; Lu. 8: instances For other 24 Ac. :10; Eph. 2 :13; Col. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:13, etc. 43; Jo. 5 :5; instances of the present participle to undoubted are also There express the notion of purpose, futuristic in conception, though participle

:

:

present in form. ing:

Mk.

3

:

Add

to the instances already given the follow-

31, e^w arrjKovTes arkaTeCKav KoKovi'Tes.

Here the

first

only noticeable as the usual linear action (with aorist The second participle, however, is practically purindicative). pose. 'They sent to him calling him.' 'They sent to call him.' participle

So

is

also Lu.

13:6

strictly true that

^X0ev

fryroiv,

(13

:

7)

tpxopaL

^tjtcov.

It

not

is

means future or only that the purpose goes on coincident

here the present participle

subsequent time. It is with the verb and beyond. This prosj^ectivi^ j^resent i^art. (cf. present ind.) appears in Ac. 21:3, fjv o.-Ko4>opTi^6iitvov t6v yopov. 'The ship was appointed to unload her cargo.' Cf. Mt. 6 30; :

1

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 17; CJildersl., Synt., Part

I,

p. 139.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1116

Lu. 7: 19; 1 Cor. 15 :57; Jas. 5 1; Ac. 3 26. "simulated"^ also by the present participle when It is, of course, not the participle it is used for conative action. that brings out this notion. See (Mt. 23 14) ov8i tovs elaepxoixk23) Treivovi d0t€T€ eiaeKdetv, (27 40) 6 KaraXvoiiV rov vabv, (Ac. 28

11:3; 26 :28;

The

future

:

:

is

:

:

d(X)v

:

The notion

avTovs.

also as in Ac. 2

of repetition (iterative present)

occurs

adding those

47, irpoaeTWei tovs aco^ofitvovs, 'kept

:

saved from time to time.' So TrwXoCi'res e(])€pov Kal eridow (Ac. 4: 'They would from time to time sell and bring and place at the feet of the apostles.' There is thus a sharp contrast from 34).

the specific instance of Barnabas, of whom it is said: TrooXrjaas It is not clear, however, why the present partirjveyKev (4 37) .

:

ciple occurs in 3

:

8, e^aXXo/xews earr] Kai TrtptTrdret,

unless

note that he kept on leaping and walking (alternately) notion in verse 8, irepLTarcbp Kal aXKofxevos. Cf also in 5 .

ireaoiv e^e\J/v^ev,

where

Teacov

:

2:8. It present and the Tov avdpcoTTOV

of distribution

to

this

.

5, clkovusv

:

d/coucoj/ is

perhaps pres-

is

14, tovs ajLa^onevovs, 'the objects of sanctification.'^

in

Certainly 6 KkkirT^v is iterative Col.

.

antecedent to the verb, but

The notion

descriptive (linear).

ent in Heb. 10

is

it is

Cf

Eph. 4:28.

Cf. Ac. 1:20;

between the

interesting to note the difference

is

aorist participle in

Mt. 16

:

28,

ecos

av Iboiaiv t6v vibv

and in Ac. 9 12, eUev avbpa eicreXdovTa. The same verb and in the same construction

kpxbiJLevov,

:

perfect participle of the

Mk. 9 1, ecos av ido}
occurs in

:

kv bvvaixei.

be illustrated by the punctiliar notion of the aorist in

ireaovTa in

18, the durative notion of -jnirTovToov in Mt. 15 27 and of TiTTovTes in Mk. 13 25, the perfect notion of ireTTcoKOTa in

Lu. 10

:

:

:

Rev. 9:1. (5) The Perfect. the participle. irpoai^aTcos

(Rev. 9

:

This tense brings

kX7]Xvd6Ta (Ac.

1),

little

that

distinctive in

is

Cf. TeTeXeiwixevot (Jo. 17: 23), xeTrotTjKores (18: 18),

kXrjXvdoTa

18

(1 Jo.

:

2),

4

:

4 6), €^X#ws (Mt. 25

KeKOinaKcos (Jo.

2), 6

:

:

TreTTooKora

The

24).

between intensive and extensive was drawn under Some of the intensive uses have lost the notion of Tense. completion (punctiliar) and hold on to the linear alone in the distinction

Cf. eaTc^s dp.i (Ac. 25

present sense.

with which contrast

ol

eypuKOTes (2 Jo.

:

10), 1),

etScbs

avueLdvlris

(Mt. 12 (Ac.

:

25)

5:2),

(Lu. 7 12), TrapeaTr]K6:s (Jo. 18 22). The periphrastic use of the perfect participle in past, present and future time has been sufficiently illustrated already. So has the rare comTedprjKoos

1

:

:

Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 140.

^

Moulton,

Prol., p. 127.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOs) bination of perfect and present participle in Eph. 4 1

:

The

21.

perfect participle also

6

:

crvKrju

elx^v ris Te(j)VTevtxkpr]v,

anar-

(Heb. 5

:

in

14)

to.

needs to be noted again that

It

aiadtiTrjpia yeyvfxvacrfjiha exovruv.

18; Col.

:

either articular or

is

For the predicate use see

throus, attributive or predicate. particular Lu. 13

1117

the perfect participle has no time in itself. In the nature of the case the act will be antecedent except where the tense has lost its

But it is only relative Tedv-qKchs, elSojs. and the leading verb may itself be punctiliar,

true force as in earus,

time, not absolute,

linear or perfect, in the past, present or future.^

present participle

may

Just as the

suggest antecedent action and so be a sort

of "imperfect" participle (past time), so the perfect participle is sometimes 2 used where a sort of past perfect sense results. The action was finished and is now no longer the fact, though the So eirl tw avu^elSr}state represented by the perfect once existed.

Ac. 3

KOTi aiirQ in KadrjjjLevov

:

10.

This

ect)oj3r]dr]aav.

Cf.

Mk.

5

:

15, deoipovaiv tov baLixovi'^biJ.tvov

kol aucppovovvTa, tov kaxriKora tov X€7tcl;ra, Kai

i^aTiankvov

The historical by side. The appear side by side. The

a most instructive passage.

is

present and the aorist indicative here occur side attributive

and the predicate

participles

present and the perfect participles fect participles, one,

come

IfxaTLafjLkvov, is still

Of the two per-

together.

true (punctiliar plus linear)

and describes the man's present state; the other, tov kaxvKOTa, is no longer true and describes the state of the man before Jesus cast out the demon, which casting-out is itself in the past. This participle

is

Cf. also Jo. 8

therefore a sort of past perfect. Jo. 11:44,

31.

:

Another striking example is Here 8e8efxevos is still true, though Te6vt]K<^s is not. Lazarus had been dead, but is not now. We see the same situation in 1 Cor. 2 7, 7171^ a.iroK€Kpvnnkvy]v. The widsom of God is no longer e^fjXdev

6 Tedvr]K(hs

5e5e-

nevos.

:

Ro. 16 25 f., nvaTrjplov xpowhere the long silence is sharp contrast in the the Note broken. be said to now expressly between the perfect distinction This vvv. with aorist participle See 2 Cor. 12 21 drawn. clearly often is participle and aorist hidden.

The point

is still

clearer in

:

voLS alojvloLs aeaLy-qnevov (l)avepoidevTos de vvv,

:

TLcv irpor]jj.apTr\KbTO)V /cat

p.r]

fxeTavo-qaavTuv, (1 Pet.

2

:

10) ol

o\jk

rjXeri-

The same act may be looked at from cither One may not always care to add the linear aspect

fxhoL vvv 5e eXe-qdevTes.

standpoint.

to the punctiliar. t6v kaxv^oTc-

^oj/

Cf. 6 yeyevt^nkvos

Xtyicova in

Mk.

5

:

and

6 yevvr]Bds in 1 Jo.

15 and 6

1

Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt.

2

Cf. Burton, N. T.

I,

M. and

daLfiovLadels in

p. 142.

T., p. 72.

5

:

18,

5

:

18,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1118

6 \al36)v in

Mt. 25 20 and :

k^€\rj\vdvlav air' e/ioD (Lu.

(Mk. 5

e^eXdovaav

:

:

Adverbs

30).

25

6 eiX7?0cos in

8 46) and

may

of time

perfect as with other tenses of the participle.

:

35).

after tUov TU3V

occur with the

Cf. Jo. 19

:

33,

ri8r]

a sort of harmony in 6 IwpaKws fj.€fxapTvpr]Kev The difference between the perfect and present tenses

There

Ttdv-qKOTa.

(19

Cf. eyvoov bbvafnv

24.

:

eTTLyvovs ttju e^ avrov SvvajjLLv

is

is

strikingly

ka^ayiJLevoov

(6:9),

shown in Revelation.. Cf. el8ov ras \puxas aWov ayyekov ava^aivovTa (7:2), aarkpa e/c

One must not confuse the

eiSvla.

Tpe/jLovaa,

Mk. 5:33,

Cf. also

ToO ovpavov TreTTTOOKOTa (9:1).

(po^rjdeLaa

perf. part,

Kal

in Gal.

2:11 and Rev. 21 8 with a present like \(/7]\a(f)o:iJiei>cp in Heb. 12:18 ('touchable'). The future participle, like the future tense in (e) The Future. general, was later in its development than the other tenses. It :

usually punctiliar also and has something of a modal value

is

(volitive, futuristic) like the

subjunctive (aorist).^ See discussion under Tense. The future participle is always subsequent in time to the principal verb (cf. the present participle by suggestion), not coincident and, of course, never antecedent. Hence the future participle comes nearer having a temporal notion than any of the tenses. But even so it is relative time, not absolute, and the future participle may occur with a principal verb in the past, present or future. This idiom grew out of the context and the voluntative notion of the future tense .^ This point is well illustrated

by the

parallel use of /xtXXwv to express intention.

6 irapaSuacov aiiTOV (Jo.

6

:

64)

and

As already shown, the future the N. T. (as in

Another

papyri).

LXX) rival

6 iJLeWoov avrov TTapabibbvaL (12

participle

than in the to

the

are anticipatory presents.^

much

Koivi]

future

4).

frequent in

less

generally (as in the

participle

Both

(Jo. 1:9), 6 epxoixevos (Lu. 7:19). etjui)

is

Cf. :

hpxonevo^

is

and epxonai (cf. and fxeWovTa in Ro.

jueXXo)

Cf. ej^earcora

Nearly all the N. T. examples of the future participle (see chapter on Tense for discussion) are in Luke and Paul and Hebrews (the three best specimens of literary style in the N. T.). 8

:

38.

But

Mt. 27:49, crdoacov; Jo. 6 64, For the Gospel of Luke

see

6 Trapadoiaoov;

:

see 22

13, 6 KaKwaoov.

The awv,

of

rest

vqaojv,

(20

(24 1

:

:

his

22)

17)

ret

:

examples are in the Acts, as 8 avvavTrjcrovTa, (22

TTOLrjaccv.

:

5)

a^cov,

For Paul see Ro. 8

:

(24

1

:

27,

:

11)

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 523.

'

There

is

an expectant note

in rd kKxvvi'o^epov

:

rpoaKv-

irpoaKVpi]-

33, 6 KaraKpLvup (a

Cf. Delbruck, Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 97.

2

Pet. 3

49, to habn^vov.

(Mt. 26

:

28).

1119

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOs) question of editing, but

in verse 34), 1 Cot. 15

cf. 6 airo0av6:v

For Heb. see 3 5, twv TO yivqaonevov. find
(13

XaX-qdriaonepcov,

:

:

37, 17)

In conclusion one must from the later wholly disappeared part, future the that note Instead it all. at know it not does Greek modern The Greek. :

But

uses vd and the subjunctive.^

in general in the N. T. the

used in thorough accord with the ancient idiom In the papyri I note it more so far as the tenses are concerned.^ frequently than in the N. T. Cf. Koivo\oyn(T6fj.evov, P. Goodsp. 4

participle

(ii/B.c);

is still

ra—

P. Tb. 33 (b.C. 112). no need to tarry here to prove the verbal the participle as to cases. Precisely the same cases occur

force of

[a]Tad7ia6tiepa,

There

Cases.

(c)

is

with the participle as with the eK^a\
(Mk. 5

:

and

40)

modes

finite

Kparrjaas

rijs

of the verb.

Cf.

xetpos tov iratdiov (5

:

These illustrations illustrate the point and that is enough. The Supplementary Participle. The term supplementary or complementary is used to describe the participle that forms so close a cormection with the principal verb that the idea of the speaker is incomplete without it. The participle does not differ in reality from the adjective in this respect, and it is still an

41).

{d)

adjective like

(2

xtcrros tikpeu

aspect of the participle that

But it here accented. The

Tim. 2 is

:

13).

is

the verbal

participle

fills

out the verbal notion.

The Periphrastic Construction. The general aspects of this idiom were treated in chapter on Tense (cf. also Conjugation of (a)

Verbs).

between

It is only necessary here to stress the close connection this participle and the principal verb as in rjv U^aWoiv

haiixbvLOV ku4>6p

nepovs virapxeiP,

13

:

In Ac. 19 36, 8eop earlp I'/iSs have two examples of this idiom.

(Lu. 11

we

:

14).

Sometimes we

11.

find

:

the

/cartaraX-

Cf. Lu.

periphrastic participle alone

without the copula as in k^ov (Ac. 2 29), el 8kop (1 Pet. 1:6). But note e^op rjp (Mt. 12 4) and 6eop earlp (Ac. 19 36). So Tp'eirop Particularly interesting is elatp yeyopores (Heb. earlp (Mt. 3 15). :

:

:

:

periphrastic participle, as already noted, was far than in the older Greek. common in the N. T. and the

The

7:23).

LXX more frequently so used in the verbs But the reverse is true of certain commonness of the perithe that Attic. Radermacher^ thinks the rhetorical tendency. to due is T. phrastic participle in the N. Jcbb

1

Cf.

2

The

in

V. and D., p. 335. the inscr.

fut. part, is rare in

Cf. Granit,

Dial. Graec. (iucstionoa Synt., 181)2, p. 122. =»

N. T. Ck.,

p. IGG.

De

Inf. ct Partic. in Inscr.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1120

NEW TESTAMENT

This might apply to Hebrews, but surely not to the Synoptic Gospels and Acts. Moulton (ProL, p. 226) admits that the Semitic sources of part of the Gospels and Acts account for the frequency of the periphrastic imperf. (cf. Aramaic). Certainly the LXX is far ahead of the classic Greek and of the kolvt] in general. The papyri (Moulton, Prol, p. 226) show it often in fut. perfects and

Schmid

in past perfects.

(Attic, III, p. 113

f.)

finds

it

rare in

Moulton finds periphr. imperf. in Matthew 3 times, Mark 16, Luke 30, John 10, Acts (1-12) 17, Acts (13-28) 7, Paul 3. And even so some of these examples are more adjectival than periphrastic. Cf. Ph. 2 26. literary

kolvt]

save in fut. perfects.

:

A

Diminution of the Complementary Participle. This decrease is due partly to the infinitive as with apxoiiai, SoKtu. See discussion in this chapter on Relation between the Inf. and the Participle. But it is due also to the disappearance of the personal construction and the growth of the impersonal with 6tl or Lva. In Mk. 2:1, eiaeXOciiv toXlv els Ka<j)apvaovn 5t' rnxepuiv rjKOvcrdr] (/3)

OTL kv oUco tdTiv,

the personal construction

the circumstantial participle. oTi kari eTLaroXi} XpLarou.

But

is

retained even with

Cf. also 2 Cor. 3 it is

:

2, <^avepovp.evoi

vanishing with the verbs where

it was once so common. See under Infinitive, 5, (e), for further remarks. Jannaris ^ has made a careful study of the facts in the later Greek. It may be noted that dixoixat- does not occur at all in the

N.

though the

LXX

(and Apocrypha) has it 24 times, twice disappeared from the vernacular. As to ru7xam it occurred only once with the participle (2 Mace. 3:9). It has the inf. as well as lva (va) in the later Greek, though it is very abundant with the participle in the papyri.^ Cf. T[vy]xaveL NeTXos peuv, P. B. M. 84 (ii/A.D.). But rvyxo-^^ tXos without uv occurs T.,

with the

It

inf.

(Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 169). Curiously appears once with the participle in the (Tob. 12 13) as in the N. T. (Heb. 13 2). In the kolvt, the inf. supplants the part, as it had already gained a foothold in the old also in the

enough

kolvt]

LXX

Xavdavo: :

Greek.2

:

Note

adverb as in \adpq. kKJ3aK\ovaLv (Ac. 16 37). through the kolvt], but with the sense of 'arrive,' 'reach,' not the idiomatic one 'arrive before.' This latter notion appears in Tpo4)davoo (cf. irpokap^avw), which has it once only in the N. T. (Mt. 17: 25), while the inf. is seen in irpoeXa^ev ixvplaai (Mk. 14 8) As early as Thucydides the inf. is found with also the

:

^davo) continued in use

:

davi)i,

1

2

and

Gk. Moulton, Hist.

.

see also

1

Ki. 12

:

18.

It

Gr., p. 493.

»

Prol., p. 228.

*

is

common

in the

koivt].'^

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 493. lb., p. 494.

The

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs)

1121

tendency to reverse the construction by using one of these ver])s in the participial form is seen in tvxov (participial adverb) in 1

shows the participial but not in Ro. 7 13, where the participle is circumstantial, not complementary. The impersonal construction gains ^ on the personal in the Koivi}. In the N. T. we no longer have StjXos dtil nor av€p6s el/xi. But we do have evpWrj exovaa in Mt. 1 18. "Apxo/uat has lost the part, in the N. T., but virapxoi holds on to it, but not in the sense of 'begin,' rather of 'existing.' Cf. both adjective and part, in Jas. 2 15 and 1 Tim. Cor. 16

:

It is possible that ^aivoyiaL still

6.

construction in Mt. 6

:

16, 18,

:

:

:

an auxiliary verb with the periphrastic participle, as in Ac. 8 16; 19 36. The same thing is true of xpouTrapx" in Lu. 23 12, but not in Ac. 8 9 where (xayevwv is circumstantial. We have seen that iravoixaL is true to the part. (cf. Lu. 5:4; Ac. 5:42, etc.) and that the part, occurs also with eiTLfxeuo: (Jo. 8:7), reXeco (Mt. 11:1), and that StareXeco 4:3.

It tends to sink into the level of

as

et/xt :

:

:

has the adj. without

u>v

(Ac. 27

See also the part, with

:

Cf. also

33).

:

in Gal.

eT/caKeco

StaXetTrco in

Lu. 7 44. :

6:9; 2Th.3:13.

The

Heb. 11:27 is circumstantial, as is that and with /capj^co in Heb. 12: 3. The doubtful participle with fiavdavo^ in 1 Tim. 5 13 has already been discussed (Relation between Inf. and Part., 3, (d)). Moulton^ is positive that the absolute construction advocated by Weiss is intolerable and that we must either admit the supplementary participle here or boldly insert ehat with Blass. Moulton^is probably right in opposing (7) Verbs of Emotion. the incorrectness of the part, with ev -rrpaaaoi in Ac. 15 29, 4^ o}v SLaTijpovvTes eavrovs ev Trpd^ere. At bottom this is the same idiom as we have in 10 33, KaXcos ewoiriaas -Kapa'yevojxevos. Cf. also Ph. part, with /caprepeco in

with

dj/exo/xat

in 1 Cor. 4: 12

:

:

:

4: 14; 2 Pet.

category

t'l

1

:

19; 3 Jo. 6.

iroLeLTe

riPiapTov irapaSovs

Blass^

(Mk. 11:5),

ri

is

right in including in this

iroLelTe

(Ac. 21

KXalovre^

As a matter

(Mt. 27:4).

of fact

it is

:

13),

not be-

yond controversy that the part, with these verbs of emotion is the supplementary and not the circumstantial participle. At any rate the idiom comes to the border-line between the two constructions. I do not wish to labour the point and so treat the

The connection

construction as complementary. so close with these verbs as lists.

is

is

true of those in the

not, however,

two

iiroceding

Indeed, the connection varies with different verbs and with

the same verb in different contexts. 1

lb.

»

2

Prol., p. 229.

*

It

seems clear enough

228 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk., lb., p.

p. 245.

in

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1122

Ac. 16 34, ^YaXXtdcraro :

ireTnaTevKiOS,

and

The examples with

cLv ^\aa4>ri(jLovPTes.

in 2 Pet. 2

:

10, ov TpefJLOv-

ayavaKTew (Mt. 21

:

15, etc.)

and xatpco (Mt. 2 10, etc.) all seem to be circumstantial. same thing is true of Xvireu. The participle does not occur N. T. with aiaxvponai. The step over to the circumstantial ciple of manner or cause is not very far to take.^ (5)

This participle

Indirect Discourse.

in the

N. T.

cipal verb.

The

and

The

^

:

clearly

is

in the

parti-

supplementary

usually connected with the object of the prinnom.^ of the part, exovaa appears with the pas-

is

Mt. 1 18 as noted above. The active in the N. T. would have had on and the ind., if the reference was to Mary. The classic Greek could have said evpev exovaa, but the N. T. Greek, evpev on ex^t.. Cf. also evpedels ws iivdpojiros in Ph. 2 8. But 1 Tim. 5 13 has to be noted. This subject was treated in detail under Indirect Discourse (see Modes). See that discussion for details about the different verbs, some of which, besides the participial construction, may instead use the inf. or 6tl and the Here it is sufficient to give enough illustrations of indicative. this participle in indirect discourse with verbs of mental action sive evpWr] in

:

:

:

show the

to

real

complementary nature

The

of the participle.

With most tense, of course, represents the tense of the direct. participle the of these verbs (especially* olda, ixavOavw, 6iJ.o\ojecS) common idiom is still the is giving way to the inf. or ort, but in all parts of the

enough to attract notice aavTov e^ovTa, P. B.

M. 356

It

(i/A.D.).

is

N. T.

common

Cf. yeivoiaKe

to explain this

participle as the object of the principal verb after the analogy of

the

inf. in

indirect discourse.

So Jannaris^

calls it

"the objective

participle" and Burton*^ "the substantive participle as object." Blass^ more correctly perceives that it is the substantive or pro-

noun that

is

the object while the participle

tive agreeing with

tliis

object.

indirect discourse occurs, as in

no

is

a predicate adjec-

It is easy to see this point

Heb. 7

:

where

24, airapa^aTov ixei

ttjp

upw(jvvr]v, where exw does not mean to 'opine' and where the verbal adj. occurs. But see the participle in 5 14, rdv to. aicrdr]:

Tiypta yeyvuvacrfxem kxovrwv, or,

TTjuevop,

where €xw means

1

Blass, Gr. of

3

Blass,

*

The

ib.,

N. T. Gk.,

still

better, Lu. 14:18, exe

'consider'

p. 245.

and we have the ^

/xe ivapxj-

participle.

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 495.

p. 247.

pap. show the same tendency.

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 229.

See Ra-

dermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 169. 6

6

Hist. Gk. Gr., N. T. M. and

p. 497.

T., p. 176.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 246.

:

VERBAL NOUNS '('ONOMATA TOT Cf. Mk. 3:1; Ac. 9 Then note Ph. 2 3,

:

:

of

IW

21,

1123

'PIIMATO^)

See also 24 27. The addition

deSeixhous avrovs ayayy.

:

aWrjXovs -qyounepoL virepexoPTas.^

does not change the real construction as in tovs 'XoyL^onhovs TrepiTraroO^ras, 2 Cor. 10 2; cos exdpou rjyelade,

cos

r]fxas COS /card crdp/ca

2 Th. 3

:

:

In principle

15.

common

the double accusative, too

it is

with some verbs, only the second ace. is a predicate adj., not a Cf. Ro. 10 9 (margin of W. H.), kav onoXoyrjans substantive. :

and 2

Jo. 7, oiuoXoyovuTes 'Irjaovv XptaTOP kpxontvov tv

The presence

or absence of the copula does not materially

Kvptov 'I-qaovv,

aapd.

change the construction when an adj or substantive .

Thus

ace.

Mk.

6

note 2 Cor. 8 22, ov

:

17: 16.

in classical Greek.

out well in Ac. 8 23. the

hardly necessary to appeal to

It is

The

it.

If

:

is itself

:

predicate force of ovra comes no substantive or adj. is used, the partipredicate and represents the predicate of the

the "ellipse" to explain

full

Cf Mk. 12 28 aKovaas

direct discourse.

:

.

avTcov aw^-qTovvTcov, (Lu.

The point

bvvaixLv e^ekifKvdvlav air' kfxov.

€7J'coj/

:

and

b'tKaLov.

:

:

common

8 46)

the second

So we have no part, after 20, et5cb$ though it occurs in Ac. 8 25 23; Mt. 38, Jo. 1 50; Blass^ calls this an "eUipse" of the participle, an idiom aurdv avbpa

dbov in

ciple

is

edoKLfxaaafxev (nrovSa^ov oura,

:

to note

is

that

even here in indirect discourse, where the participle represents the verb of the direct, the participle is still an adjective though the verbal force has become prominent. The examples are too numerous to discuss in detail or even to quote in full. As representative examples see Mt. 16 28 after el8ov {epxoiJ.evou, but Mk. 9 :

1

has

(cf.

k'\r]\vdv'Lav)

also Lu. 23

7: 56), Jo. 1 yLvwcTKoo,

after

24

:

,

Mk. 5:30

2),

Lu. 10

38 after

:

10 after

:

2 Jo. 7 after

deaofxai,

eTrlaTaixat.,

2 Cor. 8

7ij'cbo-/cco,

:

:

2:11; 24

:

18;

Heb. 2

9 after

:

SoKt^idfco,

/SX^Trco,

Ph. 2

punctiliar idea

is

Mk.

9

:

TreTrrcoKora

38; 1 Jo. 4

substantive participle" (see

h

4

:

39,

and Heb. S

ample

really the attributive participle like rod

is

:

23

ifyeofxai,

(Heb. 10

:

25),

Cf. also Ac.

Burton ^ explains as "the

4, (d)) also Jo.

Tvpovarjs,

:9,

35 after

present as in we-

(Rev. 9:1).

2.

:

:

Heb. 13

3 after

:

18, or the linear as in iyyl^ovaav

or the perfected state as in

after evpiaKco

in particular Ac.

^ecopeco (cf.

7: 32 after ckovco, Ac. 19

22 after

The

d/xoXoyko}.

abvTa in Lu. 10

7:30

after einyLvcoaKoo,

18 after

:

rijs

rinkpa kTriKa^onkvov fxov.

ywaiKbs

The

irpociyriTov

first

fxap-

ex-

Xeyovro^

(Mt. 21:4). The second example is more difficult, but it is a (Jer. 31 32) and is not therefore a quotation from the model of Greek. The iiov has to be taken with 'niitpq. and the

LXX

Goodwin, M. and

:

T., pp.

1

Cf.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21G.

359 =>

flf.

N. T. M. and

T., p. 17(5.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1124

participle would be a circumstantial temporal use. It is probably suggested by the original Hebrew, as Moulton (Prol., p. 47) admits. Cf. Barn. 2 28, kv "finepg. kvTtCKatikvov aov avrCo. Cf. kivl :

G. U. 287 (a.d. 250). The reference of Burton to Josephus, Ant. 10, 4. 2, does not justify the interpretation which he gives. irapovaip vfxeiv, B.

The Circumstantial Participle or Participial Clauses. The General Theory. There is but one difference between the supplementary and the circumstantial participle. It lies in the fact that the circumstantial participle is an additional statement and does not form an essential part of the verbal notion (e)

(a)

of the principal verb.

moved and

The

may

circumstantial participle

the sentence will not bleed.

It is still

be re-

a true parti-

predicate adjective as well as circumstantial addition to the

ciple,

In point of agreement the circumstantial

verb.

may

be related

to the subject of the principal verb or the object, or indeed

any

may have

also

other substantive or pronoun in the sentence.

It

an independent construction with a substantive or pronoun of its ouTi (genitive or accusative absolute) or have no substantive or pronoun at all. Once again the participle may be so independent as to form a sentence of its own and not merely be a subordinate clause. See the section on The Independent Participle as a Sentence. Here we are dealing with the independent participle in a subordinate clause with various stages of independency from mere addition and agreement with a substantive or pronoun to complete isolation though still subordinate. Some of the grammars. Burton^ for instance, call this the "adverbial" participle. There is a slight element of truth here, but only so far as there is a sort of parallel with the subordinate conjunctional clauses which are adverbial

But

(cf. ore, tva, cbs, etc.).

it is

In

distinctly misleading

a constant tendency to read into this circumstantial participle more than is there. In itself, it must be distinctly noted, the participle does not express time, manner, cause, purpose, condition or concession. These ideas are not^ in the participle, but are merely sugto treat this participle as adverbial.

gested

by the

context,

tWvs, Kalirep,

a/ua,

ttotc,

at

all,

vvu,

cbs.

if

fact, there is

or occasionally

There

to use the circumstantial participle.

by a

particle like

no necessity for one he wishes a more pre-

If

is

note of time, cause, condition, purpose, etc., the various subordinate clauses (and the infinitive) are at his command, cise

besides 1

the

co-ordinate

N. T. M. and

The vernacular

clauses.

T., pp. 169

ff.

^

Blass, Gr. of

increasingly

N. T. Gk.,

p. 247.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1125

'PHMATOi:)

preferred the co-ordinate or the subordinate clause with conjunctions to the rather loose circumstantial participle.^ We see the triumph of this analytic tendency in the modern Greek.^

remains true that the participial clause was one of the great resources of the Greek language and in contrast the Latin seems very poor.' The English comes next to the Greek in its rich

But

it

use of the circumstantial participle. Moulton* notes the failure of the English, even .with the help of auxiliary verbs, to express the precise difference between Xvaas and XeXu/cws d\ri(t)6:s,

for instance, in

Mt. 25

:

20, 24).

He

(6 'Ka^dov

attention to the weakness of the Greek because of participles, since so

much ambiguity

is

though'?

terpret the context correctly.

By means

its

wealth of

Good

or 'al-

and men do not always inOne more remark is necessary. tell,

of the circumstantial participle the sentence

lengthened indefinitely.

6

Does a given

possible.

circumstantial participle bear the notion of 'because'

Only the context can

and

rightly also calls

illustrations of this

may be may

freedom

be seen in the periodic structure in Thucydides, Isocrates, Lysias and Demosthenes. But the N. T. itself has examples of it as is seen in 2 Pet. 2

{0}

:

12-15,

j3\aa(j)7]novvTes, abiKobixevoL, rijovfxevoL, kvrpv-

Varieties of the Circumstantial Participle.

Here are treated

only those examples which have syntactical agreement in case with some substantive or pronoun in the sentence. It may be repeated that this participle does not express the ideas called by the usual classification into participles of time, manner (means), cause, purpose, condition, concession.

The

the examples together.

Hence

it is

proper to group

classification is only justified

by the

context and occasional use of a particle.^ The same classification The is possible also for the absolute use of the participial clause.

examples are too numerous for exhaustive treatment.

must

Time.

It is

not the tense that

is

few

here under discussion, though

naturally the different tenses will vary in the

treated

The

A

suffice.

(antecedent,

way

simultaneous, future), as

point more exactly

is

that time

already

is

shown.

whether a given circumstantial parti-

1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 499.

*

" Moulton, Prol., p. 229. Jebb, in V. and D., p. 333. lb. Cf. Alexander, Partic. Perii)hrasc3 in Attic Orators (Am. Jour, of

*

Philol., IV, p. 6

Certainly

meanings.

291

f.).

we cannot admit

the idea that the part,

Cf. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 15S.

itself

has different

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK

1126

NEW TESTAMENT

ciple occurs in a context where the temporal relation is the main one rather than that of cause, condition, purpose, etc. It is usually a mistake to try to reproduce such participles by the English 'when,' 'after,' etc., with the indicative. To do this exaggerates the nuance of time as Moulton^ observes. It is generally sufficient

to preserve the English participle or to co-ordinate the clauses'

The

with 'and.'

slightness of the temporal idea

the pleonastic participles avaaras (Mt. 26 15,

very

aireKpidrj

common

in the Synoptic

but very slightly

so.

6).

:

5;

24 47; Ac.

1

:

Kade^rjs,

Kade^TJs

:

the part, as with

In Ac. 11:4,

22. is

is

(Mt. 13

:

46), \a^iov (13

Here the notion seen in Mt. 20

Mt. 20:

Tpcorcov in

:

:

:

temporal,

is

The use

11.

8f.; Lu. 23

:

but note contrast with Cf. epxop.evo[s] tpxov,

8.

Sometimes the temporal idea

P. Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.).

:

ap^ap.evos Ilerpos k^eTidero avrols

slightly pleonastic,^

ecos tcov

(Mt. 3

John usually has

Cf. also Tpoadels elwev in Lu. 19

of ap^afxevos as a note of time

well seen in

is

62), airoKpidds

Gospels.

Kal direv as in 1 :49), airekdbiv

31, cf. verse 33), iropevdepres (21

:

is

much more

prominent, as in diodevaavres (Ac. 17:1), eXduv eKelvos eXey^ei tov Kodfiov (Jo. 16 8). So also Mt. 6 17, av 8e vqaTevwv oKtopaL. Here the descriptive force of the participle is distinctly temporal. In :

:

examples like Mk. 1 7 Kui/'as XDcrat tov inapra, Ac, 21 32 irapaXajSojv arpaTMTas KaTkbpap.ev evr' ainovs, there is precedence in order of time, but it is mere priority with no special accent on the temporal relation.^ Cf. Mt. 2 16; 13 2. In Ac. 24 25 f. we have some interesting examples of the participle. In bioKejopikvov avTou we see the temporal notion of 'while' with the genitive absolute. In tov jieWovTos the temporal notion in this attributive part, is due to yueXXco. In yevoixevos it is mere antecedence with aireKpWr] (almost simultaneous, in fact). In to vvv Ixov the attributive participle again has the temporal idea due to the words themselves. In p.€Taka^6iv we have antecedence emphasized by Kaipov. In aiia Kal eXirl^wv we have the linear notion stressed by a/ia. In TTVKvoTepov avTov p.eTa-Kep.Trbp.evos wfxlXeL avTLo the note :

:

:

:

:

and verb. An example is also seen in Heb. 11:32, tinXelypeL p.e bir]jovfxevov 6 xpovos, where in a poetic way time is described as going off and leaving the writer discoursing about Gideon and the rest. In 1 Pet. 5 10, oXiyov iradbvTas, the adverb of time makes it clear. The note of time may appear in any tense of the participle and with any tense in the principal verb. It is not always easy to of repetition in TVKPOTepov reappears in participle

interesting

:

1

Prol., p. 230.

2

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 249.

^

lb., p. 248.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1127

'PHMATO:;)

discriminate between the temporal participle and that of attendant circumstance or manner. Moulton^ and Blass^ make

These two uses are the most frequent of all. A this ambiguity occurs in Ac. 21 32, where TrapaXa^cou (cf. \aj3uv in ancient Greek) may be regarded as merely So also the notion of occasion the attendant circumstance. wavers between time and cause. Cf. aKovopres (Lu. 4:28). For

no distinction. good example

of

:

with this participle see

(I)s

1

Cor. 7 29 :

ff.

,

Manner. The ancient use of ex^ov in the sense of 'with' occurs in Mt. 15 30 exopres iJLeO' eavTOJp x'^^ovs, Mk. 14 3 exovaa dXct/Saarpov iJLvpov, Ac. 21 23 evxw exopres acj)' eavTUP. Cf. also
:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

not the periphrastic construction with (Ac. 3

voi,

:

Tpoa8oKuv

5) h-Ktix'^v avrols

kyepero, (1

tl (a

:

5) e^o/jLoXoyovne-

picturesque bit of descrip-

Th. 3:11) jx-qh^p hpya^ojjLepovs dXXd Teptepya^oixepovs (a real pun). It is hard to tell how to classify a participle like that in Gal. It makes sense as temporal, causal or modal. But 6 3, (iridep UP. there is no douljt in a case like Lu. 19 48 e^eKpefxero avrov clkovcov tion), (2

:

:

or Ac. 2

:

13 diaxXeva^oPTes eXeyop or ws ovk aepa

b'epo:p

(1

Cor. 9

:

This notion of manner appears in the participles that

26).

have an adverljial notion 14: 72), Tvxop (1 Cor. 16 (Lu. 19

:

11).

like a-irevaas (Lu. 19 :

:

5

6), ^Xewopres (Mt. 13

Cf. also apa^Xe\J/as

elirep

:

f.),

eTLJSaXwp

in verse 5.

may

pleonastic participles like airoKpLdeis (see above)

(Mk.

14); irpoaOeis elirep

So also the be looked at

modal or even adverbial. See further Kpe22) as good examples of the Burton^ makes a separate division for the

either as temporal or fxaaaPTes (Ac. 5

modal

:

30), avpi^L^a^wp (9

participle.

:

but this is not necesThese examples are either temporal as in e^eXdopres (Mk. 16:20), UXe^anepovs (Ac. 15: 22) or modal as do^a^ofxepo^ (Lu. 4 15), apaXalSdop (2 Tim. 4:11) Blass' term or pleonastic as aireKpldrjaap XeyouaaL (Mt. 25 9). "conjunctive" {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 249) throws no particular light on the point. In 1 Tim. 1 13 aypocjp is manner. In Ac.

participle "of attendant circumstance,"

sary and leads to overrefinement.

:

:

:

de is

1

Pro!., p. 230.

3

N. T. M. and

la

T., p. 173.

Synt. Grccquo, 1888, p.

not necessary to do that.

2 Gr. of N. T. Ck., p. 24S. Cucuel and Riciniinn (Ragles Fond;iiiuMital(-s 110) consider this notion an "exception," but it

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1128 18

:

we have

18, KCLpanevos,

But

modal.

in truth

NEW TESTAMENT

both the temporal and the

easy to split hairs over the various circumstan-

it is

and to read into them much more than is there. f. See ^awTi^ovTes and StSdo-Kovres in Mt. 28 19 f. as modal participles. So aypoa:u in 1 Tim. 1 13. Cf. Kara ayvoiav tial participles

Cf. 2 Cor. 4

1

:

:

:

in Ac. 3

:

17.

usuaP to distinguish means from manner in the There is a real point, but it is not always clear where manner shades off into means. But some instances are clear. Cf. Mt. 6 27, ris ixepiiJ-voiV dvuaraL TvpoaOelvaL; So also navTevofxhrj Means.

It is

participle.

:

16

in Ac.

masters.

:

16.

Thus the maid furnished the revenue

In Heb. 2

10 ayayovra and 2

:

:

18

ireipaaOels

for her

we may

may

be temporal Jannaris^ blends the treatment of man-

also have instances of this notion, but the

and the second causal. ner and means and notes how

first

this participle disappears in the

later Greek.

Cause.

gested by

of action in the principal verb

The ground

the participle.

Cf. dUaios Kal

firi

may

be sug-

deKcov avr-qv SeLyfiaTlaaL

Mt. 1: 19; rjfxapTOV irapabovs alpa, 27:3; exa.pr](jav ioovres, As a matter of fact this idiom is very frequent. 20: 20. Jo. 2 3, 10; Jo. 4 45; 21 12; Ac. 4 21; 9 26; further Mt. Cf. elVas, Ro. 6 6, yLi>6)aKovTes, and 9, dbbres; 2 Pet. eldcos 24 22, f.; 1 Tim. Col. 1 3 4:8; Jas. 2 25. For ws with this parti3:9; e^ovXrjdr],

:

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

22 eidoos may be taken as 'wishing to know,' though Felix may also have actually had some knowledge of Christianity (cf. Paul's appearance before Gallio). So also eiSws (24:22) may mean 'wishing to know.' The N. T. no longer has are, olov, ola with the part, as classic Greek did.^ In Jo. 5 44 a causal participle Xan^avoures is cociple see 1 Cor. 7

:

25, ws

In Ac. 24

ijXerjiievos.

:

:

ordinate ^vith

frjreTre.

Purpose. The use of the participle to express aim or design has already been discussed several times from different points of view (Tense, Final Clauses, Tense of the Participle). This fine Purpose is expressed classic idiom is nearly gone in the N. T.

For the future chiefly by I'm or the inf. Mt. 27:49; Ac. 8 :27; 22 5; 24 11, 17. :

:

airoScoaovTes,

there

is

as

much

accepts acrwaaonevoL in Ac. 25

:

part, of purpose see

In Heb. 13

:

17,


cause as purpose. Blass^ wrongly The present part, is also used 13.

purpose where the context makes it clear. So Cf. Lu. 13 :6f.; Ac. 15 26, airkareCKf.v avrov tUkoyovvra.

in the sense of

Ac. 3 1

2

:

Goodwin, M. and T., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 504,

:

p. 333.

'

*

Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 248.

p. 335.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) 27; Ro. 15

Goodsp. 4

But

25.

:

(ii/B.C.)

it

1129

not absent from the papyri.

is

aTrtaToKKaiiev

— KOLVoXoyrjaofxevSu

aoL.

Cf. P.

So also

the present part., P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66), OLaKovov[v]Ta Kal TroLo[v]vTa. The use of the conditional disappeared more Condition. rapidly than the temporal and causal in the later Greek.^

only the protasis, of course, which

common

a

KOdnov oKov

Here

6\ov.

is

here considered.

It is

It is still

In Mt. 16 26 we have kav t6v idiom in the N. T. while in Lu. 9 25, we find Kepb-qaas t6v Koafiov :

KepS-ffCTj},

:

the condition of the third class plainly enough.

it is

B. G. U. 596 (a.d. 84). In 1 Cor. 11 29, be the first class condition with ei that is the equivalent, but one cannot always be certain on this point. Cf.

See

liij

Toiriaas ear], kt\., in

SiaKpiviop, it

Ro. 2

:

may

27, reXovaa; Gal. 6

:

Heb. 2:3,

:

9, ^77 kKKvofxevoL;

Tim. 4

1

:

4, Xa/i^avo-

7:12, p.eTaTLQep.'evr]s. Moulton^ denies that the participle stands in the N. T. for a condition of the fxevov;

afxeX^qaavTes;

second class (unreal condition). the condition

In Lu. 19

the participle

:

Kayw kXdwv avv

23,

part of the apodosis, while implied in the preceding question. Moulton'

TOKco av avTo ewpa^a, is

rightly notes that one can

with the participle that has come in the

kolvt]

is

no longer decide by the presence is

it

of

nr/

conditional or concessive, since

/xr)

to be the usual negative of participles.

There is no instance of av with the participle in the N. T., though Moulton {ProL, p. 167) quotes one in a kolvtj inscr., I. M. A. iii, 174, dcKaLOTepov av awdevra (in a despatch of Augustus). For cos ap see Particles with Participles. This

Concession. :

7

11, TOPr]poi opres.

:

9,

Jo. 12 1

Xvirrjdels.

:

37; 21

Cor. 9

:

is

also

The context

14

:

Mt.

Cf.

the adversative idea in See further Mt. 26 60; 14: 5; Mk. 4 31; calls for

:

11; Jas. 3

19; Jas.

a frequent construction.

:

4; Ac. 13

3:4; Jude

make

often used particles to

:

:

28; Ro.

1

:

21, 32; 9

To avoid ambiguity

5.

:

22;

the Greek

the concessive idea plain, and this

—

idiom survives in the N. T. Cf. Kai ye virapxovTa (Ac. 17:27), KaL TOL yeurjdevTcov (Heb. 4:3), Kaiwep more frequently as in Ph. 3 4; Heb. 5 8; 7 5; 12 17; 2 Pet. 1 12. In Heb. 11 12 we also have Kal ravra veveKpwp.kvov. 'Kalroiye occurs only with the finite verb as in Jo. 4 2.'* So /catrot in Ac. 14 17. It is worth while to note the survival of oh with nal ye in Ac. 17:27.^ Moulton {Prol, p. 231) admits Wellhauscn's {Einl, p. 22) claim :

:

:

:

:

:

that XaXeT

^Xa(T(i)r}ix(A.

(Mk. 2:7)

:

:

is

an Aramaism

»

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 502.

•

«

Prol., p. 230.

5

»

lb., p. 229.

for

two Aramaic

Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Moulton, ProL, p. 230.

p. 24S.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1130

participles,

NEW TESTAMENT

"the second of which should appear as a participle" But W. H. punctuate 65, ^\a(x4>r]ixovvTes eXeyov.

as in Lu. 22

:

XaXtt; ^\aa4>r]{jLeL.

The Absolute Participle in Subordinate Clauses.

(7)

It

not

is

strange that the participle should have been used in clauses that stand apart from the rest of the sentence. There it has its adjectival

agreement.

It

but a step further than the ordinary

is

cir-

cumstantial participle wliich makes an additional statement.

All

the varieties of the ciicumstantial participle can appear in the

absolute participle.

Nominative Absolute. It is possible thus to explain some examples of anacolutha in ancient Greek ^ and the N. T., though Trora^tot e/c rrjs KoiXlas avTOv Blass^ demurs. Cf. 6 TLcrTevoiv els efxe

—

pevaovffLV (Jo.

7 38) :

;

eTLyvovres, de

—

(j)Ct}vr]

eykvero

/xta €k

iravTwv (Ac.

and So Mk. 7: 19; Rev. 2 26. At any rate it is the nominativus pendens, and there is not any special In the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 169) the difference. nominative absolute with the participle occurs, though rare, and usually a conjunctional clause has supplanted the genitive ab19: 34); 6

vLKihv hdoaio avrci

KareadovTes (Mk.. 12

oi

:

(Rev. 3

:

21).

Cf. also tccu dekovroov

40).

:

solute.

Accusative

This construction was used with im-

Absolute.

personal verbs or phrases like

8eov, e^ov, irapbv, etc.

It

was prob-

ably an appositional addition to the sentence.^ It has nearly, if not quite, disappeared from the N. T. The adverb tvxov (1 Cor. 16 6) is really an instance of it, but not so k^bv in Ac. 2 29, where koTlv is probably to be supplied. Cf. k^ov rjp (Mt. 12 4) and 8eov eariv (Ac. 19 36). Cf. also oh crvfi(f)€pop (xh in 2 Cor. :

:

:

:

12

:

1.

But a

possible accusative absolute

is

yvdoarrjp

ovra (Ac.

very rare to see the accusative absolute with a substantive of its own.* In such instances it was usual to have also djs or ibcrwep.^ The accusative is an old idiom, appearing in the oldest Greek title known to us.^ But it came to be rather 26

:

3),

though

common

it is

in Thucydides.''

It

was

rare in the Attic orators.

Luke

avoids the accusative absolute in Ac. 23:30, by an awkward^ Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 259. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 251. He calls it "antiquated." common. 1

2

3

* 6 ' 8

It

was never very

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 524. * Thompson, Synt., p. 261. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 339. Deiss., Exp. Times, 1906, Dec, p. 105. Lell, Der Absolut-Akkusativ im Griech. bis zu Arist., 1892, p. 17. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 252.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1131

"PHMATOi;)

use of the genitive absolute, nrjwOeiarjs 8e ixol iin^ovkri^ €ts Tov av8pa eaeadai. The papyri use e^opros rather than e^ov.^ We do not have the ace, absolute in Ph. 1 7, since vfj.S.s ofras is a resumption :

(apposition) of umSs before. Genitive Absolute.

It

by no means

is

certain that the

case

always genitive. Indeed, it is pretty clear that some of these examples are ablative. Probably some are real genitives of is

The

time.2

Sanskrit uses chiefly the locative in these absolute It is possible that the Latin ablative absolute

constructions.

may

The

sometimes be locative or instrumental.^

use of the

true genitive in the Greek idiom is probably to be attributed to expressions of time in the genitive case with which parti-

was

Then

were used.

ciples

that

tors,

we

the temporal circumstantial participle

It is in Attic prose, particularly the ora-

right at hand.

see the highest

development

of the idiom."*

The

accusative absolute was just as idiomatic as this genitive-al)lative construction, but it did not get the same hold on the language.^

The kolvt] shows a rapid extension "In the papyri it may often be seen

See Cases for further remarks. of the genitive absolute.

forming a string of statements, without a finite verb for several Unes."^ In the N. T. different writers vary greatly, John's Gospel, for instance, having it only one-fourth as often as the Acts.^ The most frequent use of the idiom is when the substantive (or pronoun) and the participle stand apart with no syntactical connection with any part of the sentence, n'tv-qs d\'ol/e(j)s

5ta)7/xoO

r)

yei'oiievqs 6e rifxepas

rjv

ha

Mk. 4

Cf.

:

17,

tov Xoyov evOvs (XKapSaKi^ovTaf,

rapaxos ovK oKlyo%; 18

:

eUa

yevo-

Ac. 12: 18,

20; 7: 5; Eph, 2

:

20;

These are perfectly Mk, 8 1; 2 Pet. 3 11; Heb. 9 the genitive absosometimes But regular and normal examples. in the sentence. So genitive already a lute occurs where there is

Mt. 6

Mk.

:

3, (TOV be ttolovvtos

we Even

14 3 :

avTov.

when

:

:

:

—

17

6-8, 15, 19.

apiaTepa

cfov;

9

:

10; Ac. 17

find a double gen. absolute ovtos avrov

:

In

16.

— KaraKHixevov

Greek the genitive absolute is found some sul^stantive or the sentence.^ It was done apparently to make the in the classical

the participle could have agreed with

pronoun

in

1

Ow

2

Hrus-, (Jrioch. Gr., p.

*

Cf. Spiekor,

i^bvTo^,

P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). '

ry24.

The Genitive Abs.

Monro,

Tloin. Or., p. 167

in the Attic Orators,

Am.

f.

Jt)ur. of Pliilol.,

VI, pp. 310-343. t-

Bluss,

Gr.of N. T. Gk.,

p.

'

Gildcrsl., Styl. Effect of the

8

Goodwin, M. and

"

2.'-)l.

Gk.

T., p. 338.

Part.,

Am.

Moulton,

I'rol., p.

74.

Jour, of Philol., ISSS, p. 153.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1132

more prominent. The papyri show illustrations same thing/ as in B, U. 1040 (ii/A.D.) xa^pw 6tl ixol raOra

participial clause

of the

Tepi nr]8ev6s.

eTTol-qaas, hfxov neTa/JLeXoixevov

common

It is fairly

in the

We

have it even when the part, refers to the subject of the verb, as in Mt. 1 18, fxvrjcrTevdeiarjs rrjs fxrjrpds avTOv Mapias In Ro. 9 1 the construction is regular, though fxoL evpWr] exovaa. r]Ko\ovdr]and fjLov occur. In Mt. 8 1 we find Kara^avTos avrov Cf. 5:1; 9 18; 17: 22; 2 Cor. 4 18, etc. Likewise aav ahrQ. the genitive and the accusative come together as in Jo. 8 30, Cf. also Mt. 18:25; Ac. eiriaTeuaav eis avrbv. avTOv XaXoOvroj 28 17. Quite unusual is Ac. 22 17 where we have /xot vToarpeThe N. T. occasionally \J/avTL, irpoaevxoiJievov /jlov and jeveaOai fxe.

N. T.

—

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

—

:

:

uses the participle alone in the genitive absolute according to the

In the papyri

occasional classic usage.^ in the

N. T."

it is

common

17:26,

Ac. 21:31,

eiTrovTos;

participle although abrQ

is

h^ovros, P.

^rjTovvTo^v.

eXdoPTos Kal Kpomavros eWkoos avol^ccaiv avrQ,

on

more frequent than

Cf. also 8r]\ccdevTos, B. U. 970 (ii/A.D.).

(a.d. 66). eKdbvTOiv;

In particular note the

nov KLpSeuaavTos

eis

is

:

we have

the genitive

Cf. B. G. U. 423 (ii/A.D.)

present.

daXaaaav

Oxy. 275

See Mt. 17: 14, In Lu. 12 36,

eaojae,

where

the object of

yue

ecrcocre

not expressed. (/)

The Independent

doubt that the use

Participle

in a Sentence.

There

is

no

of the absolute participle (nominative, ac-

is a sort of ''implied predication."^ remains to be considered whether the participle ever forms an independent sentence. We have seen that the inf. is occasionally

cusative, genitive-ablative) It

It is but a step from the independent clause to the independent sentence. Did the participle take it? The nominative absolute as a sort of anacoluthon appears in the ancient Greek.

so used.

Cf. Plato, Apol. 21 C, Kal SLaXeyoiJLepos avrOi, eSo^e (Tocf)6s.

As the

p.OL

6 avrjp elvai

genitive-absolute, like other circumstantial par-

retreated before the conjunctional clauses, there was an increasing tendency to blur or negle'ct the grammatical case agreements in the use of the participles. The N. T., like the kolvyj in general, shows more examples of the anacoluthic nominative participle than the older Greek. ^ The mental strain of so many ticiples,

participles

in

rapid conversation or writing

1

Cf. Moulton, Prol., pp. 74, 236; CI. Rev.,

*

Goodwin, M. and Moulton, Prol., p.

'

XV,

made anacolutha

p. 437.

T., p. 338.

74.

This idiom

is

common

in

Xen.

Roche,

Beitr., p.

128. *

Monro, Hom.

Gr., p. 167.

^

Thompson, Synt.

of Attic Gk., p. 259.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT easy.^

"Hence even

'PIIMATOS)

1133

writers of systematic training could not but

occasionally blunder in the use of the circumstantial participle."

Jannaris had thus concluded that the late Greek showed an independent use of the participle as anacoluthon.^ Blass' would

go no further than this. Vitcau^ found abundant illustration of the independent use of the anacoluthic participle in the LXX. Viteau explains it as a Hebraism. But Moulton^ claims that the subject is removed from the realm of controversy by the proof from the papyri. Thumb ^ finds the idiom in classical Greek and It is kolvt] (in the LXX, N. T., papyri, inscriptions, etc.). easy to be extreme on this point of dispute. In the chapter on Mode (the Imperative) adequate cUscussion appears concerning the participle as imperative. That discussion need not be re-

in the

may be insisted, however, again that the participle never imperative nor indicative, though there seem to be examples in the N. T., as in the papyri, where, because of ellipsis or anacoluthon, the participle carries on the work of In examples like 2 Cor. either the indicative or the imperative. 1 3, evXoyrjTos 6 deos, either kcrTLP or earco may be supplied with

peated.

in itself

It

is

:

the verbal adjective.

must not be forgotten that

It

this is the

work of the interpreter to a large extent rather than of the grammarian. The manuscripts often vary in such examples and the editors differ in the punctuation. But the grammarian must admit the facts of usage. The papyri and the N. T. show that sometimes the participle was loosely used to carry on the verbal function in independent sentences.'' Cf. airocrTv(Ro. 12 9), for mstance, without connection with sentence where we have a complete is ij ayinr-q awiroKpiTOs sentence preceding anything else. The followed by a series of is and it itself) (an independent sentence

YoDj/tcs to TTOvrjpov, KoWcoiievoL TU) ayadca

independent participles (verses 10-13). abruptly

evXayelre — Kal

absolute infinitive

fxij

xaipetz'

be incontrovertible.

:

(imperatival also).

Cf. also Col. 3

:

16.

we have and then the

In verse 14

Karapaade (imperatives)

The

point seems to

It is only necessary to

add a word about the independent participle in the midst of indicatives, since this use is far more frequent than the imperative idiom just noted. In general it may be said that no participle pp. 200 ff. ProL, pp. ISOfT., 222 IT. « HcUon., p. 131. » Gr. of Gk. N. T., p. 283. 7 Moulton, Prol., p. 180, cites Mcistcrh., pp. 244-216, for the use of the imp. part, in decrees. It is the nominalivus pendens apphed to the part. 1

Jann., Hist, Gk. Gr., p 505.

*

2

lb., pp. 500, 505.

'

Le Vorho,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1134

should be explained in this way that can properly be connected with a finite verb. In Ro. 12 6, exovres 8e, it is clear that we cannot carry on the participle as suborcUnate to exofxev or kafxev in the :

W. H. boldly start a new sentence. In either whether we have comma or period before, we must take exovres as imperatival or indicative, on the one hand, or, on the other hand, supply eapih or oifiev as Trotetre is supplied in Ro. 13 11 with Kai eldores rbv Kaipov} But other examples leave no such alternative. We may first summarize Moulton's satisfactory exposition of the matter. There is a striking similarity between preceding verses. case,

:

the third person plural indicative and the participle in the Indo-

Germanic tongues frequent

noted

(*bheroriti, ferunt,

ellipsis of est in

The

also.

indicative

is

may

is

The to be

probability that the Latin second plural middle

really a participle

the verb inflection

This fact

hairand, etc.).

(t)epov(TL,

the Latin perfect and passive

(cf.

which has been incorporated into

sequimini and

eTrbixevoi)

point to the prehistoric time

also suggestive.

is

when the Latin used

The papyri re-enforce the argument quote a bit from Moulton^: "Tb. P. 14 (ii/B.c), Tcot ovv criixaLVOu'evoii 'Hpart TraprjyyeXKOTes evcoinov, '1 gave notice in person' (no verb follows). Tb. P. 42 (ib.), r]8LKriij.evos (no verb folthe participle as indicative.

We

strongly.

A. P. 78

lows).

This

may

^iav waaxoiv eKaaroTe, etc. (no verb)."

(ii/A.D.),

serve as a sample of

many more

like

Moulton

them.

{ProL, p. 223) adds that use of the part, as ind. or imper. in the

papyri

is

"not at

all

a

mark

of inferior education."

See

1 Pet. 2:

We may now

12 where exovres does not agree with the TrapoUovs.

approach the passages in dispute between Winer ^ and Moulton.* Moulton passes by Winer's suggestion that in 2 Cor. 4 13 This is probable, though exovres is to be taken with Tnarehoixev. awkward. So in 2 Pet. 2 1 the participles can be joined with irapeLaa^ovaiv. But in Ro. 5 11 it is, Moulton argues, somewhat forced to take oh /xovov 8e, dXXd /cat Kavxo^pievoL otherwise than as independent. If we once admit the fact of this idiom, as we have done, this is certainly the most natural way to take it here. :

:

:

Moulton

20. Winer connects and he is supported by the punctuation of verse 19 as a parenthesis by W. H. But even so in verse 19 we have ov ixbvov 8e dXXd Kal x^i-porovrjOeis (cf. Ro. 5 :11) stranded with no verb. Moulton also passes by Heb. 6 8 and 2 Pet. 3:5. In Heb. 7 1 Moulton follows W. H. in reading 6 (not it

with

is silent

as to areWbuevoL in 2 Cor. 8

avveTrkp.\paiiev

:

in verse 18

:

:

1

2

Moulton, Prol., pp. 180, 183 pp. 223 f.

lb.,

f.

=>

*

W.-Th., Prol., p.

351 224 f.

p.

f.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

1135

'PHMATOi;)

6s) avvavT-qaas on the authority of C*LP against NABC^DEK 17. So he sees no necessity for taking epfxrjvevofxevos as an indicative. In Heb. 8 10; 10 16, Moulton takes 8i.8ovs as parallel with cttiTpdi/'w, whereas Winer would resolve ewcyparl/o} into a participle. Here Moulton is clearly right. In Ac. 24 5, evpovres yap, we have anacoluthon as both Winer and Moulton agree. Moulton adds: :

:

:

"Luke cruelly reports the orator verbatim." Moulton omits to comment on Winer's explanation of the parenthetical anacoluthon in 2 Pet. 1:17, Xa^dsv yap. It is a violent anacoluthon and Winer does not mend it. Note 2 Cor. 5 6, Oappovvres, where after a parenthesis we have dappovnev de (resumptive). But Moulton :

takes 2 Cor. 7:5

d\L^6p.evot. as an example of the "indicative" So does he explain Ro. 12 6 exovres, and ex^^" in Rev. 10 2. In Ac. 26 20 the MSS. vary between dTraTTeXXcoj' and awrjyyeXov. In Heb. 10 1 excov will also be independent if

participle.

:

:

:

:

be read. In Ph. 1 30 exoj'res has vjxtv above and halts in the case agreement. On the whole, therefore, we may conbbvavTai

:

clude that, while every instance is to be examined on its merits, a number of real examples of the idiom may be admitted in the N. T. Viteau^ has entirely too large a list of such instances.

Many 1

them admit a much simpler explanation as in Ph. In Revelation, it is true, there is more than usual the agreement of the participle, especially when it is in

of

30 above.

:

laxity in

There is also a change from nominative to accusative and eUov as in Rev. 4 1-5; 7:9; 14 1-3; 14 14, etc. But there are real examples in Rev., as Kal exoiv (1:16), \kywv (11 1). With all this development along a special line we must not forget that the participle is both adjective and verb. Blass^ has a careful discussion of "the free use of the participle." In Col. 1 26 he notes that the participle airoKeKpufx/jLhou is conapposition.

between

Ibov

:

:

:

:

:

tinued by the indicative Co-ordination

(g)

e^ai/gpaj^?;.

between

Cf. Jo. 5: 44.

Blass^ uses the term

Participles.

"conjunctive" participle instead of a special use of the "circumstantial" participle. It is not a particularly happy phrase. But it does accent the notion that this participle, though an addition to the principal verb,

matical agreement.

may

Blass'*

be expressed by two

is still joined to it in gramshows clearly how identity of action

finite verbs, as well

tic participle of identical action.

Kal

elirav 1

»

(Mt. 15:23

Le Verbe, pp. 201 Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

rjpcoTovv IT.

p.

284

f.

Cf. Jo.

Xeyovres),

1

:

as

25

12:44

by the pleonas-

Kal rjpoiTrjo-av avrou

eKpa^ev

Kal

^

Cr. of N. T. Gk., p. 247.

*

lb., p. 250.

€lTr(i>

(Mt. 8 22

:

29 eKpa^av

aaro Xkyoav), where

But

verb.

18

together.

25

John

Ac. 3

:

:

(Ac. 13

€fxapTvpr]creu Kal elwe

(Mt. 26

:

70

Two

or

Cf,

more

vTveptKxvvvbpevov

pLadriTCLS.

5

:

:

Jo.

participles

may

23, bi.epxbp.evos

Cf. Lu. 6

Tovs

be connected by

But we

:

TaXaTLKijv x'^P^-v,

rijv

38, p'tTpov KoXov

Sometimes

ddocrovaLv.

aeaa-

TV eiTieff jxevov

Kal

only

occurs

15, Kadijpevov Ipanap-evop Kal cco^pofoCvra.

There

be a subtle reason for such a procedure as in Ac. 18

KareXdcbv

els

KaLaaplav, avaj3as Kal aairaaapevos,

ciple stands apart in sense

In a

5

where the

first

:

22,

parti-

from the other two. Cf. also Mk. 5 may be subordinate to the other

:

of participles one

list

Mk.

as in

:

rippr]-

'

8, TrepnraTO^v Kal aXKofxevos Kal aivdv tov debv.

CFTTipL^oiv

Mk.

48, laKo^ev koL e^ddwev,

deep.'

Xevjjiepou

32.

21

prefers the particularity of the finite

have asyndeton^ in Ac. 18

once as in

:

r]pvrjaaTO Kal elirev

he dug and 8:59. There remains the participles to each other when a series of them comes There is no rule on this subject beyond what applies

to other words. Kal as in

:

see also Lu. 6

= deepened' 'he dug relation of

13

"KeyovTes),

fxaprvprjaas),

elirev

may

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1136

:

30, einyvous ev eavrCi

e^ avrov bbvapiv e^eXdovaav

rifp

This accumulation of participles is only occasional in the Synoptic Gospels (cf. Mt. 14:19; 27:48; and, in particular, Mk. 5 25-27), but very common in Acts and the Pauline Epistles. Blass^ concedes to Luke in Acts "a certain amount of ein(TTpa(l}els.

:

refinement" in his use of a series of participles, while

stylistic

it is rather ''a mere stringing together of words," an overstatement as to Paul. Luke was not an artificial rhetorician nor was Paul a mere bungler. When Paul's heart was all ablaze with passion, as in 2 Corinthians, lie did pile up participles like

with Paul

boulders on the mountain-side, a sort of volcanic eruption. 2 Cor. 3:8-10;

But there

Cf.

always a path through these participles. Paul would not let himself be caught in a net of mere grammatical niceties. If necessary, he broke 6:9f.; 9:llff.

is

the rule and went on (2 Cor. 8: 20).

saying that

mar."

all

this

is

But Moulton^ is right in "more a matter of style than of gram-

It is rhetoric.

It is worth noting that in normal negative of the participle, fxrj occurring only once, Od. 4. 684, and in an optative sentence of wish. It cannot be claimed that in Homer has won its place with the participle. In modern Greek fxri alone occurs with the pres(h)

Oil

Homer ^

and

/jlt]

with the Participle.

ov is the

ijlt]

ent participle (Thumb, Handb., p. 200).

It is generally said that

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 250.

^

Prol., p. 231.

2

lb., p. 251.

»

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p.

262

f.

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PUMATOS) in classical Attic ou

is

always the negative of the participle unless

condition or concession if

one looks at

all

1137

when

implied

is

the negative

But

is ni].

the facts up to 400 b.c. he will go slow before

he asserts that mt is proof that the participle shows a conditional Jannaris- claims the rule only for Attic, or concessive force. ^

"though even here

not rarely replaced by

ou is

/xi?,"

that

is

to

even in Attic. The use of "replaced" is wholly gratuitous when it is admitted that the rule does not apply outside of Attic. It is so hard to be historical always even If one takes the long view, from in an historical grammar. to the modern Greek with nothing Homer with its one use of which gradually he sees a steady progress in the use of but marks one the kolvt] anAttic stage, The ousted ov altogether. say, the rule does not apply

fj.rj

/.'t?

iJL-n,

It is true that in the Attic there is a sort of correspondence

other.

between ov and the participle and the indicative with ou on the one hand, while, on the other, ^117 and the participle correspond to the subjunctive or the optative with

Homer

with the subj. and

fxrj

But

/jlyj.

ou

occurred in

The

persisted with the indicative.

was not even, but on the whole the participle. In the N. T., aside from pushed ou gradually JU17 has gone quite beyond development the generally, kolvt] in the as the Attic. In the Attic the use of ou was the more general, while in the kolvt] the use of /xi? is normal. In the N. T. there is no need to explain ^117 with the participle. That is what you expect. Cf. lines crossed and the development

Lu. 12 33 :

nrj

raKaLOUfxepa,

Jo.

5

:

23

6

//17

Tifiaiv,

Ac. 17 6 :

fJLri

In the N. T. it is ov that But it may be said at once that the calls for explanation, not ixr]. N. T. is in thorough accord with the kolvt] on this point. Even in a writer of the literary kolut] like Plutarch^ one notes the inThe papyri go further than Plutarch, but still have roads of

eupovres,

Heb. 11

:

13

/jL-q

KOfiLaajjievoi.

fx-i].

examples of

ov,

like

ou

P. Par. (b.c. 163), t6v ovk

KeKOfiLajj-evai.

\euKaLS eadrjaiv kv dearpa: KaQiaavra 0. P. pcoKOTCOV

ton''

0. P. 491

(ii/A.D.), ou Svvanepos

thinks that in

many

471

h

(ii/A.D.), oubkirc)} ttcttXtj-

A. P. 78

(ii/A.D.).'»

of these papyri examples there

Moulis

"the

lingering consciousness that the proper negative of a downright fact

is ou."

In general

it

may

be said of the

kolvt}

that the pres-

ence of ou with the participle means that the negative 1

Howes, The Use

of

/xr,

with the Part., Ilarv. Stu.

is

clear-cut

in Class. Philol., 1901,

pp. 277-285.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 430.

Blass, Gr. of

2

Hist.

*

See further exx. in Moulton, Prol., p. 231. Prol, p. 232.

6

3

N. T. Gk.,

p. 255.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1138

and

Mt. 22

Cf.

decisive.

42) ov

OVK ovTOS avT(2 TeKvov, (17

22) ovbev eKTOS rpkiroiv, (9

:

KparGiV, poi, (1

Xkyciiv,

26)

(Ph.

nepoi,

3

:

11 ovk h8e8vfxepov epdvfia yafxou, (Lu. 6

(28

Kal

:

— virapxovTa,

27) Kai ye ov fxaKpav

17) ovSep TroLrjaas, (1 Cor.

ovk kp aapKl

8) OVK idoPTes, (2

:

(26

:

14) ovk kp-

8) dXX' ov arepoxcopov-

:

TeTocOoTes,

2

(Col.

(SXiTrofihcov , (11

10)

:

4

4

:

(Ac. 7: 5)

tvoljit^v,

:

(Heb. 11:1) irpajnaToop ov

Pet. 1

o}p

:

ovk akpa depwp, (2 Cor.

cos

4)

:

10: 12) 6 ijnadwros Kal ovk

(Jo.

/SXcTrcov,

:

:

19)

/cat

ov

35) ov Trpoade^afjLe-

In

ol ovk eKeqixkpoL.

these

all

we

have no special departure from the Attic custom, save that in Ac. 17 27 the participle is concessive. But we have just seen that the Attic was not rigid about ov and /xtj Tvdth the participle. In two of the examples above ov and p.r] come close together and the contrast seems intentional. Thus in Mt. 22 11 we have ovk hbebv:

:

while in verse 12

liepop tpbvjia yaiJLov,

The

first

we read

uri

exo^p epSv/jia yanov.

instance lays emphasis on the actual situation in the

description (the

while

plain fact)

apn

idoPTes ayaTTOLTe, eis op

fxrj

the

second instance

is

the

we read

op ovk

opccPTes TTLaTevopres 8e ayaXKiaTe.

Here

hypothetical argument about

it.

In

1

Pet.

1

:

8

harmonizes with the tense of iSopres as an actual experience, while /ii7 with dpoopres is in accord with the concessive idea in con-

ov

trast with TiarevopTes.

of particles here

is

Cf.

Hort in

not capricious.

who holds that the change "Though Blass thinks it arti-

loco

hard to believe that any but a slovenly in so rapid a change without a reason."^ It may be admitted further that "in Luke, Paul and Hebrews we have also to reckon with the literary consciousness of an educated man, which left some of the old idioms even

ficial

to distinguish,

writer

it is

would have brought

had generally swept them away."^ See also to. p.7] KaOrjand Text. Rec. to. ov aprjKopra (Eph. 5:4). Cf. 9. Blass ^ notes that the Hebrew !s)3 is regufXT) and ov in Ac. 9 larly translated in the LXX by ov without any regard to the Greek refinement of meaning between ov and with the participle. Hence in the N. T. quotations from the LXX this Moulton* observes also that, while peculiarity is to be noted. this is true, the passages thus quoted happen to be instances where a single word is negatived by ov. Cf. Ro. 9 25 ttjp ovk where

nrj

KOPTa (Ro. 1:28)

:

i^-f]

:

rjyaTrrjfj.eprjP,

Ac. 19

:

11,

"common

(Gal. 4

:

27)

17

ovk riKTOvaa,

ov ras Tvxovaas,

is,

17

ovk oodipovaa.

A

case like

of course, not pertinent.

vernacular phrase,"^ besides the fact that ov 1

Moulton,

2

lb.

»

Gr. of N- T. Gk., p. 255.

Prol., p. 232.

"

Prol., p. 232.

5

lb., p. 231.

is

It is a

not the

VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) negative of the participle' any more than 21.

Moulton-

that

it is

it is

in Ac. 19

also rules out ovk e^ov (2 Cor. 12

But note

ovk e^ovros, P.

:

4)

Oxy. 275

(a.d.

28

11;

:

:

on the ground

The copula

the equivalent of the indicative.

pressed.

1139

not ex-

is

On

66).

this

count the showing for ov with the participle is not very large in the N. T. Luke has ov five times with the participle (Lu. 6 42; :

Paul leads with a dozen or so (Ro. 9 25; Gal. 4 27 twice; 1 Cor. 4 14; 9 26; 2 Cor. 4 8, Hebrews has two (11 9; Ph. 3 :4; Col. 2 19; 1 Th. 2:4). Ac. 7 5; 17 27; 26 :

:

:

22; 28

:

:

17).

:

:

:

:

:

:

35)

1,

and Peter three

(1

1:8; 2

Pet.

10; 2 Pet.

:

1

:

ov

16,

—

Matthew has only one (22 11), and note /^i) exoov in the The MSS. vary also between the negatives as in Mt. 22 11, where C^D have nrj which Blass^ adopts with At any rate Mathis whimsical notions of textual criticism. almost exclusively with thew, Luke (Gospel) and John use

dXXd).

:

next verse.

:

fxri

the participle, while Mark, James, the Johannine Epistles and

Revelation do not have ov at

8

20, ovx

:

€Kov(Ta,

Heb. 9:11.

all

with the participle.

the old participle

In Ro. 9

:

In Ro. merely an adjective as in

is

25, t6v ov Xaov, the negative occurs with a

LXX).

substantive (quotation from

The

ancient Greek would

usually have added ovra.

Other Particles with the Participle. The ancient Greek ^ list of adverbs (particles) that were used with

(i)

had quite a

the circumstantial participle on occasion to

make

clearer the

precise relation of the participle to the principal verb or substan-

Some

tive.

of these (like are, olop, ola)

part, in the it

N. T.

But some remain

no longer occur with the These particles,

in use.

should be noted, do not change the real force of the parti-

ciple.

They merely sharpen the

usage

is

Tork (Gal. 26).

In

outline.

The

simplest form of this

seen in the adverbs of time like to irporepov (Jo. 9:8); 1

:

Mk.

idiomatic

is

23.

9

:

Cf.

Eph. 2

20; Jo. 5

:

:

13; Lu. 22

:

32); TrvK^drepou (Ac. 24

the use of eWvs as in eiaeKdovaa eWvs (Mk. 6

:

:

More

6 note other expressions of time.

25).

Cf.

Th. 2:5) and apTL eXdouTos TLfxadeov (1 Th. 3:6). Blass^ denies that ana with the participle in the N. T. suggests simultaneousncss or immediate also

i]87}

sequence.

6\plas

He

yevofjieprjs

(Mk. 15:42), en dv

sees in aixa Kal eXiri^ojv (Ac. 24

in the expectation,' not 'at the 1

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

p.

255

f.

same time *

(2

:

26) only

hoping.'

I

'

withal

question

Prol., p. 231.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255. Cf. Gildcrslceve, Encroachmenta of ^n on o6 in later Gk., Am. Jour, of Philol., I, p. 45 f. < Cf. G(M)(lwin, M. and T., pp. 340 IT. Gr. of N. T. Cik., p. 252. '

<*

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1140

NEW TESTAMENT

the correctness of Blass' interpretation on this point.

Cf. also

(Col.

4:3), where it requires some overrefinement to refuse the classic idiom Under the concessive participle we saw examples of to Luke. Kai ye (Ac. 17:27), /cairot (Heb. 4:3), KalTep (Heb. 5:8, etc.). There is also the use of o/jlcos in the principal sentence to call at(27:40);

d-vevres

a/xa

irpoaevxoiJievoL

'dfia

Kal

rjnuv

irepl

tention to the concessive force of the participle (1 Cor. 14

So

ovTcos

Worth

11).

manner

points back to a participle of time or noting, besides,

7). :

though

tovto as in Ro. 13: 11,

is Kal

:

(Ac. 20

may be implied. So also Kal ravra veveKpconevov There remain cbs, uael, ihairep. The use of cbo-et (Ro. 6 13) and of coairep (Ac. 2:2) is limited to condition or comparison. It is only with d)s that there is any freedom or abundance. Blass notes the absence of the accusative absolute with cos in the N. T. and its absence from the future participle save in Heb. 13 17, where it is not strictly design. There here a finite verb

(Heb. 11

12),

:

:

^

:

nothing specially significant in the phrase ovx w, 'not as if,' in Ac. 28 19; 2 Jo. 5. The N. T., like the classical Greek, uses cos

is

:

without the participle in al^breviated expressions (Col. 3 etc.,

:

23);

ev

cbs

where the

^pkpa (Ro. 13

participle

is

:

13);

like

cos tc3 Kvplco

Th. 2 2), from the context.^ ijpup (2

cbs 8l'

easily supplied

:

In some instances one must note whether the particle does not belong with the principal verb. But, common as cbs is with the participle, it does not change the nature of the participle with

which

The

may

be causal, tempomay be used to express the notion of the speaker or writer as well as that of one who is reported. In truth, cbs implies nothing in itself on that point. The context alone must determine it.* The various uses There may be nothing but comof COS itself should be recalled. it

occurs.^

parison,

as in

Cor. 9

(1

participle with,

Then

conditional, manner, etc.

ral,

:

cbs

e^ovalav

excov

So also Mk. 6

26).

:

(Mk.

cbs

again

1

:

cbs

22)

34; 2 Cor. 6

cbs

;

:

9

ovk

f.;

1

aepa depcou

Pet. 2

:

13,

In Lu. 22 26 f. observe cbs 6 Smkovcov. The causal idea is prominent in cbs ifKe-qpkvos (1 Cor. 7:25). Cf. Heb. 12 27 and D in Ac. 20 13, cbs p-eWo^v. The concessive or conditional notion 2 Cor. 5 20, cbs tov deov irapaKais dominant in 1 Cor. 7 29 f \ovvTos dt' ripcbv. So also in Ac. 3 12; 28 19; 2 Jo. 5. In Lu. 16 1, cbs dLaaKopTri^oov, the charge is given by Jesus as that of the 16.

:

:

:

;

:

:

.

:

:

:

1 ^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. De Particulae cbs

Fiihrer,

Usu Thucydideo, *

«

cum

1889, p. 7.

Goodwin, M. and

T., p. 343.

ib.

Participiis et Praepositionibus

punctae

^

VERBAL NOUNS ("ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOS)

and the context implies that it is untrue (only makes a similar use of ws airo(TTpt4>ovTa t6v \a6v He declines by the use of cos to accept the cor-

slanderer

{Sie^XriOr])

alleged).^

Pilate

in Lu. 23

:

1141

14.

rectness of the charge of the Sanhedrin against Jesus. similar use see ws (xeWovTas (Ac. 23

:

15);

cos

fxeWcov (23

:

For a

20); Trpo-

But in 2 Cor. 5 fxeXKovTcop (genitive absolute 27 30) 20 (see above) Paul endorses the notion that he is an ambassador God of God and cos is not to be interpreted as mere pretence. There is no instance of av with is speaking through Paul. Winer the participle in the N. T. as appears in classic Greek. notes two instances of cos ap with the participle in the LXX To these Moulton^ adds another (2 Mace. 1:11; 3 Mace. 4:1). (2 Mace. 12 4) and a genitive absolute example in the papyri,
:

.

:

:

Par. P. 26 (ii/B.c),

cos

(ii/B.c),

cos

ap

—

dv

The

TTjs \ifj.r]s dLaKuofxepot.

evraKTridrjaoiievoov.

inscrs.

(xvue(TTr]Kvias.

show

Blass

"*

Cf. also

it also,

lb., cos olp

O. G.

I. S.

finds a genitive absolute

Barnabas 6 11. All this is interesting as shadowing the modern Greek use of cav as a conjunction.^

with

cos

ap in

1

Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2

W.-M.,

3

Prol., p. 167.

p. 378.

:

N. T. Gk., p. 253. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 167; Hatz., <*

vto

90, 23

fore-

Einl., p. 217.

CHAPTER XXI PARTICLES

(AI

IIAPA0HKAI)

Scope. The word particle is a Latin diminutive, particula French particule) from pars. It is a small part of something. Longinus terjns this part of speech irapaOrjKr] with the notion that I.

(cf.

it

No

was a word placed beside another.

treated with so

satisfaction in the

little

portion of syntax

grammars.

is

The gram-

marians are not agreed as to what parts of speech should be called "particles." Riemann and Goelzer^ treat under this term (Les Particules) negative particles, particles of comparison and prepositions.

negative

Jannaris^ includes prepositions, conjunctions and

particles.

prepositions

Kiihner-Gerth^ here discuss conjunctions,

and the modal adverbs, though they use the phrase

"die sogenannten Partikeln."

almost confines the

Blass"*

He makes

cussion of particles to conjunctions.

equivalent: "Particles (Conjunctions)."

dis-

the two terms

Winer^ uses the word

broadly to cover all adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions. Monro ^ limits the designation to certain conjunctions and adverbs "that are mainly used to show the relation between other

words and between clauses." But he does not treat all conj mictions (paratactic and hypotactic) nor all modal adverbs. He passes

by

prepositions.

Brugmann^

sees clearly that, as there

is

between adverbs and prepositions, so there is fast line ("keine feste Grenze") between "particles" and other adverbs. All languages have a large group of words that pass over into the category of particles, but Brugmann cuts the Gordian knot by declaring that it is not a function of scientific grammar to delimit these words. That is a matter of subjective

no no

real distinction

standpoint.

He

of the particles,

takes

1

Synt., pp. 802-820.

2

Hist.

=>

II,

4

little

interest in the various subdivisions

but he extends the term to "

Gk. Gr., pp. 365-433.

«

pp. 113-347. Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 250-275.

1142

'

its

widest sense to

W.-Th., pp. 356-512. Horn. Gr., pp. 240-269. Griech. Gr., pp. 525-550.

PARTICLES

nAPAGHKAl)

(aI

1143

modal adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions. Brugmany of these particles go back to the IndoGermanic time and hence their etymology is unknown. He treats the particles from the standp>oint of their origin so far as known. Hartungi takes a much narrower view of particles. He discusses the paratactic conj mictions and the intensive particles. He^ conceives that the greater portion of the particles have no meaning in themselves, but are merely modifications on other words This is not strictly correct. We are or on whole sentences. cover

all

mann

notes that

not always able to discover the original import of these words, but it is probable that they originally had a definite meaning. It

is

the sentence.

in

subordinated to other words it may be stated that there

(verbs,

nouns, pronouns, particles)

In a broad

ways.

four classes of words

are

way

true that the particles are

in various

covers

all

jections.

the

But

From

adverbs, it

is

all

this point

of

prepositions,

impossible, as

view the word particle conjunctions and inter-

Brugmann

make a much over-

holds, to

perfectly scientific treatment of the particles without

The interjections in one sense do not belong to gramThe negative and the interrogative particles cannot be

lapping.

mar.

properly treated imder adverbs, though they are adverbs.

So but a good deal more. Intensive It is not worth while to particles again are adverbs, but more. recount the story of the adverbs and the prepositions at this stage. They are particles, but they have received sufficient discussion in special chapters. In the same way the construction of hypotactic conjunctions came in for somewhat careful treatment in connection with subordinate sentences mider Mode. Hence, hypotactic conjunctions do not here demand as much discussion as the paratactic conjunctions. One has to be, to a certain extent, arbitrary in this field, since the ground is so extensive and so much remains to be done. There is still need of a modern and exhaustive treatise on the Greek Particles. It was in 1769 that the Dutch scholar Hoogeveen^ wrote his book. He was followed by Hartung.^ Klotz^ reworked the writings of Devarius. In also conjunctions are adverbs,

Lehre von den Partikcin dfr grioch. Rpr., Tl. I, 1S:52; Tl. II, 1S33. lb., Tl. I, p. 37. Schrocder (tibcr die forniello Untcrsch. dor Redot., 1874, 35 f.) write.s well on the obscurity of the origin of particles and the use

'

«

p.

of the term. '

Doctrina Particulanim Linguae Graecae.

*

See above.

^

De Graecae Linguae

Particulis, vol.

I,

Ed. Secunda, ISOG.

1S40; II, IS

12.

1144

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1861 Baumlein produced his Untersuchungen uher gricch. PartiPaley^ has carried the work on, as has Navarre.- There are, to be sure, a great number of monographs on special groups keln.

"If any particular section of Greek grammar were taken as a specimen to illustrate the historical evolution of the Greek language, no better representative could be selected than the section of the particles."* Jannaris speaks thus, or on single particles.^

not because the grammars have treated the particles with such skill, but because the particles best show the growth and decay of parallel words before other new synonyms that are constantly coming into existence. The particles come to a sharp point and gradually lose the edge and whittle do^\^l into platitudes. Then they give way to others with more freshness. In general, the particles mark the history of the effort to relate words with each other,

clause

with clause, sentence with sentence, paragraph

with paragraph. language,

They

are the hinges of speech, the joints of

or the delicate turns

of expression,

We

thought that are often untranslatable.

the

7iuances of

must here

confine

our attention to Intensive Particles, Negative Particles, InterrogThis order is ative Particles, Conjunctions and Interjections. chosen for logical reasons simply, not because this was the order of development. That we do not know. The particles that are linked to single words logically come before conjunctions which Interjections stand apart ^vith clauses and sentences. particles are employed the of list. Some the in last put and so are (like apa, 5e, ovv), so that a strict sentences and clauses words, with division on this basis is not possible.^

have to do

Intensive or Emphatic Particles (irapaBTiKaL €|Jici>aTLKaL or irapair\Tipa)|JiaTiKol (n3v8ecr|xoi according to Diomjsius Thrax). Here again there is no absolute agreement 1. Limitations. II.

particles are considered "emphatic" or "intensive." has no separate cHscussion of the intensive parindeed, Winer, He admits'' that, while the Greek of the N. T. Trep. ticles Hke 76,

as to

what

uses adverbs well in an extensive sense, it is defective in the inAdverbs of place, time, manner, all come in abundtensive use. ance in the N. T. Thompson^ follows Winer in the absence of discussion of the intensive particles. 1

2 3 *

B

The

intensive particles, in

The Gk.

Particles, 1881. fitudes sur les particules grecques, R. E. A., VII, pp. 11&-130. 70-87. Cf. Hubner, Grundr. zu Vorlesungen uber die griech. Synt., pp. ' W.-Th., p. 462. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 365.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 240.

^

Synt. of Attic Gk.

PARTICLES

(aI

1145

nAPAOIIKAl)

But as a rule receive poor handling in the grammars.^ part finished Paley^ properly sees that they are "an elaborately

fact,

of a

Poetry, especially

most complex and beautiful machinery."

tragic

poetry,

uses these emphatic

In Homer "they sustain and articulate the By them alone we can perceive that Greek

kinds of writing. pulses of emotion.

was the language

more than other

particles

of a witty, refined, intellectual, sensitive

would be impossible

in

any book

and

to tabu-

passionate people. late the delicate shades of meaning, the subtle, intricate touches of irony or pathos, the indescribable grace and power which the It

many of the grandest passages in ancient literaby a close study of the entire context that these only ture."* can never be fully translated from one lanThey felt. can be it is impossible to reproduce in English Thus another. to guage

particles lend to It is

the various shades of meaning of

and

ixev

when

5e

in contrast.

to translate a particle leads to curious results. Dr. Cyril Jackson used always to render Tpwes pa by 'the Trojans, God help them,' and a former head-master of Eton always

"The attempt

distinguished between

aoi, 'Sir, to you',

and

tol, 'at

Indeed,

(Coleridge, Greek Classic Poets, p. 221)."

your service'" is not pos-

it

put into mere written language all that the look, the gesture, the tone of voice, the emphasis of the accent carried when heard and seen. Cf. a Frenchman in conversation. The

sible to

spoken vernacular thus has all the advantage of the written stjde. Cf. the All the vernacular cannot be reproduced on the page. charm of the actual speech of Jesus and Paul. The N. T. is in the vernacular kolvt], but even so it does not reproduce to any great extent the witchery of the old Greek particles. Time has

worn them down very much.

Still,

we do

There is a good example in Ph. 3 ttcos vSv irore (Ro. 1 So also riyov/xaL. Cf. P. B. M. 42 (b.c. 168) ov ^.w (3:7). there.

:

them here and

dXXd

8,

and

10)

:

e'i

find

dW

/xev

ri

ow

ye Kai

en Kayu ws

and O. P. that Paul shows This 1104, 5 (vi/vii a.d.) ov /jltiv 5e dXXd Kai. thought by of shades at least knew how to indicate the finer comparison in that, notes means of the Greek particles. Blass^ with the Semitic languages, the N. T. seems to make excessive use of the particles, poor as the showing is in comparison with the classic period. "Modern Greek has lost the classical Greek wealth of connective and other particles which lend nicety and The Gk.

Particles, p. vi.

1

Paley,

2

lb., p. ix.

»

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 195.

*

lb.

"

Cir.

of

kird Kai

N. T. Gk.,

p. 259.

1146

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK

precision of thought. Only Kal {ovre, ov8e), and the less commonly used conjunctions dXXd, w\r)v, o/jloos have been retained. The loss of yap, apa has been compensated by new formations; but the ancient Greek re, 8e, /xev — 5e, ixkvroL, firjv, ovv (yovp), Itl, brj, yk, Trap have left no successors" (Thumb, Handh., p. 185). The papyri seem barren of intensive particles in comparison with ri

the older Greek.

Jannaris ^ observes

and

how

these postpositive par-

compounds) tend in the later Greek either to disappear or to become prepositive. The N. T. is in harmony with tliis result. The same thing occurs with apa, wliich sometimes becomes prepositive, but that is not true of yap, 5e, ovv. Dionysius Thrax^ has a very extensive list ticles

(76,

8r},

rot

irep,

ixev,

their

of "expletive particles" or irapawXrjpcoiJLaTLKol 8r),

pa, vh, TTOv,

dXXd,

iJLrjv,

to'l,

Tolvvv,

drjv,

ap, Srjra, irep,

Toiyapovv).

and one might add

7dp,

be)

Some

ttco,

p.riv,

crvuSea-fxoL

(elal 5e

oUe'

av, av, vvv, ovv, Kev, ye,

of these (like dpa, ovv, dXXd,

are so prevailingly conjunctival that

they are best treated under conjunctions. belong to earlier stages of the language. could have come here very well, since

Others

The

(like Kev, pa)

discussion of

iiv

undoubtedly intensive whatever its actual meaning, whether it is blended with ei into eav or used with 6s, oarts, tva, otcos, cos, etc., or used with the verb itself in the apodosis of a condition. It is a modal adverb of emphasis (now definite as in Rev. 8:1, now indefinite as in Mt. 23: It is hke a chameleon and gets its colour from its environ18). ment or from its varying moods. This fickleness of meaning is true of all the intensive particles. Indeed, Dionysius Thrax is it is

rather slighting in his description of these words, oaot wapovres ov8ev io4)e\e7v 8vvavTai ovre p.riv xcoptcr^eiTes XvfxaivovTat.

He

contradicts his

disparagement by the use of /jltjv in this very sentence. The adverbial nature of the intensive particles is well shown by the variety of usage of the modal adverb ovto:s. See Thayer's Lexicon for the N. T. illustrations, which are very numerous

(some 200). In Jo. 4:6, eKade^ero ovtcjs eirl rfj inijyfj, we have a good example of the possibilities of ovtoos. The local adverb xo6 dwindles from 'somewhere' (Heb. 2:6) to 'somewhat' in Ro. 4:19. Cf. also 517 irov ('surely') in Heb. 2:16. Some of the temporal adverbs also at times approach the emphatic particles. Cf. to Xoltov in Ph. 3:1; 4:8 (see Kemiedy in loco) sdmost^ = ovu. But in the N. T. aprt and i]8r] are always strictly temporal. HowGk.

Gr., p. 400.

1

Hist.

2

Cf. Uhlig's ed., p. 96,

3

and Schol. Dion. Thrax

So mod. Gk., Thumb, Ilandb.,

p. 181.

in

Bekk. An., 970.

10.

.

PARTICLES sometimes

ever, Trore

1147

nAPAOirKAl)

(aI

loses its notion of 'once

upon a time'

(Gal.

1:23) and fades into that of 'ever' as in 1 Cor. 9:7; Eph. 5 In rjdr] Tore (Ro. 1 10; Ph. 4 10) it is more the notion of 29. culmination (' now at last ') than of time. But in ni] irore the notion :

:

:

may

be wholly gone before that of contingency (' lest perIn the N. T. we find undoubted instances of the non-temporal use of vvv and wvl where the sense Some of the passages are in doubt. differs little from Si? or ovv. But the logical and emotional use, as distinct from the temporal, 22, 24 where vvv 8k gives the contrast to the is clear in Jo. 15

of time

chance'), as in Lu. 12: 58.

:

preceding conditions, 'but as it is.' Cf. also 1 Jo. 2 28, rat vvp, T€Kvla, where John's emotional appeal is sharpened by the use of :

vvv.

Cf. likewise

vuv 8evpo in Ac.

/cat

7:34 (LXX).

Cf.

/cat

vvv,

In general, the N. T. language, Hke the English, leaves most of the emotion and finer shades of thought to be brought out by the reader himself. "The historical ])ooks of the N. T., and especially their dialogues and discourses, are only B. U. 530

fully

(i/A.D.).

and truly

us in reading them in high voice in

intelligible to

the original Greek text, and in supplying the intonation, the gestures, the movement, that is to say, in reconstituting by the

imagination the scene 2.

The N.

We may

Fe.

(a)

itself."^

T. Illustrations.

begin with

The

ye.

origin of ye

is

by no

In the Boeotian, Doric and Eleatic dialects it is ya. It seems to correspond ^ to the k in the Gothic mi-k (German Brugmann sees also a kinship to the Cf. Greek eixk-ye. mi-ch).

means

certain.

g in the Latin ne-g-otiiwi, ne-g-kgere, ne-g-are. Hartung^ conIt may also be the same word nects it with the adverb fa.

as the Vedic Sanskrit gha, which

further qui in the Latin qui-dem. KOLvrf

used in the same way.'*

is

It is

not so

as in the classic Attic (Radermacher,

A''.

common

Cf

in the

T. Gr., p. 29).

Its

function is to bring into prominence the particular word mth which it occurs. It is enclitic and so postpositive. The feelings are sharply involved

when

ye

is

present.

It suits the Greek,

^

which "delights in pointed questions, irony and equivocal assent."

But

there

is

translated at

no English equivalent and all.

it

frequently cannot be

Hartung'^ sees in ye a comparative element, while

'

Vitcau, fitude sur

2

Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 541.

»

Partikellehre,

*

K.-G.,

6

Partikellehre,

I,

p.

le grec,

344

II, p. 171. I,

p. 326.

f. »

180G, p.

ii.

Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 171-178.

Paley,

The Gk.

Particles, p. 14.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1148

cumulative and arithmetical. As a matter of fact, ye brings word with which it is used, but adds

Kai is

to the fore the idea of the

no

Hlibner^

distinctive notion of its own.^

particle

on a par with

The

ye.

distinction

But that

o/jlojs.

made by

may

ye

calls it

a concessive

not always true of

is

be either the least im-

The resultant idea portant or the most important (Thayer). may be 'at least,' this much if no more, a concessive notion. AVe find this to be the significance of ye in Lu. 11:8, 5id ye r-qv Here, however, the ye more properly belongs to avaiblav avTov. The avaidiav, since that is the point, not the preposition 5td.

same shght variation from the ye to Trapexftv

5ta

5,

idiom appears in 18

classic

kottov Trjv

MO'^

The

ravT-qv.

XVP^^

:

concessive

minimizing idea comes out clearly in Jo. 4:2, KalToiye 'Irjaovs See further apa ye and /cat ye in Ac. 17 27, and, in particuavTos. lar, dXXd ye hutv el/jii (1 Cor. 9 2) where again the ancient idiom would prefer vfuv ye, 'to you at least' (if not to others). Once :

:

more note el ye in Eph. 3 2; 4: 21; Col. 1 Mt. 6 1 9 17, etc. There is a keen touch :

;

:

means

other hand ye

21, dXXd ye

/cat crvv

and

Mt. 17

much

much,' 'as

'this

So in Lu. 24:

contexts.

23,

3

:

8,

7: 20

dXXd

8

:

and :

ovv ye Kal -qyovpiaL

fiev

/cat

30.

32).

On

26.

ye in Ac. 2

A

So 10

:

20,

the

as this,' in other

where the

reached in

is

same climacteric force of the particles occurs

Paul, 'as far as to consider

Ac. 8

:

iraai toutols,

is accented by /cat, (tvv and not adversative), and the climax of the crescendo

The

ye in

ixr]

dXXd (affirmative here,

ascensive force

ye.

8e

el

of irony in Ro. 9

Cf. iipaye in

fxevovvye crv tLs el;

avdpixnre,

0)

:

:

all

18 (Joel 3:2).

:

example There 18.

fine :

things to be

is 6s

is

ye tov

loss.'

in Ph.

Cf. apaye in

So we have

apa.

l8iov vlov ovk e^yelaaro

irony again in

says

'I go,'

itavTa ^rjixlav elvai.

Mt.

ye in

(Ro.

Kat 6(})eX6v ye e^aaiXev-

of ye apart from /cat. In but in the N. T. pronouns,^ with the Homer ye is very common find e7co ye, but more no We we have only 6s ye (Ro. 8 :32).

aare (1 Cor. 4:8),

and note the position

—

av (3 14), e7co be (5 22), auros eyco (Mt. 3 11), eyoi thirty examples of ye in the N. T. the all of (Ro. 9:3). Indeed (paratactic or hjrpotactic) or other parconjunctions occur with Cf. d/xaprta y'e 18 in Lu. 11:8; those ticles except 5; Ro. 8 32. with particles The i, 1.8. Hermas, Vis., in sin') is eariv ('indeed it ey
:

:

:

:

which ye

is

:

found in the N. T. are dXXd ye (Lu. 24

(Mt. 7: 20); dpd ye (Ac. 8

:

30);

el

ye (Eph. 3

:

2);

:

21); apa ye

€^ 5e m'?

7^ (Mt.

Baumlein, Griech. Partikeln, 1861, p. 54. Grundr., p. 85. Cf. also Nagelsbach, Comm. de particulae yk usu Horn. ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 258. 1830, p. 4. 1

2

PARTICLES 6:1); 3)

;

11:8; 18

ye (1 Cor. 4:8); fxevovpye (Ro. 9

Tap

5.

:

1149

IIAPAOIIKAi)

(Ac. 17: 27); KaiTotye (Jo. 4:2); fx-qnye (1 Cor. 6

ye

Kai

6(t)eKov

(aI

compounded

is

more than an intensive

it

Cf.

particle.

20).

:

Cf. 5id ye in Lu.

dpa, but it will be sometimes not much yap KaKou eiroirjaev (Mt.

and

of ye

treated under conjunctions, though

:

is

tL

27:23). (6)

with

an uncertain etymology.^ It appears vrj, vai) and is seen in composition

It has likev\dse

A17.

in the Attic poets as 5at Stj-tov,

5i?-ra,

(cf.

rj-dr].^

eireL-Sri,

In

i]-8rj

we probably have'

rj

was originally temporal in idea and goes back to are Jannaris^ thinks that 8e and the Indo-Germanic period. one and the same word (cf. fxh and uriv) and holds that the difference is due to the transliteration from the old to the new alphabet when alone a distinction was made between e and e (r?). Thus the spelling 6r] was confined to the intensive particle, It is certain that in while 56 was the form for the conjunction. Homer there is confusion between 8e and 8r] before vowels.* In Homer also 8r] may begin a sentence, but in the N. T. as and

dr].

It

8-fj

elsewhere

all

the examples are postpositive (but not

enclitic).

but as a con-

as an hard to follow Blass' theory of the parLike the other intensive particles it has no English nor ticles. German equivalent and is a hard word to translate. It is

Blass^ does not treat secutive particle.

intensive particle,

it

It is

and indicates that the point is now at last clear and r)5rj (1 may be assumed as true.^ Cf. Latin jam nunc, vvv sense bein similarity The 1 10). Jo. 4:3); r?57? irore (Ro. tween 577 and one usage of 8e may be seen in Ac. 6 3, einaKeCf. Kai av 8k m \paade 8e (Siy), where W. H. put 5t7 in the margin. There are left 12 1. 2 Cor. in genuine is not M] Lu. 1:76. Heb. in 2 16, ov yap 8r} irov counting illustrations, only six N. T. it KapTO(t>ope'L, 6s 5?) In Mt. 13 23, eTrCkaii^aveTaL. ayyeXcov 8r} irov who.'^ The man the just 'who is sentencfe, relative in occurs a climacteric

—

:

:

:

:

:

other examples are

with the hortatory subjunctive (Lu. 2

all

:

15; Ac. 15 :36) or the imperative (Ac. 13 2; 1 Cor. 6 20) in accord with the classical idiom. There is a note of urgency in The pas20). 2) and So^daare 8i) (1 Cor. 6 a(j)opiaaTe 8r) (Ac. 13 :

:

:

:

sage with 1

8i)

irore in Jo.

\h.; Prellwitz, Et.

'

Monro, Horn. Hist. Gk. Gr., Monro, Horn.

6

:

4 has disappeared from the

critical text.

Briis-, Grioch. Gr., p. 547.

2

^

5

Wortcrbuch,

Gr., p. 256. p. 410.

Gr., p. 256.

p. 73.

^

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 273 f. Klotz ad Dcvar., H, p. 392.

»

Blass, Gr. of

«

N. T. Gk.,

p. 274.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1150

El

(c)

fxrjp, PT]

and

Somewhat akin

pal.

to the positive note in

14. 5i7 is nrjp which is read by many MSS. in Heb. 6 uncertain, though it quite is again adverb this of The etymology Cf. root as {rjFe, same the riFe).^ have it may that possible is In i]Trep (Jo. 12 43) and rjroi (Ro. 6 16) we have the 8ri (r/Srj). comparative or disjunctive ^. In Homer it was often used in

the use of

rj

:

r;

:

rj

:

connection ^vith other particles.^ We may pass urip for the presIf rj were genuine in Hebrews the usage would be in strict ent. accord with classic construction for a strong asseveration. But

This queer idiom appears a few el fxifp is the true text. (Ezek. 33 27; 34 8; 38 19, etc.). It occurs times in the also in the papyri and the inscriptions^ after iii/B.c. Cf. d ijltjp, P. Oxy. 255 (a.d. 48). So that it is mere itacism between ^ and certainly

LXX

The Doric has

el.

that the distinction

:

:

el is

:

where Moulton^ holds against Hort^

for ^

See further chap-

strictly orthographical.

Orthography and Phonetics, ii, (c). So then el nrjp has to be admitted in the kolptj as an asseverative particle-. It is thus another form of jx-qp. Jamiaris" gives a special section to the "asseverative particles" pi] and jxd. We do not have ij.a in the N. T. and vii ter VI,

rj

1 Cor. 15 31, KaQ' rnx'epap a-Kodp-qoKw pi) rijp vfierepap Kavxw-v- Nt] is a peculiarity of the Attic dialect and is used in solemn asseverations (oaths, etc.) and means 'truly,' 'yes.' It is

only once in

:

probably the same word as pal, the affirmative adverb which occurs over thirty times in the N. T. Nai may be simply 'yes,' as in Mt. 13: 51. It may introduce a clause as 'yea' or 'verily,' as It i^ used in respectful address, Nai, Khpie (Jo. 11: be used as a substantive (like any adverb) with the article (2 Cor. 1: 17) or without the article (Mt. 5 37), where It stands in It occurs with ap.i}p in Rev. 1 7. it is repeated.

in

Mt. 11

27).

It

:

9.

may

:

:

37 and 2 Cor. 1 17. There was an But we do not know the etymology, though Brugmann^ compares it with the Latin tie and nae and contrast with oh in Mt. 5 old form mt-xt

(cf.

:

:

ov-xl).

possibly also with the old Indo-Germanic na-na ('so

We know

— so').

which is postposiIt is only another form of ixr]p which occurs tive, but not enclitic. The Doric and Lesbian use imp in the N. T. only in Heb. 6 14. Se. So then it seems probable^ that p.b.p and the Thessahan ^a {d)

Mev.

a

little

more about

nep,

:

—

1

Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 541; K.-G., II, p. 144.

2

3

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 248. Moulton, Prol., p. 46.

«

Hist.

*

lb., p. 46.

^

Griech. Gr., p. 544.

6

App.,

8

lb.

p. 151.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 410.

:

PARTICLES

1151

nAPAGHKAl)

(aI

words of swearing after a negative), nrjp and fxh same word. Indeed, in Homer all three forms the and are one sense. That original sense is affirmative, meansame the occur in

(na used with

^

ing 'surely,' 'indeed,' 'in truth.' It is overrefinement to find in fih (nvv) the subjective confirmation and in 8ri the objective at-

probable that in the change from the old alphabet the transcribers adopted the two ways of spelling, common in Attic and Ionic {fxh and ixrjv) with a notion that ii-qv was merely emphatic with single words, while fxev was correlative It is

testation.^

to the

new

(forwards or backwards)

may at

all

that in

mean

does not

itself nkv

Questions of metre

or antithetical.^

But there

have entered into the matter.

also

no dou])t

is

The

or imply antithesis.

was simply emphatic confirmation of single words, usually the weightiest word in the sentence. This use was gradually left more and more to txriv and other particles, but it is not anacoluthic, as Winer" holds, for fxev to occur without the presence

original use

The

of 5e or dXXd.

original idiom with

older language

but

/xej/,

it

is

naturally richer^ in this

survives in the N. T. and

is

not to

be regarded as unclassical or uncouth. For an example in the papyri see B. U. 423 (ii/A.D.), wpd fxev iravTwv. The old idiom survived best in the vernacular and in poetry, while the literary prose was more careful to use the antithetical or resumptive tiku.

This

solitarium, as the

nh

nev yap 6 kpxofxepos (2 Cor.

is

p.tv

11:4),

fj.ev elfxi,

(28

e5et nkv,

stances of contrast

21) 6v 5eT ovpavov

(17: 12) ttoWoI

elirev,

avOpooTOS

:

:

:

.

not adversative), (3

21)

a concessive

It is seen also rather

often in the Acts.

fxev

may have

call it,

no thought of 8e or dXXd. Cf 1 18 ovtos iitv ovv kKTrjaaro x^pi-ov, (3 13) ov TrapeBuKare (cf. vfieh 8k in next verse which is copulative,

where there buds

d

Cf.

or restrictive force.^

books

oi

is

(23 :

22)

fxev

18) 6

:

fxh odv like

Acts

See

ovv irapoKa^wv

fxev

ivepl (xev

intended.

el

de^acdai, (3

ixev

:

22) Mcoucttjs

ovv e^ avTWV ewiaTevaav, (21:39)

yap 1

:

ixh ovv in

:

41

;

5

:

Heb. 7

41

;

8

-.11

;

:

fi

:

eyo)

31), (27

and the inwhere no

alpeaecos ravr-qs,

Trjs

6; 2

also 23

(cf.

25,

nev evSoKta in

Cf. 2 Cor. 12

12; Ro. 10 1; pevovv as instance of single the also Cf. p'ev. 1 Th. 2 18, eyw The contrast. without obviously is which one word (Lu. 1 1 28) same thing is true of p-tvovvye (Ro. 9 20; 10 18; Ph. 3 8) €'

:

oaov nkv ovv

dpi

kyo: in 11

13.

:

:

:

:

however point and there is

printed. is

1

Monro, Hoin.

2

K.-C;., II, p. 135.

3

J;inn., Iliwt.

The main word

is

sharpened to a

a hint of contrast in Ph. 3

Cr., p. 251.

Ck. (>.,

p. 409.

:

:

:

it

:

8.

Indeed, most

"

W.-Th.,

^

Jaiin., Hist. (ik. (\v., p.

«

fine

p. bl^^.

Ilartunt!;,

40'.).

I'aitiki4k4irc, II, p. 404.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1152

N. T. are resumptive, not corThere remain the instances where iJih imphes contrast. It is just a step in advance of the original idiom. Cf. Mt, 8 21, kirirp&l/ov fjLOL TrpoJTov aTrekOelv, where there is nothing of the instances of

/jih

ovv in the

relative or antithetical.^

:

to correspond to

The

irpcoTov.

and

—

cTretra is

involved in what precedes.

—

Ro. 1 16 and irpwrov /cat in 2 Cor. 8 5. The /cat does not answer to the xpcoroj'.^ Just so we have rbv p.ev tpojtop 'Koyop in Ac. 1 1 without a devrepov 5k, though the clear implication is that the Acts is the second book. In 1 Cor. 11:18, irpooTov pep yap, the contrast is implied^ in verses 20 ff., but in Ro. 1 8, irpoorop pep ei'xapto-rco, there is no hint of other grounds of thanksgiving. This instance may be a change of thought on Paul's part (anacoluthon) or it may be the original

So with

TrpCjTov

re

/cat

in

:

:

:

:

,

use of

meaning

Cf. irpcoTop p.'ep in Ro. In Ro. 7:12, 6 pep popos, there is no contrast stated, but in verse 14 it is given by 5e, yet without ph. In Col. 2 23, artz^a pep,

'first of all in truth.'

3:2.

:

eaTLP \6yov pep exopra aocplas, the antithesis is really stated in ovk ep TLpfj, kt\.

without an adversative particle.

In

1

Cor. 5

:

3 the

and irapccv are contrasted by 5e. In contrast between the pep clause and the next,

pep stands alone, while cltoop

Heb. 12 9 there is which has no particle (only toXv paXKop). In Ac. 26 4, 6, pep is followed by /cat vvv by way of contrast and by rd pvp in 17:30. Cf. pep Kol in 1 Th. 2 18, pep —- re in Ac. 27: 21, where there is practically no contrast. But see 6 pep Kat erepop in Lu. 8 5 ff., o pep /cat aXXo in Mk. 4 4 ff We have pep evretra in Jo. 11:6; Jas. 3 17; 1 Cor. 12 28. These are all efforts to express antithesis. We see this also in pep -KK-qp in Lu. 22 22 and in p'ep dXXd in Ac. 4 16; Ro. 14: 20; 1 Cor. 14 17. In Mk. 9 12 f. dXXd is independent of the pep. But it is the pep be construction that is the most frequent in the N. T. as in the Attic Greek. There are two and a half pages of examples of pep in its various uses in the N. T. given in Moulton and Geden's Concordance, but even so the particle has made a distinct retreat since the Attic period.'* It is wholly absent from 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Titus (critical text) and Revelation. It occurs only once in Eph. (4 11), Col. (2: 23), 1 Th. (2 18), Jas. (3 17). It is most frequent in Matthew, Acts, :

:

—

:

—

—

:

:

:

—

.

:

—

—

:

:

:

:

—

:

:

1

Blass, Gr. of

large 2

:

list

N. T. Gk.,

p. 267.

Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 410) gives a very

of illustrations of the original use of

y.kv

from anc. Gk.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 576.

3 But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., and so the original use of ixkv.

p. 267) takes

it

to be 'from the very outset' ^

j^,.,

p. 266.

PARTICLES

(aI

1153

nAPABIIKAl)

Romans, 1 Corinthians and Hebrews. and 5e may contain the roots of one

nh

Paley^ thinks that (fiia)

and two

But

(56o).

certainly the correlative antithesis is not necessary to either of them, though with 8e there is the notion of adcUtion. Cf. in this /cat (Mk. 4:4; Lu. 8 connection ij.h 5) and rote nkv (Jo. 11:6). There are varying degrees of contrast where iikv and 5e occur There may be no emphasis on the (ikv and very little together.

—

on the

which

be,

serve almost

:

not essentially adversative. The ^kv may preidiom while 5e has slight contrast. So

is

its original

Lu. 11 48, apa

jxaprvpes eare Kal avvevdoKeiTe rots epyoLS tuip Tvarkpoiv,

:

The whole senagreement (correspondence), not here accented. In verse 47 we have 5e, but not

OTL avToi ixev airenTeLvav avTOvs y/xets 8e olKoboixeiTe.

tence

quoted to show that

is

opposition, that

is

it is

which is hardly felt in 48. See also Ac. 13: 36 f.; Ph. 3:1; Heb. 7:8. In particular we note this slight contrast when a whole is distributed into its parts as in Mt. 25 14 ff 1 Cor. 9 25. ixkv,

;

:

:

.

Cf. also Ac. 18

14

:

f.

But the

division, as in 1 Cor. 1 '£7(0 be

how

'E7C0 be Xptarov.

KT]
pointed

inherently

cated by

'E7W

12,

:

Mt. 3:

11, €7cb

33, Kal

(TTr}(TeL

^g

—

:

Cor. 15

e-weLTa be

ixh—6 bL

words

juej^

and

may

that

be

be indi-

:

p.'ev

avrov

ol ixev

— rivh

be

p.'ev

ei

iiev

e^ evwvbyLiov.

to. be epicpLa

—

(Ph. 1

oi be

(Ph. 1: 15);

be

p.'ev

39); tovto

(Heb.

See

— dXXot (Mt. 16 14) — tovto (Heb. 10 be (Ac. 19 ovv — 7:2);

ol

;

be^Lccu

e/c

are numerous.

f .)

good illustration of clear baptism and that of Christ in

gee a

his

See further 20: 23; 22: 8; 23: 28; 25:

Tpo^ara

(Jude 22); rivk

be

(Heb. 9 6

be (1

words about

to, jxev

The examples be

YlaiiKov, 'E7cb be 'AttoXXw,

alone as in Mt. 5: 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44; 25: 46; Ac.

be

antithesis in John's

— ovs

dya

to sharp

thus the context that decides

Indeed, the contrast

opposition.

12: 9; Heb. 2: 8; 4:13; 6:12.2

ix'ev

p.kv

It is

It is not the

the contrast.

is

mean

may amount

distribution

:

be

el

;

aWr] :

:

16

:

els

ff .)

jiev

jxev

— aXX?;

33); wpcoTou

38

f .)

el

;

oh

;

— eh fiev

p.'ev

—

These examjoles fairly exhibit the N. T. usage of pikv. It is often a matter of one's mood how much emphasis to put on pi'ev and be, as in Mt. 9 37 and Mk.^ 14: 38. In p.evT0L there is always strong contrast. As examples of p.ev dXXd in sharp contrast see Ro. 14 20; 1 Cor. 14 17. So vvv bk (Heb. 11

:

15

etc.

f.),

:

—

:

ph — Tr\r,v

also (e)

Uep.

more

Trepi

usually in

(Lu. 22

It is

:

:

22).

probably a shortened form of

irepl (cf.

perfect) or

both postpositive and enclitic and the N. T. printed as a part of the word with which exactly.^

'

The Gk.

=

Blass, Gr. of

It is

Particles, p. 34.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 266.

»

Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 545.

is it

»

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1154

But

occurs.

in

Homer

is

with the other, for

Germanic

follows Kal only

irkp

-rrepav

or

this particle.^

Cf. wepaLTepoj

irepa.

idea does not conflict

this

It is

the locative of repa.

irept is

original notion of

and the

root,

But

19:39).

irepL-Tr\r]dT]s,

ximttXtj/xi,

not true, while

is

directly ^\dth

it

text in Ac.

(critical

this

no doubt about the etymology of

There Some^ even connect

once.i

irkpi

an Indo-

occurs in

-n-ept-

per-tnanere, per-tinax, sem-per, etc.

nu-per,

to do a thing to the limit (beyond), thoroughly. a note of urgency in wep. It is intensive as ye, but probably tends to be more extensive also.* Sometimes the emphasis in Trep is in spite of opposition ^ as in Kaiirep which occurs six times

means then

It

There

is

N. T. (Ph. 3:4; Heb. 5:8; 7:5; 12 17; 2 Pet. 1 12), and always with participles, as Kaiwep wv vlb$ (Heb. 5:8). The Textus Receptus has ovirtp in Mk. 15 6, but W. H. read only Cor. ov, but hoTip appears twice as an inferential conjunction (1 8 13; 10 14). See 'daTtep, O. P. 1125, 6 (iii/A.D.). The other

in the

:

:

:

:

:

examples are

with conjunctions, as tavwep (Heb. 3: 14; 6:3); Ro. 8 9; 1 Cor. 15 15);

all

elVep (a half-dozen times, all in Paul, as

:

:

(some MSS. in Ro. 3 30, but the best MSS., as W. H. exetS^jrep (only Lu. 1:1); w^P (only the critgive, have dwep) save ical text in Jo. 12 :43); Kaddirep (some 17 times, all in Paul Heb. 4:2), KaOo^airep (Heb. 5 4 and a varia lectio in 2 Cor. 3 18), kirdwep

:

;

:

:

ioairep

chiefly in

(some 36 times,

Mt. 6:2), (hawepd (once only,

1

Matthew, Luke and Paul, as

Cor. 15:

8).

the N. T., but only in composi(/) Tot does not occur alone in It is enclitic as in r/rot, KairoL, ixkvToi, but it comes first tion.

m

Toiyapovv

takes

take

to'lvvv.

to be a fixed

it it

and

The etymology

is

not certain.

Brugmann''

of the ethical dative col (rol).

form

Others^

Kuhner-Gerth as the locative of the demonstrative to. There seems no way it the locative of the indefinite tL

consider

seems to have the notion of restriction and in Homer is often combined with adversative particles. In the N. T. we find titol once (Ro. 6 16), KaiToi. twice (Ac. 14 five 17; Heb. 4:3), KairoLje once (Jo. 4:2), p.ePTOL eight times, Tim. 2 19), in John's Gospel as Jo. 4: 27 and once in Paul (2 of telling for certain.

But

it

^

:

:

:

TOLyapovp twice (1 Th. 4

20

:

25;

1

Cor. 9

:

:

8;

Heb. 12

26; Heb. 13

:

Gr., p. 257.

1

Monro, Horn.

2

Hartung, Partikellehre,

*

Biiumlein, Partikeln, p. 198.

*

K.-G.,

*

Monro, Horn.

I,

II, p. 168.

Gr., p. 257.

p. 327.

13).

:

1),

robw

"Omcos is

three times (Lu.

an adversative par-

«

Griech. Gr., pp. 402, 525.

'

Cf.

»

II, P- 149.

»

Horn. Gr.,

Monro, Horn. p. 252.

Gr., p. 252.

.

PARTICLES

1155

lIAI'AOIIKAl)

(aI

tide that occurs three times in the N. T. (Jo. 12 42, here with 15), twice with a participle. 7; Gal. 3 :

nevTOL; 1 Cor. 14

:

:

Negative Particles ((rT6pT|TiKa I irapaSTiKai).

III.

The

use of the

negative particles has been discussed already in various parts of the grammar in an incidental way in connection with the modes, verbal nouns and dependent clauses. But it is necessary at this point to treat the subject as a whole. It is not the logical negaMany words are negative tive that one has here to deal with.

which are positive in form. Thus "empty" is negative, Aristotle uses o-repr/rt/cos is negative, "death" is negative. It is in reality an ablative idea this negative conception.

in idea

"cold" for

as

(TTepecc

But the grammarian

implies.

make

those words that are used to

This

negative.

concerned simply with

the grammatical negative.

is

in Greek, as in English, negative

mon

is

positive words (or clauses)

negative Greek

post-fixes.^

There

are, indeed,

But there

is

a com-

prefix aiv) called alpha privative, Sanskrit

Gothic un, English un. In Sanskrit this prefix does not occur with verbs and is rare with substantives. It is there found chiefly with adjectives and participles.^ In Greek it occurs with verbs, but chiefly denominative verbs like drt/xafco.^ a(w),

Latin

The

use of d- (dv- before vowels)

common mation

in,

of

Words

Cf.

for details.

The Objective Ou and This

(a) Origin.

is

1

its

unknown.

in the

Greek

still

:

more

See the chapter on For-

adoKLfjLOS, d5t/cia, dxet^ijs,

(Ro.

aveXerj/jLo^v

acTVpOeroSf iicrTopyos, 1.

is

with adjectives and verbals.

aavperos,

28—30).

Compounds.

Hiibschmann^

sees a connection

with the Latin haud as do other scholars.^ Fowler^ takes it as an original intensive particle like pas in the French ne pas and -xl (Indo-Ger. -ghi) in ou-x'i- The Zend ava is also noted and the Latin au {au-fero)J But there is no doubt that ov in the Greek took the place of the Sanskrit nd, Latin ne- {nc-que, ne-scio; the relation of ne ne-quidetn, ne-quam to this ne is not known), Gothic ni. 1

2

The use

of the

Greek

oh

Anon., Notes on Negativo Postfixes in Gk. and Lat., 1SS4, Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 447.

3

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 529.

*

Cf Das

s

Cf. Gildcrsl.,

.

pp. 43 6

corresponds to the Sanskrit nd.

ff.;

indoffor.

HriiK.,

Vokal-Systom,

Am.

The Negatives

p. 191

.Jour, of Philol.,

Griech. Gr., p.

p. 6.

XVIII, pp.

4,

123

f.;

Horton-Smith,

ib.,

ry2S.

of the Indo-Eviroj). Lang., 1S96.

Cf. Delbriick, Grundr.,

IV, p. 519. ^ But Draeger (Hist. Synt., haud cannot be shown.

p. 133) say.s

that this connection with the Lat.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1156

As

History.

(h)

not hold

its

back as Greek goes we find

far

own with

/jlt]

but

ov,

in the progress of the language.

ov did

Within

the past century ov has become obsolete in

modern Greek outside few proverbs save in the Laconian and the Pontic dialects.^ The Pontic dialect uses kL from Old Ionic oM. But modern Greek has ov8e and ovre (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). In the Boeotian dialect, it may be noted, ov never did gain a place. We have seen ov8h used as an adverb, an idiom that goes back to Homer.^ Jannaris^ explains that the vernacular came to use ovSkv and nrjbev for emphasis and then on a par with oh and /ny. Then ovb'ev dropped oh and y.y]bkv lost b'ev, leaving bkv and ^157 for the modern of a

Greek.

At any rate this is the outcome. Aei- is the negative of modern Greek except after va and final clauses when va fXT] (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). And bh is the regular

the ind. in

we

find

negative in the protasis of conditional sentences both with ind. subj.* The distinction between oh and nrj did become more or blurred in the course of time, but in the N. T., as in the kolvt] generally, the old Greek idiom is very well preserved in the main.

and

less

Buttmann^ even thinks that the N. T. idiom here conforms more exactly to the old literary style than in any other point. Ah

may

(Rendel Harris, Exp., Feb., 1914, p. 163). Oh denies the reality of an alleged fact. It is the clear-cut, point-blank negative, objective, final.*' Jannaris^ comrepresent

(c)

fx-qbh

Meaning.

pares oh to indicative

and

OTL

mode and

are not wholly true.

word

as in ov

0r;/xt

ohK edco (Ac. 16

:

7)

to

fXT] /X17

tva,

while Blass^ compares oh to the

Sometimes, indeed, not merely 'I do not

= = 'I

But these analogies

to the other modes.

forbid.'

with the

oh coalesces

say,'

Cf. oh OeXo:

but

'I

(Mk. 9:

deny.'

So

30); ohK exw

(Mt. 13: 12); ohK ayvoeoi (2 Cor. 2 11). See also t6v oh \a6v in Ro. 9 25 (LXX) where oh has the effect of an adjective or a prefix. Delbriick^ thinks that this use of oh with verbs like the Latin ne-scio was the original one in Greek. In the LXX oh :

:

translates (d)

i^^.

Uses.

Here

it will

since the separate uses

1

Monro, Horn.

*

Thumb, Handb.,

6

Gr., p. 259.

brief

summary,

^

Hist.

Gk. Gr.,

p. 426.

Jebb, in V. and D., p. 339. Gr. of the N. T. Gk., Thayer's TransL, p. 344.

Cf.

p. 194

f.;

Thouvemin, Les Negations dans

229. 8

make a

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 182; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 425.

2

6

be sufficient to

have already been discussed in detail in

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253.

le

N. 7

»

T.,

Revue de

Hist.

Gk.

Philol., 1894, p.

Gr., p. 427.

Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 147.

PARTICLES

is to show how all the varied true meaning of the particle.

The point here harmony with the

the proper places. uses of ov are in

1157

nAPAGHKAl)

(aI

in both inThe Indicative. We meet ov with the indicative clauses. dependent dependent and Here the negative ov is universal (a) Independent Sentences. (i)

The force of ov with the indicative in declarative sentences. very powersometimes is aspirate) before ovx vowels, (ok before Cf. ovk kbwKart, ovk kiroTiaaTe,

the heavy thud of a blow.

ful, like

(Mt. 25 :42f.). The in the one ob in verse up gathered force against each other. 44. In verse 45 ov and ov8e are balanced over In Cf. ob wapkXa^ov in Jo. 1:1L See ovK lirecxev in Mt. 7:25. airijXeev. Mt. 21 29 see the contrast between kyo:, Kvpie and ovk till ov Note the progressive bluntness of the Baptist's denials alone ob In the N. T. out flat at the last (Jo. 1:21 f.).

ov avvr]yayeTe, ov Trepte/SaXere, ovk kireaKexl/aade

these negatives

of all

is

:

comes

prohibition, though occurs with the future indicative used as a (Mt. 5:21); the classic idiom sometimes had fxr]. Cf ob cj)ovevaei.s nr^Sha quotes Blass^ Still, obK eaeade ws ol vwoKpiral (6:5), etc. nature subjective The volitive uaa-fiaere in Clem., Hom., Ill, 69. .

of this construction well suits

In Mt. 16

suits the indicative. ob

end

at the

of a clause,

it

is

:

22, ob

When

in the prohibitive sense.

tiv

but

jui?,

ob is /xi?

more emphatic and we have

ecrrat aot tovto,

ob occurs alone

written ov as in ov,

fxi]

=

'no,' as

irore

(Mt.

O'i ov (2 Cor. 1:17). always expects in interrogative (independent) sentences ob between ob distinction a answer 'yes.' The Greek here draws

13:29); t6

But the

rather difficult to reproduce in English. The use to expect the anof a negative in the question seems naturally question. This the by challenged swer 'yes,' since the negative is Ob in questions it. to come we till may leave applies to ob. tQ> oQ bvbmn ob Mt. 22, Cf. 7 corresponds to the Latin nonne. whole long the of negative the is where ob

and

tx-h

that

is

m

We

:

kTrpocj^-nrdaa^ceu

kt\.,

not repeated with the other verbs. See further we have ob Mt. 13 55; Lu. 17 17; 1 Cor. 14 23. In 1 Cor. 9 1 in tone. sharper bit is a obxl form The four times (once ouxOone with have we fxv 39 Lu. 6 In 6. 12 Cf. Mt. 13 27; Lu. other the with and obxi bbriyfTiv; TV(l)\6v Tv4>\6s dbvarai

question,

and

is

:

:

question,

:

:

:

:

:

mi? tl

There is a els ^bdwov efireaovvTai; Ac. in ob 13 10, ob of use the in indignation tone of impatient 21 In Ac. 38, ovk ebdelas; ras Kvplov rod bSovs tcls 8La(TTpe(j)U)v (side

by

side) obxl antjiOTepoL

:

jravay

&pa ab

:

d

6 klyb-KTi-os;

the addition of apa 1

Gr. N. T. Gr., p. 254.

means

'as I supposed,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1158 but as of ov

I

now

and

see denied.'

NEW TESTAMENT

In Mk, 14: 60 note the measured use

^

tion of Christ's silence, koL ovk dTre/cpimro ovbkv. ni} TOLTjar}

and the

ov8ev in botii question, ovk airoKpivu ovbkv;

—

we come near having

liaKpoOvfiel ew' ahrols;

/cat

descrip-

In Lu. 18

:

ov

7, oh

in

/ir]

a question with the present indicative as well as with the aorist subjunctive. In a question like firi ovk exofxev; (1 Cor. 9:4) ov is the negative of the verb, while Cf. Ro. 10

:

In

18, 19.

question and ov in the other, 6

we have

the negative of the sentence.

we have

8

:

questions of possibility)

(e.g.

one part of the

Mk. 12 and Mark adds

17 (Lu. 20

used in questions of

is

in

/jlyi

Kara apdpwwov ravra XaXw,

fxt}

^ ov; as the alternative question,

Babbitt 2 holds that "ov questions

:

In Mt. 22

ravra ov Xeyet;

vofjios

is

/ii?

Cor. 9

1

is

ix-q

22;

:

Kal

rj

:

14)

r)

nrj.

while in other

fact,

used."

I

doubt the

correctness of this interpretation.

In declarative sentences the position of ov is to be noted when emphasis or contrast it comes first. Cf. ov and dXXa in Ro. 9:8. So ov yap dXX' 6 in 7: 15. In 7: 18 f. note ov- ov side for

—

by

side.

Cf. also position of ou in Ac. 1:5; 2 :15; Ro. 11 :18 (ov

— dXXd),

ah

(i8)

So dXX'

ovk

in

ky
But

as in independent sentences. tions

Cor. 6 :12.

1

In principle the use of oh

Subordinate Clauses.

there are

some

the same

is

special adapta-

which have already been discussed and need only

brief

men-

tion here.

In

clauses with the indicative oh

relative

as will be seen directly. clauses where pbvov

This

is

as in Mt. 10

:

:

:

where

jlh;

not an encroachment^ on

(Mt. 24:

the old Greek, as

we

Lu. 9

pi]

principal

and

Cf. 6 deXoi

and is

W.-Th., p. 511. Harv. Stu. in Class. W.-Th., p. 4S1.

oh

:

is

pri a4>edfj <S5e

\Wov idiom in

Xldos kwl

common enough

26 (Lu. 12:

2), ohSev kcrnv /cem-

Cf. Lu. 8:17,

where the second

in 10:

and Ro. 15:18

relative clause.

same* construction

'^

It is a

2).

it

ypcoadfj,

ohK exet.

1

Cf. oh

prj.

airoKa\v4)6r](jeraL.

relative has oh

2

see

by no means necessary, 50; 14: 33, etc.). The preceded by a negative

possible, but

is

38, 6s oh XaMiSdj^et (cf.

OS oh Kara\v9r]aerat

\vppkvov 6 ohK

being very few

true both with definite relative

use of oh in the relative clause which is

pi]

obviously natural, as in 2 Cor. 8 10, oinves oh (cf. Ro. 10 14; Jas. 4:14), and in indefinite

it is

— wpoevrjp^aade

relative clauses

almost the only

is

negative used in the N. T., the examples of

In

6 oh OeXcj

Mk.

4

:

for the negative oh in

25 note

(Ro. 7: 15, 19).

os

ex^i

and

with the relative in a question, as

ris

The Use of M17 in Questions, p. 307. Thouvemin, Les Negations, etc., p. 233 f.

Philol., 1901, *

os

Practically the

PARTICLES

(aI

1159

nAPAGHKAl)

Heb. 12:7. For further illustration Mt. 12 2; Mk. 2 24; Jo. 6 64; Lu. 14 27; Jo. 4 22; Ro. 15 21; Gal. 3 10; Rev. 9 4. In temporal clauses with the inflicativc ov comes as a matter of course.^ This is true of a definite note of time as in Ac. 22 11, cos ovK he^Xeirou, and of an indefinite period as in Jo. 4 21, ibpa Ac. 19:35;

eaTLv OS ov in

cf.

of ou with relative clauses see :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ore ovT€ (cf. also 9

:

4, vv^ ore oi'deis).

comes

In comparative clauses with the indicative the negative outside in the principal sentence, since comparison

made with a

(8:5);

riXirlaafJiev

We

do have

Cor. 10

:

14

So

positive note.

cos

om

et/xt

ibcnrep

ov KaOairep (2 Cor. 3

(Lu. 18

:

11); ovx

ovk aepa depcov in 1 Cor. 9

we have

ov yap,

cos

(j.r}


:

usually

is

13)

m^wj

ou

;

(Ro. 5

:

15

f.).

26 (participle) as in 2

:

e4>iKPovp,epoL,

where the two nega-

tives are in good contrast. local clauses likewise

In

dxev

yrjp iroWrju

the use of ov

(Mt. 13:5);

obvious, as in

is

oirov ov ^eXeis (Jo.

21

:

18.

6Trov ovk

Here the

very pointed); ov de ovk eanv vop-os (Ro. 4: 15). In causal sentences ov is not quite universal, though the usual negative. Cf Mt. 25 45 €0' 6aov ovk eTroirjaare ivl TOVTOiv T<j}V k\axi(yTO}v, (2:18) on ovk elaiv, (Heb. 6:13) evret Kar' ovdepos elx^P, (1 Cor. 14: 16) eTrecdri ovk oUev. See further Lu. 1:34; Jo. 8:20, 37; Ro. 11 6. In Heb. 9 17 eirel /xij rore [mt? TTore marg. of W. H.] taxwet may be a question as Thcophylact takes it, but W. H. do

ov is

:

.

:

:

But it is not a departure from anit so in the text. Greek idiom to have /X17 with the ind. in causal sentences as be shown. Cf. Jo. 3 18 with 1 Jo. 5 10.

not print cient will

:

:

In final clauses with the ind. oh does not occur. The reason for )ui7 in clauses of purpose is obvious even though the ind. mode be used (cf. Rev. 9 4, 20). It is only with clauses of apprehension :

that ov tion.

is

found with the verb when

Cf. 2 Cor. 12

:

20, 4>o^ovixai,

ixij

p.i]

ttcos

occurs as the conjuncovx

^vpo:.

But

this is the

not the ind. Cf. here ovx o'^ovs ^eXco and oloj^ ov deXere. Cf. /cat ov rts eVrat also Mt. 25 9. In Col. 2 8 we have /3X£7rcre Kara XpicTTOV. The Kal ov is in contrast with Kara to. crroix^ici tov Koa/jLov, though as a second negative it would properly be ou anysubj.,

—

fx-f]

:

:

—

—

obb't ouSe. Rev. 9 4 we have ha p,r] aZLK-qaovaiv This^ does seem unusual and is alm-ost an example of Iva ov. No example of a clause of result with a negative occurs in the indicative, but it would, of course, have oh. The use of ov in conditional sentences has already received

how.

But

in

:

N. T. Gk., p. 255. M. and T., p. 181.

1

Blass, Gr. of

»

Burton, N. T.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1160

adequate treatment. See Conditional Sentences, ch. on Mode. The details need not be gone over again here. There is no doubt of the fact that ei oh made encroachments on ei (xii in the later Greek.^ Blass^ puts it "in direct contradistinction to the classical language." Thouvemin^ likewise treats this use of ei oh as " contrairement a I'usage classique ou on le trouve exceptionnellement." It is only the frequency, the normality of d oh in the N. T. that is remarkable. This is in full accord with the kolvy)

—

development, since* in the modern Greek

used in

8ev "is regularly

the protasis of a conditional sentence, alike with the indicative

and with the subjunctive mood." So d 8ev Trj-yaipa, 'if I had not gone' (Thumb, Handh., p. 195). See Mt. 26:42; Lu. 12:26; Jo. 1 25; 3 12; 5 47; 10 35; Ro. 7 9; 8:9; 11 21; 1 Cor. 16:22; 2 Cor. 12:11; Heb. 12:25, etc. They are all condi:

:

:

:

:

:

tions of the first class (determined as fulfilled) save one of the

second class (determined as unfulfilled) in Mt. 26 24. In 26 42 ei oh and eav [xr] stand out sharply. It is so nearly the rule with conditions of the first class in the N. T. that it is hardly necessary :

to follow out the analysis of

accord ^\^th ancient usage. causal in Lu. 12

:

Cor. 16

Cf. also

ei

is

oh

:

make

and

Cf. also 2 Jo. 10, el ttolQi

:

f.,

denial, as

has

made

/cat

as

denial

e'L

tls oh

oh

4>'epei.

where the antithesis

See also the decisive negation in Jo.

all is said, ei oh

oh 8e

ei

9:2a

tls epxerat

el

in Jo. 10 37

take

in 1 Cor.

ei ohic eifxi

There are cases of emphatic 22).

TToioj

quite marked.

when

to bring the examples into

It is gratuitous to

26, or to

of a positive idea. (^tXet (1

Winer ^

:

distinct inroads

on

1

25.

:

ei

But, in the

fxi]

later Greek.

As

to the negative in indirect discourse with the indicative,

only remains to say that the use of oh

'6tl

oh irepl aprcov elirov hixiv;

(ii)

:

:

Cf.

11 note

where each negative has

ttcos

its

it

Mt. 16

:

oh voelre

own

force.

9.

The Subjunctive.

In

Homer

futuristic subjunctive^ as in oh 8e ristic

universal.

In 16

12, avvrJKav otl ohK elirev irpoaexeLV.

Cf. also 1 Cor. 6

is

use of the subj., as

we have

oh

was the negative with the

i'Swyuat,

Iliad,

1,

262.

This futu-

seen (Modes), largely passed over

to the future indicative,'^ so that oh disappears from the subjunctive almost entirely both in principal 1

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 429.

•

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254. Les Negations, etc., p. 233.

»

«

«

and subordinate

clauses.

Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., W.-Th., pp. 477 ff. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 198.

p. 339.

Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 498. Cf W. G. Hale, The Anticipatory Subjunctive in Gk. and Lat., Cornell Stu., 1895. 7

.

PARTICLES

One may compare the In Jer. 6

participles.

have

KaTOLKL(jdr)(TtTai

.

noted, that in the

:

final

8

B

(aI

nAPAGHKAl)

1161 with iirj where ^{AQ*

disappearance of ov before reads

tjtis

ou KaroiKLad^

It is to be remembered modern Greek bkv occurs

also,

as already

the

in

protasis

with subjunctive as well as with the indicative, as a biv TrtcT-rei/ps (Thumb, Handbook, p. 195). This is partly due, no doubt, to the obscuration of the oh in bkv, but at bottom it is the futuristic

We

have already noted the use of jui) obx in 2 <j)o0ovfj,aL, where the ov is kept with the idiom) to distinguish it from the conjunctional n-q.

use of the subj.

Cor. 12 20 with eupw after :

subj. (classic

a case of the futuristic subj., not volitive as in final clauses with IVa or orcos. In Mt. 25 9 the margin of W. H. has Tore ovK apKkaxi without a verb of fearing, though the notion It is also

:

IJLT)

The text has /X17 Trore oh fxrj. Jannaris^ boldly cuts the knot by denying that ixr] in oh nrj is a true negative. He Gordian makes it merely a shortening of ij.r]v. If so, all the uses of oh fxr) with the subj. would be examples of oh with the subj. Some of This view of Janthese, however, are volitive or deliberative. there.

is

naris

not yet accepted

is

among

scholars.

It

too simple a

is

though Jannaris argues that oh fj.7]v does occur as in Soph. El. 817, Eur. Hec. 401, and he notes that the negation is continued by ov be, not by jui) 5L Per contra it is to be observed that the modern Greek writes urip as well as ^17, as va niju elxe TrapdSes, 'because he had no money' (Thumb, Handh., p. 200). But, whatever the explanation, we do have oh (xri with the aorist We have had to discuss this point already subj. in the N. T. (Tense and Mode), and shall meet it again under Double Negatives. But in Jo. 18 11, ov ixi] ttico; the answer is in accord solution,

:

with

ov.

The

(iii)

Optative.

In the N. T. there are no instances of the It is only in wishes (volitive) that

use of oh with the optative.

the optative has a negative in the N. T. and that is naturally /X17.2 But this is just an accident due to the rapid disappearance of

There

the optative.

no reason why

is

with the potential optative

was always

ohx o

—

Koa/jLos,

The most

striking instance

:

18,

It is the

aXX' 6 KpvTTOS, kt\.

with dXX' that explains the use of ohx2

should not be found

which

rare.

The Imperative.

(iv) S}v earco

oh

(futuristic) or the deliberative

is 1

Pet. 3

:

3,

sharp contrast

Cf. also oh nbvov in 1 Pet.

where the participle stands in an imperative atmosphere. Gk. Gr.,

p. 433.

1

Hist.

2

RobertsoD, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 200.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1162

Cf. also ov with the inf. in the imperatival sense in 1 Cor. 5

:

10;

Elsewhere with the imperative we have fxij (xbvov Ov is used in an imperatival (Jo. 13 9; Ph. 2 12; Jas. 1 22). connection with the fut. ind. (Mt. 5 21) and in questions of like 2 Tim. 2

:

14.

:

:

:

:

nature (Ac. 13

10).

:

The Infinitive. It is common to say that in the N. T. ^ ov does not occur with the infinitive, not even in indirect assertion. In Homer and in the classic Attic we do find ov with the inf. in indirect assertion. This is usually explained on the ground that (v)

the ov belonged to the original indicative in the direct and

is

-Monro {Horn. Gr., p. 262) obSanskrit only finite verbs have the negative in the old serves that particles. This question received full discussion under Mode and Verbal Nouns. Only a brief word is allowed here. The oldest use of the negative in indirect discourse was in the form ov 4>r]aiv Scbcretv where oh formally goes with 4>r]aLv, but logically with dcoaeLv. From this use Monro conceives there came ov with the inf. itself. But the situation in the N. T. is not quite so simple as Blass^ makes it. In Jo. 21 25, ov8' avTov olfiai xo^prjaeLv, the negative does go with olixai. But this is hardly true in Mk. 7 24, nor in Ac. 26 26. Besides ov occurs in a number of clauses dependent on the inf., as in Heb. 7: 11; Ro. 8 12; Ac. 10 :41; Ro. 7:6; For the discussion 15: 20; Heb. 13 9; 1 Cor. 1 17; Ac. 19 27. simply preserved in the indirect.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

XX,

It is proper to 5, (J). have remnants of the old use of In Ro. ov with the inf., though in general /xi? is the negative. 15: 20 ovx oTTou after evayyeXi^eadat stands in sharp contrast with dXXd Kaddos. In 2 Cor. 13 7 we have //t) TOLrjaai v/jlcLs Kamv H7]bkv, dXX' I'ra where the ovx is clearly an addendum. Burton^ ovx explains eis oWeu XoyiadrjpaL in Ac. 19 27, "as a fixed phrase," but even so it is in use. Besides, there is ^n) Xo7o/xaxeTi' kw' ov8ev See also Kal ov after cocrre dovXevetv in XPWLfjLov in 2 Tim. 2 14. Ro. 7 6. The use of ov8ev with the inf. after ov with the prinCf. Mk. 7 12; Lu. 20 40; Jo. cipal verb is common enough. 3 27; 5 30; Ac. 26 26, etc. Burton ^ notes that in the N. T. ov iibvov occurs always (cf. Jo. 11 52; Ac. 21 13; 26 29; 27: 10; Ro. 4 12, 16; 13 5; 2 Cor. 8 10; Ph. 1 29; 1 Th. 2 8) except once )U77 iibvov in Gal. 4 18. The use of oh ixbvov occurs both in limiting clauses and in the sentence viewed as a whole. (vi) The Participle. There is little to add to what was given on

of these passages see Infinitive, ch.

we

say that in the N. T.

still

:

't-^o.

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Gk. Gr.,

1

Cf. Jann., Hist.

2

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.

p. 430.

'

N. T. M. and

*

lb., p.

183

f.

T., p. 184.

PARTICLES

11G3

HAPAOUKAI)

(aI

the subject of ov and nv with the participle under the Verbal AsGalloway ^ thinks pects of the Participle (see Verbal Nouns). that it was with the participle that ou was first used (as opposed to the Sanskrit negative prefix) before the infinitive had ov. At may simply accent any rate ou is well established in Homer.

We

the fact that the encroachment of nv on oii with the participle gives all the greater emphasis to the examples of ov which remain. Cf. 6 ovK &V TTOLii-qv (Jo. 10 12) cbs ovk Sepcoj/ (1 Cor. 9 26). :

There

no trouble

is

:

;

in seeing the force of ov

wherever we find

it

with the participle in the N. T. Here we see a further advance of the nega(vii) With Nouns. tive particles over the Sanskrit idiom which confined them to the The Greek usually employs the negative prefix with finite verb.

we have

So t6v ov. ctt' (LXX), ov \a6i> in Ro. 9 25 (LXX), ov \a6s in 1 Pet. 2 10 no is by this But OVK Wu€L in Ro. 10 19 (D3> ^)> Deut. 32 21). writers. Greek means a Hebraism, since it is common in the best ova e^ovaia in 5, 50. 3. Cf. oil SictXyo-is in Thuc. 1, 137. 4 and Cf. As Thayer well says, ov in this OVK apxtep€ws in 2 Mace. 4 13. nouns, but in a few instances in the N. T.

:

:

:

:

ri

17

:

construction "amiuls the idea of the noun." The use of ou to deny a single word is common, as in oii Ovaiav (Mt. 9: 13). Cf. In general for ov with exceptions see ovk kv OVK kn'e in Mk. 9 37. :

Cor.

ao4>lq. (1

1

:

17), oh ixkXavi (2

ovbtv xPWi-fJ^ov, it is possible

There

sense.

adjectives like ov ttoKKoI

v/orthy

Greek. 15

:

the litotes so

is

that xPWf-l^ov

of course, nothing

is,

ov ttoXu

Cf. net

ao(j)ol

(1

common (Ac. 27

14);

34);

:

What

12).

N. T. as

(ler'

aarjfxov :

14,

:

with note-

in the

older

wepas (Lu.

Cf. ovk

and

7ras

ov

is

ov TroXXds

(21:39).

Ou

I-k'

in the substantival

unusual in the use of in the

:

(Ac 17:4); ovk ov nerpius (Ac 20

is

Cor. 1:26).

13); ovk 6\iya

Tpov (Jo. 3

In 2 Tun. 2

Cor. 3:3).

ttSs ov

k

/xe-

have

received discussion under Adjectives, and so just a word will Ov iraca aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39) is 'not every kind of suffice. :

Cf. ov TravH Tc3 Xac3

flesh.' Trai'TaJS

(1

Cor. 5

means 'no

:

10).

flesh,' like

10: 41); ov Tavres (Mt. 19 11); oil ovk av kacoOrj Traaa aap^ (Mt. 24:22)

(Ac

:

But the Hebrew

t^^-^i.

The

construction in S>iioptic

both senses

is

more common

Gospels.

is

perhaps worth while to note the use of

It

in

John than

in

the

ovSev or

oWkv (1 Cor. 13 2) as an a])straet neuter in the ])redioate. In general, attention should be called to the distinction made by the Greeks l)etween negativing a word and a sentence. This is :

one reason »

On

why

with the

im])(T., subj.

and

inf.

we

find ov with

the Ubc of M17 with the PurticMplc iu Class. Gk., 1S97, p. 6.

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1164

words or phrases, where

single

the normal negative of the

is

n-f]

NEW TESTAMENT

clause.

In general when a positive clause is followed by a Kal ov as in classic Greek. Cf. Ro. 7:6 (with as in Heb. 7:11). See also Col. 2 8, 19. So Lu. 8 U, owKal Ov.

(e)

we have

negative inf.

:

we

a peculiar case, 6

37, Kal

:

/JLT]

find Kal

Kplvere Kal ov

:

Mt. 9 13. Once, indeed, in connecting two negative clauses, Lu.

irvlyovTaL Kal ov Te\ea(f)opov(nv.^

fxr]

Cf.

:

Kpidrjre.

There is one instance of ov (/) Redundant or Pleonastic Ov. in indirect discourse where it is pleonastic according to the classic idiom (see also the French ne). It is in 1 Jo. 2 22, 6 apvovfxevos OTL 'Itjctovs ovk ecTLv. Some MSS. have the pleonastic ov in :

Mk.

9

39.

the

tive,

full

Ov.

of

'Icxtlv

€/c

second

the

retained.

is

same

of ov in the

ov irapa tovto ovk

f.,

When

force of each

two examples

find

15

:

Repetition

(g)

It

is is

a single negaseldom that we

clause, as in 1 Cor. 12

tov au/jLaTos, 'It

is

not of the body.' There are instances of ov followed by where both preserve the full force, Ac. 4 20, ov dwafxeda

—

:

Cf

\a\eLv.

.

also ov

—

^117

in 1 Cor.

9:6.

So also

:

not therefore

6

/xt?

p.ri

woLciv 81-

p.rj

eanv e/c tov deov (1 Jo. 3 10). Cf. 5 12. The examples are numerous enough when the second ov is in a dependent clause. So ov8ev yap kaTiv KeKa\vpp.kvov 6 ovk aT0Ka\vcf)6r](T€TaL (Mt.

KaLoavvr]v ovk

10

:

26);

ttcos

:

:

ov voelre otl ov, kt\. (16: 10); ov

XaXelv uv

To\p.r](jco tl

ov KareLpyaaaro XpiffTOs (Ro. 15 :18); ovk oI'5are otl

— ov

KkripovoyLr]-

aovdiv (1 Cor. 6:9). In Mt. 24:2 ov follows ov p.rj. See also Lu. 8 17. The uses of ju?) ov and ov nrj are treated later. But note ov, p.r] TTore kptfcoo-T/re (Mt. 13 29) where ov stands alone. :

—

The solemn

:

repetition of ov

— ou in

Cor. 6

1

:

10

is

rhetorical.

Compound Negative. We have seen how ov can be made stronger by xl (ovxl, as in Lu. 1:60). Brugmann^ considers this an intensive particle and different from The

(h)

Intensifjdng

the Homeric^ ou5e

was

which

kL (ov-kL)

so printed in Homer.* 29.

is

hke

tl (kls,

kl,

tls,

originally just ov 8e ('and not,' 'but not')

The form

ov8eis is

tl).

and

So also is

often

In the sense of 'not even' see Mt. 6

:

intensive also, originally 'not one indeed'^

and was sometimes printed ov8i els (Ro. 3 10) for even stronger emphasis. But ov tls also occurs (Jo. 10:28). Cf. also ov8e :

—

TLS

(Mt. 11: 27);

W. H.

o^»

8{jvri

eTL

(Lu. 16

2); oure

:

—m

(Ac. 28

:

1

Cf.

*

Griech. Gr., p. 528.

*

lb.

»

Monro, Horn.

^

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 528.

S. Jones., CI. Rev.,

Gr., p. 259.

Mar., 1910.

21);

;

PARTICLES

—

nAPAOHKAl)

(aI

occurs in Homer.

The adverbial form The form oWels (cf. Ac. 26

omen (Mt.

Ovkovv

ov

Pet. 1:21).

TTore (2

1165 occasionally

ov8ev

which flourished for a limited period in the kolvt], has already had sufficient discussion. Various other compound negatives were built up on ovdeiroTe (Mt. 7 23) ou, as oudafxois (Mt. 2:6); ov8eiroi (Jo. 20 9) lost its

:

6).

:

was used so much

negative force (Jo. 18

:

26),

;

:

19

:

37), unless

in questions that

one writes

it

ovkovv.

it

These compound negatives OvTe is, of course, only ov and rt. merely strengthen the previous negative. This emphatic repetition of the compound negative was once good vernacular in both English and German, but

gave way in literary circles It was always good Greek.

it

before the influence of the Latin.^

This discussion does not apply to subordinate clauses (as in Jo. 8 20) where each negative has its own force. The use of ov8e and ovre belongs to the discussion of conjunctions (cf. ovre :

—

ovT€ — ov8e

but the examples in the N. T. of the Farrar^ gives ov are numerous. some good illustrations of old English. *'No sonne were he never so old of years might not marry," Ascham, Scholemaster. Modern in Ac. 24: 12

f.),

compound negatives with

other

English vernacular refuses to give up the piling-up of negatives. "Not nohow, said the landlord, thinking that where negatives

more you heard of them the better" (Felix Holt, ii, 198). Again: "Whatever may be said of the genius of the English language, yet no one could have misunderstood the query of the London citizen. Has nobody seen nothing of never a hat not their own?" So likewise the Hebrew uses two negatives to strengthen each other (cf. 1 Ki. 10 :.21; Is. 5 9). A good example is Mk. 5:3, ov8e omeTi ov8eis. So ovSels ovirco (11:2). The commonest are good, the

:

kind of example

is

like ov 8vva<7de TvoLelv ou8ev (Jo. 15

:

Cf. 2

5).

Another instance of triple negative is Lu. 23:53, The ov is sometimes amplified^ by ovre ovK rjv ov8€ls ouTTO). ov8e as in Jo. 1 25. ovre as in Mt. 12 32, as well as by ov8e Plato shows four negatives, ov8epl ov8a(JLfi ov8aixa)S ovSenlav KOLVWvlav Cor. 11:8.

—

—

:

(Phaedo 78

d).

as ov8€v ov

fxr]

(Heb. 13

power

:

The combinations with (Lu. 10

5); otVert ov

of this

19); ov

fxi}

jxi]

(Rev. 18

I'll

is

/jltj

may

:

14).

There

also be noticed,

txi]

is

at kyKaToKliru)

no denying the

Cf. the English

hymn

never, no, never, no, never forsake."

The Disjunctive Negative.

one thing

ov

ae avw ov8' ov

accumulation of negatives. "

(i)

:

:

We

denied that another

»

W.-Th., p. 499.

'

»

Gk. Synt.,

*

p. 189.

frequently have ov

may

"where Here

be established."'*

Cf. W.-Th., p. 499. Thayer's Lex., p. 461.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1166 there

is

sharp antithesis.

Jas. 2 :11, or

oi;

— dXXd

The

as in

simplest form

Mt. 15

:

11;

Mk.

ov

is

5

:

—

as in

8e

39; Lu. 8:52;

In Jo. 7 22 we have In Ph. 4 11 ovx otl ocIn 2 Cor. 7 9 we have ovx on curs alone without dXXd. dXX' OTL. In 1 Jo. 2:21 we have ovk eypa^pa iifuv otl dXX' 6tl where

Ac. 5

4; 1 Cor. 15

:

— aXKa,

ovx oTL

:

10; 2 Cor. 3

as also in Ph. 4

:

:

3, etc.

:

17.

:

—

:

—

more naturally we might expect eypaxpa ovx Winer makes rather overmuch of the possible 1

— dXX'

6tl.

rhetorical

dis-

otl

between the varying shades of emphasis in the differdXXd occur. Cf further ovx dXXd dXX' 'iva (Jo. 3 17). (Jo. 6 :38); ovx Iva We usually have ov dXXd Kal (Jo. 5:18; Ro. 1:32, etc.), but sometimes fjLopou merely ov novov dXXd (Ac. 19 26; 1 Jo. 5:6). Sometimes the negative is not expressed, but is to be supplied in thought as in Mt. 11 7-9. Then again we may have only the negative as in ov ^pwfxaaLv (Heb. 13: 9), leaving the contrast to be supplied in the thought. The contrast may even be expressed by kuI ov as in Mt. 9 13, eKeos de\co Kal ov dvaiav (LXX). But we have already tinctions

ent contexts where ov

—

'(-'fa

.

—

—

:

—

—

:

:

:

entered the sphere of the conjunctions as in the parallel ovt€

—

So 3 Jo. 10. 2. The Subjective Negative M?; and Its Compounds. The Ionic, Attic and Doric dialects (a) The History of M17. have fxr], the Eleatic has ixd, like the Sanskrit mti. In the old Sanskrit ma was used only in independent sentences, while ned occurred in dependent clauses.^ In the later Sanskrit 771a crept into the dependent clauses also. It was originally a prohibitive particle with the old injunctive which was in the oldest Sanskrit always negative with ma.^ In the later Sanskrit ma was extended to the other modes. In the Greek we see fxi] extended to wish and then denial.^ Wharton^ undertakes to show that is primarily an interrogative, not a prohibitive or negative particle, but that is more than doubtful. Already in Homer "pi] had established itself in a large and complex variety of uses, to which we have to appeal when we seek to know the true nature of the modal constructions as we come to them."^ The distinction between ov and prj goes back to Indo-Germanic stock and has Kai in Jo.

4:11.

fx-f]

1

W.-Th., pp. 495

2

Thompson, Thompson,

'

6

The Gk.

in Questions,

Moulton,

ff.

Synt., p. 448; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 528. ib., p.

499.

*

Indirect Negative, 1892, p.

Harv. Stu. (Goodwin Prol., p. 170.

Vol.).

1.

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 260.

Cf. also Babbitt,

The Use

of Mt?

.

PARTICLES

1167

IIAPAGHKAI)

(aI

survived into modern Greek.

But from the very

inroads on

occupies

ov,

so that finally

fx-f]

much

start

nrj

made In the

of the field.

modern Greek fxi] is used exclusively with participle, in prohibitions and with the subj. except in conditions, and occurs with vd Gildersleeve^ has shown in a masterly way (vd fxri) and the ind.

how

luT]

side of

shows

made el

is

ov,

continual encroachments on

the advance of

ov.

In the N. T., out-

quite distinct, as Gildersleeve

So as to the papyri and the

true even of Lucian.

The exact

tions.

is

/jlti

Attic refinements between ov and

/it?

inscrip-

are not

reproduced, though on the whole the root-distinction remains.^ (6)

Significance

of

Max

Mr].

Miiller^ gives

an old Sanskrit

phrase, 7na kaphaltiya,' not for unsteadiness,' which pretty well It is an "unsteady" particle, a hesian indirect or subjective denial, an effort to prewhat has not yet happened. It is the negative of

gives the root-idea of

ij.r].

tating negative,

vent (prohibit) will, wish, doubt.

If ov denies the fact,

made one advance on

We

see this use of

ma

conjunctional use of

fir}

fxr}

is

denies the idea.

Mri

to be used as a conjunction.

in the late Sanskrit.'' ^^7

•both fear and purpose.^

where

came

It

ov.

But the

origin of this

undoubtedly paratactic in clauses of

It is

suggests 'perhaps.'

obviously so in indirect questions^

CampbelF argues

that "the whole

This is an extreme position, but there is no doubt a border-line between ov and fxT} which is very narrow at times. One's mood and tone have much to do with the choice of ov or nrj. Cf Jo. 4 29, n-q TL ovros eaTLu 6 Xpcaros; where oi) would have challenged the opposition of the neighbours by taking sides on the question whether The woman does not mean to imply Jesus was the Messiah. flatly that Jesus is not the Messiah by using i^-q tl, but she raises the question and throws a cloud of uncertainty and curiosity over In a word, jii] is just the negait with a woman's keen instinct. tive to use when one does not wish to be too positive. M17 leaves the question open for further remark or entreaty. Ov closes the

question of the Greek negatives

indeterminate."

is

.

door abruptly.*^

The

LXX

uses

jjlt]

for

:

b^^.

Encroachments of Mj? on Ov in Later Gk., Am. Jour, of Philol., I, pp. 45 IT. Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Cf. also Birke, De Particularuni ^ui? et ov Usu Polybiano Dionysiaco Diodoreo Straboniano, 1897, p. 14 f. ^ Oxford Inaufjural Lecture, Note C. * Thompson, Synt., p. 448. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 192 f 1

''

lb. T

On

8

Cf. Postgatc, Contrasts of Oh

Soph. Trach., 90.

and

M17,

Cambridge

Philol. Jour., ISSG.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1168

NEW TESTAMENT

Uses of M17. In general we may follow the outline of ov. Blass^ expounds the two negatives by say(i) The Indicative. ing that "ov negatives the indicative, ixi] the other moods, includ(c)

and

ing the infinitive

participle."

But, unfortunately, the case

"In reviewing Blass, Thumb makes the important addition that in modern Greek bh belongs to the indicative and ^ii}{v) to the subjunctive." ^ But b'ev occurs in the protasis with the subj. in modern Greek, as we have seen. Besides, as Moulton^ adds, "/xi? has not been driven away from the indicative" in the N. T. It may be said at once that ixi] with not so simple as that.

is

the indicative

Homer

already in

The

as old as historic Greek.^

is

gests that originally

was not used with the

/xi?

Sanskrit sug-

But

indicative.

occurs with the indicative in prohibition,

ixi]

"The essence of these idioms is the which shows itself in the combination of the imperative tone particle with the mood proper to simple assertion." But in the N. T. we no longer have p.T] with the fut. ind. in prohibition, wish, oath, fear, question.^

—

—

"^

except in case of oh

ixij.

In independent sentences we have in questions.

and

of oh

is

very distinct from that maintained in the N. T. Greek without real weaken-

In Jo. 21:5,

ing."'^

with the indicative only

^i]

"It's use in questions

iraibla,

tl

fir]

is

Tpo(7(l)ayLov

typical example with the answer ov.

we have a

ex^Te;

Blass ^ expresses needless

Moulton rightly ex4:33; 7:26; and Ro. 11:1, mi? airdiaaTo;

objection to this "hesitant question," as

pounds

it.

Cf.

Jo.

with the answer in verse

2,

ouk

airooaaTo.

See Jo. 7:51, where

Nicodemus adroitly uses nr] in a question and the sharp retort of the other members of the Sanhedrin fxr] Kal av; The difference between oh and in questions is well shown in Jo. 4 33, 35. In the use of fxr] the answer in mind is the one expected, not always ij.r]

:

the one actually received as apostles at the last passover. /3et;

I,'^

much 1

illustrated in the question of the

They

all

asked

^17 rt e7cb el/xi,

pa^-

The very thought was abhorrent to them, 'It surely is not But Judas, who did not dare use oh, received the affirmative

answer, ah

*

is

etvras

like ohxi

(Mt. 26

:

25).

M57 tl

comes to be used intensively

(both chiefly in questions).

In the case of

/xt)

ov

2 Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. lb. De ix-q Particulae cum Indicativo Conjunctae Usu Antiquiore, 1876. =•

Vierke,

Monro, Horn.

« lb., p. 261. Gr., pp. 260 ff. Moulton, Prol., p. 170 f Moulton gives an interesting note on the use of iraiBia as "lads" in the mod. Gk. 8 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254. 9 lb., p. 254.

5

^

.

:

PARTICLES in questions (Ro. 10

17f.;

1

terrogative particle while ov

is

:

1169

HAPAOUKAI)

(aI

Cor. 9 :4f.; 11:22)

mi?

the in-

is

the negative of the verb.

In dependent clauses nrj occurs with the indicative with the second class conditions (el idii) always except in Mt. 2G 24 (Mk. 14 21). Cf. d ixrj in Jo. 15 22, etc. There are also four instances with the ind. in conditions of the first class.^ So Mk. 6:5; of d 15 Cor. 2; 2 Cor. 13 5; Gal. 1 7. We have iirj in a few relative 1 :

:

:

fjLrj

:

:

clauses, as a

:

Set (Tit. 1

/xi)

6

m

is

a certain aloofness about

oiJLoXoyel (1 Jo.

4

:

3,

11);

:

W. H. fxi]

w

TrapecTLv ravra (2 Pet. 1:9);

m^?

There

D.

Cf. Ac. 15 29

text).

:

here that one can feel as in Plato

who, "with his sensitiveness to subtle shades of meaning, had in an instrument singularly adapted for purposes of reserve, irony, This use of txrj with the relative and pohteness or suggestion." ^ indicative is clearly a remnant of the literary construction.^ This (jL-q

literary use of

ixr]

with the relative was often employed to characa subjective way the relative. There is a soli-

terize or describe in

tary instance of 18),

may

which

fxi] in a causal sentence, be contrasted with on ov

6tl

fxij

TeirlaTevKep (Jo. 3

ireirlaTevKep (1 Jo.

5: 10).

For OTL ixri exets see Epictetus, IV, 10. 34, and 6tl aoL ov, IV, 10. 35. Radermacher (N.T. Gr., p. 171) quotes ^ao-i;^ on /xri 5eT, Diog. of Oinoanda, Fragm. IV, 1. 9. There is, besides, kwei fxij roTt Laxvei in Heb. 9 17, according to the text of W. H., though they give In that case (the marginal had'eixivo%; in the margin eirel ni] irore reading) fii] iroTe would introduce a question. See further Causal with the ind., as in Clauses. In clauses of design we have iW Rev. 9 4, I'm jut) aSLKrjaovaLv. The margin of W. H. in 13 17 has :

—

/jltj

:

:

with the ind. after verbs of apprehension as not originally a conjunction, but m'? in the sense of 'perhaps' (paratactic, not hypotactic). So Lu. 11:35, 'im

Moulton^ explains

TLs bbvarai.

p.r}

cTKoret

jxr]

to

Gal. 4: 11;


1

— aKOTos

ecxTiv.

Th. 3:5.

Moulton {ProL, p. The use (ii/B.c).

The

liT]

Cf. also Col. 2

:

8;

Heb. 3

:

12;

papyri give abundant parallels.

193) cites ajbivLoo

/xi?

Trore appcoffrei:,

P. Par. 49

of /xi? as a conjunction in clauses of design and fear with the indicative is parallel to the use of the negative particle nv, but does not fall here for discussion. After all that has been said it is obvious (ii) The Subjunctive.

that

/X17

volitive

was destined to be the negative of the subj., first of the and deliberative uses and finally of the futuristic also.

The few remnants cussed.

For the

1

Moulton,

2

Thompson,

have already been disnormal and universal negative of the

of ov with the subj.

rest the

Pro!., p. 171.

Synt., p. 441.

'

Moulton,

*

lb., p. 192.

Prol., p. 171.

subj. fxi]

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1170 is

fXT].

Cf.

bOiixev; (cf. o{;

evKaKcciiev

fjirf

just before),

In

(Gal. 6:9).

we

how

see

well

Mk.

12

:

14, dci/xev

rj

suits this delibera-

/itj

The use of /x^ with the aor. subj. in prohibitions need not be further stressed. Wherever the subj. in a dependent clause has a negative (save after the conjunction ixi] after verbs of fearing) the negative is jut?. Cf os av fxri exv (Lu. 8:18); IVa /xt) tive question.

.

e\dT]Te

(Mk. 14:

(iii)

It

The

It

38), etc.

is

more examples.

needless to give

wish that uses

It is only the optative of

Optative.

juiy.

rare to have the negative precative optative in the old

was

is used with the optative for But already in Homer with the a future wish. In the N. T. there is no example of yepoiTo, as in Ro. optative except in wish. It is seen chiefly in 3:4, 6, 31; Gal. 6 14, etc. But note also the curse of Jesus on

Sanskrit.^

/jltj

/x-f]

ij.ri

:

the fig-tree in

Mk.

11

14,

:

ixrjSels

Kaprov

(payoL.

The Imperative. It seems that the imperative was originally used only affirmatively and the injunctive originally only negatively with ma. The oldest Sanskrit does not use 771a with the imperative.2 In Homer we find once ni] evdeo (II., IV, 410) and once nij KaraBvaeo (/?., XVIII, 134) and once nrj a.KovaaTc>3 (Ocl, (iv)

301). The second person aorist imper. in prohibitions did not take root and the third person only sparingly (in the N. T.). See Mt. 6:3, /xi) TJ^wrco.^ The original negative injunctive appears in the form /xi? iroL-qarjs (Latin 7ie feceris). The imperative

XVI,

uniformly.

between

^117

and uses fxr] For the difference

of this construction

Greek follows the analogy

in

nv imol kotovs irapexe. with the present imperative and

Cf. Lu. 11

:

7,

subjunctive see Tenses and Modes.

with Lu. 12 11, (Mt. 10 28, 31).

iJ.r)

:

and

Mk.

For a dehcate turn from

with the aorist

iirj

13

m'7 (f^o^etade

It is obviously natural for

:

the imperative.

fxepLfxprjarjTe,

Cf.

firj

:

21,

with

fxi]

firj

Trto-rei-ere, 4)o(3rjdfJTe

to be used with

oh to nrj see Jo. 10

:

37.

T. Gr., p. 171) cites ovded k^earo: from an inscr. (Benndorf-Niemann, ReiseTi in Lykieti und Karieyi, 129 N.

But Radermacher (V. 102).

The Infinitive. As we have already seen, the oldest Sanskrit did not use the negative particles, and in Homer* oh appears to be the original negative. But there are a few instances of p.i] with the inf. in Homer. They occur when the inf. is used as an imperative (cf. in the N. T. 1 Cor. 5 9; 2 Th. 3 14), for an oath, a (v)

inf.

:

:

thus from the imperative and crept into constant use with the inf.

wish or an indirect command. other finite modes that »

Thompson,

2

Yb ^ p, 495

/xi?

Synt., p. 499. f.

It

is

^

lb.

^

Monro, Horn.

Gr., p. 263.

PARTICLES It

came

IIAPAOIIKAI)

(aI

to be the normal idiom with the

1171

outside of indirect

inf.

and in antithetical or emphatic phrases (see under ov). Thompson! challenges the statement of Gildcrsleeve: "Not till the infinitive came to represent the indicative (in indirect stateassertion

ment) could ov have been tolerated with the infinitive." Thompson adds: ''But this toleration is established in Homer." Just as make inroads on ov in other constructions (cf. partiwe saw ciples), so it was with the inf. Even in indirect statement n-q came to be the rule (cf. the Atticist Lucian). Even in the Attic ov did not always occur with the inf. in indirect statement.^ The facts as to the use of fxij with the inf. in the N. T. have been fjLT)

already given (see Infinitive and Indirect Discourse). instance, \eyov<jLV dpaaraaLP

for

Cf.,

18); aireKpidrjaap

:

firi

In short, Blass^ says that in the N. T. 'V17 used throughout." That is not quite true, as we have seen, but

eldemi (Lu. 20 is

(Mk. 12

elvai

fx-q

:

7).

the limitations have already been given under Tavra

8e eSet TOirjaai naKetva

jjlt]

XaXelv after ov dwafxeda (Ac. 4

fjLT}

Here

fxr)

Cf. Tov dta t6

retains its full value.

(Ac. 21

fjiT]

txi]

(Mt. 13

12); irpds to

:

5); rc3

:

ixi)

:

14.

:

42,

:

The use

of

20) has already

been noticed. need not pursue the matter.

We /jltj

Cf. Lu. 11

ov.

Cf. 21

irapeLvai.

(2 Cor. 3

(2 Cor. 2

:

13);

eis

13); ciare

pi]

:

to

nrj (4:4); (Mt. 8 28), :

The redundant or pleonastic use of pi] with the inf. has likewase come up for consideration under the Infinitive. In Lu. 20 27 some MSS. read avTL-\k.'yovT€s and thus pi] is redundant after avTi-, but ^{BCDL do not have avTL-. Then in 22 34 J
:

:

:

redundant

of the use of the

pi]

in the

N. T.

eKdetv,

(24

biKTov eaTLV TOV

TO.

eiriyvoivaL avTov.

See also Lu. 4: 42;

this pleonastic

15

:

It

22).

note Ac. 10

Here

vai;

pi]

(TKCLpdaXa

pi]

1

Pet. 3

pi]

47, tl

pi] tl

is

Cf. -Lu. 17

:

:

1

avh-

eKpaTOVVTO tov

16)

by no means necessary

is

does not usually occur with :

:

10; Gal. 5 (cf.

kcoXuco in

:

pi]

But

7.

Ac. 8 :36; Ro. the N. T., but

to v8o)p bhvaTai Koikvcfai rts tov

pi] ^aTTTiaOrj-

the interrogative particle expecting the an-

redundant afte^ /cwXueti'. But in Ac. 24: 23 We do not have pi] ov with the inf. in the N. T. Here (after oi) pi] stancis alone and is not redundant (cf. Ac. 4: 20) or is redundant (20 20, 27), as the case may be. The use of pi] and pi] ov was not compulsory in the ancient Greek.'' swer

'no,'

py]bkva is

while^^

is

not pleonastic.

:

jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 430.

'

Synt., p. 414.

s

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.

*

Cf.

«

Goodwin, M. and

T., pp. :521IT.;

Thompson,

Synt., pp. 425

fT.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1172 (vi)

NEW TESTAMENT

The Participle. We have seen already how the oldest Sannot use the negative particles with the participle. In we have only one instance of ix-q with the participle {Od.,

skrit did

Homer

IV, 684). 1

But

JU17

made

gradually

way with

participles even has driven oh entirely In the N. T. oh still hangs on, as we have its

In the modern Greek

in Attic Greek.

/ii?

from the participial use. but that is all. The drift of the KOLvi] is for ^17, and a writer like Plutarch shows it.^ Mi] is the usual negative of the participle. The details were given in connection with Participles. In the N. T. we need pay no attention to the Attic refinements on this point, which were not always observed even there. We have /X17 with the participle in the N. T. as a matter of course. Cf. Mt. 12 30 6 d)U and 6 nrj awayoov, (1 Tim. 5 bkovra, (Lu. 13) to. 4 35) ixr]Uv ^Xaxl^av, (Ac. 20 22) fiij eiddos. In Mt. 22 11 f. and 1 Pet. 1 8, a distinction, as was shown, seems to be drawn between oh and JU77 with the participle, Cf. Mt. 18 25; Lu. 12 33; Jo. 7:15; Ac. 9:9; 17:6; 1 Th. 4 5 (cf. Gal. 4:8), etc. The do^vnright denial of oh lingered on awhile in the kolvyj (cf. papyri), but nr] is putting oh to rout.^ The ancient Greek* used jui? with substantives as (vii) Nouns. 6 /X17 larpos (Plato, Gorg. 459 b), adjectives as ol /xi] Kadapol (Ant. V. 82), or adverbs as to nij kfiiroSuv (Thuc. ii, 45. 1). In the N. T., so far as I have noticed, fxrj with substantives and adjectives occurs only in contexts where it is natural. Thus in Lu. 10 4, fxri TTjpav, fifi viTodriixaTa, we have just before ^tj) /3ao-Td^ere ^aWavTLov. In Jo. 13 9, p.i] rovs woSas ijlov {jlovov, we have no verb, but vLTTTe is to be supplied from the preceding sentence. Cf. also Eph. 5 15; Jo. 18 :40. So in Ro. 12 11 jui) oKvrjpoi is in the midst of participles used in an imperatival sense. In 1 Tim. 3:3, fxri TrapoLVov, fxr] T\r]KTr]v, the construction is del elvai. This infinitival construction is carried on in verse 6 (in spite of the parenthesis in verse 5) by fxri vt64>vrov. So as to verse 8 and Tit. 1 7. There is no difficulty as to the use of txi] in Col. 3 2 and 2 Th. 3 6. id) The Intensifying Compounds with M77. The same story in the main that we found with oh is repeated with ixij. There is no jx-qxi, but we have /iijrt in this sense. The examples in the N. T. are all in questions (cf. Mt. 7: 16: Jo. 18 35) except one, d ixi}Ti (Lu. 9 13). The position of ni) may give it emphasis as in Jas. 3 1 (cf. oh in Mt. 15 11). The use of the compound seen,

jjii)

:

/jltj

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

1

2

Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 263. Thompson, Synt., p. 255.

:

'

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 231

^

Thompson,

Synt., p. 410

f.

f.

PARTICLES

nAPAGUKAl)

(aI

negative as a second (or third) negative

the negative as (Ac. 25

:

24) ewi^ooovTes

(Ac. 27:33),

firjdev

delu avTov 7)

—

/jltj

simply to strengthen

is

11

14

:

/xT/xtrt /x-qdels (payoL,

(Ro. 13

//ij/ceri,

frji'

Besides

etc.

fj-rjdh,

8) firioevl

:

nrjdeis

there

in the sense of 'not even'

ixrjdk

Tim. 3:7), (margin of W. H.

(Mt. 6:1),

AH77€

3),

:

Mk.

Cf.

ov.

(jltj

(2 Cor. 13

fi7]8iv 64)el\eTe,

is

true of

is

1173

(2

ix-q^kiroTe

/x'jSeTrw

(Eph. 5 (Heb. 11: 7),

:

(Mk. 9 25), p-ij-KOTe in Heb. 9 17. Elsewhere in the N. T. a conjunction), firjdafiCJs (Ac. 10 14), /iriTrov (Ac. 27:29), tivwcc (Ro. 9:11), tir,TLye (1 Cor. 6:3), fivrts (2 Th. 2:3). MijTTcos is only a conjunction in the N. T. If nij is MTy/cert

:

:

:

by

followed

ov as in 1 Jo. 3

10, 6

:

ovk

ttolojv 8iKai.oavvr]v

fxi]

So

Tov deov, the last negative retains its force.

kK

i(XTi.v

Ac.

vice versa in

a sharp contrast between tl and fxrjdep (both neuter abstracts referring to a person.). We saw that after a positive statement the nega(e) Kai JU17. tive was carried on by /cat ov. So also we have /cat /xr] as in Eph. 4 26, opyl^eade /cat /zi) d)uaprdv6T€, and in Lu. 1 20; 2 Cor. 12 21 0o/3oi) dXXd XdXet /cat /it) (ncoTrjcrjjs, where In Ac. 18 9 note a positive command comes in between the two examples of /ii). KaraKavxaade Kai xpevSeade Kara rrjs In Jas. 3 14, per contra, a\r]deias, the negative /xiy seems to cover both verbs connected by Cf. also Lu. 3 14. We have instances /cat rather than fxr]8e. also of /cat connecting a clause with the conjunction fii] Trore (Mt. In Lu. 14 29, tva ix-q Trore dhros avrov difxk13 15; Mk. 4 12). ^ ap^oovrai, we have fxr] Trore with ap^oovrat and \iov /cat jut) lax^ovTOS 4 20.

In Gal. 6

:

3 there

:

is

:

:

:

:

fj.ri

iJ.r\

:

:

:

:

:

—

JUT]

with iaxvovTos.

Use

(/) Disjunctive

trast

have 4)o^ov

is

p77

/jltj

oXka

In Lu. 10

XdXet,

Ac. 18

Cor. 6

dXXd

:

Kat.

10

:

20,

yui)

:

We

9.

6rt in

:

12.

simplest form of this con-

x^tpere

— xatpere

Then we

8e.

/xi)

have 6rt

fxi]

—

5^

—

iv\i}v

in Lu. 23

Moulton

6rt.

the N. T., but considers

3 as tantamount to

So Ph. 2

/xt)

tovtov dXXd tov Bapa^l3a.v, Jo. 18:40;

20 we really have

:

240) does not find 1

The

of Mr].

— 8e as in Lu. — dXXd as in

fjL-f]

We

See Jo. 13

it.

:

9 for

/jltj

28.

{Prol.,

fi-qTiye ju?)

:

in p.

(jlopov

—

need not trench further upon the

conjunctions. 3. (a)

Combination or the Mt7 ov.

This

questions where

/iri

tive of the verb. it

is

hsh.

a

Two

Negatives. It is in the

very simple.

is

the interrogative particle and ov

Each negative thus has

it

is

good Greek. 1

own

is

the nega-

though combination into good l^ngMoulton {Prol., p. 192) quotes

bit difficult to translate the

But

N. T. confined to

is

Cf. W.-Th., p. 494.

its

force,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1174

Plato's Protag. 312 A, dXX' ovx'i-

in

Jer.

23

:

ixpa

ixi]

So Ro. 10

24.

Cf. also

ouk viroKaiJL^aveLS. 18,

:

NEW TESTAMENT om

fxi]

riKovaav;

/JL-q

We may

it 'Did they fail to hear?' expecting the answer 'No.' Paul repeats the same idiom in 10 19. See further 1 Cor, 9 1 Cor. 9:8 is not an instance, since fx-q comes in 4f.; 11:22.

render

:

:

We do have nr} but here fxr) is a conjunction and ovx is the negative of evpo:, both retaining their The construction in 1 Jo. 3 10 is not pertinent. full force. The use of ou ^117 in Ac. 4 20 is not under discus(6) Oil fxrj. sion, nor the redundant /Z17 after ov (Ac. 20: 20, 27), but only the with the aorist subj. (rarely present) or occasionidiomatic ov one part of the question and TTcos

ovx

tupco

after

ov in the

other.

in 2 Cor. 12

({)oj3ovfjiaL

:

20,

:

—

:

/jltj

ally the fut. ind.

Cf. ov

P. Oxy. 119

a.d.).

j-LT]

hhvoivTaL.

(ii/iii

/jL-fj

({>a.yoj,

See

Whatever the

Is.

ov

/jL-q

Trdvoj in

11:9, ov

origin of this

the boy's letter,

KaKoiroLqaovcnv

/jltj

ovbi

vexed problem, the neg-

ative is strengthened, not destroyed, by the two negatives. We need not here recount the various theories already mentioned.^ See Tense and Mode. Let it go at Gildersleeve's suggestion that it

was

originally ov

Moulton

firj.

{Prol., p. 249)

quotes Giles to

the effect that this explanation was offered in the Middle Ages (the ancients have all our best ideas) and notes "in one if not both of the best MSS. of Aristophanes it is regularly punctuated ov- nrj." In Mt. 13 29 we have ov- i^rj wore kptfwo-Tjre where fxq is a conjunction. Gildersleeve notes that ov fxr] is more common in the LXX and the N. T. than in the classic Greek.^ But Moulton (Prol, pp. 187-192) will not let it go at that. "In the LXX Nb is translated ov or ov nrj indifferently within a single verse, as in Is. 5 27." It seems probable that the force of ov /iri has worn down in the LXX and the N, T. In the non-literary paHe pyri "ov ixi] is rare, and very emphatic," Moulton notes. urges also that in spite of the 96 examples in the text of W. H.

—

:

:

the idiom in the N. T.

is

as rare as in the papyri

when the

13

LXX quotations and the 57 from the words of Christ are removed, "a feeUng that inspired language was fitly rendered by words of a peculiarly decisive tone." But in these 70 examples the force of ov is still strong. Of the other 26 fj'^^'Oia are probably weakened a bit as in Mt. 25 9; Mk. 13 2; Jo'. 18 11. It is only in the Gospels and the Apocalypse (64 and 16 respectively) that ov It is interesting to observe that on HT] occurs with frequency. this point Moulton gets the Gospels and Revelation in harfj.ri

:

:

Goodwin, M. and

»

Cf.

*

Juatin Martyr, p. 169.

T., pp.

389

ff.;

Thompson,

:

Synt., pp. 431-438.

PARTICLES

1175

IIAPAOIIKAi)

(aI

raony with the papyri by ehminating the 70 passages due to Semitic influence. Cf. Gildersleeve (A. J. P., iii, 202 ff.) and Ballentine

453 ff.)- But Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 172) ov8' oh tiri yh-qraL, not as a Hebraism, Mt. 24:21, o'la a "barbarism" like the Wesseley Papyrus xxvi, ov5' ov mt {ib., xviii,

—

explains

but as

He

yePT^Tai hol yvvi).

yvvalnas ov

deXrjs

(Mt. 16

earai

Cf. ov

Even ov /xr] Trkajj. we have owe and ov fxrj So

ae eyKaToXlTrco.

13

:

we have

2

ov

also ixi]

107, 9, kav

II, p.

(Rev. 2

:

11); ov

uri

—

Heb. 13

in

oiiSev

in

a8LKr}drj

is

— ov8i nn that

jut)

ov5k a climax in Rev. 7:16, ov was not strong enough sometimes, so

There

22).

:

quotes also Pap. Lugd.

ax^OrjpaL.

/xi)

ov

:

5, ov

nij abiK-qaei

ae avu ovd' ov

ixi]

(Lu. 10

:

19).

ni)

Mk.

In

both the principal and the subordinate

(relative) clause.

IV. Interrogative Particles (eircpoTTiKal irapaGfiKaL). It is not the mode that we have under discussion here, but simply the particles used in the various 1.

forms of questions.^

Single Questions.

(a)

Direct Questions.

(i)

No

Particle at

So 13 :28 and very

So

all.

avvriKare

ravra iravra; (Mt. 13

Here the inquiry

often.

may

as the tone of voice or context

is

:

51).

colourless except

In

indicate one's attitude.

fact,

most interrogative sentences have no interrogative word at

all.

Cf. Lu. 13

:

2; Jo. 7

:

23; 13

:

6; Ac. 21

:

37, etc.

Hence

it is

sometimes a matter of doubt whether a sentence is interrogative or declarative. Cf. Jo. 16 31; Ro. 8 33; 14: 22; 1 Cor. 1 22; 2 Cor. 3:1; Heb. 10 2; Jas. 2 4, etc. It may be dou])tful also at what point the question ends. Cf. Jo. 7 19; Ro. 4 1. Winer^ :

:

:

:

:

:

:

rightly says that on

grammar cannot speak. Particles. They are used to indicate

this point

the The Use of Negative suffialready had has subject This expected. kind of answer See under ov and nrj. Ov expects the answer cient discussion. and fxi] the answer 'no' (cf. Jo. 7:31). In 7:22) 'yes' (cf. Mt. according to W. H., which has lost its omovv, have we Jo. 18 37 preserve it. Probably Pilate was would omovp but force, negative (ii)

:

hardly ready to go that far unless in

The

greatly in tone.

jest.

The

use of

nrj

varies

precise emotion in each case (protest, in-

dignation, scorn, excitement, sympathy, etc.) depends on the context.

Cf. Jo.

4:29; 6:67; 7:47; Lu. 6:39; Ro. 10:18; 11:1. first part of the question has no negative and the

In Jo. 3 10 the second part has :

ov.

»

Cf. W.-Th., pp. 508

2

W.-Th.,

p. 508.

ff.;

Robertson, Short Gr.,

i)p.

177

IT.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1176

There are not many.

Other Particles.

(iii)

There

dpa (akin

is

to root of ap-ap-iaKco, 'to join'), an illative particle which occurs

with ovK as in Ac. 21 38, firjrL as in 2 Cor. 1 17, or with tLs as in Mt. 18 1. This classic use is not strictly interrogative, but illative in the interrogative sentence. But apa, from the same root^ :

:

:

with more vocal stress, is interrogative. Indeed, it is sometimes doubtful which accent is correct, as in Gal. 2: 17, where dpa is probably correct. In Ro. 14 19, however, W. H. give iipa ovv. We have apa in Lu. 18 8 and apa ye in Ac. 8 30. "Apa looks :

:

:

But the accent

backward, Spa forward.

The use

ing.

of

So is el

in direct questions

el

Mt. 12

Cf.

involves elhpsis.

10,

:

common

Hebraism ^ or

either a

is

e^ean

el

a question of edit-

is

ad^^aaiv

toIs

LXX

depaireveLv;

Gen. 17 17) but foreign to the old Greek. The classic Greek, however, did use in indirect questions, and this fact may have made it easier for also 19

It

3.

:

the direct use of this

el

el

is

:

Gr., p. 136) takes

but the papyri have evTVVxo-VLv; P. Fay. 137 (I/a.D.).

T. does not use

^ /i€X(X)a)

ev j3a/cxtd5t;

fxelvwc

(cf.

Radermacher {N. T.

to arise.

= ^. The N.

in the

it:

rj,

^

So

the question to the oracle.

The most common in the N. T. is Other words are frequently added, as apa (24 The various uses of tI as adverb 45) 'yap (9 5) ovv (Lu. 3 10) (Mk. 10 18, Lu. 16 2); wHth prepositions, as bia ri (Mt. 9:11) (iv) Interrogative

Tis (cf.

Pronouns.

Mt. 3:7).

;

:

;

:

:

:

:

and

els tI

tI 6tl

(Mk. 14

(Lu. 2

:

49)

:

4) or x^pi-^ tIvos (1 Jo. 3

and

double interrogative TTOLos (Tos

.

occur in l.Pet.

see 15

:

We

34.

iVa tL

(Mt, 9

:

4),

:

12)

;

or eUiptically, as

need not detain

Mk.

The

us.

Both

and Mt. 8 27, and woneed not tarry longer on these elementary appears in

rts tL

1

:

For

11.

Trorairos

15

:

24.

see

tLs

:

details.

These are

(v) Interrogative Conjunctions.

Mk. 10 49= 'how' in

:

The

18).

is

sustained

Cf. iroaaKLs (Mt. 18

8

25); ttws (10

:

(6)

:

:

common

besides

possible exclamatory use of

by the modern Greek

21); irSre (25

26); T60ev

Indirect Questions.

:

(Mt. 13

38); :

ecos

ri

tI in

tI

KaXa='how

wdre (17

:

(as

Lu. 12: fine.'

17); rod (Lu.

27), etc.

Here there must be

either a

pronoun

or a conjunction. (i)

Pronouns.

The use

of

ris (rt) is

common.

Cf.

Mt. 6

:

25;

Lu. 9 :46; Jo. 2 :25; Ac. 19 32. We find 6ri so used in Ac. 9 6 and a apparently so in 1 Tim. 1:7. Certainly otoIos occurs :

:

in this construction (1 Cor. 3 ^

2

:

13).

The same thing

Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 411) notes the pre-Attic Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 260.

rj

pa.

is

true of

PARTICLES (Mk. 5

oo-os

:

19)

and

29); TToaos (Mt. 27

and

rfKiKos

in Gal. 6

and

(Jo.

TTou

Cf. also

birolos (Jas. 1: 24).

11 (margin of

:

:

-kolos

(Mk. 11:

(Heb. 7:4), this reading be ac-

W.

H.)

if

18.

:

(Lu. 24: 20); owov (Mk. 14

oTTcos

1177

These are also common, as ei (Mk. 15 :44); 3:8); Tdre (Mk. 13 33); ttws (1 Th. 1:9);

Conjunctions.

(ii)

TTodev

HAPAGUKAI)

13); TroraTros (Lu. 7:39); TTTjXkos

:

Cf. rl in Ac. 12

cepted.

(aI

:

14);

^i? Trore

(Lu. 3

15), etc.

:

Double Questions. These are rare. There is no instance of Trorepov (i) Direct. We do have ??. (Mt. 9 5; 23 17; 27 17), the later Greek caring little for TLs the dual idea in Trorepov. We more commonly have simply rj with the second part of the question and nothing in the first, as in Lu. 20 4; Ro. 2 3 f. We may have ^ ov (Mt. 22 17) or rj uri (Mk. 12 14). Sometimes we have simply at the beginning of the question with a reference to an implied alternative (1 Cor. 9:6; 2 Cor. 1:17). This r/ may come in the middle of the sentence as in 2 Cor. 9 8. The r; may even precede ris as in (c)

—

—

r?

:

:

:

:

:

:

r/

:

:

Mt.

7

(ii)

:

9.

Indirect.

There

rect question (Jo. 7

V. Conjunctions

had

:

is

one instance of

irorepov

—

tJ

in

an

indi-

17).

(crvvSeo-iioi).

In the nature of the case

much

to be said about the conjunctions^ in the treatment of the

Sentence and also Subordinate Clauses.

The

syntactical prin-

both paratactic and hypotactic sentences have received adequate discussion. But conjunctions play such an important part in the language that it is best to group them all together. They connect words, clauses, sentences and paragraphs, and thus form the joints of speech. They have a very good name, since they bind together (con-jungo) the various parts of speech not otherwise connected, if they need connection, for asyndeton is always possible to the speaker or writer. The point here is to interpret each conjunction as far as possible so that its precise function may be clear. 1. Paratactic^ Conjunctions (crvvBea/jiOL irapara/cTiKoi). (a) Copulative. Conjunctions which connect words and clauses are evidently later in development than the words and clauses. The use of conjunctions came to be very common in the Greek so that the absence was noticealjle and was called asj^ideciples controlling

1

The

distinction

botwoon adv. and conj.

advs. just as the other particles are.

is,

of courso, :irl)itrary.

p. 406. ^

"Co-ordinating"

is

Conjs. arc

Cf. Paul, Principles of the ilist. of Lang.,

from co-ordino, to range

togcthi^r.

1178

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK But

a mistake to suppose that these connectives are fail to use them as a result of rapidity of thought as the words rush forth, or they may be consciously ton.^

it is

One may

necessary.

avoided for rhetorical effect. Cf. (SXewere, ^Xkrere, /SXerere in Ph. 3 2, with Tennyson's "Break, break, break." All this is entirely within the province of the speaker. Cf. 1 Cor. 3 12, xp^<^ou, :

:

apyvpov, Xtdovs

rt/xtous,

^vXa, xoprov, Kokanriv.

Cf. also

1

Cor. 13

:

4-7 where the verbs follow one another in solemn emphasis with no connective save one be. In the same way contrast may be expressed without conjunctions as in 1 Cor, 15 43 f.^ In Luke and John there is a pleasing alternation of asyndeton and con:

Cf. Gal. 5

junctions.

:

22.

The

first

conjunctions were the para-

tactic or co-ordinating, since language

sentences.^

The

copulative

was

(connecting)

originally in principal

conjunctions are

simplest and earliest type of the paratactic structure.

the

They

simply present the words or clauses as on a par with each other.'* The primitive conjunctions were monosyllabic like /cat, re, bkJ' This word appears to be related to the Sanskrit ca, the (i) Te. g"), and the Gothic -h.^ These words and postpositive. The Sanskrit is almost devoid of conjunctions which were so highly developed by the Greek and Latin, but ca is one of the few possessed by this ancient tongue. There is a striking connection between quis, que, quis-que and TLs, re, rts. The Thessalian dialect has ds for tIs and da-Ke. We have tIs re in the old Greek. Te shows this double pronominal origin in its use for and and ever (just like que, quis-que).^

Latin que (with labio-velar

are

all enclitic

'^

The

indefinite use

is

distinctly Homeric.^

The use

of ewei

re, 6s re

was old Ionic and continued in Attic tragedy, as ol6s re did in Attic prose. Cf. Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 5). Indeed, some scholars^" hold that the correlative use (re re) was the original .

—

one, but this

It seems certain that re indicates a than does /cat. This close correlative use certainly very old. Cf. av r' €70; re in Homer.^^ In the N. T. it rare except in the Acts, where it occurs some 175 times. It is

somewhat is is

common

is

doubtful.

closer unity

in all parts of the

book and

*

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 551.

2

Cf. W.-Th., p. 538.

*

Cf. C. Pitman, Conjunctions., p. 5

5

W.-Th., p. 434. Whitney, Sans, Gr., p. 417.

7

8

Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 530.

9

Monro, Horn.

10

K.-G.,

II, p,

3

6

is

Brug., f.;

thus a subtle argument

ib., p.

552.

Blass, Gr. of

N. T. Gk.,

Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 536

ff.

Gr., p. 242.

246.

11

p. 261.

Brug., Griech, Gr., pp. 529, 541

Brug., Griech. Gr., p, 530.

f.

PARTICLES work

for the unity of the

(aI

1179

IIAPAOHKAi)

(u'c-sections

and

something

It is

all).

We

additional, but in intimate relation with the preceding.

find

where v\pco9eis and Xa/Scov are united byCf. also 10 22, where again two participles are connected. re. In 23 24, kttjut] re irapaaTrjaaL, the change from the direct to the indirect discourse is marked by re, whereas Kai is used twice before to join minor phrases, Te puts irapaarrjaaL on a par with (toluclcare} In the same way in 20 11 the first two participles are joined by nal and then both are related to the next by re. The same idiom occurs in Jo. 6:18, where re gives an additional item somewhat apart from the mt /cat just before. In Jo. 4 41 Kal re are not co-ordinate. Kal introduces the whole sentence and re connects the two parts. Cf. thus 5e re in Ac. 2 37. But T€

alone as in Ac. 2

33,

:

:

:

:

—

:

—

—

— re as —

is strictly

re

:

Cf. the Latin que

— que,

English

See Ac. 2 46 where the two participles are co-ordinated.

50.

:

In Ro. 14 8 :

are here

correlative.

two

we have

re

four times in succession with

The

pairs of conditions.

The

anced carefully.

disjunctive

el're

There

kav.

parts of each pair are bal-

—

(cf.

ei're

1

Cor. 12

:

26)

is

— —

same correlative use of re. So as to ovre ovre The use of re (Mt. 12 32) and ixrire Kat 20). fxrire (Ac. 27 is also common where there is an inner bond, though no hint is at

bottom

this

—

:

:

given as to the relative value of the matters united. pets re Kal ypaniJ.aTe'LS ai>8pes

re

/cat

(Lu. 22

yvpalKes (8

Kalwv re Kat adlKwv (24 re Kat ^ap^apoLS

:

:

:

12);

15)

;

66);

Tvoielv re Kat didaaKeiv

eKivridr]

re

—

/cat

Cf. dpxte-

(Ac. 1:1);

eyevero (21

fXLKpu re Kat fjieyaXo: (26

:

22)

;

30);

:

(Ro. 1: 14); 'lovdalov re TpoJTOU Kal "EWrivos (2

— re

5t-

"FXKrjfflv

— — —

:

9),

re Kat 26 9:15, and for re Kat Kat ('both Kat, we really have the re 20. In Jo. 4:11, ovre Cf. Latin non que — et. We even have oi;re and') construction.

etc.

For

re

Kal

see Ac.

—

— ovTe — Kat

:

37

f.

:

20

—

^ijre stand toPer contra we find 2 and also 3. The manuscripts often varj' bere 5e in Ac. 19 tween re and 5e (cf. Ac. 3 10; 4 14, etc.). We have re yap (common from Aristotle on 2) in Ro. 1 26 followed by 6/xotcos re Kat. In As a rule re stands after the word Kat. Heb. 2:11 note re yap or words that are paralleled, but this is not always so. The etymology of this conjunction is disputed. Cur(ii) Kat. tius^ makes it the locative case of the pronominal stem Ka-, ko-, so

in Jo. 5

In Ac. 27

:

—

urire

gether and both are parallel to re following.

—

:

:

:

:

—

' This classic idiom is a mark of Luke's literary style. But in the kolpt] n on the retreat before Kal. Jann., Ilist. Gk. dr., p. 401. ^ Cf. Hammer, De Te Particulao Usu llerodotco Thucydideo Xenophonteo, » Gk. Etymology. 1904, p. 92.

is

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1180

it would ultimately come from the same root as re (que). would thus mean 'in this respect/ 'this besides.' Brugmann^

that It

The

finds its original sense in kolvos, Latin co-, cum, Gothic ga.

would then be 'together with,' 'in addition to.' The Arkadian, South Achaean and Cypriote dialects use /cds and-Kd = Kat. Whatever the origin, it all comes to the same thing in the end. It is by far the most frequent of all the conjunctions or other It is so common in fact that Moulton particles in the N. T. and Geden do not list it in their concordance. This in itself is in accord with the later Greek idiom, as Thumb ^ notes in Aristotle and in the modern Greek and Moulton^ in the papyri. Moulton

.idea

cites Par. P. 18, ere 8vo rfixepas exofiev

Mk.

parallel to

15

:

/cat

But

25; Jo. 4: 35.

4>da(xoixev

ets

there can be

Yl^\ov(Ji,

as

doubt

little

that the extreme fondness for parataxis in John's Gospel, for is partially due to the use of Kal in the LXX for the Hebrew 1 which "means a hook and resembles a hook in shape."* It was certainly used to "hook" together all sorts of sentences. There is not the same unity in the older Greek in the matters united as is true of re. Kat " connects in a free and easy manner" ^ and the Hebrew i still more loosely. There are three main uses of Kai which appear in the N. T. as in all Greek. The Adjunctive Use ('Also'). This is possibly the original use, though one cannot tell. It is thus like the Latin et-4am, English too (to) = addition to something already mentioned, and is common enough in all stages of the language.^ A good example of this use of Kal is seen in Mt. 8 9, Kai yap eya? avdpioirbs elfXL bird

instance,

:

The

k^ovcriap.

The who

Kal

here points to Christ's relation to the boy.

centurion, like a true soldier, does not say that he

man

a

is

who obeys them. He has the true military spirit and knows therefore how Jesus can cure the boy without going to see him. The Kal is here very significant. gives orders, but rather one

Cf. ovTO)s Kal

v/xeTs

in

to Christ's hearers

(12

:

Mt. 7 by Kai.

:

12,

10) tva Kal TOP Aa^apov.

Luke than elsewhere (Lu. 12 :41);

(Mt. 8:

5e

in the

Kal (12

:

where the Golden Rule

Cf. Jo. 7

:

3 tva Kal

This use of

Cf

N. T.^

.

Kal is

ol

is

ei

Kal (2

Kayo) (Lu.

20

3)

:

Cor. 11:15); Kal

dt

fj

Kal

1

Griech. Gr., p. 542.

HeUen., p. 129.

*

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 196.

»

Prol., p. 12.

B

Jann., Gk. Gr., p. 401.

6

Cf.

7

Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 140.

CI. Rev., 1897, vol.

;

in Kal

yap

(Mt. 10

2

M. W. Humphreys, The

aov,

more frequent

54, 57); tI Kal (1 Cor. 15 :29);

9); kau Kal (Gal. 6:1);

applied

/jLadriTal

XI, pp. 140

ff.

:

PARTICLES 18);

(Ac, 11

d)s /cat

24

OS Kal (Ac.

11

:

25); KaOawep

:

17); Kadoos Kal (Ro. 15

:

diioius

8);

6,

nAPAGHKAl)

(aI

/cat

(1

Th. 3

:

6

(Jo.

/cat

12); 8l6

:

7); ovtc^ nal coaavrojs

11);

:

(Lu. 1

/cat

1181

:

(Ro. 6:11); Cor.

(1

/cat

35); 5td tovto Kai

(Lu. 11:49); dXXd

/cat (24:22), etc. So then /cat in the sense of with nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs, conjunctions.

'also' occurs

It

may

a word or a clause.

refer to

For the use of

(i/A.D.).

Prepositions.^

It is

6

common

Cf. dXXcos re Kat, B. G. U.

530

and for avu /cat see sum up a sentence that

see the Article,

/cat

for

to

/cat

For the relative and articular participle see the /cat in the sentences in Mt. 5 39^3. Here /cat balances the principal and the subordinate clauses. So in the apodosis of a conditional sentence we find /cat as in Jo. 14 7. Cf. Heb. 7 26, where /cat almost means 'precisely,' and Mt. 6: 10, where it means 'just so.' Cf. Ro. 11 16. So with a we find it in the apodosis (Jo. 5 19). Cf also after ibawep in 15 26. Sometimes the /cat seems to be redundant as in Lu. 11:1, Ka6
:

:

:

:

:

.

:

:

—

:

:

See ol8a Kai

XotTTOts WvecTLV.

— olda

Kai (Ph.

4:12).

The Ascensive Use {'Even'). The notion of 'even' is an advance on that of mere addition which is due to the context, not to Kat. The thing that is added is out of the ordinary and rises to a climax like the crescendo in music.

(Ac. 21: 13; Ro. 13:5). context.

Cf.

(So Lu. 10

46

Mk.

17).

1

:

belongs here.

Kat

27, Kat rots TvevixaaL toXs aKadaproLS kinracratL.

Cf. also Kat

See further Ac. 10

f.

Kttt €t

:

Cf. ov ixovov, dXXd Kat depends wholly on the

Cf. Latin adeo.

This use of

:

TeKwvai

ol

45; 11

(Cf. 1 Cor.

8

1,

:

:

and

Kat ol kdviKoi,

20; Gal. 2

:

13.

Mt. 5

The use

:

of

5.)

The Mere Connective {^And'). The difference between Kat as 'and' and Kat as 'also' is very slight, whichever was the original The epexegetic or explicative use of Kat occupies a middle idea. ground between 'also' and 'and.' Blass^ treats it under 'also.' Cf. Lu. 3 18, TToXXd Kat erepa irapaKoXcbv, where the "connective" force of Kat is certainly very slight. So also Jo. 20 30, TroXXd Kat dXXa ariiieta. Sec further Jo. 1 16, Kat x^-pi-v clvtI xdptros, where the clause is an explanatory addition. Ct. (Ac. 22 25) Kat aKaraKpLToi', :

:

:

:

(1

Cor. 2

idque)

:

2) Kat tovtov eaTavpcankvov,

which

is

our 'and that too' where

'also' ('too') in the Kat, (Hel). 11 »

2

(Ro. 13

:

12)

K-at

we

:

11) Kat tovto (Latin

combiiu^ 'and' and

raOra (frequent in ancient

Cf. Dciss., B. S.; Hatch, Jour, of Bib. Lit., 1908, p. 142.

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 2G3.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1182

See in particular Eph. 2 8, Kal tovto ovk e^ vncbv, where The simple rovTo refers to the whole conception, not to x^-pi-tl. use of /cat where common most copulative idea is, however, the Greek).

:

words are piled together by means of the connection

is

as close as with

(Lu. 8

Kokfj Kal ayadfj

1:3);

loosely joined in idea, as

Kal

may

15).

all

Thus 6 deos Kal Trarrjp (2 Cor. But the words may be very

after the imperative

(Mt. 16

Kal ZaddovKaZoL

sorts of words, clauses

XeTco "Epxov, Kal epxerat

:

1).

and sen-

The use of The chain with

(Mt. 8:9).

seen in Mt. 11:29.

is

Sometimes

this conjunction.

ol $aptcraTot

be used to connect

Thus

tences.

:

re.

Kal Kal

may

go on indefinitely. Cf. the four examples as the connective in Ro. 9 4; the six in Rev. 7 12 (so 5 12). So in Ph. 4 9; five times in 1 Cor. 15 4 (/cat to connect 6tl three we have Kal 6tl 12-16 every paragraph and most of the senIn Rev. clauses). :

:

:

:

:

tences begin with

In fact

/cat.

lypse.

much

true of

it is

If one turns to First Maccabees,

of the

Apoca-

true even to a

it is

much

In First Maccabees /cat ^ has found this repetition Thumb But 1. Hebrew the translates of Kat in Aristotle so that the Hebrew influence simply intensified Kat. a Greek idiom. We have noted the use of /cat with re (re greater extent than in the Apocalypse.

—

The

Cf. Ro. 1:20).

sense of 'both Cf.

Mk. 4

:

use of

— and'

41; Ph. 2

:

/cat

— Kat

in Ac. 2

as

13; Ac. 26

:

29, Kat

:

Cf.

r).

Kixv

— kHu (Lu.

12

:

eTeXevT-qae

Kal

in the erd^rj.

Sometimes the connection

29.

almost amounts to 'not only, but Kat —

more common

far

is

In Col. 2:16 note

also.'

A. Brinkmann contends that

38).

and late Greek kclv is sometimes 'at any rate' and is never a mere link {Scriptio continua und Anderes, Rhein. Kat — Kat ov Mus. LXVII, 4, 1912). In Lu. 5 36 we have Kat Kat. It is usual to (so Jo. 6 36), and in Jo. 17 25 Kat ov—8^ have Kat ov after an affirmative clause as in Jo. 10 35. Cf. Kat in the papyri

:

—

:

:

— :

In Lu. 12 6 Kat ov See Negative Particles. fXT] follows a question with ovxi- Kat connects two negative sentences in 2 Cor. 9

in Lu. 6

:

:

5.

:

For

37.

ovre

— Kai

see Jo. 4

when the coimection Children use "and" thus often in

gins a sentence

Cf. Kat av rjada in

questions.

Mk.

See also Jo. 9

in

:

Ro.

10

:

1

:

Mt. 26 70 (and :

:

2.

Sometimes

be-

Kat

Et tu, Brute. So also Lu. 10 29;

73) like

:

Cf. also the use of Kat in parenthesis as

13, Kat kKco^Wrjv axpi Tov 8evpo.

The context

gives other

that are sometimes rather startling. It is common where it has to bear the content 'and yet.' So Jo.

Kat

to find Kat

11.

26, Kat tIs Svparai audrjvaL.

36; 2 Cor. 2

turns to

:

with an unexpressed idea. telling stories and asking

is

1

HeUen.,

§ 129.

PARTICLES

1183

IIAI'AOnKAl)

(aI

4 20; 6 49; 7 30; IJo. 2 9. The examples are common See Jer. 23 21. in John's Gospel (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 135 ff.). In 21 we have ov Kal in Kal. 1 Cor. 10 In Mk. 4 4 note /xeu Ph. also Kal av So Cf. also Mt. 3 14, contrast. 'Ipxv t'Pos fxe; This idiom occurs in Plato, and Abbott 1 22, Kol tI alpr]a-oiJ,aL. Cf. 1:5; 2 20; notes a number of them in the Gospel of John. In 24 Kal is almost etc. Lu. 12 27 f.; 8 39 f.; 7 57, 3 13; 5 3

19;

:

:

:

:

:

:

—

:

—

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

equal to dXXd, that

— Kai);

the context makes contrast.

is,

Mk.

:

Cf. also

Mt.

Tholuck^ so takes mt in Ro. 1 13 (the parenthetical Kal). Sometimes Kal seems imitative of the Hebrew \ by almost having the sense of oTt or iva ('that') as in Mt. 26: 15; Mk. 14:40; Lu. 9:51; 12: 15. In In particular note Kal eyevero Kal (as in Lu. 5 1, 12, 17, etc.). Mt. 16 6 observe opare Kal. So Lu. 12 15 and Mt. 26 15. In modern Greek Kal has so far usurped the field that it is used not 6

26

:

{ov

12

:

12; Lu. 20

:

19; Jo. 18

:

28.

:

:

only in

:

:

:

all

sorts of paratactic senses like 'and,' 'but,' 'for,' 'or,'

but even in hypotactic senses for va or tov, declarative and even consecutive (Thumb, Handb., p. 184). In Mk. 3 7 Kat comes near taking the place of 6, for in the next verse there are five instances of Kal co-ordinate with each other, but subordinate to Kal in verse 7. Sometimes after Kat we may supply 'so' as in See also Ph. 4 7. Kat Xd/iTret, Mt. 5 15; Kat ^XeiropLev, Heb. 3 19. This is a kind of consecutive- use of Kat. Cf. Lu. 24 18. The 'and

so,'

:

:

:

:

:

fondness for co-ordination in the Gospels causes the use of Kat where a temporal conjunction (ore) would be more usual. Cf. Mk. 15 25, rjv c6pa tpIttj Kal karavpoiaau (Lu. 23 44). But Blass^ :

:

admits that this is a classic idiom. Cf. Mt. 26 :45; Lu. 19 :43, where Kat drifts further away from the ancient idiom. Cf. also In 2 Tim. Kat l8ov in the apodosis, 'and behold,' as in Lu. 7: 12. In Ph. 4 16 note Kat a. be. 2 20 note Kat followed by a ixkv

— — and

:

thrice (one = even,' '

(iii)

Ae.

two = both '

This conjunction

is

:

').

generally ranked wholly as an ad-

Monro^ says: "The adversative bk properly that the new clause stands in some contrast to what

versative particle.^ indicates

has preceded.

Ordinarily, however,

of a narrative."

the matter here

As a matter turned

used in the continuation my opinion, Monro has

it is

of fact, in

round.

The ordinary

narrative

use

(continuative) I conceive to be the original use, the adversative

the developed and later construction. 1

Beitr. zur Sprachorklilrung d.

2

Blass, Gr. of

3

lb.

N. T. Gk.,

N.

p. 2G2.

The etymology

confirms

T., p. 35. •

So Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,

"

Iloni. Gr., p. 245.

p. 407.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1184

this explanation,

associates enclitic

it

though

with the

it

is

aksl. ze

ending -5e {oUa-Se,

Brugmann^

largely conjectural.

and possibly

also^ with

8r]

and the

while Hartung^ connects

6-8e, roaos-de),

The enclitic -be thus it with 8vo, Sis, and Baumlein^ with btv-repos. means 'again/ 'back/ while the conjunction 5e would mean 'in the second place' or 'a second comment' or 'an important addition' {bi]). But, however we take it, there is in the word no essential

notion of antithesis or contrast. What is true is that the is something new^ and not so closely associated in thought

addition as

true of re and

is

and

tive

/cat.

begin with the narra-

I prefer therefore to

transitional (copulative) use of

Kiihner-Gerth^

bk.

call

'something new' {etwas Neues) copulative and Abbott has the matter correctly: give it separate discussion. "In classical Greek, be, calling attention to the second of two this use of be for

'^

things,

The

may mean

second

(1)

of these uses

first

adversative.

is

in the next place,

Abbott notes

Matthew and Luke

occurs in

Mark and

on

(2)

the original one and

is

is

the other

hand."

The

copulative.

both senses

also that be in

nearly three times as often as in

mainly in the historical books of the N. T. It is so common there that, as with Kai, Moulton and Geden do not give any references. A good place to note the mere copulative force of be is in the genealogy in Mt. 1 2-16 where there is no notion of opposition at all. The line is simply counted from Abraham to Christ. In verses 6 and 12 there are breaks, but the contrast is made by repetition of the names, not by be, which appears with every name alike. In Mt. 23 4 we have both uses of be. The first is properly translated 'yea' and the second 'but' (adversative). See further 1 Cor. 4: 7 (5e and be /cat) where there is a succession of steps in the same direction. So 15 35; 2 Cor. 6 15 f.; Heb. 12 6; and in particular the fist of virtues in 2 Pet. 1 5-7. Sometimes a word is repeated with be for special emphasis, as biKaLoavvq be in Ro'. 3 22 (cf. 9 :30). A new topic may be introduced by be in entire harmony with the preceding Its use is

John.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

discussion, as the Birth of Jesus in

The use

Mt.

etc.).

seen in Jo. 3

19 ('And this is/ etc.); 19

For

COS

be

:

1

:

18

('Now the

:

23 ('Now the coat,'

('and when,' 'so when') in John see 2

:

9, 23.

1

Griech. Gr., p. 547.

2

lb.

3

I,

*

Part., p. 89.

«

II, p.

B

W.-Th., p. 443.

^

Joh. Gr., p. 104.

p.

Cf. also Hist.

156

Gk.

birth of

of be in explanatory parenthesis

Jesus Christ,'

Gr., p. 410.

Cf. Klotz

ad Dev.,

f.

274.

II, p.

is

etc.).

In John

355.

PARTICLES

(aI

HAPAOUKAI)

1185

sometimes not clear whether 8e is copulative or 3:1, rjv 8e. Is Nicodemus an illustration or an exception?^ The resumptive use of 8e, after a parenthesis, to go on with the main story, is also copulative. Cf. Mt. 3:1; Lu. 4:1. There is continuation, not opposition, in the use of Kal 5e, as in Lu. 1 76, /cat av 8k, where 8e means 'and' and /cat 'also' Cf. further Mt. 10 18; 16 18; Jo. 15 27. In Jo. 6 51 we have Kal Ae is always 8e in the apodosis of the condition in this sense. postpositive and may even occupy the third place in the sentence (Mt. 10 11) or even the fourth (Jo. 6 51) or fifth (1 Jo. 2 2) or sixth (Test, xiii, Patr. Jud., 91) as shown in chapter on Sentence. In accord with the copulative use of 8e we frequently have ov8e and fX7]8e in the continuative sense, carrying on the negative with as elsewhere

it is

adversative.

Cf.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

no idea

of contrast.

we have

yap, etc.).

Mt. 6

Cf.

So also 6

ov8€ avvayovacv.

ov8e in

In Mt. 6

:

:

28;

:

:

26, ov cnrelpovcnv ov8€ depl^ovaLV

Mk. 4

:

22, etc.

In Jo. 7

:

15 ov8e

means 'not

also' (cf. also 21

:

in the continuative sense see

in 1 Cor.

Cor. 10

:

For the repetition

5:11. 7-10.

Mt. 7:6.

In

Mk.

It

:

.

fx-qSe

— ov8e), we come pretty close to having ovre — (Jo. 4:11; 3 Jo. continuative sense as we have in ovre — /cat

'AXXa.

'AXXa

ogy.

is

see 1

(some MSS. ovre in the merely

eirlaTafxaL

ovK

(iv)

29,

8e) For means 'not even'

of continuative

14 68, ovre ol8a ovre

:

27, etc.).

All three uses of Kat are thus paralleled in ov8e (merely ov tiTjSe

5, ov8i

the sense of 'not even' as often (Mt. 6

10).

no doubt at all as to the etymola virtual proclitic (cf. ein and cTri), and the neuter

Here there

is

was dXXd (aXXa, 'other things')- Biiumlein^ does take dXXa as originally an adverb. But in reality it is 'this other matter'' In actual usage the adversative came to (cf. raOra and tovto). be the most frequent construction, but the original copulative held on to the N. T. period. It is a mistake to infer that aXXos means 'something different.' In itself it is merely 'another.' Like 8e the thing introduced by dXXd is something new, but not essentially in contrast.^ So the classic Greek used dXXd fxfiv in the plural

emphatic continuative sense.^ Blass^ observes that "the simple dXXd also has this force of introducing an accessory idea." Cf. 2 Cor. 7: 11, Toarju KareLpyaaaTO vplv Girov8'r}v, dXXd d7roXo7tai', dXXd ayapoLKTrjcnv, dXXd (^6j3ov, dXXd iirnrbdriaLV, oXka ^fj\ov, dXXd eK8'LKr]aiv. All these six examples are confirmatory and continuative. Sec further Lu. 24 21, dXXd ye /cat aiiu irdcnv TouTOLs, where it is cli:

1

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 105.

^

Untors. iibcr griech. Partikeln, p.

"

Palcy, Gk. Particles, p.

1.

7.

*

K.-G.,

'

lb.

»

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 269.

II, p.

286.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1186

The story is carried on by dXXd macteric, not contradictory. In Cor. 2 1:9; Lu. 12:7; 16:21. also 22. Cf. Kal in verse Ph.

1

:

dXXa

18, xo-ipo),

The most

Kal xc^PWo/J-ai.,

example

striking

of all

the connection

Ph. 3

is

:

very

is

close.

dXXd nevovvye

8,

Kal

In 2 Cor. 11:1, dXXd Kal avexeade, the tone of irony ijyovfiai. whether to take dXXd as copulative or adverdoubtful makes it similar passages are not a dropping of the and These sative. adversative idea, but merely the retention of the original copulaAbbott^ sees that "it is hard to find a satisfactory explanation of Jo. 8 26" along the usual line. If one no longer

tive meaning.

:

impelled to translate by 'but,' the trouble vanishes. Just make it 'now' or 'yea' and it is clear. Abbott^ likewise considers feels

dXXd "inexplicable" in 4

23, because

:

has to

it

mean

In 4

oviroj tbvvaade.

dXX' ov8e vvv dvvaade after

:

'but.'

Cf.

The same

Jo. 16:2, dXX' epxerai wpa, 'yea, the hour comes.' use of dXXd occurs also in negative sentences. In

1

Cor. 3

3,

:

dXX' ovbk after

3,

In Ac. 19 2, dXX' ovb', the thought answers clause. the preceding question and is probably adversative, as is possible The dXXd at any rate is negative like the obbL So in 1 Cor. 3 3.

an affirmative

:

:

as to dXX' ovbe 'Hpoj^Tys (Lu. 23 It

Adversative.

{h)

15).

of

all

contrast (antithesis) or opposition, but

mean

these conjunctions

:

should be stated again that not

The modern Greek keeps (Thumb, Handh., p. 185). In Jas. 1 13 f note the two uses of be (continuative (i) Ae. and adversative). Sometimes the positive and the negative are sharply contrasted and then be is clearly adversative as in Mt. the context

dXXd,

o/xcos,

makes the matter but not

Tz\i]v,

23

:

ixkvToi

More obvious

4, avTol bl oh d'e\ov(TLv.

Cf also 6

edi^ be ixr} a4>rJTe.

clear.

and

.

:

—

bk

.

:

So

23.

i^rj

still is

6

:

14

drjaavpl^eTe

f.,

—

eav d0^re

6r](ravpi^eTe

19 f.). Cf. 1 Cor. 1 10, etc. The contrast may he in the nature of the case, particularly where persons stand in contrast as in eTcb be (Mt. 5 22, 28, 32, etc.), av be (Mt. 6 6; 1 Tim. 6 be 11); i7Meis be (1 Cor. 1 23) vixels be (Mk. 8 29); the common 6

be (6

:

:

1

:

45), ol be

(Jo. 2: 24), etc.

of

fjih

:

;

:

(Mk.

:

:

:

(Mt. 2:5); avrds

The

contrast

is

be

(see Intensive Particles) as in

ao4)Lav be oh tov alojvos tovtov,

(Lu. 8

:

37), avrds be 'Irjaovs

made more manifest by In

Mt. 3:11.

an exception

is filed

1

the use

Cor. 2

:

6,

to the preceding.

This adversative use of be is very common indeed. Cf. further Mk. 2:18; Lu. 5 5; 9 9, 13; 24: 21; Ac. 12 15; Ro. 8:9£f. Just as aXXos (cf. 2 Cor. 11:4) can be used in the (ii) 'AXXd. sense of erepos (when it means 'different,' not merely 'second'), so :

1

:

:

Joh. Gr., p. 100.

2

lb., p. 99.

PARTICLES

mean

dXXd can

nAPAOHKAl)

(aI

1187

'another' in contrast to the preceding.

negative the antithesis

sharp as in Lu,

is

1

60, ovxi,

:

—

"With a

dXXd

KXrjOrj-

So Jo. 6 32, ov Mcoi;o-^s dXX' 6 irarrip (cf. 6 38). Cf. Mk. 9:37; 1 Cor. 15:37. In verse 39 of 1 Cor. 15 note dXXd oXXt? fih dXX?7 8e where both dXXd and dXX?? have the notion of difference due to the context. In 1 Cor. 9 12 note dXXd twice. In Mt. 15 11 ov begins one clause and dXXd the other. Cf. 2 Cor. 4:5, ov yap eavrovs Krjpvaaofjiev, dXXd Xptcrrw 'Irjaovj^ Kvpiov. So Mt. 5 17. In Lu. 12 51 note ovxl, dXX' r), and in 2 aeraL 'Iwavrjs.

:

:

—

:

:

:

Cor.

dXXd

:

— dXX'

a sort of pleonastic use of dXXd. This is a classical idiom. ^ Cf. also ov nbvov dXXd (Ac. 19 2G) or dXXd Ktti (Ro. 5:3). See Negative Particles. For ovx otl oWo. 1

13,

:

r/,

—

:

—

see Jo. 7

:

22, for ovx

Cor. 9

osis

see

15.

Sometimes dXX'

1

:

'AXXd alone

8.

:

1

2,

i'^'a

for dXXd

may

I'm

may

expressed, as in Jo. 12

— aXKa

:

Col. 2

be

For dXXd ye

38.

:

:

5,

in

apod-

for dXX' ov, 1 Cor.

Mk.

elliptical as in

4

:

14 :49; Jo.

an interruption in thought not most striking instances of ov yap, dXXd, where ov yap means 'not Kal vvv; just before). Both Winer and

refer to

27.

dXXd occurs in Ac. 16 37, much' with fine scorn (cf. :

W.

see 6

One

of the

Moulton (W.-M., p. 566) felt certain that dXXd never d firj, not even in Mt. 20 23 and Mk. 4 22. But J. H. Moulton (Prol, p. 241) quotes Tb. P. 104 (I/b.c), Kal nrj e^earw F.

equalled

:

yvpa^Ka oKXrjv eirayayeadat. dXXd 'AiroXKwviav,

$tXio-/v'coi

means

:

practically 'except.'

gests that, since

means 'but

ei ixi]

only,' the

See also Gen. 21

:

where dXXd

Moulton sug-

26.

(brachylogy) in Lu. 4 :26f.; Rev. 21:27,

same may be true

of dXXd.

from -wKkov ('more'), but Brugmannfinds its original meaning to be 'near by.' At any rate it was a preposition (Mk. 12:32). Cf. Ac. 15:28, TrXeoi' Tr\r)v tovtwv where the two words exist together. Probably its original use as a conjunction is seen in the combination TrXiiv 6tl (Ph. 1: 18). It is chiefly confined to Luke's writings in the N. T. As a conjunction it is always adversative (cf. Lu. 6 24; 12 31, etc.). In Mt. 26 39 note ttXtj?/ ovx <^^ aXX'
(iii)

Curtius gets

it

:

:

—

:

:

:

:

N. T. Gk.,

»

Blass, Gr. of

2

Gricoh. Gr., p.

'

Blass, Gr. of

p. 209.

.^GO.

N. T. Gk.,

p. 268.

"

lb.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1188

This word is a combination of two intensive parand is used to mean 'however.' Cf. Jo. 4 :27; 12 42. It occurs in the N. T. only eight times. This word is even more rare than fxeuTOL. It occurs (v) "Ofxcos. with two participles (1 Cor. 14: 7; Gal. 3: 15) and once with fxh-

MkvTou

(iv)

Toi),

ticles (nep, :

12:42). This phrase marks an exception, as in Mt. 12 :4; Jo. 17 12. We even have kros d fxr] (1 Cor. 14 5; 15 2; 1 Tim. 5 19). Dionysius Thrax calls this construction avv(c) Disjunctives. TOL (Jo.

Etjuiy.

(vi)

:

:

:

:

was always

It

deais bia^evKTLKi].

any conjunction

ideas without

copulative conjunctions

vernacular

1

vice versa. (i)

Hebrew

(cf.

Kal as in Col.

3

(cf.

common in the may be united by

a construction

(de,

/cat),

)).

Dissimilar things

/cat

as being

or

77

'^

Its origin

"H.

the Latin nolens volens) or by

but we do not have to take

11,

:

express alternative

possible to

are equivalent in

from

rjk

They

held by Brugmann.^

(enclitic) is

Homer. We may have

just

r/

as in

Mt. 5

:

17.

In the sense of 'or' 7) may For fj Kal see Mt. 7 10; Lu. 18 In Ro. 1 21 we have ovx—v 8 35). be repeated indefinitely (Ro. This use in negative (Ro. 9:11). M^jSe 7/ as in 4 13. See juiyxco— In 1 Th. writers. later and Thuc. 122, 1, clauses appears in :

:

11.

:

2

19 note

:

Lu. 20

prove

:

—

:

:

we have

In Mt. 21 23

ovxi nal.

rj

:

2 (parallel passage) the reading

Kal

and

to be

r)

differently.

In

Handh., p. 185).

1

The

synonymous.

The modern Greek

is

rj

logion

retains ovre,

Cor. 11: 27,

while in

Kal tIs,

tIs.

iii]re

6s av eadl-d t6v

This does not

was translated (Thumb, and r?

aprov

to

Trivia

ri

is the true text. TOTrjpLov Tov Kvplov, somc MSS. havc /cat, but of one element partook some that mean not does This, however, element was taken in whatever that, other, but the and some of (' either of use correlative The guilt. was this way, there In Ro. 6 14: Cor. 6. 1 Cf. Mt. 6 frequent.^ 24; also or') is in Jo. -KOTepov have disjunctive we a As 7?Tot 16 note Mt. see For irplp Mk. 35. in 13 and 17 ^ v 7 Mt. Ka\6u, 18 14 after Cor. 8; see 1 OeKo: 19; after for 1 18; Radermacher after xo-po-, Lu. 15:7; for dXX' 7?, Lu. 12:51. ij

rJ

—

—

7?

:

:

— — — —

—

r?.

ij

:

ij

i]

:

ij

:

:

:

{N. T. Gr., p. 27) finds Gk.

1

Jann., Hist.

2

W.-Th., p. 440.

i]

tol

—

v,

B. G. U. 956; ^

rot

—

7^

rot,

Gr., p. 406.

3

Griech. Gr., p. 541.

*

Cf. Margolis,

Lit., July, 1909).

7)

The

Particle ^ in O. T.

Gk. (Am. Jour, of Sem. Lang, and

PARTICLES Vett. Val., time);

rjre

Eire

(ii)

13; 14

:

follows

t;

sive — 7.

— ^ in —

OvT€

(iii)

—

etre {kavTe

:

I-

G. XII,

562, 5

2,

(Roman

Quaest. Barth., pp. 24, 30. These conditional particles are eavTt)

rjre,

Latin

like the

So 12

— —

vre-v,

138, 11;

p.

1189

IlAPAGHKAl)

(aI

.

Cor. 10:31, dre

Cf. 1

sive.

We

eight times in 3

have etre verse 6. For kavre

—

ovTe(iJLr]Te

make

ing inherent in ovre to

— eUe —

— kapre see Ro.

eire.

In 14 7

22.

:

14

it

8.

:

We have seen that there

nr]Te). it

:

is

noth-

Cf. Jo. 4: 11; 3 Jo.

disjunctive,

simply ov and re (cf. ov 5k), a negative copulative con12) ovre (cf. Gal. 1 In Rev. 5 3 f we have ov8k junction. ovre have we f. 12 Ac. 24 In ovre. and the next verse ov8eis In Jo. 5 37 f note ovTt Cf. Lu. 20 35 f ovbk. ovre ovre In ov. ov ovre ovre note 10 6 Cor. 1 In Kol ov. ovre correlathe of example good A question. after Jas. 3 12 cf. ovre In Ro. 8 38 f ovre occurs ten ojjTe is 1 Cor. 3:7. ovre It

10.

is

—

.

:

:

—

— —

:

—

— —

:

:

.

.

— —

—

:

:

—

tive

:

.

—

—

This is also just ix^re. fxijTe times. In Ac. 23 8 we find fxi] In Mt. (/xi? re). 5 34-36 we conjunction negative a copulative Th. 2 we have ^^ 2 2 f^VT^Mi7Te A"7Te M^^^ have Ml? 9:3 fxrjdkv in while fxi)Te, 7:33 ixii Lu. In fjiVTe. iiVTe pLn8k confusion some often is There times. five firjTe by is followed :

:

—

—

in the oi5re

—

—

—

:

—

—

MSS. between

[XTjdk

olbaovre kmaray^ai in

and

Mk.

firjTe,

14

:

ovhk

and

ovre.

Blass^ rejects

68 (kVBDL), but on whimsical

grounds. It is not easy to draw a disConjunctions. There is no between ''inferential" and "causal." doubt about apa and ovv. These are inferential paratactic parWhat about Tap? Monro 2 calls it causal. Kiihner-Gerth* ticles. well to reserve treat all three as causal. Perhaps it is just as (d)

Inferential

tinction

One the term ''causal" for the hypotactic particles on, kwel, etc. (apa, particles has to be arbitrary sometimes. And even so these sense. yap) were originally just transitional or explanatory in conjunctions. Blass'' calls them "consecutive" co-ordinate

ovv,

The etymology seems to be clear, though not acsuits cepted by all scholars. The root dp- (dp- ap- laKu, 'to fit') "arour Cf. .s It means then 'fittingly, accordingly.' exactly correof sort some ticulate" (ar-ticulus). The word expresses (i)

"Apa.

spondence between the sentences or clauses. It was postpositive always so. Cf. in the ancient Greek, but in the N. T. it is not p. 265.

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

2

Horn. Gr., p. 253.

6

Cf. K.-G., II, p. 317

Griech. Gr., p. 539.

»

f.,

H,

p. 317.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 272. So Drug., for the discussion of the theories. *

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK

1190

NEW TESTAMENT

Mt. 12 28; Ac. 17: 27. It occurs some 50 times in the N. T., in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Hebrews. The original notion of mere correspondence is apparently pre:

served in Lu. 11:48, apa i^aprvpes

hare, 'so ye are witnesses.' Cf. In Mk. 11 13; Ac. 17: 27, el apa has the idea of 'if haply.' Klotz takes apa to describe the unexpected and strange, something extrinsic, while Baumlein considers it a par-

also Ac. 11: 18.

:

what is immediately and necessarily concluN. T. instances seem to be clearly illative. Cf. Mt. 17: 26 f.; Ro. 7: 21. It has ye added several times (cf. Mt. 7:20; 17:26f.; Ac. 17:27). Paul is specially fond of &pa ol>u (Ro. 5 18; 7: 3, 25, etc.). Once he has apa vvp (Ro. 8 1). "Apa giving point to

ticle

sive.

Most

of the

:

:

occurs also in the apodosis (Mt. 12 :28; Gal. 2 :21). /xTjTt apa in a question in 2 Cor. 1 17.

We

have

:

There

Tap.

no doubt as to the origin

of this word. It is always postpositive. It is called abvbeap.os alTLoKoyiKos, but it does not always give a reason. It may be merely explanatory. We have seen that apa itself was originally just correspondence and then later inference. So then ye can accent as an intensive particle either of these ideas. It is a mistake, therefore, to approach the study of yap with the theory that it is always or properly an illative, not to say causal, (ii)

is

a compound of ye and apa and

Thayer wrongly is

common

calls

the illative use the primary one.

John and

first.

The word

books of the N. T. It is least common In Matthew and Luke

in all the larger

in the Gospel of it is

in fact, to note the explanatory use

It is best,

particle.

is

in Revelation.

much more frequent in the discourses and is rare in the strict In Mark and John it is about half and half.^ In gen-

narrative. eral the

N. T. use

of yap

The explanatory use

is

with that of the

in accord

common

is

classic period.

The N. T. examples

Homer.^

in

Cf. Mt. 19 12; Mk. 5 :42; 16 :4; Lu. 11 :30; Here the explanation follows immediately. Sometimes the explanation comes in by way of appendix to the train of thought. So Mt. 4 18, rjaav yap dXtets. Cf. also Mk. 2 15; Ro. 7:2. In questions we have good examples, particularly tI yap. So Mt. 27 23, tI yap KaKov eToirjaev; Cf Ro. 3:3. In Ac. 16 37, ov yap, dXXd, we have to resolve yap into its parts and make the phrase =' not much, but.' In Jo. 9 30, ev tovtco yap, the man

are numerous.

18

:

:

32.

:

:

:

.

:

:

uses yap with fine scorn, 'why, just in it is

illative. »

Cf. also Jo. 7 Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

:

41 Ac. 19 ;

p. 102.

this,' etc.

common

hardly creditable to Pilate's

35;

:

2

In Jo. 19 :6

sense to take yap as

Mt. 9

:

5.

Monro, Horn.

Tap sometimes Gr., p. 253.

"PAKTICLES

gives the major premise (Mt. 26 ise (2 Pet. 1

15

:

nAPAOIIKAl)

(aI

52),

:

sometimes both

f.),

use of 7dp

1191

more often the minor prem(Jo. 3 19 f.). The purely :

simple enough, though the force of the ground or reason naturally varies greatly. See Mt. 1 21, avrds illative

is

:

yap

(6

o-ojo-et;

24)

:

yap; (Ro. 8

fj

:

every sentence with yap in Ro. 8 11: 1; 15

The

3.

text

if

Cf

possible.

(iii)

it is

Ionic also has

ever that

not

Jo.

.

4

:

44.

—

Note yap 6tl in 1 Tim. 6 7. is unknown. Brugmann^ thinks :

The etymology of ovv

Ovu.

probable that

The

18-24.

For Kal between clauses or sentences That must be gathered from the con:

precise relation

not set forth by yap.

is

it

:

Paul begins yap see Ro.

18) \oyl^op.ac yap.

derived from *6

o^v

h

or 6 6v (cf

.

ovtus,

(so Lesbian, Doric, Boeotian).

tQ

ovtl)

.

But, how-

may

be, it is important to note that the particle is nor even consequential in Homer.^ It is merely a

illative

transitional particle relating clauses or sentences loosely together

by way

of confirmation.

though rare

It

was common

in this sense in

in the Attic writers save in jxh ovv.

But

it

Homer, is

very

frequent in the Gospel of John as a mere transitional particle. In this Gospel it occurs about 200 times, nearly as frequent as all

the rest of the N. T., though

it is rare in the other Johannine In John's Gospel, outside of 8 examples in the words of Jesus, the rest occur in the narrative portion.^ Abbott * seems puzzled over the many non-illative instances of ovv in John and

writings.

suggests that "the writer perhaps had in view the objections of

But

controversialists."

this

is

wholly gratuitous and needless in Probably a majority of

the light of the history of the particle.

the instances in John's Gospel are non-illative as in Homer, the original use of the word.^ Luke preserves the literary Attic idiom by the common use of nev ovv as in Ac. 15 3, 30, etc. But John :

boldly uses ovv alone and needs no apology for doing so.

It just

with no necessary thought of cause or because of John's free use, one of the commonest

carries along the narrative result.

It

is,

particles in the

N. T. and

in the epistles.^

note

when

is

oftener in the narrative books than

It is interesting in

ovv is

John

to take a chapter

merely continuative and when

illative.

and

Cf. ch.

11, for instance, verses 3, 6, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 31, 32, 33, 36,

38, 45, 47, 54, 56.

So we start

off

again in 12

:

1

with

6 ovv 'Ir]aovs

1

r.ricch. Gr., p. 549.

»

Abbott, Job. Gr.,

2

Monro, Horn.

*

lb., p. 168.

^

Cf. K.-G., II, p. 326.

p. 105.

See also Weymouth, App. A, Rendering into Eng.

Gk. Aorist and Perfect, 1S04. Blaiis, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 272.

of the 6

Gr., p. 255.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1192

commonest connective between sendo not feel the same need sentences. The anindependent between connecting-particles for delicate nuances. The inthese point out loved to Greeks cient It is the

(continuative).

We modems

tences in this Gospel.

37. A good instance of Mt. 3 8, TOLriaare ovv Kapwov. It is (Ro. 5:1; 6 12, etc.). Paul is fond and of tL ovv (6 1, 15; 7:7; 8 31,

terrogative ovK ovv occurs only in Jo. 18

the purely illative use

common

in Paul's Epistles

also of apa ovv (Ro. 8

Ovv

etc.).

in

is

is

:

:

12)

:

:

always postpositive.

Hypotactic Conjunctions

2.

:

:

{avvSea-fioi viroraicTLKoi).

The

conjunctions used in the N. T. with subordinate clauses have been See discussed and the constructions given in detail already.

The relative, temporal, comparaand consecutive, apprehensive, conditional and declarative conjunctions make a goodly list. But it is not necessary to go over the same ground again. Most of these con-

Modes (Subordinate

Clauses).

tive, local, causal, final

junctions, as previously shown, are of relative origin.^ All are adverbs. It was necessary to treat at length the paratactic con-

junctions which antedate the hypotactic in origin and were always exceedingly abundant in the vernacular. The hypotactic belong

more highly developed speech, but one must not think that the hypotactic conjunctions regulate the construction of the sentence. They get their meaning from the sentence, not the sentence to the

The other view is a mechanical theory of language out of harmony with the historical growth of both mode and particle.2 Hypotaxis grew out of parataxis. This paratactic

from the conjunction.

origin survives in

many

1 Jo.

3

:

11

f.

Cf., for instance, the relative at

ways.

the beginning of sentences, as

The Greek

is

ev

oh (Lu. 12

:

1).

So also on in

particularly rich in its subordinating

conjunctions as compared with the Sanskrit and the Hebrew. Each subordinate clause possesses a case-relation toward the principal sentence as substantive, adjective or adverb, so that the sentence expansion is on the lines of the word-relations. In general the

disappearance of the ancient Greek conjunctions from

the

modern Greek

kef)'

(3

''have

Thumb 'until.' 1

is

noticeable.

entirely

goes on with the story.

"On

is

gone before

ttoO

We and

p.

^'h

186).

have ws in aav and ware va= though ottcos has revived.

va,

the relative origin of conjs. like on, ore, ottws, ws, fws see Baron, Le Relatif et la Conjonction, 1891, pp. 95 ff. Cf Nilsson, Die Kausalsatze im Griech. bis Arist. See also Gildersl., Am.

On

Pronom 2

'OTrore {diroTav), axpi-s, A^expts,

disappeared" (Thumb, Handb.,

.

Jour, of Philol., 1907, p. 354

f.

PARTICLES

Na has

greatly extended

modified, like d^oD,

The

TTov (oTTov), irpoTov, etc.

into service to

functions.

its

eav, eire

1193

(aI nAPAOIIKAl)

—

Some

survive greatly ws irov

etre, hut, eTretSi?, irplv,

(eojs),

paratactic conjunctions are "pressed

form dependent clauses" as at the beginning.

Parataxis turns into hypotaxis. VI. Interjections,

Winer ^ considers

interjections to

be mere

sounds, and so entirely outside of the sphere of syntax and in-

deed of grammar. But one^ of the imperatival forms (0176) is exclamatory in origin. Or is the interjection an imperative in origin? We see this form still used as an interjection in Jas. 4 13. So also Ue in Jo. 1 29, l'3e 6 iifjLvos rod deov. Cf. devpo (Mk. 10:21), SeOre (Mt. 11:28). Aevpo is very vivid in Jo. 11:43, Adfape Sevpo e^co. 'I8ov is either used absolutely (Mt. 11: 10) or with the nominative (Rev. 4 1) and is of frequent occurrence. Kat I80V is good Greek, but its frequency reminds one of the Hebrew idiom. We have ea in Lu. 4 34. Once ova occurs (Mk. 15 29) with the vocative. So oi^at is found with the vocative in Lu. 6 25. It is found absolutely in Rev. 18 10, 16, 19, oval, oval. Twice it is used with the accusative (Rev. 8 13; 12 12), as the object of thought. Usually the dative is found with oval as in Mt. 11 21; Lu. 6 24 f.; 11 42. The word occurs mainly in Matthew and Luke. Sometimes we have oj with the vocative as in Mt. 15 28, w yvmi.. So Ac. 13 10; Ro. 2 1; Gal. 3 1. There is usually some vehemence or urgency when w is used. But not always. See Ac. 1:1; 18 14. In Ro. 10 15 ws is an exclamatory particle, as tI is in Lu. 12 49. It is not quite true, therefore, to say that interjections lie quite outside of grammar. Indeed, language may come from just these ejaculatory sounds, like ''mama" with the babe. Tragedians' naturally use interjections more frequently. People differ greatly in the use of "Oh" and "Ah." The English audiences are fond of "Hear, hear," while the American crowds love to clap their hands or stamp their feet. Farrar^ follows Scaliger and Destutt de Tracy in regarding them as words par excellence and as having high :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

linguistic importance.

Grammar can

deal with emotion as well

as with thought. 1

W.-Th.,

'

Miillor, I)c interjcctionum

*

Gk. Synt.,

p. 356.

p. 201.

2

Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 171

f.

apud Sophoclem, Euripidem que Usu, 1885, p.

3.

CHAPTER XXII FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA 2XHMATA) Strictly speaking tliere is no I. Rhetorical, not Grammatical. need to go further in the discussion of the points of syntax. There

are various matters that the

grammars usually

discuss because

no N. T. rhetoric. These points belong to language in general, though in some of them the Greek has turns of its own. Each writer has, besides, his own style of thought and speech. Under The Sentence we have See discussion in chapter IV. there

is

already discussed the

ellipsis (of

subject, predicate or copula),

matters of concord, apposition, the position of words (emphasis,

euphony, rhythm, poetry, prolepsis, varepov Tporepov, postpositive words, hyperbaton, order of clauses), simple and

compound

sen-

between words (polysyndeton and asj^ndeton), connection between clauses and sentences (paratactic and hypotactic) and asyndeton again, running and periodic style, parenthesis, anacoluthon, oratio variata, connection between paragraphs. These matters call for no further comment. They could have been treated at this point, but they seemed rather to belong to the discussion of sentences in a more vital way than the remainFor attraction and incorporation see ing rhetorical figures. Cases and Relative Pronouns. The points now to be discussed have not so much to do with the orderly arrangement ((rvvdeaLsY as with the expression and the thought. The characteristics of the N. T. writers II. Style in the N. T. tences, connection

received treatment in chapter IV. The precise question here is whether \he writers of the N. T. show any marks of rhetorical study. We have seen already (The Sentence, Rhythm) that the Blass^ scholars are divided into two camps on this subject. (but not Debrunner) argues that Paul's writings and the Epistle to the

Hebrews show the

influence of the rules of

literary prose of Asia (Asianism) V

1

^

and

Rome

rhythm

of the

(Pausanias, Cicero,

N. T. Gk., p. 295. Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa, 1905. 1194

Blass, Gr. of

FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA L'XIIMATa) Curtius, Apulcius).

Deissmanni

must get

his bearings.

We

can

have none of

will

pretty quarrel and, as usual, there

is

all

1195 It

it.

truth in both views.

is

a

One

agree with Blass^ at once

that the N.T. writers are not to be compared on this point with the literary masters of Attic prose, but with writers like Polybius.

We

are surely not to look for the antithetic style of the Attic

orators (Isocrates, Lysias, Demosthenes).^

If there

is

esthetic

beauty in 1 Cor. 13 or Heb. 11, it may be the natural aesthetic of Homer's rhapsodies, not the artificialities of Isocrates. Blass* admits the poverty of the Oriental languages in the matter of periods and particles and does not claim that the N. T. writers rose above the O. T. or rose to the level of Plato. And yet Norden in his Antike Kunstprosa claims that in his best diction Paul rises to the height of Plato in the Phccdrus. WilamowitzMoUendorff likewise calls Paul ''a classic of Hellenism." Sir W. M. Ramsay is a stout advocate for the real Hellenic influence on Paul's life.^ But Ramsay scouts the word "rhetoric" in connection with Paul: "I can hardly imagine that one who had ever experienced the spell of Paul could use the word rhetoric about the two examples which he mentions from First Corinthians, and Romans."^ There was in Paul's time artificial rhetoric with which Paul evidently had no connection, nor did any of the writers of the N. T. One cannot believe that Paul, for instance, studied at one of the famous schools of rhetoric nor that he studied the writings of the current rhetoricians. This much may be freely admitted about all of the N. T. writers, who wrote in the language of the people, not of the schools. Deissmann^ correctly says: "The history of Christianity, with all its wealth of incident, has been treated

much

too

often as the history

of the Christian literary upper class, the history of theologians

and

ecclesiastics,

1

Thcol.

Lit.,

and most truly

schools, councils

tianity itself has often been 1900, p. 434;

The Expositor,

Paul (1912). 2 Hermcneutik und Kritik, 1892,

p. 198.

willing to see the other point of view.

parties,

whereas Chrisremote

alive in quarters

1908, p. 74.

The

See also his St.

true grauiniariau

Cf. Gildersl.,

Am.

is

but too

Jour, of Philol., 1908,

p. 206. ' * ^

Ilahne, Zur sprachl. Xsthctik der Griech., 1890, p. 4.

Hermcneutik und Kritik, p. 198. the controversy between him and

C'f.

I'riiicipnl (iarvic in

for 1911 anent (Jarvic's book. Studies of Paul "

The

^

Light from the Ancient East, p. 404.

Expositor, Aug., 1911, p.

IT)?.

and His

Tlic lOxpositor

(.iospcl (,1911).

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1196

is all pre-eminently true and we must never was a carpenter, John a fisherman and Paul a tentmaker. And yet Deissmann^ himself will say of John: "St. John has no liking for progress along an unending straight

from

This

councils.'*

forget that Jesus

circling flight, like his symbol, the eagle. something hovering and brooding about his production; repetitions are in no wise abnormal with him, but the marks of a contemplation which he cherishes as a precious inheritance from St. Paul and further intensifies." There is a perfection of

road; he loves the

There

is

form in the Parables of Jesus that surpasses all the rules of the grammarians and rhetoricians. The eagle flight of John makes The passion of Paul the cawing of the syntactical crows pitiful. broke through all the traditional forms of speech. He lacked the punctilious refinements ^ of the Stoic rhetoricians, but he had the cyclonic power of Demosthenes and the elevation of Plato. Even Blass^ sees that "the studied emplojrment of the so-called Gorgian assonances is necessarily foreign to the style of the N. T., all the more because they were comparatively foreign to the whole period; accident, however, of course produces occasional instances

and the writer often did not decline to make use of any This would seem modest enough to Deissmann. In particular Blass* notes "the absence of

of them,

that suggested themselves." satisfy

rhetorical artifice in the Johannine speeches."

that nature in is

some

Mark and

artistic sense

Luke.

of style,"

"But but

it

in

He

Matthew

is

finds little of

there really

"mainly drawn from

Hebrew and not from Greek." The many quotations in this Gospel show a close use of the LXX and the Hebrew O. T. And on the whole, the Greek runs smoothly enough. Konig has a valuable article on "Style of Scripture" in the Extra Volume of Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, but he deals mainly with the

yet,

There

O. T.

is

in truth little that is distinctive in the style of

the N. T. apart from the naturalness, simplicity, elevation and

passion of the writers.

It is only in the Epistle to the

Hebrews

that Blass^ finds "the care and dexterity of an artistic writer" as shown by his occasional avoidance of hiatus, but even here Blass has to strain a point to

make

it stick.

Bultmann^ draws a

definite parallel between the style of Paul and the Cynic-Stoic '

Light from the Anc. East,

2

J.

p. 410.

Weiss, Beitr. zur paulinischen Rhetorik, 1897, p. 168.

3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 298.

*

lb., p. 302.

*

Dor

Stil

6

lb., p. 296.

der pauUnische Predigt

und

die kynisch-stoische Diatribe, 1910.

FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPFIEIA SXHMATa)

1197

Diatribe and makes his point, but even so one wonders if after all Paul uses question and answer so skilfully by reason of definite

study of the subject or because of his dialectical training as a It is per se, howrabbi and his native genius in such matters. Paul knew the common that Stoic dialectic possible ever, entirely also as he did the tenets of current Stoicism (cf. Paul's

Athens).

The examples

of figures of speech in the

work

in

N. T. are due

to the nature of speech in general, to the occasional passion^ of the writer, to the play of his fancy, to unconscious expression

We must not make the mistake of Luke, Paul, James and the author of Hebrews as boorish and unintellectual. They lived in an age of great culture and they were saturated with the noblest ideas that ever filled the human brain. As men of genius they were bound to respond

of genius, to

rating

men

mere accident.

like

to such a situation.

They do show a

Heinrici^ has so well shown.

and thought.

Even John,

In

1

distinct literary flavour as

Cor. 13

we have

called aypafxnaros Kal

form

finish of

tStcbrrjs

(Ac. 4

:

13),

Deissmann in his St. Paul goes to the extreme of making Paul a mere man of an untenable position in affairs devoid of theological culture, view of Acts and Paul's Epistles when he says: "His place is with Amos, the herdsman of Tekoa, and Tersteegen, the ribbon-weaver

rose to the highest planes of thought in his Gospel.

—

Miilheim" (p. 6). We may brush aside the artificial rules of Gorgias as too studied efforts for the N. T. Indeed, the men of the time had largely refused to follow the lead of Gorgias of Sicily,

of

though his name clung to the figures of speech. His mannerisms were not free from affectation and pedantry .^ The Attic orators of the fourth century b.c. had their own rules for easy and flexible The writers and speakers of the later time practical speech. modified these in their

own way.

We

are not concerned here to

follow Blass" in his effort to prove that Paul and the writer of Hebrews were students of the current rhetoricians. This we fail to see, but

we do

see that the language of the

organism and exhibits many which the rhetoricians have discussed. we adopt their terminology.

N. T. was a

of the peculiarities of

1

Norden (Die

torical figures as

«

living

speech

For convenience, therefore,

ant. Kunstprosa, Bd. II, p. 508) speaks of Paul's use of rhedue to his "Ton." Hcinrici (Zuni Ilellen. d. Paulus, Komni.

zu II Kor.) sees raul'a "Eijj;enart." 2 Der hterarische Charakter d. neut. »

human

SchiifttMi, 1908.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 295. Die Rhythnien der asianischen und roniischen Kunstprosa, 1905.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1198

ni. Figures of Idea or Thought {
Some

period of Attic oratory.

abundant

'lovSalov; (4 is

are distinctly rhetorical

which Paul makes

question of

use, especially in the Epistle to the

makes a good liveliness and This

them

of

as the rhetorical

character,

in

:

perspicuity, as in Ro. 3

10) ttws ovv eXoylaOr]; ev TrepLTOfxfj ovtl

r)

quite like the diatribe in Epictetus and other

(Radermacher, N. T.

Blass^

dialectical

ri ovv to TvepLaadv

1

:

Romans.

showing

critique of such questions as

kv

rod

aKpo^vaTla;

writers

kolvt]

Other questions are quite emotional, as in 2 Cor. 11 22. In Ro. 8 31-35 we have a "brilliant oratorical passage," worthy of any orator in the world. There are others almost equal to it, Ro. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11; 1 Cor. 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15; 2 Cor. 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13. Here we have oratory of the highest kind with the soul all ablaze with great ideas. The words respond to this high environment and are all aglow with beauty and light. Certainly the Epistle to Cf.

Gr., p. 182).

1

Cor. 7

:

18

ff.

:

Hebrews

is

oratory of the highest order, as are the addresses in

Blass' thinks that

Acts.

tisch)'' in his iSiwrtKi]

:

manner

4>paaLs,

not

have a martinet

Luke

is

distinctly "unprofessional {idio-

of presenting the great speeches in Acts,

rexviKrj

That

4)paais.

spirit to cavil at

is

true,

but one would

The

the word eloquence here.

Matthew, Luke and John are above all content and spirit. One cannot think that Jesus was a

discourses of Jesus in praise in

technical student of rhetoric, but he sang with the woodrobin's note,

and that

far surpasses the highest

trained voice whose highest praise

is

achievement of the best

that she approaches the

woodrobin or the nightingale. There is perfection of form in the thoughts of Jesus whether we turn to the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, the Parables in Luke 15, or the Discourses in the Upper Room and On the Way to Gethsemane in John 14-17.

The

consummate skill "Master Preacher" of the ages. There is undoubted use of irony (eipcoveia) in the N. T. We see it in the words of Jesus. See the high scorn in /cat v/jLels TXTjpcocrare to style of the reporters does not conceal the

of Christ as the

neTpov Toov iraTepwv Tr\7]pooaeT€.

OTL 1

So also

ovK evSex^Tai

v/jlcov

(Mt. 23

:

32).

This

is

the correct text, not

koXccs d^eretre Trjv evToX-qv tov 6eov

7rpo(f)riTr]i>

airoXeadaL

e^co

(Mk. 7

'Iepov(raXrj/j.

:

9)

(Lu. 13

:

and 33).

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 304.

lb. The " Terminology of Grammar" is not fixed like the laws of the Medes and Persians. Cf. Rep. of the Joint Com. on Gr. Terminol., 1911. ^

3

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 305.

:

FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA ZXHMATA) There

more

of

1199

in Paul's writings.

Cf. 1 Cor. 4:8; 2 Cor. There was never a more nimble mind than that of Paul, and he knew how to adapt himself to every mood of his readers or hearers without any sacrifice of principle. It was no declaimer's tricks, but love for the souls of is

11: 19f.; 12

it

13; Ro. 11:20.

:

men that made him become all things He could change his tone because he when they had been 1

f.,

16

f.,

and

23)

Cf. also 1 Cor. 7:3; 12

v/jLels,

:

:

instead of

:

all

men

(1

Cor. 9

:

22).

loved the Galatians even

The

20).

a(i>poavvT[j

Ro. 3

:

5,

rhetoricians call (cf.

'Kk'^oi

also 11

Kara apOpwirov Xcyoj.

11; Ro. 8 34; Gal. 4:9. So Paul uses 9:4, /X17 ttcos KaTaiaxvv9a}ij.ev ij^ieTs, tva

/jlt]

:

/jlti

iroTe KaTaicrxvvOrjre.

Paul's innate delicacy of feeling

on

h

21,

epidiorthosis, as in

paraleipsis, as in 2 Cor. Xe7a)/xef

4

led astray (Gal.

prodiorthosis, as in 2 Cor. 11

it

to

As Blass^

suggests,

makes him take the reproach

Xeyu otl koL atavrbv /xot irpoooSo in Ro. 7 4 Paul says Kai vyueTs WavaTcodrjTe toj pouco rather than bluntly assert Kai 6 vofios cnredavev (or WapaTcodri) There is sometimes a lack of parallelism (heterogeneous structure). Cf. 1 Jo. 2:2, IXaafJids irepi twv afxapTLOJv rnxUhv, oh wepl tojv rnjLeTepojv himself.

Cf. also Phil. 19, iVa


fxij

:

.

ixbvov,

aXXa

also Ph. 2

Mk.

12

:

Kai oXov tov Koapiov, :

38

22, Trarpi f.,

7771'

— avv

phovaav

instead of

epoi.

Cf

.

tcoj'

oKov tov Koapov.

irepLiraTelv

Kai

aairacr povs

ev riplv Kai peO' -qpcov ccrrat in

2 Jo.

Cf. in

2.

What Winer ^ "Broken and Heterogeneous Structure" (anacoluthon, oratio variata) has had sufficient discussion under The Sentence. So as to asyndeton. There remain a number of other points which may IV. Figures of Expression (o-xip-aTa Xelcws).

calls

be grouped for convenience.

Parallels and Contrasts (Parallelismus memhrormn). many illustrations of this idiom in the N. T., both in the Gospels and Epistles. The O. T. is full of such words and phrases, particularly in the Psalms. One who read these hymns much would naturally have his eye and ear trained to this form (a)

There are

of rhythm. We do not need to see conscious effort at poetry, though in 1 Tim. 3 16 we probably have a fragment of an early :

Christian hymn.

The Hebrew

parallelism is manifest in Lu. 1 42-45 (the song of Elizabeth), 46-56 (the song of Mary), and 68-79 (the song of Zacharias), 2 29-32 (the song of Simeon). One does not have to go to the Greek rhetoricians. The spirit of rhapsody here shown is due to the Spirit of God moving the heart and stirring the highest impulses of the soul. There are other examples of primitive Christian song in the N. T., as in Eph. 5 :

:

:

1

Blass, C.r. of

N. T. Gk.,

p. 304.

^

W.-Th.,

p. 5(30.

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NE"W TESTAMENT

1200

14; Jude 24 f.; Rev. 5 12-14, and often in this book. There is the perfection of poetic form in the noble prose in 1 Cor. 13; 15: 54-7; Col. 1 10-12. One hesitates to think that this use of :

:

antithesis or paralleHsm

is artificial even if it is conscious. This be synonymous (Mt. 10 26; Jo. 1 17; Ro. 11 33) or antithetic (Jo. 3:6; Ro. 2:7).^ There are also examples of Chiasm or Reverted Parallelism (from the letter X) as in Phile-

parallelism

mon

may

:

5, TTiv ayairrjv Kal T-qv Triariv

doubt very much

Paul was at

if

:

exets eis tov Kvpiov 'Irfcrovv Kal els

SoMt. 7:6; Ph. l:15f.;

TzLvras rohs aylovs. I

riv

:

all

1

Th. 5:

6;

Ph. 3:

10.^

conscious of the stilted paral-

lelism that Blass^ sees in 1 Cor. 1: 25

ff.

with anaphora (the

first

— ov iroWol, or antistrophe (the last words alike) as in rod deov — tov deov — — or symwords

alike) as in ov toXXoL

toov avdpd>irwi>

•

rwt' avOpiciroiv,

ploce (both alike) as in e^eXe^aro 6 debs IVa KaTaiaxvvr], e^eXe^aro 6 Beds

Cf. Heb. 2 16. The manuscripts vary a deal in 1 and Blass has to juggle the text in order to make it come out in "rounded periods of three sections." What if this finesse was praised by dilettante rhetoricians when they found it in Demosthenes or Cicero? Surely Paul was not a I'm KaTaicrxvvri.

Cor.

1

:

25

:

ff.,

"stylist" of the fashion of Cicero nor even of Demosthenes. Perhaps no orator "would have regarded the eloquence of this passage with other feelings than those of the highest admiration." Doubtless so, but for the passion and force, not for the mere

word-play.

Just so the three poetical quotations (Ac. 17:28;

do not justify straining after accidental Heb. 12 12 f., or elsewhere. Blass* is so fond of finding poetic parallelism in the Gospels that he actually makes it tilt the scales against the best manuscripts in some passages as in Mt. 5 45; 7 13 f.; 25 35. This seems 1

Cor. 15

lines in

33; Tit. 1

:

Ac. 23

:

:

12)

5; Jas. 1

:

17;

:

:

much

:

:

like eisegesis.

There is the solemn repetition of (6) Contrasts in Words. a word with powerful effect (the epanadiplosis of the rhetoricians), but Blass does not claim this as a rhetorical device in the N. T. It is natural to strong emotion. Cf eTrto-Tara eTrto-rdra (Lu. 8 24) Kupte Kvpie (Mt. 25 11) (XTavpcoaov (jTavpwaov (Jo. 19 6) Rev. 18 2, eireaev eweaev. See Ph. 3 2. Cf. also the two hours of shouting in Ac. 19 34. Climax is as old as Homer. This is again a perfectly .

:

:

;

:

:

;

:

:

natural

method

of emphasis.

Cf. the links in the

list

of virtues

See also Ro. 5 3-5; 10 14. There is a cumulative force in the repetition. Per contra, zeugma puts together in 2 Pet.

1

:

5-7.

:

1

W.-Th.,

2

Green, Handb. to N. T. Gk., p. 355.

p. 639.

:

'

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 300

*

lb., p. 302.

f.

:

1201

FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA SXHMATA)

words that do not properly go together, as in 1 Cor. 3 2, yaXa So also Lu. 1 64, avecoxOr] to arbtxa avrov vnas kiroTLaa, ov ^pccna. yXwaaa avrov. Cf 1 Tim. 4 3. This construcirapaxpwo- '^^i^ tion is usually explained as elliptical, one verb (as above) being :

:

.

^7

:

used where two are necessary for the full statement. KiihnerGerthi treat it as a species of brachylogij. The use of synonyms of the classic is not absent in the N. T., though not in the richness

h

and the use of (xtqTrdw and (t>L\eoo side by side in Jo. 21 15-17 where Peter makes a point of using
idiom.

:

15,

KapSla KoXrj Kal ayadfj, :

:

amples of 29);

initial alliteration occur, like Tvov-qpia, irXeove^ia. (Ro. 1

i-jSpio-ras,

(1:30);

inreprjcjiavovs

6.(TT6pyovs, aveXevnovas (1

30

:

It is

f.).

aawdtrovs,

aavperovs,

aireLdels,

hard to

whether

tell

this

is

conscious or unconscious. There are also instances of 'paronomaParonomasia is rather loosely applied in sia and annominatio.

only for words of similar sound, while of the same word or wordrecurrence Blass'' confines it to the -Kavrl TavTore wdaav (2 Cor. h stem, like KaKov^ mKoos (Mt. 21:41);

the books.

Winer ^ uses

it

9:8); 6 vo/jlos wmi/xcos (1 Tim. 1:8), and uses parechesis for different words of similar sound, hke Xiyuot Kal \oLixoi (Lu. 21 11); 'ifxadev aawkrovs aavv(pdovov bvov (Ro. 1 29) a(i>' o)V ewadev (Heb. 5:8); point is a The 11:17. Ro. 10:12; Seealso2Cor. ekTovs{l:dl). with deals annominatio But pressed. be not fine one and need :

;

:

Thus

the sense as well as the sound.

16:18; yivuaKeis a

—

(jw4>poveiv

(Ro. 12

:

3)

;

Tlerpos

(Ac. 8 30)

avajLVCoaKeLS

:

;

and

-werpa in

v-wep^povdv

Mt.

— 4>poveiv

p-n^h epya^ofxevovs, dXXd irepLepya^ofxhovs

Mt. 27 9; Lu. 9 60; Ac. 23 3; 2 Cor. (2 Th. 3:11). 3:2f.; 2 Cor. 4: 8f.; Ro. 1:20; 5: Ph. ll:29ff.; Cor. 3:2; 1 so there is a certain amount of Even 4:1. Eph. 19; 12:15; overlapping in the two figures. The ancients did not smile because a pun was made. It was merely a neat turn of speech and was Cf. also

:

very common. So Jesus says to Thomas, TTLCTos (Jo. 20:27). (c)

Contraction and Expansion.

:

:

firj

ylvov ainaTos dXXa

It is difficult to

draw

lines

between groups among these figures of speech. Zeugma, as we have seen, can very well come in here as a sort of ellipsis. The under ellipsis of subject or predicate came up for discussion 1

II, p. 570.

a

Cf. Trench,

8

W.-Th.,

N. T. Synonyms; Heine, Syncniytnik d. neut. Criech. * Gr. of N. T. Clk., p. 298.

p. 636.

The

But a few more words

Sentence.

So

of the absence of the copula.

Cor. 11:6.

though

It

is

and

dtxl

yivoiiai

:

ovk ev Xoycc

15;

context makes clear what verb

Ac. 18

Ro. 4

6;

:

In 2 Cor. 8

:

:

where Winer

4:6.

It is

4 3

^

Cor. 5

1

Gal. 2

7;

:

Usually the

Rev.

9;

:

Cf. also Ro. 13

idiom.

1

rw top

7,

:

4.

:

6 ac-

Cf. also

Cor.

1

passages like Heb. 1:7 Xe-

6 Beds in

The context

rod deov, dXX'

12.

:

k

(pwvrj ttoXlv

.

must be supplied with

noun

supplies the

a case

in

Cf. Jo. 20

31, ^rjTOvvTCJV re avrov aTOKTetvac.

:

Cf

jSacrtXeta

rj

28, 34; 2

:

to be supplied,

is

supplies d7ro5t56mt KeXevovrL.

easy to supply

e'iprjKe.

:

Ac. 21

Cf.

wanting, as in Mt. 27:25;

is

18; 2 Cor. 9

:

common Greek

(jiopov,

yeL,

5

9;

21;

:

15 the participle excof

cording to a

11; Ac. 19

:

common.

are the most Cf. Jo. 21

Cor. 4: 20.

1

Jo. 14

not always clear what verb

SevTepov irpos avTOV, Ac. 10 dwiL/jLet,

are needed here.

(2 Cor. 1:18); 6 Kvpios €77us (Ph. 4:5) as samples

6 debs

TTLaTos

h

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1202

like

tov

rjpav

2,

:

took away')- In Ac. 21: 16, avpjjXdov nal tojv /xa^jjMany verbs are conTU)i>, supply TLves as in Lu. 11:49, rtvas. So 5ia7aj (sc. jSiov) in sidered clear enough without the object.

Kvpiov ('people

3:3;

Tit.

24

:

Lu. 17

Trpoo-ex^ {sc. vovv) in

Mk.

xoXop) in

6

:

19; avjjL^aWo)

(sc.

3, kirex^ in

:

14

7, evexoi (sc.

:

4

Xoyovs) as in Ac.

15

:

Lu.

(cf.

avTL^aWeTe with object); avWap-^avco in Lu. 1:31.

17,

It is

unnecessary (see Adjectives) to recount again the many instances of the adjective without a substantive where the gender and

A few common examples sufit clear. For the absence of rifxepa note rfj Tplrri (Lu. 13 32); avpLov (Mt. 6 34) ttjs awepov (Mt. 27 8) rfi 'txoixkvrj (Lu. 13 33) ttj r^ is e^r?s (21: 1); t^ erepg. (Ac. 20 15). tTCLovaxi (Ac. 16 11); ^?7pd, and in Heb. 11 26, kv Aiyvireasily supplied in Mt. 23 15, Tov. Supply y\u)aaa in Rev. 9 11, h rfj 'EXXrjvLKrj. So with 656s number and context make

fice.

17

:

;

:

:

;

:

77

:

;

:

:

:

17

:

in Lu. 5

:

3,

17

5e^ta,

more

19, wolas; 19 :4,

and

kv \evKOLs,

17

aptaTepa

serious

is

the

We

eKelvrjs.

Mt. 10 and x^pa

CScop in

ellipsis

:

miss

in Lu. 17

in

Mt. 26

:

:

24,

k

rrjs

the context must supply both verb and subject.

— dXX' there

figure

2 Th. 2

:

3

:

Much

els ttjv. :

12,

13,

where

Cf. also ovx

on

—

oti,

f.,

on

edv

no apodosis expressed. These are but samples of the as to all languages more or to Greek (cf. el 8e It is not worth while to try to bring under this rhetorical Cf. the all the lapses and turns of style in each writer.

common

/jltj)

absence of the verb with

with

like

—

:

Mt. 6

is

ellipses less.

In a case

in Jo. 7: 22.

x^tp in

and Gal. 5

5,

20

ifxaTiov in Jo.

So with

42, \pvxp6v.

ev

8e

in Ph. 3

:

l3, 1

IVa in 1

Cor.

with tovto

1

:

be in

W.-Th., p. 590.

31, with to

2 Cor. 9

:

/xtj

6,

in 4

with

6,

:

I'm

:

FIGURES OF SPEECH (ropriEiA sxhmata) again in Gal. 2

:

Cf. also

9.

Mk.

14: 29;

Cor. 10

1

:

1203 24; 2 Cor.

5:13. Aposiopesis stands to itself since it is a conscious suppression of part of a sentence under the influence of a strong emotion like Curiously enough Blass,^ who sees so many anger, fear, pity.

any instances of aposiodo not consider his objections well founded. We may dismiss Mk. 7: 11 and Lu. 22 :42 because of the true text (see W. H.), and need not quibble over 6pa fxi] in Rev. 22 9. We may agree with Winer ^ that we have simply anacolutha in 2 Th. 2 3 ff But we have left others like Mk. 11 32, N. N. T.

T., denies that

rhetorical tropes in the pesis occur in the

I

:

.

:

dXXd 13

:

e^

e'iirwfiev'

:

avdpo^itcov;

— k4>o^ovvTO

9, Kav fiep TTOfqari Kapirov el 8k

So again 19

:

42,

el

vlbv Tov apdpLOTTOV ava^alpoPTa

23

:

9,

el

So

owov

Jo. 6

rj

See also Lu.

ox^ov.

to jikWov kKKbyptLS avTTjv. :

62, eap ovv dewprJTe t6v

Then again Ac.

to irpoTepov;

rjp

TTPevpa e\a\7]aep avTiS>

de

ets

iiri'ye,

e7J'cos hat <jv.

top

ayjeXos

—

It is possible to

.

regard Ro. 7 24 as aposiopesis. What differentiates these passages from ellipses or abbreviations of other clauses (cf Mt. 25 14; Mk. 13 34; 2 Cor. 3 13) is the passion. One can almost see :

.

:

:

the gesture and the flash of the eye in aposiopesis. We need not follow minutely the various sorts of hreviloquence

Thought moves more rapidly

or brachijlogy that are possible.

than expression and the words often crowd together in a compressed way that may be not only terse, but at first obscure. A

good vlos

illustration occurs in

Mt. 9

:

6, I'm 8e eldrJTe 6tl e^ovalap ex^- b

kirl ttjs yrjs a(f)LepaL a/JLapTlas

TOV avdpoiTTOV

XuTiKo) "E7etp€ apop oov

inserted TOTe Xeyei tw

Trap,

— TOTe

\e'yeL tui irapa-

Here the Evangelist has

kt\.

ttjp kKlptjp,

before the conclusion to

make

it

clearer.

done in the parallel passages in Mk. 2 10; Lu. The argument for a common document for this incidental 5 24 (an

same thing

is

:

:

paragraph).

Mk. 14:49,

Cf. also

dXX' IVa

ir'KrjpcoduiaLv

al

7pa0ai.

where ^p^aTo implies /cai SteSee a similar reXet before iroLe'LV re Kai hhaaKeiP axpi- V^ W^P^s, fcrX. use of ap^apepos in Mt. 20 8, Lu. 23 5. A case like Lu. 24 47, ap^apepoL, amounts to anacoluthon or the use of the participle as a principal verb. Cf also Kaeapii;oiP in Mk. 7 19. Various examples of ellipsis-like zeugma are also instances of brachylogy. No clear line of distinction appears. So in comparisons we sometimes have to fill out the sense. Cf. Rev. 13 11, €ix« nkpaTa Cf. 1 Jo. 3 11 f.; 2 Pet. 2:1. 8vo opoia. apPLU}, i.e. KepaatP applov.

So Jo. 13

:

18; 15

:

25.

Cf. Ac. 1

:

1,

:

:

:

:

.

:

:

Other instances of brachylogy 1

may

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 294.

be seen in Lu. 4 :26f.; Jo. »

W.-Th.,

p. 600.

^

1204

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

5

15

:

tio

36;

:

11; Ac. 27: 22; Gal. 2

praegnans belongs here

fiaaiKdav,

though

to Felix

10 :46). Triv eK

23

:

24)

and so saving Paul.

Tim. 4

mean

so-called construc:

18, acbo-et

'into.'

where the notion

is

6

iraTrip

7171'

5ta-

ttjv

ovpavov,

e^

eis

But note

that of taking

Cf. also kd^rjro wapa

See also Lu. 11: 13 6

AaoBLKias.

The

16.

:

Cf. 2

of itself does not

ets

^rj\LKa (Ac.

o-ojo-ojcn Trpos

also.

NEW TESTAMENT

bbbv

(Col. 4

(Mk. :

16)

Blass^ distinguishes brachylogy from elhpsis in

that brachylogy affects the thought rather than the grammatical

Cf.Ro. 11:18. It would be wearisome to endeavour to put a name or tag upon every structure that seems defective from the standpoint of formal grammar or rhetoric, "It will be seen that many of them are due to that agility and acuteness of the Greek intellect which enables

form, but both ideas are usually present.

the Hellene or Hellenist readily to sacrifice the sentence to

its logic,

or in other words

Hence arose the many forms cqixacvoiJLevov,

section

"^

to to

K\r}p.a;

its

of a meaning. to

We

have seen illustraunder Concord (The Sen-

and only a few further are called for here. is largely an illustration of this principle.

avTo. refers

grammar

form to

of the sense-figure (arxwf^ ^rpos

constructio ad scnsmji) ."

tions of this construction /card avvtaiv

tence)

its

Indeed, this

In Jo. 15

in Ac. 17: 16 avrov points to Christ,

:

6

who

has not been mentioned; in 7: 24, rbv kiyh-wTLov, though no Egyptian had been mentioned; in 1 Cor. 7: 36, yafielTcoaav, the subject being drawn from the context (the two young people). Winer was glad to note a decline in emphasis on these overrefinements in his day. These supposed abnormalities were called hypallage. From the present standpoint Winer himself yielded entirely too much to the very thing that he condemned. What is the use in figuring out the various ways that Paul could have expressed

The papyri have taught us John with being ungrammatical in Tr\T]pr]s xaptros (Jo. 1: 14). These matters simply show that the N. T. writers used a live language and were not automata."* It is doubtless true that no other writer used repetition of word and phrase as did the author of the Fourth Gospel, but no one will deny that he did it with consummate skill and marvellous vividness and dramatic power .^ himself in 2 Cor. 3

:

7, for

instance?

to be chary about charging

1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 294.

»

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 202.

*

Cf.

1899, p. 26. 6

^

w.-Th.,

p. 634.

Emil Heinxich, Die sogenannte polare Ausdrucksweise im Griech.,

Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., pp. 401-465.

FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPFIEIA SXIIMATA) There are many instances of pleonasm It is of

vernacular speech.

many

repeated for clearness as in

tom

in all

(Col. 2

13)

:

a-wobbaaov

;

of the language with

— auT^s

—

This redundancy is usually due to the cusno thought of the repetition/ as in rjs

Tim. 4:9).

raxecos (2

iinas

N. T. as

in the

The same word may be

sorts.

—

viias

1205

(Mk. 7:25);

d

n-q

(1

Cor. 15

—

(2 Cor.

{xaXkov

Trepto-o-orepajs

(Ac. 20 :20, 27); kros

7:13); ov htj \eyuv (Mk.

2); aireKpidrj

:

15 :9); avaaT-qOi Kal iropevov (Ac. 8 26); TcS olKodeaiTOTxi ttjs okias our "church-house" (Lu. 22 11); eireiTa fxeTo. tovto (Jo. 11: :

like

:

(Ac. 2

:

30); apvovp-evos otl ovk

Sevrepov (Ac. 10

dundances

19:4);

(Lu.

ejXTvpoadtv

irpodpaixwv

7);

cb/Jioaeu

:

(24:50);

e^co

(1 Jo.

2

:

opKio

TraXti' €K

22);

Re-

Cf. also the cognate accusative.

15), etc.

like these

e^aYeti' ecrTiv

examples are not

pleonastic to the technical student

linguistic vices.

who

They seem

unwilling to allow for

is

the growth' of the language. Emphatic words have the constant tendency to become less so and to need re-enforcement. This love of emphasis in the N. T. is natural to conversation and to a certain extent has the Oriental richness and wealth of colour.^ We see the same thing in the O. T. and in the papyri letters. It is a sign of life and in particular life in the East. These vivid details give life and beauty to the picture. Cf. eKTelpas ttjp xftpa

(Mt. 26:51); epxerat

'Irjaovs

Kai

Xa/jL^avet

(Jo.

21:13);

ypaxl/avres

6td X€tpos avTOJv (Ac. 15: 23); wixoKoyriae Kal ovk rjpprjaaro (Jo. 1

common.

Epexegetical clauses are

(Ro. 12 ktX.

:

So

1),

1

Cf.

rrjv

:

20).

XoyiKiju \aTpelav vfiuiv

in apposition with the infinitive clause, TrapaarTjaat,

Cor. 7 26, 6rt koKov :

an expansion

dvOpuiru), as'

of tovto

In Jo. 7 35 on is probpbly causal. We meet hyperbole in Jo. 21 25, ov8' ambv olixai t6v Koap-ov Litotes is Cf. also Mt. 13 32. xoopijo-etj' TO, ypa4)6peva /StjSXta.

KoKov virapxeiv.

:

:

:

common

enough, as in Ac. 1:5,

28, xpovop OVK bUyov. 14, 20;

28

:

2.

Meiosis

oh peTo. -iroWas TaiiTas ripepas; 14

:

21: 39; 27

:

See also 15 is,

:

2; 19

:

11,

23

f.;

of course, only a species of hyperbole

by

Paul's use^ of it in 1 Th. 2:15; 2 Th. put together two remarks of Milligan.^ "St. Paul had ef;il'i;:;'ntly not the pen of a ready writer, and when he had once found an expression suited to his purpose found it very difficult to vary it." "St. Paul had evidently that highest gift of a great writer, the instinctive feeling for the right word,

understatement. 3

2, 7.

:

Cf.

We may

and even when

writing, as he does here, in his

N. T. Gk.,

most 'normal

p. 295.

1

Blass, Gr. of

2

Cf. A. J. Wilson, Einiiluisis in the N.T., Jour. of Thcol. Stu., VIII, pp.75

3

Milligan,

Coram, on Thesa.

Epistles, p.

Ivii.

*

lb., p. Ivi

f.

IT.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1206

and with an almost complete absence

style,

figures, so largely practised in his day,

of the

rhetorical

he does not hesitate to

more popular methods of adding point or emphasis to what he wants to say." There is no necessary inconsistency in these two statements. Add another from Milligan^ which will help to reconcile them. "We readily recognise that avail himself of the

the arresting charm of the Apostle's style 'the

man

is

and that the highest form

behind,'

rhetoric of the heart,'

speaking to us."

is

principally due to

of all eloquence, 'the

So

it is

with

all

the

N. T. writers more or less. They are men of genius, of varying degrees of culture, and men of love for Christ and man. Language with these men is not an end in itself. They do not say "pretty" things and toy with them. As the words of Jesus are spirit and life, for they throb and pulse to-day (Jo. 6 63), so the Letters of Paul are ^apetai koL laxvpal, as even his enemies admit (2 Cor. 10 :

:

The Judaizers

10).

at Corinth did not discuss the rhetorical

They

niceties of these Letters.

them even when they

felt

the power of the ideas in

Paul used tropes,^ but he smote hearts with them and did not merely tickle the fancy of the lovers of sophistry .^ Paul denied that he spoke kv ttiOols ias XoyoLs, though his words seem to the lover of Christ to be full of the highest appeal to the soul of man. One must discount this disclaimer not merely by Paul's natural modesty, but by contrast with the Corinthian's conception of irLdos. They loved resisted Paul's authority.

the rhetorical flights of the

artificial

orators of the time.

We need not tarry over

Metaphors and Similar Tropes.

(d)

oxymoron, periand the hundred and one distinc-

antiphrasis, ambiguity, hendiadys, hypokorisma, phrasis, polyptoton, syllepsis,

and the joy

Most

anatomy.

tions in verbal

of

it

is

gone.

(M€ra0opd), since little progress could be

the picture of the literal

and spiritual as in 6 metaphor in the N. 1

:

22

The

f.).

use of

ofxoLOS

oiKobecrirbT-Q.

simile

TOLfM-qu

6 koXos (Jo.

made

10

:

Cf. the greatest

11).

T., Paul's use of acona for the

Simile

in

the rattle of dry bones

is

We may

pause over Metaphor in speech without and physical carried over to the moral

of dissection

is

just a bit

Mt. 13

:

more formal,

church (Eph.

p^Jfh,seen in the

52, ttSs ypamxarevs ojioibs k(TTLV avOpdoirw

Parables are but special forms of the metaphor or

and form the most

Jesus in so far as form 1

Comm. on

2

Cf. Heinrici,

3

1

Cor. 2

:

4.

characteristic feature of the teaching of is

concerned.

The parable

{irapa^oXri)

Thess. Epistles, p. Ivif.

Zum

HeUen. des Paulus,

Komm.

zu 2 Kor.

:

FIGURES OF SPEECH (ropriEiA sxhmata)

1207

draws a comparison between the natural and the moral or implies It may be a crisp proverb (Lu. 4 23) or a narrative illustration of much length, as in the Sower (Mt. 13). The Allegory {aWriyopia) is a parable of a special sort that calls for no explanation, a speaking parable (cf. the Good Shepherd in Jo. 10 and the Prodigal Son in Lu. 15). Metonymy (iJ.eToovvfxla) and Synecdoche (crvveKSoxv) are so much matters of exegesis that they must be passed by without further comment. It is certain that no words known to man are comparable in value with those contained in the N. T. Despite all the variet}^ of diction on the part of the reporters, probably partly because of this very fact, the words of Jesus still fascinate the mind and win men to God as of old. Kal eyhero ore ereXeaev 6 'Irjaovs tovs it.

:

\6yovs TOVTOvs, e^eir\T](7aovTO

baaKwv avTovs 7

:

28

f .)

.

cos

ol

oxXot

ctti

e^ovaiap ex^i' nal ovx

rfj

tos

Sidaxf] avTOV'

It is the constant peril of scribes

strain out the gnat

and

rjv

yap

ol ypajjLjj.aTe'is avrcou

5l-

(Mt.

and grammarians to I may have fallen ^

to swallow the camel.

a victim, like the rest, but at least I may be permitted to say at the end of the long road which I have travelled for so many years, that I joyfully recognise that grammar is nothing unless it reveals the thought and emotion hidden in language. It is just because Jesus is greater than Socrates and Plato and all the Greek thinkers and poets that we care so much what Luke and Paul and John have to tell about him. Plato and Xenophon hold us because of their own message as well as because they are the interpreters of Socrates. It matters not if Jesus spoke chiefly in the Aramaic. The spirit and heart of his message are enshrined in the Greek of the N. T. and interpreted for us in living speech by men of the people whose very diction is now speaking to us again from the rubbish-heaps of Egypt. The papyri and the ostraca tell the story of struggle on the part of the very class of people who first responded to the appeal of Paul (cf. 1 Cor. 1 26 ff.). Christianity is not buried in a book. It existed before the N. T. was written. It made the N. T. It is just because Christianity is of the great democracy that it is able to make universal appeal to all ages and all lands and all class(^s. The chief treasure of the Greek tongue is the N. T. No toil is too great if by means of it men are enabled to understand more exactly the 1

Gildersl.

is

scornful of tlioso

who

fcjir

the sacrosanct reahn of syntax, which

omists and statisticians of Philol., 1907, p. 235.

"that anthropology

is fioinj;;

beloiif^s, strictly speakinfj;,

— (ntherwise known

as

Dead Sea

to invade

to tiie niicrot-

Ajjcs."

Am.

Jour.

A GR^iMMAR OF THE GREEK

1208

mind

of Christ.

because

it

If

one

is

NEW TESTAMENT

disposed to think less of the N. T.

stands in the vernacular

kolvt], let

him remember that

the speech of these Christians was rich beyond measure, since out of

it

These were carried in the common and written down from time to time (Lu. Paul was not a rhetorician, though a man of culture, but

came the words

of Jesus.

tradition of the period 1 :l-4).

he cared much for the talk of the Christians that it should be worthy. '0 \6yos v/jLuiv iravTOTt kv x^-P^t'- aXazL rjprviJLevos, elSevai ttcos That was good advice Set ii/xSj evl haaTio aTOKpiveaOai (Col. 4:6).

and and makes a

for the Colossians

included, cians

who

for all speakers

and

writers,

grammarians

hon mot to leave with the rhetorimight care to quibble further over niceties of language.

TaOra ^eXcra,

fitting

kv tovtols ladi.

ADDITIONAL NOTES KaQapit^oi or KaGepil^co (p. 183).

1.

Mr. H. Scott furnishes

the following table for the variations between a and

mented tenses

e

of Kadapl^w: tKaQap

eKadep

N B

A C

D Syr.

For

LXX

2.

0/8 2/7 Mt., Mk. 7/7 4/5 0/6 0/6

.

.

.

.

.

.

8/8 5/7 0/7 1/5

.

6/6

.

6/6

see Helbing and Thackeray.

Prothetic Vowels in the N. T.

(p. 206).

The

following

table of (probable) prothetic vowels in N. T. (supplied

H.

Scott).

Before

me

in the aug-

is

a

by Mr.

text), ohb'

have both

much

is

Mr. H. Scott adds

Elision (p. 208).

3.

W. H.

We

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1210

and Kara

Kad'

els,

W.

ly

but

hav (Lu.

ovd'

16:31,

H.), ov8' avrbv (Jo. 21:25).

(Mk. 6:40).

/card tKaTov

(p. 212).

Mr. H. Scott notes that out

N

remaining 16 7/14,

L

cept in Jo. 11 14, :

5.

N

ev txeaco

6.

Rules

Allen,

14/14,

C

9/10,

Trap- ex-

Mr. H. Scott notes that

[leVco (p. 216).

^{BD never have eju/xeaco,

Hort (Notes on

etc.),

all

But

eufxeaco.

while

for Assimilation of

are given in

Goodwin,

A

always has

occurs 27 times in the N. T., of which 2 (Jo.

of Acts always have

liar rules

B

:

8:3, 9) are in a spurious passage.

observes that

10/16,

In Gospels

In the

only in Jo. 11 14.

Assimilation of kv

the phrase

B

reads irapp- 13/16,

8/9, Syr. 16/16.

40 oc-

of

currences in the N. T. 24 read irapp- without variant.

D

There

variation with prepositions before nouns.

nappT|o-ia

4.

(Tisch., ov8e

ri

C

has

it

Orth., p. 150)

of Gospels

and

E

9/12 times.

Consonants

the school

A

(p. 216).

grammars

and need not be given here

(cf.

in

The fami-

Hadley and detail. Note

only these: Before a t mute a

tt

or k

mute

is

co-ordinated.

Before n a t mute changes to n, " " a K mute changes to 7, " " a T mute changes to a (analogy).

Before o- a tt mute makes \J/, " " a K mute makes ^, " " a r mute drops out. Before a labial v changes to " a palatal v changes to 7 (nasal). " X or p, V is assimilated. fj..

"

o, V is dropped, and the preceding vowel Between two consonants o- is dropped.

The

insertion of a in

some tenses

is

is

lengthened.

treated in the chapter on

Conjugation of the Verb. Metathesis (p. 221). We find aLvb\Lov in P. Oxy. Ill, 531, but also 4>ai\\o\v'iwv, B. U. iii, 816, 24 (iii/A.D.). So the modern Greek (peXopi. ^cltpt] (Lu. 2:7, etc.) is the Homeric and Attic form. Moeris (212, 9) says that iradvn is the Hellenistic form. Modern Greek has iraOvr]. Some LXX MSS. have it so. Cf. Thackeray, p. 106; Blass-Debrunner, p. 20. 7.

14

(ii/A.D.),

ADDITIONAL NOTES and

Enclitics

8.

Proclitics (p. 233

1211 Rules for accent by

f.).

Mr. H. Scott: Encuticb Indefinite, tIs in all its forms.

(6)

Pers. pron.,

(c)

fxov, not, fik]

Enclitics retain their accent:

(jov, ffoi, ak.

Pres. indie,

(except 2d sing,

ei/xt

^rjni,

(f)r](Tip,

tl);

ipaalv.

ivoTk, wov, wkp, ttoj,

the preceding word

(c)

if

proparoxytone, properispomenon,

(c)

a proclitic.

If

dissyllables,

perispo-

after

((/)

after

(e)

if

an ehded vowel; a prochtic.

dissyllables, after

two or more

occur to-

enclitics

gether, each one receives the accent

Enclitics lose their accent

preceding word

they begin or end a sentence; a paroxy-

dissyllables, after

mena;

is

(b)

when the

of

the preceding,

unaccented.

is

oxytone,

(a)

if

-ircos.

when

Enclitics incline their accent

(a)

if

(6)

tone;

-5e. .

(a)

and the inseparable

Particles, ^e, rk

Indef adverbs,

perispomenon, paroxytone.

the last being

Editors

differ

in

practice as to this rule.

Proclitics Art.,

Prochtics receive the acute accent:

6, ^, ol, al.

Prep.,

eis, tK, e^, kv.

Conj.,

ei, cl)s.

(a)

9.

and then

alternately.

to right)

when followed by an

enchtic.

The Greeks

first wrote from right This alternate method (right to

was called ^ovarpocjirjdov, 'as oxen turn at the A Compendious Greek Grammar, 1888, p. xiv.

Cf. Geddes,

plow.'

The Greeks had a For

(b)

Bov(rTpo(j)Ti5o'v (p. 243).

left, left

are at the end of a

sentence;

Negative, ob {om, ovx)-

to left

when they

full

system of abbreviations in frequent use. Thompson, Handbook of Greek and Latin

fine

particulars see

Palceography, pp. 86-96.

Perfect of opdo)

10.

active (indie,

Acts

2;

inf.,

(p. 364).

Mr. H. Scott counts the

John, Gospel 20, Ei)istles 6;

established 5 times, John's Gospel 20.

20/24.

C

2/2,

11.

In

D

1

Ep. John

1/3; -0-

Augment

perf.

N. T. (Luke, Gospel 3, Paul 3). Luke has -co-

part.) 34 times in the

A

B

NACD

so always,

has 6/6 -o-, Paul 3 -co- (N 3/3,

B

B

2/3,

3/3).

in the Past Perfect (p. 366).

Mr. H. Scott notes

that of the 15 out of 22 verbs with past perfects in the N. T. the active verbs are equally divided as to augment.

Of the 7

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1212

BaXXw is augmented OefxeXLoco is imaugmented. but not in the active. Ftw/xat and lariqiiL have both the augmented and the unaugmented forms in the active.

passive verbs only in the passive,

(Purely normal verbs are not Only the tenses are given that occur in the N. T.)

List of Important Verbs.

12.

listed here.

Mr. H. Scott has rendered valuable aid

(Lu.

1

47),

:

(Ps. 15

9)

:

:

:

:

35 {&yaX\La6rji'aL, BL —aOrjvai.). 'A.yyOO\.(o (comp. ai>~, air-, 5t— e^, eir—, irpo-eiv—, Kar—, only in Jo. 20 18 ayyeWovaa, and Jo. 4 51 in i
:

,

The

-riyyeXnai, -^yyk\r]v.

LXX

an

f.),

as in Attic

Kar-dyvfjivt.

and LXX).

LXX

(Mt. 12:20;

Kar-ea$€t

19:32

classic aor. pass. riyyt\Or]v

-o77eXw, -riyyuXa, does not occur in

or N. T.

"AYvvjii (only

The

Simplex

irpo-Kar—).

:

:

act.

it.

8 and Rev. 19 7; aor. act. rjyaXXiaaa but the active does not occur in LXX. The middle is in LXX and the N. T. (Jo. 8 56, etc.). The aor. passive appears in

Pres. act. in 1 Pet. 1

'A-yaXXidw.

in preparing

has

/caTd^co),

aor. pass. Kareayuxxiv (Jo. 19:31.

copyists kept the

pres. act. KaTedao-co

"A-yw (comp. av—,

is

augment where

found.

it

Three forms in N. T.: a an aor. act. Kar-ka^av

fut. (Jo.

Cf. KaTeayfjvat in Plato, etc.).

did not belong, so that even a

Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 253.

kir-av—, arr—, avv-air—, 5t— , eia—, wap-elcr—,

The

Trap-, Trepi-, Trpo~, Trpoo— , crvi^, ewi-avif-, vw-).

e^,

eir—,

Kar—, fier—.

principal parts are reg-

ular save the aorist active (usually the redupUcated second aorist form

but sometimes the rare sigmatic aorist

i^yayov,

Alp^o) (comp. &V-,

LXX),

(as

a(f>-, 5t-,

ef-, Kad-, irepi-, Trpo-).

alprjcTOfiaL, —aipedrjaoiiai;

—eiXov

rj^a

as in Hesiod).

Simplex only middle. -eXw

and —eiXa (middle

also); -Tipovurjv,

—(iprinai, -jipWr]v.

Aipw

k^,

(dTT-,

kir-, /xe-r-,

avv-, inrep-).

imperative aor. act. apop and

and

Only note

while ind. aor. act.

is fipa

fut. act. apd.

Only once

Al
'Akovw

Principal parts regular.

inf. aor. act. apai,

(5t-, €10-—, Itt—

,

in

N. T. (Lu. 9:45), aor. mid.

Trap—, Trpo-, vw—).

aiadcjivTai.

'AKovaoo, fjKovcra, aKriKoa

("AttiC perf.

),

aKovaofxaL, aKovaOrjaonai, rjKohadriv.

'AXXd
"AXXo|iai '

,

(«$-,

pass.

Aor.

£
A\i.aprdv
'A|i4)id?w.

'AXXd^co, f/Wa^a, riWa^ap.T]v

6t— , Kar—, awo-KaT—, ner—, avu—).

LXX);

(Ro. 1:23,

'

—)7XXa7Mai, —ijXXdYTjf, -d/xTj^

A/xapTriaci},

So W. H.

and

Cor. 15:51). Confined to Acts save Jo. 4:14.

-6p.riv.

rip^apTov

and

rjixapr-qaa, ^fiaprriKa.

12:28 instead of

in Lu.

&.\\ayr)
aiJ.<j)Lk^u.

r}p.4>lea p.ai.

'A|x4)ie'vvv}J,i.,

'AvaGdXXw (only comp.).

'Are^dXere (Ph. 4:10).

'AvaXC
Other tense-stems from dj'aXdcLi; kua(N. T. forms do not show H. in margin give avakol as present (so Attic

(car-ai'-).

Xwo-co; aor. act. inf. avakuiaai; aor. pass. d^aXco^Tjre

In 2 Th. 2:8

augment).

W.

and LXX). 'Avof-yw (5t-,

J^XX

or

k^, Ac. 12:16 D).

N. T.

avkw^e, ^^^^e.

Acts

(5),

Rev.

The simplex

dlyw, olyw/it does not occur in

Imperf. Sivvoiye (Lu. 24:32); fut. ami^co] aor. act. ^wi^e, The aor. ind. (22 times) is confined (H. Scott) to John (6),

(10),

except

dirivoi^ev

(Lu. 24:45).

The predominant form

is

ADDITIONAL NOTES fjuoi^-

(16 times without v.

9:14),

and

and read by W. H., except

r.)

Afi^^ev (Jo. Pass. fut. AvoixOriffeTai (Lu. 11:9 f. A);

(Jo. 9:17, 32).

rii>(co^(v

1213

(W. H., Mt. 7:7, 8=Lu. 11:9,

AvoiyriaeTai

10). Aor. indie, occurs 9 times: Lu. 24:31); Aftdjixerr- (Lu. 1:64); vvei^xOv(Mt. 3:16; 9:30; 27:52; Jo. 9:10; Ac. 16:26). 2d aor. indie. r,polyrr- (4 times, Mk. 7: 35; Ac. 12:10; Rev. 11:19; 15:5); subj. Mt. 20:33. Perf.

(Rev. 20:12

iivoixd-n-

part,

(only)

{his),

Si-,

times: Si^uoLytikvos (Ac. 7:56); Aveajytiiuos (Ac. 9:8; 10: 2 Cor. 2:12); r,uei^y,xhos (Rev. 3:8; 4:1; 10:2, 8;

11

11; 16:27; Ro. 3:13;

19:11).

'Avrdw

Fut.

infin. KaT-avT-qauu (Ac.

avT-qaovTo. (Ac.

-KTkvvoy (2 Cor.

and

"Atttw

W. H.

3:6

-KTevw/ii

&-rro-KTkvv€CT0ai.

'Apird^w

{ol-k—),

alt.,

occur.

'Apirdaw,

pass.

iipwacra',

2d

Short forms of the imperative dvd^a,

/SaXw

ijpvrjfiai.

k^

16:37);

wap-ep-,

kin-,

W. H.

(Mt. 7:22

pluperf

.

Mid.

€K-j3€/3Xi7K€t.


Ik—,

k/j.—,

eiri—,

ext—

Kara-, fiera—, Trapa-, irap-

,

kir- ffVP-)]

fut.

1st aorist ("Alexandrian") ?/3aXa;' (Ac.

irepi-).

alt.;

14:46); 2d aorist, i^aXov {k^,

dia—,

-fir](joixai, -kfirjv, -fik^riKa.

Imperf. ejSaWov (k^

vpo-, avv-, virep-, viro-).

{he-,

inf.

d;'d/3are.

(dju0t-, di'tt— , avTL—, diro—, Sia—, en—, kfi—, wept.-,

W. H.

aor. rjpTrdyrjf] 1st aor. rjpTrdadTjv;

Kara-, /xera-, Trapa-, wpo-, avp.-, avy-Kara-, vtrep-).

ep.-,

-Krelvo},

ri4)0T)v.

q\p6Lij.r]i>,

2d fut. dpTrayr]CTOfj,ai. Bafvu (only in comp., ava—, wpoa-ava—, avv-ava-, dwa-,

BdXXu

between Lu. 12:4

&Tr-eKTav9r]v.

dpPTjaoixat, —apv-qOrjaoixai, -Tjpvrjcranriv,

(5t-, avp-).

alt.,

fut. cltto-kt woi; aor. air-kKTeiva; pass.

(Rev. 6:11); 1st aor. 'HiZ/a,

Pres. varies

Mt. 10:28 W. H.

(Mk. 12:5);

(ai^, KaO-, Trepi-).

'Apveofxai

The parts, are marg.); fut. part, avv-

occur.

W. H.

26:7,

20:22).

The simplex does not

'A-iro-KTetvw.

alt.)

The simplex docs not

avi^, vw-).

(ctTT-, /car-,

regular.

21:39

W. H.

alt.);

kw- (Ac. 21:27;

irap-, irepi-, avv-, utt-)

kir-,

k-;

Mk.

perf. ^e/3X7;\-ws;

(Rev. 3:5); 2d aor. di^, wept-,

fut. irepi-^aXelTai

pass. fut. ^\r]6r]aopai,

;

1st

aor.

5l-,

k^,

k^X-qd-qv]

j)erf.

PkpXripai, irepi-; pluperf. kjSejSXriTo.

Bapco)

{kiri—,

Kara-).

'E^dp-qva, ^e^dprjpai, k^aprjdrjv

Only passive save Bapvvw.

The

in

is

It is read in

BXaoTdvw. This is (Mk. 4:27). The

aor. «j3Xdo-Tr?(Ta

of the pres. occurring in

BX^irw

(dj'a— , dTro—

,

Lu. 21:34).

ousted in N. T. by /Sapeco except in Mk. 14:40, Lu. 21:34 Rec. ffapwOwcri. the old form of the pres. The pros, in N. T. is /SXaordw

older verb

Kara-^apwopiivoi.

(2 Cor. 1:8,

compounds.

8ia-~,

may

be from

jiXaardco or ^Xaarkio,

a form

LXX.

kp—, kiri-, irepi-, irpo-).

'E^Xeirov,

/SXei/oj,

efiXexf/a]

irepi-

e0XkireTO', irepi-ivpo-^Xeipdpevos.

TayAia.

'Eydixovv, Attic tyr]p,a, late kydp.i}(Ta, yeydnrjKa, kyapr]9r]v.

Tafili^u is

a

form and only pres. active and pass, and imperf. pass, kyapliovro appear in N. T. TaplffKo: likewise in pres. pass, stem appears in Lu. 20:34 (W. H.) and kK-yapiaKu in some MSS. in Lu. 20:34 Rec. F^VOfxai {diro-, dia-, kiri—, irapa—, avp-irapa—, irpo—). Never 7171-0^101 like Attic. 'Eyivoprii'; yevr\(Topai; part. yevTjabpevos (1 Cor. 15:37), eyevSprju and kyevqOqv. late

Opt. ykvoiTo) part, yevbpevos. dTTo-, bia—,

kiri—,

The

irapa-, avv-irapa-,

is

fraiuent use of the part, in comp.,

noteworthy.

Vevapevos

is

a fnHjuent

H. Moulton counts 69 instances of the i)art. (simple and comp.) in Luke's writings, and 48 in remainder of N. T. It does not variant.

J.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1214

"Strong perfect," ykyova, yeyhrjthe Johannine writings. Mace. 14:30 has kykvnv, probably an error (cf. ykyova). Vtiv- is a rather frePluperf. ytybvti (Ac. 4:24), and iytyopei. (Jo. 6 :17). quent spelling, e.g. Ac. 21:14 hB*AD; 23:10 B*; Lu. 22:26 SBD; 42 occur at

all in

A

/xai.

SiBAA;

in

1

Cor. 10:20

1

B*D*,

etc. f7;^coi',

tyvwKa, kyvuKup, eyvw-

Subj. aor. both yvQ (Jo. 7:51) and yvdt (Mk.

kyvuddrip, yvoiadiiaoixai.

ff/xai,

Tvucronai,

Kara-, irpo-).

{ava.-, bia-, kin-,

Tivwo-KW

5:43; 9:30; Lu. 19:15); imper. yvQiOi; inf. yvwvai; part, yvovs. Kara- irpo-). •E7pa0or, ypa^j/o), typaxpa,- yky pa
rpd<j>a) (dTTO-, ky-, eirt-,

kiri-,

ykypa/jLixai, -tyeypanp.-r}v,

kypa
Mid.

irpo-.

1st aor.

a.iro-yp(vpa<jOai

(Lu. 2:5).

and

AciKVV|i.t

SeiKvu'w {ava-, airo-, kv-, kin.-, inro-).

(Heb. 8:5); perf. diro-Sedeiyixkvos; mid. 1st aor. forms from -wixi, and -vvu.

Aei^oj, cdeL^a] pass. kv-edei^afiriv.

The

kSelxOv

pres. has

"ESeLpa, dap-qaofiaL.

Aipa.

{ava-, &iro-,

A€X0fJ.ai

'E5e^a^iT]v^,

'ESeop-riv,

Aio> (irpoff-).

(W. H.

kbktro

alt.)

Ae'w (Kara-, irepi-, k8k9r]v;

k-,

eta—,

5ta-,

mid.

In Lu. 8:38 Impersonal

kbti]dr]v.

or eSteiro.

aw-,

(2d sing.), 3d

-5i5ol

km-, irapa-,

irpoa-,

viro-).

inrcr-).

Arjaw,

W. H. 3et

and

read

kbtiTo

rather than

tSet.

SkdeKa] pass, dtde/xai, irepi-edi8kp.Tiv,

eS-qcra,

kbT\aap.t]v

A£8w|ii (di'a-, dj'r-OTTo-, aTro-, 5ta-, k-, StScos

kv-,

air-eK-,

pass. SkSeynai, -fSexdv-

BEG);

pi. didoaaiv

eirt-,

fiera-, irapa-, irpo-).

(Rev. 17:13); subj. wapaSidQ

(1

imperf. kdldoaav (Jo. 19:3), irap- (Ac. 16:4); fut.

PreS. Trapa-

Cor. 15:24, 5
part.

(Heb. 13:17), irapa- (Jo. 6:64) Scoauv] -Ka aor. Uo:Ka, 3d pi. iSoiKav; 2d aor. 3d pi. wap-khoaav (Lu. 1:2); imper. 56s; subj. 5^, 5c3s (Mk. 6:25),

dTTO-

5(?

3d sing. cont. bol (Mk. 8:37), irapa- (Mk. 4:29), S^t? or Tim. 2:25, Eph. 1:17); opt. 3d sing. 54)7, (Ro. 15:5; 2 Th. 3:16; 2

(Jo. 15:16); subj.

boiXt

(2

18); inf. hovvai; part. Sous; perf. bkhwKa; plup. htboiKtiv; mid. fut. 21 41) 2d aor. e^eSero (s Mt. 21 33 =Mk. =Lu.) with vari-

Tim. 1:16, SdxTo/iai,

k- (Mt.

:

:

;

-oTo in each passage; plur. without variant, dir-eSoo-flt, -kdovro. Pass, pres. and imperf. -kmero, Sl- (Ac. 4:35), irap- (1 Cor. 11:23), with variant -OTO in each case; fut. dodijaonai, dcrairo-, wapa-. 1st aor. kboB-qv, dir-, eir-, Dr. Hort considers the change of the vowels in imperf. irap-; perf. SeSo/xai.

ant

1.

from -oto to -tro as probably euphonic. AiSew (diro-, 5ia-, irapa-). (Rev. 3:9); imper. didov (Lu. 6:30; 11:3); part. diro-SiSoOi' (Rev. (Rev. 22:2); imperf. kdiSow (Mk. 3:6; Ac. 1:20), eir- irap-; fut. Sia-dido^aovai-v 17:13 Rec.) ex fid tone Erasmi. Pres. 2d sing. dOvaaai (Mt. 5:36; 8:2; Mk. 1:40; Lu. 6:42). Opt. Avvafiai. and 2d Pres.

aor.

5t5a)

dwain-nv (Ac. 8:31; 27:12, 39).

and ri8vvk
Mk.

Advo^ai,

2d

of this late

'ESwann" and r)hvvanr,v, bwijaoixai, T,5vvr]dr,v (Mk. 9:22 f.; Lu. 16:2; Rev. 2:2).

sing. dOvv

Greek form

in

B

in present tense in

Mt.

19: 12;

10:39; Ac. 4:20; 27:15.

1:32. («-, dir-fK- [mid.], ki^, kir-ev-, irap-eiff-, km-). Simplex only, Mk. wapeiapass, mid.-tdvaapLTjv; (Mk. idvaa 1:32); eSw, aor. 2d eiri-Suerco; Pres.

Aim

2d

edirqv.

Avvti) (««-).

'Edw

aor. (Ju. 4)

(irpoo--).

'Eyyiltt

Augt. etraf = eaf = ei-. See Jannaris, § 719. myyi^ov, kyylaoi and kyyiti (Jas. 4:8 W. H. alt.), nyyiaa,

Eiuiv, edo-co, etacra.

(irpoo--).

TJyyLKa.

ev-SeSvfjikvos.

In pres. only.

ADDITIONAL NOTES aw-).

"Eyilpo> (Si-, i^-, kir-,

'l^yepQy, f,yupa,

iyvyepnat, vykpOnv, hepdr,aonai. e'7etp6 (cf. a7e, iTcecye)

•E8a<j>££w.

"E9w.

Obsolete in pres.

and ,e8«

El8€o>

and 2

2d

alt.).

inf. i8el,>; part.

imper. tare €150^

and

0:18 Si-vy !ilt ) hut usually intransitive 'Eytcpac not in N. T., nor lypvyopa

5:41.

fut.).

Ei'w^o,

and

aor. el5o,

2d

subj.

iio}Oeii>.

Not used

part.

in pres.

and Ure

imper.

;

(?),

plupcrf.

etScbs;

Fut.

elSvao,

(W. H. text 18 times

elSai>

both complete)

t5ou (ind.

perf. olSa complete,

elSco; inf. el8ei>ac]

have the

ol8a

kyeipov,

1st aor. dSa, dSafxeu, dSare,

150,//.

(?);

Si-eytipero (Jo.

Mk. 2:9

(Att-, ^tt-, vrpo-, .r.,.-, 6,rep-).

LXX).

(Heb. 8:11,

Mk.

as

("Attic"

'E5a<^iw

In

1215

tSe;

subj. Ma,;

Uacriv (Ac.

f,dH,>

2(5 -4)'

complete.

As

sa7ne root they are

put together. It does not seem reasonable to divide the same root between eUop and dpao,. Hec iSco. El|x£ (air-,

iv-, It- Trap-, avu~, aufx-rrdp-). '^Iv and mid. f,pr,,>, imper. pres. UOi, laro^, tJtco, larojaai- (lare 2d pi. does not

f,ada, np^^a; occur); opt. tlrjl

taopai, eaeaOai, kaoutvos (Lu. 22:49).

Only

Elfiu

comp.

in

i^, l^-, abv-). Only pres. (fut. sense) 3d 9:6); imper. da-iOi (Ac. 9:6 B) and imperf. (ri^eiv). 'EXavvw (i.e. k\a-vvo,) (Att-). Pres. inf. k\abvtiv. 1st aor. b.T,-i{kaaa; perf. tX^XaKcos; imperf. pass. tiXawero. pi. -io.<ji,

da-,

(Att-,

da- (Heb.

"E\k«. Pres.

and pass.

act.

«{-; imperf. elXKoi'] other tenses

from

iXKvco.

'EXK{>ao^,

i'iXKvaa.

"EiTuiaPT-,

dTT-, TTpo-).

eiTrdv (?), tiTTdrco, etTTco; inf.

inf.

Pres. not used.

eiwdu; part.

elprjKhai;

Perf.

elTrcI,*'.

part.

eipjjKcbs.

Pass. 1st aor.

tpp-herj

and

•EpY^Sofiai (K-ar-

TTfpi-

(W.

elpriKa,

Pluijerf.

3d

2d

1st aor. elra, etc.; imper.

aor.

eliroi^;

imper.

and -Kaaiu Mid. 1st aor.

pi. -/caj'

6ip,i«t.

ei7r4;

Subj.

(Ac. 17:28); aiv-eiira,xida.

tpp^^,,;

part, prjdds; perf. erpijrot; part, dpij^hos. Etp7af6M7?^ (Ac. 18:3 HIP) and vpya^6,ir,p

7rpo(7-).

H.), vpyaaa/xriu (Gosp.)

sive).

Fut. epS.

-are, -drwaaV, part. «7ras.

and KaT-etpydaaro (2 Cor. 7:11), ttpTaer/xat and rar-T/p- (BDC, W. H. alt.).

(pas-

1st aor. KaT-ei.pyhae'qv

"Epxojiai {av-,

KaT-,wap-,

k-w-av, Att-, 5t-, ela-, ^7r-eto-, Trap-eto-, trui'-eto-, k^-,

iuTi-Trap-,

and ijX^a, kX-nXvOa. 'EpwTdw (5i-, £7r-).

wept-

Trpo-, irpoa-, avv-).

di-e^-,

kw-

•UpxS^rju, kXfOaonai, ^XOol

Plupcrf. kX-nXveeiv. 'Hpajrw;-

and

r,p,

kpcorrjaoo,

r,p
1st

aor. pass.

and ?a-ekyopaL, 2d sing. 0d76aat (Lu. 17:8); e4,ayov complete; opt. 0A7ot (Mk. 11:14).

•Eo-Gfw

EiayveXC^w ^6tx7)v,

Ei8oK€«

Active only, 1st aor. (Rev. 10:7; 14:6).

{irpc^).

tvriyyeXiaaii-qv,

iavu-), (.6, r,b)boKovpev (1

Th. 2:8),

{ev,

the Epistles the reading varies). EvpCo-Kw (Au-). Ei^pcaKou and 7,vp., tvpijaw, elpov

MSS.),

"Ex«

Jlpo-, evvyytXi-

einjyykXiapai, tvt^yyeXiad-qv. 7]v)S6Kvaa (ev- in Gospels.

In

and d>prjaa (some Mid. dpapeuos.

{tvpapei', etc.)

tvpriKa, rju-, fvpiaKoptjv, tvptOyjv, evpeOrjaonai.

(&V-, &UT-, Att-,

^j.-, kir-, Kar- yuer-, Trap-, Trepi-, Trpo-, Trpoa-, <7u»^-, CrTrfp-, Elxou (dxapeu, dxoaav, as well as elxav and elxo.'), 2$w, taxov, taxv^a, eixonTjv, 'i^ofiai; 2d aor. mid. iv-faxonrjp. Zdw (A;.a-, aw-). Pres. fco, f^^, ff); inf. ^iju. "E^c^p, ^^aco,

i-rro-).

^vao^at, i^rjaa.

Zuivvuiii

and

-f^oiaa,

"Hk«

5a,vvva) (i.e.

mid.

fut. Trepi-fwtrojuai.

(d»-, Ka0-).

fiKaaiv

fw-^^H (dm-,

"Ikoj', Tjt^,,

instead of

fiKovatv.

5ia-,

Tr.pt-

^rro-).

•Ei-J,;';
^,l>ac,,

1st aor. k^coaaprji', -kticoanai.

^t„ (in subj.),

f,„a in

Mk.

8:3.

Some MSS. have

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1216

'Ho-o-ooftai

once

©diTTO) {aw-).

17:8

ixaaonai (Rev.

and mid.

Both

Simplex

and

TiBvix-vai.

Pres. iarai,

6aV'

54B).

©vTJo-Kw (dTTo-, ffwaircr-).

'Idopiai.

rjTTaofxai, riTTr]nai, r}TTi]Br]v.

'Edavna^ov, Wavnaaa, fdavtiaaOrjv, Oavnaadrjcroixai

Qav\iaX,
TtdvTjKa.

Elsewhere

(2 Cor. 12:13).

""EOa^a, kTa4 rel="nofollow">rjv.

mid.

i(!onr]v',

perf. only,

a-n--k6vr\aKov; -davovixat., -iBavov,

(Ac. 14:19), but

rtdvT]Kkvai

pass.

laaotxai, laaafiTjv;

Te6i>r)K0}s.

Mk.

tajuai {tarai

5:29),

laOr]v, ia6r](roiJ.ai..

For

"I8aj obsolete.

2d

aor.

el5oi>

and el8a see el'Sw (tiSew). Simplex not found in N. T.

inf. i(t>-iKecr9ai',

a4>'i.KeTo',

or N. T. forms in 1st aor.

d0-eis.

Medio-pass.

etc.;

pres.

acji-Unai;

Subj.

d<^-£027;

aw—).

{d<j>-,

avv-lwai.; part,

aw-w,

a—,

dfjy-edriv;

—M

Simplex does not occur in LXX a.4>-, aw-. Fut. 6.4>-, aw-ijaw. 2d aor. imper. d^-es; 2d pi. a4>-,

Kad-, aw-rjKa (complete).

a.4>-,

subj. av-,

1st aor. d;^,

aijy-iKoiJievos.

Pres. "complete, au-,

-/it.

avv-eTt]

eifjikvos.

part.

Ka0-, Trap-, aw-).

*o-t-(r77-M0 (di/-, d(^-,

"Iy\\>.i. (i.e.

Pres. -ikwu/xctoj;

e<^-).

5t-,

(d<^-,

'lK-v€0(j.ai

Pres.

d(^—

inf.

part.

W. H.

20:23

aw-tivai;

Trap-,

Fut.

(Lu. 11:4), Tj^-tei'

ffw-iouo-iv; subj.

d— ,

(Mk. 1:34; 11:16).

-ew

marg.).

part, av-, a-f9i]aoixaL;

(Lu. 5:20); part. Trap-

perf. a(f)-koPTai

a<j)-ioti€v

aw-lwv (Ro. 3:11); imperf.

pres. a<}>-iovTai (Jo.

,

Kad-ienevos.

Pass.

d^-eis (Rev.

Pres.

(d<^-).

2:20, 2d sing.). "I
awecj)-,

Karecj)-,

e4>—,

i^av-,

I^,

5t-, Ij/-,

a(f>-,

Simplex has not the pres. and imperf. active or passive,

Both

drjaonai.

and

kitava-, awo-,

ava-,

ixat:

earrjaa (complete),

(complete),

eaTTjv

eTr-[taTatiai],

KaB—, dvTLKad—, diroKad-, ixfB—, irap—, irepi- , Trpo—

karois

etc.

and

'iar-qKa,

Passive dvd-,

kaTTjKus,

ei[l](7Ti7K€ii';

mid. fut.

and

avv—).

Both

karavai.

aor.

arijao-

taTaOr)v,

k^-iaTdjXTtv,

a-,

e^-earaKevai.

,

2d

^Trjaw;

ara-

'iaraKa

'iaT7)Ka.

KaOatpu)

(5i.a— ,

tKaddpiaa, KeKaddpianai,

The simplex

Ka0€'to[j.ai (vrapa-).

part. Kadi^ofievos] imperf. Kd0T)|Aai {aw-). KadrjaOe

Inf. KaBapai.

—eKoBapa, KeKaOapnai.

£K— ).

Ka^aptw, KaGapf^w (5ta-). (Mt. 8:3=Mk.).

Pres.

2d

hiadaplad-qv

LXX

efo^at does not occur in

and or

eKaOeplaOrj

N. T. Pres.

1st aor. part. irapa-KadtaOds.

kKa6e^6p.-i)v.

sing. Kadrj (Ac. 23:3); imper. KaOov (Jas. 2:3); subj.

(Lu. 22:30); inf. Kadrjadar, part.

KaBrj/xePos;

imperf.

fut.

iKadTifj.r]v;

/ca^Tjtro/xai.

Kafl^tco (dj-a-, l^rt-, Trapa-

LXX or N. T.

Fut.

[Rec], aw-).

KaOLaix)]

The simplex

if« does not occur in

1st aor. kKddiaa] perf. KeKadiKa] mid. fut. KaBlaeaOe

(Mt. 19:28). KaCo)

(k-, Kara-).

KaT-'tKatov, Kara-Kavao:,

eKavBr)v, KaTa-Karjaofxai., Kara-KavBrjaofxaL.

Briaiopai (fut. subj.,

KaXe'u {avTi-,

Kd|J.V(<>-

Kar-tKavaa, 1

KeKavfiaL,

Cor. 13:3

KaT-iKa.r)v,

some MSS. have

e^-

Kav-

Byz.)>

kv-, tla- [-p^ai], ctti-, fiera-,

'EkclXow, KoKkao}, ikokeaa, KeKXrjKa,

Mid.

In

vapa-, awwapa-, irpo-, irpoa-, avy-).

K€K\r]p.aL,

kv-eKkKX7]To,

eKXrjBrjv,

KXriBrjao/xai.

fut. eTTi- , fieTa-KoXeaoiJiai, €7ri— , nera-, Trpoa-eKa\eaafn]v. "E/ca/iOJ',

KeKurjKa.

K€pd-vvv-ixi, Kepa-vvvw {avy-).

The

present does not occur in N. T.

aw—. KcpSaCvco. Pres. and imperf. do not occur. aor. subj. KepSdi-w: a matter of editing.

'EKkpaaa,

KeKepaafiai,

Fut. Kepdavco

(1

Cor. 9:21

W.

H.);

I

.

ADDITIONAL NOTES Kep8d«.

Fut.

9: 19-21).

KXaCcD.

4:13); aor.

(Jas.

KepSrjffo

Pass. fut.

"ExXaioj', KXavaco, eKXavaa, KXavcrofiai

KXdw

(tK-,

KXcCco

{airor-, tK-,

KXCvw

Kara-).

Kara-, avy-).

avy-,

(«/c-

Kd-iTTw (dTTo-,

2d

pass.

KXtiaw,

some MSS.

e/cXettra,

marg.).

KiKXeiafiai, iKXeladr]i>.

tKXiva,

Pass. fut. tva-

(ckXi/ca.

Pass. t^-tKoiii^iTo; mid.

2d

aor. ki-tKoir-qv]

and

Kotiiov-

wpo-Koxl/w,

tKO\pa;

KofiiffofjLat.

in Col. 3:25), tKofxiaan-qv.

Kara-, irpo-, Trpoo—).

tj^,

€/c-,

W. H.

(Rev. 18:9

'Ava-KXiuui,

ko/xicra, avv-).

Pet. 5:4;

ixai (1

Cor.

(1

ava—, Kara—, irpoa—.

KXi6-qaop.ai, —fKXidriv,

Ko|i(tw

KepStjau

1).

e^.

'EKXatra, kKXaaBriv,

k-, Kara-, wpoa-).

(ava-,

subj.

iKkpSriaa;

Pet. 3:

Ktpbt]dnaotxai- (1

1217

"Ekotttoj/,

ck-,

fut. tK-Koirrjaotxai., eKO^'d/xrjv, Koipoixai, awo-.

Kop€vvu(iv, K€Kopecr/xecos, Kopeadeis.

Kpdjo) (dw-).

occur. Kpfvci)

dxo-, avrairo-

Kp€fjid(<>

(dTTo-,

KvXCcD (dj'a—

dTTo-,

,

TTpoa-).

active pres. does not

and

aw-,

-fiaro. vivo-,

avvvTro-).

Mid.

aor.

iKpiva,

1st aor. air-eKpivaix-qv.

wept.-eKpvfiei'

(Lu. 1:24).

[This

KkKpvufiai, kKpv^rjv.

'Airo-KvXiau,

Both presents could give

or Xdo-Kco.

dm-,

Aa|x.pdvu (dm-,

airo—,

irpoa-eKvXicra;

pass.

e/cuXuro,

kXaK-qat (Ac. 1:18).

(jvvavTL- {-p.ai\, kiro-, kin-, Kara-, fiera-, irapa-, avv-irapa-,

TTpo-,

wpoa-, aw-, aw-irept.-,

Ad/3e,

not

1:12).

2d

''E.Kpxnpa;

Kpu/3w.]

2d

d>'a— , aTro—

Ke/CLiXt(7/xoi,

AaK^u

TTepi-).

€£<-,

be the imperf. of

The

(both a question of accent),

KeKpLKa, KeKpLKuv, KiKpifiai, kKplO-qv, KpLd-qaoixai.

may

aor. dLV-Upayov)

k^-eKpe/xeTo

5ta-, tj^, tTrt-, Kara-,

[-p-ai.],

AieKpiva, Kpifd; pass. fKpivonTjv; KaTa-Kpipuf

KpvTTTw

2d

Lu. 19:40.

(««-).

In Lu. 19:48,

'E/cpeMao-a, kKptpcKrO-qv .

(d^'tt-,

eKtKpa^a;

KeKpa^oixai in

and

Kpcfjid^co

and

e/cpa^a

Some MSS. have

Kpe|xavvv«,

KpcVO'H-ciS

/cpd^w,

"E/cpafo;',

perf. KtKpaYo.

viro-).

''EXapi^avov, XTjp.ipop.aL, eXaffov] opt. Xd/3ot.

2:27); irap-eXalioaav (2 Th. 3:6), eXa/Ja;/ (Jo. {Rev. 11:17); -eLXrjppai, kX-np4>eriv. Pass. fut. vapa-

Xa/3e; eXdiSare (1 Jo.

EtXrjfpa; elXij
mid. 2d aor. kXa^oprip; imper.

XT]p(t>eriaop.aL;

AavGdvw (k—,

kir- [-/uai]).

wpoa-Xal3ov.

k-n-i-,

Simplex active only,

eXaOou.

'Ew-eXaOopriv, -XeXjjcr-

pai («K— kin-). ,

Aiya, 'say'

and

(dj/ri-, 5ta-,

pres. mid. only.

imperf.

^L-eXeybiJLijv;

Alyo), 'choose'

ZvX-

is

irpo-)

Imp.

eXeyou, avr-, irpo-; eXtyav (Jo.

.

and imperf.

pres.

11:5G »D).

act.

Pass.

1st aor. bL-tXkxOn^', mid. 1st i«or. BL-eXe^apLtjv.

(t/c-, kirL-,

Kara-, wapa-, avX-).

compound with

the only

The simplex has

km-,

Simplex has not

active forms.

this

meaning.

Fut. avX-\k^u; 1st aor. awk-

Xe^a; mid. pres. Kara-, irapa-, avX-', imperf. e^-, irap-tXty6p.r)v; 1st aor. 5t-, bi-, km-iXt^apriv; pass. pcrf. kK-XeXtypikvo^.

Adira and

i&iro-, Sia-, ««-,

km.-, Kara-, kv-Kara-, irepi-).

pass.) except Tit.

3:13

pass. -XkXttppai, -fXti4>0r)v. pres.

and

AoY^^of'''*'''

imperf., Ac. 8:24.)

(dj'tt-,

Simplex Only pres.

W. H. marg. 'RXeLirov, -Xeti/'w, (Some MSS. have a compound See

dia-, irapa—, avX—).

(act.

-kXeix^a, iXiirov;

of Xi-p-irdvu in

Pet. 2:2.

1

'EXoyi.^6prjv,. kXoyiadprjv,

iXoyladrjp,

Xoyi-

aOrjaopaL.

Aovw

(dTTo-).

'EXovaa; pass. XkXovpai

and

XkXovapai. (Ileb.

10:23); mid. 1st

aor. kXovaap7]v.

MavOdvco {Kara-).

Mi\w.

Only

km-ptXrjaopai. McXXti).

"EpaOop, ptpaOrjKa.

fxkXei.,

^ptXep, ini[)ors()nal.

Pass. ptr-epeXoprjp, km-,

'EpeXXop and fjptXXop, pfXXrjaoj.

Pass. pkXopai, km-, pera-; mid. fut. pLiT-tptXrjOijp; pira-peXijOrjaopai.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1218

Mcvcd {ava—, 5ta— iv—, ,

Kara—, irapa—, avf-irapa— [Rec],

eiri— ,

irpoa—, vtto—),

irepi—,

'E/ievov, /levui, Ijueifa, —p.ep.kvrjKa, p.tp.tvriKtiv Mtyutayjptat,

MiaiV(o< M£*yvu|Jii

and

MifiVTJcTKW (dftt—

,

'Evv^a',

Nvcro-o) {nara-).

'Efii^a,

iTT-ava—, vwo-).

2d

aor. pass. Kar-evvyriv.

Pres. does not occur.

^T^paivw.

The form

nkmynaL.

—pLPrjau), yikixvrjp.ai, ifJivricrBrjv, ixvria6r}aop.ai.

kp.vr](TTevdr]v.

'Ep.vr)(TTevp.aL,

Mvn
Qvpdw.

kfiia.v6r]v.

(aw-ava—).

|Aio-yio

'E^-qpava, k^-qpanfiai, i^rjpavOtjp.

^vpaadai occurs (1 Cor. 11:6),

OlKoSoueo)

—

«i

(«*'">

)

avv—).

'^cKodopLovv,

a)Ko56/x77/uai, wKodoiJ.rjp.riv, <^Ko5opr]driv

"OXXv|ii

may

which

adaL (pres. inf.) or ^hpaaOai (1st aor. mid. inf.).

be accented fupS-

'E^upTjyuai, ^vprjaonai.

(also

wKobop-rjaa

olKodonrjcro:,

oi/co5—),

(also oUod—), olKoSopridrjaopaL.

and oXXvu. Simplex docs not occur in N. T. and part of Jer. (Thackeray, p. 279).

It

is

confined in

Comp.

to Job, Prov.

LXX

dir-, avv-air~.

Pres. act. dTr-oXXuw; pres. pass. air-oWvpai] imperi &.w-u\\vvto (1 Cor. 10:9); .

fut. dTT-oXeffw anddTT-oXco

mid. imperf.

(ICor.

dTr-coXXiijuTji-

1:

19 Q); 1st aor.dTr-ojXeo-a; 2d perf. d7r-oXwXcbs;

fut. a.Tr-o\odp.ai',

;

2d

aor. kir-oiKbprjVy avv-a-K—', inf.

dTT-oXeo-^at; part. air-o\6pevo'S. '0/iOtcbcrco, CcpoiCodriv

'Ouoioco (d<^—).

'Opdw pi.,

(d^-, Kad~, irpo-).

(also bpoioiOrfv), bponoOr)(Top.aL,

Jo. 6:2); perf. eojpaKa

between eo)— and to-)] plup. ewpdKei; pass. pres. Stem 6ir-: fut. 6\popaL', fut. pass. opwpr]v (LXX). aor. mid. subj. o^prj^de (Lu. 13:28).

w4>dr]p; 1st

'^pv^a, €$— di-opuxdv""-'- OT

'Opva-(roi (5i— , e|—).

,

Ua.
mid.

(afa—).

Il6i6a>

imperf.

Kad-oparai', 64>6r](Topai;

Stem

irpo-

1st aor. pass.

18-: see ciSew.

8i.-opvYrjvai

(W. H.

alt.).

'Eiradov, irkirovda.

Simple aor.

Ilatiw {aua—, kir-ava—, (Tvv-ava [-pai], Kara-). eiravaa',

a.(t>-oipoLO}pkvos.

Imper. 6pa, dpare; imperf. ewpwv (3d (Gospels and Acts. In Paul and 1 John variation

Pres. complete.

act.

once only.

Haixro},

iravopai, kiravoprjv, ivavaropai, ewavcraprji', Trerravpai, -^iraijaofxaL. 'ETrtt^oj',

fireiaa,

irtTroLda,

(TrtTroLOtLi'',

pass.

irtTrucrpai,

eTrtidoprjV,

eTreLadr]v, TreicrOrjaopai..

IXid^ci)

and

irU^co, eiriaaa, ireiriecrpai, kmaaOriv.

Pres. part. kpimfKwv,

IIi|iirXT]|j.i.

Tlivo) {Kara—, avp.—).

only

Trie),

tTrXrjaa, kp.-weirXrjap.kvo'i, kirXrjaOrjv, irXriadrjcropai.

Iliop,aL {irleaaL,

Lu. 9:8), imov (both wfiv and

intiv,

but

TrtTrcoKa, Kar-eTrodrjv.

XIiirpdcTKiu, irerrpaKa, Kkirpap.aL, iirpaOrjU.

IHtttw (dra—

,

djTi—

,

airo—,

be—,

'EirtTTTov, Treaovpai,, eirtaov,

In Rev. 2:5

TrkirrcoKts,

kv—,

kiri—,

eveaa (3d

Rev. 18:3

Kara—, irapa—, irepi—,

pi. tireaav.

Gospel

5,

irpocr—,

Acts

avp—).

2), irkirTUKa.

irkirTooKav.

IlXeco (dTTo— , bia—, be—, Kara—, wapa—, viro—, —kirXeoi' (3d sing. k^-kir\ei contracted), —kTrXevcra.

(kp- only comp.), yrXkKopai; aor. act. part. wXk^as',

IIXcKb)

2d

aor.

pass,

t/x-

irXaKiLs.

nXT|o-o-co («K-, km.-).

Act. 1st aor. subj. km-TrXri^ys (1 Tim. 5:1); pass. pres. 2d aor. kwXrjyr} (simplex) and k^-tirXayriv

kK-ir\i]aaeadaL] imperf. k^-tTr\r)<7abpr}v;

(see Veitch).

IIV17W

{airo-, kiTL-, (Tvp—).

Ilpdo-crw.

II\iV0dvo}Jiat..

'PaVT^Jw. kpp).

'Eirviyov, eirvi^a, ki:viybpr)v, iLTT-ewvLyriv.

Ilpa^co, firpa^a, irkirpaxa, irkirpaypat.

'EirwOavbprjv, kirvObprjv.

'EpavTiffa

Mid.

(some MSS.

kppavi.), pepavTiapai (so

1st aor. subj. pavTlaoiviai

(Mk. 7:4).

W.

H., but

some MSS.

,

ADDITIONAL NOTES 'Pi
"Peii(rw;

2d

aor. pass, -(ppvrjv.

and

'Ptjo-o-w (5ta-, irepi.-, irpoa-

and the passive to St-, irepi-, Trpoo— ;

prjyvvpn).

Act. pros,

priywixi..

and

The

active forms belong to prjaacj

prjaaei, Sia-; fut.

pv^w; 1st aor.

ep(p)r]^a,

pass. pres. priyvvvrai; imporf. 8i-fp{p)r]ypvTo (Lu. 5:6).

reading of Lu. 5:0 varies between 2|3€vvv|i,i

1219

dL-fp{p)r]ypvi rel="nofollow">To

stem

o-pevvvw, o-p«vvu|iai.,

a(it{<j)-.

and

The

8L-ep{p)ri(TatTo.

Pres. a^kvwTt, ajik^w,

tcr/3eo-a;

pass. a^kvvvpLai 2e£(o (dj'a-, 5ia-, Kara-).

'Ay-St-KaT-taeKra, vdaoi', pass. pres.
Ist aor.

tcrtio'^jji'.

'^OKaxj/a, — etr/ca/x/iai (Ac. 15:16 Rec). not found in N. T. save in (TriffKeirTeadai (Jas. 1:27; Heb. 2:6 Q), hri.-aKeipop.ai', 1st aor. mid. iir-eaKepa.p.T\v.

SKaTTTu

(/cara— ).

2K€irT0(iai is

2ird(i>

(dva—

dTro— 5ta— tTrt— ,

,

,

irepi-eaTrwp.r]v, —eawaadtji',

mid.

airaaaptvo's (simplex).

Sir£Cp(i> (5ta— , £7rt— ).

aTr-kawaaa',

aTro-trTra;', ava.-aTra.ao},

av—, airo-, 5ta— J perf. inf. bi-tavaaOai.

1st aor.

'EffTretpa, eairapp.ai, kairaprjv, Sl—.

Simplex only

2t€\Xw.

Pres. mf.

irept— ).

,

pass.

Kara—, av{v)—, vwo—).

in

pass. pres.

('Atto-,

k^-airo-, aw-a-rro-,

'Tir-eareWoi', Si.-eaTeWoprji',

— oreXco,

5ia-, kwi-,

—eartuXa, air-iaraXKa

— eo-raXyuai, air-eaTaXrji', Sl—, vir-eaTtLXapriv. modern Greek arkKw from 'iarriKa. Imperf. tarr^Kov in Jo. 8 44 and Rev. 12:4 according to W. H. SxTipttw (Itti-). Srrjpt^w (-iaco in MSS., 2 Th. 3:3, W. H. alt.; cf. -iCb in LXX), kaT-qpL^a and karripiaa, aT-qpi^ai. (opt. and inf.), eaTr)piyij.ai, kaTripixOT]v. {a-KtaToKKav in Ac. 16:36),

Cf.

Sttikco.

:

(dj'a—, dTTo— ,

2Tp€(|>a>

6ta—

Kara—, ixera—, av{v), vtto—).

€7rt— ,

e/c— ,

,

'Tw-iaTpe<{)Ov,

-arpepo}, taTptxpa, —tarpappai, tar pa.4>r)v , p,6Ta-aTpa4>r]aopaL.

Srpuvvufil or (TTpuvvvd) (xara—

,

Present does not occur.

iitto— ).

'Earpwi'vvoi'f

farpicaa, earpcofiai, Kar-earpuO-qv.

Present does not occur.

2i{>a^(o (Kara-).

Sw^ci) (5ta— , tK—).

{ava—

Tdcro-w.

dxo— 5ta—

avri—,

[—fiat.],

S^d^w,

ea(t>a^a, ea4>aynai, iacfyayrjv.

akawKa, taw^opL-qv, aeawapai, ,

'Era^a, 5ta-rerax«»'at, reray-

iiTTo-).

2d

2d)(Ta>, etrwcra,

,

[-pai.];

2d

aor.

(dTTO—

,

5ta—

,

iK—, £7rt— , an;'—).

wpoa-, aw—,

5i-, vw-eTa.yr)v,

mid.

fut. viro-Tayrjaopai', 1st aor. 5ta-raxS«ts; 1st aor.

TtXew

kacodrjv, acoOrjaopat.

e7rt-5ta- [— juat], tTri— , [ttpo— ]

—reXtcrco,

ereXecra,

5i.a-Ta^opai;

era^dpriv.

rerkXeKa,

TtreXtapai, tre-

XkaOrjv, TfXeaOrjaoixai.

T^XXw

Simplex does not occur

(ava-, k^ava-, kv-).

i^av-ireiXa; perf. aua-TeraXKa', mid. pres. kv-T€TaXnai',

T^|ivw

in

N. T.

aor. &i^,

1st

tv-reXXopai; fut. h-reXoupai; perf.

mid. 1st aor. kv-tTtCXapriv. Simplex does not occur.

(irepi-, ffuj'-).

2d

aor. irepi-kTepov; inf. 7r«pi-

Ttpelv; pass, pres., 1st aor. irepL-€TpridT]i>; perf. Tvepi-Terp-qptvos. T£9t)[JH.

(dva— , irpoa-ava-, &Tro-, Sta—, diri-Sia—

fxera-, irapa— , Trept—

and

€tW£i pi.);

fut.

(tTrt-,

mid. and pass.

ha-,

,

t/c— , Itti— , tri'i'-eTri— ,

k-Ki-Oqaopai',

(from

KOTa—

TCktoi.

aor.

triu'-Kara—

Imperf.

TiOeco)' fut. ^lycrco; aor. ^^Tj/ca, -Kas,

-Kav (3d

Trpoo—); .subj.

Ow (complete);

inf.

0errat;part. 0ets; perf.

riOtpai, rkOeipai, aw-tTtOtii'To, tTiOkpriv {k^-, irpoa-)',

2d

mid.

aor. kdkpqv ((complete); imper. dov (xapa-); OkaOe

(diro-); inf. OkaOai (diro— , Kara-); part. Okptvos (dTro-, 5ia-). ffo/xai;

,

Act. pres. complete.

irpo— , irpoa—, avv—, viro—).

kriOfaav, kriOow

imper. 0«

jkOtLKa;

,

krkOrjv', inf. re^^i/ai;

Pass. fut.

rtfli?-

part. Testis.

Te^o/ioi, iTe/cof, erex^l''.

Tpivitt {6.va—, 6,iro-,

kK-, kv—,

«7ri-,

pera—,

TTtpi-, irpo-).

Sinipli^x

1st aor. &i^, kTr-tTpt\pa; mid. pron. inijM'rf. kv-tTptiropqi'', 1st

not

in

N. T.

;ior. p;u"t.

irpo-

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1220

"strong"

Tpepaixevoi] pass.

Tpecbo) (dva—,

fut. €K—,

"Edpe^pa, —e9pe\pdfXT]v. TtOpannai,

e/c— , ep—).

2d

fv-Tpaiirr}crovTa.L',

aor. €k— ,

tir-tTp6iivT]v',

14:34 Rec.)-

perf. kirL-TeTpa-n-TaL (1 Cor.

Tp«\cij {ila—, Kara—, irepL—, Trpcr-, wpocr—,

aw—,

—eTpa.(f)r]i'.

Pres. complete.

vwo-).

i.ivi.-avv—,

'KTpexov, ebpapov.

Tpfpw

Simplex does not occur. Pres.

{5ia-, avv-).

5ta-, avv-; imperf. 5t-4rptj3oj';

fut. avv-Tpbpoi', 1st aor. 5t— , aw-kTpopa; pass. pres. avv-TpiPonai; TpLl3r]cronat.',

Tvyx,dvw

#afv« (dw-, kcjidvrjv,

avv—,

tTTi-).

,

and

(LXX).

(pavod/xai

k(f>ei,crdij.rjv.

awo—, 5ta— eia—, Trap-etcr— ,

"Ecjjepop,

xjTTO—).

rivkxdriv',

^evym

'Etvxov, opt. tvxoi, rervxa. (Heb. (Rec, BE, or even TervxvKa in MSS.). Pres. -e4>dva {(t>ai'r], Rev. 8: 12, 18:23 is variously accented),

^daoiJ.ai,

4'€p(o (di'a—

2d

,

ck— ,

Kara—, Trapa— Trept—

kiri—,

,

—TjveyKa,

o'iaco,

e
indie.

,

fjpeyKoi'',

irpo—, irpoa—,

other parts

perf. act. irpoa-ev-qvoxa..

tK— ,

5ta— ,

(dTTo— ,

aw-

rerevxa.

4>avi]aop.aL

^€iSo|xai.

fut.

vwep-tv—, twL—, irapa—, avi^).

{iv—,

5**AD*KL),

8:6,

2d

perf. inf. avv-Terplcpdai', part. avv-TtTptp.pkvos.

Mid.

Kara—).

fut.

2d

(jt^v^onai',

perf.

kK-Tr€(i>ivykvai,

i.vyov.

*edv«

(ttpo-).

4>6£ip(i> (5ta-, /jat,

k4>9dpTjv,

4>pd
4>»5«

(k-,

Th. 2:16

'E^ffao-a, e(i>daKa (1

Imperf.

Kara-).

(?)

W. H.

marg.).

(Rev. 19:2).

t-^Oeiptv

*9epaj, i(f>eeipa, -k4>dap-

(pdaprjcrofiai.

'E<^pa^a,

further form

k4>pa.yr]v,

(ppayrjaonai.

Pres. part.

o-uj'-).

kK-4>vri


2d

pass.

(Mt. 23:32 =Mk.)

aor. part.

may

vkv,

(Tvv-vti
A

(W. H.) and and will then be

be accented

-^ii;?

then be active pres. subj. or 1st aor. subj.; or -(f>vy 2d aor. subj. In this case rd <j>vWa is considered the subject. Simplex does not occuT in N. T. and ^vvvw Xe'w («-, kwi-, Kara-, avv-). or N. T.). Comp. ««-, vtrepeK-, avv-. Active part. (simplex not in will

pass.

LXX

kin- (Lu. 10:34); imperf. aw-kxvpvev (Ac. 9:22); fut. kK-xeco

k-,

KCLT-kxio-',

kK-xkai (Ro. 3:15,

inf.

LXX); 2d

aor. (?)

(LXX);

1st aor.

imper. kK-xkere

(Rev. 16:1), aw-kxeov (Ac. 21:27). Hort. (II, p. 165) would refer the above forms "to an otherwise virtually unknown 2d aor." Pass. pres. kK-xttraL (Mt. 9:17) and kK-avi^, --VTrep-eK-xvvvop.ai.', imperf. k^-ix^^v^TO (Ac. 22:20); fut. kK-xvOijaopai] 1st aor. k^, aw-ex^V'} perf. e/c-, avv-Kexv^ai. XpCw {ky-, kiri-). Aor. explaa, ky-xp't^ai (Rev. 3:18) may be inf. of 1st aor. active (W. H.) or imper. of 1st aor. mid. (eyxpi^o^o-t.). XaCpo)

(cru;^).

XapC^O(Jiai.

'Kxa-Lpov, kxdprjv, xipivtro/iat,

Mid.

some MSS.

x^-P^^

(Rev. 11:10).

pass. Kexd.pi.anai, kxapiadrjv,

x°-Pi-(fof^°-'-)

kxo.pi.aa.ix7]v',

'Expcb/ir;i^,

kxpwdp.r}v, Kkxprip-at.

xapi<76ij
fxai..

Xpdo[xai (Kara-).

Impers. XPV Only once (Jas.

3:10). 'P'xi)(^(o

(di^a— , dTTo— , Ik—,

"flveojiai.

'^vi)adp.r]v,

Kara—;

not

di>—,

£K— , KaT-k\pv^a)

.

'^vyrjaofiai.

kirpLdix-qv.

13. Ablaut. It is important for the student to note the part played in Greek words, both root-syllables and other syllables, by ablaut or vowel-gradation. We find qualitative ablaut, as 0epco,

4)bpos

and

\diTw,

\k\onra.

Then

qualitative-quantitative ablaut, as in

there

'liiev,

etfXL

is

quantitative or

and

Xiireiv,

Xdiro).

ADDITIONAL NOTES

1221

The subject is still more or less obscure as to the precise order of these vowel-changes and the precise factor in each change (accentuation, vowel-contraction, compensative lengthening). For

a brief account see Wright, Comparative Grammar of Language, 1912, pp. 49-61; Brugmann, Kurze vergl.

the

Greek

Gr.,

pp.

138-50; Hirt, Handbuch der griech. Laut- und Formenlehre, pp. 84-105. For a fuller discussion see Hirt, Der indogermanische Ablaut; Brugmann, GrundriB, vol. I, pp. 482-505.

.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS References to pages.

A

complete List of Topics

72

f.;

not attempted.

is

141-

in the N.T., 82; part II,

376. S*

:

Accumulation

see Sinaiticus.

of

personal

nom.

staining 518, of missing, lacking, despairing 518, of differing, excel-

488;

tive,

512^;

f.

;

inf.,

1092

;

by

486-8; inverse

by

antiptosis,

of,

f.;

799

799; transitive or intransitive, f.; effect of prepositions, 800;

variation in tenses, 800

Accent: discussion of, 226-36 (age of Greek accent 226-8, significance of, in the kolvIi 228 f., signs of 229, later developments in 229 f., short-

tive,

801

f.;

with

f .

;

causa-

reflexives,

802;

802; infinitives, 802; as passive of another verb, 802 f See Index of QuotaActs: 120-3. impersonal,

ening stem-vowels 230 f., separate words 231 f., difference in sense

tions,

and passim

in the

volume.

Adjectives: with formative suffixes, 157-60 (primitive, 157 f.; secon-

232 f., enclitics and proclitics 23.3foreign words 5, proper names 235, 235 f .) rules for accent of enclitics

dary, 158-60: from verbs 158, from substantives 158, from adjectives

;

and

;

53, 63.

Abstract nouns: 152, 794.

159

proclitics, 1211.

Accidence: in the vernacular

488;

attraction,

Active voice: endings, 337-9; displacing future middle, 356; meaning

geni-

positive adjective in

absolute sense, 661; participle, 1130-2.

like

.

.

and hearing 519,

accusative, 490

f.;

with the infinitive, 489 f ace. absolute, 490 f., 1130; whh prepositions, 491 and ch. XIII; compared with genitive, 506-10. Achaean: origin, 16; Achaean-Doric, 17, 54, 266; Achsean-Dorian KoLv-q:

parative, 667.

;

f

adverbial,

Ablaut: 1220 f. Absolute: use of cases, 416; nomina.

265

;

with the partitive idea 519, attraction of relative 519 f.); after com-

f

plural,

name, 466 f.; meaning with verbs of motion, 468 f.; exte nt of space, 46 9; for t ime, 469-71 with transitive verbs, 471-7; cognate, 477-9; double, 479-84; with passive verbs, 484-6; 467

of,

459

f.;

in -et, 266; singular of adjec-

tives, 274;

name, 514; meaning, 514; rare with substantives, 514 f.; with adjectives, 515 f.; with prepositions, 516 f. and ch. XIII; with verbs, 517-20 (of departure and removal 518, of ceasing and abf.;

tive,

264

decl.,

Ablative case: form, 248; Doric genitive-ablative, 254; Attic gen.-abl.,

ling 519, of asking

see

accusative, 257; singular in third

names,

171-3.

255

prepositions:

Accusative case: form, 248; double

A: see Alexandrinus. Abbreviations:

of

prepositions.

a-text: see Syrian text.

f.,

jiound,

KOLfij,

1223

from adverbs 160); com161-9 (with inseparable

. ;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1224

161

prefixes

or

agglutinative

f.,

juxtapositive

168

of adjectives,

270-6

adjective 270

f.,

declension

f.);

(origin of the

inflection of ad-

jectives with one termination 271

f.,

with two terminations 272 f., with three 273 f., the accus. singular 274, contraction in 274 f., indeclinable 275 f.); comparison of, 276-81 (positive 276, comparative 276-8, superlative 278-81); in pred401; and substantive, 407;

icate,

gender in, 412 f.; with vocative, 464; with genitive, 503-5; with 515 f.; with locative ablative, or instrumental, 523; with dative,

537; distinguished from ad-

verbs, 549

657; syntax

f.,

XIV, 650-75;

ch.

of,

origin of, 650; adjec-

.;

.

NEW TESTAMENT

formation

of,

294-7

294

accus.

294,

(fixed

cases

ablative

f.,

295,

genitive 295, locative 295, instru-

mental 295

f.,

dative 296, 'suffixes

compound adverbs

296,

297, anal-

ogy 297, comparison of adverbs 297); adverbial stems, 297-9 (substantives 298, adjectives 298, nu-

merals 298, pronouns 298, verbs 298 f.); use of adverbs, 299-300 (manner 299, place 299 f., time 300); scope of, 300-2 (relative between adverbs and prepositions and conjunctions 301, adverbs 301 f., adverbs and intensive particles 302, adverbs and interjections

adverbial accusative,

302);

486-8; genitive with, 505; dative with, 537 f.; syntax of, ch. XII,

tival or appositional use of sub-

544—52;

as substantive, 651 f 652-4 (any gender 652, masculine 652, feminine 652 f., neuter 654 f.); agreement with substantives, 654 f

nature

(number 654 f., gender 655, case two or more adjectives 655);

with participles 546, loose relation 546) with other adverbs, 546 with with substanadjectives, 546 f tives, 547 as substantives, 547 f

stantive,

.

;

655,

attributive, 655

f

.

;

predicate, 656

personal construction, 657 cases, 658;

with the

inf.

f.

;

f.

with

and clauses,

658 f.; as adverb, 659; positive, 659-61 (relative contrast 659 f., as comparative or superlative 660 f., with prepositions 661, comparison implied by

t)

661, in absolute sense

special

f

;

.

;

;

;

.

;

.

frequent use style,

548 f distinguished from ad549 f. (different meaning ;

.

jective,

549, difference in ;

ositions,

superlative, 669-

669

f.,

elative 670,

no "Hebrais-

tic" 671); numerals, 671-5; with inf.,

1076

f.;

part, originally, 1100

f.;

adjectival aspects of part., 110410; negatives with, 1163

Adverbs: 160;

with

f.

formative

agglutinative

suffixes,

compounds,

169-71; neglect of adverbs, 293;

Greek and Eng-

idiom 549 f.) adverbial phrases 550-2 (incipient adverbs 550, preplish

out suffixes 663, double 663 f ., without object of 664-6, followed by v 666, by the ablative 666 f., by prepositions 667, displacing the su;

548; as marks of

of,

ositional plirases

71 (vanishing 669, few true in N. T.

of,

adverbs with verbs, 545 f (commonest 545, N. T. usage 545, predicate uses 545 f., with ex'^ 546,

544

661); comparative, 662-9 (contrast or duality 662 f., degree 663, with-

perlative 667-9)

544;

difficulties,

544; narrower sense

of,

551, 1109

f.);

554

550

f .,

participles

the verb, 554 f.;

article with, 765 f Adversative particles: 1187 .ffiollc:

f.;

prep-

adjective as, 659;

f.

lyric odes, 17; persistence of,

52; relation to Doric, 17, 53; influ-

ence on

KOLfT],

and here and

63; on the N. T., 82; there,

ad libitum.

.^schylus: see Index of Quotations. Affixes: 146.

Agent: words expressing, 153 f.; dative of, 542; with passive, 820. Agglutinative: tj-pe of languages, 37;

compounds, 163-71. Agreement: see concord.

.

.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Aktionsart: 344

f., 823 f., 828 f., 8318o0 f., 858 f. Alexander the Great: 44, 49-51, 53 ff.,

841-3,

1225

relation

to

present

per-

5,

fect 843-5, epi.stolary

60-3, 66-8, 71, 239, etc.

847, variation in use of tenses 847, translation of aorist into English

grammarians,

Alexandrian:

31;

do

not treat adjectives, 650; no Alexandrian dialect, 68, 91, 100, 213, 215, 227, 242.

Alexandrian type of text: 180 and passim.

Alexandrinus 179 and passim. AUegory: 1207. :

tion to the future 846

845 f.,

847 f.); subjunctive and 848-55 (no time-element quency of subj, 848-50, art 850 f., aori.st subj. in

rela-

f.,

in wishes

optative,

848, fre-

Aktionsprohibi-

tions 851-4, aorist subj. with dv (jltj 854, aorist opt. 854 f.); imperative,

Alliteration: 1201.

855 f.; infinitive, 856-8; participle, 858-64 and 1112-4 (Aktiomart

Alphabet: original Greek, 178; law

858

enforcing Ionic alphabet, 181, 209, 222.

745-50 (see distributive); questions, 736 f. Amplification: of subject, 398-400; of predicate, 400 f Anabasis: passim. See Index of pronouns,

Alternative:

Quotations.

Anacoluthon: discussion of, 435-40 (suspended subject 436 f., digression 437-9, participle in 439 f., asyndeton 440); distinction from oratio variata, 440 f kinds of, 1203 f. Analogy: passim. Anaphora: 1200. Anaphoric: see article, demonstra;

.

tive, relative.

f.,

6

and

cedent

action

action

860

f.,

aorist

859

ante-

f.,

simultaneous subsequent action

860,

861-3, aorist participle in indirect discourse 863 f.). Aoristic: see punctiliar, present, perfect, future.

Aphaeresis

205 f Apocalypse: 101, 135 f.; solecisms in, 413-6 and passim. See Index of Quotations. Apocrypha: passim. See Index of :

Quotations. Apodosis: see 921-3 and conditional sentences, 1007-27. Aposiopesis: 1203.

Apostrophe: use of, 244. Appian: see Index of Quotations. Apposition:

Anarthrous: attributive, 782-4; predicate, 790-6; participle, 1105 f. Annominatio: 1201. Antecedent: see demonstrative, rela-

with substantive, 368400; partitive, 399; predicative am-

plifications, 401; peculiarities in, 416; to vocative, 464; genitive of, 498 f appositional use of substan.

tive, preposition.

Antiptosis: 488.

;

651

tive,

f.;

with

olros,

698-700;

Ikuvos, 708; appositional inf.,

1078

f.

Antistrophe: 1200.

Aquila

Antithesis: 1199

Aramaic: 24; spoken by Jesus, 26-9; distinct from the Hebrew, 102;

f.

second aorist of -;ui verbs, 307-11; forms of, strong and weak, second and first, 345-50; passive, 816 ff.; name, 831; Aktionsart in, 831-5 (constative 831-4, ingressive

Aorist:

:

see Index of Quotations.

portions of the O. T. in, 103; the vernacular of Palestine, 103 f Josephus' use of, in his Tl'or, 104; .

signs of, in the N. T., 104

f.;

;

pos-

rekition

by Mark and Matthew, 105; proper names, 214 f., 236; on propositions, 5.56 f. and passim.

to imperfect 837-40, rekition to jiast

Arcadian: 63, 67, 82, 84, 184, pas-

834,

effective

834

f.);

835-48 (narrative or tense 835 f., gnomic 836 perfect 840

f.,

indicative, historical f.,

relation to present

sible use

;

sim.

and the vernacular, See Index of Quotations.

Aristophanes: 66.

shows influence and marks transition to

Aristotle:

58, 128, 146, 148-53,

Ionic

of

koivt),

168

f.,

55,

171,

See Index of Quotations.

passim.

Arrangement: see sentence. Arrian: see Index of Quotations. Article: use by Peter, 127; with vocative,

465

f.;

as possessive, 684; with

possessive, 685; with reflexive, 690;

with

NEW TESTAMENT

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1226

ovTos,

700-2; with

eKeXfos,

708;

and development of, 754 f. (a Greek contribution 754, derived from demonstrative 755); significance of, 755; method employed by, 756-8 (individuals from individuals 756, classes from classes 757, quahties from qualities 758); origin

758-76 (with substantives, context, gender, proper names, anaphoric 758-62, with advaried usages

of,

jectives, resumptive, adj alone,with .

numerals 762-4, with participles 764 f ., infinitive 765, with adverbs 765 f., with prepositional phrases 766, with single words or whole sentences 766, with genitive alone 767, nouns in predicate 767-9, distributive 769, nominative with = vocative 769, = possessive 769 f ., with possessive 770, with avros 770, with demonstratives 770 f., with oXos, Tras [tiTras] 771-4, with ttoXuj 774 f., a/cpos, fiiJ.L(TVS, ecrxo-Tos, fiiaos 775, with aXXos and ei-epos 775 f., with fiovos 776); position with attributives, 776-89 (with adjectives, normal, repetition, one with several, anarthrous substantives, participles 776-9, with genitive, between article and gen., after gen. without repetition, repetition with gen., absent with both, correlation of article 779-82, with adjuncts or adverbs, between article and noun, repeated, only with adjunct, only with noun, when several adjuncts occur,

phrases

exegetical

of

verbal

questions,

origin,

anarthrous

attributive 782-4, several attribu-

same person or

tives

with

Ktti,

thing,

when

distinguished, treated

as one, point of view, difference in

number

or gender, with disjunctive

particle 785-9) ; position with pred-

789

icates,

f

absence

;

.

names

(with proper

790-6

of,

791, with geni-

prepositional phrases with both preposition and genitive 792 f., titles 793, words in pairs 793, ordinal numerals 793 f., tives

791

in

791,

f.,

abstract words

predicate 794,

794, qualitative force 794, only ob-

kind 794-6) with

ject of

;

inf.,

1062-

8; articular part., 1106-8. Article,

and

indefinite:

el$

674;

as,

ns

eU, 796.

Articular infinitive: 1062-8. Articular participle: 1106-8. Artistic prose

:

see literary

koivti.

Asianism: 60, 73, 87 f., passim. Aspirate: 191, 209; doubling of, 215; aspiration of consonants, 219; ori-

gin of the aspirate, 221

MSS., 223-5;

tions in

varia-

f.;

transliter-

ated Semitic words, 225; use with and pp, 225 f.; question of avrov,

p

226.

Assertion, sentence of: see indirect discourse.

Asseverative particles: 1150. Assimilation: of consonants, 215-7; rules for, 1210.

Associative case: see instrumental.

Asyndeton: 427-44; imperative

in,

949.

Athens losing :

its

primacy in culture,

67, passim.

Attendant circiunstance, participle of: see participle. Attic: 16, 17, 20, 22, 35

umph

of,

f.,

41-4;

tri-

51; vernacular, the base

the

N.

T., 82; Attic inscriptions

KoivT),

on show

60-2; influence

of

indifference to hiatus,

207; geni-

tive-abl.,255f.; "Attic" declension,

260; ad libitum in the book. Attica: 181

f.

Atticism: not part of the

koivt},

50; the

;;

1227

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Atticistic reaction

and

its

influence,

58-60, 73; conservative influence of, 177 f.; pronunciation, 239, pas-

the forms 247

blending of case-

ff.,

endings, sjTicretism of the forma

Attraction of relative: inverse, 488;

249 f., origin of case-suffixes 250); concord in, 413-6 (adjectives 413, participles 413, the Book of Reve-

to genitive, 512; to ablative, 519

lation 413-6, apposition 416, abso-

f.;

732 f. Attributive: adjective, 655 f.; positive See participle. article, 776-89. Augment discussion of, 365-8 (origin of 365, where found 365, purpose of 365, syllabic 365 f., temporal 366 f., compound verbs 367, double

lute 416); syntax of, ch.

367 f.); in past perfect, 1211 Authorized version: influence English language, 92.

cases,

with

OS,

714-9;

6o-os,

:

f.

of,

on

B B

:

p-text: see Neutral text. Bezae, Codex: 179 f., passim. "Biblical" Greek: 5; view of E. Hatch refuted by Deissmann, 24 f.; the new point of view, 30; N. T.

77-9,

not "biblical Greek," 92, 112 f., passim.

88,

Bilingualism: in Palestine, 27-30; in Brittany, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, 30, 69, 102 f. Blending: see cases.

Boeotian: 16, 52; influence

monophthongizing, 204

of, 61, f

.

;

63;

pronun-

f.,

modem

usage 447, synf.,

Green's classification 447

cretism of the cases 448, freedom

448 f.); purpose of the 449 (Aristotle's usage, wordrelations) encroachment of prepositions on, 450-3 (reason 450, no "governing" of cases 450, not used indifferently 450 f., original use

in use of

;

1211.

Brachylogy: 1201, 1203. Breathings: 221-6; use with p and pp, 225 f.; in Ionic, 240. Breviloquence see brachylogy. :

distinctive

;

idea in each case, 453-6 (fundacases not yet

mental idea 453

f.,

interchangeable

454,

vitahty

of

case-idea 454, historical develop-

ment

of the cases

this

grammar

454

f.,

456);

method

of

nominative,

456-66; vocative, 461-6; accusative, 466-91; genitive, 491-514; ablative, 514-20; locative, 520-5; instrumental, 525-35; dative, 53543; functions of prepositions with, 567-71 see discussion of each prep;

and

substantive, 655; with adjectives, 658; OS, attraction and incorporation,

714-9;

oo-ris,

1058-62; with

inf.,

728

f.;

of inf.,

1082; participle,

1119.

Causal participle: see participle and

Brittany, bilingual: 29. see perfect

preserved in N. T. 453)

osition in ch. XIII; adjective

ciation, 240; passim.

Broken continuity:

tribution 446

with "local" cases 451, 567, increasing use of 451 f., distinction

see Vaticanus.

pov(rTpo4>'r|86v :

XI, 446-

543; history of interpretation of, 446-9 (confusion 446, Bopp's con-

and

causal clauses.

Causal

past p(!rfect.

particles:

see

conjunctions

Byzantine Greek: literature on, 22-4,

and causal sentences (hypotactic).

43, 155, 179, 183, 191, 210, passim.

Causal sentences : use of 3s, 724 f paratactic, 962 f.; with hypotactic conjunctions, 963 f .; rohitives, 965 f .

.

Slo. tIi

C= Codex

Ephraemi: passim.

Cardinals:

s(!(!

miinerals.

Cases: number

of,

247-50 (history of

and the

ticiple, 966,

infinitive,

1128;

inf.,

966; par-

1091.

Causative verbs: 150; active, 801 middle, SOS f.

f.;

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1228

Cautious assertion: see

and con-

final

secutive sentences.

Chaldee (Aramaic): 211.

See Ara-

rivative

161, inseparable prefixes 161-3, agglutinative or by juxtaposition 163-71).

Compound sentences

maic.

Chiasm: 1200.

:

order of clauses

423; two kinds of sentences, 425 f.; two kinds of compound or complex, 426; parataxis, 426; in,

Chinese: 250. Christian [element in N. T. Greek: chiefly lexical, 112-6; new connotations of familiar words, 115 f. Chrysostom: passim. Circumlocutions: 330, 648 f. Circumstantial participle: see parti-

hypotaxis, 426 f Conative action: 880, 885. Concessive: imperative

949;

as,

clause, 1026; participle, 1128.

Concord and government, 397 f in person, 402 f.; in number, 403-9; :

;

.

ciple.

"Classical Greek": 5, 89, passim. Clause: paratactic, 428 f.; hypotactic, 429-31; inf. and part., 431 f.; clauses with the adjectives, 658 f.

CUmax:

1200.

Collectives: see gender

and number.

Colloquial: see vernacular.

Colon: 243.

Comma:

origin of, 243.

Common

in gender, 410-3; in case, 413-6. Conditional sentences: apodosis of second class, 921-3; two types, 1004-7; four classes, 1007-22 (de-

termined as fulfilled 1007-12, determined as unfulfilled 1012-6, undetermined, but with possibility of determination 1016-20, remote possibility of determination 1021

speech: see kolvt). Comparative: see adjectives.

mixed conditions,

Comparative clauses: with relative oaos, 966 f.; relative with /card, 967; KadoTi, 967; cos and its compounds, 967 ff. Comparative grammar or philology:

6; concessive clauses,

8-12; the linguistic revolution, 8; sketch of Greek grammatical history, 8-10; the discovery of San-

from Bopp to Brugmann, 10 ff.; importance of, 36; the original Indo-Germanic speech, 38; Greek as a "dialect" of, 39 f.; applied to N. T. word-formation, 144; system of affixes, infixes, prefixes, skrit, 10;

suffixes,

14&-247, 250, passirn.

Comparison: of adjectives, 276-81; of adverbs, 297; s^oitax of, 661-9.

Complementary

infinitive: see infini-

tive (with verbs).

Complementary

participle: see parti-

ciple.

Composition: compound words common in the N. T., 82; compound verbs in -eco, 147 f. discussion of composita in the N. T., 160-71 ;

(kinds of, proper, copulative, de-

conditions, 1022 particles with

el

f.

;

elliptical,

and

f.);

imphed

1022;

1026

f.;

1023other

1027; par-

kav,

ticiple, 1129.

Conjugation of verb: ch.VIII, 303-76. Conjunctions: adverbs, 301; in subordinate clauses, 951 f and all tlirough the discussion of hypotac.

;

clauses, 950-1049; paratactic, 1177-92 (copulative: rk 1178 f., Kal 1179-83, 5^ 1183-5, dXXd 1185 f.; adversative: 8k 1186 f., n-Xiji' 1187, tic

nkvToi 1188,

1188

f)

kdvTe 1189, ovre

ferential: apa

odp 1191

f.);

and

1189

f.,

^77x6

f.,

Ml?

6s,

1188;

and

elre

1189; in-

yap 1190

hypotactic, 1192

Consecutive: use of see final

d

1188,

o/icos

disjunctive:

f.,

f.

724; clauses,

and consecutive.

Consonants: changes, 209-21 (origin and character of the consonants 209 f., the insertion of 210, the omission of 210 f single or double .,

211-5, assimilation of 215-7, inter-

change and changing value of 217aspiration of 219, variable final 219-21, metathesis 221). 9,

;

.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Constative action: see aorist. Constructio ad sensum: illustrated in,

400-424, 683 f., 1204. praegnans: 1204. discussion of, 203

Becond declension, 260 f

f.

;

in

in third de-

; .

clension, 268; in adjectives,

275

f.;

in verbs, 341-3.

Contrasts: in Greek words, 175

comparison, 662 Co-ordination ciples,

1135

:

443

f.;

in

f f.

;

between parti-

f.

Coptic: 215, 250

f.,

passim.

f

or o declen-

first

; .

sion, 2.54-9 (Doric genitive-aljlative f.,

Attic genitive-abla-

tive 255, vocative in -a 256,

and

in -pa

also prepositions. :

tory of the, 246 singular 254

See

Constructio

Contraction

1229

words

participles in -via 256,

retention of -a in gen.-abl.

256,

double declensions 257, heteroclisis and metaplasm 257-9, indeclinable substantives 259); second or o, 259-63 (the "Attic" 260, contraction 260 f., vocative 261, het-

and metaplasm 261-3, mixed declension 263, proper names 263); third decl., 263-9 (nomieroclisis

Copula: not necessary, 395 f. Copulative conjunctions: 1177-86. Coronis: 244.

native as vocative 264, accus. singular 264 f., accus. plural 265 f.,

Correlation of article

267

Correlative

709

f.,

:

pronouns: 289

298,

f.,

in

the

nominative

gen.-abl.

268,

contraction

peculiarities

see article.

732.

f.,

proper names 268

268,

f.,

hetero-

and metaplasm 269); inde-

clisis

Crasis: 208.

clinable words, 269

Cretan dialect: passim.

adjectives, 270-81; numerals,

Crete: early Greek culture

4; pronouns,

in, 43.

Culture: variations ia N. T. writers,

f

declension of

; .

302.

Defective verbs: in voice, 799.

381.

Cynic-Stoic diatribe: 420

f.,

1196

f.

Cyprus as purveyor of Greek culture, 43; language and N. T. Gk., 82, :

passim.

281-

284-93; adverbs, 293-

See

verbs.

Deictic: see demonstrative.

Deliberative: future, 875

934

tive,

f.;

opt.,

f.

;

subjunc-

940; questions,

1046.

D:

see (Codex) Bezae.

Western text. 248 ff.; syncretism, 535; decay of dative, 535 f.; idea of, 536; with substantives, 536 f.;

8-text: see

Dative:

form,

with adjectives, 537; with adverbs and prepositions, 537 f. and ch. XIII; with verbs, 538-43 (indirect object 538, dalivus commodi

vel in-

commodi, 538 f., direct object 53941, with intransitive verbs 541, possession 541, infinitive in dative

541

f.,

of the agent 542, because of

preposition in composition 542

f .)

ambiguous examples, 543. Declarative clauses: 915

f.,

Delphian: 266. Delta: 91. Demonstrative pronouns: inflection of, 289 f.; nature of, 693; shades of meaning, 693; 6, i), t6, 693-5; 5s, 695 f.; 556, 696 f.; oItos, 697-706 (the deictic use 697, the contemptuous use 697, the anaphoric use 697 f., in apposition 698-700, use of article 700 f., without article f ., contrast with cKeifos 702 f., antecedent of relative 703 f., gender and number 704, adverbial uses

701

704

shift

and

see

indirect discourse.

De-aspiration: increasing, 222

f.

Declensions: ch. VII, 246-302; his-

phrase tout' ianv 705, with pronouns 705, ellipsis 705, in reference 706) inflvos 706-9

f .,

other

;

(the purely deictic 707, the con-

temptuous u.se 707, the anaphoric 707, the remote object 707 f., emphasis 70S,

with apposition 70S,

.

;

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1230 with

antecedent to rela-

article 708,

and number 708

tive 708, gender

f.,

NEW TESTAMENT

or more, contrast, antithetic); article as, 769.

independent use 709); amm, 709; correlative demonstratives 709 f .)

Division of words: not in old MSS.,

derived from, 755; article

Doric: purest Hellenic, 17; tenacity of, 52; Doric- J]]oUc, 53; influence

article

with, 770

f

Demosthenes:

in the

New

Attic, 52;

pronouncing Greek, 238. See Index of Quotations. Denial and prohibition, with ov jiii:

and

see aorist subj.

final.

marks: 226. Diaeresis: 204 f.; marks of, 244. Dialects: fuller knowledge of dialects, 16 f .,

39

f.,

41-4, 46, 52

nacular, 61-9, 82, 178

229-31, 238

ff.;

accent

f.;

on the N.

T., 82;

Doric: 16

193

f.,

52^, 62

82, 118, 184

f.,

211, 224, 229, 240, 249, 254

f .,

f.,

f.,

Double compounds: 160, 165, 565. Double consonants: 211-5. Double declension: 257. Double interrogative 737. Dual: origin and disappearance of, :

the f.,

dialect-coloured ver-

f.;

63;

KOLv-n,

genitive-ablative, 254, -passim.

663, 670.

Diacritical

71, 79, 110

on the

Double comparative and superlative: f.

Derivation: derivative verbs, 147-50.

Design, sentences of: see

f.

267, passim.

fut. ind.

Denominative verbs: 147. Deponents: 332 f., 811-3, 817

243

in,

251

f.

DuaUty:

in the comparative adjec662 f with erepos, 749. Durative (Unear) action: 823 f., 879tive,

;

.

declension

in,

247;

passim.

92.

Diatribe, Cynic-Stoic: 420

f.,

1196

Dynamic:

f.

see middle voice.

Diffuseness: see pleonasm.

Digamma:

209, 223 f. Digraphs: 209. Digression 437 f Diminutives: frequent in the N. T., 82; less common than in modem :

Gk., 155. tations.

Diphthongs: 204

f.

Direct discourse: exchange with in-

1027

442

f

; .

with recitative on,

f

Discord: see concord.

f.,

and

infinitive. :

244

f

Effective action: see aorist.

Egypt: 21, 56; peculiarities of Koiurj in, 68, 91, 100 f.. Ill f., 178, 186, 189, 191, 195 f., 200, 202, 257, passim. Elative: 278 Elean: 266.

f.,

670.

EUsion: 72, 206-8, 223, 226, 1210.

Disjunctive particles: 1165

clauses

Editor's prerogative

Diodorus Siculus: see Index of Quo-

direct,

Ecbatic Zva: see consecutive clauses. Ecbatic infinitive: see consecutive

negative,

1173; conjunctions, 1188

f.

EUipsis: of subject or predicate, 391; of oSros, 705

f.;

in general, 1201

f.

Distributive mmierals: see numerals.

Emphasis: position of, 417 f.; in pronouns, 677 ff., 684 f., 686, 708.

Distributive pronouns: inflection

Enallage: 454.

Dissimilation: see assimilation.

of,

syntax of, 743, 744-50; d^(poTepoL, 744 f.; eKaaros, 745 f.; aWo^, 746-8 (absolutely, for two, adjec-

292

f.;

tive, sis,

with

axXos

rpios);

with

article, aXXos ctXXo, eUip-

and

'irepos,

article,

erepo^, different,

a\\6-

748-50 (absolutely, pair,

different,

three

EncUtics accent :

681

f.;

of,

233

ff .

;

pronouns,

rules for accent of, 1211.

EngUsh: best English' spoken burgh and Louisville, 69. Epanadiplosis

:

1200.

Epexegetic infinitive: 1086 f. Epexegetical apposition 399. :

in

Edin-

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Epic: 185, 204, passim.

985-7, ws 987, /mj, firj iron, ny TToJs 987-9, relative 989, infinitive 989-

Epicene: gender, 252. Epidiorthosis

:

1231

1199.

participle

91,

Epimenides: see Index of Quotations. Epistles: distinction from letters, 70 f., S5 ff., 197, 200, 239.

991-7

final,

nv,

991-4,

996, infinitive 996 oTi 997);

Erasmus on

997-9, w(XT€ 999

:

i)ronunciation of Greek,

994

f.,

relative

f.,

d and

1087-9,

f.,

sub-

f.);

67rwi

995

TTore, nil ttws

ixT)

Epistolary aorist: see aorist. 237, 240.

1128

991,

(iffa

consecutive, 997-1003 (tm f.,

1000

cbs

f.,

5rt

1001, relative 1001, infinitive 1001 fT., 1089-91).

Etacism: 191. Etjmiology work of the philosophers, 31; use of term, 143 f.

Final consonants (letters) 21, 248.

Euphony: 419-23.

Finnish:

Euripides see Index of Quotations. Euthalius: 241.

a declension: 254-9, 267. Foreign words: 108-11, 235 f. See

:

:

Exclamation: 461, 739, 741.

2.50.

Latinisms. lar

of

tions.

words:

in the

72; ch.

KotPT,,

formative Papyri: see Index of Quota-

II,

vernacu-

pp. [143-76;

146-60; by com-

suffixes,

position, 160-71.

Forms, rare see declensions and con:

Feininine

:

see gender.

jugation of verbs.

Figures of speech: ch. XXII, 11941208; rhetorical, not grammatical, 1194; style in the N. T., 1194-7; figures of thought, 1198

(rhetor-

f.

ical question, oratory, irony, prodi-

orthosis, epicHorthosis, paraleipsis,

heterogeneous

structure)

;

figures

of expression,

1199-1208

and contrasts:

parallelism, synony-

mous

219-

First or

Formation

Fayum

194,

:

(parallels

or antithetic, chiasm or re-

Formulas of citation: 1027 f. Fourth Book of Maccabees: see Index of Quotations.

Fourth Gospel and Apocalypse: see Index of Quotations. French: accent, 230; cases and prepositions of,

Future: conjugation of 353

f.,

verted parallelism, anaphora, antistrophe, poetry 1199 f.; contrasts

pated 353

words: epanadiplosis, climax, zeugma, brachylogy, s>'nonyms, onomatopoetic, alliteration, paronomasia, annominatio, parechesis, pun 1200 f.; contraction and expansion ellipsis, ajjosiopesis, breviloqucncc or brachylogy, constructio

sive 356

in

:

praegnans, constructio ad scnsum, hypallage,

pleonasm, hyperbole, mciosis 1201-6; metaphors and similar tropes: metaphor, sim-

litotes,

252; gender, 252; pas-

sim.

active

of,

353-7

(origin

Ionic-Attic 355, syncof.,

of liquid verbs 356,

and middle 356, second pas-

f., first passive 357, periphrastic 357); syntax of middle,

813

f.;

passive, 818-20; relation of

846 f.; punctiliar (aoris870-6 ("mixed" tense, punc-

aorist to, tic),

tihar or durative 870-2,

modal

as-

merely futuristic, volitive, dehberative 872-6, in the modes 876-9: indicative 876, subjunctive pect

of,

and optative 876, participle 877

f.,

infinitive

876,

periphrastic sulv

metonymy

Btitutes for 878 f ); durative (linear), 888-9 (three kinds of action 889,

Final and consecutive clauses: kinship, 9S0; origin in jKirat axis, 980 f.;

periphrastic 889); fut. ind. and aor. subj.,92t f.;fut. ind. as imperative,

ile,

1206

pure

parable,

allegory,

f.).

final,

981-91

(iVa

981-5, owws

.

942

f.,

1118f.

;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1232

Future perfect: 361, 906

Gerundive: 157.

f.

modal aspect

Futuristic:

NEW TESTAMENT

of future,

merely futuristic, 872-4; present, 869 f., 881; pres. part., 992; present 898; subj., 928-30; opta937-9.

See verbal adjec-

tives.

Gnomic:

aorist,

836

f.;

present, 866;

present perfect, 897.

perfect,

Gorgian figures: 1197

tive,

Gothic: passim.

Grammar: the

ideal

ff.

grammar,

pre- Winer period,

3; the the service

3;

4; the modern period, the service of DeLssmann, Thumb,

of Winer, 7-text: see Alexandrian text.

Gender:

of adjectives, 156

stantives,

f.;

in sub-

252-4 (grammatical gen-

der 252, kinds of 252, variations in

252 f LXX illustrations 254) no feminine inflection in second declension, 259, 261 f.; concord in, 410-3 (fluctuations in 410 f., neuter singular 409, 411, explanatory o ecTTiv and tout' ecmv 411 f., the participle 412, adjective 412 f.); of adjectives without substantives, 652-4; agreement with substan.,

;

tives, 654; ovTos, 704; iKtivos, 708; 5s,

712

Genealogy

in

Greek grammatical history, 8-10; advance in general Greek grammar, 12; critical editions of Greek authors, 13; grammatical monographs, 13; grammatical commentaries, 29;

new point of view,

30; comparative, 31-48; in Alexander's time, 58-61;

Greek grammarians and Latin, 822; Alexandrian grammarians and adjectives, 650; passim.

Greek authors: 13

Matthew:

270.

Genitive: form, 248, 263, 491

55, 57-9,

f.,

94, 109, 121, 128

729.

ff.; ocTTts,

Moulton, etc., 5-7; the new grammatical equipment, 8-31; sketch of

f.,

203, 218, 227, 238, 251, 265 f.;

Doric

254 f.; Attic geni255 f.; name, 492; specifying case, 493 f.; local use, 494; temporal use, 495; with substantives, 495-503 (possessive 495 f., attributive 496 f., predicate 497 f., appositive or definitive 498 f., subgenitive-abl.,

tive-abl.,

on Formation passim. See Index ter

86

f.,

147, 191, 199,

of

chap-

f.,

Words, and

of Quotations.

Greek language: sketch

of Greek grammatical history, 8-13; relation to earlier tongues, 39; regarded as a

whole, 40-45; unity

ods

of,

43; the

of,

41

f.

Greek point

;

peri-

of view,

46-48; passim.

jective 499, objective 499-501, of

Greek

relationship 501

503); with adjectives, 503-5; with

non-Greek influences, 49, 58,- 67, 75, 84 f.. Ill f., passim. Greek, later: see Byzantine or mod-

adverbs and prepositions, 505 and ch. XIII; with verbs, 505-12 (very

Greek point

position of 502

common

506,

f.,

partitive 502,

concatenation of

f.,

fading

relative

512);

attraction

f.,

of

£f.,

35; subject to

ern Greek. of view: 46-8.

distinction

from ace. 506, verbs of sensation 507 f., of emotion 508 f., of sharing, partaking, filhng 509 f., of ruling 510, of bu3Tng, selling, being worthy of 510 f., of accusing and condemning 511, due to prepositions in composition 511

culture: 14

infinitive,

of

512;

Headings, anarthrous: see

Hebraisms:

article.

24 ff.; Deissmann, 25 f number of, in N. T., 76 ff., 89; the traditional standpoint, 88 f translation, 89 f papyri and inscriptions disprove many, 90 f real, in the

3; the old view,

revolt

of

.

;

.

absolute, 512-4, 1131

f.

.

German: passim.

;

;

.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS N. T., 94-6; greater indirect influence of the LXX, 96-102; transwords,

literated

N. T. tions,

of

€is,

variety

225;

1233

Hypothetical sentences: see conditional sentences.

Hysteron proteron: 423.

in

106-8; on preposi-

writers,

556 f.; o(iel(Tdai 6.ir6, 577; use 595 f superlative, 671 tense, ;

;

.

822; passim.

Identical pronouns see intensive pro:

Hebraists: 76 ff., 88 f., 90 f. Hebrew: proper names, 214; transliterated Hebrew words, 225; accent of

proper names, 236, 259,

263, 268

ff.,

Hebrews:

passim.

nouns. Illative particles : see (inferential) con-

junctions. Illiteracy

106;

of,

Imperative: origin

alone of 132 f the N. T. books avoids hiatus, 206, 218; rhythm in, 1196 f. Hellenism: influence on Paul, 86.

-o-at 329,

Hellenistic: see

son 329

peculiarities

the papyri, 70

in

:

f

.

diver-

;

sity of culture, 85; passim.

quality

literary

•

of,

;

.

Koifii.

328, old injunctive 328

Hendiadys: 1206. Herculaneum: 196, 223, passim. Hermas: see Index of Quotations. Herodotus: 13, 57, 59, 266, passim. Heteroclisis: 257-9 (the first and second decls., the first and third); between second and third, 261 f.; between masculine and neuter of second, 262 f.; third decl., 269.

finitive

Heterogeneous structure:

uses

441

f.,

form

forms in

f.,

in -a-ou 329, first per-

prohibitions 330, perfect

f.,

330, periphrastic 330, circumlocutions 330) aorist,

;

855

perfect,

360

f

; .

use of

present, 890; perfect,

f.;

908; imper. and subj., 925; origin of,

941; meaning

of,

941;

disap-

pearance of imperative forms, 941 f.; alternatives for, 942-6 (fut. ind.

942

f.,

subj. 943, opt. 943, in-

943 f., participle 944-6); 946-50 (command or ex-

of,

hortation 946

1199.

327-30

320,

of,

(non-thematic stem 327, thematic stem 327 f., suffix -Oi 328, suffix -rw

f.,

prohibition 947,

Hiatus: 206-8, 219.

entreaty

Historic present: see present.

concession or condition 948

method

947

f.,

permission

948, f.,

in

31-48; historical element essential,

asyndeton 949, in subordinate clauses 949 f tenses 950, in indi-

grammar,

rect discourse 950); negative with,

Historical

study: ch.

of

31; descriptive historical

II,

41, 71, 78, 173-5; syntax, 386.

History of words: 173 passim.

1161 252,

See Index of Quotations.

:

and

wishes 1003

f.,

consecutive f.,

980-1003, conditional 1004-27,

indirect di.scour.se

to aorist, 837-

doubtful,

direct discourse, 887; periphrastic,

429 f.; hypotactic sentences, 950-1049 (relative 95362, causal 962-6, comparative 9669, local 969 f., temporal 970-9, final

of,

882 f.; descriptive tense in narrative, 883 f.; iterative or customary, 884; progressive, 884; 40;

tive," 885; potential, 885-7; in in-

171-3.

Hypotaxis: 426

1170.

inchoative or conative, 885; "nega-

f.

Hyperbole: 1205. Hypocoristic

f.,

Imperfect: relation

f.

Homer and Homeric Greek: 249, HypaUage: 1204. Hyperbaton: 423

.,

1027-48,

of subordinate clauses 1048

sc-ries f.).

887 f.; past perfect as, 888. Impersonal verbs: active, 802; construction, 820.

"Improper"

prepositions: sec prepo-

sition.s, 5.")4, diU)

IT.

Inceptive action: 150.

Incorporation of antecedent: 718 731, 733.

f.,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1234

Indeclinable words: accent, 236; sub-

words, 269 736;

various

259;

stantives,

foreign

adjectives, 275

f.;

f.; tI,

744.

rt,

Indefinite article: 674

796.

f.,

pronouns: inflection of, 292; tU, 741-4 (accent 741, relation to rh 741 f., as substantive 742, with numerals 742, with substantives 742 f., with adjectives 743, as

Indefinite

NEW TESTAMENT

junctions

and

iva

1046, in-

oTTws

1046 ff.); mixture, 1047 f.; the subordinate clause, 1048. Individuality of N. T. writers: 116-37. Indo-European: see Indo-Germanic. finitive,

Indo-Germanic:

10, 37 ff., 145 ff., 209, See comparative philology (grammar). Inferential conjunctions: 1189-92.

217, passim.

forms

Infinitive: ending, 246;

of,

368-

predicate 743, position of 743, as antecedent 743, alternative 743,

71 (original terminology 368, fixed case-forms 368 f., with voice and

negative forms 743

tense 369

Ti

744);

744;

els,

indechnable

f .,

ttSs,

744; 6

SeXfa,

744.

of inf. 371,

Independent

sentences:

para-

see

no personal endings

f.,

370, article with 371, disappearance

N. T. forms 371);

position, 399

f.;

accusative with, 489

taxis.

Indicative real mode, 320 :

322

sign,

sentences

of

.

meaning

48; future, 876;

kinds

f

;

no mode

use of aor. ind., 835-

f.;

914 f.; using, 915-8 of,

(declarative or interrogative 915-7, positive or negative 917

512; in dative, 541

658

tives,

f.;

in ap-

in clauses, 431 f.

f.;

in genitive,

;

with adjec-

f.;

article with, 765;

and

voice,

802; use of aorist, 856-8;

future,

876

f.

perative, 943

;

perfect, f

; .

908

f.

;

as im-

causal use of 5td

966; temporal use

978

f.;

918-24 (past tenses, for courtesy 918 f., present necessity,

purpose, 989-91; sub-final, 996

f.;

obhgation,

discourse,

uses

special

f.);

of,

919-21, apodosis

etc.

TO,

consecutive,

1001-3;

1036-40;

of second class conditions 921-3,

command, 1046-8;

impossible

1051

923

f .,

wishes

future 924)

1032-6;

course,

1157-60, 1168

442

direct,

863

f.

in indirect dis-

negative

with,

;

f.;

in

indirect

in

indirect

origin of

exchange with

aorist participle in,

inf.,

development, 1052-6 (pre-

historic period

1052,

earliest his-

toric period 1052-4, classic period

1054-6, later period 1056-8)

f.

discourse:

Indirect

;

present

923,

of,

stantival aspects of (case, subject or

inf.,

;

sub-

1058-79

object 1058-62,

imperfect ind., 887; present

articular 1062-8, prepositions with

part., 992; perfect in, 897; inf. perf.,

1068-75, with substantives 1075 f ., with adjectives 1076 f., with verbs

f.;

on

908; recitative

in oratio recta,

change of person in indirect f change of tense in, 1029 f change of mode in, 1030 f.; limits of indirect disc, 1027

f.;

discourse, 1028 .

1031

f.;

.

;

;

declarative clauses (indi-

rect assertions),

1032-43 (on and

indicative 1032-6, infinitive 103640,

1082-5,

participle,

1122-4, Kal kykvtTo 1042

1040-2, f.);

indi-

rect questions, 1043-6 (tense 1043,

mode 1043

1077

f.,

appositional

and

1079-95 (voice 1079 f., tense 1080cases with 1082, in ind. disc. 1082-5, personal construction with 1085 f., epexegetical inf. 1086 f., purpose 1087-9, result 1089-91, cause 1091, time 1091 f., absolute 1092 f., negatives with 1093-5, 1162, 1171, av with 1095); relation between part, and inf., 1101-3. 2,

pronouns used 1044 f.); indirect command, 1046 f., 1082-5

Inflectional languages: 37.

(deUberative questions 1046, con-

Ingressive action: see aorist.

and

f.,

interrog.

conjunctions

epexe-

getical 1078 f.); verbal aspects of,

Infixes: 146.

;

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Injunctive

mood:

Inscriptions: the

14-6, 52, 56

f.,

321, 328

TToIos,

f.

Greek

inscriptions,

66

76-80; more

ff.,

than the papyri, 84, 90 f., f., 106, 116, 130 f., 138 f., 148, ISO, 181-93, 200, 202, ad libitum through the book. See Index

literary

96

100

f.,

of Quotations. Inseparable prefixes: 161-3.

Instrumental case

f.

526; 525 f.; synci'etistic, time, 527 f associaplace, 526 f tive idea, 528-30; with words of likeness and identity, 530; manner,

term,

;

.

.

;

530-2; with adjectives, 523, 530; measure, 532; cause, 532; means,

532^; with prepositions, 534

and

f.

ch. XIII.

Instrumental use of

iv:

See

589-91.

also locative.

Intensive

563

prepositions,

VT]

and

yk, 1*01,

indirect questions);

Troaos,

meaning, indirect, (rare, Trdrepos, 741 indirect questions) irorairos, 741 in indirect questions, 1044 f. Intransitive: 330 f., 797 f., 806, 815 f. Inverse attraction: 488, 717 f. 741 f. (rarity, exclamatory);

;

;

on the kolvt], 62 f on the N.T., 82, 181-93, 200, 203-6, 210 f., 217 f., ad libitum. Iota adscript: 194 f., 209. Iota subscript: 194 f. flu(!nce

.

;

Ireland, bilingualism in: 30.

Irony: 1198

f.

Irrational final

i

and

v: 194, 219-21.

"Irregular" verbs: see list, 1212-20. Isolating languages: 37. Isolation of Greek, not true 36-39. Itacism: 72, 178 ff., 182, 191 ff., 1947, 198-200, 239 f., 265 f., ad libitum. See ch. on Orthography and :

adverbs,

particles:

1144-7;

740 (qualitative, non-quali-

tative,

Ionic: earliest in literature, 16, 17; in-

249

endings,

:

1235

f

1147-9; 1150;

1153f.;roI, 1154

; .

8v,

nev,

302;

limitations,

1149;

el urtv,

1150-3;

irep,

Phonetics.

f.

Intensive perfect: see perfect tense. Intensive

pronouns:

declension

of,

287; nominative use of avrds, 685 f.; varying degrees of emphasis, 686; airos with ovtos, 686; aiirds almost

demonstrative, cases,

686

f.

;

686,

side

by

oblique

in

side with re-

flexive, 687; 6 avTos, 687.

Interjections: 302, 1193.

Interrogative particles: single tions,

1175-7

negative,

(direct,

others,

no

ques-

particle,

interrogative

pronouns,

conjunctions,

pronouns,

conjunctions)

indirect, ;

double

questions, 1177 (direct, indirect).

Interrogative pronouns: inflection

of,

735-40 (substantival or adjectival 735, absence of gender 735, = TToios 735 f., indecUnable tL 736, alternative questions 736 f., double 737, as relative 737 f., predicate tL 738, adverbial 738 f., with prepositions 739, with particles 739, as exclamation 739, indirect questions 739, rts or ris 739 f.); 291

f.; Tts,

James, peculiarities of: 123 f. See Index of Quotations. Jesus, language of: both Aramaic and Greek, 26-9. "Jewish" Greek: see "Biblicar* Greek, Hebraisms, Aramaic, koivti. Jews: 83, 98 f., 102, etc. John, peculiarities of: Index of Quotations.

133-7.

See

Josephus 28 an illust rat ion of At ticistic Gk. in contrast with 1 Mac:

;

cabees, 87, 236, 269, passim.

See

Index of (Quotations. Jude: peculiarities of, 124 f. See Index of Quotations. Justin Martjrr: see Index of Quotations.

KaOapcvovo-a Gre(>k,

3(),

:

IS;

artificial

modern

60, pa.'^sim.

Kinship of Greek words: 174

f.

;;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1236

Koiv^: 17, 18, 21-4, 32, 46; 'chapter on, 49-74; term, 49; origin, 49; tri-

umph

of the Attic, 51; fate of the

other dialects, 52

f

the dialects on the

kolvti,

koines,

53;

; .

of

effect

influence of

53 partial Alexander's ;

campaigns, 53 f spread of the 54-60; a real world-speech, 54-56 vernacular, 56 literary, 57 f the Atticistic reaction, 58-60; char.

;

Koivrj,

;

;

.

acteristics of the vernacular

kolvti,

60-73; vernacular Attic, the base of the KoivT], 60-2 the other dialects ;

in the

62-64; non-dialectical 64 f.; new words in, 65;

kolvt;,

changes in, new forms of old words, 65 f poetical and vernacular words, 65; new meanings to old words, 66; I/a.d. the climax of the kolvti, 66; provin. ;

influences in,

cial

66-9;

kolvti

in

Asia Minor and in Alexandria, 67 f.; in Palestine, 69; kolvti a single language, 69; personal equation, 6971 resum(5 of the characteristics of the vernacular Kotj/97, 71-4 (phonetics ;

and orthography 71

f., vocabulary word-formation 72, accidence 72 f ., syntax 73 f .) adaptabihty of

72,

;

the

.

kolvti

to the

Roman world,

74

f.

place of the N. T. in the kolvti, 76-140, 152 f., 159 f., 161-3, 171; accent in, 228 f pronunciation in, ;

.

236-41; ad libitum in the book.

NEW TESTAMENT

the N. T., 108-11, 131, 137, 144, passim. Latin authors: 85, 108 f., 128, passim. See Index of Quotations.

Latin versions: passim. Latinisms: 108-10, 131, etc. Lesbian: 17, 184, 249. See iEolic. Letters: as distinct from epistles, 70,

85

ff.

Lewis Sjriac: passim. Lexical: new knowledge of words, 65 f.; N. T. lexicography needing reworking, 144, passim. Limitative infinitive see infinitive. :

Linear action: see durative. Literary element in N. T. 83-8. :

Literary

koivt)

50, 57

N.

f.

;

:

true part of the

kolvti,

literary elements in the

T., 83-8, 106; high standard of

culture in the

Grajco-Roman world,

85.

Literary plural: 406

677

f.,

f.

Litotes: 1205.

Local cases: 451. See cases. Local clauses: 969 f. Locative: form, 249 f.; name, 520; significance, 520 f.; place, 521 f. time^_522f.; with adjectives, 523; with verbs, 523 f with substan;

.

with prepositions, 524 f. and ch. XIII; pregnant construc-

tives, 524;

tion, 525.

Lucian: see Index of Quotations. Luke: literary element in, 106; pecuharities of,

120-3,

135,

179, 240,

passim.

Labials: assimilation before, 216, 264, 1210.

Language

of Jesus: 26-9, 99, 102 f., See Jesus. Language, study of: the fascination 105.

of, 3;

the

new

See Index of Quotations. Luther's German Bible influence of, :

92.

LXX:

see Septuagint.

Lycaonian: vernacular surviving in KOLvri, 55 f

point of view, 8-12;

M

as history, 31; a living organism, origin of, evolution in, changes in

vernacular, lated, 36;

33

f

.

;

Greek not

common bond in,

iso-

37, pas-

sim.

Late Greek: see Byzantine. Latin: 36, 39, 46 f.; late Latin as in KOLvii, 55, 74, 79, 103; Latinisms in

Macedonian: influence on the 63

f.

;

kolvt;,

words. 111.

Magnesia:

Manner:

196, 200, 208, 223, passim.

see adverbs,

instrumental

case, participle.

Manuscripts of N. T. vary in orthography, 179-89, 191-231; show :

;; ;

.

.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS changes in pronunciation, 239

have beginnings

.

uncials have no f. between words, 242 ff.;

paragraphs, 241 distinction

966-9, local 969

ff

chapters and

of ;

ad libitum. influence

in,

lOG;

Latin, 110; peculiarities of, 118

f.

See Index of Quotations. Masculine: see gender.

Matthew: Aramaic

influence in, 106;

119 f., 135, passim. See Index of Quotations. Means see instrumental case, h, parpecuharities

of,

:

ticiple.

f.,

wishes 1003

f.,

conditional 1004-27,

indirect discourse

subordinate

1048 f.); change of mode in indirect discourse, 1030 f Modem Greek: literature on, 22-4; unportance for N. T. Gk., 44-6; illustrating N. T. Gk., 137 f., 147, 150, 155, 177 f., 557, ad libitum. Mood: see mode.

Music: 228. Mycenaean age 43

f

f.

Metaphor: 1206. Metaplasm: 257-9, 261-3, 269.

N

Metathesis: 221, 1210.

Names

Metonsony: 1207. Middle displacing passive, 333 f giving way to acendings, 339 f tive, 356; perfect, 359; with reflexive pronoun, 690 f.; origin of, 803; meaning of, 803 f acute difference from active, 804; use of not obligatory, 804-6 transitive or intran-

Narrative, tenses

:

.

.

;

;

.

;

sitive,

806; direct, 806--8; causative

or permissive, 808

f indirect, 809 f redundant, 811; dynamic (deponent), 811-3; middle future though active present, 813 f.; retreating in .

;

.

N. T., 814. Minuscules: 217, passim.

Mixed declension:

263.

See declen-

names. Greek: see

of persons : see proper in,

in

aorist, imperfect, present,

present

perfect.

Negative particles in relative clauses, 962; with inf., 1093-5; with participle, 1136-9; objective ov and its compounds, 1155-66 (origin 1155, history 1156, meaning 1156 f., with the indicative, independent sentences, subordinate clauses 1157:

with the subjunctive 1160 f., with the optative 1161, with the imperative 1161 f., witli infinitive 1162, with the participle 1162 f., with nouns 1163 f., Kal ov 1164, redundant or pleonastic ov 1164, 60,

of

repetition

sions.

Mode

1027-48, series

clauses

:

Meiosis: 1205

temporal 970-9,

and consecutive 980-1003,

final

of

Mark: Aramaic

1237

ov

intensify-

1164,

compound 1164

(mood) conjugation of, 32030 (number of 320 f., distinctions between 321 f., indicative 322 f., subjunctive 323 ff., optative 325 ff., imperative 327-30); syntax of, ch. XIX, 911-1049; introductory dis-

ing

cussion, 910-4; in paratactic sen-

tive 1170, infinitive 1171, participle

914-50 (indicative 914-24, subjunctive 924-35, optative 935-

1172, nouns 1172, intensifying compounds 1172 f., Kal HT] 1173, dis-

hypo950-1049 (use of

junctive use 1173); combination of

:

tences,

40, imperative 941-50); in

tactic sentences,

modes

in 950, use of conjunctions

in 951 f., logical varieties of subordinate clauses 952-1049: relative

953-62, causal 962-6, comparative

f.,

disjunctive

and its com1165 f.); subjective pounds, 1166-75 (history of jui? 1166 f., significance of 1167, uses of firi, indicative 1168 f., subjuncii-f)

tive 1169

f.,

optative 1170, impera-

two negatives, 1173-5 ov

fxr]

1174

(m')

ou

1173

f.,

f.).

Negative pronouns: ov5tU, ovdds, oiiSi, ov, 750 f.; ovtis, ni] Tis, eh, els 751 f.; ov Tras, ixij ttS':, 752 f.

—

Neuter: as substantive, 156, 267

f.;

Neutral type of text: 180, 212, 219, material: ch.

I,

Non-thematic

460; in

stems:

present

Northwest Greek: remains

3-30.

Testament, Greek of: place in the Koivri, 76-140; chiefly the vernacular, 76-83; not a biblical Greek, 77-79; proof that in the vernacular, 79-83; the lexical proof from the papyri and inscriptions, 80-2; accidence corroborated by paj^yri 82;

inscriptions,

syntactical

comand papyri, 83; literary elements in N. T. Gk., 83-8; literary quality in the N. T., 84; 82

peculiarities,

mon

parenthetic,

f.;

see

present tense.

passim.

and

459

lute,

exclamations, 461; absolute, 1130.

see gender.

New New

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1238

f

.

;

phrases

to N. T.

controversy

now whether

there

is

KOLvr],

N. T., 82, 266, passim. Nouns: root-nouns, 145; substantive and adjective, 246; verbal, ch. XX; negatives with, 1163

Number:

special

instances

731.

influence, Ust of probable Hebraisms, 94-6; deeper impress of the LXX in vocabulary, accidence and syntax, though great variety in the LXX, 96-102; Aramaisms in the N. T., in vocabulary and in syntax, 102-5; variation in

Aramaic and Hebrew colouring in different parts of the N. T., 106-8; Latinisms in the N. T., names of persons and places, military terms, words and phrases, syntax, 108-11; sporadic foreign words in the N. T.,

f.;

708;

OS,

adjective

409);

and substantive, 654

N. T., 88 f view of Deissmann and Moulton, 89-93; some real Hebraisms in the N. T., 92 f.; little direct

Hebrew

251

403-9 (subject and predicate 403-7, substantive and adjective 407 f., representative singular 408, idiomatic plural in nouns 408, idiomatic singular in nouns 409, in,

eKelpos,

;

1172.

f.,

substantives,

in

concord

appreciable Semitic colouring in the .

the

of, in

53; influence of, 61, 63; on the

704;

ovtos,

f.;

714; ocrns, 729;

Numerals: declension

of,

281-4

olos,

(ori-

gin of 281, different functions of 281, cardinals 281-3, ordinals 283 distributives

284, adverbs 284); syntax (els

and

irpwros

671

f.,

proportionals

284,

f.,

of,

671-5

simplification

of the 'teens 672, inclusive ordinal

672,

distributives

iifTa

673

cardinal

673,

not ex-

substantive

f.,

pressed 674, adverbs with 674, as indefinite article 674 distributive use of

675, Tis

793

els

eI$=Tt$

f.,

el$

675);

with, 742; article with ordinals, f.

Ill; the Cliristian addition, 112-6;

transfiguration of the vocabulary,

Object of verb: see cases.

116; individual peculiarities of N.

Object-clauses: see hypotaxis.

T. writers,

116-37; see separate

by name; N. T. Gk. illustrated by modern Gk., 137 ff.; synwriters

tax

of,

381-3.

Oblique cases: 247. See cases. Old Testament: 99. See Septuagint and Index of Quotations. Onomatopoetic 1201. Optative: origin of form, 320, 325-7; perfect, 360 f., 907 f. use of aorist, 854 f.; future, 876; present, 889 f.; opt. and subj., 925 f.; history of, significance, 936 f three 935 f uses, 937-40 (futuristic or potential :

N. T. authors: 28 f., 76-139. See Index of Quotations. Nominative: nominativus pendens in the vernacular kolvti, 73; form as vocative, 264, 461; N. T. forms in, 267 f.; not the oldest case, 456; reason for, 457; predicate, 457 f.; sometimes unaltered, 458 f abso;

.

;

;

.

.

937-9, volitive 939

f.,

;

deliberative

940); as imper., 943; in indirect dis-

;

1239

INDEX OF SUBJECTS course,

1030

f.,

1043

877 f.; present, 891 f.; per909 f participle as imperative 944-6; causal, 966; temporal use,

negative

f.;

future, fect,

with, 1161, 1170.

Oratio obliqua: see indirect discourse.

Oratio recta: see direct diiioourse. Oratio variata: 440-3 (distinctive from anacoluthon 441 f heterogeneous structure 441 f., icifticiple in 442, exchange of direct aiid mdirect ^

discourse 442

f.).

Oratory: in Hebrews, 11Q8. Ordinals: see number. Orthography in the vernacular koivti, 71 f.; ch. VI, 176-24.5; the ancient :

hterary spelling, 177 f. Ostraca: 17-21; texts of, 22, 91, 191,

Index of

see

Quotations.

f.,

979; purpose, 991; in indirect discourse, 1040-2; history of part.,

1098-1100 (Sanskrit 1098, Homer's 1098, Attic period 1098 f., KOLPr, 1099, modern Gk. 1099 f.); significance, 1100-4 (originally an adjective 1100 f., addition of verbal functions 1101, double aspect of 1101, reflation between part, and

tune

inf.

1101-3,

method

of

treating

1103 f.); adjectival aspects of, 1104-10 (declension 1104, attributive, anarthrous, articular 1105-8,

266, passim.

Oxyrhynchus papyri:

Palatals: 216

. ;

predicate 1108, f.,

bal

aspects

1110

f.,

as

as a substantive

an adverb 1109

1108

f.);

1110-41

of,

ver-

(voice

tense 1111-9, timelessness

1111, aorist 1112-4, present 1115

1210.

Papyri: literature on, 17-22, 52, 56 f., 66 ff illustrate the vernacular Koivi], 69; illiteracy in, 70 f.; and the N. ;

f.,

perfect 1116-8, future 1118f., cases

1119, supplementary 1119-24, peri-

.

T. Gk., 80-3; agreeing with the uncials in orthography, 181 accidence and syntax of, 381; ad libitum ;

through the book. Parable: 1206 f. Paragraph: discussion of, 241 nection between, 444.

f.;

con-

discourse

1124-

32 (general theory 1124, varieties of, time, manner, means, cause, concession

condition,

1125-30, absolute nominative, accusative, genitive 1130-2); inde-

'

in para-

tactic sentences, 914-50, 953,

1122^; circum-

participial clauses

purpose,

ParaUeUsm: 1199f.

modes

direct

stantial,

Paraleipsis: 1199.

Parataxis: 426, 428;

construction 1119 f., diminution of complementary 1120 f., with verbs of emotion 1121 f., inphrastic

980 f

.

paratactic conjunctions, 1177-92.

Parechesis: 1201. Parenthesis: 433-5; parenthetic nom-

pendent

1 1 32-5

,

;

co-ordinat ion

between, 1135 f.; ou and m4 with, 1136-9, 1162 f., 1172; other particles with, 1139-41). Particles: ehsion with, 207; with sub-

6 (name- 371 f., verbal adjectives 372 f., with tense and voice 373 f.,

950-1049; with 1036-41; scope, 11424; intensive or emphatic, 114455; negative, 1155-75; interrogative, 1175-7; conjunctions, 1177-93

in periphrastic use 374-6); gender

(paratactic,

ordinate clauses,

inative, 460.

participle,

Paronomasia: 1201. Participle: in -via, 256; forms of,

371-

in,

412; case, 413; in clauses, 431

in

anacoluthon,

variata, 442;

ace.

439

f.;

in

f.;

oratio

absolute, 490

f.;

gen. absolute, 512-4; adverbs wilh, 546; as adverbs, 551; article with,

764

f.,

777-9; use of aorist, 858-64;

1192

f.);

1177-92,

hypotactic

interjections, 1193.

Partitive: apposition, 399; genitive,

502, 519; ablative, 519; use of .599;

tK,

with UaaTos, 746.

Passive: giving

way

to middle, 333

endings, 310f.; future, second

f.;

and

.

356

first,

origin

of,

f.;

o-

in

with accusative, 484—6; 814 f.; significance of,

syntax of

transitive,

or

intransitive

815;

359;

perfect,

f.;

aorist, 362;

aorist,

passive "deponents," 817

f.;

816

ff.;

future,

818-20; agent with, 820; impersonal

;

.

;

;

.

905

f

; .

in conditional sentences,

906; periphrastic, 906; augment in, 1211 f.

906;

kKtlnTjv,

127-31, 135, 179,

of,

f.;

f'x-Ko,

f.; €7rt,

195, 218, ad libitum.

See Index of

irepl, 61'i('; Trpos,

conjugation

330;

imperative,

f.;

of,

359-62 (name 359, original perfect 359 f., K perfect 358 f aspirated 359, middle and passive 359, decay of perfect forms 359 f., in subjunc.,

imperative 360, in-

tive, optative,

dicative 360-2,

(J

in

middle and in, 363-

f.; virkp,

of culture, 56

of,

242

£f.,

f.

Periodic structure: 432

f.,

1200.

Periods of N. T. grammatical study: 3-7.

Periods

43

of

the

Greek

language:

f.

Periphrasis: with participle, 330, 357, f.,

889, 906,

1119 f. Persian: words in N. T., 111. Person: concord in, 402 f., change in ind. disc, 1028 f. 329,

335;

712;

active,

Personal construction: with adjective, 657 f.; with inf., 1085 f. Personal equation: in the koivt), 69 ff., 179.

Personal pronoxms: question of auroO, 226; inflection of, 286 f.; nominative, 676-80 (emphasis in 676, first 677 f., second 678, tliird 679 f.); oblique cases, 680-2 (originally reflexive i'or

5;

892^

627

61, 63, 2)6, 75, 111, 208, 223, passim.

completed state, 823 f.; relation of aorist to, 843-5; present as perfect, 881; perfect as present, 881

;

<j\iv,

Ik,

613;

tive," S26-8.

Pergamura: a centre

passive 362) reduplication

of,

623;

f.;

irapa,

335-9.

Perfect, past: see past perfect. Perfect, present: of -hl verbs, 319

581

5ta,

f.;

629; "perfective" and "imperfec-

Person-endings:

Quotations. Perfect, future: see future perfect.

idea

576

600; Kara, 606;

374-6, 826, 878, 887

Patronymics: 155. Paul: 54 ff.; and Hellenism, 84-8, 106; pecuHarities

563 596

Period: use

construction, 820.

Past perfect: relation of aorist to, 837-40; double idea, 903; a luxury in Greek, 903 f intensive, 904 exof broken continutensive, 904 f ity,

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1240

815

;

(present, intensive

extensive, time) present perfect in

680

f.,

possessive

avrou 681, genitive 681, enclitic forms

681 f.); frequency of, 682 f.; redmidant, 683; according to sense, 683

f.

;

repetition

of

substantive,

684.

;

894-903 (intensive 894 f 895 f., of broken continuity 896, dramatic historical 896 f., gnomic 897, in indirect discourse 897 f., futuristic 898, "aorisdicative,

extensive

tic" present perfect 898-902, peri-

phrastic

907

f.;

902

subj.

f.);

and

opt.,

908 f. (indu-ect not indirect disc,

infinitive,

discourse 908

f.,

subject or object, preposition 909) participle,

909

f.

and 1116-8 (mean-

PhUo:

see Index of Quotations.

Philology: see comparative

Phocian: 266. Phoenician: words

m N. T.,

grammar. Ill, 182,

209, passim.

Phonetics: in the vernacular 71 f.; ch. VI, 177-245.

ing, time, various uses, periphras-

Pindaric construction: 405. Plato: see Index of Quotations.

use

of

prepositions.

Koiv-q,

Phrygia: old dialect of, 67. Pindar; see Index of Quotations.

tic).

"Perfective":

See

Peter: pecuharities of, 125-7. Index of Quotations.

Play on words: 1201.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Pleonasm:

in pronouns, 683; ov, 1164,

1205.

Pluperfect: see past perfect.

Point-action: see punctiliar. Polybius: see Index of Quotations.

Polysyndeton: 1194.

Pompeian: 186, passim. Pontic infinitive: see infinitive.

minor words in 418 f., euphony and rhythm 419-23, prolepsis 423, hysteron proteron 423, hyjierbaton 423 f., postpositives 424 f., fluctuating words 424 f., order of clauses

compound

in

sentences

425); of genitive, 502 f.; of article with attributive, 776-89; with predicate, 789 f. Positive: adjective, 276, 659-61.

Possessive pronouns: inflection article

f.;

and second f.;

only

684;

of, first

article,

685; possessive 685; objective use,

685; instead of reflexive, 685; ar769 f article with, 770. Postpositive: 424; some prepositions, ticle as,

.

;

553.

Potential:

imperfect,

885-7;

opt.,

937-9.

390

f.;

essential part of sentence, only predicate, 390 f.; verb :

not the only, 394 f.; copula not es395 f.; one of the radiating foci, 396 f.; expansion of, 400 f. (predicate in wider sense 400, inf. sential,

and

part.

400,

relation

between

predicate and substantive 400, pronoun 400, adjective 401, adverb 401, prepositions 401, negative particles 401, subordinate clauses 401,

and

apposition

looser

amplifica-

tions 401); agreeing with subje(!t, 403-6; position, 417; pred. nomina-

457 f vocative in, 464 f adjective, 655 f.; nouns with article, tive,

.

;

;

.

Prepositional

169

f.,

794;

adverbs:

525,

548

new ones

f.

Prepositions: double in composition, 160, 165; adverbs, 301; encroachcases,

450-3; accusative

with, 491; genitive with, 505; effect of compound preps, on case, 511 f.,

542

with ablative, 516 f.; with locative, 524 f.; with instrumental, 534 f.; with dative, 537 f.; phrases, 550 f.; ch. XIII, 553-649; name, 553 f (some postpositive 553, origf.;

.

inal use not

with verbs 553, expla553 f.); origin of, 554 f. (originally adverbs 554, reason for use of 554, varying history 555); nation

growth

555-7 (once none adverbs in Homer 555, decreasing use as adverbs 555 f., 555,

N. T., 684; emphasis,

in

with

as,

genitive,

Predicate

789

Pregnant construction: 584 f., 591-3.

ment on

Position: of words, 417-25 (freedom 417, predicate 417, emphasis 417 f.,

684

with,

Prefixes: 146; inseparable, 161-3.

See number. Plutarch: see Index of Quotations. Poetry: see rhythm.

and

article

participle, 1108.

Plural: 251.

288

767-9;

1241

in use of,

still

Semitic influence in N. T. 556 f., 557); in composition

modern Greek

with verbs, 557-65 (not the main function 557 f., prep, alone 558, increasing use 558, repetition after verb 559

f.,

different

after verb 560

preposition

second preposition not necessary 562 f., dropped with second verb 563, intensive or perfective 563 f., double compounds ff.,

565); repetition

and variation

of,

565-7 (same prep, with different case 565, repetition with several nouns 566, repetition with the relative 566 f., 721, condensation by variation 567); functions

of, with 567-71 (case before prep. 567, notion of dimension 567, original

cases,

force of the case 567

meaning

f.,

ground-

of the prep. 568, oblique

cases alone with 568, original free-

dom by

568 f., no adequate division cases 569, situation in N. T.

569 f.: with one case, with two, with three, one with four, each prep, in a case 570 f.); "proper"

;

prepositions in N. T., 571-636; dm, f.;

572-4;

6.PTi,

(original significance

ing

"back" 576

Hebraism"

in

f.,

574-80

aw6,

575

f.,

mean-

"translation-

4>o^tia0aL

airb

577,

comcomparison with Ik 577 f parison with irapo. 578 f., compared with i}wb 579 f .) 5t
;

with

use

584

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1242

571

;

f.,

accusative

or

older than ds 585

586, time 586

f .,

among

locative f .,

place

587, in the

of 587 f as a dative 588, accompanying circumstance 588, amounting to 589, instriunental use of 589-91); ds, 591-6 (original

case

.,

static use 591-3,

with verbs of mo-

tion 620

.,

;

.,

(meaning 596, in composition 596 f., place 597, time 597, separation 597 f., origin or source 598 f., partitive use of 599, k and kv 599 f .) e-rtl, 600-5 (ground-meaning 600, in composition 600, frequency in N.

642,

T. 600 f., with the accus. 601 f., with the gen. 602^, with the loc. 604 f., the true dative 605); Kara, 605-9 (root-meaning 605 f., distributive sense 606, in composition

ifKrialov

606, with ablative 606

f .,

with geni-

superiority

irpbs,

639,

f .,

f.,

622-6 (meaning 622 f., in composition 623, originally with five cases 623, with ablative 623 f ., with the locative 624, with the accusative 624-6); avv, 626-8 (meaning 626 f., history 627, in composition 627 f., N. T. usage 628); {iwkp, 628-33 (meaning 629, in composition 629, with genitive 629 f., with ablative 630-2, with accusative 632 f.); vT^b, 633-6 (meaning 633, in composition 633, cases once used with 634 f with the accusative 635, with the ablative 635 f .) the "adverbial" or "improper" prepositions, 636-48 (ci/xa 638, &.vtv 638, avTiKpvs 638, avrlirepa 638 f aivkvoiVTi 622);

time 594, like a dative 594, aim or purpose 594 f ., predicative use 595 f., compared with ctti, irapa and vrpos 596); kK, 596-600 tion 593

cases used with 621,

f.,

place 621, time 621

639 TL

arep

639,

tyyvs

639,

axpi(s)

eKTos 640, 'ifiTrpoadev 640, evav-

f.,

640, tvavTiop 640, iveKa 641, kvTOS

641, tuwirLou 641 iirtKeLPa

642,

e^co

f.,

eao:

642

642, f.,

tTrctj'co

eos 643,

KarkvavTL 643, Karevdoiriov 644, kvkXo6tv 644, kvkK<^ 644, ukaov 644, fxera-

^v 645, fxexpi 645, oTnadev 645, bwiffco

645,

b\pk

645

f .,

646,

wapaTr\i](ji.ov

waptKrbs 646, Tfkpav 646,

646,

ifKrjv

646, vwepavo: 646

virtpk-

f.,

Ktiva

647, vweptKirepicrcTod 647,

KciTco

647, x^ptJ' 647, x'^P's 647

compound

6fop.a,

{p.k(Tov,

f .)

prepositions, 648; prep-

circumlocutions,

ositional

vtto-

Trpbcraiirov,

648

x«'P)

j

f.

^-d-

comparison with, 661,

tive 607, with accusative 607-9);

jectives of

609-12 (root-meaning 609, in composition 609 f., loss of locative use 610, with genitive 610-2, with accusative 612); -rapd, 612-6 (significance 612, compared with irpbs 613, in composition 613, with the locative 614, with the ablative 614 f., with the accusative 615 f.); Trepl, 616-20 (root-meaning 617, in composition 617, originally with

667; article with, 766; ei^ect on ac-

juerd,

tive

voice,

800;

with

infinitive,

1068-75.

Present tense: 73, 119 203;

150,

classes

of

of

-p.c

present

f.,

12.3,

verbs,

stems,

14.5,

311-9;

350-3

(non-thematic reduplicated 350, non-thematic with -pa and -w 351, simple thematic 351, reduplicated thematic 351, thematic with suffix

four cases 617, with the ablative

351, 351-3, with a dropped 353);

with the genitive 618 f., with the accusative 619 f.); 7rp6, 620-2 (original meaning 620, in composi-

relation of aorist to, 841-3; punc-

617

f .,

tiliar

865

f.,

864-70 (specific gnomic 866, historical pres-

(aoristic),

INDEX OF SUBJECTS ent 86C-9, futuristic 869

du879-82 (descriptive 879, progressive 879 f., iterative or customary 880, inchoarativo

(linear)

f.);

indicative,

tive or conative 880, tiistorical 880,

deliberative 880

as perfect 881,

f.,

perfect as present 881, futuristic

881 889

and

durative subj.

1243

Prothetic vowels: 205

1209.

f.,

Psilosis: 191, 222-5.

Psychological treatment of grammar: 32.

Ptolemaic: 210, 220, 256, passim.

Pun:

1201.

Punctiliar

823

action:

830-79

f.,

opt.,

(aorist 831-64, present 864-70, fu-

f.; durative imperative, 890; durative infinitive, 890 f durative participle, 891 f. and 1115-6 (rela-

Pimctuation: discussion of, 241-5 (the paragraphs 241 f., sentences 242 f.,

f.);

;

.

ture 870-9).

tive time 891, futuristic 891, de-

words 243

scriptive 891, conative 892, ante-

24.5).

cedent time 892, indirect discourse

Purists:

892, with the article 892, past ac-

sim.

tion

in progress 892, "subse-

still

3,

76

Purpose: see

editor's prerogative

f.,

90

88,

ff.,

160, pas-

f.,

final clauses.

quent" 892, durative future 892). Principal parts of important verbs in

N. T.: 1212-20. Proclitics:

accent

accent

of,

235; rules for

of,

1211.

see article.

Prodiorthosis: 1199.

"Profane Greek": Prohibition:

see

Qualitative use of anarthrous notins:

Questions: 5,

89.

6s in direct,

725 f.; mdirect 730 f.; direct,

imperative,

aorist

subj., future indicative, infinitive.

olos,

coiu'se, interrogative

terrogative particles,

684

possessive,

personal, f.

676-84;

intensive

;

and

f.,

see direct discourse, indirect dis-

Pronouns: 226, 234; declension of, 284-93 (idea of 284 f., antiquity of 285, pronominal roots 285 f., classi-

XV, 676-753;

os in in-

731; oaos, 733;

Prolepsis: 423.

fication of 286-93); sj-ntax of, ch.

725;

direct 729

oaris,

1043-6;

rect,

mode;

deliberative,

indi-

1046;

1175-7; double, 1177; pardirect, 1175 f.; indirect,

single,

in

ticles

1176

pronouns, in-

f.

Quotations in O. T.

206, 242

:

f.

identical, 685-7; reflexive,

687-92; reciprocal, 692 f demonstrative, 693-710; relative, 710-35; interrogative, 735-41; indefinite, 741-4; ;

.

alternative or distributive, 744-50;

negative, 750-3.

Pronunciation: 71

f.,

236-41.

decl.,

269

f.;

of,

263; in third

article with,

759

ff.,

791, passim.

"Proper" prepositions:

1007-27.

sec

inflection

reflexive as, 690;

f.;

syntax

of, of,

f.

f.;

see direct dis-

course.

Redundance

:

see pleonasm.

Reduplication: discussion (primitive

362,

of, 362-5 both nouns and

verbs 362, in three tenses in verbs

362

f.,

three methods in 363, in the

perfect 363-5). 554, 636

f.

Reflexive

2S7

ripo(ru)8(a: 22S.

Protasis:

292 692

Recitative Sn: 1027

Proper names: abbreviated, 171-3, 184, 205; douliling of consonants in Hebrew and Aramaic, 214 f.; accent of, 235; foreign names, 235 f.;

mixed declension

Reciprocal pronouns:

conditional

clauses,

6S5;

f.;

pronouns:

inflection

(KTsonal originally so, 680 distinctive

use,

687

f.;

of, f.,

no

nominative, 688; indirect, 688; in

;; ;

688

singular,

f

689

in plural,

; .

with,

article

f

Result: see consecutive clauses.

.

reciprocal

in

690;

middle voice, 690 f., 811; use of 181.0s, 691 f.; with active sense, 690; with

:

.

to genitive, 512; attraction to ablative, 519 f.; repetition of preposi-

N. T., 710 f.; name, 711; bond between clauses, 711; 6s, 711-26 (in Homer 711, comparison with other relatives 711 f., with any person 712, gender 712 ff., number 714, case

tions with, 566

in the

f.; list

714-9, absence of antecedent 719£f.,

and

prepositions with antecedent relative 721, plirases 721

nastic antecedent 722 of OS 723

haTLV

ovdels

726);

os

and

OS

f.,

octtls,

idiom 726—31

distinction be-

726

oo-Tis

indefinite

f.,

use 727, definite exx. 727 f., =value of 5s 728, case 728 f., number 729,

729

questions

direct

731

olos,

f.);

f.

incorporation

731,

question 731, 732)

k
double f.

;

(relation to os

indirect

731,

number

oTToios,

indu-ect

f.,

731, ol6v rk

732 (quaUtative,

correlative);

office,

ocros,

(quantitative, antecedent, at-

traction, incorporation, repetition,

with

'dv,

indirect question, compari-

adverbial)

son,

;

734f.;rlsas, 737

ifKlKos,

733

f

.

;

6,

clauses relative

in

usually adjectival,

955

f

; .

definite

origin,

953

955

modes

and

f.;

f.

indefinite,

use of 'dv in, 957-9; special 960-2; negatives in, 962; causal, 965 f.; purpose, 989; subfinal, 996; consecutive, 1001.

956

uses

f.;

of,

Relative time

:

see tense.

Repetition: of substantive, 684; of

723

f.;

of

1198.

Rhythm metrical passages so printed in W. H., 242; position as showing, :

417-23; poetry, 421 f. the koivV) 74 f Romans: passim. See Index of Quo-

Roman Empire and

:

tations.

Roots: in Sanskrit, 38; discussion 144-6; verb-root, 344 f. Running style 432 f

of,

:

ocros,

733.

Sahidic: 202, passim. Sanskrit: the discovery of Sanskrit, 10,

36

f.,

39

f.,

47, 143, 145

f.,

ad libitum. Second Epistle of Peter passim. Index of Quotations. 8; voice in, 798

:

Second or

246-

f.,

See

o declension: 257, 259-63.

Semitic: 37, 88-108, 198, 205, 212, 225, 236, passim.

See Aramaic and

Hebrew. Sentence, the: punctuation of, 242 f.; discussion of, ch. X, 390-445; the sentence and sj^ntax, 390; sentence defined, 390-7 (complex conception 390,

two

essential parts

membered sentence

390

f .,

one-

391, elliptical

only predicate 391-3, only f., verb not the only predicate 394 f ., copula not necessary 395 f ., two radiating foci 396 f ., varieties of the simple sentence 391,

subject 393

f.

Relative sentences: originally paramost subordinate tactic, 953;

in,

924; with the subj., 930; in Paul,

repetition

f.,

725

(varied uses 726,

tween

Rhetorical questions: with the ind.,

pleo-

f.,

direct questions 725,

f.,

questions

indirect

:

consecutive idea 724,

f.,

causal 724

Reuchlinian pronunciation 240. Revelation: see Apocalypse. Rhetoric: figures of speech, 11941208.

voice, 802.

Relative pronouns inflection of, 290 f inverse attraction, 488; attraction

732

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1244

730

.

os,

397) expansion of the subject, 397400; expansion of the predicate, 400 f ; subordinate centres in the ;

.

sentence, 402; concord in person,

402 f.; concord in number, 403-9; concord in gender, 410-3; concord in case, 413-6; position of words in, 417-25; compound sentences, 4257; connection in sentences, 427-44

.

.

Vndex of subjects (single words 427, clauses 428-32, two kinds of style 432 f., paren-

398-400); subject and predicate as to concord, 403-7 (two conflicting

thesis 433-5, anacoluthon 435-40,

principles 403, neuter plural

connection

440-3,

variata

oralio

singular verb 403

between sentences 443,

between paragraphs 444, forecasts 444 f.); independent or paratactic, 914-50; subordinate or hypotactic, 950-

stantives 404

406

LXX,

in the

LXX

f.);

:

aorist,

91; influence of the

889 924

on the N. T., nature of this and character of the LXX

360 f., 907 f.; use of 848-54 future, 876 present, relation to other modes,

perfect,

5;

Hebraisms

f.

;

;

(aor.

ff.

subj.

96-102; " septuagint-Grsecisms" in Luke, 108, 118-26, 18392, 198-204, 208-11, 213-27, ad li-

original

itself,

928 934

Codex: spelHng

of,

179,

See number. 75 f Solecisms: in the Apocalypse, 413-6. Sophocles: see Index of Quota:

Sources for study of

koivt|: see ch. I

Spoken Greek:

,

943; negative

1169 f. sentences:

f.,

Subsequent action in

hypo-

see

participle: see

Substantives: root-substantives, 145; with suffixes, 150-7 (primitive 150 f., derivative 151-7: from verbs 1514,

from substantives 154-6, from adf.); compound, 161-8

143;

dialectic,

f.;

Style: in Scripture, 87;

N.

two kinds

of,

T., 116-39, 1194-7.

See individual peculiarities. Sub-final: see final

and consecutive.

Subject: essential part of sentence, ellipsis

of,

number

agglu-

of,

246-

251 f.; gender in substantives, 252-4; with genitive, 495-503; with ablative, 514 f with locative, 524; with dative, 536 f.; in,

;

.

1197.

in the

(inseparable prefixes, 161

70;

see vernacular.

grammarians,

f.;

as imper.,

tinative 165-8); declension

KOLvr\.

Southeast dialects: 211, passim.

390

f.);

jectives 156

tions.

f.;

926-8;

of,

participle.

Singular: 251.

432

opt.);

taxis.

passim.

Stoic:

ind.,

fut.

and

volitive 930-4, dehberative

ff.,

Subordinate

course.

and

subj.

significance

with, 1160

dis-

Simile: 1206.

Socrates

and

subj.

threefold usage, 928-35 (futuristic

hitum.

Sinaiticus,

;

and imper.,

influence

Sequence, rules of: see indirect

literary plural

f.,

suspended, 436 f. Subjective: see genitive case, possessive pronoun and middle voice. Subjunctive origin of form, 320, 323-

1049.

of Alexandria, 91;

and

collective sub-

f .,

singular verb with

f.,

subject 405

first

Septuagint: influence of Jews in Alexandria, 84; in the vernacular Koivi)

1245

391; only sub-

appositional use

of,

651

f.;

adjec-

tive as, 652-4;

agreement of adjec-

tive with, 654

f.

;

substantival as-

pects of infinitive, 1058-79; wilh

1075

inf.,

f.;

participle as, 1108

f.;

negatives with, 1163f.

393 f one of the radiat396 f expansion of the subject, 397-400 (idea-words and form-words 397, concord and government 397 f., group around 398400, subordinate clause 398, with the article 398, the adverb 398, the

Suffixes: 146; comparative without,

adjective 398, the substantive in

f.;

ject used,

ing

foci,

.

;

;

.

an oblique case 398, or

in apposil ion

063.

Superlative: forms, 278-81; positive as,

660

f

; .

displaced by compara-

tive 667-9; syntax of, 669-71.

Supplementary: see participle. Syncope 203 f Synonjons: in Greek words, 175 phrases, 1200 f. :

;

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1246

Syntax: in the vernacular Koiv-q, 73 f. in the N. T., 82 f.; of LXX, 100; part III, 379-1208; meaning of syntax, ch. IX, 379-89 (backwardness in study of 379-81, N. T. limita-

tendency (periphrasis) 826, "perfective" use of prepositions 826-8, Aktionsart with each tense 828 f.,

interchange of tenses 829 tiliar action,

830-79

p\mc-

f.);

(aorist 830-64,

by Delbriick province of 384-7, the word

present 864-70, future 870-9)

f., f.,

construction of words and

present, imperfect, future 879-89,

tions 381-3, advance

383 384

rative (Hnear), 879-92 (indicative,

clauses 385 regularities

grammar

f.,

386

historical f.,

386,

method

of this

principles

387-9,

ir-

387,

form and development 388,

original significance 387,

function 387

f.,

388

f.,

context

translation

389,

hmits 389); the sentence and syntax, 390.

subj.

and

890,

infinitive

891

f.);

;

du-

889 f., imperative 890 f., participle perfected state, 892-910 opt.

(idea of perfect 892-4, indicative,

present perfect, past perfect, future perfect

907

892-907,

and

subj.

opt.

imperative 908, infinitive 908, participle 909 f.) tenses of imperative, 950; change in ind. discourse, 1029 f f.,

;

Syriac versions: passim.

Syrian text (o-text): 179f., 189, 210f., 214 f., 219, 260, passim.

Textual criticism: passim.

Textus receptus: 199, 213, 217, passim.

Thematic vowel:

see present tense.

Tarsus: new centre of culture, 67; Paul learning Greek in, 239.

Thessalian: 192, 202, passim. Third declension: 258, 263-9.

Temporal clauses: kin to relative, 970 f.; conjunctions meaning "when," 971-4; group meaning "until," 974-7; some nominal and

Thucydides: 265, passim.

prepositional phrases, 977 inf.,

978

f.,

1091

f.;

f.

;

use of

participle, 979,

1125 f. Tenses: of

-m verbs in the N. T., 307-20; conjugation of, 343-68 (term tense 343 f., confusion in names 344, verb-root 344 f., aorist 345-50, present 350-3, future 3537,

perfect

359-62,

reduplication

362-5, augment 365-8); infinitive,

369

f.,

1080-2; participle, 373

ff.,

1111-9; periphrastic tenses in N. T.,

374-6; syntax

of,

ch.

XVIII,

Time: cases used, 460-527

Greek grammarians 822, Hebrew gradual growth of Greek tenses 822, "Aktionsart" of

verb-stem 823, three kinds of action 824, time-element 824 f., faulty nomenclature 825, analytic the

f.,

(nom.

460, ace. 469-71, gen. 495, locative

522 f., instrumental 527 f.); Slo., 580 ff.; h, 586 f.; els, 594; k, 597; Trpo, 621 f.; element in tense, 824 f., 894; temporal clauses, 970-9; timelessness of participle, 1111.

330 f with accu471-7; with genitive, etc.,

Transitive verbs sative,

506 797

ff.;

:

.

;

transitiveness

and

voice,

799 f., 806, 815 f. Translation Greek: in the LXX and portions of Gospels and Acts, 89 f., 91 f 93, 100 ff. Transliteration of Semitic words: 225. f.,

.,

821-910; complexity of subject, 821-30 (Greek and Germanic tenses 821, influence of Latin on influence 822,

See Index

of Quotations.

U Uncials: 179-81, 186, 189, 192

f.,

195,

200, 202, ad libitum.

Uncontracted vowels:

see

contrac-

tion.

Unfulfilled condition: see conditional

sentences.

tNDEX OF SUBJECTS Greek dialects in the 53—4; finally complete, 07. Universal language: the Greek, 49 f.; Panhellenic, 49; origin of, 53 f.; Unification of KoivTJ:

march towards real

universalism, 54; a world-speech, 54-56; limita-

tions in, 64.

1247

Vernacular:

17 f., 22 f., 34 fT., 44; "vulgar" Greek, 50; vernacular

KOii^v,

60-73; vernacular Attic, 60-2;

N. T. chiefly in the vernacular kolpti, 76-83; vernacular writers in the T., 76; dialect-coloured, 178 f.;

N.

indifferent to hiatus,

207; ad

li-

bitum.

Vase-inscriptions

:

see inscriptions.

Vaticanus, Codex: 179, passim. Verbal adjectives: in —reos and -to^, 157 f.; relation to participles, 372 f.;

syntax of verbals in

—ros and

-rios,

1095-7.

Vemer's law: 11, footnote. Verses: see rhythm. Vocabulary: 65 f.; in the vernacular Koiv^, 72, 80-3, 87, passim. Vocative: 247; in first declension, 256; in second declension, 261; in third deck, 204; nominative form, 204, 461 nature of, 461 various devices ;

Verbal nouns: ch. XX, 1050-1141; kinship between infinitive and participle, 1050 f.; the infinitive, 105195; the participle, 1098-1141. Verbs: root-verbs, 145; with formative

462

;

f.;

use of

463

f.; adjectives with, 464; apposition to, 464; in predicate, 464 f. ; article with, 465 f. cL,

Voice: conjugation tive

of,

330-43

and intransitive 330

(transi-

f.,

names

146-50 (primitive verbs 146 f., secondary verbs 147-50); compound verbs, 161-5 (with insep-

planting

arable prefixes 161 f., agglutination or juxtaposition 163-5); conjugation of, 303-76 (difficulty of the

endings 335, cross divisions 335, active endings 335-9, middle endings 339 f., passive endings 340 f.,

suflfixes,

of voices 331, relative age of 332,

"deponent"

332 f., passive supmiddle 333 f., personal

subject 303, nature of the verb,

contract verbs 341-3); with infini-

noun 303 f., meaning of pure and hybrid 304, survival

369 f., 1079 f.; with participle, 373 f., 1110 f.; syntax of, ch. XVII, 797-820; point of view, 797-9 (distinction between voice and transitiveness 797 f., meaning of voice

relation to

304,

of -/xi verbs, cross division 306, oldest verbs 306, gradual disappear-

ance 306, second aorists 307-11, 311-9, perfects 319 f., modes 320-30, voices 330-43, tenses 343-08, infinitive 368-71, presents

tive,

798, names of the voices 798, history of 798, help from Sanskrit 798 f., defective verbs 799); syntax

participle 371-0); accusative with,

of active, 799-803; middle, 803-14;

471-86;

passive, 814-20.

genitive

505-11; ablative with, 517-20; with locative, 523 f.; instrumental with, 528-32; dative with, 538-43; adwith,

verbial

use, 551 f compounded with prepositions, 557-65; syntax ;

.

XVII, 797-820; syntax of tense, 821-910; syntax of

of voice, ch.

mode, 911-1049: inf. with, 1077 f.; verbal aspects of inf., 1079-95; verbal aspects of particij)le, 1110-41; of important verbs in N. T., 1212-20.

list

VoUtive: future, 874

f.; subj., 930-4; 939 f. Vowels: original of vowel svTnbols, 178; the original Greek vowels, 181 f.; vowel changes, 181-203 (changes with a 1S2-6, with e 18691, with 7, 191-5, with i 195-9, with o 199-201, with V 201 f.; with co 202 f .) contraction and syncope, 203 f.; diphthongs and diuresis, 204 f.; ai)lurrcsis and prothetic

opt.,

;

vowels, 205

f.;

ehsion, 206-8; era-

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1248 sis,

208

230

f.

f.;

shortening stem-vowels,

Vulgate: passim.

contrasts

W

243

Wales, bilingualism in: 30. Weltsprache: 44 f., 4^56, 64, 66, 79, passim. See universal or koli^t].

Western 218

f.,

145; with formative suffixes, 14660; composita, 160-71; history of, 173 f.; kinship of Greek, 174 f.;

text (8-text) : 180, 214, 216, 253, 260, ad libitum.

in,

175

.

;

World-language: see

Wish: mode and tense in impossible wishes, 923; ways of expressing, 1003 f. Word-formation: see

formation

of

Words: number

in the

N.

of,

koivt].

X

T., 81, 87,

115; relation of words in origin,

punctuation

Xenophon, forenmner of the koiv^* 55.

words.

f.;

idea- words

and form-words, 397; position of, in sentence, 41725; connection between, 427; wordrelations, 449; glory of the words of the N. T., 1207 f. f

Zeugma: 1200

f.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS Only words are here given which are discussed, not

many

thousands of which are given in the

words in the Hats of examples, See Index of Quotations.

the

text.

871, 931; part., 891; use of d7«, 941, 949. -a:

voc.

161

ending, 168,

f.,

151,

170,

256; prefix,

273,

516,

vowel-changes with, 182-6, 191, 274, 341 f., 326; Dor. gen, abl., 254 f.; stems in, 258, 267; ace. ending, 264 f.; aor. ending, 305, 337-9,

348

2d

perf. in, 3.58, 801; ad526; prothetic, 1209. -a: dat. ending, 249, 256. f.;

verbs

dSiaXciiTTtos:

1155;

in,

'A8pa(i,vvTT]vds: spelling,. 2 10.

-d^w: verb ending,. 147, 151. aiC: form, 185, 295; use, 300. 'A0^ivT]o-i:

case

249.

of,

vowel-changes, 186, 204, 327, 367; dat. ending, 249, 542; inf. ending,

oi:

249, 370, 542, 1051 aldv: form, 190. dtSios:

d7a\Xid(o: constr., 509; forms, 1212.

-aCvw: verb ending,

d"Yairdft):

and

Koii'i],

art.,

aip€(»:

758; meaning, 768.

alp|j.€vos:

d7ain]Tds: discussed, 1096.

al'ptoa:

d-yairdw: use, 1201.

"A^ap: 254, 411, 759, 766. of,

.

;

compounds

799; constr., 855

of,

compounds and forms in,

f.,

of,

349, 352.

ai(r0dvo|xai: constr.,

1040; form

1003; part., 891.

777.

of,

509; in

or.

obi.,

1212.

and

1102;

use,

al
part.,

1122.

dYvC^to: voice of, 816.

alT^w:

1212.

constr.,

voice

of,

of,

alTiariKiri:

dYopdJw: constr., 483, 510.

480,

482,

850,

857;

805, 814, 820.

name

of ace, 466.

dKaTairdcrrovs: spelling, 185.

"Ayovo-tos: spelling, 185.

compounds and forms,

f

1212.

of,

-ais: dat. ending, 249.

ayiucrvvr]: form, 201.

Siyu:

349,

use, 1097.

-alpm: verbs

338, 1212.

compounds and forms

150,

1212.

on with, 1033. d-yYtWw: compounds and forms

ft-yw)i.i:

147,

806, 809

of,

voice

1097;

ayyekCa:

&7i,os: use,

voice

and forms

152; gen. use, 499;

aYid?u): constr., 855,

form, 272.

352.

use, 1078. in

dYd-TTi]:

1122.

c. part.,

1067; opt.

ff.,

ending, 335.

ayadoxrvvi]: reading, 201.

d^avaKTew:

.

472, 808, 816; use,

of,

878, 881, 889.

*Appd: case, 461. a^aeds: meaning, 176, 276, 653, 661; reading, 201; forms, 273.

form, 295.

voice

d8iK€a):

-dKi-s: suffix, 296.

299,

oKii^v: 488, 546.

302, 328, 330, 346, 348, 363, 368,

dKoXoue^u): constr., 52S; use, 880.

391, 428, 430, 1212; constr., 477; voice of, 799 f.; meaning, 865; use.

dKovw:

1249

c.

rases, 449,

717; voice

of,

506

803; in

f.,

511, 519,

or. obi.,

864,

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1250

1103,

1035,

1042; use, 881, 901,

1116;

compounds and forms

of,

dKpiPto-TaTos: form, 280. oiKptPeo-Tepos:

use, 424, 841, 855, 887, 920,

and

offos,

meaning, 665.

art.,

aX€t(|>w: constr.,

937

483.

obi.,

1030, 1040, 1044.

232-4;

accent,

negative, 424,

c.

form, 249, 294.

compounds

511;

constr.,

dWTiXovCa: spelling, 205, 225.

form, 292; use, 690;

dXXtjXwv:

cussed, 692

dis-

f.

compounds and forms

a\Xofj.ai:

974;

in condif.,

1129, 1141; in or,

inf.,

-av: ending, 155, 257; verb ending, 336, 338; verb-stem in, 352. -dv: inf. ending, 194, 343. dCd: cases with, 451, 491, 524, 569 f.; in comp., 163, 476, 561, 571; use,

556; in mod. Gk., 557 f.; case-form, 570; discussed, 571 f.; with aw6,

575; with els, 673; in prepositional phrases, 791.

1212.

of,

f.,

c. cbs,

f.;

f.,

and

1013-8, 1021

f.; c.

ff., 443; and asyndeton, 440; in mod. Gk., 1146; discussed, 1185 ff.

and forms

1010

922

967-71;

985

1025

1166; use, 427

dXXdo-o-w:

c. oirws,

tions, 1007,

form, 244, 294; 752,

984;

775.

207;

d\Xd: elision,

956-9,

ff.,

733; meaning, 921;

c. iVa,

-dXii9pov: suffix, 174.

tiXXoi

&v: form, 181, 190; crasis, 208, 984;

935,

1212.

£LKpos:

NEW TESTAMENT

of,

-ava: in verbs, 349, 352. dvaPaivo): forms, 328.

dvapdXXw: use, 863. dvaYivioo-Kw: otl with, 1032.

1212.

&XXos: use, 292, 692; in comparison, 662; with eh, 671; with art., 695, discussed, 746

775

f.;

pos,

749; antithetic, 750. and aXXos, 748.

and

ff.;

ere-

dva-yKd^w: constr., 857.

dvaGaXXw: forms

dvdOeixa: spelling, 153, 187.

voice

dXXoTpios:

dvaK€(j)aXai(5a):

dXo-yos: form, 273. &|ia: origin, 249;

dvaKXCvw: voice

num.

adv.,

295, 301; case with, 534, 638; iiera, 609; and aw, 627; c.

284,

dvaXCo-Kw:

and

1212.

inf.,

of,

of,

809.

819.

compounds and

dva|xi}i.vT)o-Ka>:

forms,

constr., 482, 509.

dva-iAt^: fixed case, 294, 460.

1069; use, 1126, 1139. d|iapTdvw:

348, 1212; constr.,

of,

476.

compounds and forms

348, 1212; constative aor.

of,

of,

833;

dvd|ios: constr., 504.

voice

dvttiravo):

of,

807; use, 873.

dvairC-rmo: forms, 338.

use, 850, 854. d|j.apTia: use,

dva<j)a£vw: constr., 486; voice of, 817.

d(ji£iv«v:

dvtKXdXi^Tos: use, 1096.

780. form, 277; use, 662.

dvtve'YKai:

-djievos: ending, 374.

and

d(w}>C:

in comp., 451, 553,

art.,

759.

555

f.,

558;

use in Homer, 524; case form, 524; origin, 555; original use, 569; disuse, 569; and irepi, 620; non-use

with

inf.,

dji<|)id?w:

1069.

compounds

184;

and forms, 1212. djj.<})ievvv[j.i:

483;

constr.,

form

of,

dfi
use, 251

cussed, 744 dH.<J)«:

f.;

f.,

and

282, 292; dis-

art.,

use, 282, 292, 744.

769.

f.

constr., 508; voice of, 807;

dvc'xoK-O'i-'

c. part.,

1121.

dvTJKw: use, 886.

avoCyot:

forms, 310, 328.

compounds and forms

of,

364, 368, 371, 1212; voice of, 800. dvTdu: compounds and forms, 1213. avri:

1212.

900

&vtv: use, 553, 638.

dvC
reading,

form, 338.

dveo-is: use,

d|iT|v:

elision,

451, 569

f.;

223; cases with, case-form, 524, 570; in 208,

comp., 163, 165, 542, 563, 572; use, 556; in mod. Gk., 557; in conden-

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS sation, 567; avrh in

and

virkp,

base

of

639;

c.

mod. Gk., 570;

572-4; with

discussed,

irpd,

620;

630; and ivriirepa, 639;

compound

prepositions,

causal, 963; with inf.,

Jji'

1060, 1069

f.

fivTiKpvs: use, 638.

diroKaTKrrdvti: reading, 316.

voice

diroKcJTTTw:

diroKp^vojiai:

809, 819.

of,

"deponent, "334; constr.,

160; use, 296; adv., 298. 316.

827

f.

diroXovw: voice of, 807, 809.

d|ida>: constr.,

dirovfirTO(iai:

511.

alius: constr., 505. -cos,

anayyiKXu: in

or. obi.,

267.

of,

807.

or. obi.,

&iras:

and

d7roo-Tp€<|)0|iai:

819; use, 873; in

of,

1036. art.,

338.

use, 639, 644.

916

meaning, 828; use, 866.

548, 550; with 6

135, 414, 459,

ibv,

"translation -Hebraism,"

472; with verbs, 511, 517

f., 559, 562, 566; for "partitive gen.," 515,

519;

827

comp., 164 f., 542, 563, frequency, 556; in mod. Gk.,

in f.;

557; use, 561, 977 tion, 567;

810.

508,

voice

with

f.;

6.ptI,

in

condensa-

574; discussed,

and «, 596; and irapi., and wpos, 624; and vwd, 634;

f.;

425, 429, 916

in prepositional phrases,

791; for

agent, 820.

dpaPuv: spelling, 211 footn. dpeo-Kco: ccnstr.,

487.

dpK€«: forms, 210, 324; constr., 541; use, 889. in or. obi, 1035 f.; compounds and forms, 1213. dpTrd^to: compounds and forms, 1213. apvfo|iai:

iLpira^: use,

272.

dppriTa: breathing, 225.

dpri: use, 548, 1146.

diro9v^o-Kw:

form adv., 546. 257

dpxi-: prefix, 161

f.

f.

-apxos: in comp., 257. of,

dTToScCKWfjLt: constr.,

voice

1146, 1157,

f.

dpa7£: use, 425.

-dpx^is: in comp., 231,

diroSCSwiAi:

f.,

1176; discussed, 1189

613

voice

of,

810.

of,

dpxT]: ace.

d'jro7pd(j)io:

voice

244; in interrogation, use, 1176.

574-80; f.;

853;

compounds and forms, 1213.

-dpa: in verbs, 349, 352.

anticipatory position, 110; cases with. 111, 469, 482, 534, 554, 568, 570; in adv. phrases, 297, 300,

diro:

f.;

constr., f.;

fipa: use,

dir\ovs: use, 284.

574

constr., 476.

of,

dpa: reading,

dircpxofiai: use, 905. dire'xw:

d7ro(f>EVY(o:

dirw96'o|xai:

direXiri^w: constr., 476.

case, 472.

voice

806

ff.

and

diroTi0Tifi.i:

a-irtw:

771

dir€i7rd(i€0a: spelling,

d-ire'vavTi:

forms, 336; use, 893, 896,

816.

637.

voice

diroo-Tt'XXw:

diroo-T€p€w: constr., 483; voice of 808,

&Tra|: use, 284, 296. dirapve'oiJiat:

810.

905.

dfravTao): use, 873. dird,va)6€v: use,

of,

diropeofiai: intransitive, 472.

1032, 1036.

form, 272.

fiirais:

voice

contract verb, 342.

diroirXt'co:

-aos: equal to

voice

obi.,

'AttoXXws: reading, 260.

&|ios: constr., 504, 1077, 1079.

airdYx.o|iai:

802,

use, 635; voice of, 802, 815; meaning, 827; forms, 1213. dirdXXvfii: voice of, 800; meaning of,

avT^ufpa: use, 638.

in,

of,

dTTOKTttvw:

avTiXtYovTes: reading, 1171.

-dvw: verbs

845; use, 635, 869; voice 815.

473, 484, 626; voice, 818; in or. 1036.

-avTi: ending, 336.

fivw: in adj.,

1251

of,

807, 809.

dpX«o: &p^a.neuoi reading, 49; use, 904,

480.

1102, 1121, 1126;

810.

ellipsis,

meaning, 345, 827, 838,

&s: in

c. inf.,

1077; and

1203.

mod. Gk., 430, 923, 931.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1252

-as: ending, 172, 254, 256, 265, 267,

337.

800, 1213.

ending, 336.

-do-i:

and compounds, 305-8,

PaCvu: forms

with

'A
art.,

pdXXta: aor.

788.

862

dcrirdtonai: constr., 853,

voice, 372; use, 1097.

d
307, 338, 836, 847;

f.,

815; meaning, 834,

constr.,

-are: per. end., 308.

592; voice 1111, 1128.

639.

mod. Gk.,

drds: in

389,

of,

807

papEu:

f.

Papvvw: forms, 1213.

-dTwo-av: per. end., 308.

Pao-tXcvs: voc. of, 465;

av^dvco: voice of, 799.

and

form, 294.

Pao-i\€ii(i>:

form, 273.

aires: in

problem of

causative, 801; constative,

Pao-KaCvw: eavrov, 226, 232;

and

cases, 473.

Pao-rd^w: constr., 853.

intensive, 287, 399, 416; semi-de-

-PP-: 213

monstrative, 290; gen. form ad-

P€€X?ePov\: spelling, 210.

verbial, 298; position of gen., 503;

PeXrepos: form, 662.

3d

p€\Tiov: form,

per. pro.,

c.

683

679,

f.;

use of

681, 683; discussed, 685-7,

f.;

and

use, 688-90;

eKeivos,

707

723;

5s,

c.

f.;

c.

oCros,

705;

pXdiTTw: constr., 472, 484.

226; use, 232, 287,

pXa
constr., 480, 483; voice of,

329, 855

forms

of,

f.,

931

f.,

935.

315, 329, 337, 342,

347; constr., 855

f.;

use, 873; aor.,

900. d
forms

a<}>pwv:

of,

315, 335.

voc. of, 463.

pXcirto:

and

case, 473.

and asyn-

constr., 330, 996;

c. inf.,

1074.

-dw: verbs in, 147 341 ff., 351.

ff.,

use of

577;

1110; in

^Xewere,

or. obi.,

932

c.

awo,

f.,

955,

1035, 1041;

com-

pounds and forms, 1213. Podw: in or. ob{„ 1036. PoTiBew: case with, 472, 541. PovXonai: forms, 339; use, 876, 878,

-axov: suffix, 296. dXP<-: with final s, 221, 296; use, 639, 954, 974; in prepositional phrases, 791;

pXatrrdvu: voice of, 799; forms, 1213.

deton, 430; and case, 471;

d4>€s: use,

mean-

PiqpvXXos: reading, 199.

ptpXos: spelUng, 199.

819.

ditTiixi:

294, 299;

f.,

Pipdw: meaning, 865.

289; feminine, 254. d()>aip€0(i.ai,:

277

ing, 665.

in

770, 779;

art.,

of,

f.

pleonastic, 722;

sense-figure, 1204.

avTov: question

760,

833; use, 902.

avTojidTT]:

709

art.,

769.

avT60i: use, 296.

airrov,

590,

1073,

use,

f.;

compounds and forms, 1213.

-drw: per. end., 308.

a,{!piov:

944;

329,

525, 533,

520,

pdpPapos: form, 272.

185.

ending, 277, 279

-ttTos:

form,

^cnrTiaai

PaTrrfJw:

do-vv0€Tos: voice, 372; use, 1097.

ixrep: use,

compounds and

838; use, 905; forms, 1212 f.

f.

meaning, 665.

do-o-ov:

of,

799

voice,

886, 919; in or. obi, 1036 inf.,

1055

f.,

f.;

with

1060.

PpaSvvco: forms, 230. Ppc'xw: voice of, 799.

184, 203, 316,

y: 209, 216, 359.

B

FaXaTiKTi: with art., 788. Yaiie'to:

P:

209

f.,

217, 240, 353.

constr., 1204; forms, 1213.

7dp: use, 424, 433, 443, 962, 1189; in

pdoX: 254, 411.

interrogation, 916;

Bapv\tGv: 494.

1020;

c. re,

c. ei,

886, 1003

1179; discussed, 1190

f.,

f.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

1147

and

7€vo)xai:

and

—yi:

507

306

mod. Gk., 570, 982.

of,

658, 829; voice

801, 818, 820; yhoiTo with

ixr,,

1003; imper.

of,

854, 935, 939

896

871,

869,

use,

855;

f.,

905,

f.,

951, 1085, 1202; subj. forms, 890;

900; yeyovev '6tl, 1034; compounds and forms, 1212 f.

perf.,

yivwo-Kcd:

compounds and forms, 210,

308, 324, 328, 330, 346, 1214; use

yvwarbv,

of,

834, 904; aor. in

yXwo-o-a:

of,

and

1041;

f.,

c. part.,

c.

inf.,

1103.

406,

constr.,

1214;

845

f.,

853; in mod. Gk., 851; use, 875, 895; in

or. obi,

1035

and

ellipsis,

652.

yuv^:

1156

ff.,

8€|i6s: in

forms, 342; constr., 519, 1059.

8eo|xai: 8e'ov:

1168.

comparison, 662.

use with

forms

8€'pw: 8£xipo:

881, 1130.

eo-Tt,

1214.

of,

form, 299, 302, 328; use, 430,

931, 949, 1193.

form, 299; use, 330, 430, 931, 949; in conditions, 1023.

8£VT€:

SeuTcpaioi: use, 298.

283

8€VT€pos: ordinal, Stxofxai:

voice

and forms

of,

f.;

813;

of,

and els, 671. compounds

1214.

compounds and forms, 1214. with on, 1034.

8T|irov: use,

and case, 474. and iras, 772. compounds and forms, 346,

362,

mod. Gk., 206, 928, 1011,

in

8€v:

obi, 1036.

8tiia6o-ios: loc.

•yovviraTtco:

ypd(|>
8€Ka: use, 282; in comp., 283.

8t]\6(o: in or.

in comp., 164.

7pa({>T):

307,

f.

8€iva: use, 292, 744.

8fi\ov:

853.

roX^oGd: spelling, 211; form, 259. -yovtr-:

obi, 1035

or.

8^: use, 302, 443; discussed, 1149.

various readings, 204.

yo-yyv?co: constr.,

compounds and forms,

311; in

8^(1):

652, 1202.

ellipsis,

yXwo-cr6KO[j.ov:

827,

843, 856; use, 871;

obi, 1035

or.

1062, 1103;

meaning,

656;

t5«,

311, 327, 1214.

f.,

8€iKvviw:

with KaL, 95, 107, 393, 426, 1042 f.; frequency in Mt., 122; followed by asyndeton, 429; in periphrastic forms, 330, 902; ybeffdai cases with, 449, 497; with f.; 674;'tro,

ff.;

compounds and forms, 174 f.,

8€£kvu|j.i:

eyevtro

advs., 545

nega-

886, 919;

f.

eUipsis, 272, 652, 1202.

'Y^voiiai.:

c.

1183-5; ad-

form, 319; use, 880, 919 c. inf., 1078.

8€i:

f.

case, 473,

in verbs, 351.

yid: pref. in

1025;

y.n,

-8*: suffix, 296, 1211.

reading, 211, 213.

ycvvdw: use, 866

d

c.

versative, 1186.

constr., 510.

•yiynfia:

1145, 1153;

tive, 1164; discussed,

enclitic, 1211.

ff.;

yi\i.ilo>:

•^rj:

1144; discussed,

302, 424,

use,

•y^:

1253

form, 295; use, 691.

302.

8id: c. encUtic, 244; in

comp., 164,

476, 529, 558, 561, 563, 800, 827

f.;

cases with, 491, 534, 565, 569

f.;

frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 557; verbs, 560; in condensation, c. case-form, 570; discussed, 580-4; and Kara, 606; and v-n-kp, 629;

567;

f.

and

636;

iiTTo,

c.

ixkaov,

648;

c.

ri,

730; in prepositional phrases, 791; for agent, S20; c. inf., 858, 891, 8:

909, 966,

210, 240, 248.

8av€C5u>: 8^:

voice

elision,

of,

207;

conj., 301,

428

8ia?tovvvjJii:

voice

8ia\€iiTto: c. part.,

809. 290, 694

c.

art.,

f.,

440, 443

095

f.;

f.;

post-

f.; c.

ovtos,

positive, 424;

c. 8s,

705;

707; antithetic, 750,

c. tKelvos,

1060,

1069

f.,

1091;

c.

TOVTO, 965.

-8a: adv. end., 295. Saijidvia: COnstr., 404.

of,

810.

1121.

8iafjLapTvpo|iai: constr.,

m,^^^

484; in

f.

ohl, 1035 f. meaning, 564, 828.

SiavoC-yto: in or.

8iao-7Tdu»:

or. obi,

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1254

SiareXeoj: c. part.,

1121.

8vo: forms, 251, 282; Sho Svo

meaning, 828.

Siariipea):

ism

cases with, 455.

8ia(})€p&>:

8ia4)€VY":

(?),

673; and

Suo— in comp., 161

compounds and forms, 1214.

8«8€Ka: use, 282.

1035

8
f

compounds and forms, 307 f.,

fT.,

Bib)-,

spelling, 200.

Swpedv: 488.

335, 337, 347, 409,

876, 1044, 1214; constr., 855, 940,

983

command, 1047;

1135; in indirect

8i6'px,o|Aai:

constr., 477, 869.

8niY€'o|ji.ai:

otl

reduphcation and augment, 363-7; voc. ending, 462 f prothetic, 1209.

with, 1032.

Suo-xvpC^ofiai: in or. obi., 1036.

.

meaning, 176. 8uKaiocrvvTi: with subjective gen., 499; 8iKaios:

'ia.:

€dv:

form,

957, 959;

use, 1154.

SioTi: use, 962, 964.

Idvircp: use,

8iir\6T€pov: form, 299.

€dvT€

8ts:

and

case, 474,

508.

c.

of,

807.

use, 1189.

compounds and

623

compounds

f.;

form, 294, 298; in comparison,

547; use, 549, 558, 639

f.

€76ipw: voice of, 799, 817;

f.

896;

€7KaK€w:

e7Ka\€w: constr., 511.

474.

c.

paxt., 1121.

voice

€7KO[ipdo(jiai:

compounds and forms

of,

230, 234

820; constr., 857; use, 879

with

1055, 1060, 1077

886,

f.

808.

286, 420; interchange

406; iyo^v old form

discussed,

466;

forms

8uvaT6s:

c. inf.,

and

8vvojJLai:

reading, 312.

compounds and

f.,

-nuels,

Svvaixis: use, 176.

1077, 1079.

of,

iyi: crasis, 208; accent with enclitic,

312, 340, 351, 368, 1214; voice of, f.,

use, 866,

compounds and forms, 1215.

8ovX6a>: constr., 540.

forms, 1214.

art.,

form, 296, 298; use, 524.

constr.,

8ov\-: in comp., 164.

8vvw: voice of, 800;

and

f.;

298; constr., 538, 638; adjectival,

8o|d5»: aor. of, 837, 843, 847, 853.

c. inf.,

691

ISlos,

1156;

ovK,

c.

€77115:

spelhng, 153, 200.

-8ov: adv. suffix, 295

920;

c. 6s,

965; in conditions,

k-irei,

and forms, 1214.

form, 336, 343.

8i3vanai:

967, 6(7os,

forms, 1214.

l-^yilo>:

8oKi|id5w: in or. obi., 1041.

8pdo-
208;

1154.

— iavre:

'EPpaio-Ti':

voice

8oK€w: constr., 541, 853, 1085.

8djjia:

and o^ns, 727; and

687-90; and law:

aor. forms, 342;

8oXida):

928,

779; with mid. voice, 810.

283.

Uxo.- adv., 284.

8o7[AaTi|a):

crasis,

850,

lavTov: form, 185, 226; use, 287, 289,

284.

adv., 284; spelling, 296.

8iij/da):

f.;

1005-27.

AiooTKopos: 199.

8i
325,

733; use, 948, 968, 971, 1129;

Aiovvo-os: reading, 200.

81'rrXovs: use,

190

181,

220,

969, 1129;

950.

;

use, 391, 1193.

constr.,

use, 781.

Sio-irep:

vowel-changes with, 178, 183-91,

€:

324; instead of o, 308; inserted by analogy, 349; with Doric fut., 354;

bovvaL, 1052, 1058, 1132.

8i6: use,

E

1032; use, 905, 1062, 1080,

f.,

ff.

:

form, 331; constr., 474, 482, 1083; voice of, 816; in or. obi,,

311, 324, 326

Hebra-

769.

8vpo|xai: spelUng, 206.

meaning, 828; constr., 987.

8i8tto-Kw:

8i8w|xi:

art.,

of,

677

f.;

of,

enclitic

682; use, 685, 689, 693;

e/cetj'os,

707;

and

aXXoj, 746;

position of nov, 779; use of vnCov,

785;

c.

particles,

forms

of,

1211.

1148;

enclitic

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS forms

€8a({>Ct<»: €t:

and \ho), 838,

480, 484, 626, 902;

1215.

of,

1255

or. obl., 1048.

883; use, 930; in

in contraction, 342.

rnXot: form,

tlpuvo-: in comp., 164.

?0w:

€ls:

€t:

205 f.; use, 878, 886, 919. forms of, 1215. vowel-change, 187, 191-4, 195 f.,

481, 484, 491, 524, 535, 569

198, 204, 324, 367. tl:

accent, 233

and

430, 965;

1003

886,

1176; c.

244, 1211; and

f.,

oCros,

699

use,

916,

f.;

6tl,

and

f.;

928,

influence,

540, 542, 559

27, 1129; in or. oU., 1030, 1045; c.

196

-ila: ending, 152,

compounds and forms,

ilBio):

forms,

tI8ov:

366;

use,

1135; in

906

f .,

use, see

and

el

el|ji£:

1069

192

n-q,

f.,

747,

compounds and forms, 312

f .,

supplanting

f.;

188, 194,

325, 327

f .,

330,

i(Ti:

art.,

of,

806; use, 880.

—

dre

eire,

ff.,

950; constr.,

481, 497, 545; earLv

c.

tovto,

705; meaning, 865; use, 874, 945

f.,

1045,

1025,

1179,

1189.

form, 160, 183.

eiris OtXet: 961.

887-90, 906

292; case,

855.

voice

€It€v:

f.,

tIs,

ending, 265.

elo-epxcfiai: constr.,

periphrastic forms, 330, 822, 860,

ff.,

1060,

anarthrous, 1070; prochtic, 1211. and ou, 232, 751; indeclinable use,

337, 340, 350, 395, 908, 1215; in

877 394

ff.,

€lTa: use, 300, 429.

discussed, 1150.

ff.,

1001

997,

1088, 1090; reading, 862;

ff.,

tlo-iroptvoiiai:

220, 232

858, 862, 891,

c. inf.,

f.,

«Is:

-€is:

1188. €l \ii\v:

990

thetic, 750.

form, 221, 283.

\i.-f\:

613;

TrapA,

674, 796; equal to ns, 675, 744; distributive, 675; and aXXos, 747; anti-

f.

EiKovov: speUing, 197.

el

and

460; and irpwros, 671; as indef.

-€iKa: perf. end., 310.

€i'Ko
in

wpos, 624, 626; in prepositional

909,

282 335.

-327,

wish constr., 1003

in

361,

1215.

-€w: opt. end., el'Oe:

1041.

or. ohl,

compounds and forma,

€i:8w:

verbs, 469, 481,

adv. phrases, 550; frequency, 556; rather than 5ta, 582; and h, 584 ff.;

phrases, 792;

1215.

223 f., 325, 344, 360, 413 f., 437, 441, 892,

in

562, 566; in "preg-

nant construction," 525, 1204;

and

326.

f.,

f.; c.

ff.,

discussed, 591-6;

1160, 1187; proclitic, 1211.

JU17,

457

ydp,

rts, 956; c. ov, 962, 1160; 1004; in conditions, 1005-

f.;

mod. Gk., 453, 535, 557; Semitic

997,

c.

n-qv,

meaning, 389, 449,

spelling, 187;

561; in idiom, 401; case with, 451,

sk: in

comp., 163

444;

-5.

f.,

215, 828;

verbs, 510, 517

f.;

titive gen.," 515, 519;

c. tovtov,

for "par-

case with,

1202; Kai iarai in or. obl, 1042; 6 ibv, 1107; encHtic forms of,

534, 570; in adv. phrases, 548, 550; frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 558;

1211.

use, 561

1030,

tlfii.:

accent, 232

f

; .

compounds and

forms, 313, 350, 396,

1215; use,

;

c.

dx6, 575, 577; discussed,

696-600; and

614; and

Trapd,

636; for agent, 820;

c.

inf.,

1073; proclitic, 1211.

869, 881.

use,

^Kao-Tos:

-«iv: ending, 342.

370

-tiv: ending, 339, 361,

292; discussed, 745

with eh, 746; and

f.

-tivos: ending, 197.

irSs,

art.,

771.

-eios:

ending, 197.

tKardv: use, 283.

tiirep:

use, 1154.

4KpaX\a>: voice of, 803; use, 880.

Att6v: form, 329.

iKtZ:

accent, 229, 231

329, 338, 345

f.,

f.;

769; and

^Kdrtpos: use, 292, 745.

-€iov: ending, 197.

tlirov:

vir6,

1061,

;

forms

of,

327,

363, 368; constr.,

and

295;

aphasresis, 206; loc. form, meaning, 299; constr., 443,

548; as root, 706, use, 969.

A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1256 €K£ivos:

Ionic

693;

eKeivrjs

707

f.;

use,

290,

and

vneh,

533

707; dis-

use,

Keivos,

and

702

oItos,

and

cussed, 706-9;

form,

€K€io-€:

and

299;

of,

808,

591-3; and

€1$,

in

Iktos: use, 640.

JvavTi: use,

meaning, 828.

forms, 341.

eKc|)vw:

277

€v8t6|ATi
1215.

double su-

forms of, 342. IXee'w: forms of, 342; transitive, 474. eXevGepos: meaning, 662. IXedw:

¥Xkw:

form, 296, 298.

aspiration constr.,

338;

223

of,

476;

f.;

forms,

use, 877, 884,

€|xds:

art.,

770.

^v:

c.

inf.,

891, 978

in

mod. Gk., 313.

€vv€a: use, 282.

evopKt^w: constr., 484.

of,

684;

LXX,

with

ifioi

ev,

and

evwiriov: constr., 540, 641. tg:

form, 215; in mod. Gk., 557; verbs,

558;

with,

phrases,

122, 431, 490, 858,

1042, 1062, 1069, 1072, f.;

229j 1211; meaning, 449;

accent,

and

case,

2|€ip.i: 'i^iCTTi:

forms, 314, 339.

e^iis:

1084 meaning, 829.

constr., 491,

t^Ti-yeofiai:

constr., 547.

568;

792;

tla^opd^w: voice of, 810.

use, 621, 640.

1092; assimilation, 216

cases

chtic, 1211.

transitive, 474,

f.,

1068.

evTptirw: cases with, 455.

286;

/xov,

682; with avros, 687;

107,

inf.,

340.

evTos: use, 641.

1210.

prepositional

tlATTopeiiofiai.:

?|iirpocr9€v:

476; meaning, 564. meaning, 299; use, 548.

-€VTo: in

forms, 341.

use, 288, 496, k/xov,

c. inf.,

1073, 1091.

evTeXXonai: with

compared with

588;

225; position, 425; use, 641;

€VTav9a: use, 299.

687-90.

assimilation

e/j-ov

1060.

^voxos: constr., 504, 537.

tuPaCvw: forms, 328.

€[ili€o-a):

249; position, 301; use, inf.,

€VKaK€w: use, 1102.

-€na: ending, 188.

€[j[.(3pi[j.do[Ji.ai:

case, 474.

?v€K€v: spelling of, 183, 187; aspiration,

'ivi:

1080, 1082.

IfAavToii: use,

and

'ivtKa: origin,

evOdSe:

€XXo7e'w: forms, 342. eXir^tw:

809.

cv€p-y€w: constr.,

accent, 230.

compounds and forms, 1215.

'EXXtivio-tC:

€ve8p€vu):

of,

spelling, 201.

641; with

perlative, 670.

'A.t7|j.a:

f.

reading, 946.

voice

IvSiJw:

f.

f.

eXdxio-Tos: form, 278, 669;

f.

€v8i8vo-K«: voice of, 810.

458

compounds and forms,

eXaiivw:

kiri,

2v8€Ka: use, 282.

Ikx««: forms, 213, 342, 352. €Kwv: use, 298. IXdo-trwv: form, 218,

639

kvavTiov: use, 639 tvSeCKvviii:

'EXaitSv: case of, 232, 267,

599; and

mod. Gk., 282.

-^vai: ending, 370.

constr., 476;

k-,

accent, 232.

'iva:

€KTivd(rcrw: voice of, 810.

€K<j)£v-yw:

f.,

chtic, 1211. '^v:

form, 342.

sKTrXew:

559

600; and vv6, 636; in prepositional phrases, 792, 978; c. v, 963; pro-

•

802.

of,

505, 521,

540,

510,

562; case-form, 524, 570; in "preg-

and

480; voice

f.

Voice

verbs,

c.

721; frequent

f.,

c. nea-c^,

550; origin, 555; discussed, 584-90;

€kX£ktos: forms, 273. iKirCirTco:

569 556;

f.,

in comp., 164, 542; in adv. phrases,

eKXavOdvw: constr., 509.

810

452

nant construction," 525, 548, 592;

owov, 722.

form, 340.

eKX€'yo|Aai: constr.,

520, 522-5, 527, 531,

f.,

554,

ff.,

1210;

770.

art.,

meaning,

296;

constr., 548;

f.,

€KKXiio-ia: origin, 174.

tKKp€|xa(iai:

451, 484

206;

in Lu., 494;

f.

c.

in

pro-

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

1257

^Iwrrdvo): voice of, 806.

lirLiiapTvpofiat: in or. obl.,

l^o|AoXo7£w: forms, 188.

iirijieXt'ofiai:

i^opKlt,oi: coiistr.,

forms

ImjUvw: use, 850;

475. of,

342; constr., 853.

form, 296, 301;

adj. stem, 160;

i^o>:

use, 642.

and

tirixdo-CT-u:

intran-

aor.

ciraKOvw: constr., 507.

856; use, 948.

constr., 542, 1084.

542.

€TriTi|Adw: constr.,

form, 371.

€irK}>a£vo):

tTrrd: use,

971.

282; cardinal, 673.

€Travairavop,ai: voice of, 819.

lirrdKfs: use, 281, 298.

tirdvw: use, 642, 666.

'iiro>:

eirdvwOev: use, 637.

Ipavvdw:

k-rni:

use, 954, 963, 965, 971,

tTretSTj-rrep:

voice

?pis:

and

164

f.,

204;

elision,

568 ff.; case-form, 524, 570; in "pregnant construction," 525; with verbs, 540, 542, 559 ff., 562, 566; 550; frequency,

phrases,

556; meaning, 561; and ek, 596; discussed, 600-5; and /card, 607; and irpos,

625;

c. oarov,

733, 963; in prep-

ositional phrases, 792, 963, 978; c. inf.,

mod. Gk., 230. meaning of,

tiri^ivwo-Kw:

909; in tiri-ypdcjxo:

use,

voice

of,

and

tTTiKaXtoj:

voice

1060. t-n-CXvo-is:

1215;

use

1105;

compounds and forms,

cpwrdw:

of

341,

1215; constr., 482; in indirect com-

mand, 1046. -£s:

ending, 266, 337.

compounds and forms, 204,

eo-Olu:

1215;

meaning,

564;

stems

of,

823. ?o-6a):

compounds and forms 279

f.,

of,

1215.

669; and art.,

€
tTcpo^v-y^o):

form, 330.

?T€pos: use,

292; and

with

inf.,

-€TTjs: suffix,

231.

with

inf.,

^Toifios:

abl. use, 514.

f.,

833; use, 869,

of,

tKOovaa,

cussed, 748-50;

809.

^TTiXavOdvofiai: constr., 509;

compounds

800

crepo-: in comp., 164.

cases, 474, 508. of,

f.,

craipos: use, 725.

810.

spelhng, 188.

€Trievp.€co:

327

part., 1118.

'ia-b)9tv:

€in8€iKvvw: in or. obl., 1036. €Tr{0€(ia:

948;

905,

'iiru):

use, 1135.

€Tri8cCKvu|xi:

313, 538;

of,

769, 775.

827;

1035, 1042.

or. obi.,

and forms

?o-xaTos: form,

1069, 1071.

'ivia
use of part., 1135.

constative aor.

223; cases with, 451, 491, 524, 565,

in adv.

form, 272.

form, 267.

?pxo|jiai: constr.,

807.

case, 473.

em: in comp.,

breathing, 223.

kp\i.i\vi-C(»:

of,

meaning,

constr., 474, 484:

compounds and forms, 1215.

¥pT](j.os:

meaning, 828; on with, 1032.

t-mipcd^w:

cp-ydto|j,ai.:

^p-yov:

1154.

use, 642.

€Tr€KT€£vw:

compounds and forms, 1215. compounds and forms, 329.

564;

300, 549.

iTtiira: use,

€Tre'xw:

f.

Use, 965, 1154.

ivtliTtp: use,

t-irjKEiva:

1025

965, 971.

IwtiSri: use,

845;

of,

1068.

IwiTVYxO'Vw: constr., 509.

sitive, 473.

Iirdv: use,

epistolary

inf.,

iiria-rpi^bi: constr.,

case, 472;

or.

1035, 1041.

with

-€os: in contraction, 274.

€irai
forms, 314, 328, 340; in

€irC
eirio-TeXXw:

meaning, 662. with kv, 523.

€|wTepos:

part., 1121.

c.

origin, 159.

€iriovo-tos".

obl.,

^
lopTTJ:

voice of,

820.

^6v: use, 1130. egouOeve'w:

1036.

509;

constr.,

tTovTos: in

fiXXoj,

and

746 f.; dis775 f.

art.,

1068, 1077.

mod. Gk., 290.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1258

form, 268; with iv, 523. vowel-changes, 198, 201 f.

'iros:

iv.

th in comp., 164, 367;

365.

F:

irpaaaoi,

c.

289.

fiSios:

1121. constr.,

eua-yyeXt^o):

799; in

of,

474,

pounds and forms

483; voice

1035

obi.,

or.

of,

com-

f.;

1215.

form, 272.

€i)-y€VTJs:

EuSia: case

of,

460.

forms

of,

eu9ecos: use,

compounds and

837, 842, 1215.

549.

and

forms, 330.

€uo86a):

form, 343.

of,

833

t«vY»'^H^"'=

f.; fut.,

compounds and forms,

314.

forms, 203, 342. 1078.

f.

?wo-: in comp., 164. t<6vvv|xi:

compounds and forms,

314,

1215.

compounds and forms,

327,

loivvvia:

compounds and forms,

?woiroiT)9€ts: use,

1122, 1135; in or. obi, 1035, 1041.

1215.

1114.

H

ending, 272.

eiia-epTis:

H: breathing,

form, 272.

evxapio-Tew: voice of, 474.

origin,

r\:

€uXO(iai: use, 886, 919.

-€uw: in comp., 147

ff.,

152.

€4>to"TTi[i.i:

vowel-changes with,

178;

191-6,

324,

184,

187,

nom.

end., 267; after

e,

361;

341, t,

274;

p,

fut.

pas.,

356.

form, 328.

€(al)t}>vl8ios:

222.

augment, 286, 368; in

form, 295.

"E4>€cros:

gx.w:

1105.

^Ciy,

809; use, 873, 883, 893, 1103,

of,

-€iis:

889;

1097.

speUing, 200

5
1215; aspiration, 225; voice

338,

ing

194,

807; mean-

of,

-?«: verbs in, 348, 352.

case, 473.

ivvoio)-.

vjpCa-Ku:

1215; voice

StiT€'«: c. inf.,

form, 294; use, 549.

€vXo7e'w:

f.,

l-q\6a>:

in comp., 164, 296.

€v9v(s):

341

Seo-Tos: use,

trans., 474;

€uSoK€'a):

compounds and forms,

5dw:

299.

tSye: use,

txidv-:

218, 240.

I:

form, 272.

use, 412, 427, 661, 663, 666, 789,

Jj-.

compounds and forms, 200

1158; and

f.,

-jrapa,

616; in interroga-

917; in mod. Gk., 1146; in

206, 319, 338, 346, 367, 870, 897,

tion,

900

comp., 1150; in double questions, 1177; discussed, 1188 f.

1215; aspu-ation, 223; peri-

f.,

phrastic forms, 330, 360; elxoaap,

use, 1150.

336, 887, 921; in Rev., 414, 441; in

fj:

anacolutha, 439; exet impersonal,

-g: ending, 194, 232, 249, 256, 274.

457; constr., 480, 487, 508, 789, 838, 843, 850; c. adv., 546, 799; voice

of,

799

802; stems

f.,

809, 815;

c.

/ca»cws,

^xw, 881, 1106, 1122, 1126 f., 1134 f., 1202; "Latinism," 1034. verbs

in,

147

ff.,

184, 203, 341

flf.,

•4ior.

in

use, 297, 550, 643, 674, 953, 975;

phrases,

729;

T|7€on.ai: constr.,

c. inf.,

550,

792;

and

odTis,

979, 1060, 1070, 1074,

1092. €(ovTov: Ionic, 203.

198,

324,

or. obi.,

1036,

f.,

480; in

1041. Vfir\:

position, 423; constr., 546; use,

1146. TjSicTTa: i]{.:

form, 294; meaning, 670.

vowel-changes, 193

—»lKa:

351.

194

326.

823; meaning, 828;

of,

use, 879, 902, 906, 930, 946, 1122;

-e'w:

vowel-changes,

Tj:'

•fJKw:

f.

mod. Gk., 898. compounds and forms, 337, 358, in

907, 1215. T|\iKos: use,

733 •fjXios:

291

f.,

710, 741; discussed,

f.

gender

of,

252.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS compounds and forms,

f\i.ai:

314, 329,

340, 350.

522; and

Btjia: spelling,

ellipsis,

652, 1202.

-e«v: suffix, 296, 300.

use, 286, 288, 684. form, 192, 1024; use, 1150.

(jitiv:

^lAi-: prefix, 161, 163. ij-xio-us:

form, 274

noun

-t)v:

and

f.; c. art.,

775.

end., 256; verb end., 347,

—f\vr\

suffix, 151.

reading,

633;

use,

art.,

760.

-60-: 215.

ex^pw: use of part., 1135.

form, 218, 277. fjo-vx,os: form, 272.

accent, 230.

eXi<J/ts:

evTJo-Kw:

use, 1154.

compounds and forms

OvTjTds: use,

vowel-changes, 205.

of,

319, 1216; meaning, 345, 827, 845; use of inf., 1030.

form, 341, 1216; meaning,

865. 7]v:

verb end., 818.

-6rio-op.ai:

Gi-yYaw: constr., 508.

forms, 1216.

Tjcro-ov:

T|TTdo|xai:

f.

853.

-0i: suffix, 328.

accent, 230.

•r|
340, 356

9r]
296.

suffix,

iJToi:

340, 347.

comp., 164.

Otipio-: in

-Otis: aor. end.,

and

proper names, 172, 214, 255; gen.end., 256, 295; adj. in, 272;

o-Tj:

mod. Gk., 898.

-Ot]v: aor. end.,

abl.

Tj

durative meaning, 838; impf.

843; in

-OiiKa: in

1154. 'Hp«8t)s: -ris:

758, 761, 780, 786, 795;

or. obi., 1032, 1035, 1041. -Oip: aor. suffix, 357.

ViKa: use, 300, 971. disputed

decl.,

Bto^iv: form, 269.

of,

adverbs, 349.

ijirep:

art.,

flfwp^w:

end., 343.

—Hva:

double

2.53;

omitted, 1202.

349. -Tjv: inf.

of,

257; vocative of, 261, 403, 465; reading, 477; use of gen.', 499 f. 516; abl. of, 514; meaning, 70S;

T|(jL6'T€pos:

^

gender

Gtds:

Kal vvKTos: 495.

T|fj.€pas

153, 200. form, 1212.

eefitXido):

gen. use, 295, 497; loc. use,

TJn^pa:

1259

1097.

Gopvpc'w: aor. of, 851.

0pia|xP€vw: constr., 474; voice of, 800.

subj. end., 310.

-9u>: 9:

222, 353.

ed: in

-0w: verbs

149.

in,

mod. Gk., 353, 870, 889, 907,

926. -Oa: ending, 337. edvaros: USe, 784.

vowel-changes with, 187

f.,

195-9, 204

237;

i:

OavaTwOtCs: USe, 1114. GaTTTOj:

eappe'w:

compounds and forms, 1216. in

anacolutha,

440,

1135;

constr., 474.

compounds and

205 f.; con.str., 3.53, 391, 431, 551, 857, 878; use, 919, 923 f., or.

obi.,

1046;

191

f.,

loc.

dat.

f.;

ending,

-la: suffix, 156, 196

1036; in indirect c.

inf.,

f.,

273.

-lavds: suffix, 155.

voice

of,

819;

compounds and

forms, 1216.

f.

e€\«: form,

command,

augment, 366

Idojiai:

eedonai: meaning, 829, 893

933; in

230,

520; prothetic, 1209.

eav|xd5«: various readings, 188; constr.,

474, 532; use, 879; forms, 1216.

207,

ending, 249, 452, 520, 1067; class of verbs, 351; in reduplication, 363; in

6dp
f.,

1055

1060, 1078, 1093; inf. of, 1058

f.

f.,

-Cas: gen. -idco: ISc:

end

verbs

accent,

in,

,

259. 150, 351.

231; adv., 302; intorj.,

32S, 391 l'8ios:

compared with

airos, 2S7; iSiaf

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1260

with Kara, 609; discussed, 691

and

adv. and

l8ov:

f.;

770.

art.,

interj.,

302; in elliptical

sentences, 391, 396; case with, 413,

speUing

225; gender

of,

IT]:

in,

346,

f.,

-(.cria:

ff.

fut. end., 355.

*Iwdv»is: forms, 194, 214.

-C«v: ending, 276

201.

end., 355.

verbs

319

f.,

'Iroupaia: with art., 788,

760.

art.,

i€p»
-Ll^:

compounds and forms, 316. compounds and forms, 225,

-lOTos: ending, 276

Upovp-y^w: constr., 474,

-i€
lo-Tdto: toTTjfjit:

760.

817.

declension, 257.

253; and

of,

155.

359, 366, 1212, 1216; voice of, 800,

Upos: spelling, 223, 225. 'I«poo-6\v(ia:

art.,

231, 305, 310, 315

441, 460; use, 1193. iSw: forms, 1216. 'l€pq, IloXei:

and

-lo-o-a: suflax,

'I<rpa'<]X:

'Iwtriis:

147, 149

ff.,

351, 355.

f.

form, 268.

and

'IwcrriA:

art.,

761.

in opt., 326.

ttiiii:

compounds and forms,

309, 314,

1216. iKavos: c. inf., 1077.

k: 216, 223, 346 f., 358 f., 1210. -Ka: suffix, 296, 308 ff., 319, 358f.,801.

iKavow: constr., 480.

KaO": in

form, 263; and

'ItIo-ovs:

iKveojiai:

compounds and forms, 1216.

'Ik<5viov: spelling,

words

-iKos:

760.

art.,

in,

KaOdirep: use, 967, 1154.

words

augment of, 1209; compounds and forms, 1216. forms and other comKa6«^o(i.ai:

tions, 273; constr. of

in,

504.

VXtws: form, 272.

meaning, 408; and

eUipsis,

I'va:

pounds, 1216. Gk., 292.

KaGTJKw: use, 886.

mod. Gk., 261.

rather than

Ill, 371, 996,

inf.,

1054 f., 1071, 1077; use, 120, 244, 393 f., 400, 430 f., 584, 907 f., 928 f., 933, 935, 940, 943, 950, 960 f., 980, 1054

KaOapi^w:

Ka0€is: in naod.

1202. -uv: in

f.,

constr.,

1087

f.;

c.

201, 203,

Kd9T]iiai:

compounds and forms,

KaOt^w:

compounds

866;

use,

constr., 480.

fut.

ind.,

194;

Kaeio-TT]jii:

292,

325,

330,

Ka66: use, 967.

987; in consecutive clauses, 997-9, 1002; and Sn, 1032, 1049; in indirect command, 1046 f.; and dXXd,

Ka9t6
1202.

-ivos: suffix, 158, 197. -lov:

endmg, 154-6, 197, 273.

'lowirri:

speUing, 214.

-los: ending, 159, 197, 273, 276. -tov
355.

ending, 261, 296.

-i«r€(i):

-{(TKw:

fut. end., 355.

verb

suffix,

869.

and

forms, 1216.

KaOoTu use, 722, 963, 967. Ka9c5s: use, 433, 963, 968; in

ellipsis,

314,

329, 340, 350, 1216.

850; origin, 249, 301; c. o5ros, 699; c. M^, 981, 987, 995, 1169; in final clauses, 981-5, 991-4; and Sttcos,

1187; and

963,

three termina-

f.;

iXa
ijidriov:

f.,

compounds and forms, 1216.

KaOafpw:

197.

158

phrases, 195, 209, 223

967, 1210.

or. obi,

1045.

984; use, 393, 426-9,

Kal: crasis, 208,

432, 443

680, 947

f.,

1136, 1188;

C.

f.,

951, 1041,

avrov, 441;

460, 487, 1140;

c. Kai,

C.

tovto,

427, 566;

c.

numerals, 672; c. art., 694 f., 724; and ovTos, 705; with several attributives,

785-9; and

ws,

968; correla-

tive, 969; in concessive clauses, 1026;

m or. obi., 1047; Gk., 1146;

c.

c. ye,

1129; in mod.

negatives, 1164, 1173;

discussed, 1179-83.

.

.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

1261

Kai,v($s:

meaning, 176.

Karap-y^o): aor. of,

KaC-irep:

use, 431, 1129.

KaTacrKT]v6w: form, 343.

Kaipos:

form and meaning, 522

f

meaning

KaTa<})€ii-ya):

KaCroi: use, 1129, 1154.

851.

of,

Kalroiye: use, 1129, 1154.

KartVavTi: use, 639, 643

Katw: meaning, 828;

Karevwiriov: use, 644.

compounds and

forms,- 1216.

and

KUKdw: with

KarecrGCu:

208.

KoiKcivos: crasis,

inf.,

1068.

kAWiov: form, 277 KaXos:

KaTO-iTTpfgw:

f

.

meaning, 665.

;

compounds, 164.

meaning, 661;

c.

forms

of,

1216.

Kaprepsw: forms of, 833;

c. part., 1121. Kara: form, 204, 223; in comp., 163, 165, 476, 511, 558, 561, 827 f.;

cases with, 491, 531, 569

f.;

frequency,

550;

in adv.

556;

in

mod. Gk., 557, 570; with verbs, case-form,

560;

with

&va,

contrasted

570;

571 contrasted with ;

523; discussed, 605-9; and

tional phrases, 792; with

with

inf.,

KaraPatvw:

6s,

of, 316, 350, 375; voice of, 813; special use of, eKeijjLrjv, 906.

K€tvos: Ionic, 206.

form, 197.

K€(.p(a: KiCpo)-.

voice

673;

967;

1069.

forms, 328, 330; constr.,

1036

f

KcXXw: speUing, 206.

Kepdvvufii:

Kcpavvvw:

compounds and forms, 317, compounds

838.

of,

of,

forms

Kt^JoXi]: use,

802.

KTjpvg:

KaraKaCw: meaning, 828.

-KI-: 742.

KaraKpivb): constr., 784;

meaning, 828;

in or. obi, 1036.

voice

812; in

or. obi.,

1036.

of,

1217.

781.

use of part., 1106.

KivSwfvw: use, 884. kIs (kC):

of,

Thessahan Gk., 291.

-KK-: 214. KXatw:

KaToKiyoi: form, 341.

KaraXvo): meaning, 828; constr., 857. inf.,

1068.

Karavrdw: use, 863. KaraTravw: voice, 800. Karapdofjiai:

and

forms,

accent, 230.

Kt]pii(r
with

and

K€p8aCvw: forms of, 1216.

Karai: case-form, 296, 605.

KaTav€\iw:

958.

1216.

K£p8dto:

KaraYeXdw: meaning

KaTaXafi,|3dv(o:

809.

1216.

856; use, 895.

KaraSouXdw: voice

of,

KeXevw: constr., 541, 1084; in or. obi,

K€v-: in verbs, 164.

preposi-

in

mod. Gk., 206. compounds and forms

in

K€ifiai:

K€v: in rel. clauses,

els,

967;

341, 876; constr.,

use, 354.

avri,

with

733,

of,

Trapd,

616; and vwip, 630; with oaop,

forms

475.

Kci:

mod. Gk., 292.

phrases,

298.

Ke:

Kd|Av«: c. part., 1121;

voice of, 810. stem, 160; case, 296; use,

KavSa: spelling, 211.

eifxi,

form, 248, 295; use, 299.

Kavtfs: in

Kdrto: adj.

Kav^doixai:

Ka\6i>

886, 1084. KoXtSs:

meaning, 564. meaning, 564.

KaTOTricrOev: use, 647.

constr.,

KttXo-: in

f.

KaTTj-yopew: constr., 511.

case, 473.

480; use, 885; compounds and forms, 907 f., 1216.

KoXe'o):

f.

KarepYd^ofjiai:

KaK-: in comp., 164.

KaKo\o-y€(tf:

827

form, 342.

KOLTaxioi-.

case, 473.

Kardparos: USC, 1096.

constr., 475, 834; forms, 1217. KXavSa: form, 211. KXdo):

kX«Iw:

853;

meaning,

compounds and forms, 1217. compounds and forms, 340,

1217. kXt]povoh^w: constr., 475. KXtfia: spoiling, 230.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1262

A

compounds and

kXivw: voice of, 800;

forms, 1217. Koindw: voice of, 817, 819; aor. of,

848.

XaKcw or

Koivos: readings, 202; use, 691.

Hellenism, 1077.

817, 819.

of,

KoXoo-o-aC: form, 184

Xa|x|3dv(o:

210, 231, 327 use, 897,

forms, 1217. voice

constr., 475;

KoiTTw:

compounds and forms,

809;

of,

in or. obi, 1035

compounds and forms, 325,

compounds and forms, 348,

mean-

Xtjo-ttjs:

299, 669; su-

perlative of, 670; Kpeiaaov with

compounds and forms, 316 f.,

Kptfiavvvo), Kpeftd^w

and

Kpejjidw:

com-

pounds and forms, 1217.

constr.,

use,

905;

gender

of,

253; reading, 718.

Xijios:

gender

of,

253.

-XX-: 214.

on with. compounds and forms, 1217, XoYos: forms, 327; on with, 1033. Xoi8op£(d: and case, 473. Xovw: compounds and forms, 340, 1035;

form, 186, 230.

KpCvb>:

X(0os:

XoYi^ofiai: voice of, 816, 819;

Kpi: root, 175. Kpt|ia:

XiOo-: in comp., 164.

-Xiir-: root, 197.

1217.

3.50,

meaning, 828;

511;

compounds and forms,

1217.

1217. KpCcris: oTi

KpviTTos:

Xv|iaCvo|j.ai:

with, 1033.

and

art.,

817;

764.

Kpv<j)d:

voice

constr., 483;

of,

compounds and forms,

ttSs,

forms

of,

328, 333, 347; constr., 856; in

871.

M

compounds and forms, 1217.

KuXvu: use, 838, 863. constr., 521,

Kvpios: voc. of, 466; gen. or abl., 503;

761, 785

pi:

210, 216, 362.

-jia: suffix, 151, 153, 230. f.;

644.

art.,

mod.

Gk., 870; meaning, 828.

772.

kvkXw: case-form, 295

and

part., 1122.

Xvw: accent, 230; reading, 202; form,

kvkX60€v: use, 644. KuXiw:

c.

gen., 515.

XvTpov: discussed, 175.

Kxi^w: use, 896.

and

case, 473.

807,

1217.

Doric, 249.

KTdopiai: voice of, 810;

KTt
and

use, 871;

Xvirt'ti):

Xvirt):

KpvTTTw:

forms, 409.

AiPepTivos: constr., 788.

riv,

886. Kpc|iaH-ai:

f.

1217; constr., 541.

ing, 865. f.,

1039, 1048

f.

KpaT€«: constr., 455, 475, 511;

277

ff.,

-XciTT-: root, 197. XiliTO):

348, 361, 907, 1217; use, 895

Kp€iVo-wv: form,

and forms, 329,

339, 1217; constr., 480, 484, 626, 1084; and tlwov, 838, 883; use, 866;

Kpd|3aTos: spelling, 213. Kpd^o):

compounds

Xe'Yw:

796.

art.,

com-

XaTp€v(o: constr., 540.

forms, 1217.

and

Kdo-|ios:

1127, 1135; perf.

meaning, 829.

ff.;

pounds and forms, 1217.

use, 777.

KO(r|i,iKos:

899

XavGdvo): constr., 551, 1102, 1120;

1217.

Koiridw: forms, 341. Kopevvvfi,!,:

of,

939, 1217; use of

f.,

aor. part., 859,

compounds and

878;

use,

compounds and forms

f.

KoWotJpiov: readings, 202. Konf^w:

form, 1217.

Xdo-Kco:

use, 873; in or. obi., 1048; a

XaXe'io:

Koivcovos: constr., 504.

KoXXdu: voice

X: 211, 216, 352, 356. Xa-: in comp., 164.

f.,

795.

KwXvw: constr., 1089, 1171.

|ia0>iT£vw: constr., 475; voice Ma09aios: speUing, 215. -fitti:

of,

800.

per. end., 340.

(xdKap: adj., 272. fjiaKpdv:

adv., 294; adjectival, 547.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS (laKpo-: in

comp., 164.

comp., 164, 561;

|A€Td: in

IxdXicTTa: use, 279, 298, 663, 670.

jidWov: constr., 276, 278

elision,

223;

in phrases, 226; origin, 249; cases

298, 663.

f.,

12G3

Mavao-o-fjs: form, 268.

with,

491,

524,

531,

569

533,

f.;

and aOv, 526, 626 f. frequency, 5.56; in mod. Gk., 557; c. verbs, 560, 562; case-form, 570; and iv, 588; and Kara, 607; discussed, 609-12; and wpos, 625; with radra, 704; c. ;

jiavedvw: in or. obL, 1040; c. inf., 1103;

compounds and forms, aor.

(Aap-rupew: or. obL,

1036.

on

[lapTvpta:

with, 1033.

with

(j.dpTvs:

1217.

850; use, 894; in

of,

inf.,

136, 414; 6rt with,

art.,

1033. \i.i:

(xeraPatvw: forms, 328.

prep, in

mod. Gk.,

|A€"yaXw(rvvT): spelling,

570.

.53.5,

p.€Ta8t8wp.i: constr.,

201.

tive of, 670.

854.

spelling, 206.

forms

368

of,

periphrastic

use, 882, 921,

1217; and

f.,

forms,

877

891;

889,

1082, 1126;

ff.;

c.

inf.,

1056, 1078; use of part., 1118.

^Li^l.vr]^i,al.

in or. obi., 1040.

(i.€fi(f)op.ai:

constr., 473, 475.

(j.ev:

428,

c.

695

OS,

747;

erepos,

c.

1145;

1183;

c.

c.

694;

aXXos,

1150-3;

c.

Kai,

ow, 1191.

and

comp., 164.

s, 221, 296; and axPh 639; use, 645, 954, 975; in prepositional phrases, 792; c. inf., 979,

|i€xpi:

final

401,

423,

874 f., 929, 934, 962, 1004, 1156-66; in interrogation, 917 f.; meaning, 930; in prohibitions, 947; 951;

c. t's, ff.,

c. tva,

995

-|A€vai: inf. end.,

987 ff., 995 1016 ff.; c.

^i.ivovvyi•.

use, 425.

iUvroi: use, 424, 1154, 1188. fitvw:

constr.,

compounds and

475;

forms, 475, 1218; aor. p.6pi(j.vda):

[lepos: use, fA€'crov:

art.,

775;

6t,

c. irwj,

985

995 f.;

in

f.; c. Trore,

in condition.s,

1024

985,

f.;

in

1011 or.

f.,

obL,

command, 1046;

1045;

in indirect

1061, 1066, 1093

ff.; c.

part.,

1136ff.; discussed, 1166-77. use, 428, 1173, 1185.

iir]Si:

form, 219; use, 282, 292, 750

f.,

1094, 1156ff.

with

use, 550;

f.;

ff.,

c. inf.,

liTlSeCs:

use, 644, 648.

Mio-a-lar-

433.

850, 856.

487.

Mto-oTTOTafxCa: ji«Vos:

of,

constr., 853.

987

983; Sttwj,

c.

f.;

final clauses,

370.

751,

f.,

oi>,

987

373.

436

430,

850-4, 890, 916, 925, 931, 933 f., 937, 941 f., 962 f., 981; c. oi, see

-H«v: per. end., 370.

-fjitvo-: suffix,

509.

form, 244; c. ttSs, 292, 752 f.; c. yhoLTo, 325, 854, 939 f., 1003; use,

749; antithetic, 750,

discussed, c.

424;

art.,

705;

c. ovTos,

f.;

use, 879.

JIT):

747, 749,. 1145, 1186;

4.32,

and asyndeton, 440; and

fierpio-: in

330,

particle, 302; postpositive,

5e,

|i£TaT(0Tj[ii:

1074.

compounds and forms, 1217.

\U\
819.

fi€Toxos: constr., 505.

tense, 824; constr., 857, 870,

in

of,

use, 645.

|i€T€X(o: constr.,

p,e\avT
voice

reading, 1010.

with verbs, 562; origin, 626;

|i«Ta^v:

forms, 272, 274, 277; in comparison, 663.

iidloiv:

|ji€ipo|iai:

(ji6Ta|i€7^.o(iai:

fitTavoe'w:

(AeOuo-Kw: constr.,

510.

fi.€TaXa|ipdvw: constr., 510, 519.

forms, 294; use, 661; superla-

fjte'Yas:

858, 909, 979, 1060, 1069, 1074,

1092.

art.,

with

M«<7f, c. iv,

spelling,

214

788.

581; and 1210.

8ca,

f.;

use, 416,

firiStv:

use, 1156ff.

fXTjeti's:

form, 219, 282; use, 282, 750

1094, 1156 HTJv:

form, 929, 1151; 1161.

c.

c. ov, fiT|-iroT€:

f.,

ff.

use, 203, 1173.

d, 1004, 1024;

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1264

use, 1173.

(xirjircos:

|x^Tis:

vCiTTw:

verbs: use, 147, 335

discussed,

f.;

345

of,

350

ff.,

ff.,

|iiaCv(o:

forms, 1218.

\Lly\ua:

spelling, 230.

480; in

780; and

voice

or. ohl.,

1036

f.

796.

art.,

810.

of,

votJV€X"s: use, 297.

317,

-vs: ace. end., 265.

-VT-: part, end., 373.

1218. 487,

constr.,

IxiUVTJo-Ka):

com-

509;

pounds and forms, 1218. [iCa-yta: compounds and forms, 1218. voice

fiio-Odw:

806.

voew: in or. obi., 1036.

vo£5w:

compounds and forms,

(xCyvdhi:

MitvXtjvt]: readings, 199.

509; in

constr.,

or.

ohl.,

1035, 1041.

p.6\is: use,

in,

constr., c. 5^,

470, 495.

311.

546

f.;

use,

1117,

548,

1013.

wvl: use, 290, 1147; loc. form, 523. vv|: dat. form, 249; gen. merging into adverb, 295; with eu, 523. vvio-crw:

compounds and forms, 1218.

-vu: verbs

forms, 1218.

Hvrio-T€vw:

T||i€pav:

-wni: verbs 1147;

-iHL~: 214. p.vT]fj.ov€va):

in verbs, 147, 351.

vvKTa Kal

vw:

809.

of,

-W-:

MiTvXtivaios: use, 199.

in,

147.

296.

-fjiovTJ: suffix,

151.

use, 423, 549, 657, 659; nSvop

and

adv., 657, 659; c. 6v,

1161

-|i.6s: suffix,

jiocrxo-: in ixvpioi:

of,

-vvw: in verbs, 352.

vofios: use,

306.

-jii: suffix,

243, 414;

fT.

voixC^w: constr.,

358.

(iovos:

voice

-VV-: 213

form, 292; use, 743, 751.

306-20; forms

art., 136,

865.

use, 1172.

p.'qTi:

with

viKU)v

forms, 203; constr., 475; meaning,

constr., 501.

|iTJTiip:

-|ii

viKau:

use, 427, 1179; discussed, 1189.

jji^T€:

f.;

151

novov

art.,

c. nT],

776;

ixovov

1162.

^:

209, 216, 230.

levi^ofAai: constr., ^T]paivo>:

f.

comp., 164.

836,

847, 12ia.

use, 283.

Mcocrfis: spelling, 203,

475.

compounds and forms,

205; forms, 268.

|w: form, 626 f. ^upaw: forms of, 342, 1218; voice

of,

809. -|a: aor. in, 349.

N medial, 214

v:

f.,

final,

264

274, 296.

vd: in

f.,

340, 352, 356, 362,

216,

1210;

219-21,

258

f.,

o:

994.

6,

370

f.,

196, 198-201,

'H,

to: c. vtKuv, 136, 243,

414; crasis

of Tov, 208; as demonstrative, 290;

-VO-: in verbs, 351. vaC: discussed, 1150. -vai: inf. end.,

vowel-changes, 189

308, 324, 367; prothetic, 1209.

mod. Gk., 923, 933, 940, 982,

c.

ea-TLP,

411; constr., 502;

c.

inf.,

122, 287, 512, 584, 587, 599, 659,

f.

990,

996,

1001

1039

-v€-: in verbs, 352.

858,

v€av£as: type, 256.

1042, 1054-69, 1078, 1080; reading,

v€os:

meaning, 176; comparative

VT|:

discussed, 1150.

VI1-: prefix,

of,

599; discussed, 693-5, 754-96; ovTos,

664. 161, 163.

vii<ms: form, 275.

ff.,

700;

c. eKelvos

and

6Xos,

f.,

c.

708;

relative, 734 f.; with aXXos, 747; and aor, part., 859 f.; in relative clauses,

in

Homer, 711; as

c. Tis,

739;

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 956; in

forms

c. ibf,

1107;

1211.

of,

289

and

f.;

693

f.,

702

o5ros,

and

f.;

art.,

oSn-yew: reading, 1010.

and

contraction

o/v.

of,

contraction

of,

325, 342.

contraction

of,

308.

524, 588; in or.

dat. end.,

520.

-ov: per. end., 335, .348.

compounds and forms,

317,

forms, 310.

otSa: forms, 239, 319, 329, 337, 357,

1035

f.,

1045;

801;

c. inf.,

olKoSo(t£b):

gvirep:

obi.,

-ovTo: per. end., 340. 6vT«s: form, 295, 298.

1062, 1103.

of,

g-n-ep:

ottCo-w:

oliiai:

use, 406, 1082; c.

oii,

with verbs, 562; use, 645. 291, 1176 f.; and toioDtos,

710; discussed, 732;

1162,

291; and tolovtos, 710; dis6rt,

1034; in

or.

oiroTc: use, 8-Trov:

266; loc. ending,

disputed

reading,

use, 1120.

om, 199.

6k: for

compounds and forms,

compounds and forms,

317,

compounds and forms, 1218.

8\os: with Kara, 607; with ouros, 705;

TTOXUS,

art.,

774.

708, 768, 771

f.,

994; in final

indirect

command, 1046; with

f.;

in or. obi., 1045; in inf.,

8pa: use, 330, 430, 874, 932, 935.

compounds and forms,

1211,

1218;

823; in

1218; use, 893.

with

992

994

188,

324, 339, 344, 348, 364, 368, 876,

oXC^os: use, 660.

oXXvw:

IVa,

clauses,

opdu:

f.

iiXXvfjii:

980, 987; discussed,

fiv,

1056.

oKTw: use, 282. 6\€9p€tla>:

548; use, 712, 722, 1045.

731, 933, 953, 980,

use, 430,

982; with

985-7; and

469.

f.,

or. obi.,

oirrdvw: voice of, 820. gTTws:

452. irapaXCav:

740;

300, 971.

adv., 298

969; in

1045.

-ois: dat. ending, 249,

irolos,

oTTorav: use, 971.

-oio: archaic gen. end., 494.

and

and

in or. obi., 1045.

-olv: inf. end., 194, 343, 371.

ol'xo|iai:

710.

use, 645.

oirotos: use,

adv., 295.

189

LXX,

use in

889.

T'fjv

on

oo: use, 202.

oilKoi:

obi.,

649;

reading, 291, 710, 1154.

838,

SiTia-Qtv:

f.;

circumlocution,

or.

compounds and forms

cussed, 731

"pregnant construction,"

in

in apposition with, 1033.

365, 1218; constative aor.,833; fut.,

olos: use,

in

use,

904; in

form, 296.

ol'KaSr.

iivo|x,a:

525;

1212.

473, 475, 480.

oveiSC^to: constr., ov(vT)|ii:

voice,

1035, 1041.

obi.,

mod. Gk., 1146.

and augment, 367; old

406;

298;

295,

1140, 1154, 1188; in

use, 423,

«(i«s:

vowel-change, 195, 198, 204, 326;

1128; meaning,

from,

constr., 475, 480, 541, 1103; c. kv,

«9ev: constr., 548, 969.

363,

forms

6|j.oXo-y€(o:

01]:

01

compounds and forms, 1218.

6|Aotdw:

325, 342.

thematic vowel, 147, 323, 356.

oi!7vv(j.i:

form, 295, 296. 530, 1206.

gjxoios: constr.,

oi]:

oi:

317,

1032; with h,

588; use of aor. part., 859. 6|j.o0u|xa86v:

652, 1202.

ellipsis,

68vvdw: forms, 341. oe:

compounds and forms,

371; constr., 475, ©nvvw: constr., 484.

770.

68os:

per. end., 200.

6(iw|ii:

709; discussed,

f.,

form, 206.

o(i€fpo|iai: -o|j.€v:

uncontracted, 275.

8-y8oos:

gSe: use,

696

obi, 1045;

or.

proclitic

12G5

ff.;

with

or.

voice,

819

f.;

stems,

obi, 864, 1035, 1038,

1041; use, 871, 893, 901; use of 5pa

and

dpart,

lllS;perf. 6p-yt]^o|jLai:

932 of,

f.,

949; use of parts.,

1211.

meaning. 834.

.

.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1266

508.

6pe70|iai,: constr.,

708; use, 724, 951-3, 962-5, 967, 997, 1054 f., 1085 f., 1122, 1176,

6p0o-: in comp., 164. opOds: use, 549, 659.

1192

6p9«s: use, 549, 659.

gation,

bpClm: constr., 863.

c.

opKtJw: constr., 475, 483.

ttXtju,

opvt^: spelling, 219.

and

6pos:

8

760.

art.,

-opos: ending, 199.

ov, ovK, ovx:

and

c.

jiev

710; in Homer, 711;

iffTLv,

713; and ocrns, 726;

728; and

of,

with

731; and

olos,

and

antithetic, 750;

820; with

attraction,

959; and

kdv,

961;

S.y,

Kara, 967; in consec. clauses,

1001; in

obi, 1044

or.

-os: ending, 157,

260

f .,

263, 268, 274.

-oo-av: per. end., 63, 335, 343.

8
732

discussed,

710;

956

ff.;

f.,

in or.

obL, 1045; use, 1177. 8cP'Tr€p:

use, 291.

So-Tis:

form, 290

T0I.OVTOS,

and

Tts,

710;

959-61; in

use, 693, 928;

1044

and

726-31;

956

rel. clauses,

or. obi,

f.,

f.

clauses,

957

and

489

f.,

oZ: accent,

ff.;

1136ff.;

1183;

/cat,

229; use, 286, 298

f.,

301,

ovd: use, 1193.

gender, 270, 410; interjection, 302; in eUipsis, 391; case with, 487 use, 1193. elision, 207, ff.,

1210; and eh, 751

1185.

form, 219; use, 282, 292, 1094 726; discussed, 750.

1156 ff. form, 219; use, 282, 750, 1094.

ovSev: use, oieets:

ovKoOv: accent, 233, 1165, 1175; use,

ofiv:

part, end., 374.

443

use, 424, 434,

f.,

841; in in-

terrogation, 916; discussed, 1191

f.

-ovv: verb end., 341, 343.

form, 296.

-ovpos: ending, 199. -ovs: adj. end., 274. oijTc.

use, 428,

ff.;

ff.,

1179; discussed,

form, 292; use, 743, 751.

oStos: c.^cTTt, 207, 223 f.,244, 411, 416;

and

233; and 6

rt,

hia-

243,

291; Sn-clauses, 393, 400, 426, 430, 1001; and ovtos, 699;

1156

1189.

ff.

Ill, 120, 371, 437, 442,

kffTip,

c.

1016

717, 722, 969; discussed, 679.

oiJTis:

584, 966, 1054

tus, 206; c.

f.,

f.;

Kai,

proclitic, 1211.

ovtos,

compar. end., 278. inf..

1154-77;

discussed,

temp,

8 T€: in Attic, 290.

gri:

962,

— aXXd

part.,

c.

ff.;

in

970 ff. adv., 300 f.; use, 953, 970

-6T€pos:

c. fj.6voi>

and f.;

clauses, «T€:

850, 854, 942,

ovpavos: use, 408.

Srav: use, 300, 325, 968; rel.

1093

inf.,

oii-iTto:

ocrrpaKivos: form, 158.

700; in

^r,,

933,

f.,

c. els,

917, 1165, 1175.

discussed,

737; in

c.

929,

947; in conditions, 1011

-oi)|j.€vos: f.;

751;

Tts,

889,

c. eo-xti' OS,

in rel. clauses,

f.;

c.

ff.,

965, 995;

f.,

987, 1004; in interrogation, 917

oiSeCs:

291.

form, 291; and ovtos, 698; and

966

937, 962

use, 1156

reading, 710.

TOIOVTOS,

751;

873

ovU:

8s dv 9«Xti: use, 961.

6o-8T|iroT€: use,

f.,

ovai:

f.

oo-dKis: use, 973.

6(r8T|ir£p:

ff

401, 418, 423

use,

meaning, 930;

with

c.

see oo-ns.

vowel-changes, 199, 202

953 f., 956, 959; discussed, 695 f., 711-26; and odros, 698, 703; 928,

6

1182;

c. /cat,

1187.

928

value

1027-49;

obi,

or.

negatives, 1173;

with CLP and edv, 72, 191; with ye, 244; with re, 290; 6p not expressed, 425; reading, 438; wv with verbs, 511; w with ki>, 587; use, 693, 706,

gs:

ToiovTos,

730; in interro-

otrrts,

916; in

-ov: in gen., 255, 295; in ace, 265.

compounds and forms, 1218.

opvo-o-w:

Ti:

ov:

and

f.;

and keiws,

use, 290, 401, 411, 419, 437,

693,

and 65e, 696; discussed, 697-706; and eKelvos, 708; pleonastic, 722 f.; and 6aos, 732; TovTo with Ti, 736; and art., 770; c. 720, 843;

c. a(jT6s,

686;

.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 771; and 6s, 723; c. iroXvs, 774; 6rt with prep, and, 1033 f.; c. inf., 1059; in idioms, 1111; c. Kal,

8,ira^,

1181.

and

298, 710;

oiros,

adv., 286,

f.;

705; use, 965,

968, 1140, 1146.

6^iXov: use, 923, 940, 1003

f.

©xXos: with

in, 147,

gen. form, .301.

xttp<5s:

meaning,

f.;

149, 342

351.

f.,

210, 223, 353, 1210.

tives,

c.

oWos,

705;

meaning, 865. meaning, 865.

7raTT|p:

irdXai: form, 296.

c. OS,

•ireSd:

x€5fj:

irdvTOTe: use, 300.

tTiCQu:

423.

comp., 165; origin, 249; case.301, 482, 570; cases with,

451, 491, 524, 534, 554, 565, 567, 569 f.; constr. in comp., 477, 542;

with verbs, 517 f., 560, 562; in "pregnant construction," 525; in adv. phrases, 550; frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 558, 570; use, 561; €K,

and

596; and

eis,

596; discussed, 612-6; and

irpos,

625; and vwo, 636; with comparatives, 667; in prepositional phrases,

792; for agent, 820; with irapa8C8wfii: forms, 309,

inf.,

1069.

347

and

art.,

788; use, 1038.

1102, 1121;

compounds

constr.,

540,

form, 260, 296, 301, 537.

c. inf.,

1084; voice

of,

compounds and forms

871, 1218.

of,

Ktivau: aor. form, 342, 371;

and

case,

474, 508. irtipd^w. TT^fiira):

voice

of,

802.

epistolary aor. of, 845

f.

use, 272.

ir€VT]s:

trevOtw: constr., 475.

nip:

intensive,

cussed, 1153 ir^pav

and

302, f.;

617,

1144; dis-

enclitic, 1211.

avrCirtpa: use, 646.

in comp.,

165, 477, 487, 542, 564; form, 301 f., 524, 570; with cases, 471, 491, 509, 524,

•Tr€p£:

562,

with verbs, 511, 560, 566; 556; in condensation, 567; and Kara, 608; discu.ssed, 616f.;

and Trpos, 626; and i-Trep, 629, 632; in prejxisitional phrases, 792; with inf., 1()()9; use, 616. 20;

irapaiWoiAai: voice of, 810.

irapaXajipdvco: readings, 336.

609.

fiera,

fr(K]uency,

irapaivtw: constr., 475.

irapaKaX^u: form, 943;

of,

464; art. with voc.

f.,

Case of, 249; for form, 295.

569

irapaOaXao-o-Ca: form, 273. irapal:

voc, 461

801, 810;

f.;

c.

woXvs,

and forms, 1218.

irovTaxoii: form, 296, 300; use, 299.

578

c.

957.

•n-avw: c. part.,

wavTaxTJ: form, 526.

&ir6,

732;

ocros,

compounds and forms

IlavXos: 197.

iravoiKcl: spelling, 197.

and

c.

1107;

ff.,

465.

of,

iraXiv: use, 300, 551.

form,

727;

1163;

708, 771

art.,

ndrtpa: use, 183.

xaGtiTos: use, 1097.

n-apd: in

751-3,

437, c.

292,

/xri,

327, 1218; with kukCs, 802; constr., 858.

irayaCvo):

irdvTctfs:

spelling,

nega-

ffdcrxw:

Tra(«rXii9e£: spelling,

1033;

c.

774;

n ird-yw:

with,

indecUnable Trap, 274; c. 752 f.; use, 419, 436, 744;

offTts,

it:

on

Trds:

645

517,

517.

-6u: verbs

meaning, 950. constr., 542, 855.

1210.

774.

iroXvs,

constr.,

646.

irap€xw: voice of, 810; constr., 853.

trappr\(rla:

6\\q—. in comp., 165.

6}\ii:

forms, 341.

irapeKTrfs: USC,

irapto-TT]fi,i:

use, 841, 886; constr., 1003.

o(j)€(\o):

TrapaxpTJfia: U.se, 550.

irapioT-dvw:

form, 290; use, 391, 917.

ovrxC:

TrapdXios: form, 273. 7rapaTrXT|aiov: U.se, 646.

irapeio-Svco:

form, 221, 295

oiiTco(s):

1267

1068.

irepid-yio:

constr., 480.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1268

voice

485

constr.,

•ircpipdXXo^ai:

S55;

f.,

voice

•jrepipXe'irw:

mean-

809, 813;

of,

ing, 838.

TTipit,o)vvv\i{,:

form, 330.

of,

485; voice

of,

815.

ircpiXaiipdvo): constr., 483.

etymology voice

of,

of,

constr.,

iT-vew:

and compounds, 317.

irt]\£Kos:

use, 292; discussed, 741; in

508; forms, 1218.

317,

774

iriirpdcrKw:

338,

329; aor.

of,

;

Trto-re^ere,

mood

850, 856; in or. obi,

origin,

159

—irXao-twv:

iricrTet.

voice

iroo-os: use,

of,

670,

compounds and forms, 1218. compounds and forms, 1218. in

discussed, 1187.

816, 820; constr.,

292; discussed, 740

f.,

f.;

in

160; use, 292; disobi.,

1045.

adv., 298, 300; with

TTore:

fxr,,

1173; meaning,

adv., 300; in or.

irdTcpov: in

987

ff.,

1147; en-

mod. Gk., 1146;

obi.,

1045.

double questions, 1177.

jTOTepos: use,

292; and

t/s,

736; dis-

cussed, 741; TvoTtpov an adv., 741,

1177. -iroTC^w: constr.,

irXTjOvvw: use, 871.

use, 646;

788.

of,

1045.

or. obi.,

iroTc:

775; in idiom, 775.

irXTiv:

230.

art.,

chtic, 1211.

proportional, 284, 673.

constr., 516.

665; superlative

art.,

856; use, 869, 874.

995

11, 533.

TrXeCwv: use,

irX^to:

and

cussed, 741; in or.

f.

gen. use, 499, 515, 704;

Heb.


IIovTos:

iroTairos: origin,

1036. -irioTTiKos:

294; constr., 532,

f.

irop€vo[j.ai:

m
ace. form,

660; in comparison, 664; with irofia: Spelling,

forms, 1218.

compounds and forms,

843, 1218; parts., 864, 1116.

•jrXeiov:

obi.,

TToXXdKis: form, 296.

340, 343, 371, 1218; use, 838, 883.

in

woias in

498; with k, 578.

TToXiis:

irtoTis:

f.;

732; equal to

form, 204; with Qvareipa,

iroXis: dat.

1206.

compounds and forms,

compounds and forms, 318. compounds and forms of, 204,

of,

oiroios,

1045.

1218.

trCvra:

and

291

735; discussed, 740; in or.

Tts,

-irCp.irpTjiAi:

trlva:

and

1068.

inf.,

interrogative,

Lu., 494;

forms, 1218.

ir^fXTrXrini.:

1045.

473; constr., 480, 850, 852,

923, 934; with irotos:

forms, 268.

iriOos: use,

or. obL,

548; in

form, 295.

854, 856; voice, 802, 812; use, 884,

1045.

irid^w: constr.,

compounds and forms, 1218.

ird0£v: constr.,

KttKws,

TTTiYvuiAi:

irifjxvs:

299.

iroUw: forms, 325, 327; with eu

form, 295.

ir^pa: use, 1201.

or. obi,

art.,

form, 342.

irvlyoi:

constr., 483, 485; voice of,

iroi:

iripva-i:

and

436, 590, 709;

7rv£v[iaTiKtos: use,

516; in

815.

•n-it^o):

compounds and forms, 1218.

761, 795.

comparison, 664. ir€piT£0T)|Ai:

form, 294; use, 646.

irXTJo-o-w:

irv«v|Aa: use,

form, 940.

use, 279;

irepicro-os:

851; use, 948.

•irX-qo-iov:

-ttXovs: adj. end., 284.

810.

irepippaivw: reading, 211. •7r€picr
325, 343; constr.,

of,

rrXoidpiov: constr., 521.

159.

855.

irspiiraTto): constr.,

iT€piirowa»:

forms

483, 510, 857; meaning, 834; aor.

U96, 1103.

ircpiovo-tos:

413, 464;

£f.,

constr., 1204.

f.;

xXtipo-: in comp., 165. irXi]p6w:

7r€pi£'pxoH^
ireptKeiiAal: constr.,

188, 274

irXVjpTis: indecl.,

voc, 463

807, 809, 819,

of,

TTov:

484.

accent, 234; use, 291, 298

mod. Gk., 723;

in

(yr.

obi.,

f.;

1045.

in

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 298

TTov: use,

—TTovXos:

f.,

1146; enclitic, 1211.

suffix, 146.

TTpao-iat: distributive,

use of

-irpdo-o-w:

673.

1058;

of,

c.

970, 1049;

c.

in periphrastic forms, 822.

7rpo4>9dvu): use,

1103, 1121.

ij,

irpwt: use,

295; and

700.

638.

d/za,

irpwivos: readings, 201.

position, 110; elision, 206; cases

comparison,

irpwTos:

283

constr. in comp.,

f.;

1120.

•irpox«Lpt<J"a(r9ai: constr.,

976 f., 1053; c. inf., 1074 f., 1091.

with, 451, 569

constr., 480; voice of, 810;

•irpoTC6Ti|it:

irpovirdpx^co: C. part.,

comparison, 277, 664.

use, 431, 954,

irpCv:

«5,

spelling, 201.

ij-p€crpvTT]s:

283; meaning,

280,

662; use, 669.

constr., 541.

n-pe-irto:

irpto-pvTepos: in

•jTpd:

inf.

649.

irpoTtpos: form,

compounds and forms, 1218.

1121;

comp., 165.

"TTpdcruTrov: use,

readings, 200; form, 274.

•irpdos:

Kpo
accent, 231.

irovs:

1269

280; ordinal, adverb, 294, 297,

ttpCtop

f.;

165, 477; separation implied, 517;

460, 657,

frequency, 556;

meral, 298; meaning, 516; use, 549,

and

620-2;

cussed,

and

phrases, 792;

622

irpos,

prepositional

c. inf.,

858, 891, 977,

978, 1061, 1074

f.,

1091.

TrpoSrjXov:

of,

irw: enchtic,

with on, 1034.

TTciiroTe:

p:

separation

implied,

517;

with verbs,

524,

542, 560

566; in mod. Gk., 570;

ff.,

airo,

570;

575; and

els,

596; and

613; discussed, 622-6; with 682; in prepositional phrases,

211-4, 216

-pa: words

ff.,

995

f.;

741, 985,

1032

f.;

in

in or. obl, 1045.

c. inf., 8,58,

990

f.,

1003, 1060,

peo)-.

225, 1218;

ending, 256, 275.

compounds and forms,

pTJo-
212,

318, 1219.

forms, 211,

874. 'PiijiTi: initial

Trp6
f.,

compounds and forms, 1219.

pCirrw: 3I^0\'^'i.a\!,

352, 356, 364.

piina: breathing, 225.

trpoo-SoKdu): in or. obl.. 1036.

form,

f.,

voice, 807.

-pT]s:

•7rpo(r€iJX.o|J.ai.:

225

256.

^avrCtw: forms of, 211

1069, 1075, 1088. irpocravaPafvw: form, 328.

f.,

in,

pappct: 41b, 433.

TTopd,

792;

302,

mod. Gk., 1028;

case-form,

fi€,

987

comp., 165; accent, 234; final of, 248; frequency of use,

f.;

and

use,

ir«s:

451, 491, 556; cases with, 491, 524,

569

/xr],

enclitic, 1211.

477.

irpooptjw: constr., 480.

letter

f.

form, 249; use, 896.

use, 298; with

-TTws:

irpoKaTav-ytWoj: in or. obl., 1036.

rrpds: in

212

1211.

-ir«: origin, 296.

338.

jrpo«pxo|xai,: constr.,

671.

els,

meaning, 834. meaning, 665.

iTru))(^ivo):

Tr\jpp6s: spelling,

845.

irp6So|Aa: spelling, 200. irpoeiirov: spelling,

and

f.;

in verbs, 351, 353.

iruvBdvofAai: forms, 1218.

7rpoaiTido|xai: in or. obl., 1036.

epistolary aor.

—ITT-:

nu-

TrpJjrws

irvKvorepos:

irpoaYw: constr., 857, 871.

•iTpo7pd<{)u:

1152;

659,

657, 659, 662, 669

f.;

in

630;

iirkp,

verbs, 560; dis-

c.

188. ^«4vv\j|xi:

2.30.

212.

/i,

forms, 318, 330, 908.

irpoo-KaXtw: voice of, 809. Trpoo-KvXtw: constr., 543. irpoa-KWiot: constr., 455,

476 f ., 540, 990.

Trpoo-Xa|xpdv«: constr., 510, 519; voice

irpoo'<|>^p(<>:


s:

210, 214

267, 296,

of, 80!).

form, 338.

f.,

34(),

-o-a: per. end.,

218, 220

f.,

223, 248,

354-6, 362, 1210.

305.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1270

o-dppaTov: with

kv,

523.

verb end., 329, 340

-o-ai:

o-jrdto: f.,

369

f.

form, 210.


etymology, 158 f. etymology, 158.

o-apKiKos: o-oLpKivos:

o-ardv: in papyri, 287. o-pevvu[Jii:

forms, 318, 1219.

-o-e: suffix,

verbs

-o-€iw:

in,

928.

in,

150, 351.

gender

o-eXrivTi:

of,

o-eo/e: fut. suffix, -o-Ti:

itacism

orTjixa^vw:

in,

252.

354

forms,

use, 176.

o-T)p.€pov:

form, 294.

compounds and forms,

voice

compounds

o-rpwvvvw:

801.

voice

verb end., 186, 370.

jTTvXos: accent, 186.

-a-Qa: per. end., 328.


pronominal suf-

forms, 268.

denoting action, 151

o-itoTrdw: use,

883, 908; reading, 1010.

forms,

1219.

o-KviX\aj:

-o-koj:

voice

verbs

of,

in,

-o-o: per. end.,

use, 693;

in or.

voice

807.

150.

340.

form,

kKelvos,

1043.

ohl.,

811; in

or. ohl.,

528.

460;

distributive,

constr., 1084.

(rv|i(f>
o-vji<J)va):


562,

reading, 1010.

comp., 165, 216

827

f.;

LXX

frequency,

and

kv,

528

f.,

451;

556; with verbs,

588; and

cussed, 626-8;

form, 286, 288; use, 682, 684,

f .,

use,

558,

case

with, 53?,"^J'^:.; use in Attic, 553;

nera, 526, 610;

-orov: per. end., 329.

528.

form, 341.

2oXo[nov: spelling, 268.

689; with avTos, 687.

of,

o"u |i|xop(}>os: constr.,

-tro/e: fut. suffix, 355.

o-c5s:

and

f


meaning, 829. verb suffix, 352.

o-KTivdco:

-o-Ko:

418; voc, 461; dis-

o-vn<j)VTos: constr.,

352.

compounds and

f.;

673.

compounds and forms, 1219.

o-K€TrTO(Aai,:

forms,

314.


suffix,

of,


1036

ff.

o-Kdv8aXov: liistory of, 174.

verb

and

1211.

of,

o-v|iPo\)Xev(o:

verbs, 352.

-
forms,

position of, 779; encUtic

0-0 0,

«ru5'^7VV|Ai:

meaning, 834; constr., 857.

o-KaTTTw:

707;

forms

306.

-cridw: verbs in, 150.

o-k:

position

cussed, 678

-o-0«
-o-L-s:

and

1219.

-(r0€: per. end., 186.

o-ivairi:

compounds

800;

of,

and forms, 1219. compounds o-Tptovvv|jii: 318, 1219.

o-tjitcd:

o-i^dto:

230,

1068.

inf.,

use, 649.

oTpt^xo:

-
fix,

320,

o-Tparo-: in comp., 165.

f.

-o-i: dat. ending, 249;

315,

224,

188,

a~Toi\iu: use, 329.
928.

crTi(A€iov:

346,

1219; reading, 1010.

1219; with

in or. ohl., 1036.

of,

compounds and forms,

o-TTipi^w:

compounds and forms, 1219.

crei'w:

form, 275.

oT^Kw:

296.

itacism

-
form, 198.


1219; use of part., 1134.

form, 226; use, 288, 687-90.

o-€avTov:

erreipto:

o-T€XX«:

forms, 1219.

o-pevvvo):

299.

form, 296.

o-TTOvSfj:

784.

o-dpt: use,

of,

compounds and forms,

compounds and forms, 1219.

o-iretpw:

mod. Gk., 974.

o-dv: in

meaning, 564, 828; voice

805, 810;

1219.

o-aXirC^w: constr., 853. 2a(A
NEW TESTAMENT

Kara,

and -wpbs, 625; and ana, 627.


o-uvavrdw: use of part., 1135. (rvvep-yos:

substantival, 504.

560;

606; and dis-

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 1097.

o-uv€t6s: use,

voice

o-\ivex«:

ending,

-
compar. end., 277

-rtpos:

808; meaning, 828.

of,

1271

T£(r
o-vvio-rdvw: constr., 480.

T€TapTos: form, 284.

form, 296.

TerpdKis'-

meaning, 828. orvvTt9€|xai: with inf., 1068.

T'qXtKoo-Sc: use,

(rvvTt]pi(o:

compounds and forms, 1219. com-

pounds and forms, 1219.

and

o-wTT|pios:

constr.,

meaning,

850;

598,

828. 154.

153

-TTis: suffix, 151,

156,256, 272.

f.,

t£ dv BeXou in or. obi, 1044.

786.

art.,

771.

art.,

-Tifipiov: suffix,

use, 1206.

crwTTJp:

and TT]p«'<«):

constr., 598; part., 891;

|ia:

709.

TTiXtKovTos: form, 290; use, 709, 731;

oXsSdv: form, 295. o-ci^w:

form, 183.

T€Tpa-: in comp., 165.

use, 896.


ar<^aX,<ji:

298, 600.

Tco-trapecTKaiSfKaTOs: form, 284.

1.56.

(Tuv^iii: in or. obi., 1040.


f.,

reading, 266, 282.

T€'(r
form, 272.

compounds and forms,

tC0t)|ii:

310,

318, 347, 1219; constr., 480; use,

900.

T t:

TiKTw: forms, 1219.

218, 223, 248, 352, 1210,

Ta8€: use,

289

696.

f .,

TLjAdo):

forms, 305, 334.

tCs:

and

t'l

hiatus, 206; interrogative,

—rai: per. end., 340.

291

TaX€i0d: voc.

395, 539, 730; with gen., 515; dis-

of,

465.

1084;

compounds and

and

670; in mod.

Ti c.

forms, 1219. f.,

tIs: tl

rdxiov: form, 278

T€':

f.,

rel.,

position,

427

f.,

Tl

290; conj., 424;

c.

re,

301,

427;

1178

f.;

Kai,

c.

432, 566, 789; use, 434; in

Homer, 711;

TtXeidu: reading, 987. 8.34;

use,

901;

c.

compounds and forms,

1219.

Te'tAvw:

-r€os:

372

form,

verbal 4,S();

157,

with gen., 515; 584; and

tl c. 5td,

698; in Homer, 711; and

with

750;

1164; and

tis,

negative, art.,

751,

art.,

987

f.,

156

f.;

778, 796.

185; denoting quota-

ToiYttpovv: use, 425, 1154.

Tolvvv: use, 425, 1154.

1219.

771.

1219.

ToioiiTos:

304,

discussed, 1095

T^pas: use, 176.

f.,

425;

739; discussed, 741-4; antithetic,

Toido-8*:

compounds and forms, compounds and forms, f.,

adverb, 547;

234

sentence,

in

tion, 243; with ''Ayap, 254, 411; forming adv. phrase, 294 f., 487; with Xonrou, 470, 487; with inf., 966. Tot: use, 302; discussed, 1154 f.

with gen., 497, 651. T€KTo~: in comp., 165.

meaning,

hiatus, 206; enclitic,

position

not the

T€Kvo-: in comp., 165.

reXXw:

f.;

1040;

rlva,

to: sub.stantivized neut. adj.,

enclitic, 1211.

T€Kvov:

part., 1121;

and

ovTos,

-T€: ending, 296.

TtKio)-.

1176; in subj., 9-34

f.,

1034; accent of

TLva constr., 490;

297.

form, 294, 298.

c.

916 oTi.,

1211;

use, 664.

rdxitTTos: form, 294, 669. Taxvi:

740;

in or. obi., 1044.

Gk., 668. TavPTd: crasis, 208. Tdx,€i.ov:

c. ttoTos,

739, 741; tL in interroga-

TI.S,

tion,

-raros: form, 277, 279

916, 933, 940; rl in idioms,

cussed, 735-40, 1176;

-rafios: early end., 279. Tdo-o-«: constr.,

f.,

ff.

320,

form, 290; use, 709; and use,

Siroios, ToXfj.d
290,

732; and

stems

-ros: verbal

of,

710,

art.,

731;

art.,

and

771.

S23.

form, 157

f.,

304,

320,

.

372

f.;

comparison of verbals

in,

276; superlative ending, 283; adv. end., 296; constr., 504; discussed,

1095

ff.

709.

TocrocrSe: use,

Too-ovTos: use, 290, 710;

and

art.,

771.

pronominal, 298; use, 300; constr., 429; in Mt., 443, 549.

TOTt:

—row: gen., 262.

TpaxwvtTis: with art., 788. Tpeis: forms, 282.

compounds and forms,

Tp^TTw:

359,

1219. Tp€'<j)w:

use; 203

;

compounds and forms,

compounds and forms,

Tpexco:

870,

tp-irdpxw: c. part.,

1102, 1120.

meaning, 634. xiir^p: in comp., 165, 477; adverb, 293 450; constr., 784; cases with, 491 569 f.; separation implied, 517 frequency, 556; with verbs, 560 in condensation, 567; with avri 573 f.; and kiri, 600; and /card, 607 and Trept, 616, 618; and irpos, 623 discussed, 628-33; with comparavirdKbi:

with

inf.,

iiirepdvw: USB, 550,

646.

tives, 667;

1069.

uirepdvtoGcv: use, 647.

297

f.

viTrepKdrwGev: use, 647. virepeKeiva: USe, 647.

1220.

uTr€p€Kir€picr(rou: use,

TpiaKOvra: form, 283.

compounds and forms, 1220.

TpC^w:

viravrdw: meaning, 634.

iiircppaXXovTws: origin,

359, 1220.

Tp£s:

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1272

iiirepPCav: use,

form, 284, 296.

uTTo:

form, 223, 226; constr. in comp.,

165, 477, 542; cases with, 491, 517,

Tpwrx^Xioi: use, 283. rp^Tos: in

647.

550.

mod. Gk., 284.

534,

532,

524,

569

536,

case-

f.;

frequency,

556;

-rpov: nominal suffix, 174.

form,

Tpoiro-: in comp., 165.

with verbs, 560, 562; in condensation, 567; with aird, 575, 579; and

Tvyxavw:

constr.,

509,

1120;

com-

pounds and forms, 1220.

5td,

524,

570;

582; and

iiri, 600; and irapa, 630; discussed, 633-6;

Tvx6v: adv. ace, 488, 490, 1130.

615; and

—rw:

in prepositional phrases, 792; for

per. end., 328.

agent, 820; with inf., 1069. {nropdWw: meaning, 634,

—rwcrav: per. end., 328, 336.

v:

inrkp,

-inroStiKvuixi:

aor. of, 848.

{iiroSe'xoiAai:

meaning, 633. meaning, 633.

vowel-changes, 185, 195, 198-202,

tiTTo^wvvvni:

205, 230, 265; stems in, 247, 249.

v-iroKdrw: Use, 647.

v^Llo):

tiTToKdrwOcv: use, 637.

case, 473.

gen. use, 495; loc. use, 521, 533,

•590.

—uia: -v£iis:

forms

in,

of,

274

viroXa|ipdv(o:

f

463; with gen., 497

form, see

f.,

195

f.;

discussed,

288, 684.

—u|Ai: verbs in, 311. —uv«: in comps., 147, itrayia: COnstr.,

855

meaning,

constr., 483, 509;

inroirXe'w: xiiro-irve'to:

150, 213.

f.;

use of vwaye,

949. viraKovw: constr., 507; meaning, 634.

mean-

ing, 634. virovoe'w: in or. obi.,

678. v(iiT€po5: use,

480;

meaning, 634.

iiroXeCirw:

{iirofii(xvT|(rK«:

cb,

constr.,

633.

275.

501, 651, 781. i|icts:

meaning, 633. meaning, 633.

iiTTOKpio-is:

viroKpiTTis:

participles in, 256,

mds: voc.

1036.

xiTTOKpCvojAai: in or. obi.,

275.

t>-yiir]s:

iiScop:

and

iiiroo-ToXT):

uiroTa'YTi

:

1036.

meaning, 634. meaning, 634. gen., 515.

use, 819.

inroTdo-a-o):

use, 946.

voice

of,

807,

809,

817;

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS viTorCBr\\L\.

:

{i-iroTpt'xw:

meaning, 633. meaning, 634.

iio-Ttpew: constr., of,

807.

voice

4>iia>:

in or. obL, 1033, 1042.

<}>wvT|: <J>ws:

gen. use, 496

X: 215

f.

form, 340; use, 883, 1063.

(jxi-yu):

compounds and forms,

4>atva):

1040;

or. obi.,

and

4)avep(5s:

328,

1220; use, 868; in

341, 349, 871,

c.

art.,

part., 1102, 1120.

and forms, 295, 298, 1220. compounds and forms, <|>€'pw:

338,

363, 430, 1220; stems, 823; constr.,

855; use, 882, 1097; use of

(f>kpe,

compounds and forms,

<{>€VYa>:

forms

clitic

1120; 4>96ipw:

<|>i(j.6(o:

305, 310,

1036,

1211.

and

577; aor.

of,

1046. <}>opos:

and

<j>oivi|:

accent, 230.

758.

mod. Gk., 284.

spelling, 201.

^opTClo): constr., 484. 4>pd(r
*pv-y(a:

forms, 1220.

with

art.,

788.

4)U7ds: use, 272. 4>\)\aKT|-.

with

e:>,

and

652, 1202.

ellipsis,

X€u: X06's:

compounds and forms,

XtXioi: use, Xis':

1220.

form, 206.

281

f.

283.

Xoivi|: accent, 230.

Xopa^tv: spelling, 205.

compounds and forms,

Xpdo|iai:

319,

XPTH-aTi^w: in or. obi., 1036.

reading, 330; use, 908.

4)opd: in

1069.

920.

comp., 105.

art.,

inf.,

341, 1220; constr., 476, 530, 532,

249.

airo,

647; with

X?s': 283.

case,

852

871, 995, 997; in indirect

<j)op6'a>:

1039;

1156, 1162; en-

551; use, 842, 1102,

^o^ioi: accent; 232;

with

xdpiv: position, 425; prep., 488; use,

XeCp: use, 649;

use, 1003, 1201.

<}>iXo-: in

Xapd: gen., 515. Xapt^ofAttt: forms, 341, 1220.

346,

compounds and forms, 1220. compounds and forms, 1220.

-4)i: suffix,
obi,

c. oi,

of,

constr.,

c|)0dva):

or.

compounds and

1122;

part.,

of,

X«tpwv: form, 278, 669.

compounds and forms, 905; in

c.

X«^Kappos: forms, 275.

319, 337, 342, 346, 434, 899, 902;

constr., 1083;

use, 871; use of xaipt"',

949.

828, 1220; constr., 476.

use,

329 817 944, 1093

sense,

855; voice

509,

Xa|iaC: case-form, 296, 521, 537.

compounds

origin, 295, 298;

<J)£C8ofi.ai:

constr.,

forms, 1220.

764.

OTL with, 1033.

<})do-is:

222, 359.

f.,

"Xa: adv. suffix, 296. Xatpo: inf. with imp.

215, 222, 353, 359.

<J)T)fiC:

compounds and

constr., 480.

vi\i6it):

<},:

800;

of,

forms, 1220.

form, 294; meaning, 662. form, 279, 669.

i!4/i«rTos:

spelling, 203, 342.

4>x)ori6a):

476, 519, 541; voice

814.

vcTTcpos:

constr., 477, 483; voice of,

<|>uXdoro-
ending, 202.

-vppiov:

1273

523.

Xpio-(j.a:

472 f.;

f.;

use,

command,

accent, 230.

Xpio-Tos:

spoiling,

192, 230; accent,

with h, 587, 784; with th, 592; and art., 760 f., 795; and 'lri
XpCw: constr., 483; forms, 1220. xpc'vos:

with

if,

compounds and

523; case, 527

f.,

543.

Xpovo-: in comp., 165. Xpi)o-6s:

form, 202; reading, 274.

Xu>pa: form, 248;

and

ellipsis,

form, 369; use of reading, 10S2.

\o)pi(a:

272, 1202.

inf.,

XupCs: position of, 425; use, 647

1030;

f.

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1274

aSpa: icpav acc. of

^. 209, 230. constr., 854.

\|/T]\a<}>d,
opt. form, 327; constr., 508.

xlrux^xos: origin, 158.

tj/tofjit^a):

t|fvX«>:

431, 481, 661,

674; and toiovtos,

710; use, 953, 963, 967 982, 1032;

c.

constr., 484.

compounds and forms, 1220.

1093;

1091,

1000

f.;

f.,

974, 980,

on, 964, 1049;

966; discussed, 987;

use, 689.

ijnixTi:

kv,

is: origin, 295, 301; constr., 302, 401,

x|/dXX«: use, 874. \|;£v8ojj.ai:

time, 470; with

523.

c.

consec.

in

c.

part.,

inf.,

990,

clauses,

in conditions, 1021, 1025;

in Lu., 1030;

c. iiu,

1040; use, 1130,

1140, 1193; procUtic, 1211.

a «: 178, 196, 199-203, 324, 367.

compar. end., 276; verb end., f ., 335, 350 f. &: use with voc, 463, 1193. wSe: pronominal, 298; use, 299, 548;

-«:

306, 315

reading, 696. w/tj:

thematic vowel, 323.

-ojXos: adj. end., 157. -t>)(i€v:

-tov:

per. end., 200.

nom.

end., 154, 272; gen. end.,

-ws: adv. end., 160, 295, 297

forms, 1220.

f.;

neut.

substantives, 267; part, end., 274. tocravTws: adv., 298. ibo-tC:

use, 674, 968, 1140. use,

dio-irep:

431,

969,

1130,

1140,

1154. use, 1154.

wa-TTipfC:

inf., 431, 909, 990, 1088, 1090; with subj., 931, 955; and Xva,

S
c.

999; in consecutive clauses, 999 compar. end., 278.

-(OT€pos: wii:

257. a>vio|xai:

-ws: names, 172; adv., 248.

203, 205.

w<}>€X€a>:

constr., 472,

483

f.,

541.

f.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Complete for Scripture references and reasonably so for the other sources quoted. (Figures at end of lines refer to pages.)

(a)

NEW TESTAMENT

Matthew 780,793,795

1:1 1:2

1:2-16 1:4 1:6 ... 1:10 1:11 l:llf 1:12 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18 .

.

763 760,788,1184 269 255, 268 6is, 501, 1184 263 6is 269,603 501

494,781,1184 215 1107

576,643,773 514, 977, 1041

.

6is,

1091,

1121,1122,1132,1184,1188 .... 817,966,1060,1128 261,334,350,418,463,

1:19 1:20

.

.

.

464, 514, 541, 817, 820, 852, 932, 1060

...

1:21

287,302,459,575,679,

779, 872, 874, 889, 942, 1191

1:22

.

.

.349,517,534,567,582,

636, 705, 774, 820, 982, 998

1:23 1:24 1:25 2:1

505,611,713,881 541

459,975

...

2:2

...

2:3 2:4

...

.

255, 263, 408

.

760,762,791 234,366,370,419,540,

bis,

575,

2:12 2:13

561,747,800,816 313,476,513,828,868, 882,990,1060,1088 2:14 1112 2:15 636 2:15,22 299 2:16 231,297,298,834, 1112, 1126 2:17 255 2:18 475,1159 2:20 392, 406, 892 bis, 996, 1111 2:21 559 2:22 510,574,1029 2:23 593 3:1 587,697,868,1185 3:2 ... 408,609,652,762,895 3:3 255,697 3:4 ... 231, 577, 620, 686 bw, 709, 883 3:5 ... 255,624,652,773,883 3:6 271, 525 Ms, 5S6, 636, 651, 760,791,883 3:7 .. 213, 602, 735, 848, 883, 916,1176 3:8 504,835, 1192 3:9 598,834,853,1035 3:10 418,423,771,881 3:11 .418,428,516,520,586, 590,645,658,679,889,1076,

...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

542, 840, 915, 990, 1062, lOSS

2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11

.

...

695,1186

3:13 3:14

.

255, 559, 587, 652, 669, 729, 1106, 1 109, 1165

3: 15

.

530,762,1103 366,479,860,971,986

3:16

517

... ... .

.

.

.

1148, 1153, 1186

3:12

253,263,760,772,774 627, 773, 795, 866, 1043, 1045

6is,

.

260,355,533,562,575, 581,606,683,722 575 235,677,682,885,1076,

1148, 1183 221, 309, 315, 393, 491, 772,

881,1058,1086,1110,1119,1126 .538,561,575,578,968, .

.

408, 642, 714, 810, 969, 975

258,477,484,1122

1025, 1213

3:17

593 1275

...

372,460,597,697,837, 842, 1097

635,820,880,990 349,860,1112

4:1 4:2 4:3

781

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

853, 857, 858, 932, 990, 1080, 1088, 1187, 1188

6:22

.

.

.

5:25

.

.

.

5:26 5:27 5:28

.

.

604, 649, 889

756 4:5 221,548,625 4:6 311,319,874,883,895 4:7 ... 311,419 4:8 705 4:9 391 4:10 540,838,847,883 4:11 219,273,593,61.3,759 4:13 469,500,646 4:15 576 4:17 269,615,656,1190 4:18 4:19 ... 480,517,645,949 770 4:20 263,501,586,747,770,780 4:21 477,499,562,617,655 4:23 428 4:23-25 4-24 412,799 28,788 4:25 561,593,597,756,1132 5:1 .. 885 5:2 417,523,762 5:3 6-3-10 757 945 6:3-11 6-3-12 443 5-4 533,764,872 5-6 474, 508 395,523,871 5:8 394, 485 6:9 234,392,473,505,551 6:11 621,855 6:12 269,534,590,7.39,751, 5:13 . 768,1019,1024 505,642 5:14 ...221,263,428,491,633, 5:15 635, 757, 766, 1183 640,710,782 5:16 231,427,789,83-3,834, 5:17

5:19 5:20 5:21

5:23 5:24

329, 993

4:3,6 4:4

5:18

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1276

... .

.

.

.

186,405,406,-561,677, 751, 933, 1062 660, 669, 698, 712, 959 bis .

516,666,667,854,933

...

212, 342, 349, 504: bis, 538, 541, 658, 844, 850, 889, 957, 1035, 1042, 1157, 1162 .

.

.

219,502,535,537,541,

677, 744, 772, 1107, 1148

5:22,28 5:22,28,32 6:22,28,32,34,39,44

...

866 1186 1153

849 428,470,529,621,640, 657, 690, 882, 949 375,488,573,729,890, 975, 976 255,976 889 .474,508,573,842,1003, 1060, 1075 6is

502,539,575,681,779, 834,992,1009,1018 687 6:29f 779 5:30 5:31 850 5:32 348, 517, 646, 764 bis, 773 224,3.33,889 5:33 5:34 .... 475,588,1060,1094 594 5:34 f 1189 5:34-36 1084 5:34,-39 5:35 633 5:36 853,1214 5:37 279,516,618,660,947, 1150 bis 5:39 727, 746, 747 1181 5:39-43 5:40 ... 437,529,538,683,802 183,562 5:41 5:42 311,809,855,943 5:43 ... 330,-547,646,889,943 5:44 630, 889, 941, 943, 947 .392,757,764,799,801,1200 5:45 735, 1019 5:46 1181 5:46 f 5:47 687, 850, 1019 bis 429,678,889 5:48 244,394,542,626,818, 6:1 ... 820, 8-58, 991, 1003, 1075 &is, 1080,1088,1148,1148-9,1173 6:2 .. 349, 429, 577, 633, 687, 853, 866 6ts, 969, 972, 986, 1154 652,662,856,943,1131, 6:3 .. 1170, 1202 437, 471, 653, 764, 986 6:4 ... 6:5 ... 552, 828, 874 6is, 942,

5:29

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

6:6 6:7 6:8

.

.

.. ..

963, 968, 986, 1157 204, 777, 835, 855, 947, 1186 .

184,589,-591,969,1035

452, 482, 720, 726, 857, 881, 895, 978, 1061, 1075, 1091 459, 464, 779 6:9 .

855 6:9-11 6:9-13 422, 852 .334,350,396,600,818,1181 6:10 159,779 6:11 538,677,963,967 6:12

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 6:13

.

.

.

6:14f 6:15 6:16

.

.

518,575,593,652,653, 853, 932 1186 1185 395,427,854,1040,1102

7:21 7:22

1121

7:24

6:16, IS

....

6:17

683, 779, 811, 1035, 1102, 1126 589, 891, 1115

6:18 6:19 6:19f 6:20 6:21 6:22

231,40.5,853,875 286, 687, 1186 792 523 284, 768, 1018 849

6:22, 23

....

6:23 6:24

.

.

.

740,917,1027,1186 251,573,748,749,751, 890, 1052, 1188, 1191

...

6:25

6:25, 31

6:26 6:27 6:28 6:29

.

1031 561, 581, 1035, 1183, 1185

.515,561,733,891,1115,1128 341,606,619,799,1185

.

6:30 6:31 6:32 6:33 6:34 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4 7:5 7:6

.

539,564,738,853,917, 935, 1028, 1044, 1176

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

... .

.

7:7

.

.

.

.

1213

7:7, 8

439, 482, 917, 1177

7:9,16

7:10 7:11

.

7: 12

.

7:13 7:13 7:14 7:15 7:16 7:17 7:19 7:20

5 5,

8

f

917 231, 1023, 1188 740, 1053, 1062, 1103, 1129 427, 704, 732, 733, 959, 1180 800 1200 730, 739

...

272, 477,

....

589, 727, 72<), SOO, 96()

.'")4S,

392,566,576,1172

425, 1148 bis,

221 402 1190

1035, 1165 468, 479, 602, 727, 772, 905,9.57, 1105 6j.s, 1107

361,366,606,905, .

.

727,

7.52,

11.57

772, 957,

1107 1100 350 532, 835, 883, 970, 1043 966, 1207 394, 656 ,

f.

.

.

.

.

.

183

9 11

20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27

8:28 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:32 8.34 9:1 9:2 9:4 9:5

9:6

597, 683, 11.32

.

391, 1018, 1019, 1214 391, 684, 770, 102S, 1216 330, 338, 430, 595, 683, 849, 854, 932, 949

.... ....

.

8 .

.

932 258

329, 473, 635, 653, 657, his 681, 819, 992, 1076 391, 817, 1180 his, 1182 710, 844 334, 357, 408, 819

658

773, 866

7:8 7:9

1213

110.5,

7:27 7:28 7:28 7:29 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4

12 13 14 15 16 18 19

203, 538, 763, 853, 875, 988, 1185, 1200 357, 1023

1107

708, 917,

548, 5.59, 575, 1028,

.

7:25 7:26

532, 1107, 1115

542 411,509,547,594,765, 853, 1202 853, 890, 947, 983 534, 590, 718, 721 471, 685 bis, 738, 782 234, 286, 430, 596, 931 582, 659, 1088

7r^2ter, .525,

11.57, 1175,

10

404, 419, 705, 771

.... 367, 524,

7:23

502, 515, 746, 807, 1164, 1185

738,934,935,1028,1044

1277

,

....

.

.

278, 298, 803 818, 968

....

1026 367 392, 533, 653, 773 491, 646 282, 674, 675, 796, 969 737, 757 his, 800 748, 1152 690, 858 525, 560, 585, 683 679, 883 828, 879, 941 738, 813

.... .

.... ....

.... .

.

....

292, 507, 543, 741, 917, 1001, 1176 597, 634, 708, 1171 348, 621, 702, 1136

499 948, 1009 339, 570, 607 528, 609, 628, 771, 995, lOU) .

.

.

.

.

.

.

691, 692, 770

....

315, 603 244, 395, 739 his, 916, 1176 1S6, 617, 737, 916, 917, 1176, 1177. 1190 119, 319, 434, 443, 562, 907, 1203

9:8 9:9 9:9 ff 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:24 9:25 9:26 9:27 9:29 9:30 9:31 9:35 9:36 9:37 9:38 10:1 10:2 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:8 10:9

409,710

10:28

.

.

314, 602, 800

215

...

316bis, 529, 1043, 1131

352, 472 6is, 473, 577 bis, 1046, 1213

10:28,31 10:29 .

.

.

10:31 10:32

.

.

.

.

.

244,916,1176 316 261,844,1163,1164,1166 '. 402 300,497,559,722,733,978 214,278,604 ... 251,292,342,352,745, 880, 1025, 1220 433,842,1109,1132

.

.

.

....

212, 1115

1019 .

.

.

264,433,462,517,575 512

300,508 708

6is

463 609

.368,430,932,949,996,1213

.

.

.

.

70S 477,65.5,773 211, 212, 364 6zs, 619, 968 1153 995

500,809,990,1089,1090 657,767 760,859,1114 495,500 358,800,881 488,799 810

10:9f 10:10

852fei;s

10:11 10:13 10:13 6is 10:14 10:15 10:16 10:18 10:19 10:20 10:21 10:22

395 1185

874,948,1019 849

.

.

.

.

.

.

437,517,642,813,959 214,257,587,663,666 648,653

.

.

.

7.38 bis, 739, 972,

.

.

.

1180,1185 1045 401 403 357,437,584,792,871,

889,891,1110 10:23 10:24 10:25 10:26

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1278

748

bis,

393,537,740,992 .

.

.3.34

bis,

727,951,957,959,968 956 603

284,581,607 633, 1108

1108 10:37 f., 41 f 956 .'956,962,1158 10:38 10:39 859,1108,1109,1111,1112 10:40 859,1108,1115 10:41 356,389,525,-595 10:41 f 593,649 10:42 484,653,1108,1202 11:1 683, 1102, 1121 11:3 748,934,1107,1116 11:4 194,258,726 652,816 11:5 11:7 765,820, 1088 1166 11:7-9 11:8 364,589,653,1088 1150 11:9 11:10 698,703,960,1193 11:11 516,587,668 11:12 548,816 367 11:13 1026 11:14 11:16 186,477,748 204 11:19 279,670,1078 11:20 11:21 .269,923,1014,1015,1193 646 11:22 11:23 505, 643, 6.53, 792 6is, 975 1036 11:24 11:25 337,419,523,682,696,

10:37,39,40,41

...... .

....

....

.... .

.

.

.

.

11:26 11:27

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

709,965,1099 461,465,769 682,742,752,842,878, 1024,1164 235,625,682,91.5,

11:28

924,1193 11:28 11:29

873 bis 200,523,537,687,

f

1023, 1182

472, 473, 485,

575,577,726,816,853,960, 10:26,28 10:27

.

776, 976

632 .

10:32 f 10:33 10:33,38 10:34 10:35 10:37

1170 355,356,510,515,603, 637,638,751 437,519,853 108,436,475,524,541, 588,957,959,961 956

1001,11.58,1164,1200 472 603,705

11:30 12:1

12:1,12 12:2

....

262 696 262

392,523,587,1159

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 12:3 12:4

.

726,844 491,611,714,776,1016,

.

1025, 1032, 1039, 10S4-5, 1119, 1130, 118S

12:5 12:7 12:9 12:10 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:23 12:24 12:25

.... .

1035 261, 904, 923, 1015 683

511,512,916,1024,1176 292,740,999 401,656,746 119,994

.

994

.

541,993 474,842 752 365,1212 889 292,697,917 590 319,406,413,817,1105,

.

1106, 1116

12:26 .602,750,842,876,1008 12:26 f 452 12:26,28 847 12:27 1008 12:28 425,429, 1008, 1190 6u 12:29 742, 757, 1018 12:30 607,611,1172 12:30,32 956 12:31 494, 500, 655, 779, 873 6is 12:32 594,607,1165,1179 12:34 880,924 12:35 408,7.57,776 12:36 436,439,459,718 12:38 515,579,742,923 12:39 25.5,411 12:40 429 12:41 453, 525, 561, 593, 828 12:42 268 12:43 418, .560, .582 12:44 300,548,1011 12:45 516, 611, 749 12:50 679,957 13:1 314,367,61.5,813 13:2 602,979,1126 13:3 512,652,7.57,764,1088 13:4 ... 107,490,564,606,695, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

765, 1073 «er

13:4 f 13:5 13:5f 13:5-8 13:6 13:8 13:9 13:11

747 11.59,1171 891, 1071, lO'Jl

746,749 794 838,883 956 707

13:12 13:13 13:14

1279 727, 957, 11 50

233.315,993

...

94, 531, 539, 1004 bis,

1110, 1127

13:15

201,376,533,844, 988, 1173

13:17 13:18 13:19 13:21 13:23 13:24 13:25

339,367 501

...

.

315,744,773,1105 623,1136 1149 835 244,5.56,571,762, 1070, 1073 695,

feis,

13:26 348,762,799 13:27 418,917,1157,1176 13:2S .418,430,878,924,93.5,1175 13:29 534,637,638,1157, 1164, 1174 13:30 479,482,626,639,645, 974, 1075 13:31 656,836,1126 13:31 f 713 13:32 194, 343, 372 feis, 1000, 1205 13:33 503,1110 1126 13:34 517, 648 13:35 791,1106 13:.37, 39 233 13:39 ... 768 13:40 969 13:41 598 13:44 562,580,71.5,837,868 13:44,48 715 13:45 f 847 13:46 735,837,844,897, 1110, 1126 13:48 561, 763, 837 13:49 5.50,578,648,775 13:51 310,1150,1175 13:52 399,475,539,5.59,656,

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

....

.

.

.

727, 1206

13:54

1091 757,917,11.57 625 760

13:.55 13:.56

14:1 14:2 14:3 14:4 14:5 14:6 14:7

f

694,840,842 508,585,840 485

481,817,1129

....

648 611,877,963,1028, 1031, 1039, 1047

14:8 14:9 14:13

233,434,604,866 1129

520,550,609

14:14 14:15 14:17 14:19 14:20 14:21 14:22 14-23 14-24 14-25 14:25 f 14:26 14:28 14:29 14-31 14-33 14:34 14:35 14:36 15:2 15:2, 3 15:3 15:4 15:5 15-6 15-9 15:11 15:14 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:19 15:20 15:22 15:23 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 15:29 15:30 15:32 15-33 15-34 15:35 15:36 15:37 16-1 16:2 16-1 f 16:3 16:5 16:6 16:7

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1280

568

546,613,842 265

....

350,367,561,1136 392,1109 419, 648, 674 477,857,891,975, 976 bis, 1048, 1081 224,656,657 469,644,775

523 603 580 601 601

508,739 546 219 546,827 732,956,958,993 564,811,972 739 477 531

485,789,875 845, 874

1028

16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:12

16:13 16:14 16:14 16:16 16:17 16:18

506, 1045

f

16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22

235,678,768,781 255,419,682,842 .

.

174,255,408,457,510,

.

562, 604, 682, 780, 791, 875, 889, 1028, 1029, 1185, 1201 231, 265, 361, 907 485, 679, 983, 993 bis,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

224,787,788 405,562 .425,490,538,661,750,

.

.

.

16:23 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:27 16:28

.

1046, 1049 311, 579, 587, 1035, 1082

.260,272,396,541,942, 1157,1175 174,498,562 690, 742, 878, 890 425 485,501,935,1023,1129 576,745,882 489, 743, 794, 955, 957, 962, 1116, 1123

482 .

.

559,1166,1172,1187 488,849 488,546 773,1035

.

561 408 bis, 427 1058, 1082 261, 463, 464

....

341,484,645,1135 541 757

519,577,1116 463,464,1193 615

.... .

.

.

212,615,749,1127 266,275,460,602,623, 720,737 710,990,1089

17:1 17:3 17:4

1009 bis

17:5 17:6 17:8 17:9 17:10 17:11 17:12 17:14 17:15 17:16 17:17

311 219, 502 1182

657 596, 597

487 870 484, 588 bis, 815 513,1132 802

17:19 17:20

213, 460

147

1062

bis

812

....

472, 949, 1047, 1183

1028

.bis

17:22 17:22 17:24 17:25 17:26 17:26 17:27 18:1 18:2 18:3

367,396,697,776,837 409

.

.

740, 1176

491,561,602

Ws

1164 1047,1160 1029,1035,1047, 1060, 1160 781 bis, 1103 695, 749 bis, 1103 695

334,350,368,817 300,548,643,917, 1101,1176 224,487,739 .268,300,308,328,548, 849, 889 594,870,1132 681 580

f

....

551,748,1102,1120 513, 1132, 1148

1190

f .

.

.

bis

425, 573, 593, 687, 792

668,916,1176 216 551

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 18:4 18:5 18:6 18:7 18:8

244, 281

525,710 317, 594, 620, 992 537, 577, 580

400,537,593,658, 601

18:9 18:10 18:12 18:12 18:13 18:14 18:15

bis,

687, 1084, 1188

270,496 995,996 541 ff

.

.

.

870, 1019

bis,

213 1019,1043,1058 993 339,348,428,505,562, 645,687,842,846,949, 1019

18:16 18:17

18:18 18:19 18:20 18:21 18:22 18:23 18:23 18:24 18:25

6is,

1020

604,649,840 231,539,757,846, 1019,1027 362,375,733,907 715,716, 1010 .

593,656,685,767 281,333,356,548,674, 889,917,934,1176

.

673

6is

611,837 109

f

.

.

.

233,283,674 .514,735,1048,1068, 1132, 1172

18:26 18:26 18:27 18:28 18:30 18:31 18:32 18:33 18:34 18:35

538,568,570,949 605 509 538,883,1025

f

309,834,885,976 689,690 464,708 886,919,968,1181 773 746

19:1 19:2 19:3 19:4 19:5 19:6 19:8 19:9 19:10 19:11 19:12

19:14 19:10 19:17 19:18f 19:20

6?;.s

517,763 774 609, 916

bis,

1176 574

458,595,819 314,845,1165 626 646,649,747,1028 545, 1008

706,720,752,1103 233,312,307,727, 1190, 1214 710, 1001 6i,s, 1094 675, 735

653,661,738,768 766

....

419,476,478,1216

19:21 19:22

.

.

12S1 949, 1023, 1038, 1083

.

110,1127 192, 666 1096 309 Ws

19:24 19:26 19:27 19:28 19:29 19:30 20:1 20:2 20:3

314, 565, 601

673

bis

280,669 ... 548,638,658,728,809 470,510,562,599,611,769 586,620 20:3,6 320 20:4 190 20:0 470,738 .

20:8 643, 1126 Ws, 1203 20:9 673 20:10 ... 706,876,1028,1029 20:12 530,658,842 20:13 472,510,881 20:10 769 20:17 224 20:18 532,794 20:19 349,522,595,1072 20:20 482 20:20,22 805 20:21 597,750 20:22 291,343 20:23 685,721,765,1153,1187 20:24 619 20:25 1100 20:26 190,943 20:20 f 874 20:28 175,507,573,1088 20:29 561 20:30 463,464,491,615 20:32 994 20:33 1213 21:1 267,834,971 21:2 644 21:3 742,874,943 21:4 1123 21:5 536,560,633 21:6 968, 1126 21:7 409,477 21:8 .279,318,404,600,090, 774, 779, 838 21:9 525,670 21:10f 697 21:11 219 21:15 1122 21:10 049,845 21:19 594,003,074,943, 1024-5 21:21 767,840,1018,1020 21:22 959 21:23 053,740,1188 .

.

.

....

.

.

.

....

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1282 21:24 21:25 21:26 21:27 21:28 21:29 21:31 21:32 21:33

482,740 300,613 443,481 1185 949 1157

291,737 334,996,1060,1066,1090

.

.

.

308, 340, 367, 399

.

bis,

575,617,727,1214 696

21:35 21:36 21:37 21:38 21:39 21:40 21:41

.

.

484,880 .119,355,727,873,960,

21:42

.

.

.254,410,458,587,615,

516,667 473,485,819,873 330,697 1213

989, 1201, 1214 655, 704, 718

43 45 46

873

...

.

787, 1029, 1035, 1041

481,965 409,860 408,957 885, 919

1

2 3 4 5 7 8

10 11

22:11 f 22:12 22:13 22:15 22:16 22:17 22:23 22:25 22:27 22:28 22:30 22:34 22:36 22:37 22:38 22:39 22:40 22:42 22:43 22:44 23:2 23:3 23:3, 10

788

399,691,695 834, 835

1153 424 485, 818, 113S bis, 1139 bis 1172 1138

486,828 148

392,550,619 269, 1158

6zs,

1177

891, 1081

348 488,668 833 392 840 660, 740 774:bis

411,661,669 232, .530

317 760 480

310,314 758,786,837,866 733,866 1128

NEW TESTAMENT 560,1184,1186 542,1075

23:4 23:5 23:12 23:14 23:15

957

892,1116 204,278,299,652,

763, 1202 424,475 23:16 720 23:16,18 1177 23:17 737 23:17,19 1146 23:18 23:20f 859 317 23:21 f 23:23 .261,309,310,337,347,845, 886,919,944,1080,1084,1092 23:24 205,606 642,765 23:25 23:26 517, 640, 641, 642, 765 23:27 203,260,267,506,530,548 1102 23:27, 28 23:28 505, 633, 1153 23:30 312, 340, 394, 922, 1015 538 23:31 948,1198,1220 23:32 23:33 476,929,934 23:34 266, 333, 356, 515, 599 23:35 213, 255, 645, 715, 789 23:37 120,204,486,531,689, 718, 917 548 23:39 24:2 565, 601, 828, 960, 1001, 1158, 1164 224 6zs, 787 24:3 430,933,995 24:4 604 24:5 24:6 430,500,889,932,949,996 24:9 353,889 24:12 357,660,858,966 698 24:13 320,434 24:15 24:17 .. 231,307,328,599,856 24:18 453,548,586,645,856 24:20 495, 522, 523 24:21 207, 244, 731, 793, 1175 24:22 .... 752, 772, 1016, 1163 990 24:24 409 24:26 792 24:27 24:28 871,969 24:30 334, 356 Ws, 603, 611, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

819, 873, 891

24:31 24:32 24:32-51 24:33 24:35

611, 775

232,341,640 443

525,604,792,972 757

1283

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 24:36 24:38 24:39 24:40 24:40 24:41 24:42 24:43

776

621,639,717,974 975 675 750,869

f

1157 312,1157

f

1157, 1159 272, 1153

595,612,809,870, 1072,1090 263,693,811,993

154,231,233,675 292, 522, 740 .

.

Ws

.349,708,740,870,922, 1014, 1015

24:44 24:45

25:42 25:43 25:45 25:46 26:2

.

.

.

718 768,777,783,792,845, 916, 1065, 1176

891 24:46 604 24:47 24:49 bis 849 24:50 715,716,718 25:1 727,1127 272 25:2,4,9 611 25:3 611 25:4 25:5 349, 367, 838, 883 25:6 ... 495,522,775,793,897 25:8 318,879 25:9 .244,334,689,818,929,933, 934, 995, 1127, 1159, 1161, 1174

25:10 25:11 25:14 25:14ff 25:14-18 25:15 25:16 25:17 25:19 25:20 .... 25:20,24 25:21 25:21,23 25:24 ....

272,763 1200^ 969, 1203

1153 969

282,696 746,813 747 652

835,910,1111,1118 1125 337,601 299,604 718,909,910,1034, 1111, 1116, 1118

25:24,26 25:25 25:27

548 1045 .

886,919,922,1014,1015

.

.

873 559 408,1153 504, 516, 777, 793, 1106

.

.

.

25:29, 32

25:32 25:33 25:34 25:35 25:35-39 25:.36

25:37 25:38 25:39 25:40 25:40,45 25:41

.

.

340,347,1087,1200 '.

.

915 234

334,339,357,819 917,1123,1176 234 733 963 777,792, 1096

26:4 1202 26:5 26:6 263, 595 26:7 512 739 26:8 26:9 510, 886 26:10 484,842 26:12 603, 1075 26:13 842,873,969 934 26:14 26:15 .... 951,1023,1183618 674 26:16 26:17 400,935,989 26:18 234,292,491,625,744,870 316 26:20 26:22 675,743,746 917 26:22,25 26:23 525, 559, 585, 698, 707 Ws 26:24 707, 886, 887, 920, 1014, 1015,1160,1169 26:25 859,915,1028,1114,1168 842 26:25,64 768 26:26,28 26:27 519 26:28 213,352,567,595,618, 1106,1116,1118 523 26:31 26:32 490,563,858,1039, 1074,1092 1008,1026 26:33 26:34 873, 1091 26:35 208, 628, 849, 875, 1026 bis 26:36 976 26:38 617, 643, 856 26:39 .... 469,653,737,1187 26:42 1012, 1019, 1020, 1160 bis 26:43 906 26:44 597 26:45 807,882,890,948,1183 26:40 312, 428, 439, 799 bis 26:47 774, 1127 26:.50 002 bis, 69ti, 725, 917 26:51 496,805,810,1205 26:52 524,534,859,1191 26:53 276,312,666,681,1214 26:.54 851,934 26:55 602,813,884 26:56 705 2(i:.57 694 26:.')8 883 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1284 26:59 26:60 26:61 26:62 26:63

505,883,986 1129

.

.

.

581,697 562,738,1126 475,607,781,865,883, 993, 1045

26:64 26:65 26:66 26:67 26:69 26:70 26:71 26:73 26:74 26:75 27:1 27:3 27:4

27:5 27:7 27:8 27:9 27:10 27:11 27:12 27:13 27:14 27:15 27:17 27:18 27:19 27:20 27:21 27:22 27:23 27:24

678,679

374,891 307,419,746 .

.

.

504

.

.

.

bis,

658

212,561,694 313,337,674 517,1136,1182 547,697 28,103,653,1182 1028,1035 .910,1028,1091,1113

653, 990, 1089 b?s 609,817,858,859,860, 1112, 1113, 1128 ... 109,290,339,626,736, 859, 860, 874, 942 bis, 1121 409, 807, 860 510, 537, 599 .... 643,848,962,1202

...

1201

967 .

.

.

678

bis,

768, 769, 915

473,484,1073 512,741,1177 473,738,751 606,608,884,888 330,737,1177 583, 841, 888 bis, 898, 1029 396,707,842 805,835,993 515,577,737 484 .... 279,845,1149,1190 516, 576, 639, 644 <er, .

.

.

.

1202 562, 593 483 465, 474, 598

.

.

593,884 483 bis, 840 528,993 411,714,881,1087,1105 611

690,811 604 697 27:37,47,54 27:38 675,750,792 27:39 473 27:40 308,465,581,781,892, .

.

.

1107, 1116

317, 1028 bis, 1029 409,473,480,482,487,

1106

27:45 27:46

602, 643, 772

....

212, 802, 842

678,770,874,810,942 27:25 27:27 27:28 27:29 27:30 27:31 27:32 27:33 27:34 27:35 27:37

27:41 27:42 27:43 27:44

29,95,215,219,261,

412, 463, 705, 739, 842

27:47 27:49-.

235,1136 .430,877,931,991,1045, 1118,1128 27:51 297, 300, 580, 593, 643 bis 27:52 1213 27:54 258,780,781 27:55 548,727 27:55,62 957 27:56 263 27:57 208, 263, 475 bis, 487, 697, 800 27:58 697,1078 27:60 542,681,715 27:61 405, 505, 639, 747, 1104 27:62 653, 728, 765 27:63 816,870,1035 27:64 280,669,775,794 27:65 949 2^7:66 611 28:1 ... 517 bis, 519, 522, 622, 646,775,841 841-2 28:2 28:3 197 28:6 430,845,931,949 28:7 842,889 28:10 949,993 28:11 233 28:14 871,1019 28:15 614 28:17 694 28:18 772,842 28:19 475,525,592,649,684 28:19f 1128 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Mark 1:1 1:2 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9

1:10 1:11 1:12

.

.

.

781,793,795 606,621,960 774,1106 .496,595,782,891,892,1127 592,791,1127 .• 118,204,485 231,656,722,961,1052,1126 524 497,525,592 .

.

.

.

.

517

bis,

561, 577, 597

532,768,837 880

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 13 14 15 16 17 19 21

22 23 24 1:27 1:29 1:31 1:32 1:34 1:36 1:37 1:38 1:39 1:40 1:42 1:44 1:45 2:1

255,0)11

1074

...

119,453,536,540,601 188

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

996,1023 659 262,559,880 1127,1140 589,784 118,263,395,488,738, 762,916 334,540,1181 255,611 860 341, 348, 1109, 1214 Ws 195,315,319,367,546, 1034, 1216 606,766 1028

299,424,477,595 118,593 1214 183,559 118,430,619,932,949 300,604,1186 119,525,559,581,586, 593, 1120 119, 625 392,1097 604, 969 866 474, 849

.

.

...

.

.

ter,

2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:7 .118,221,697,705,1025,1129 737,1215 2:9 119,434,907,999,1203 2:10 428,855 2:11 1028 2:12,16 119,596 2:13 316,393,1043,1190 2:15 730,917,1029,1035 2:16 990 2:17 786,787,1186 2:18 2:19 528, 587, 718, 733, 879 fczs, 978 6Js lis 2:20 212,1025 2:21 214,373 2:22 523,720,763,1043 2:23 523,738,1045,1159 2:24 679 2:25 603,628,714 2:26 584 2:27 439 2:28 656,789,902,1123 3:1 1024, 1045 3:2 775 3:3 368,813 3:5 .

.

.... ....

....... .

....

1285

994,1214 3:6 3:7 596, 611, 624, 838, 1183 Ws 3:8 28,620,733,898 3:11 118,404,884,922,958,973 3:14 611, 1088 441,459,488 3:16 434 3:16,17 3:17 411,434,713 530 3:18 3:20 627,792 614 W.s, 842, 845 3:21 3:22 210,778,1106 1036 3:23 3:24 817,879 602 3:26 1019 3:27 3:28 479, 732, 733 3:29 504 ter 589 3:30 3:31 991,1115 404 3:32 3:34 521,524,617 4:1 525,615,625,670 431 4:3 4:4 107,339,1073,1153,1183 1152 4:4 ff 4:5 747, 749 915 4:7 4:8 589,592 232 4:8, 20 720,956 4:9 4:10 244,341,482,550,653,765 4:12 233,315,1173 876 4:13 4:17 300,880,1131 4:21 789, 917, 1028 bis 883 4:21,24,26,30 4:22 653,764,960,999,1020, 1185,1187 4:23 956, 1009, 1087 4:24 392,471,718 4:25 .392,720,956,957,1158 4:26 603,928,968,974 987 4:26 f 470,1213 4:27 4:28 160,183,273,275,276, 549,687 309,800,972,1214 4:29 4:30 407,678,736 4:31 516,782,1101,1129 4:32 343,371,635 710 4:33 884 4:33 f 224 4:34 549 4:36 4:37 231,501,800,868,1000 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

....

.

.

.

f

427, 602, 623, 879, 965, 1034 330, 360, 428, 908, 950 405, 468, 699, 1001, 1182 223, 1165 231, 581, 636, 765, 828, .

.

.

.

909, 966, 1070 bis, 1071 bis, 1079, 1081, 1091 244, 582, 793

5

300

6 7 9

279, 475, 483, 670

656 624

11

13 14 15

bzs

283, 580, 607, 674, 884, 968 476, 910, 1043 868, 900, 1099,

.

1136 1032 1117 624, 733, 901, 1045, 1177 625, 733 1117

16 18 19 20 23

.

.

...

bis,

297, 299, 324, 546, 933, 943, 986, 994

774, 838 779,892,1115 1105 1136 015, 635, 1110-11 619 208, 1018, 1025, 1027, 1060 ... 232, .524, 1041 bis, 1216

24 25 25,27 25-27 26 28 29 30

.

....

508, 599, 1042, 1110, 1123, 1136

....

32 33 34 35 36 39 40

.

.

.

838, 883, 1088, 1136 542,726,858,897,1118 462, 596 502, 845 845

1166 1119

...

;41

6:10 969 6:11 257, 517, 647 6:12 993 6:13 483 6:14 694, 1029, 1111 6:16 698,719 6:17 964 6:19 539,542,800,1202 6:20 1103, 1123 6:21 408, 523, 786 6:22 f 482, 956 6:22-25 805 6:23 ... 275,502,643,655,729, 775, 959, 1028, 1032, 1040, 1047 6:24 934 6:24 805, 934 6:25 431,611,933,943,993, 1139, 1214 1084 6:27 6:29 310, 347 6:30 733 6:31 ... 224,367,488,654,1087 6:33 530 6:34 482, 1140 6:36 279,640,670,737, 1044, 1045 6:37 ... 201, 309, .580, 876, 934 6:38 916, 949 6:39 ... 460,487,604,673,1084 6:39 f 284 6:40 ... 460, 487, 673 6is, 1210 613 6:41 6:45 259, 975, 976 6:46 542, 684 6:47 550, 686, 775, 884 6:48 ... 400,477,528,640,1073 6:.52 604, 806 6:53 214,623 6:55 ... 234, 477, 604, Gil bis, .

.

...

6:56

....

308, 1079, 1085, 1214

880

1

:2

.

.

3

.

.

.

202, 705, 710 his, 735, 771 255, 263, 697, 768, 785

.

269 368,682,751,1011 1013 his, 1169 212 797 284, 673 438,441,657,944,950,

.

4 5

13

5,

6 7

8

.

.

.

993, 1042, 1046 f

10

17 his

413, 43S, 033

884, 953, 1029, 1049 7.33, 806 6is, 922,

318,

957, 958, 969, 973, 984, 1025

497,531,1190

:42 :43

.

29, 104, 465, 684, 714,

866, 881, 1119, 1215

8 9

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1286

7:1 7:2 7:3 7:3 f 7:4 7:5 7:6 7:9 7:10 7:11

7:12 7:13 7:15

562 2.34,

.

.

.

399, 416, 705

806 439 256, 791, 807, 1087, 1218 790 367,546 1198 793 233, 270, 4.3.3, 599, 1023, 1203 484, 1162 715, 716

642

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 7:18

233, 43S, 548

7:18, 21, 23

300

7:19

118,413, 438 fcis, 1130, 1203

7:20 7:22 7:24

707 408

...

27, 15G, 334, 350, 368,

1094, 11G2

7:25 7:26 7:28 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:35 7:36

7:37 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4 8:6 8:7 8:11 8:12 8:14 8:15 8:17 8:18 8:19 8:22 8:23 8:24 8:25 8:28 8:28 8:29 8:31 8:34 8:34 8:35 8:36

560,683,722,1205 155, 487, 884, 993 633, 634, 647 1123 491, 596, 775 210, 770

.

... ...

190,841, 1060 471, 541, 577, 949 360, 409, 789

508

bis,

902 292, 535 259, 807 916, 1027

423, 1041 bis 170, 368 f

f

8:38

9:6 9:8 9:9 9:10

.

278,279,488,546,663, 680, 733, 967 171, 297, 546 407,696,708,737,1131 460, 726 266,275,337,1215 508,1028 561, 983 339, 1046-7 529, 614 94, 1004, 1024 bis

8:.37

9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5

231 29, 215, 714 349, 549, 835, 838, 885, 1213

.

.

747,1028 1036 861, 1186 350,579,1035 727, 956 956 ... 193,956,957,959,961 472, 485, 689 309,573,935,1214 472, 485, 523 742, 957, 962, 1041, 1116, 1123 428 375, 723, 890, 903 268, 529 750 .

1287

9:11

7.30

9:11, 28

244, 917

...

9:12

149, 219, 224, 31(), 342,

602, 993

9:12f 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:22 9:23 9:25 9:26 9:28 9:30 9:31 9:33 9:34 9:35 9:36 9:37 9:38 9:39 9:40 9:41 9:42 9:43

1152 732 620 407, 597 624 184, 318,850, 969 264, 464 ... 436, 603 6is, 883, 1139 300, 740, 741, 963, 974 bis .

312,472,948 340,1214

f

118, 491, 766 465,769,1173

412,968, 1091 224, 514, 730

....

308, 983, 994, 1055, 1156, 1214

815,870 118

f

334, 529, 668, 811, 818 775, 874, 961

800 .

.

710, 771, 954, 1163, 1187

....

964,1123 726,1164 630 484, 795, 1033, 1034 663,997,1011 218,1019

9:43, 45

9:43-47 9:45 9:47 9:48 9:49 9:50 10:1 10:2 10:4 10:7 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:12 10:13 10:16 10:17 10:18

473, 738, 1028, 1031, 1044 657, SO!) 1025, 1065

20

1058, 1065

22

21

;

661 849 231,850 849, 1084 318 269, 534 145, 269 trr, .534 .

.

.

801,904,968 794, 916

1028 574 314 593 747 747

.

.

.

392,538 318 4\S his, 474, 675 176,276,298,479,480, 656, 661, 916, 1176 bis 597, 842

...

302,476,541,834, 1193 S8S

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1288 10:23 f 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:30 10:32 10:33 10:34 10:35 10:35,38 10:36 10:37 10:38 10:38 f 10:39 10:40 10:42 .• 10:43 10:45 10:46 10:47 10:51 .

.

741 302 780 1182

542,1096 309 427,726,955,961 611,673,727,1020 376, 541, 888 533,539,882 333,356

405,501,933,994 805 430,994 750,993,1065 426,478,485,879 715,717 312,356,1214

:

.

.

721, 1058, 1065, 1076

510 961 573,632,815 1204 760 933 259,624,971 505,1165 738,874,943

11:1 11:2 11:3 11:5 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:10 11:13

.

.

11:14

.

.

1121

309 198,593 620,786 279 877, 1024

.

bis,

1027, 1043, 1045, 1190

854, 913, 939

6is,

940,

943,1170,1173,1215 11:15 11:16 11:18 11:19 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:28 11:29 11:31 11:32 12:1 12:2 12:4 12:5

.

.

.

787 315,431,993,1216 786,838,995 392, 922, 958, 973 bis 362 473 500

.

732,1023,1029 150,188,351,958,972 292,740,916,999

880, 1048 6ts

.

.

1177 613 .

.

295, 443, 551, 887, 1029, 1034, 1203

190,308,409 519,614 149, 551 .

.

.

213,394,694,696,1213

12:6 12:7 12:8 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14

NEW TESTAMENT 334 430,768,789,931 339 718 .

.

.. .

.

.

.

234,254,410,655,704 .858,1060,1078,1183 233,786 792, 850, 928, 934 6is,

.

1158, 1170, 1177

12:17 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:23 12:24 12:26 12:28

597 1046,1082.1171 309,348 669 497,587 700 .

12:30 12:30,33 12:31 12:32 12:33 12:34 12:37 12:38 12:38 f 12:38-40 12:40 12:41 12:41-44 12:42 12:43 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:4,7 13:5 13:9 13:10 13:11 13:13 13:14 13:15 13:16

.

.

199, 253, 603, 1032 5is

410,516,669,740, 1042,1123 774 774 667, 688 1187

....

789, 890, 1058, 1081

297,546,551 660,774,775 441,589,1106

.

1199 458

.... .

.

.

.

.

.

13:19 13:20 13:21 13:22 13:24-27 13:25 .

.

13:27 13:28 13:29

.

.

233,413,1106,1130 839,844,883,884,1032 838 411,674,713 700 413,741 638, 960, 962, 1174, 1175 224,593,644,930 972 751,995,996 593,603 535 233,709,738,768 859.889 320,429 308,599 453,525,536,547,548, 586,593,645 547, 710, 715 6is, 722, 731 424,584,752,818,1015 1170 1075,891 873 .

.

.

353, 375, 782, 889,

.

.

1116,1180 599,775 232, 341, 350, 614, 827 601

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 13:30 13:31 13:33 13:34 13:35 13:36 13:37 14:1 14:2 14:3

.

.

873,975 873

14:48

1177 993,1203 185,495,1188 987 720 408, 590 988 .253,339,342,499,512,

14:51 14:54 14:55 14:58

607, 1127, 1131

739,916,1176

14:4 14:5

.

.

341, 368, 511, 538, 541,

.

642.666.674 484,564 299,473,879 551,845,1120

14:6 14:7 14:8 14:9

593 969 675,983 309 1036

14:9,14 14:10 14:10f 14:11 14:12 14:13 14:14

522,980,989 333,356,499,573,873

.

.

.

234 bis, 442, 737, 955, 960, 969, 989, 1045, 1049, 1177

14:15 14:19

14:20 14:21 14:24 14:25 14:27 14:28 14:29 14:30 14:31 14:32 14:34 14:35 14:36 14:37 14:38 14:40 14:41

.

.

.

.

.

.

185,260,538 105,282,450,460,555, 568.606.675

231,525,560 432,1016,1169 213,618,629,632 708,854,930 538 355, 681, 756, 871, 1070, 1074, 1083

.

.

.

.

.

.

394, lOOS, 1026 bis, 1203 522 bis, 550, 873, 1091

.

529,819,850,875, 1019,1026 976 856 603,883,993 .

29, 186, 461, 465, 561, 737

426,1103 933,994,1153,1170 319,339,1183,1213 391,392,470,487,577,

.... .... .

.

.

800, 842, 866

14:42 14:43 14-44 14:45 14:46 14:47

.

.

.

312,931 526,786 .... 679, 905 606 339,684,1213 292,564,684,742,805, 810,828,1110

14:4!)

14:60

1289 526 550,625,1187,1203 485,529 314,548,625,643,807 367,607,883

.... .

.

.

.

.

.

1042 550,648,738,775,792, 917, 1158

14:61 14:63 14:64 14:65 14:67 14:68 14:70 14:71 14:72

695, 917

212 1036

391,530,617 118, 313 620,1185,1189 612 317,371 .

.

509

550, 800, 861 bis,

bis,

1091, 1109, 1127

787,802,812 367,511,884 292,917 473,484 291,608,710,884, 922,1154 905

15:1 15:3 15:4 15:5 15:6

'

15:6-10 15:7 ... 255, 339, 366, 727, 841 1205 15:9 366,841,1029 15:10 255 15:11 484,718,720 15:12 232,411,505,643,712 15:16 318,483 15:17 465,898 15:18 203, 542 15:20 183, 791 15:21 259, 411, 483, 714 15:22 311,695,885 15:23 737,916,1044,1176 15:24 793,1183 15:25 231,1193 15:29 307,802,861,1113 15:30 308,856 15:32 793 f., 794 15:33 15:34 29, 205, 261, 714 320 15:35 430,742,931 15:36 300 bis, 548, 550 15:38 597,649,652,697 15:39 297, 300, 501, 780 15:40 529 15:41 965,1139 15:42 430. 845, 916, 965, 15:44 1024, 1043, 1045, 1177 579,760 15:45 542 15:46 501, 1043 bis 15:47 .

.

.

....

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1290 16:1 16:2 16:3 16:4 16:5 16:6 16:9 16:10ff 16:12 16:18 16:19 16:20

501

1:40

523, 602, 672

1:41 1:42

596, 597 1035, 1041, 1190 408, 485 817, 842 578, 672, 905

708 293, 749, 792 208,472, 1026 561,1074 891,1127

Luke 367, 841, 965, 1154 107, 121, 418,

1:1

1:1-4

432

1:2 1:3

1:4 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:16

1208 308, 347, 687, 1214 .

221, 244, 279, 392, 463, 464, 670, 771, 1039 bis, 1084, 1085

719 292, 395, 743, 760 505, 641 523, 587, 906, 963 .

.

.

.

148, 505, 640, 658, 979, 1072

.231,509,1060,1068,1113 888 418, 560, 602 480, 964

356,357,541,871 889

f

...

270, 505, 642, 871, 933

889 679 255,477, 562,683 739

f

1:16, 17

1:17 1:18 1:20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1

21 22

23 24 25 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

bis,

. 208, 353, 594, 714, 717, 721, 728, 889, 960, 963, 975, 1173 .260 bis, 532, 979, 1073, 1092

....

.

582, 680, 888, 1029

658 351, 617, 1217 224, 566, 721, 792 364 611 741, 9.38, 1031, 1044, 1045 614, 647 480, 1202 602 1159

.... .

409, 560, 764, 1181 256, 267, 272, 275, 701, 790

752 940 255, 652, 708

NEW TESTAMENT 255 506 417, 660 422, 1199 235,398,699,992, 998, 1076 615, 689 242, 422 1199 532, 605, 1212 355, 547, 560 594 590, 793 837 510 508, 1001, 1086 535, 562, 628 1039, 1052, 1076 1061 530, 610, 611 480, 523, 605, 885 391 bis, 1187

1:42-45 1:43

1:45 1:46-55 1:46-56 1:47 1:48 1:50 1:51 1:51-53 1:53 1:54 1 56 1:57 1:57, 74 1:58 1:59 1:60 1:61 234,726 1 62 683, 739, 766, 884, 890, 938, 940, 1021, 1025, 1031 bis, 1046 1:63 457 1:64 297, 550, 885, 1127, 1201, 1213 1:66 409, 736, 739 1:67-79 422 1:68-79 1199 1:70 107, 762, 783 1:71 649 1:72 509, 1001, 1086 1:73 475, 479, 488, 718 1:74 540, 1039, 1076 470, 527 1:75 1:76 560, 678, 694, 1149, 1185 1001 1:76, 78 f 990 1:76 f., 79 1 79 231 bis, 340, 349, 371, 1086 497 1:80 2:1 .. . 185, 417, 561, 708, 793, 809, 1076, 1086 2:2 82, 510, 657, 669, 701, 704, 790 417, 746 2:3 2:4 ... . 417, 578, 72S bis, 729, 966, 1039, 1071 2:5 .. 216, 364, 804, 807, 809, 1080, 1214 1061, 1076 2:6 541, 1210 2:7 376, 477 2:8 542 2:9 538 2:10 :

:

.

....

.

:

.

.

....

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 350 701

2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:21

.

272,404,407,412,655,656 242, 792

.

.

.

.

.

Ws

393,714,1149 759,760,861,1109,1113 532,619,838 828,884 429,716,717 457,480,621,858,978, 1039, 1075, 1076, 1091

2:22 2:22,24 2:24 2:25 2:26 .

491,561,609,1088 990 204, 1088 395, 602, 770 362, 816, 858, 977 bis, 1030, 1036, 1047, 1080, 1084, .

.

1085,1091 .47,490,504,619,858,979, 1039, 1065, 1073, 1081, 1109 473, 593 2:28 2:29-32 1199 210 2:32 2:33 405, 412, 605 2:35 687, 986 723 2:36 2:37 .232,495,518,559,576, 680 bis 2:38 523, 541, 574, 686 2:39 766,800,841 2:41 ... 224,279,523,608,884 497 2:42 2:44 269, 469, 479, 496, 1036, 1060 491 2:46 883 2:47 2:48 402, 879 2:49 ... 502,586,739,767,884, 1034, 1176 680 bis 2:50 828, 884 2:51 3:1 189,255,510,523,788,793 255 bis, 501, 603 3:2 458, 595, 652 3:5 772 3:6 853 3:8 870 3:9 850,916,934, 1176 3:10 213, 996 3:12 187,667 3:13 3:14 ... 409,532,541,582,626, 853, 1173 939, 910, 9S8, 996, 3:15 1031, 1044, 1015, 1177 355,521,722,828 3:16 200,503 3:17

2:27

.

.

.

3:18 3:19 3:20 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:23-38 3:24 3:25 f 3:27 3:29 3:32 3:33 3:35 3:36 3:37 4:1 4:3 4:6 4:7 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:13

.

1291 474, 749 Ms, 1181

.

.

258,512,619,717,719

....

60'} his

371,771,1073 795, 837 6i«

1102

236,761 215,263 215 214,236 215, 236 214 255 236 236 184 396, 880, 1185 781, 1009 bis

701,771 234, 540

834 582,642,762,1068 762

.

.

.

5:1 5:1, 12

375,615 393

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1292

1183 559 597, 733

5:1, 12, 17

6:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:7 5:9 5:10 5:12 5:14 5:17 5:19

.. ..

.

.

... ...

431,860,891,1102,1120 339, 582, 604, 774, 1186 212, 318, 885, 1219 feis .

.

... .

.

.

...

529,616,745,748,769, 1039, 1068

433,628,717 353,504,528,765,889 334,792,817,849 442,537 323,393,788,888,906 494,506,550,561,636,

652, 740 feis, 1029, 1044, 1202 5:20 342, 1216 315 5:20,23 703 5:21 502 5:22 896 5:23 434,907,1203 5:24 642 5:25 845 5:26 263,612 5:27 263 5:29 611 5:30 844 5:32 478 5:33 264,978,1085 5:34 5:36 560,1025,1027,1182 356 5:37 5:38 157, 373, 486, 1097 6:1 .. 168, 393, 533, 560, 1043 235,425 6:2 6:3 300,726,971 1045 6:3 f 6:4 ... 714,1032,1039,1084 6:6 393,684,748 1103 6:7 6:8 680, 800 6:11 327,854,885,938, .

.

.

.... .

.

940bis, 1021

6:12

...

6:13 6:13-17 6:14 6:16 6:17 6:17 f 6:18, 20f 6:20 6:21 6:22 6:23 6:24

.500,582,1010,1049, 1058,1085 477,577 428 480

501,767 28,273,613 714 910 593,681,683,770 333,356 641,834 208,523,687,855 1107, 1187

6:24 6:25

1193

f

333, 355, 459, 466,

1107, 1193

6:26 6:27 6:27 f 6:28 6:29 6:30 6:32 6:32 f 6:33 6:34 6:35 6:37 6:37 f 6:38 6:39 6:40 6:41 6:42

208 473 428 473

bis

518

855,890,1214 1019,1026 740 850,1019 .... 576,720,721,1010 223,476 930,1164,1182 948 184,213,718,828,1136 .

.

.

917

1157, 1175

tcr,

520, 1105

691

...

312, 597 6ts, 686, 932,

980, 1138, 1139, 1214 676, 762, 763

6:45 6:47 6:48

436 .212,214,232,256,365,530, 551, 779, 909, 1071, 1081, 1091, 1105, 1136

6:48 6:49 7:1 7:3 7:4 7:5 7:6 7:7 7:8 7:9 7:11 7:12

712

f .

.

...

212,648,785,1105,1114 .

546, 841, 965

6is,

971

582,995 872, 884, 961, 996 367,724 518,807 '.

1023

...

767,856,865 290,474 523,530,547,660,774 232,536,537,680, 1116, 1183

7:16 7:17 7:18 7:19

7:19f 7:21 7:24

7:24f 7:25 7:27 7:28 7:30 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:35

842 586

...

194,258,742 292,1108,1116,1118 748 818 1080 857 364,816 872,960 234,504 535 778,792,1107 519,1189 594 837

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS :36 :37 :38 :

742 586, 1035

...

525, 533

bis,

262

...

:39

.292,727,736,741

...

:41

:42

515, 737

:42f

....

:43

47

:43,

:44 :45 :47 :49

... .

581,653,717,978,1102 647,722,774,777,962,966

:47

703, 724, 735, 961

:48 :49 :50 :51 :52 :53 :54 :55 8 :56

587, 608

22

680 743 214, 215, 599, 749 313, 505, 583

:2 :3 :4 :

668 393,659, 1034, 1048 720 701, 1121

1

:1,

bis,

887, 923, 1012, 1014, 1048, 1049, 1177 742, 1087 201, 668, 749, 750, 920

:40

:

645, 799

44

38,

5

.

.

.

107, 478, 695, 990, 1072,

1073, 1153

:5f :5£f :6

:6-8 :7 :8 :9

:10 8 :11 :12 13 :14 14 :15 :

:

:

f

.

:18 :19 :20 :21

:22 :23 :24 :25 :26 :27 :28 :29

29 30 31

749 1152 966 350, 949 216, 341, 644 284, 777 736, 938, 1031 993 704 233 625, 793 1164 704, 728 176, 1182, 1201 318, 634 726, 764, 1001, 1158, 1164 957,962, 1170 530 349, 881 700, 870 675 834, 838, 884, 885 787, 879, 1200 541, 697,917, 1176 573, 6.38, 639, 728

.........

16

8 :17

.

...

527, 528,

718,809,841

234, 463, 464, 519

... f

:33 :34 :35 :36 :37 :38 :39 :40 :41 :42 :43 :45 :46

212,262,318,392,527, 581, 827, 905 543 244, 404 252

1293

....

107,

607 339 339 1043, 1045 1186 203, 342, 1214 608, 733 587, 891, 1073 697 232, 680, 827

367, 1105, 1115

828

....

234, 742, 910, 1035, 1042, 1103, 1109, 1118, 1123

9 :1 9 :3 9 :3-5 9 :5 9 :6 9 :7 9 :7f 9 :8 9 :9 9 :9, 13 9 :10 9 :11 9 :12 9 :13 .

...

.718,721,726615,966, 1045 bis, 1032 264, 462

...

742,827,867,890,895

549 752 .... 475, 809,853, 1166 341,827, 838 264, 465, 769 1049, 1085 1109 427 571, 944, 1072, 1092, 1189 1047 437, 733 299, 608 506, 729, 1071, 1109

.

743, 750, 1(M9 233, 636, 747, 1218

710 1186 691, 733 367 800 .

.

201, 666, 751, 762, 1016,

1017, 1025, 1172

9 14 9 14, 18 9 :15 9 :16 9 :18 9 :18, 20 9 :18f 9 19 9 -.22 9 :23 9 :24 9 :25 9 :27 9 :28 9 :29 9 :30 :

:

:

482, 487

968 771 561 371, 375,431, 891

1036 1035 695, 1047 579, 762 681, 688, 690, 811 641. 688, 689, 698 816, 1023, 1129 473 107, 434, 460 163, 748, 1073 957

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1294

9:31 343,884 9:32 529,533,582,628,766 9:33 .720,726,750,931,1030,1048 299 9:33,41 885 9:34 9:35 507,818 9:36 337,364,657,680,720, 776, 834, 897 bis 9:37 393, 529, 774 232,541 9:38 231,296 9:39 993 9:40 9:41 264,463,464,623 212,818 9:42 537,716,717 9:43 9:43-45 883 9:45 509,812,998,1212 9:46 424,491,585,726,739, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

766, 890, 938, 940, 1021,. 1031, 1044, 1046,' 1176

9:47 9:48 9:49

9:50 9:51 9:52

614

668,698,954 611,838,864,885,892, 964, 1030, 1034, 1041, 1048 ... 607, 720, 956, 962, 1158 .... 349,426,951,1002, 1042, 1068, 1183 621,967,987,990, .

.

.

1089, 1091

9:54

...

561

bis,

858, 878, 935, 1046, 1080 731, 740 6is

9:55 9:56 9:57 9:58 9:59 9:60 9:61 9:62 10:1

10:19

.

.

.

.

.

.

748 969

969,1044,1045 1039,1084 582,1201

10:20 10:21 10:22 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:29,36 10:30 10:31 10:31 f 10:34 10:34f. 10:35 .

965, 1035, 1173 6is

464,524,709,764,788 845, 959

339,678,843 743,796 423,917,1176 765 949

....

234,547,1182 646,765 521,524,542,1113

....

565,572,613 508,691,817,1220

.

10:36 10:37 10:38 10:39 10:40

.875,890,1061,1076, 1165,1175

165

219 107,243,291,602,681, 688, 729, 959 bis, 964, 1039 '.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

501,561,585,593,908 611,802 633,743 289,613,696 529, 560, 565, 573, 618, 627, 816, 1087, 1090

10:40f 10:41 10:42 11:1

620 816 .

518,559,562,728,810,819

...

371, 375, 429, 742 bis, 891, 952, 1036, 1042, 1181

11:2-4 11:3 11:4

.

.

.

.

.

.

852 159,487,766,855,1214 315,335,541,744,773,

11:5 11:6 11:7

... ... ...

185,738,875,930,934 720,726,960,965,996 330,340,362,593,853,

11:8

.

853, 880, 963, 1216

536, 593

1097

....

284,299,571,655, bis, 749, 884, 969 644 608,853,1172

.

.

244, 518, 733

1026,1027,1070,1071, 1148

673 10:3 10:4 10:5 10:6

537 .

.

.

10:6,8,10 10:7 10:8

.

.

.

334,357,394,561,819, 874,948,1025 849

408,561,615,709,757 959,1115 437

10:8, 10

10:11 10:15 10:16 10:17 10:18

.......

401,539,699 643,678,870 418 543,1181

.

.

843,864,883,910,1041, 1042, 1114, 1116, 1123 bis

947, 1170 feis, 1012,

11:9

436,490,573,738 439

f

ll:15f 11:17 11:18 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:24 11:26

1149 1213

11:9, lOf

11:11 11:11 11:13 11:14 11:15

bis,

357, 1213

f

.

.

.

.

548,599,1045,1204 1119 515 749 750

750,891,1081 1008

690,779 .231,366,580,904,971,1181 969 775

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 11:27 11:2R 11:29 11:30 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:38 11:39 11:40 11:42

219 500 1190 963

231,764 284,971 995,1045,1169 532,621,808,965,1035 399,459,505,642,643,786 547,642 315,477,499,500,800,

.

.

.

.

642 473 484, 751 1153 529, 1153 6zs, 1190 1181, 1202

213,796

.

789 265 474 231,577,587,623,696,

.

.

.

.

627, 818 6is, 1158 696,722,724,818,952,962 472,577,704,752,935, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

802, 807, 933, 949, 979, 994, 1073, 1183 Ws

349 699

12- 16

12:18 12:19 12:20 12-21 12:23 12:24

1160

.

.

.

594,902 264,392,406,463,464, 523,-541,816,820 689 411,516,6.54,917 606,1035,1183

6i.s

184,352,1212 609 419,705

.

.

.

12:34 12:35

.

.

.

12:36

.

.

.

12:38

....

158,523,794,1018,

12:39 12:40 12:41 12:42 12:43 12:44 12:46 12:47

....

471,740,922,1014

1187

231,261,465 .215,504,1100,1109, 1137,1172 969 313,314,328,330,360, 375,890,908

.

1046, 1087, 1213 232,560,818,858,950, 979,1046,1074,1092 751,818,917,1157,1182 12:6 818 Ms, 1186 12:7 108,193,459,475,524,541, 12:8 588, 684, 955, 956, 957 bis, 959 1114 12:8 f 439 12-8,10 642,812,818,819 12:9 436,459,473,594,718, 12:10 728,818,957 334,561,739,787,1170 12:11 523,709,726,776 12:12 742 /ns 12:13 480 12-14 472,476,543,598,772, 12:15

12:5

669, 670, S70, 1012,

12:28 12:29 12:30 12:31 12:32 12:33

.

.

714, 722, 727, 801, 818, 952, 953, 1091.1192

12:2 12:3 12:4

....

1151

919, 1171, 1193

11:44 11:45 11:46 11:47 11:48 11:49 11:50 11:51 11:52 11:54 12:1

12:26

1295

597, 1024, 1044, 1045, 1110, 1132 1025, 1182

718 1180 604 891

604,866

718 479,485,626,859, 1112, 1114 653 12:47 f 12:48 436,477,485,659,718,720 12:49 302,739,917,1176,1193 302,729 12:50 1187, 1188 12:51 361,375,907 12:52 605 12:52 f 1180 12:54,57 109,686 12:57 12:58 559,909,967,988,1062, .

.

.

.

.

1079, 1081, 1147

12:59 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:4 13:6

.

.

.

.

616

775,976 290,317,611,613,686 6is,

661, 801, 1029, 1175

849

...

.

253, 283, 616 Ws, 724

906,1115,1117 1128

13:6f 13:7 13:8 13:9

.

.

.

.

.

.

739

bis,

879, 977, 1115

528,620.976 208,394,594,874,924,

942, 1018, 1023, 1025, 1203

13:10 13:11 13:12 13:13 13:13,17 13:14 13:15 13:16 13:17 .

1110 627,1119 264,518 367,770 885 920,965 746 .

.

283,460,518,887,919 542,605

GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

A

1296 13:19 13:19,21 13:21 13:23 13:24 13:25 13:25,26 13:27 13:28 .

.

.

458,595,596,690,791 715 656 916,1024 434

188,319,800,978 324

559, 773 188,324,339,348,876, 972, 1218 13:29 254 13:32 653,1202 13:33 .... 393,652,1198,1202 13:34 204,219,267,348,635, 689, 718 972 6zs, 976 13:35 14:1 613,811 743 14:2, IG 787 14:3 14:4f 818 14:6 574 14:7 477,800,811,883, 1032,1202 14:8 907 988 14:8 f 14:9 360,910 14:10 186,308,328,338,561, 910, 984, 988 1108 14:11 14:12 988 192 14:13(21) 14:14 574 14:15 356 262 14:16 14:17 186,65? 14:18 109,360,375,480,550, 653, 1108, 1122 1110 14:18f 809 14:18,19 14:18-20 842 14:19 818 14:19f 748,902 14:21 427, 787 bis 14:23 789 14:24 473,506 14:25 774 14:26 688,789,1012 14:27 1159 14:28 1024,1045 14:29 1173 14:30 770,1102 14:31 281,531,589,748,1045 14:32 546 14:33 515,720,744,1158 14:34 269,889,934 14:35 535 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

15:2 15:4

529,697 976 213

15:4, 7

15:4,8 15:6 15:6,9

738

562,563,786,805 1035

15:7 15:9 15:11 15:13 15:14 15:15 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:19

661,1188 787, 805 743 771,1163

253,410,608,680 675,817 208,716,883,885 510,532,741,828 594, 874 658,1076,1080

15:19,21 15:20

1061

1110 845

15:21 15:22 15:24 15:25 15:26

483,649 701,904,906 507,792 407,411,736,890, 938

6ts,

940, 1031

15:27 15:29 15:30 15:31 15:32 16:1 16:2

834,842,887 529,652,697,703,1140 .... 312,736,916,1164,

16:3

.

16:3f. 16:4 16:5

...

881,885,893 470,477,879 697 685

...

16:6 16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:11,31 16:12 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22 16:23 16:24 .

.

1176, 1214 .480,483,559,600,1060, 1078, 1102 935

308,518,827,842,893 201 499

.

.

496,633,651,667,779 254,510,598 658, 660, 782 bis

1009 1012 288 bis

251,508,748 472,705,778 1108

221,645,975 579

186,921 bis, 910

485,810,883 361,364,366,905 1186 1085

408,502,586 495, 775

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 16:25 16:26 16:26 16:27 16:27 16:28 16:29 16:30 16:31 17:1

341, 696 548, 561, 800, 896

28

ftis,

986 1046 1046 986 268

f

18: 9

.

.

.

18: 10

.

.

.

1088

12 13 14 18 22

505, 646, 769, 880 231, 561, 756, 858

25 29 28 29 30

192, 1058-

393, 720, 721, 996, 1002, 1040, 1059, 1060, 1068,

1094, 1171

...

17:2

212,472,485,560,661, 992, 997 ... 477,542,689,802,1202 505, 769 310, 948 .... 887, 921, 1015, 1022 338 340,738,869,976, 1045, 1215 349 728,930 550,560,562,565,581, 648, 791, 1042 367 1042

17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8

17:9 f 17:10 17:11

17:12 17:14 17:15 17:17 17:21 17:22 17:23 17:24 17:25 17:27 17:28 17:29 17:29 17:30 17:31 17:32 17:33 17:34 17:35 17:37 18:1 18:2 18:4 18:5

18:6 18:7 18:7 18:8

.

.

.

611

917,1157 505,J641

f

.

f

.

.

224 392 652,792,1202 579 717, 884, 975 968 791 522, 718 208, 968 308,440,442,708,724, 957, 959 506 193, 957 748, 749 602, 889 969 626,997,1003,1049, 1060, 1075 743 688, 1012, 1026. 1027 201,244,1039, 1148 hi.% 1149

....

....

495,930,934, 1158 802 589,916, 1176

661, 703, 708

675 541

234 310 641, 726 284, 673 539 1190 762

31 32 33 34 35

751 743

36

890, 938, 1022, 1031

bis,

1042, 1044

18 :37 18 :38 18 :39 18 :41 19 1 19 :2 19 3 19 :4

1035 463, 464 532, 664,

800

924, 935 472, 476, 563

:

162, 457, 679, 723 423, 488, 580, 738

:

186, 201, 472, 476,

.

494

?)is,

547, 652, 983, 1202, 1205

19 :5 19 :5f 19 :7 19 :8

...

19 :8f 19 9 19 :10 19 :11

....

19 :12 19: 13 19: 14 19::15

328,861,1127 1109, 1127 614 199,275,502,742,870, 880, 892 1008 963 411,764, 1109 551, 640, 800, 1071, 1126, 1127

272 690, 976, 978

:

879, 886, 919

:

.

107,308, 737,841, 1044, 1048, 1049, 1214

.

749

19: l(y-20 19: 17

.

.

.

20

.

.

.

19:

299, 330, 375, 890, 950 361, 375, 776, 906 bis

19: 21

997

23 19: 29

922, 1014, 1023

19:

496, 651 f

748, 990, 1080, 1087-8,

502, 697, 700, 965, 1035, 1159, 1188

791 .

342, 540, 605, 778, 1107

18:11

819,871,1210 .

1297

19:

30

19: 31 19:

35

.

.

.

154

bis,

232, 259, 267, 458, 780

644 850 212, 799

318 154,412,619,623, 624 bis, 719

19:36 19:37

19:40

325, 333 6is, 356, 361, 801,

.

873,907,1008,1010,1217 19:41 19:42

.

.

.

19:43 19:46 19:47 19:48 20:1 20:2 20:3 20:4 20:6 20:7 20:9 20:10 20:11

20:llf 20:12 20:14 20:15 20:16 20:17 20:19 20:20

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1298

834 483,523,793,834,835, 842, 1023, 1203 617,873,907,1183 480 470,487,550,888 190,317,766,771, 1127, 1217 523

118 1180 117 163, 903, 1030, 1040, 1081 1036, 1038, 1171 308, 470

.

.

.

•

.

.

.

.

324,519,522,872,984

748 551,1078 94,822, 1078 497 876 939 bis, 940 718,870 626,1183 481,508,787,990,1036, 1039, 1040, 1089, 1177 1158 393 425,767,1177 508,573 458,1094,1171 849 150 509,598,782 1189 879 253,1034 1162 199,686 564 743 153,187 416,439,459,565,601,960 932-3,996 219,1201 622

20:22 20:24 20:25 20:26 20:27 20:28 20:34 20:35 20:35! 20:36 20:37 20:40 20:42 20:47 21:2 21:5 21:6 21:8 21:11 21:12 21:12,17 21:14 .... 21:15 21:16 21:17 .

641

334,818,1094,1171 573 599

375,636,878,889

21:18 21:19 21:20 21:22 21:23 21:24 21:25 21:26 21:27 21:33 21:34

597

681,683,871 1041

.

.

.

.

.

.

1061,1076,1088 216,870 534,889,974 262, 419, 794 5is, 795 566 876 873 186,272,400,542,550, 657, 708, 996, 1213

21:36 21:37 22:1 22:2 22:2-4 22:4 22:5 22:6 22:6,35 22:7 22:10 22:11 22:12 22:14 22:15 22:16 22:18 22:19 22:20 22:22 22:23

154

.

6is,

feis

476 232, 267, 458, 470

416,498 427, 766, 985

1031 766, 1031, 1046

350 .

.

.

517, 1061, 1068, 1076

639 887

.

.

.

.

333,356 934,955,969,1045,1205 185,260 219

.

.

.

.

531

bis,

621, 978, 1075

976 577 685 213, 1060, 1074 1152, 1153 427,430,739,766,890, 938, 1031 bis

22:23 f 22:23,24 22:24 22:25 22:26 22:26 f 22:27 22:28 22:29 22:30 22:32 22:33 22:34 .

22:35 22:37 22:38 22:40 22:41 22:42 22:44 22:45

.

1046 739 766,938,1031 510 1214 1140 737 1108 581 232,1216 300,1139 659 548, 90S, 976 bis, 977 bis,

1036,1094,1171 219,750 401,611,766,818 411

.

603,853 469,559 193,339,1023,1203,1214 231,339 580

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 22:47 22:48 22:49

.

.

.

477 311,533 374,450,502,590,620,

876, 878, 916, 934, 935, 1024 bis, 1109, 1118, 1215

22:50 22:52 22:53 22:54 22:55 22:56 22:58 22:59 22:61 22:63 22:65 22:66 22:67 22:70 22:71 23:1 23:2

150,675,742 611 704 559

617,644 697

612,653,678 550,697,743,746 483,509,873,1091 628 1130 1179 1020

678,695,915 519,649 404,412

....

339, 1039, 1041 6is,

1094, 1123

23:4 23:5 23:6 23:7 23:8 23:11 23:12

786

....

413,548,1126,1203

916 561 597, 884 483,628 220,289,405,025,686, 690, 888, 1103, 1120 .511,560,720,750,966,1141

.

.

.

23:14 23:15 .534,542,794,820,903,1186 23:18 170,348,530,760 23:19 323,375,860 23:21 695 23:23 805 23:20 517,045 23:28 475,1173 23:29 219 23:30 338 23:31 195, 587, 588, 929, 934 23:32 749 23:33 696,792,794 23:35,37 1009 23:38 159,604 23:39 409 23:41 720 23:44 1183 23:45 775 23:47 700 23:49 366, 560, 778 23:50 176 23:51 434,529 23:53 316,375,906,1165 23:54 493,885 .

.

.

1299

....

23:5',

24:1 24:2 24:3 24:4 24:5 24:6 24:7

.

720,720,1032,1043 274,495,522,672,718,841 575 225 267 611 1032 649,1049

24:10 214,501,767 24:11 404,540 24:13 263,424,469 24:14 529,625,883 24:14,25,31 680 24:16 .... 518,765,1061,1171 24:17 .572,625,703,735,835,1202 24:18 172,235,549,656, 657, 1183 24:19 399, 419, 651, 735, 740 bis 24:19f 1046 24:20 731,732,985,1045 24:21 216,244,392,424,028, 679,701,771,884,978,1029, 1035, 1148 bis, 1185, 1186 24:22 550,057,1186 24:23 .489,1028,1038,1039 24:24 968 24:25 487,658,659,716, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1061, 1077

24:20 24:27 24:28 24:29 24:30 24:31 24:32 24:34 24:35 24:38 24:39 24:41 24:42 24:45 24:46 24:47

.

.

887,919 367,566 297, 298 625,765,792,1065,1088 1039 575,682,1213 367,888,974,1212 334, 842, 1213 ?)is 534,587,726 587,739 203,200,1041 580, 743 159 315, 1036, 1212 858, 1080 bis, 1081

413,491,535,946, 1126,1203 643,683,1205 561,581,1072

24:50 24:51

John 1:1

...

.

135,273,579,623,625,

758, 761, 767, 792, 794, 795, 883

1:1-18 1:2 1:2,7 1:2-8

915 441,028 700 91S

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1300 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6

751

243,768,801 1183

...

416,434,460,534,615, 707, 723 583,703,707,850 1:7 915 1:7 f 619 1:7,22 505,707,708,1187 1:8 777,891,1118 1:9 762 1:9,41 1:10 834 1:11 502, 691 ier, 767, 834, 1157 563 1:11 f 1:12 339,732,778,834,1076, 1107, 1217 1:13 408, 534 1:14 ... 275,276,394,407,413, 505, 767, 794, 818, 829 «er, 1204 1:15 ... 280,434,438,473,484, .

NEW TESTAMENT

1:41 (42) 215 1:42 255,376,411,678,835 1:44 578,598 1:45 578,782 1:46 428, 478, 720, 743, 875, 949 1:46 f 598 1:47 1100 1:48 621, 634, 635 bis, 765, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

1:48 1:49 1:50

f

.

.

.

.

.

.

516, 640, 662, 670, 801, 887,

l:15ff 1:16 1:17 1:18

...

895,896,1111 964,1034 407,505,574,829,1181

1200 364,536,586,593,614, 656,707,708,829,893,896,906 1:19 704,905,915 l:19ff 897 1:20 1205 918 1:20 f 1:21 233,768 1157 1:21 f 1:24 905 1:25 1012, 1135, 1160 6is, 1165 1:28 505,550,644,720 1:27 503, 658 6is, 961, 992, 996 1:28 970 1:29 391,1193 1:29-42 868 1:30 234,629,632,677 1:31 904 1:32 408, 440, 602, 792, 893, 897 896 1:32,34,41 1:33 440,677,707,724 1:34 893 1:35 366

...

.

.

1:51 1:52 2:1 2:2

2:2,12 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:5-8 2:6 2:7 2:9

2:9,23 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20

1184 .

.

218,277,643,678 216,701-2,704,771,781 470,680,681,686 265,427

...

.

2:20,27 2:21 2:22 2:23 2:24

.

.

1:39

.

.

40

.

1:41

.

1

:

.

1042 411,416,433,465,875, 1044, 1123 299,470,714,813,871, 949, 1044 519, 614 bis, 762, 779, 785 .

.

416, 433, 549, 657, 691 bis, 714, 762 bis, 770, 795, 881, .

893,897

427 855,950 500,903,1029 311,433,964,1034 586,856,948,1023 283,365,367,495,523, 527,833,1183 230 399,498,707,708 715

.

.

.

bis

523,760 226,287,476,686,688,

689, 765, 885, 966, 1071, 1186

.

1:37 1:38

858,1075 978 769,781,1126 277,396,476,634,871, 1028,1029,1123 423 364 762 428 405 700 539,736 243,729 855 571,906 510 474,506,507,841

2:25 3:1 3:2 3:3 ff

584 1029,1043,1176 .395,434,460,599,782,1185 611 6is, 793 857

3:3,5 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:10

751 795 1200 852 bis 299, 342, 548 bis, 800, 1177 678,768,1175

2:24f .

3:11 3:12

.

.

407,653 654,1012,1160

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 3:13 3:14 3:16

...

3:17 3:18

600,859,1183 968 135,437,753,758,762, 770, 1000 /«s

4:22 4:23

1166

.4:26

897,898,963,1028,

4:27

....

4:25

1159, 1169

...

3:19

426,663,666,699,789, 964, 1033, 1183, 1184

3:19 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:24 3:25 3:26 3:27 3:28 3:29 3:30 3:31 3:32 3:33 3:34 3:35 3:36 4:1

1191

f

364,795 438, 884 392 905

433,515,598,610 539

....

94, 531 bis,

707 550

218,707,708 243,598 S59

4:1-3 4:2 ...

.

4:2, 12

4:4 4:5 4:6

857,907,1019,1162

.

.

bis,

901 his 1034

597,1163 585,643 540,879 438,666,684,841, 1034,1049 434 1129,1148,1149,1154 680

393,582,887,919 428,505,547,596,646,715

...

.

4:7 4:7ff

367,549,599,604,778, 909 6is, 1116, 1146 598 4,34

343 905 ... 204, 371, 482, 530, 678 ... 418, a.'56, 678, 922 6is, 1014, 1046, 1069, 1105, 1110 4:11 394, 656 /m-, 777, 778, 1105, 1106,1166,1179,1182,1185,1189 667 4:12 599 4:13 4:14 519,J20, 716, 813, 889, 1212 4:15 201,985, 1088 299 4:16 856 4:16,35 699 4:17 4:18 ... 657,720,790,833,843 426,842-3,1183 4:20 919 4:20,24 1159 4:21 971 4:21,23

4:7,9 4:8 4:9 4:10

.

.

.

4:28 4:29 4:31 4:33 4:33,

4:34 4:35 4:36 4:37 4:39 4:39,

4:40 4:41 4:42 4:43 4:44 4:45 4:46 4:47 4:49 4:50 4:51 4:52 4:53 5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:7 5:8 5:9 5:11

1301

233,429,678,713,1159 234,400,470,540,566, 710,1186 ........ 215,707,708 778 424,604,611,756,791, 1154, 1188 433 251, 917, 949, 1167, 1175 587,645,884 292,743,917,1168 35 1168 685,992,1076 422,626,678,870,1180 299,659 786 1123 53 709 762 1179 686 762 691,1191 1128 •. 970 368,597,884 977,1091 715 6rs, 841 1212 206,470,546,665,834 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

566, 680, 721

782

...

.

104,169,524,604,760

427 291,585,710,719,1149 892,1115 428,879 .. 879,960,978,1001,1068 681, 855 bis, 950 681, 838, 855, 890 ... 258,274,480,481,656, 695, 707, 769, 855 275 5:11,15 5:12 778,1114 841 5:13 5:14 234,890 5:15 ..836,859,1035,1112,1114 5:17 681 5:18 .... 396,884,1060,1166 5:19 ... 190, 707, 70S, lOlS /)w,

...

.

.

1094, 1181

5:20 5:21 5:23 5:24 5:24,38

188,311,325,985 969 1137 593, 897, S98

453

1302 5:25

GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

A .

.

135, 234, 333, 356

fets,

5:25, 28 5:25, 29

5:27 5:28 5:28 5:29 5:30 5:31

781,802 890 859 500 685,828,890,1162 890,1010,1018 677 479,746,764 897 896 110,866 334,625,1212 220, 265, 274 6is, 516,

f

5:31, 34

5:32 5:33 6:33, 36

6:34 5:35 6:36

.

ff

.

781 333 859

.

667, 686, 789, 894, 1204

6:37 5:37 5:38 6:39 5:39 5:40 6:41 5:42 5:43 6:44

893,896 1179,1189 678,703

f

...

.

329

6is,

678, 707, 941

1183 878 110

f

499,500 762 437,442,771,857, 1128,1135 678 707,

5:44 f 5:45 5:46 5:46 f 5:47 6:1 6:2 6:2,5 6:5 6:6 6:7 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:12

779,853,890,895 540,1014 1012 1009, 1012, 1160

44,503 368,404,604,1218 774 1035

891,950,1029,1043 745, 921, 998 407,674,704,713,736,762 486 732,762,967,1181 618,751 6:12, 16 974 6:13 598,762,777 6:14 444, 718 bis, 768 6:15 287,480,657 6:16 602,841,904 6:16-21 904 .

.

6:17 ... 361, 366 bis, 904, 1214 6:18 367, 1179, 1215 6:19 263,469,603,904 6:20 890,947 6:21 603, 857, 886, 919 6:22 437,444,776,887,1034 6:22-24 1029 .

.

.

6:23 6:24 6:25 6:27 6:28 6:29

232 887, 1029, 1049

.

.

6:29, 39,

896 471,595 850,880,889,923,934 567,706,708,720,721,850 400 40 850 375, 903 bis .

.

6:30 6:31 6:32 1187 6:34 300 6:35 349,850 235 6:35,37,44,45 6:36 889,1182 6:37 409,682 6:37,39 653,713,773 6:38 895, 1166, 1187 bis 6:39 437,439,684,718,753, 769,775,992 6:40 ... 520,522,586,708,762 6:41 ... 444,561,853,859,1201 6:42 697,698 6:43 610,853 6:44 520, 523, 586 6:45 504, 516, 859 6is, 1097 6is 614 6:45 f 6:46 1034 6:47 653 6:48 677 6:49 1183 6:50 599,768 6:51 6:52

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

234, 768, 872, 1185 6is

811 444 856

6:52,60 6:54 6:57 6:58 6:61 6:62 6:63 6:64

584

.

.

.

.

374,550,597,792,878, 1118

6:65 6:66 6:67 6:68 6:69 6:70 6:71 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4 7:4, 10

7:5 7:6

6is

968 587 470, 487, 550, 1023, 1203 768,1206

.

.

.

.

.

.

6is,

1159, 1214

234 444,597 878,917,923,1175 790,791,876,924,934 423,652.163,895,1035 779

501,884 444,885 399 308,328,1180 752,1009,1038,1100 764 1185 770 bis, 777

1303

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 833 429,444

7:9 7:10 7:11 7:13 7:13,17 7:14 7:15 7:16 7:17

.

7:18 7:19 7:22 7:23

.

.

.

.

707 Ms

491,500 619

444,838,885 1172 496 292,551,741,757,878, 1019 Ws, 1045, 1177, 1188 698 762, 1175 .

.243,434,1166,1187,1202 275,418,541,656,774, .

965, 1175

27,444,698,703

7:26, 35, 47, 51

7:27 f 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:34,36 7:35 7:37 7:38 .

7:39 7:40 7:41 7:41 7:42 7:44 7:45 7:47 7:48 7:49 7:51 7:52

.

.

.

f

135,845,1168 917 1183 231,905,1183 716,720,1175 44,1123 659 969 232,233

495,501,581,1001,1205

.

f

8:3,9 8:5 8:7 8:9 8:12 8:14

feis

478

7:24 7:25 7:26

234, 444 333,355,356,437, 459, 1130 368, 433, 795, 859 bis 599 bis 1190 578 970 857 444 1175 599 404,407 308,1168,1214 866,949 1210 405 1102,1121

282,294,602

....

768 208,866,870,1010, 1018, 1045

;16 :16,

54

922, 1015

19 :20 :20,

:23 :24

208,424,1026 1019

37

586,905,1165 1159 547 6ts, 548, 765 356

8:25

.

.

244,294,419,470,487,

.

546, 550, 729, 730 6w, 738, 917

698,1186 473,1029 698,837

8:26 8:27 8:28 8:28,32 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:32 8:33 8:38 8:39 8:42 8:44 8:49 8:51 8:52 8:53 8:54 8:55 8:56 8:57 8:58 8:59 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7

871

.

537,549,611,659,845

.

.

1132 234,453,1117 872 872,896 614 921,1015-16,1022 579,708,881,1014 .224,551,683,768,1219 690 850,1019 473,507 441,728 1034 505,530,1026 993,1212 310,337,1183 394,880,977,1091 350,581,807,817,1136 784 998 404 976,1081,1159 684, 972 420,681,779 253,592,714,855 253 9:7, 11 503,768,866,887,1115,1139 9:8 1028 9:9 339,419,420,503,1213 9:10 420,681,779 9:11 708 9:11,25 234,707 9:12 368,718,1213 9:14 681 9:15 710 9:16 779 9:16,40 9:17 964 420 9:17,26,30 1213 9:17,32 291,841,975,1029 9:18 9:19f 76S 9:20 524 733 9:21 9:22 366,480,811,816,905,993 9:24 597, 097, 700 9:25 .... 866,892,1045,1115 9:27 878 9:28 268, 473, 707 /)is 9:30 433,1190 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1029 698 597

9:30,32,35 9-31 9-32 9-33 9-34 9-35 9-36 9:40 9-41 10-1 10-3

920,1014,1016 656,678,768,774 841 960,999,1182 611 1013, 1014

.'

300,708 608 428 358,404,801 355,356,418,889 500,708,736,880 501,768 507,622

10:3,9,12 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:10 10:11

'.

.

10-11 14

10:ll'l5 10:12 10-13 .

.

1015ff 10-17 10:18 10:22 10-27 10:28 10:30 10:32 10-33 10-34 10:35 10:36 10:37 10:37 10:38 10:39 10-40 11-1 11:2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1304

.

.

1025 398,418,429,656,776, 865,1206 762 632 434,764,955,1138,1163 509 870 965 420,579,845 408,760 762 333,356,752,875,1164 402,677 740, 845, 880 bis 480 1028 .

.

.

.

434,480,708,1160,1182 425,437,442,781,952, 1015,1028 1012,1020,1170 .

1160 425,850,983,1026

f

...

.

11:3, 6, 12, 14 eic

11:4 11:6 . 11:7 11:8 11:9 11-10 11:11 11-11-13 11:12 11:13 11:14

.

.

....

.

.

.

.

409,885 487,659,833,970 256,578 859,1114 1191 632

470,706,718,1152,1153 931,1205 885 587,800,1019 587 895 905 1009 498,905,1029 1210 bis

.

.

.

.

^

.

580 11:16 266,800 11:17 11:18 283, 424, 469, 575 5ts, 760 619,620,905 11:19 521,791 11:20 420,841 11:21 313,922,1015 11:21,32 676,684,733 11:22 420 11:23 669 11:24 356,768 11:25 915 11:26 f 391,781,891,1028, 11:27 1034,1150 861,881 11:28 841, 905 bis 11:30 596 11:31 11:32 420 6is, 681, 706, 722, 779 391,834 11:35 302,339,741,884 11:36 698,857,920,985,993 11:37 341,559,560,593,596,604 11:38 657 11:39 856 11:39,44 1030 11:40 541,856 11:41 477,617,843 11:42 328,1193 11:43 193,197,361,366,486, 11:44 11:47 11:48 11:49 11:50 11:51 11:51,53 11:52 11:.54

11:55 11:56 11:56 11:57 12:1

f

.

.

905,910,1117 880 6is, 923, 934 681

675,742 631

bis,

993, 1034

688,1029,1034

709 581,593,1162 205,640 517,621 1217 905 134,234,308,905,986,993 ... 110,424,598,621,622, 702, 762 bis, 970, 1191 627 510, 598, 859 .

12:2 12:3 HI 12:4 932 12:7 656,777 12:9 774 12:9,12 811,993,994,1180 12:10 243,528,595,838 12:13 264,462 12:15 487,550,605,653,765,905 12:16 1029 12:16,33 892 12:17 .

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 12:18 .909,1035,1042,1101 12:19 843,943 243 12:19,21 27 12:20 12:21 923 12:22 405 12:23 895,992 1019 12:24 317 12:25 969,1019 12:26 12:27 598,843,895,1187 12:28 462,845 90S, 1047, 1081 12:29 12:30 584 12:32 190,597,889,1018 740bis 12:33 12:34 679,704,735 976 12:35 f 12:36 133,807,974 1129 12:37 12:39 699,875 12:42 1155, 1188 6is 301,633,1150,1154 12:43 1135 12:44 753 12:46 234 12:47 698 12:48 698 12:49 13:1 498,691,843 435 13:1 ff. 13:1-5 435 13:2 309, 799 562 13:3 13:4 188,314,597 716, 757 13:5 13:6 ... 418,420,880,915,1175 915,933 13:8 1162,1172,1173 13:9 234 13:10 481,1045 13:12 270,416,458^,466,1028 13:13 399,845 13:14 633 13:15 516 13:16 850,890,1019,1022 13:17 560,84.5,1203 13:18 765, 978, 9S3, 1075 13:19 13:20 190, 956 his, lOlS 675 13:21 739 13:22 703,724,1045 13:24 (:02, 707 13:25 707,708 13:26 488, 6()4, SSO 13:27 626,739 13:28 13:29 235,442,595,706,720 .

.

.

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

13:31 13:32 13:33 13:34 13:36 f 13:37 14:1 14:2 14:2 f 14:3 14:3 f 14:4 14:6 14:7 14:8 14:9 14:11

1305 843,847 1009 548 845, 993 857 879

329,941 424, 1015, 1025

869 353,690,846

....

299 731 249, 583, 769 923,1181 393 419,528,879 287,395,856,1016, 1025, 1202

243,727,729,850

14:13

14:13f

956 14:15 1019 14:16 613,747,1023 14:17 233,614,857 709 bis 14:17,29 14:19 395,963 14:21 635, 688, 707, 708 6is, 769 14:22 739,916,965,1001,1034 802 14:23 14:24 685 14:26 418,482,483,509,634, 708 6is, 709, 795 14:27 315, 777 234,817,923,1015 14:28 109 14:29 308 14:31 777 15:1 15:2 243,437 437 15:2,5 584 15:3 15:4 586,587 437,442,1165 15:5 15:6 ... 392, 820 Ws, 828, 836, 837 6is, 847, 850, 1020, 1204 850 15:7 ... 324,699,837,843,984, 15:8 .

.

.

.

.

.

992.1076 856,968

15:9 15:10 15:11

779 784,1204 699

15:11, 17

15:12 15:13 15:14 15:15 15:16 15:18

.

.

.

393,699,992,993 272,401,429,699,992

.

480,769,845 300,327.729,993,1214

681 .

.

....

28,

670,

lOOS,

1013

A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1306 15:19 15:20 15:21 15:22 15:22,24

.

.

.

559,598,921,1014 509,716,1009 484 921,1013,1169 336,339,887,922,

1014, 1015, 1016, 1147 921, 1013 feis 15:24 1033,1203 15:25 561,708,795,970,1181 15:26 879,1185 15:27 859,998,1114,1186 16:2 834,845 16:3 1049 16:4 1019 6^s 16:7 566,1126 16:8 964 16:8-11 857 16:12 698,708,709,1109 16:13 393,515,599,698 16:17 703,719 16:17 f 738 16:18 610,659,699,875,1029 16:19 458 bis, 595, 871 16:20 871 16:20,22 866 16:21 424 6is 16:22 16:23 190, 482 6is, 708, 1018 709 16:23,26 325,360,375,848,907 16:24 618 16:26 579,614 16:27 598 16:28 579,589,699 16:30 1175 16:31 657 16:32 135,677 16:33 801 17:1 462 17:1,5,11 17:2 .193,309,348,409,411,437, .

.

.

598 Us 768 439

17:15 17:17 17:18 17:19 17:19,23 17:21 17:21,24

360,908 983 234, 395, 461

17:21,24,25 17:22 17:23

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

500,713,718,876,963,984 17:3

17:4 17:5

.

.

.

.

.

203,699,718,776,984, 985, 992 bis, 1079

.234,418,677,682,843

418,461,678,682,716, 765, 891, 978 bis, 1074, 1075 17:6 337,598,894,895 337 b?:s, 820 17:7 310 17:7 f 234,337,423 17:8 566,567,618,619,720,721 17:9 685,770,898 17:10 464,948 17:11 716 17:11 f 599,1188 17:12 902 17:13 598 17:14,16 .

.

.

17:24 17:25

.

.

.

.

.

.

17:26 18:1 18:2,5 18:3 18:5 18:6 18:10 18:11 18:13 18:14 18:15 18:16 18:17 18:18 18:20 18:21 18:22 18:23 18:24 18:26 18:28 18:29 18:30 18:32 18:34 18:35 18:36 18:37

213,275,627,680

... ... ...

18:40 19:1 19:2 19:3 19:6 19:7 19:11 19:12

.

.

.

859 548,1127 888 521 457,762 459,683,850,934, 1161,1174 255 529,1035,1058,1084 405, 529, 537, 707 bis 764, 747 bis, 775, 777 708 909 bis, 910, 1116 589 726 1116 1009 bis 841

575,706,720 1183 500 1015,1016

....

531,740,1029,1043 288,688 1172

.

.

.

.

.

18:38 18:39

264 462 898 360,593,677,908, 1049,1116 653,713,933,969,1048 264 Ws, 419, 461, 464, 843, 1128 478 6zs, 482

922,993 233,599,915,917,1165, 1175,1192 411,736 430,541,876,878,924, 935,980,992

.

1172, 1173

801 .

.

.

.

.

.

408,483,883 311,465,969,884,1214 1190,1200 480 885, 887, 906 bis, 921, 923,1014,1015,1016 521,542,573

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 19:13 19:14 19:17 19:18 19:19 19:20 19:21 19:22 19:23 19:24 19:25 19:26 19:27 19:28 19:29 19:31 19:32 19:32 19:33

104,367 501,793 104,539 300,775 362,375,603 28,104,205 707

.

.

.

.

525

502,586,691 425,898 365,392,1212 530,746,747,775 f .

.

.

.

.

.

f

1212 546,602,909,910,963,

1041,1042,1118 707,1118 260,704 293,594,706,720,721, 772,871 578 495,1127 533

.

.

1076

.

.

593 155,623,917,1168

408,580,593,652 716,810 .

.

.

21:9 21:10 21:11 21:12 21:13 21:14 21:15 21:15ff 21:15-17 21:17 21:18 314 .

.

.

.

21:19

.

.

868 133,868 443 683,1009 869 416,462,465,714 259 561,853 438,1028,1212

20:16, 18

20:17 20:18 20:19 20:19,26 20:20 20:21 20:22 20:23 .

21:20 21:21 21:22 21:22f 21:23 21:24 21:25

.

.

395,736,978 976 593,703,1216 137,406,416,785

234, 369, 729, 877 brs, 891, 1030, 1040, 1082 6is, 1162, 1205, 1210 .

.

.

^^ .

1:1

..

.

280, 419, 440, 463, 663,

669,716,954,1152,1179, 1193,1203 1:1-5 1:2 1:3 .. 1:4 ..

121 .

767,841 147,581,820,1039,1074

.

442, 475, 507, 519, 578,

618,688,715,717,1029,1049 1:5

.

.

.

.

522, 653, 708, 722, 779

593 1128 429 207 190,315,1019

268,469,499,520,521, 533, 543, 575, 802 841 519,577,716,843,845 672,1129 437,885,949,1128 1205 702,843 187,516,659,667

501 255,1201 1028 bis, 802, 884, 969 ftis, 971, 1199 531,740,876,891,1029, 1043, 1110 724 395,411,697,705, 736 62s, 1202

589, 624, 653, 868, 906, 1202

20:13 20:14 20:14-18 20:15 20:15-18 20:16

258,259 882,1201 2G1, 461, 466 ?;i.s, 779 859,895,1028 362,655,1181 540 bis' 603

405,501,767 .353,627,882,923,990,1062

316, 762, 905

522,762,868,1097 392,566,845,1202 747 20:2,3,4 20:3 775 20:3f 746,838 20:4 278,401,549,656,662,669 20:5-7 868 20:7 593,603,648 20:8 868 20:9 1165 20:11 525, 624 feis 20: 12

.

214, 254

19:35 19:36 19:37 19:38 19:39 19:39 19:40 19:41 20:1 20:2

bis

358,801,895 212,408,1184 619,690,811,931,943 235,255,501,614,767,904

20:25 20:27 20:28 20:29 20:30 20:31 21:1 21:2 21:3 21:4 21:5 21:6 21:7 21:8

1307

1:6 1:7 1:8 1:10

l:10i

.

110, 389, 418, 420, 533, 612, 656, 702, 1158, 1205

316

^i^s,

523, 695, 916, 1151

497 418,787 267 904

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1308 1:11 1:12

1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23

.

398,701,718,771 154,232,267,269,458,

.

.

469,640,778,780 501,629,760 623

283,434,602 399,651,859 509 472,510,599,775,834, 1151, 1217 28, 219 272, 939, 1116, 1214 721 413,639,717,974,1126 214 215

...

.... .

.

.

1:23,26

678,706,861 561,692 261,376,966,969, 1105,1140 748 212,593 498,1042 224

1:24 1:25 2:2

2:4 2:5 2-6 2:7 2-9

186 788 770, 1123 692,747,883,1031 749,903,1127 1107 793,1158

2:9f 2:11 2-12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:17 2:17,21 2:18 2:20 2:21 2:22 2:23 2:24 2:25 2:26 2:27

393,531,577 1042 1148 561, 1091 bis

.

2:27, 31

2:28 2:29

.

720,744 399,427,534,579,698,716 317,339,698,1113 122,1058 234 Ms, 367, 594 224, 604 591,593,792 502 510 .

2:30 2:31 2-32 2:33

.

.

2:34 2:36 2:37 2:38

.

.

234, 587, 612, 881, 1119,

.

.

1130,1182 497,531,877,1205 593 701,714 448,498,533,625,781, 1179 652 772 350,1179 389,592,595,780,781, 782,795

NEW TESTAMENT

2:39 541,593,733 666,813 2:40 283,1151 2:41 542 2:42 541 2:43 2:45 581,722,884,922,958,967 2:46 508, 519, 608 ^is, 609, 1179 2:47 .... 318,891,1115,1116 602 3:1 3:1-10 905 3:2 .. 318, 392, 480, 884, 891, 990, 1088 429 3:2 f 313,559,877,884 3:3 538,828,1036,1127 3:5 698 3:6 210,508 3:7 3:8 423, 1116 bis, 1136 1103 3:9 3:10 ... 262, 626, 885, 887 6is, 1111, 1117, 1179 269,407,604,655 3:11 3:12 334,423,818,1065,1068, 1078, 1140 649,707,1151 3:13 399,651,785,818 3:14 714 3:15 517,639,644 3:16 609,1128 3:17 409,858,877,1036,1080 3:18 649,1075 3:19 986,1049 3:19f 716,1151 3:21 733,1151 3:22 3:23 ... 184, 189, 598, 727, 959 732 3:24 625,716 3:25 3:26 538, 549, 800, 891 ftis, 991, 1072, 1073 6is, 1116, 1128 587,966,1071 4:2 538 4:3 1047 4:5 f 214 4:6 4:7 648, 655, 678, 740 500, 703, 780 4:9 .656,698,705,715,1015 4:10 656 4:10,16 698,703,769 4:11 635 6is, 749, 751, 778, 1107 4:12 127,415,691,812,887, 4:13 1035, 1197 1087, 1179 4:14 202 4:15 656,665,880,1152 4:16 531,538,1094 4:17 546,550,607 4:18 .

.

.

.....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 4:19 4:20

516,606,1045 312,677,1094,1164, 1171 bis, 1173, 1174, 1214 766,905,966,1031,

....

4:21

1046, 1128

4:22 4:23 4:24 4:25 4:27 4:29 4:30 4:31 4:32 4:33 4:34

.

.

.

268,498,602,666,905 733 419,1214 739 905

224,560,765,772 1072,1073

311 587,884,891,892, 1115,1116 190,312,318,612,

4:35

922,967,1214 4:36 487, 530, 579 feis, 714 4:37 891,1116 5:1 215, 256 bis, 457 5:2 256, 319, 517, 627, 810, 1116 5:3 1001, 1089, 1090 5:4 541,965,1166 739 5:4,9 5:5 833,1116 5:7 460, 581 bis 5:8 308,510,710,810 5:9 529,601,1084 5:12 2m bis 5:13 529 5:14 435,453,1106 5:15 194,214,984,1091 5:16 404,412,617,929 5:17 261,1107,1108 5:19 408,581,791 5:20 497,706 5:21 635,1086 5:22 800 5:23 601,603,621 5:24 405, 736 bis, 789, 938, 940, 1021, 1044 5:25 233,881 531,995 6:26 5:28 224, 253, 510, 531 bis, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

697,760,878,895 5:29 5:30 5:31 5:34 5:35 5:36

5:38

547,1018,1019

5:3Sf 5:39

995, 1009, 1096

963

632,884,1151

5:41 5:42 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:5 6:8 f 6:11

1102, 1109, 1121

104,626,782,1043 348 816,989,1149 435 173,235,275,276 788 594,634,801,897, 1042, 1113 1102

905

688,691,751

.

.

.

405, 747 317,603,1127 480,526,1088 653 605 172,233,411,540,542,

6:13 6:14 7:1 7:2 7:3

732 835

701

546,800,916 215,419,1091 464 957 7:3,7 7:4 ... 561,566,721,979,1074 7:5 .... 1036,1131,1138,1139 889 7:6 203,959 7:7 7:8 522, 760 308 7:9 7:10 ... 339,480,481,640,1100 7:12 .... 262,536,1042,1103 537,587 7:13 .

7:14 7:16 7:17 7:18 7:19 7:20 7:21 7:22 7:23 7:24 7:25 7:26 7:27 7:28 7:29 7:30 7:31 7:34 7:35

5S9

bis

367,510,561,716 716,968,974 639,748,975 .

.

.

477, 703, 1068, 1090 bis

537,671,718 339,401,482,680,811 772 207,392 805,1204 .... 315,885,1036,1049 522,739,861,885 244,367

...

206, 718

589 760 474 .

.

.

.

187,430,932,1110,1147 .253,268,649,698,778, 860, 863, 1113

698 794 778 537 436,459,541,697,701, 703, 960 367 bi-s, 532 463,800,1087

7:35,36,37,38,40 7:36 7:37 7:39 7:40

581, 743, 1038, 1113

6:36,37 5:37

1309

7:41 7:42

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1310 7:43 7:44 7:45 7:48 7:49 7:51 7:52 7:53 7:56 7:57 7:58 7:60 8:1 8:2 8:3

.

244,355,517,550,642,647 268 367, 409, 582, 716 424

735,740 300,523,542,573 502

482,591,728 1123,1213 339,789 255,811 834 581,782,787 802 174,419,473 696

8:4, 25

695 684 8:5 8:9 316, 743 feis, 888, 1038, 1120 704,769 8:10 1113 8:10,18 ... 523,527,533,906,909, 8:11

8:4,40 .

.

966,1060,1070,1071 1179

12 15 16 17 19

367, 995 .

.

375,560,906,1103,1121 318

bis

706 940 541,640 .... 430,576,1024,1027 .458,536,593,865,1041, 327, 939

20 21 22 23

.

6is,

.

27 28 30

.

8:32 8:34 8:35 8:36 8:38 8:39 8:40 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4

.

.

.

.

.

.

f

..

9:4,7

.

9:6, 34 9:7 ... 9:8 9:9 9:11 9:11,17 9:12 9:13 9:15 9:17 9:18 9:20 9:21

.313,729,731,739,1044, 1045, 1176, 1215 310 .

213,449,472,506,529

1213 1138,1172 310 762 .... 189,864,1114,1116 484,733 496,704,1179 716,721 559 698,885,1034 .699,769,860,905,1107,

9:22 9:24 9:26 9:27 9:31 9:32

.

.

.

.

.

6is,

1108, 1123 891, 1127, 1220

820 1128

....

244,367,1035,1047 524,607,787 1085 1043 866, 986 269

9:32,37,43 9:34 9:35 9:36 9:38 9:39 9:42

213

.

.

.

.

.

.

714,716 256,505,538,568,640 311,529,542,732,810 607 258

1176,1201 .194,628,890,938,1010, 1021, 1022 bis, 1214 715,968 748 367,474 602,743,974,1094,1171 578,597 349,479 .218,593,643,975,979, 1060, 1074, 1092 216,507 190,482,497,1018,1041 538 506,1042 762

623 315,603,1213 752,1173 396,1202,1205 579,602,890,910,938, 940,1021,1031 1043,1045,1105,1107 10:18 1108 10:18,32 571 10:20 735 10:21 561,614,1179 10:22 833 10:22 f 809 10:23 10:25 98,393,996,1002,1040, 1043, 1059, 1060, 1065, 1068 686 10:26 314,665,967,1032,1036 10:28 1045 10:28, 38 .212,739,1043,1044,1113 10:29 471,645,793 10:30

630,706,720,1217 474,1151 328,602,608,698,703, 792, 1205 374,877 6is, 991, 1118, 1128 562 571, 916, 1148

8:31

.

.

.

.

..

10:1 10:2 10:3 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:9

1123 6is

24 25 26

9:6

NEW TESTAMENT

6is,

10:10 10:11 10:14 10:15 10:17

,772

471,864 609 615 272,892 538,793

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 10:31 10:32 10:33

10:35 10:36 10:37 10:38 10:39 10:40 10:40 10:41 10:41 10:42 10:43 10:44 10:45 10:47

233 399,792,794,1105 .

.

f .

.

f

8G1 Ws, 990, 1080, 1088,

1113,1121 1108 438,718,723 413,458,607 219,533,1032 339,1113 537,794 1095 .612,752,960,979,1074, 1162, 1163 833 419,1035 1036 891 578,782,897,1181 231,728,960,1061,

....

1094, 1171

10:48 11:1

1084 608 1181

11:1,20 11:2 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:11 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17 11:18 11:19 11:21 11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:26 11:28

599,766,885 1102,1126 315,498,639 787,838 1042 188

.

.

.

.

1032,1041,1049 402 566 658,736,968,1008,1181 1190 605,657,696

1107 643 530 405 990 160,192,298,659,774, 833, 1043 253, 410, 603, 728, 877 bis,

.

.

891,1036,1082 11:29 11:30 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:10

367 714,861,862,1113

578,608 533,534 411, 434, 551

629

408,620,621,878 310,328,559,597

... .

.

.

314, 807, 811, 855, 950

855,1153 477,550,762,777,794, 1107, 1213

12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14

1311 339,772

255 990 .231,319,358,580,621,908, 1036, 1039, 1040, 1081

12:15 12:16 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:25

.

.

.695,1036,1084,1186 551,1102,1212 224,411,484,736,739,916, 1131,1177 .

.

1061

.

.

.

13:1 13:2 13:3

235,906 522,603 235, 431, 835, 859 bis, 862 <er, 1099 608, 1107 bis 566, 816, 1149 bis

682 862 440,686 13:5 214, 258, 269, 480, 828, 885 13:6 639 13:7 574 13:8 279,433 13:9 734,761 13:10 264, 330, 463, 464 «er, 791, 874,917,942,1157,1162,1193 13:11 639,800 218 13:12 13:13 620,766 836 13:13f 234 13:15 1107 13:16 611 13:17 13:18 165 bis, 219, 528 523,527 13:20 13:22 458,482,501,780, 1114, 1136 13:24 94, 621 13:25 .720,736,738,916,996,1036 497 13:26 608,858 13:27 1085, 1086, 1129 13:28 429,602,728 13:31 423,474,483,1035,1107 13:32 861,1113 13:33 392 13:34 560 13:36 1153 13:36 f 706 13:37 566,720,721 13:39 409,430,933,996 13:40 597,849,1019 13:41 13:42 313, 314, 409, 594, 645 990 13:44 261 13:45 810, 965 13:46

13:3,5 13:4

.

'

.

.

.

.

.

.

13:47 13:49 13:50 13:51 14:1 14:3 14:4 14:5 14:6 14:8 14:9

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1312

221,482 582 578,788 6is

15:22

413,439,655

f

15:22, 25

15:23

.

.

,

197

...

197,502,710,789,1000 649, 833 695 424, 628 6is, 1052 257 257,521,523,1096 .... 1042 bis, 1066, 1076 14: 10 423, 549, 656, 659, 789, 838 14:11 28,104 14:11-13 428 14:12 258 14:13 621,1107 14:14 212 14:15 482, 736 feis, 738, 789, 1036 14:16 521 14:17 204,210,300,1129,1154 14:18 606,800,1061,1094,1102 14:19 319,489,859,908,1030 1039, 1040, 1081, 1216 14:21 475 14:21 f S92 bis 14:22 524,562,1035,1036, 1047,1113 14:23 905 14:26 905 14:27 611 14:28 224,1205 15:1 530,780 15:1 f 760 15:2 515,788,1084,1205 15:3 787 15:3,30 696,1191 15:4 788,818 15:4,20 789 788 15_i6 15:7 475,1035,1041 15:8 861 15:8, 9 1113 15:9 219,282,580,645,750,861 15:10 1089 15:11 487,531,718 15:12 834 15:13 834,857,1074 15:14 968,1045 15:15 529 15:16 1219 15:17 683,713,723,986 15:19 613 15:20 .518,788,1068,1078, 1080,1082 15:22 173, 214, 628, 808,

15:24 15:24-26 15:25 15:27 15:28 15:29

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

....

....

.

.

.

.

1039, 1127

15:32 15:35 15:36 15:37 15:37 f 15:38 15:39 15:41 16: If 16:2 16:3

.

1084 582,649,696,787,944, 1093, 1205 897 432 1039

.686,891,991,1128-9

186, 187, 518, 646, 1059,

1061,1078,1085,1187 212,299,318,330,360,364, 80S, 908, 962, 1121, 1160 349, 686 ier 477,655 546,714,1149 565 857,884,1081 576 1000, 1091 788 863 566 394, 428, 801, 887, 1029, 1035

311,476,562,788,1214 16:4 524 bis 16:5 16:6 788, 862 bis, 863, 1110, 1113 781,1156 16:7 863 16:7 f 561,581,1065 16:9 1034 16:10 16:11 .159,244,257,367,652,1202 263,412,497,728, 16:12 729 bis, 954 .* 792,1039 16:13 498,1036 16:14 537,1009 16:15 728,810,1043,1128 16:16 ... .

.

.

.

.

442 578,884

16:16f 16:18 16:21 16:22 16:23 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:27 16:28 16:30 16:31 16:33 16:34 16:36 16:37

16:39

.

.

.

1039, 1084 212, 609, 618, 628, 883

861,863 278,710 507,608 262

.

bis,

367, 1213

431,909,1040,1081,1213 299,484,688 880,924 402

.

.

.

518, 576 bis, 771 170,453,530,1122 336,993,1219 339,530,653,659,686 1120, 1187, 1190, 1213 573

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 17:1 17:2 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6

1126

408,576 442, 1034

.

17:6,8 17:7

.

.

.

.

.

.

17:9 17:10

17:10,15 17:11 17:12 17:13 17:14 17:15

.

,

17:16

.

.

6is,

1035

224,669,1163 165,885 572,1035,1137,1172 258 639 763 313,760 314 487,890 ;

1151

760 643 279, 313, 316

6ts,

339, 488,

669,760,968,974 169,224,408,613,760,

885, 1041, 1123, 1131, 1204 17:16-34 121 17:18 .201,529,695,787,788,890, 938,940,1021,1025,1031, 1044,1082,1085 17:19 187,701,785,879 17:20 559,736,742,878 17:21 665, 749, 751, 773, 1087 17:22 187,399,464 17:23 362,561 518 17:25 17:26 772,863,1113 17:27 327, 508, 939, 1021, 1027, .

.

.

.

.

1030, 1044, 1045, 1086, bis, 1138 bis, 1139, 1140, 1148, 1149, 1190 bis

1129 17 28 :

17:29 17:30 17:31 17:32 17:34 18:2

.

.... .

550,589,590,716,860,963

.236,459,487,530,909,

.

.

bis, .

4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

920 487,629,1084,1152 333 187

.

.

.

1040, 1047, 1049, 1116

367,471,486,1039,1215 885 529,808,1037 810,1202 263,529 453,884 .

583, 792, 890, 1173 bis

477,1002,1090 672,833 269,510 616 .

.

368, 877, 1014, 1015

bis,

1153,1193 18:15

.

19:1 19:2

256,539 342,1127 1131 1136

788,891,892,1113,1136

.

.

110, 608,

686

bis,

766, 1038

6w

172, 189

485,524,619,816,1136 665 818,1036 311,529,582,1036 189,233,260 1047 .207,234,537,816,916,1024, 1045,1113,1179,1186 739,1179 399,416,993 773 431,811

.

f

19:3 19:4 19:7 19:8 19:9 19:11

.

.

891

253,1138,1139

19:11, 23

1205 192

f

19:12 19:13 19:14 19:15

.475,484,617,759,762,791 236,255,742 736,762,777,791

19: 16

.

19:17 19:19 19:21 19:22 19:23 19:24 19:25 19:26

252, 559, 560, 607, 745 bis

.

.

418 674,828 310,476,688,787,1074 586,593,800 224 224, 810 620, 710

.

.

295, 494, 643, 697, 701, 1035,

.

195, 422, 608, 694, 1200, 1215

910 18: 3

18:17 18:18 18:20 18:22 18:23 18:24 18:25 18:26 18:27 18:28 19:1

1313

1 166, 1

187

.219,253,257,410,518,750,

19:27

1162 bis 395 19:28 1202 19:28,34 510 19:29 19:30 423,885 19:31 258,537 19:32 301,425,641,665,692,747, 898, 1029, 1176 515 19:33 19:34 436,439,1130,1200 19:35 68,253,260,653,726,892, .

.... .

1041,1123,1159,1190 19:36 19:37 19:38 19:38 19:39 19:40 20:1

.

.

212, 375 bw, 881, 909, 1119 bis, 1120, 1130

.

253

bis,

257, 410

541 1153

f .

.

545,618,1009,1154 .229,511,547,815-16,820

.

.

.

1074

A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1314 20:3 20:3,7 20:4

.

.

.

497,1002,1060,1068,1076 877 173, 205, 235 <er, 236, 501, 529,639,813

20:5

471 475 657

20:5, 23

20:6 20:7 20:8 20:9 20:11 20:12 20:13 20:14 20:15

.

.

.

313,529,653,672,792 969

...

235,579,580,835,891 1140,1179 116

235,1140 199 .

20:16

.470,472,613,905,986,1021, 1030,1058,1085 20:17 508 20:18 .299,312,334,561,566,717, 721, 773, 793 20:20 1032,1094 20:20,27. 1061, 1102, 1171, 1174, 1205 20:22 374,523,765,878, 1118, 1172,1213 20:23 262,646 20:24 480,499,811,990,1089 20:26 515,576,765,987,1035 20:27 807,1089 20:28 480,510,589,810 20:30 687,689 20:31 419,1035,1041 20:33 282,474,508 20:34 441 20:35 573, 663, 666, 679, 708, 1034 20:37 515 20:38 488,659,670,716,905 21:1 183, 235, 260, 263, .522, 547, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

653,836,1038,1202

21:2f

891

21:3

21:4 21:5 21:6 21:7 21:8 21:11 21:12 21:13 21:14 21:16

299,486,548,817, 883,1115 1046

548,643 691

205,582 339,614 289,690 .1065,1066,1068,1085,1088

.... .

21:18 21:18,26 21:19 21:20 21:21 .

.

.

21:22 21:23 21:24

.

.

.

21:25 21:26 21:27 21:28

.

.

.

199, 214, 221, 505, 573, 638,

653, 748, 1202

.

NEW TESTAMENT

393,

593,657,1077,1121, 1162, 1181 862,863,1214

,502,

515, 519, 599, 614,

719,721,891,955,989,1202

21:29 21:30 21:31 21:32 21:33

. '

.

561

313,314 746 741

482,521,524,773,950, 1034, 1046, 1082, 1084 310,337,356 1127 201,324,342,412,720, 809,816,984 476,483 522 339,1213,1220 330,526,769,783,844,

894, 897, 901, 1107 323, 362, 375, 883, 905, 906

.

774,1179 .213,256,774,879,1033, 1132, 1202

...... .

.

835,1126,1127

251, 375, 736, 938, 1031,

lOU 21:34 21:35 21:36 21:37 21:38 21:39 21:40 22:1 22:2

bis

692,747,884 392, 1043, 1085 .

.

.

.

.

.

404,407,412,655,1104 915,916,1175 769,917,1157,1176 1151,1163,1205 104,770 .

507

....

28

feis,

29, 104, 542,

653,1029 495,497,615,1105 639 299,374,548,877,

22:3 22:4,22 22:5

1118, 1128

22:6

...

536, 539, 560, 617, 620, 792, 1085

22:7 506,1042 235 22:8,13 22:9 449,472,506 22:10 716 bis, 795, 1084 22:11 580,1159 22:14 763,1033 22:15 720,773 22:16 329, 332, 808 bis, 11 lO 22:17 1039,1085,1132 784 22:18 608 22:19 22:20 213,1220 22:21 469,593 22:22 393,920,1014 799 22:23 ... 22:24 308,718,726,861, 863, 1084 22:25 258,533,916,1181 .

.

.

*.

.

•

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 22:29 22:30 23:3

.

23:4 23:5

.

.

.

1035, 1099

243 511

f

.

330, 594, 603, 846, 877,

.

908,1040,1049,1082,1130 1151

23:31 23:34 23:35 24:1 24:2 24:3 24:5 24:6

24:6,8 24:9 24:10 24:11

578,740,1035 434, 861, 863 607 236 300, 530 782,1135 288,438,724

.

.

24:11,17 24:12f 24:13 24:14

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

665, 1139 Ws 24:27 221,265,1123 836 25:1 f 25:3 995,1046 25:4 586,593,1036,1038 234,534 25:5 742 25:5,8, 11 233 25:5,22 666 25:6 25:7 153,477,619,655 1028 25:8 25:9 265,603,878 25:10 277,362,375,482,484,603, 66.5,881,895,1116 25:11 472,511,720,765,809,881, 896, 1059, 1066, 1078 429,816 25:12 25:13 412,812,861,862,863,877, 979, 1113, 1128 197,234,542,608 25:14 1048 25:14f 1048 25:14-16 787 25:15 429 25:15 f. 792,939,970,977,1030, 25:16

....

.

.

.

.

.

1035, 1091

25:17 25:18 25:20

60:3

....

.

1111, 1118

25:25 25:26

.

.

374,991,1128 1165,1189 51 U«s, 720 699,703

25:27 26:1 26:2

597, 619, 811, 892, 1041, 1103, 1115, 1123

.666,714,717,877,978,

619, 718 bis, 719 472, 890, 940, 1021,

1031,1045 580,976,1039

.

1181 .

.

25:21 25:22 25:23 25:24

319,705,1084 .

.

1021, 1022

564.995,1214 221,593 .531,802,1040,1046,1048 666,802 473,531,689 490,546,659,978,1061, 1068,1075,1077,1082,1141 231 23:17 1087 23:17,18,19 690,1151 23:18 736 23:19 738 23:19f 23:20 .... 547, 968, 1002, 1066, 1068,1141 23:21 474, 517, 579, 976 23:22 .... 235,442,1047,1113 1113 23:22,25,30 168,232,742,793,1047 23:23 442 23:23 f 23:24 1179, 1204 944,1093 23:26 339,431,4.33,778, 23:27 23:27 23:29 23:30

.

1082,1179 686,700,705 535,581,594,877,1118 578,612,1123 235,920,1014

439 24:20 24:21 348, 363, 701, 702 bis, 716 24:22 235, 580, 619, 665, 1128 <er 24:22-25 810 24:23 540,828,861,863,1171 24:25 470,487,547,551,800,1109 1126 24:25 f 24:26 .284,529,546,637,638,

582, 1023, 1203

.

24:15,20 24:17 24:18 24:19

511, 791

787

.

877, 1039, 1076,

1041, 1200

745,1094,1189

.

24:15

.

.

.

23:6 23:7 23:8 23:9 23:10 23:11 23:12 23:13 23:14 23:15

1029, 1033, 1034 615,766,815,820,1046 314,340,616,678, 1201,1216 473 .234,422,473,484,874,

.

1315

394,886,919,923 254,424,608 233, 404, 530, 1036, 1047, 10S5, 1173

908, ia36, 1040 742, 743, 760, 875. S79, 996 6i:s, 1030, l(Vt5

1039 367. 8.S5

690,811,895

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1316 26-3 26-4 26-4,6 26:5 26:7 26:8 26:9

439,490,608,1130 319,773,782,792,1215 1107,1152 280 bis, 670 463,465,522,550,718,763, 877, 1082, 1213 430,614,1024 231,688,1038,1039,1049 .

.

.

.

.

1085

bis

714,1113 26-10 432 26-10-14 885 26-11 714,780 26-12 550,633,775,864 26:13 28,104,506,1042 26-14 427,700,720,724,819,871, 26:16 1048, 1078 432 26-16-18 559,713 26-17 566,1088 26-18 272,537,962 26:19 585, 1047,1135,1179 26:20 183 26:21 520, 640 bis, 720, 1138, 26:22 1139, 1179 26-23 372 6i.s, 656, 1024, 1097 418,420,656,661,683, 26:24 774, 789 233, 812 26:25 26:26 .219,313,323,750,903,1094, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1162^8,1165 538,915

26:27 26:28

....

26:29

.

192, 653, 880, 1079,

1081,1084 291,566,646,653,660,710,

732, 854, 886, 919, 923, 938, 1021, 1025, 1162, 1182

314,529,786,789 886,887,906,909,920, 1014,1015,1016,1080,1081 256,311,459,743,1002, 27:1 1060,1068 342 27-1 f 210,223,469 27-2 532,861,1084 27:3 476 27:3,17 1039 27-4 469 27:4f 634 27-4 7 27:5' 257,263,476,563,608,787 235,585 27:6 477 27:7 186,214,538,568,613,640 27:8 261,884,909,1071,1081 27:9 162, 438, 877, 1036 bis, 27:10 1047,1082

26-30 26:32

27:12

244, 60S, 792, 1021, 1024,

.

...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

27:12,39 27:13 27:13,17 .

27: 14

.

1027,1030,1044,1045 1214 235,634,665,909,1060 799

.

166, 606, 702, 799, 834, 1163

.

205 312,572,1214 27: 16 211, 263, 477, 618, 634, 834 235,314,633,995 27:17 802 27:17,26,29 855 27:18 212,886 27:19 27:20 224, 618, 765, 1061, 1076, 1179 6is 464,886,920,1014, 27:21 1151, 1152 475,517,886,1204 27:22 479,724,758 27:23 1058 27:24 487,718 27:25 184,284,550,581,648, 27:27 775,1036 672 27:27, 33 231, 800 27:28 27:29 .244,266,886,919,995,1173 256,476,996,1141 27:30 27 33 219, 244, 282, 471, 877, 1102, 1121, 1173 451,517,570,623 27:34 367 27:35 508,519 27:36 773 27:37 508,810,818 27:38 940,1021,1031 27:39 27:40 157, 265, 309, 638, 653, 1140 145,232,256,264,580,885 27:41 432,828,987 27:42 27:43 .212,313,518,797,800,835 601,604,696 27:44 339,1205 28:2 256 28:3 28:4 ... 317, 365, 579 Ws, 697 210,233,318,1036 28:6 516.617 28:7 162, 257 28:8 199,235,613 28:11 836 28:11-15 189,200,298,550,657 28:13 1113 28:14 528 28:15 167,258 28:16 .562,789,1107,1108,1132, 28:17 1138,1139 1140 6is 28:19

27:14,20 27:15 .

.

.

:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 28:20 28:21 28:22 28:23 28:26 28:27 28:30

.

316, 485, 5G2, G13, 815, 816

....

428,752,1139,1164 1151

548,792,892,1116 333,356 204, 819, 988 774,833

Romans 1:1 1:1-7 1:2 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9

1:10

263,496,793 432 772

407,500 504,516 396,504,781 583,629,1152 589,1032,

603,1024,1027,1030,1090, 1145, 1147, 1149 .... 983,991,1060,1071 ... 244,682,700,705,1059 .242,547,968,1031,1181, 1182,1183 537,764,1179 .

1:11 1:12 1:13

.

1:14 1:15

.

221,486,608,654,678, 687,766

.

1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20

472,773,1152 499,514,599 139,606 654,763,964 .272,606,054,763,787,1002, 1038,1072,1090,1182,1201 1:21 1188 1:21,32 1129 1:22 319,457,489,891, 1038, 1084 1:23 1212 1:14 .... 585, 996, 1002, 1067, 1076,1087 1:25 396,561,585,616 1:2.5,32 960 1:26 496,561,585,051,1179 1:27 350 1:28 968,1041,1086,1087,1138 1:28-30 1155 1:29 ... 510, 533, 794, 1201 6is 1:29-31 427 1:30 232,629,794,1201 l:30f 1201 1:31 372,1097,1201 1:32 710,1100 .

.

.

.

2:1.. 2:3 2:3

.

f

.

402, 463, 464, 721, 748, 978,

1107,1193 /ns, 099

402, 459, 464, 678

1177

2:4 2:5 2:6 2:6 ff 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15

1317 654,703,880,1035 497 714 441 f^OO,

100, 599,

...

1200 764

549,757,1179 1106 598 424, 757, 796 537,701,778,796,972 311,645,728

2:15f

1097 6is 2:16 ... 590,718,721,763,971 2:17 341,796 2:18 500,764 2:19 489,801,1038,1082 2:21-23 915 2:23 712,796 2:25 796, 1019 2:26 481,683,819,1019 2:27 583 t>ii-, 778, 782, 1022,1129 2:28 590,962 2:28 f 766 3:1 395,408,763,1198 3:1,9 739 3:2 413, 485, 659 bis, 816, 1152 3:3 395,739,1190 3:4 193,986 3:4,6,31 940,1170 3:5 .. 315,761,876,1108,1199 3:6 965 6zs, 1022, 1025 3:7 678,739,1145 3:7 f 433 3:8 234,319,678,763,1028,1033, 1036, 1039, 1047, 1049 3:9 .. 391,419,423,621,812, 816, 1036 3:10 751,1164 3:11 315,764,1106,1216 3:12 187,643,751 3:13 330,343,635,1213 3:15 1062, lOSO, 1220 3:18 500,639 3:19 771 3:20 752,902 3:21 523,781,1002 3:22 500,507,1184 3:23 470,518,814,837,847 3:24 175,401,779,782 3:25 1.54,401,480,584,589,595, 781, 784, 810 3:25 f 507,000,024,783 3:2() 547,599,700,781,1071 3:27 498,582,740,780

....

.

.

.

.

.

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1318 3-30 3-31 4-1 4:2 4-3 4:3 ff 4-4 4:5 4-6 4:7 4-9 4-10 4-11

.

301,1025,1027,1154

.

.

307, 316 bis

1175 739,1009 393 458 523,609,757,759 258,274 394,722

367,720,724 394,1202 1198 .

.

4:11, 13, 16, 18

400,499,796,1059, 1078, 1188 599,766,1023 644,717,719,1028

4-14 4:17 4:18 4-19

224,616 .207,215,299,674, 1114,1146 334,532,594,861 724,816,964,1035,1114 .

.

602 200, 583, 598, 823, 850, 859, 889, 928, 931, 1192 224, 900 Ws

.

5-2 5-3 5-3-5 5-5 5-6 5-6 f 5-7 ... .• 5:8 5-9 5-10 5:11 5:12

394,1187 1200 499,500,583,896 567 632

.

5:13 5-14 5:14,16 5-15 5-15f 5:15,19 5:16 5:18 5-19 5-20 6-1 6:1,15 6:2 6-2 15 .

.

.

530,652,653,763,876 315,594,784,964,1034 518,659 529

.

.

.

.

6-3'

1066

423,521,548 423,1095,1162

4:12 4:12,16 4:13

4-20 4-21 4-24 5:1

498,780,781,782

394, 1134 6is

348,434,438,604,773, 833,963 342,796 605,833,860 348 774

.

1159 660 860 .

394,438,458,1190,1202 394,969,1201 613,722,998

850,876,934 1192 .

.

539,728,889,960,996 940 784

6:3 6:4 6:5 6:6

592

f

...

493,496,651,850,969

.

528 496,699,990,1002,1067, 1088 bis, 1128 6:8 529,872 1128 6:9 6:10 479,541,715 6:10f 539 6:11 481,537,588,1038,1181 587 6:11,23 6:12 1090,1097,1192 6:13 ... 689,855,950,968,1140 316 6:13, 16 6:14 793,796,889 635 6:14f 207 6:14-8:32 850 6:15 6:16 720,1150,1154,1188 6:17 461,719,721,792 518 6:18 6:19 537,650,856 6:20 313,523,537 6:21 714, 721 bis, 722 7:1 602, 733 6is, 978 7:2 500, 529, 1019, 1190 7:3 425, 515, 876, 996, 1002 bis, 1087, 1090 1190 7:3,25 539,1071,1190 7:4 312,782 7:5 7:6 721, 1091, 1095, 1162 his, 1164 .768,874,915,921,940,1014, 7:7 1016, 1192 402,678 7:7-25 341,1160 7:9 7:10 232,398,539,680,698,782 1152 7:12 537,550,609,1102,1121 7:13 158 7:14 1158 7:15 1158 7:15,19 698 7:15 f., 20 319 7:16 677 7:17 .234,399,416,431,705, 7:18 890,1058,1059 158 7:18f 718 7:19 683 7:20 7:21 .539,778,1035,1041,1190 529,780 7:22 .295,530,551,748,780, 7:23 796,1109 461 Ws, 497, 518, 706, 1203 7:24 7:25 287, 537, 540, 770, 780 bis

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 425,1190 402,780,784,788 •

1:1 8-2 8:3

•

•

•

372, 419, 459, 491, 618, 654, 763, 780, 784, 978, 1096

.

o.-^

:

o.-fi

778 707

'80 6is

8.7 8:8 8:9

540

.234,589,698,761,780,795, 1008,1154,1100

..Off ^:?i^ °-]l 8:12

1186 584,1009 .

341 6zs, 5.37, 996, 1067, 1076, 1087, 1095, 1162, 1192 .

.

533,098,732

]i 15

29, 405, .595

8 ^17 18

529,1035 .

1100, 1139

503,770,780,904 II 22 23 24 20

.

.

498,503,577,087 448, .531, .5.3.3, 54.3, 742, 1105 529, 500, 505 /m-, .573, 629,

.

.

.

722,739,766,770,967,1040 009,1040 477 .

.

,. 30 ?} -•

.480,504,528,021,841, 991,1071 837,841 630,1192 •

31-35 1198 31-39 432 32 244,291,424,509,62.3,724, 72.5,773,812,900,905,1001, 1148 /tr 8:33 504, 607, 652, 764, 779, 795, .

.

1118, 1175

::;:;:;::'S,'^S?

I ?-I

629

8:38 8:38 f 8:39 9:1 434, 444, 9:3 .. 307,

'

'

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

.

.

.588, 57.5,

880, 1035, 1132 812, 880, 919,

1038

/MS,

1148

409,427,980 1182 794 oru 724,9.54

ony

'

7OI, 1158

]

'394 .

394 425,434,566,782,1173, 1188 218, 277, 394,663 7m 967

.

9:12 9:13 9:14 870,917,934,940 9:15 474 9:16 342 519 9:17 686 699 705' 986 9:18 340 9:19 739 §12 9:19,20 .... 423 9:20 402, 464, 545, 678 6is, 1148, '

"

"

'

"

.

....

'

'

'

.

1149, 1151

9:21 9:22

503 OQ^

.

..:::

9:22,24 9:23 f 9:24 9:25

.

496, 654, 703, 1129 4-^8

.

713 718

.

438, 1138, '1139 6u, 1156, 1103

9:26 9:27 9:29 9:.30 9:31

...;; .

1049

.

'166 ^474

'

63^

' '

..'.'.'.'..['.

^4.7

782,1184

f.

10:1 10:2 10:3 10:5 10:0 ^0:8 10:9 10:10 10:12 10:14

roc;

...

11 CI

500 781,817,818 IO35 .' .'

499,006

394^ 505, 649

..... ..

."

ii9-?

300 son ... .i! 514, 594,' 6S7 500.648 706 Ws '790 721 bis, 934 6^, 1106, lllsi I'-QO 10:14f. ... ^oq ;

.

.

.

::::::

iS;!?. 10:18

.

.

.

;--,-

425,506,652,918, 1151,

89.5,1118

427,1189 749,779,782

l/m

698 ?>4 7i2 7?>

.

'.

639, 772

27 28 29

1

.480,601,008,760,795,1108

.

.

395, 1023 bis

535,620,061,777,87.5,877, 878,103.5,1107,1191 94 8-18 8-18-24 1191 8:20 224,298,349,550,

?:!. 9:4

9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11

1319

1174, 1175

10:18,19 10:19 10:20 .

11:1

.

.

.

3.55.057 700 1103 '

.'

.

11:1, 11

11:2 11 q 11:3

' .

810, 917, 1108,1

n^^ 1174

55',

J.t

iVoVl'U '

94,.

08 634

.529, 739, li '

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1320 11:4 11:6 11:6,22 11:7 11:8 11:10 11-11 11:12 11:13 11-14 11-15 11:15 f 11-16 11:17 11:18 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 11-24 11-25 11:26 11:27 11:30 11:31 .

254,411,739 1159 1025 509

1061,1076 262, 1061 bis

99Sbis 218 440,602,1151 1017,1024 411 395 1023,1181 402,418,678,1201 1158,1204 532,1199 609, 1012 fe^s, 1160 441, 524, 965 6is 418,524 .

.

11:,32

11:33

.

11:33-36 11:36 .

12:1 12:1 12:2 12:3

.

524,525,559,561,616 550,791 324,559,772 615,704,782 532 532,685 627,773 302,395,461,463,795, 1032,1200 432 567,583,595,759,773 444,583,1205

.

.

.

530,609,891 .562,583,616,629,633,

443

f

.

1003, 1072, 1090, 1201

12:4 12:5

967

.244,282,294,450,460, 487,568,606,673,675,692, 766,774 439,581,946,1134,1135 12:6 12:6-8 433 758 12:7,9 561,609 12:8 396,1133 12:9 12:9-13 439 946 12:9 f., 16 f 12:10-13 523 Ws, 1133 12- 11 1172 524 12:12 !! 439,1133 12:14 12:15 440,944,946,1092, .

.

12:16 12:17 12:18 12:20

395 444,579,1108 807 201,204 763 1019 1084,1162,1181 705 6is, 941 758,1202 .... 243,748,897,898, 1066, 1078 288,688,748,758,766,874 13:9 13:11 298,640,666,705,1059, 1076,1134,1140 901 13:12 261,792,850,1140 13:13 14:2 695 615,1060 14:3 810 14:4 402,539,541,678,694 423,738 14:4,10 290,616,695 14:5 539 14:6 539 14:7 201,1010,1019,1027, 14:8 1179,1189 699,834 14:9 678,694 14:10 .

14:11 14:13 14:14 14:15 14:17 14:19 14:20 14:21

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1034

1059,1078,1094 588,743 317,708 419,784 325,767,1176 583, 1152, 1153 .

.

.

!

.

534,763,881

12:21 12:26 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:3f 13:4 13:5 13:6 13:7 13:8

.

.

.

440

1106, 1201 594, 614

&is,

440,573 486,598,611,766 342

feis,

484, 1019

.

.268,706,721,858,978, 1059,1066

721 5is,1175 14:22 897,898,1019 14:23 1096 15:1 746 15:2 1191 15:3 563,685 15:4 326,1214 15:5 939,940 15:5,13 372,809,1181 15:7 .499,632,757,909,1040, 15:8 1049, 1060 686,909 15:14 298,583,665,846 15:15 474,498,587,594 15:16 681 15:16, 19 486,626 15:17 720, 1158, 11 (M 15:18 644,645,909 15:19 710, 748, 1162 &is 15:20 .

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 15:21 15:22

720,1159

470, 487, 7G2, 765, 774, 884, 99G, lOGl, 10G7, 1089, 1094, 1171 .

15:23 15:23-28 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 15:29 15:30 15:31 15:32 15:33 16:1 16:2 ... 16:4 16:5 16:5 f 16:6 16:6 f 16:7 16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:17 616, 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:23 16:25 16:25 f 16:25-27 16:26 16:27 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

152,996,1067,1076 434

324,974 1129

367,502,528,782,891 529,1009

166,

315, 505, 680, 687, 718, 633,

172,337, 622,

.

582 589 688 783 529 396 782 721 728 235 728 488 442 728 172 236

172,255,759,783 259,274 682 172, 173, 235, 255 6is

173, 773 758, 778, 783, 800, 954

771

221,487,605,813,919 611 173, 504

235, 236 bis 230, 527, 696

1117 439 772 437, 438, 776

235, 953

1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18

744

173,255,488

...

418, 987 bis, 1162, 1163 .500, 503, 537, 780, 827, 828 539 1:18, 30

1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23

356, 1218

757, 764

965 962,1175 174,1186 539 686

f

l:23f 1:24 1:25 1:25 1:26 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:29 1:31

...

654,663,667,763,962 1200 bis 962,1163 1207 411, 757, 762 409, 763 654,1109 752,986, 987 ter 949,985,1202 677

ff

ff

f

2:1, 3

2:1-3 2:1-4 2:2 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7

.

116 85 1181

157,566,1206 566 1186 418, 586, 589, 621, 784, 1107. 1110, 1117

2:7 f 2:8 2:11 f 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 3:1 3:2 3:3 ... 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:11 3.12 3:13 ... 3:14 .

1

459, 760

1:1 1:2 1:4 1:5 1:6 1:8 1:9

.

.

.

.

235 765 772 500 792 583, 782 .

.

.

.

203,360, 419, 983, 1046, 1186 265, 267, 502, 1035

1:10 11

12 13

Corinthians

.

.

.

255,401,497,699,1153 129, 910

1321

3:14f 3:15 3:17 3:18 3:19

724 1015 782 325, 510 504, 516, 654 159 159,208 724 158 bis 484,1201 158, 159,267, 1186 6ts 743, 750 583 838 743,1189 691, 786 616 427,560,983,1178 590, 731, 732 6w, 1176 233 1008 350,582,1008 412, 728,

729,960 658,1038 474

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1322

497,685,949,1000 793,1189

3:21 3:22 3:23 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6

1027

...

.

481,710,968 992,993 458,537,670,992,1186 319,627,688 752,757,763

203, 260, 325, 342, 561, 587,

.

607,630,675,721,749,984, 987, 1202 bis

4:7 4:8

..

4:9 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17

341,1184 428, 529, 818, 841, 923 Ms, 1004,1148,1149,1199 480,481,769,788

.

148, 191

1121 618

845,1138,1139 233,283,582,1018,1187

.

.

632

...

.

483, 712 6is, 724, 782, 960, 989

356,871 4:19 1202 4:20 4:21 ... 394,456,534,589,737 5:1 ... 710,727,770,803,881 705,1152 5:3 628 5:4 776 6:6 219 349 399 5:7 5:8 498, 93l' 955' 999 5:9 757, 811, 1047, 1170 423 5:9 f 317,846 6:9,11 6:10 .272,887,920,947,963,965, 1014, 1026, 1162, 1163 6:11 ... 232,1047,1060,1185 5:12 547,736,944,1202 689 6:13 603,811 6:1 .233,504,616,587,652,670 6:2 751, 1149, 1173 bis 6:3 6:4 423,698,941 6:5 232, 313, 409, 561, 648, 718, .

.....

.

.

6:13 703,704 6:14 582 860,940 6:15 6:16 233,1112 6:18 471,640 6:19 497,716 6:20 511, 1U9 bis 7:1 619,720,721,722 408 7:2 1199 7:3 7:5 .. 597, 751, 1010, 1023, 1025 609 7:6 7:7 545, 688, 695, 923, 968, 1181 218,1012 7:9 7:10 518, 794 bis 7:12 232,680 7:13 440,442,724,956 587,1026 7:14 429,948 7:15 264,462 7:16 1025 7:17 740 7:18 1198 7:18 ff 394,654,751 7:19 716 7:20 430,1023 7:21 795 7:22 429 7:23 1128, 1140 7:25 7:26 320, 545, 1059, 1205 432 7:27 7:28 536,710,846,923,1020, 1022, 1027 319,487,994 7:29 1127,1140 7:29 f 476,477,533 7:31 767 7:33 523,993 7:34 7:35 287, 504, 537, 546, 547, .

.

....

7:36 7:37 7:38 7:39

.

.

.

.

.

.

687,689,763,1109 489,629,1204 440,549,656,700 218,299 .291,716,720,733,897, 1076, 1080, 1082

.

726, 1001

6:6 6:6

460, 705

610,816 487 218, 293, 690, 808 704,705

f

6:6,8 6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11

8:12

947, 1160, 1164

.

.

1164,1189 .358,411,654,701,704, 807,809 752,1158

1019 435 1038

7:39, 40

8:1^ 8:2 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:9 8:10 8:11

...

.

698,845 424 793,1025,1026,1181 440, 583, 724 500,532,743 537,995 778,1072 317

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 8:13 9:1 9:2

268,962,1154 364,587,917,1157 244,537,1012,1148, 1160,1187 537,703,704 1158 1169,1174 918 477,480 402,1068,1164,1177 478,532,770,1147 208, 917 6is, 1158, 1174

9:3 9:4

9:4f 9:4,5 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 .. 9:9 9:9 f 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:12,15 9:13 9:14 9:15

.

.

10:10 10:17 10:18 10:19 10:20 10:21 10:22 10:24 10:25 10:27 10:29 10:30

.

.

.

223 224, 996, 1061, 1067, 1076

.

.

.

681,1009,1017,1022 500,681,1187 533

521,542,623 598

.439,587,704,845,984,

.

.

.

270,1012 485.550,816,1100 .477,656,759,784,984,

.

992, 1076

.516,540,597,600,665, 775,1129

.

.

539 1217 843

9:19f 9:19-21

9:19,20,22

232,329,504,516,1216 742,773,1199 504,843 148,478,707,880,1153 .1127,1138,1139,1140,1154,

9:21 9:22 9:23 9:25 9:26

.

.

.

.

.

.

1159, 1103

9:26 9:27

880 201,244,633,988 419 808 bis 776 883 201,339,418,838 418 704

f

10:1 10:2 10:3 10:3 f 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7-9

10:7-10 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:12 10:13

.

10:14 10:15

931 403,1185 317,635,1218 189,967 404,626,703,707 320, 430, 933, KXK) .

598, 632, 996, 1000, 1(K) I, 1007, 1070, 10S7, 10S8

471,1154 488,718

6w

263 1018 694, 739

.

688 6is, .402,509,530,609,632,

.

678, 720, 721

10:31 10:33 11:2

11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6

1189 479, 487, 504, 652, 660, 690

.

.

.479,482,487,506,881, 895,1035 769,781 477,606

.

342, 530

.

his,

656, 687, 789

342,371,809,948,1012,

.

.

1059, 1218

996, 1058

9:19

429, 488, 718, 880

508, 541

.

9:16 9:17 9:18

.

509,773,774,902 700,783 233,234,743,1035,1036 880,1214 509,791,1183 325,516,923 394,1203

.

.

1323

793 565 584 1187

11:8 11:9

11:9,12 11:11 11:12 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17 11:18

11:20 11:20 11:21 11:22

565,582,773 541,687,689,890,1086 686 574 218 bzs, 663 174,487,550,585,803,881, 893,1042,1103,1152 234,562 1152 342,695,854,880 .

.

.

ff

.

.

.

918, 928, 934, 1072, 1090, 1169, 1174

11:23 .100,312,561,579,838,1214 1049 11:23 f 234,595,685 11:24 11:25 612, 1074, 1181 974 11:25 f 11:26 880,975 504,787,1188 11:27 519 11:28 11:29 880,1023,1129 1201 11:29 ff 880 11:30 1015 11:31 KKH) 11:33 502 ll:33f 11:34 521,791,974 12:2 407, 412, 503, 922, 974, 1033 1034 12:3 470,773 12:0,11 .

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1324 12-8

696, 770

12:8,10

746,749

74:7 bis 12-9 f 758 12-9-11 166 12-10 530,580,653,1199 12:11 419 12-12 485,757,1189 12:13 793 12-13,28 550 12:15 616,1164 12-15f 1015,1023 12-19 663,664,777,1107 12-22 668 12-23 1179 12-26 550,597,792 12:27 300, 488 tis, 574, 696, 1152 12:28 757,774 12-29 311, 551, 777, 784 12:31 358,1105 13-1 758 13-1-3 13-2 219, 316 bis, 609, 750, 751, 772 bis, 1090, 1163 201, 324, 484, 504, 764, 876, 13:3 984, 1216 148 13-4 1178 13-4-7 758 13:4,8 476,477,774 13-7 357 13:8 766 13-10 000,971 13:11 13:12 208, 564 6is, 582, 600, 625, .

.

.

.

.

13:13 14:1 14:5 14:6 14:7

649,792,794,827 281,405,668,758 993 548,640,1017,1039,1188

.

483, 1188, 1189 .

.

.233,357,423,581,778,

1109, 1140, 1155, 1188, 1189 bis

871 876 807 .323,353,582,889,1110,1115 392,1021

14:7,9 14:7,9,16 14:8 14:9 14-10 14:11 14:13 14-15 14:15,19 14:16

272,588 950,955 533,874

*.

.

14-17 14:19 14-20 14:21 14:22

261 .

.

460, 691, 759, 965

bis,

1026,1159 1152, 1153 233,661,792,1188 524 207,591,748 458, 537

14:23 14:24 14:25 14:26 14:27

NEW TESTAMENT

.

.

1157 427,917 546 626 170,279,470,487,550, 571,670,791

.

166 775 606,608 497 1220 792 845,1038 948,1011 .765,1059,1061,1094 427,724 954 .425,530,640,738,1008, 1011, 1169, 1188, 1205 525, 550, 1034 bis 15:3 844,894,896,1182 15:4 15:6 511, 548, 642, 666, 674, 848 820 15:7 f 15:8 .233, 516, 669, 969, 1025,1 154 15:9 279, 658, 669, 713, 779, 962 .411,654,712,713,720, 15:10 791, 1008, 1166 707 15:11 658, 820, 1034 6ts, 1085 15:12 1008 15:13, 16 1012 15:13, 15-17 1008 15:14,17,19 007,1154 15:15 817 15:15f 244,783 15:18 204 15:19 395,794 15:21 587, 827 15:22 872 15:22,28 767 15:23 312,851,1214 15:24 870 15:26 244, 395, 658, 1034, 1106 15:27 15:28 357, 657, 809, 819 bis 15:29 630, 632, 963 bis, 965 bis, 1012,1025,1180 876 15:29,51 470,677 15:30 487,685,827,1150 15:31 539,869,931 15:32 207,422,1200 15:33 626 15:34 740,1022 15:35 264,423,463,678 15:36 .374,878,892,1021,1106, 15:37 1119, 1187, 1213

14:28 14:29 14:31 14:33 14:34 14:35 14:37 14:38 14:39 15:1 f 15:1-2 15:2

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 15:39

.

.

687, 747, 749, 752

15:39,41 15:40 15:41 15:42 15:42fT 15:43 f 15:44 15:45 15:48 15:49 15:50 15:51 15:52 15:54 15:54 f 15:54-7 15:57 16:1

.

16:

?>i.s-,

770,

1153,1163,1187 747 6i6-, 748 748, 749 6is 794 392

429,866 1178 234 Ks 669 429, 710, 731 6is 200, 349, 678 .

.

405,699,1036 334,423,753,819,1212 392,587 429,778 258 1200 1106,1116 594,619

If

197

325,343,672

16:2

16:2f

729 408-9 .992,996,1059,1061,1066, 1067, 1077

16:3 16:4

.

16:5 16:6

.

.

.

.

16:7 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:12

16:12,19 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:20 16:21 16:22

434,869,882 .488,490,551,722,969, 1109,1121,1127,1130 877 364,800 795,993 244,853,856,933,943 235,243,423,619 488 •. 173,1034 233,627 173,205,235,288,685 685 692 416,496,685 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

^

.

^.

2 Corinthians

774 1:1 1:3 .. 396, 785, 945, 1133, 1182 716, 772 Ms 1:4 393,632,685,784,787 1:6 ... 504 1:7 518,632,765,996, 1061, 1:8 .. 1067, 1213 .325,360,498,577,687,897, 1:9 900,908,983,1186 212,710 1-10 474 1-11 .

.

.

...

547, 614, 765, 1150 tw,

1157, 1176, 1177, 1190 1034, 1202

236,424 212 .602,678,1033,1034,1035 510 ... 401, 539 &is, 700, 886, .

.

1059, 1078

2:2 2:3

.

1182 .'686,699,705,706,720,721,

887,920,1014 846 423,583,598

2:3,4,9 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13

1008

411,537,782 208,532,1090 194,699,1045 720,956

474,1156,1185 364,513,595,1213 .

235, 490, 532, 536, 688, 765, 900 bis, 901, 966, 1061, .

2:14 2:14-7:16 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:21 3:1 3:2 .. 3:2 f 3:3 ..

.

.

.

313, 939,945, 1012, 1160 6zs

.

297,659 476,643,823,1187 662,886,919

1:12 1:13 1:15 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:22 1:23 1:24 2:1

1325

3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8-10 3:10

1204 1136 949 1109 ^^3 532

3:10f g

.

j^

3:12 3:13

.

.

318, 394, 883, 1003, 1075,

1102,1159,1171,1203 244,729 602 300

3:14 3:15

3:15f

971

3:15, 16

3:16 3:17 3:18

1091,1171 474,498 407 537 272,626,696 644,881 992 307, 316 6ts, 1175 560,778,828,1120,1201 217 .404,658,1034,1085-6, 1163,1166 423 367,480,1213

207,392,617,618 769 .

.

.486,503,530,789,810, 820,891,967,968,1154

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1326 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:8

1128

f

316,338,771,810 234,587 503,779,1094,1171 584,1187 764,962

1027 962,1008 7:9 599,834,1166 7:11 427, 481, 523, 686 bis, 700, 705,741,1038,1059,1078,1215 7:12 225,429,641,846,1060, .

.

.

497, 514

596,1138 1201 1139 1134

f

4:8,9 4:13 4:16 4:17 4:18 5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:6 ff

522,681,750,766 297,551,654,763 891,1132 399,418,498,762,779,1019 600

.

244, 563 bis, 1027 604, 722, 762, 963

498,596 474,560,1135 440 217 625 582,773 500,877,880,909 316,439,626,792 394,539,845,1203 499,699,833,1035 517,539,631,773 654 774 683,964,1033

5:6,8 5:8 5:10 5:11 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15 5:17 5:18 5:19 6:20 6:2 6:3 6:3 f 6:4 6:4 ff 6:4-7 6:7 6:9 6:9 f

6:10 6:11 6:13 6:14 6:15

6:15f 6:16 6:17 6:18 7:1 7:5

1140, 1141

497,507 440 442 316,454,481 591 442 bis 582,777 827

442,1136,1140 523,828 895 486,487 .

.

330, 375

528 bis, 529, 625,890,1051 217 1184

bis,

216,528 853 458,595 576 415, 439

900

7:7

7:8

7:8,14

bis,

1073, 1080, 1091

7:13 7:14 7:15 7:16 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:8 8:9 8:10

763 708, 834 bis .

.

221,425,523,703,1059, 1158, 1162

8:10f 8:11

1066 .

.395,600,996,1061,1067,

1073 bis, 1076 8:12 957,967 8:13 395 8:14 707,986 8:15 660,763,774,1202 8:16 396,585 8:17 657,665 8:18 ... 562, 582, 770, 1134 <er 8:18-21 433 8:19f 431 8:20 .431,699,1039,1134,1136 8:22 488 <er, 530, 659, 664, 1041, .

.

.

1103, 1123 bis

8:23 8:24 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:3 f

..... ...

9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11

996,1086,1182 295,604,1202 394,597,1202 1177, 1201

f

9:11, 13

9:12 9:13 9:14

.

395,441,504,632 946 782,1059,1066 221,261,475,548,550 375,983 988 988 1199

9:3,4

897,

bis, 1135 665,1091

663,1205 603,632,968 612 217,474 587 262,607 434,609,616 1152,1159 968,1003,1072,1090 195,598,933,994

.

.

272 799 946,1136 439 .323,375,435,439,536, 565,881 781,783 562,605

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 9:15

605

10:1

.407,424,457,474,686,688

12:1 12:2

217 407

12:2

10:1, 2

10:1-11:6 10:2 401, 407, 474, 481, 490 6w, 519,743,1035,1038,1059,1000, 1083, 1123 10:3 407, 792 bis 10:4 537,626 10:5 500, .593 10:7 407,497 699 10:7, 11 10:8 407 716 10:8, 13 10:9 407,597,9.59,909,1025, 1040,1091,1095 10:10 233,392,4.34,1200 10:11 291, 407, 078, 710 Ms, 731 10:12 315,401,529,687,1201 316 10:12,18 10:13 407,719,1078 10:14 477,561,029,11.59 .

10: 16

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

e29

10:18 11: 1

6is,

647

31.5,707 368, 486, 543, 886, 923 bis, 1004, 1180

.

ll:lf., lOf., 23

1199

261,349,1088 782,995 .... 747,748,1151,1186 297,519,548,5.50,629 129,395,1202 219,1165 750,778 1034 1180 11:1.5 11:16 .208,2.34,743,853^,933, 1023, 1025 1199 11:19 L 606,802 11:20 11:21 4.34,963,1033,1199 1198 11:22 244,293,297,4.50,551, 11:23 555, 558, 629 bis, 1109 442 11:23 ff 784 11:23,27 61.5,635 11:24 212,833,897 11:25 793 ll:25f 501 11:26 2.58 11:27 244, .537, 547, 646 11:28 677 bis 11:29 475 11:30 255,258,498 11:32

11:2 11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:10

.

1002,1130,1149

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

622, 77S,

7<J3, 1035, 1041, 1103

1045 349 710

f

12:2,4 12:3 12:4 12:0 12:7

212, 225 bis, 491, 881, 11.39

.

519,988 .

12:9

.

.

408, 532, 536,

.5.38,

629,

900, 985 488, 541 &is, 602, 664, 670,

.

879, 897

279 973

12:9, 15

12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13

478,920,1003,1014,1160 408,757,772,1151 218,341,479,512,1025,

.

.

.

1199, 1210

12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17

702,1077 277, 596 392,476 .436,474,488,718,720, 744, 893 bis, 896 218

.

.

244, 297, 517, 547, 550,

.

.

1327

bis,

401,084,770 297,644,696,879

12:18 12:19 12:20

.

.

12:21

.

.

.

598 751,1011,1025,104.5,1169

13:1 13:2 13:4 13:5 13:7

267, 408, 534, 5.39, 731 bis, 929, 995 ter, 11.59, 1101, 1174

.

.193,475,021,716,910, 995,1117,1173 478,674,702 674,1035

.

.394,423,0.56,70.3,880,

919,1102,1173 098,703 099.845

13:9 13:10 13:12

773

bis

Galatians 1:1 1:2 1:3

1:4 1:5 1:6 1:6 1:7

567,582,778,795 773, 780 778

f

232, 515, 618, 629

408 748, 749, 879 bw, 965 f

1:8 1:8 f 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:12

..

.

747 bis 704,778,78.5,1011, 1107, 1169 313,102,406,1010,10-26

610,939 483,968 1015 474

582.1189

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1328 1:13 1:14 1:16 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:24 2:1

783

298,620,633,779 5S7

561

224,1025 538,1034 376,530 412,888 659,892,1115,1139,1147 523 255,283,581 636 542, 988 6^s, 995 613,802,984 367,438 434 438, 731, 732 6is, 743,

f .

2:1,2 2:2 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:6

bis

f

751, 1115

2:6-9 2:7

.

130 .

.208,485,540,546,550, 816,820 394,1000,1085,1202,1203 703,714,719,723,933,960 608,816,1118 579,978,1075

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.... .

635

441 395 1172

879,1111,1199 613,810,922 995,1169 482 .

.

4:24 4:24 f 4:24,26 4:25

4:25 4:26 4:27 4:30 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:6 5:7 5:10 5:11 5:12

857,878,1074,1075 313,419,558 733,751,757 820 395,960,987 26,231,395,465

.

841,921,922,1014,1048 203,325,342,984

.

2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13 334, 530, 533, 1000 bis, 1181 2:14 224,626,880,1028,1029 530,598 2:15 2:16 .... 752,796,1025,1204 2:17 232, 916 feis, 940, 1176 316,402,480,678 2:18 402,539,796 2:19 2:20 479, 632, 715, 779 1190 2:21 978 2:23 3:1 .. .349,473,608,621,723, 792,1193 3:2 579, 1060 710 3:4 394 3:5 698 3:7 367 3:8 3:10 .562,598,631,720,744, 773,1067,1086,1088,1159 395 3:11 3:13 317, 631 6is 1049 3:14 3:15 423,1155,1188 342,604,712 3:16 3:17 580, 672, 699, 1003, 1072, 1090 583 3:18 3:19 .221,349,411,647,736, 974, 975 423 3:20 777,778,940,1015 3:21 .

....

3:23 3:25 3:28 4:1 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:6 f 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:12 4:15 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20

.

.

.

.

.

.

186,1162 713, 975 368,784,886,919, 937,1199 704, 729 &is, 760, 881 750 727

.254,398,411,530,547, 759,766

f

760 398,547 663,892,1138,1139 942 399,482,484,816 1062,1076 518 bts, 562, 880, 960 '

.

....

.

.

583 1094, 1171

540,727,746,957 1008

809,819,873,923, 940, 1004

5:13 5:14 5:15 5:16 5:17 5:19 5:20

605,692,1202 288,419,688,766,773,874 933,996 834 ... 698,850,957,994,998 404,729 265,267 5:20f., 22f 794 5:21 290,771,1035 5:22 428,1178 5:24 767 1009 5:25 541 5:26 6:1 439,995,1027,1180 6:3 .. 411,743,751,1127,1173 6:4 690 889 6:5 6:6 486,773 .

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:12

.

098 779 1023,1102,1121,1129,1170

.

732,880,885,985 401,796,854,940,

2:15 2:17 2:18 2:20 2:21 3:1 3:1-13 3:2 3:3

1003, 1170

3:4, 13

658,670,762,763,968,974 292, 533, 734, 74 Wcr,

.

...

846 feis, 917, 1045, 1177 148,201,325,532,698,

...

6:14

234, 743

6:15 6:17

295,495 ^ ^ Ephesians .

582,1107 780,991 396,763,781,785 433 1:3-14 279,644 1:4 226,583 1:5 503,716 1:6 262 1:7 716,909 1:8 226,766,809 1:10 778,1071 1:12 396,543,540 1:13 713 l:13f 608,766,782,783 1:15 813,1102 1:16 1086 1:16-18 309 6is, 326 6is, 327 <er, 398, 1:17 933, 940, 983 6is, 994, 1214 1:18 411, 1072, 1087 778 1:19 716 l:19f 408,440 1:20 1:21 413,629,647 632 1:22 729,1206 l:22f 805-6 1:23 789 2:1 497,651 2:2 419,497,503,530,788 2:3 ... 478 6is, 482, 584, 833 2:4 ... 2-5 529 533 2:5,8 202, 784 2:7 2:8 582,704,705,1182 744 2:9 605,681,716,776 2:10 774,777,783 2:11 398,516,658,782 2:12 1115, 1139 2:13 2:14 480, 498, 709 /«.s 433 2:14-18

1:1 1:2 1:3

.

.

.

1329 589,769,783 483,547 745,769 498,560,787,1131 772 505 435 424, 1045, 1148 bis

845 783 523,787 3:5 1089 3:6 1078 3:6, 8 3:8 278, 439, 483, 516, 663, 760 bis, 773 ^^^ 262 3:8, 16 724 3:11 f 784 3:12 412,728,729,784 3:13 435 3:14 433 3:14-19 772 3:15 309,327,593,766 3:16 1086 3:16 f 1087,1090 3:17 212 3:17(18) 787 3:18 401,519 3:19 3:20 517, 548, 629, 647 bts 408,660 3:21 478,716,783,1201 4:1 440,807 4:2 946 4:2 f 567 4:6 746 4:7 392,479 4:8 .278,298,499,665,667, 4:9 .. 735,766 297,550,647,806 4:10 424,694,1152 4:11 624 4:12 503, 773, 975 bis 4:13 712 4:15 589,745 4:16 700,1078 4:17 405,407,412 4:17 f 412,518,523,910,1117 4:18 4:21 507, 545, 5S8, 1027, 1148 280 bw, 283, 662, 1038, ia^9 4:22 740, 854 4:25 605,949,1173 4:20 892,1116 4:28 620,753,994 4:29 594 4:32 940 5:2 f 541,753,1173 5:3 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1330 5:4 5:5

.

5:8 5:11 5:12 5:14 5:15

714,887,920,1138 .319,330,360,406,713,753, 786,890 497,651 529 530

...

310,328,422,948,1199 1172 440 5:1.5-22 5:18 533,854,890 690 5:19 500 5:21 393,757,946 5:22 5:23 399,416,768,781,782,794 394,794 5:24 757 5:25 5:26 521,784,811,1023 687 5:27 1147 5:29 260 5:30 560,574,623 5:31 677 5:32 5:33 330,746,766,769,933,943, 994,1187 757 6:1 793 6:2 6:3 299, 875, 984 757 6:4 757,782 6:5 792 6:6 355 6:8 315,502 6:9 550,816 6:10 6:11 .... 502,991,1003,1075 566,651 6:12 563ier, 777 6:13 409 6:14 6:16 589,605,652 6:17 412, 712, 954 "618 6:18 f 6:19 1090 6:21 608, 785 6:22 699,846 .

.

Philippians

1:1 1:2 1:3 1:5 1:6

394,628,763,783 795

604,772 783

...

1:6,25 1:7

.

.

478,686,705,776,889 699

.491,504,566,632,658,787, 966, 1131

1:8 1:9 1:10

1032

633,699 594,991,1071

...

1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15

483,485,510,595,694 608,665,766 262, 1091

279,540,784 .

235, 265, 743

l:15f l:16ff 1:17 1:18

6is,

750, 1153

1200 1153 538 .

.

487, 530, 646, 703, 871,

889,1186,1187 787 787,794

1:19 1:20 1:21

1065 1059 1:22 537,698,737,810,875, 1023, 1183 1:23 130, 278, 442, 488 bis, 532, 546, 628, 664, 858, 1072, 1076 1066 1:23,29 1:25 613,787,828 1:26 588,783,784 1:27 439,505,529,637,766 1:28 412,537,729 1:29 487,632,777,1162 1:30 414, 439, 530, 731, 1135 6is 130,410,744,1019 2:1 992 2:2 2:3 ... 519, 690, 692, 1123 bis 2:4 292,746 2:5 699,703 2:6 152,407,546,1041,1059,1066 1114 2:7 523,645,1122 2:8 629 6is, 632 2:9 503 2:10 2:11 188,795,1034 2:12 534,606,634,1162,1173 2:13 560,564,632,769,1059, 1182 2:15 488,505,550,644,713, 714, 775 2:16 550 2:17 787,828 627 2:17f 2:18 207, 487, 535 2:20 960,961,996 767,773 2:21 441,1199 2:22 2:23 224,620,687,974 895 2:24 172,418,502 2:25 888,964,1120 2:26 2:27 505, 601, 646 2:28 297, 298, 545, 665, 846 480,481 2:29 184 bis, 503, 781 2:30

1:21,24,29 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 3:1

3:2 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7

.

.

420, 487, 546, 650, 890, 1058, 1085, 1146, 1153 471, 949, 1100, 1178, 1200

1

3f

1

3,

1

1201 540, 769, 785 1129, 1138, 1139, 1154 523, 598, 657 261

1

1

4 5 6

1

6,

1

7

1

396,480,481,584,898,

1

8 9

.

f

... ...

.

.

1128 860 782, 783 498 881, 968 717, 978 172, 255, 781 764, 779, 859

4

9

.

.

704, 1041

3:8

.

.

396,481,485,504,652,764,

812, 983, 1036, 1109, 1145, 1148, 1151. 1186

3:9 3:10

.

588, 598, 685, 782, 783, 784 150 6is, 990, 1002, 1067, 1088, 1200

3:11 3:12

.

1017 605,811,812,845,901,916, 1017, 1024, 1030

3:13

.

.

.

.

.

.

472, 489, 506, 807, 1038,

1060, 1202

3:13f 3:14 3:15 3:16 3:17 3:18 3:18f 3:20 3:21

4:2 4:3 4:5 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11

765

... .

146,547,608,656,782 395,749,931 .329,944,1081,1092,1187 221

473,718 413, 1107

714 .

.

496, 528, 996, 1061, 1066 1067, 1076

235 612, 728 .

546,763,1202 477,499,629,800,1183 698, 724, 733, 765, 812, 1146 698,724,1182 348,476,487,604,963,965, 1049, 1059, 1066, 1147, 1212

... .

.

.

.

4:11, 17

4:12 4:13 4:14 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:22

.

677, 687, 721

835, 845, 1038, 1041, 1060, 1103, 1166

Colossians 185, 408

1:2

1:2,6,14,16,18,20,21,22,26, 27,

28

483, 485, 576, 600, 731, 784, 993, 1049, 1102

772 433 1 10 1086, 1087 1 10-12 1200 1 13 ... 212, 496, 497, 503, 818 1 15 233, 234, 772, 896 1 15, 23 772 1 16 567, 583, 588, 654 bis, 672, 763, 844, 894, 896 1 17 234, 534, 622, 679, 774, 896 1 18 243, 375 bis, 890 1 :20 226 1 :21 375,777,910, 1115, 1117 1 :21f 434 1 :22 437, 496, 644 1 :23 243,717, 1148 .... 165,565, 574, 712, 784 1 :24 1 :24, 28 f 724 440,1135 1 :26 1 :27 262, 713 714 1 :29 2 1 337, 364, 733, 908 116 2 :lf 2 :2 243, 262, 439 243 2 :3 987 2 :4 2 :5 651, 1026, 1187 212 2 :7 2 :8 764, 787, 933, 995 his, 1107, 1

9ff

1

9-23

.

.

:

:

.

.

:

.

1116, 1159, 1169

bis,

569 117,342,371,1181 478 1121, 1178 183 594,1166 172 262, 586, 783 785 548, 599, 670

2 :8, 19 2 :10 2 :11 2 12 2 13 2 13 f 2 14 2 15 2 :16 2 :17 2 18 2 :19 2 :20 2 :22 2 23 3 :1 :

:

:

:

...

:

:

:

243

1331

.

.

.

.

.

.

1164 712 215 152, 529 560, 789, 1205 658 524, 528, 634, 648, 783 226, 474, 589, 805

204,460,1182 712 164, 477, 500, .551 bL^, 585 478, 479, 713, 113S, 1139 559, 576, 792, 807 714, 789 bi-i 375, 626, 742, 88 1 1 152 bis 529 ,

547 3:1 f 3:2 881,1172 3:3 588, 628 6is 3:5 727, 728, 758 bis, 960 971 3:7 3:9 854,890 3:11 657,712,1188 3:13 ... 508,690,692,742,968 3:14 411,605,713 3:15 499 3:16 440,560,690,946,1133 3:17 727,729,957 3:18 393,807,887,920 3:18ff 757 3:23 550,1140 3:24 498 3:25 355,1217 4:1 788 4:3 407, 638 6is, 1086, 1090, 1140 4:5 625,810 4:6 .. 269,396,439,880,104,5, 1090, 1208 4:8 699,846 4:9 355, 547 4:10 255 4:12 172,630,994 4:13 244,257 4:14 172 6is, 255 4:15 172,257,608 4:16 600,1204 4:17 343,983 4:18 685 .

.

.

.

.

1

1:1 1:3 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10

2:2 2:3 2:4 2:7 2:8

Thessalonians

173,780,796 780 1045 787 178,1032

498, 503, 779 566, 731

.

6is,

(er,

731,732,779,795,1032,1177 475,778,1107 1077 598

.

485,1085,1103,1139 505,968 .164,198,206,225,508,522, 1162,1215

2:9 2:10 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1332

2:18 2:19 3:1 3:2 f 3:3 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:11

407, 1151, 1152 &is

...

....

1205 1220

559,665,778

186

bis,

458, 988

ier,

991, 1071,

1088,1169 579,1036,1139

...

.

605, 787 6is 188, 879, 973, 1010 bis

716 297,629,647,1002,1072 327,785,1092 f 854,943 3:11, 12 940 3:12 327,940,1181 4:1 .... 439,560,739,766,1046 4:2 583 4:3 400,518,698,1059 4:3 f 1078 4:5 1172 4:6 233, 338, 629, 1059, 1078 4:7 605 feis 4:8 1154 4:9 .686,997,1003,1071,1072,1097 4:10 774 4:10f 1066 4:11 1060 4:12 751 4:13 985 4:14 355,817 4:15 618 4:15, 17 778 4:16 589, 783 4:17 357, 528, 628, 638 5:2 550 5:3 225,267 5:4 998 5:5 496, 497 5:6 497, 931 bis, 1200 5:8 497,498 5:10 .534,628,638,833,1017, .

.

.

.

.

.

.

1027

5:11 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15

293,675,692 319 171,647 625

...

309

bis,

431, 573, 692,

933, 996

593, 1003, 1075

537,545 787,997,1002,1072 545,560,791 530

.

587,1188 521 1066 686, 1059

5:16 5:16-22 5:19 5:22 5:23 5:25 5:27

947 890 218,318 518 940,1003 619 484,1085

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS

1333

...

224,749,776,777,1106 485 1035,1103 1115,1127,1128 629,782 652 657,699,771 776 261,478 620 235 582, 629 642 423 490, 573, 631, 770 242,401 273, 431, 489, 886, 919 272 508 189 613,1172 876,1172 664,1172 765

2 Thessalonians

1:3 1:4 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:10 1:11 1:12 2:1 2:2

629,693 287,687,689,716 511 497 787

334,485,818 511,714 786,987

..

G32 bis 261,582,964,1033,1072,

.

1140, 1189 497 bis, 856, 1023, 1173 2:3 .. 2:3 f 1202, 1203 2:4 234, 311, 562, 1034, 1105, 1139 2:6 409,411 2:7 792 2:8 1212 2:10 499, 500 2:12 532 2:13 339,366,501,550 2:14 714 2:15 485,816,1045 2:17 940,943,1092 1205 3:2, 7 3:3 956,961,1219 3:4 540 3:5 500,1092 940 3:5, 16 3:6 336, 560, 1047, 1172, 1217 3:7 880 3:7 f 964 3:8 1003, 1075 3:9 965 3:10 .699,950,1012,1028,1035, 1046, 1047 3:11 564,617,1042,1103, 1127,1201 3:12 1046, 1047 3:13 1121 3:14 ... 317,329,529,698,944, 1047, 1170 3:15 481,1123 3:16 309,326,940,1214 3:17 493,685,713 .

.

.

.

1:10 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:13 3:15 3:16

...

580, 1172

811

729,880,983 .

.

.

....

.

1

4:1 4:3 4:4 4:6 4:8

4:10 4:13 4:14 4:15

5:11 5:13

1:3-5 4.39 1:4 152,782 1:6 518,714 1:7 .. 325,726,737,1045,1176 1:8 ... 341,342,533,762,1201 1:9 185,539,699 427 1:9 f

5:14 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:21

.

499,518,668 518,785,1121,1201

...

.

.

.

235

1022 543, 717, 882

...

.

272,535,547,1128 565 976 508, 611, 854 bis, 890 589 1218 772 272 215,1103

5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:8 5:9

561,968

.

.

. 242, 295, 401, 422, 428, 534, 546, 551, 713, 793, 954, 1109, 1199

5:10

Timoti? '

1:1 1:3

.

.

.

.

.

302,547,565,623 509,516,691,1012 218, 277, 488, 666 163,800 512,972 .232,273,477,617,618, 638, 1040, 1103 Ws, 1121, 1122,1172 919 284,511,654 223 251,603,040,1025,1188 621

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1334

5:22 890 6is 5:23 779,789 6:24 235,620 6:2 508 6:3 609,1011 6:4 167, 267, 405 6:5 ... 166,483,486,518,582 1191 6:7 6:8 324, 871, 889 6:10 542,617 6:11 476,1186 478 6:12 6:13 603 6:15 523,660,691,785 6:15f 776 6:17 163,493,496,651,783,908 6:18 204 6:20 186,261,810,856 6:21 715 .

.

2 Timothy

796 963 485

1:1 1:3 1:5 1:6

483,718,722 962 472,529

1:6,12 1:8 1:8 f 1:11 1:12

1107 485

2:25 2:26 3:1 3:3 3:4 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:11 3:14 3:15 3:16 4:1 f 4:2 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:9-21 4:10 4:11 4:13 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:21

.

1:16 1:16,18

.

717,782 613,856 .214,235,269,472,484, 485,497, 772 235,367 .309,326,854,939, .

.

940, 1214

665 .

.

2:15 2:16 2:16, 22

2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:21

bis,

989, 996, 1044, 1214

707 699, 769

162 661, 663, 666

148,155 1173 255, 486

707,708 212, 731 6is

721 879 272, 772 6is, 1097 484 328 895 498,903 1205 759

... .

.

.

172,255,547,858,861 172,535,549,1127 186,221,235,255,614 419,949,955 779,854,939,940 212,818 1204 235

235,255,621

166, 594, 658, 718,

.

1:17 1:18 2:2 2:3 2:5 2:8 2:12 2:13 2:14

135, 309 &is, 327, 565, 983,

988

720, 1102

1:13 1:14 1:15

.

f

.

277,299,488,665,733 583,698,856 856 850, 1019 ?)is, 1027 481,1041 1008 1119 164,605,944,947, 1162 6is, 1163 856 316 890 235 620,908 262,1154 1183 597

Titus

1:2 1:2 f 1:6 1:7 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 2:3 2:4 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13

2:14 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:5

3:6

224 441

.

234 1172 774,962,1169 273,422,1200 955 472 362

1036,1038,1103 166

203,762,943,985 480,690,811 652,1087 691,944 311,780 272,527,653,656 788

82,786,787 518,618,632 483 311 1202 261, 681, 715 716

3:7 3:8 3:9 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS

1335

...

530, 505, r,S3 /.w, 861, 887, 1039, 1084, 1086, 1114, 1128

224,707,779 205bis 687 172,235

...

172

255, 260, 1217

feis,

1041

Philemon i-miemon 2 5

Q 10

2:10

509, 537, 764, 812

.'

.'

."

.'

.'

."

."

."

.'

.'

..........

'.

'.

624 1200

201,710 713, 718

11

846 410 399, 631, 919 886

12 13

13f

2:11 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:ie 2'^^ o ,o 2:18 3:1 3:2 3:3

3:5

16 18 19

l'^ I'l

20.

.

342 623,685,846,1199 310, ^09, 784, 939 6is, 940 6u A-jQ

22

179

o'i

24

iyoV,-; ^^"^^'^

.

.

.

.

323, 301, 375, 400, 90() 412, 509, 087, 705 582, 1052, 1000 6iv, 1070

.

... •

•

590,1140,1149.1200 -474,486,530,658,887, -,^,

„^^^^o' }^

721,722,963, 1128

722,785,955 661 .

.

244, 511, 615, 661, 667, 722,

'23'^^^

..,

l':::::::::.''''.''''^^ 491,632,663,670

718,1179 803 216

f

:::::::

:374, 878, iIiS ^^^' '^^'

'^i

!;2

^:J l.tt

mH

'

'

'

"

'^•l'^

qin 908 TOnn ^^ii'n^^i'oV .m «-o^ 330,496,504,8/2, 1073 6is, 1169

3:13 ... 608,744,745,974,975 3:14 1027,1154 3:15 439 3:16 233,583,613,917 3:17 233 3:18 877, 1032, iaS2 3:19 1035, 1183 4:1 814,996 4:2 520,903,907,1154 4:3 .. 132, 778, 908, 1000, 1004, 1129,1140,1154,1202 4:3,5 1024 4:4 575,653,1129 4:4, 10 518,800 4:6 474,1058 4:8 1015 4:9 541 4:11 744 4:12 ... 278,504,580,633,007 4:13 625,1153 4:15 530 4:16 261 •

Hebrews 1:1 545,546 1:1 f 422 1:1-3 432 1:2 ... 408,480,671,775,956 1:3 496 fcis, 586, 651, 781, 792, .

.

.

845, 860 1:3, 4 f

1:4

.

1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10

422 .218,420,532,615,663,667, 710 6is, 733 6is, 966 420 773 626,1202 *465

483,528 234,792

l:13f 2:1 2:2

.

1099 .

2:2-4 2:3 2:4 2:6

.

212,279,298,350,613,996 583,1107 432 710,828,1023,1129 151

234,299,411,736,742,781, 1001, 1140, 1219 484, 485, ()02, 010

2:7

2:7,9 2:8 2:9

218,743 1153 473, 485, 632, 1041, 1123 1073

..

.

.

.

5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:7 5:8

315,480,030,762 316,485,541 618 393,762,968,1154 10S9

580,598

..

.

7-2().

11-".),

W.S-,

5:10

7'JW)/.s-, 1

1027, 111.5,

MO, 1154

few,

1201

485

5:11 5:11 5:12

.

.

523,1038,1076,1081

.

.

233,375,482,490,584,

.

740, 903, 1039, 1061, 1076

.

395,516 .497,514,580,584,757,

.

789, 902, 910, 1108, 1117, 1122

498 407

6:1

6:1,3,9,11 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:4 f 6-5 6:6 6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10

501 1027, 1154 473

449,507 474 539, 613 584, 603, 708 590,640,1134 218,485,508,637 506,716,860,998,1001, 1060,1080,1082,1090

.

.

6:11 6:12 6:13 6:13, 16

6:14

.

.

311 1153 475,1159 607 192, 551, 1004, 1024 feis, 1110, 1150 6is

148,654,763 778,827,828

6:17 6:18 6: 19

7:25 7:26 7:26 7:27 7:28 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4

....

401,656,789,1039, 1070, 1122 550

....

667, 710, 1086, 1181

7:4

..

7:5

...

.

317, 408, 715

...

8:7 8:8 8:9 8:10 8:11 8:12 8:13 9:1 9:2 9:2 f 9:3 9:4 9:5

9:6 9:6

343, 371 6ts, 412, 705, 1076, 1129, 1154

9:8

7:6,9,11,13,16,20,23 ... 896 218,277,409,752,763 7:7 ... 218 7:7,19,22 654,1035,1153 7:8 7:9 .208,967,990,1086,1091,1093 .

604,1015,1027,1095,1151, 1162, 1164 748 7:11,13,15 1023,1129 7:12 580,721 7:13 719,1034 7:14 279, 659, 663 7:15 15Sbis 7:16 763 7:18 7-20 733,963 7-20 f 425,967 710 7:20-22 695 7:20,23 334, 819 7:21 7:23 613, 1061, 1085, 1119 .

....

207 1015

...

8:5 8:6

.

233,392,874,949,1214 218, 728, 733 6is, 801, 967, 1220 708 255,475 514,560,1123 440,479,1135 361,746,906,1215 260 895,1073 777 232,714 660 408,612 253 .154,409,517,550,629,632, 647, 792, 1058 313,1215 .

1153 1131

f

9:6-8, 15, 19

9:7

9:9 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17

..

.441,505,637,715,769, 776, 955

.

700,1036,1039,1040, 1049, 1078 413 201,413 412,416,705,1139

.272,339,399,809,861,1114

....

9:19 9:19,21 9:20 9:23 9:24 9:25 9:26

.

9:27 9:28 10:1

f)is

928,955,956,961,989

.

8:4,7

697,701,1134 714,1153 594 .258,292,348,399,418, 741 bis, 1177 .

710 280,691 315, 418, 480 605, 705, 710 6is

f

258, 259, 274, 298, 418, 715

.

7:1 7:2 7:3

7:11

7:24

1082

f

5:13 5:14

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1336

.

.

.

.

355 501,604 969 604,963,971,1159, 1169,1173 214,254,686 212 716 218,615,667,686 574 207,589,887 604, 920, 963, 965 bis,

1026, 1085 733,903,967,1058 871 187, 392, 439,550,716,1135

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 10:2

.

.

778, 963 6is. 905

10:6,8 10:7 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:13 10:14 10:15

?>is,

1015,

1026,1102,1175 474 895,1088 895,909 719,891 617,687 487,495 891,895,1111,1116 909,979,1074 439

......... ....

10:15f 10:15,26 10:16 10:22 10:23 10:24 10:25

1074

440,1135 .

.

211,225,340,485,486

.

362,486,1217 501 .

.

.

.

124, 532, 710, 733 6is,

967,1123 612 743 251,566,604 434,511,859

10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:31 10:32 10:33 10:34

.

.

218, 1035, 1036, 1038,

.

1041, 1103

728 998 395, 733, 978 497,515 234,1138 1139

11:1, 35

11:3

.

.

423, 909

6zs,

1003, 1036,

1049,1070,1072,1090 .... 667,724,1038,1085 365,371 234 334,1173

11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:9 11:10 11:11 11:12

593 262 .

.

616,686,793 524,704,705,777,1129, 1140,1181 533,833,1137 1034

.

.

887,921,923,1015,1062

f

11:16,35,40 11:17

11:17,28 11:18 11:19 11:20 11:21

11:31 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:36 11:37 11:39 12:1 12:1

260 812 '833

.

1036

.529 .

.

.

.

.

.

1153

399,416,508 218 359, 760, 885

Ms

895 1034 818 788 775,827,979,1115

6is,

189

476, 563, 565, 582

feis,

652,800 317,529 210,420,934,1126 477,509,606

....

.

f

.

...

748 1138 749

534,590 833 168,420,425,524,542, 562,583,653,810,931,1154 432 .

12:1,2 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:9

480,500,575,594,1202 833,1113,1121 148

1059

470,475 487,705,1153

10:35 10:36 10:37 10:39 11:1

11:13 11:14 11:15 11:15 11:16

11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:26 11:27 11:28 11:29

1337

.

764 154,502,512,574, 575, 1106 487,524,635,1107,1121 368,975 508, 509 966,1184 738,794,1159 480,532,546,1152 664 625,1109 448,497,515,519, 625, 1109 315 1200

.....

12:9, 25

12:10 12:11 12:12 12:12f 12:13 12:14 12:14 f., 24 12:15 12:16 12:17

421

422,648,871 422 496,774,800,934,995 190,308,573 319,360,611,941, 1129,1154 12:18 262,536,1118 12:18,22 542,793 12:19 ... 261,818,1094,1171 12:20 508,581 12:21 168,221 12:22 536,760 792 12:23 12:24 218,615,667 12:25 .430,472,791,810,922, 933,996,1160 .

.

.

.

12:27 12:28 13:2

.

.

.

.

766 .

/os,

1140

934, 955 /xn, 956, 989 400, 472, 475, 509 ?)w, 551, .

860,1102,1120

13:4 13:5 13:6 13:7 13:8 13:9 13:10 13:11 13:13 13:15 13:16 13:17

13:18 13:19 13:20 13:21 13:22 13:22 13:23

396 .

.

207,930,946,1165,1175 217, 334, 819, 871

514,949,955 395 1095,1162,1166 590,599

.

.

718,719,953 425,1154 108,203,268,399,524,541 532,816 .

374, 634, 877,

f .

.

.

1119

bis,

1128,1140,1214 407,678,1035 279,545,664 777,778,784 327,940 583, 845 407 .664,910,1041,1103, 1110, 1123

548,578,766

13:24

James 1:1 1:2 1:3 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:11 1:13 1:13 1:15 1:17

f

1:18 1:19

1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 1:26 1:26 1:27 2:1 2:2

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1338

329,394,944,1093 524,772 763 1023 149,478,801,895 1035 580 837 516,518,579,1034 1186 232 .153,233,413,421,501,655, 772,1200 742,1071 .319,328,329,360,429, 658 bis, 908, 941, 1003, 1052, 1071, 1072, 1076 216 947,1162 698 731,732,844,897,1177 496,780 231,272,1038,1085 .

.

.

.

.

....

f .

2:2,3 2:3 2:4 2:5 ...

124 516, 700, 1059, 1078, 1219

2:6 2:7 2:8 2:10 2:11 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:19

.

762 314,329,340,1216 1175 480, 537, 716, 763, 917

762 776 874

...

956,957,959,897,898 1012, 1166

162,262,512 395,1038 406,412,655,1121 562 404 430 273,464,878 367,477,529,1041

2:19f 2:20 2:22 2:24 2:25 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:15 3:17 4:2 4:2 f. 4:4 4:5 4:7

•

1041

521,526,966,1128 423,1172 488, 698 feis, 1076 418 290, 709, 1129 Ws 291,733,737 233,399 533,534,776,902 124, 413 473, 590, 785 319,920,1220 786 417,1189 738,1045 560,1173 881 273, 424, 1152 bis 1083 .

.

805

6is,

966, 1071, 1091

411 626 1023

4:7f 4:8 4:9 4:11 4:12

948 355,538,1214 561,856 512 778,1107

4: 13

.

289, 299, 328, 348, 474, 696,

770,799,1193,1217 728,735,740,767,

4:14

961, 1158 574,697,708,1060, 1069,1070 710 764 bis, 1106 .

....

4:15

4:16 4:17 5:1

.

408,500 124, 169

408, 510, 763

.

299, 391, 428, 430, 763, 853,

949,1106,1116 5:2 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:6

801 f

405,898 769 337, 579

757

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 5:7 5:9 5:10 5:12

.

.

201,652,8.% 394,621 480 .328,427,471,475,484, 622,

5:13 5:14 5:15 6:17 5:18

...

1

1:2 ... 1:3 1:4 1:5 ... 1:6 ... 1:6-12 1:7 1:8 ..

.

.

.

.

Peter

bis, 793, 854, 940 774,778,783,785 273,535 272,769,775,783,794 881,941,949,978,1119 724,954 654,763,778,1107 127,224,531,715,1096,

6is,

2:19f 2:20

411

740 2:21 633,784 2:21-24 954 2:24 561, 723 2:25 787 3:1 .127,324,516,638,779,946, .

984,1026,1217 3:3 3:4 3:6 3:7

...

...

.

.

1139, 1172, 1212

3:8 3:8 f 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13

3:13f 3:14

.

594, 735 6is,

.... ...

195,778,1029,1034 314,602,777 497,782 127,297,779 272,412,656,774,777 533 127 603 1114 837,1023

535,778 408,773 349,1217 192,1035 424

338,401,941 392,772,800,802 418,718 714 101,597 .

910, 1117, 1138, 1139, 1163 518, 728 Jns, 1084

1039 497,721,789,946,1134 772 1140 2:13,16 2:15 343, 400, 700 Ws, 779, 1078 2:16 127 2:18 946,947,1161 2:19 500,699,704

... .

W.s,

779, 947,

949,1161 200,272,274,712,779 479

470,487 945 208, 573 fets, 699 1061,1171 561 1106 127,374,878,1118 1020 .

.

127, 327, 478, 683, 1021,

597,719,721,778 563 740, 781, 1176

498

127,

1072 946

3:7, 9, 16

127

1138

1:10 1:10 f 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:17 1:18 l:18f 1:19 1:20 1:20 f 1:24 1:25 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:11 f 2:12 2:13

S.')3

430,515,740,1023 124,328 208,225,360,375, 908,1019 392, 531 ?ns, 802, 1094 348,799

1339

1023,1027 3:14, 17

1023 3:15 482 3:16 473,721 3:17 127,218,1021,1039,1084 3:18 523, 618 6is, 757, 1114 3:18-22 432 3:19f 778 3:20 399,416,560,656,705,779 3:21 714 3:22 792 4:1 518,816,1071 4:2 348,479,1070 4:3 127,364,909,992, 1062,1076 4:5 793 4:6 699,792,1031 4:8' 622, 789 4:8 ff 946 4:9 638 4:11 396 4:12 532,626 4:13 967 4:14 ... 602, 767, 777, 779, 785 4:15 204 4:16 192 4:17 .... 395,512,1061,1076 4:18 3.57,763,871 4:19 231 .

.

.

.

.

5:1 5:2 5:4 5:5

587,779,857,878 551

355,498,1217 808

5:6 5:7 5:8 5:9

.

5:10 5:12

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1340

258,635 212,539,560,946 740,795,1044,1085 .502,505,523,541,542,687,

.

949, 955 195,606,778,1126 173,415,582,593,846,949, 1036, 1039

5:13

169

2:21

.

2:22 3:1 3:1 3:2

.219,597,887,909,920, 1014,1039,1058,1084,1094 394,502,767,807 701,714 .

127

f .

503,762,779,785,1086,1107

3:2,18 786 3:3 775,1039 699 3:3,8 3:4 653, 717,880, 978 3:5 320, 582, 793, 794, 1035, 1134 3:6 201, 547 3:8 281 3:9 518,1128 3:10, 12 374 3:11 705,741,1131 3:14 537,542 480 3:15 3:15 f 117 3:16 773 6is 3:17 518 bis, 993 .

2 Peter

1:1

..

.

82, 127, 530, 785,

1:3 1:4 1:5 1:5-7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:14 1:15

.

fcis

101,127,533,778 279,670,783 126, 460, 487, 686, 705

.

feis

184, 1200

315 127, 423, 542, 720, 962, 1169

.

787, 985 .

.

127

....

bis,

401, 785

483,656,1129,1154 127,333,356 1191 1139

1:16 1:17

1:18 1:19 1:20 1:21 2:1 2:3 ... 2:4 2:4-10 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:12-15 2:13 .

.

.

.

.

.

290,438,636,709, 842,1135 778,864,1097 663,1121 514,518,699,772,1039 751,1165 127,613,1134,1203 297, 440, 474, 551, 724 1012 438

275,348,672 257,539 212,783 126,434,470,597 127,1122 205,665 473,721 1125

.127,355,374,485,529, 560, 878 162,497,516 521 127 186,704 533, 534 218

.

.

.

,

^

786

bis,

127

l:15f

2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:19 2:19f 2:20

786

786 127,940 432

1:1,11 1:2 1:2-7

341,476,785,786,881

1:1-3 1:2 1:3

901 777

611,713,724 528

1:3,6,7

406,678,907 579,699,1033

.

518 961,998 406 424,441,618,685,1185,1199 590,950,1079 904 500,897 708 1038 884

2:6,9 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:12-14 2:13 2:16 2:18 2:19 2:21 2:22 2:24 2:25

2:27 2:28

.

713,724,791,896

1:1

1:4 1:5 1:7 1:9 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6

,

^°°^

713,879 879,1183 845 694 788,963 573,769,794 753,906,922,923, 1015, 1086 753,845,1166 1035,1094,1164,1205 437 .400,416,479,538,704,718, 777, 845 339,437,1217 473,1147 .

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 3:1

3:1,11,23 3:2 3:4 3:6 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11

.

.

.

f

3:11,23 ... 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:15 3:16 3:19

5:21

586,1041 753 632, 1033, 1079 '^ 871 699 512, 667 512 850

2 ^ 5 q 6 7

[][[

\

."

f .

!

!

.

.

!

!

657,1116 1199 [',.[[ 902,1041 339, 11406is 699 992 702; 703 ]

!

!

!

!

!

!

480, 1036, 1041, 1103, 1107,

1123 bis g 10 12 13

4O.3

.......

792, 1093, 1160

.

368, 625, 846, 919 .

^

273

J°^^

752

619 968

480,1103,1116,1123

*

277, 663, 685, 699, /04,

546, 724, 962, 964, 1149, 1169

^

^^7 J^oT ^^1'

.

692,931 794,845 584,777,845 699 845 1009 401, 519, 599 894 768

^

^i^l

« «

oq, •oao Vififi 1166,

J^ 1^ 13 14

582 625

Jude

611,699

1

758 549 699,992,1079 432, 700

2 2,

501,588,767 9

3 4

5:3,9,11

...

704 993 258, 409, 698 683,589,657,659,1166 593

5 7 9 10

393,964,1034,1049

12 13 14 15 16 18

e
.

5:9, 11, 14

...

699

.226,963,1159,1169 400, 1033, 1034

1164

.360,401,418,699,778,845, 846, 983, 993, 1034

805,1033 482,805,1010 392,477 234

S4fi

nsf

nSQ 1185, 1189 0»jiJ

400,699,1034,1079

f

Tohn

2 ^

^

5:3,4,9, 11,

5:14 5:15 6:16 6:16

226,763,1117 .201,652,703,707,763, 776,984 476,689,856

2 3

4:10 4:11 4:13 4:14 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:21 5:2 5:3

5:10 6:11 6:12 5:13

.

8.50

4:9, 10, 13

5:4 5:6 5:8 5:9

769 880 699, 880 feis 890,1081

.

442, 679, 716

... .

5:18 5:20

404,1164,1173,1174 1192,1203 699,1079 425,647,652,968,1176 532,965

3:19, 24

3:20 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:24 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:7 4:8 4:9

135,741,999 992 233 615,736

1341

11

20 22 22 f 22,23 24

125 940 1106 265, 341, 613, 776, 786,

1107,1214 125,1032,1035,1129 125,263,486,748,1032 125, 232, 529

473 510 704 272 125,589 716 439,474 603 280, 670 W.s1153 69()

342 505,644

3:2

Revelation

.

1:4,8 1:5

.

136

.

<er,

.375

202, 414, 458, 764,

3:3 3:5

3:7 3:8 3:9

... ... ..

.

777, 779

1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:15 1:16 1:17

441

475,1150

504,785 645

218,257,263 257 .

984, 992, 1039 bis, 1214

3:10 3:12

598 .

136, 243,

.

.

...

...

777,785 231,265 404 512,715 203,216,274,289 135,213,857,1214 440 309,337 309,337,1035 309,337,1010,1218 538,539,1025 1034 203 341,414,437 218,775

2:5,16 2:6 2:7 2:7,17 2:8

1039 498 599,1175 .

655,777 172,235,255,614,712,969 474,482,519,1106 1105

534,536,610 .

.

.

203, 270, 441, 519 bis

263,441 789 136,315,414,1216 203,593,1010 871

232,392,406,654, 775, 866 bis 720, 975 bis 136, 414, 416, 437,

683, 1130

901

bis,

459,

437

759,765,777,899 886,923,1004,1097 184,857

204, 487, 751, 769, 777, 785

3: 17

3:18

1104 266, 414 6is, 1135 414, 669, 762, 769 feis,

414

655, 760, 1104

3:12,21 3:14 3:15 .... 3:16

485,530

2:5

2:28

.

135, 307,. 311, 324, 873,

216, 218, 219, 257, 258, 274,

2:2,9 2:3 2:4

2:25 2:26

.

878 470,740,901,1045 475,483,485,589,809, 819,1213 265,762 94,136,420,722,1213

414, 769, 785

1:18 1:19 1:20 2:1 2:2

2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:22 2:23 2:24

857, 884, 890, 921, 960

bis,

3:2, 16

258,349,780,793 764,788,1108 135,270,394,414,459,574, 764,877,1202 734,735,777

1:1

1:3 1:4

NEW TESTAMENT

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1342

202,216,232,483,807, 1036, 1220

3:19 3:20 3:21 4:1

148 895 414,459,586,1130 705, 601

.

feis,

136,307,328,396,412,1042, 1105,1193,1212

4:1-5 1135 4:2 601 4:3 211,272,530 644 4:3 f 4:4 ... 266 bis, 274, 485, 1042 4:5 412,713 4:6 ... 216,300,505,640,644 412 4:7 4:8 300, 412, 414, 644, 675, 793 4:9 ... 324,348,601,872,972 601 4:10 4:11 427, 466 <er 758 565 5:1 427 5:3 189 5:3 f 1061 5:4,9 5:5 782,835,1001,1088, 1089 bis, 1090 320,412,414,712 5:6 5:7 897, 899 feis, 901 274,713 5:8 510,589 5:9 5:11 ... 231, 283 bis, 502, 644 427,758,1182 5:12 794 5:12,13 1200 5:12-14 5:13 603, 714, 758 367 6:1 368 6:3 6:4 203, 213, 437, 984 501, 511 6:6 635 6:8 .

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 6:8,13 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:15 6:16 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4 7:6 7:9

.

.

635 910,1118 465,505 201,213,409,802,992,1213 203,268 338,483 752 683,722,864,1118 009,975 072 203

136,413,441,722,816,1135

7:9,13 7:11 7:12 7:14 7:16 7:17 8:1 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:7 8:11 8:12 8:13 9:1

485

...

319,339,366,644,758 427,787,794,1182 349, 899, 902 6is

752,1175 170,202 204,958,973,1140 782,876,984 529 510, 899 fcis, 901

... .

..

350,412,502,653,779 253,458,598 341,349,350,1220 135,391,487,537,674,1193 .

.

1116

231, 864, 910,

bis,

1118,1123 9:4

..

752, 992, 1159

.

9:4,20 9:5 9:6 9:8 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:16 9:19 9:20

...

.

feis,

1169 1159 992

324,709,870,873,889 339 272 104,458,653,1202

...

10:1 10:2

270,405,410 782 266,412,414,604,760 580 273 203,998 485,892 155,414,828,1135 213

10:2,8 10:4 10:5 10:0 10:7 10:8 10:9 10:10 10:11 11:1 11:2

11:2,19 11:3

853

6is

593 1034 474,799,847,1215 155 155,339 155,503 005 1134 042 7S2 485

11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:8 11:9

410,412,704,780 1017,1020

11:9, 11

11:10 11:12 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17

1343

.

974 802 727,729 315,515,599 ... 775 565,1220 307,328 502,709 135,270,410,892 412 6ts 309,337,734,801,834, 901,1217 414,757,1076 .•

.

.

11:18 11:19 1213 12:1 485 12:3 213 12:4 224,315,645,875,878,1219 12:5 349,413 12:6 203,392,597,820,985 12:6,14 723 12:7 1066,1093 12:9 399,777 12:10 136,262 12:11 224,584 12:12 537,1198 12:13 258,723 12:14 407,502,775 12:15 169 12:17 781 13:1 892 13:2 210 13:3 334,496 13:4 818 476 13:4,8 13:8 722 13:10 787 13:11 1203 13:12 992 13:13 998 13:14 256,258,713 13:15 984 13:16 401,787,984 13:17 984,1109 2S3 Ws 13:18 .

.

14:1 14:1-13 14:3 14:4 14:0

.

.

320,700 1135 072

958.909 474,565,790,1215 747 14:0,8,15,17,18 14:7 414,788 14:8 483 505,001 14:9 14:10 317,080

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1344 14:12 14:13 14:14

14:15 14:18 14:19 14:20 15:1 15:1,6 15:2 15:3 15:4 15:5 15:6 16:1 16:2 16:5 16:6 16:9

418 201,518,597,992 .

.

.

469,517,575,642 106 762 .

.

.

341,475,529,598,881 461,464,465 395,930,934 1213

485,560,620 339,342,352,1220 232,342 414 339 478, 485, 998, 1001, 1088,

.

1089,1090 214,375,598,903 258,259

16:10 16:11 16:12 16:16 16:18 16:19 16:21 17:1 17:2 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8 17:9 17:10 17:13 17:16 17:17 17:18 18:1 18:2 18:3 18:6 18:9 18:10 18:11 18:12 18:12f 18:13 18:14 18:16 18:17

135,136,391,414,530, 658, 1135 590 265 253,410

760 104 221,546,710,722, 731 bis, 978 458,503 599 774,777 441,724 .

.

.

412,414,455,474,510 156,485 233 478 532 334,719,819,1216 683,723 234,747,750,764 311, 1214 bis 590 872,975 234,604 892 260,269,843,1200 337,599,1218 317,580,716 1217 498 475 192,280,670 441 186

348,873,1165 485,653,710,771 474

18:20 18:22 18:23 18:24 19:1 19:2 19:3 19:4 19:7 19:8 19:9,17 19:10 19:11 19:12 19:13 19:14 19:15 19:16 19:17 19:20 19:21 20:1 20:2 20:3 .

20:3,5 20:4 20:8 20:12 20:15

461,464,786 753

341,349,1220 689 205 1220 337,902 283 269,1212 485 262 949 1213 414 135,211,364,374,485,533

407,412,485 503,680,960,1001 660 949 414 260,269,599 265,892 414,714 528 975 833,834 722 349,714,1213 1008,1012 394,413 539

21:1 21:2 21:3 611 21:4 262 21:5 480 21:6 337,785 21:8 712,1118 21:9 777 21:11 150,280,670 414 21:11 f 21:13 254, 494, 791 6is 21:14 412 262 21:14,19 21:16 263,405,732,967 21:17 268,672,714 21:18 201 253 21:18(21) 21:19 262 21:20 168, 199,204 21:21 282,460,555,556,568,571, .

673,675,746 21:23 21:25 21:27 22:2 22:3 22:4

541 793

753,1187 .

258, 300 Ws, 311, 545, 1214

166,753 871

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS 22:8 22:9 22:11 22:13

211 932,1203 947 429, 777

(6)

22:14 22:16 22:19

f

4:12, 14

4:24 6:4 6:17 10:19,30 13:11 14:23 16:2 17:17 18:9 19:8 19:19 19:21 20:6

21:26 22:1 24:30 24:33 24:45 25:24 27:30 28:16 29:13 31:20 32:19 33:10 34:12 34:30 37:2 37:10 38:5 38:11 38:27 40:5 41:36 43:8 44:32 47:29 49:12 60:18

757,984 399,762 356

OLD TESTAMENT

Genesis 1:2 2:24 3:15 3:22 3:24

1345

Exodus

252 574, 595 680 1002,1067,1086 639 889 673 973 325 1074 746 1024 1061

910,1176 916 967 1067 1002 1061 1187 1042 1042 1074 1042 696 973 1027 1042 1007 1073 959 481 263 888 916 551 973 696 745 907 907 907

1:16 3:4 3:10 3:11 5:22 6:7 7:10 8:25 9:16 10:23 12:6 12:10 12:10,43 13:11 f 14:13 16:3 16:33 17:12 19:13 20:10 20:17 20:23 25:9 25:21

972,1075 208 187 1001

337 691 211 696 699 693 907 819 752 1042 1078

973,1003 253 903 1027 752 508

690,691 268 822

29:20 31:3 32:1 39:23

775 485

436,899,900 906 Leviticus

2:13 10:6 14:2 14:6 21:17 22:9 23:15 25:10

269 984 500 254 738 1010 917 600

Numbers 1:1 4:41

101)7

9:10

601 096

10:2 11:9

671 208 98 878 973

1346

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK 938,940

11:29 14-2 14:8 14:30 20:3 22:12

1003 880 1024 1003 903

Deuteronomy 263 361,649 1017 364 637 888 649 809 669 95 937 889 738 649 669 1163 98

3:21 8:3 8:5 9:10 9:14 9:24 19:15 23:1 24:3 28:1 28:24 ff 28:29 29:18 30:14 31:29 32:21 33:10

Joshua 1042 437 507 218 531 174

5:1 9:12 10:10 11:22 17:13 23:13

8:7 11:1 12:23 14:45 14:47 17:34 17:42 18:16 25:20

1061 1042 1067 1024 1060 973 680

680 256 2

Samuel

(2

Kings)

739 878 722 649 940

6:20 10:11 14:15 15:2 18:13 1

(3)

Kings 964 254 1067 670 1165 1120 1078 341 1067 1002 465 819 880 1072

1:8 4:19

8:18 8:39 10:21 12:18 13:16 14:6 16:31 17:20 17:20, 21 18:1

18:12 22:8

... 2 (4) Kings

Judges 888 265 1070 918 97 906 1086 940 1017 890 637

1:7 3:25 6:11 6:13 6:18 8:11

8:33 9:29 11:9 11:10 16:20

Ruth

736

13 13 14

1001

729 260 95

13:21 18:33

1

Chronicles

633 643 729 588 588

4:9 5:10 17:6 28:4 28:6

932

1:9 2:10

1090 1070

3:3 1

1:17 4:1 7:2 f

NEW TESTAMENT

Samuel

(1

Kings)

596 1042 772

2 Chronicles

3:1 6-7 15:16 18:34 28-22 33:9

98 1067 891 906 966,1062 1090

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Nehemiah

Proverbs

5:18 9:10

G28 337 Esther

4:14 13:3

1347

964, 1033 .

.

938

1:22 3:5 11:31 12:14 24:21

973 890 871 268 292, 750 691

27:15

Job 3:21 13:22 14:13 21:24 22:3 24:12 25:5 30:24 31:31

198 977 1003 276 1010 691 916 1003 938

Ecclesiastes

1:16 2:17 3:12

1062 97 1067

The Song

of

Solomon

7:6

739 Isaiah

Psalms 8:5 14:1,3 15:9 16:8 16:10 22:1 32:1 37:21 38:2 40:6 48:9 51:6 53:5 62:2 68:24 69 (68):23 72:14 77:18 90:11 91:3 94:11 94-95:11 101:3 103:15 108:4 109:8 110:1 117:23 118 (119):5 118:22 (117) 118:23 118:23 118:32 119:7 120 (119) :3 122:2 140:6 .

;

1:4 1:12 1:16 1:31 3:5 5:9 5:14 5:26 5:27 6:2 6:10 8:14 9:16 10:20

.

1001 751 1212

367 502 29, 476 367 311 1061 738 166 193, 463, 986 bis 197 198 1061 174 903 1086 1068 1067 1000 1024

972 437 1070 939 314 655 1004 718 411 704 973 973

910 1070 637

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

10:20, 27

11:9 14:15 17:8 22:11

24:10 26:20 28:20 33:24 36:11 37:3 40:4 40:7 42:8 42:12 48:16 49:6 49:8 52:11 56:6 56:10 5S:14 59:15 03:2

.

.

487 819 807 765 746 1165 1002 775 1174 644 201, 204, 367, 844, 988 907 1042 903, 907 1012 . 929,1174 591 907 637,

W3

1061

733 312 929 103

267 595 8;i7

101 101 2;?5

UMM 507 S53 UV)2

213 907 312 253

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1348

Jeremiah 1:8 1:19 2:8 2:18 2:22 2:28

.

.

2:22 3:7 3:22 4:30 6:14 7:25 10:5-7

928,929, 1016, 1161 411 1061 309 1073 415 644 287 932 932 484 1183 1174 653 1123 746

2:4, 23

.

4:10 4:16 5:23, 26

6:8 7:97:10 9:2 11:17 14:13 17:26 18:3 f 18:8 18:11 23:15 23:21 23:24 26:6 31:32 31:34

Daniel

473 929 411 1067 96 411 916 337 335

171

977 647 900 512 199 415

Hosea 411 411 475

2:8 4:15 Joel

3:2

148

Amos 5:27 9:12

642 723, 986

Jonah 3:3

539

Habakkuk 2:3

733

Haggai Ezekiel

11:23 16:21 16:51 17:24 27:4 33:27 34:8 36:30 38:19

2:1

;

775 337 655 476 759 1024, 1150 1024, 1150 213 150

671

Zechariah

2:2 4:7 6:14 11:6

741 265 265 599

Malachi 3:3

889

APOCRYPHA 1

Esdras

1:30 1:49 2:24

Esther 185 1074 1072 722

3:5,9

722 1067 722 1072

4:54, 63

5:67 6:32 8:84

13:3

Wisdom 6:8 12:19 13:19

6:8 6:20 17:3 22:24

1059 643 638 1070

225 311 999 Sirach

Prol. to Sirach

2 Esdras

938

6:7 19:26 25:3 37:2 38:27

604 341 274, 276 268 313 1070

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Baruch 1:9 2:28 4:5

717 514 4G3

Tobit 1:5 5:5 ... 5:15 7:11 11:1 12:13 14:2

411 585

.'

97,371,822,878 973 1070, 1074

1120 192

Judith

979 1070 822 1074 979 308

1:10 4:15 6:18 8:34 11:19 14:5

1349 1120 1043 1163 618 729 260 28 1075 28 318 192 his 183,370

3:9 3:16 4:13 4:38 5:10 6:2 7:8 7:14 7:21 8:6 8:24 9:22 12:4 12:15 12:27 15:7

141

639 722 370

3

Maccabees

4:1 5:20

141

900 4 Maccabees

1

3:11 4:52 10:88 10:89 13:16 14:30 14:36 15:23 15:28 16:9

Maccabees 528 705 269 269 415 bis 1214 1090 260 415 1070, 1074, 1075

Enoch 995

6:3

Psalms

of

Solomon 654 654

3:10 8:23

2 Maccabees

159 1141

1:8 1:11 1:31

251 157 938 104 104 1062

1:28 2:9 5:13 12:7 16:15 17:20,21

974

Daniel

O Susannah 745

54

TESTAMENT OF THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS Gad

Reuben 654 946

1:10 6:1

654

3:1

Joseph 664

17:8

Levi

Benjamin

972

2:10

673

7:4

Judah 91

Naphtali

424,1185

3:2

940

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1350

INSCRIPTIONS

(c)

IG

Audollent

Defixionum tabellae, ed. Au-

Inscriptiones Graecae

dollent (Paris, 1904)

No. 238, 29

857

647 590 1,671 5, 29 5,

Benndorf-Niemann

5,

Reisen in Lykien und Karien

1170

129 N. 102

BCH de

Bulletin

IMA

correspondance

Inscriptiones Maris Aegaei

hellenique 1901,

416

p.

(lead

tablet

at

Amorgus)

174 325

iii,

109 522

1903, p. 235

CIG

1129 622

JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies

Corpus inscriptionum Grae-

(Hellenic Society)

carum

xix,

5834

192

535 406 737 728

1902, p. 349

Corpus inscriptionum Lati-

narum

xxii,

8733

14

92 299

C. Insc. Lat. (C I L)

V,

1189 777 849 669 959 579

562, 5 7 N. 240, 13

xii, 2,

1093

Deissmann

1902, 369

1061

Kaibel

Epigrammata Graeca

Light from the Anc. East, p. 75 "Limestone Block from the

Temple of Herod lem"

1878, p. 269 p.

Letronne

at Jerusa-

1092

recueillies

(Letr.)

Recueil

des

inscriptions

grecques et latines

Delphian Inscription Inscriptions

274 592

134

I'Egypte,

k

de Letronne

(1842)

Delphes (Wescher et Fou-

No.

cart)

220

ed.

1074

70, 79,

92

478 414 521

149

220

Heberdey-Wilhelm Reisen in Kilikien 137 Inscr. of

Michel 1094 1009

170, 2

90, 12

Inscription of

No. 370 694 511 938 994

Thera

1069 622, 1024

OGIS Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae,

ed.

Dittenberger

(Leipzig, 1903-5)

Hermes 1901, p. 445

d'inscriptions

grecques, ed. C. Michel (Brussels, 1900)

Magn.

Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Maander (von O. Kern) 16, 29 215

Recueil

No. 41 660

90, 23

1069 1141

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS

748, 20

406 223 223 213 213

117, 17

193

352, 66

193

458, 41

218 204 204 204

484

r

.

.

.

.

458, 71 223, 49 177, 15

565, 19 515, 26

f

618, 2

Pontica

Pontica (AndersonCumont-Gregoire) 62, 8

Studia

iii,

Papers of American School

Priene Inschriften F. Hiller

98

112,

582 595 615

f

111, 117

vols. (Oxford, 1895, 1897)

172 172

317, 391, 395, 399

343 391 (No. 254) 525

Inscr.

849 959 1093 1093

13 (B.C. 300)

249, 26

31

13,34

1018 928 972 648 668

292

ii,

Die Inschriften von Pergamon von M. Frankel

13,

von (herausg. von von Gaertringen)

50, 39

at Athens

397 iii, 375 ii,

N

931

Ramsay, C. and B. Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, by W. M. Ramsay, 2

PAS

Pergamon

1351

SyU. inscriptionum graecarum, ed. Dittenberger

Sylloge

160 375

No. 326, 12 928, 52

Perrot Exploration arch, de la Ga-

Viereck

Sermo Graecus quo senatus

latie

populusque Romanus usi sunt, by P. Viereck .

p. 24,

N

702

34

.

.

(Gottingen, 1888)

Petersen-Luschan Reisen im sudwestlichen

Waddington

Kleinasien 160,

174,

N N

A

190

599 869

223, 21

959

p. 113, xviii

5

(d)

Inscr.

81, 11

86

la Syria

837 595

PAPYRI AND OSTRACA

154 470 527 1134, 1137 977 944, 1093

1009

93

Amh. and Amh. Pap.) Amherst Papyri, part ii (1901) 723 No. 11, 26 50 77 78

de

2413* 2614

A. P. (P.

31

958

38

p.

414

111 to 113

611, 994

135 144

.

M.

92S

F.

M.) Mu.seum Papyri.

(P. B.

Britisli

G.

(\\.

Konyon (London,

1893, 1898)

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1352

Vol.

No. 21 23 37 42

i.

Nos. 1-138

997 1033 .

.

299, 546, 618, 875, 909,

1145

1081

69 77

'!!!!'!!.! Vol.

ii.

Nos. 139

No. 363 380 385 388 423

£f.

B. U. (B. G. U.) Berliner Griechische Vol.

No.

1

16

22 27 36 45 46 48 86 110 113 114 136 146 164 168 179 183 197 226 229 242 287 297

i.

Urkunden

Nos. 1-361 (1895)

1061

531 1068 933, 994 689, 691

213 509 962 900 478 997 691 942 691, 857 874 991, 1069 660 479 833,843,1124 900

691 318 ^,

Nos. 362-696 (1898)

11.

692 487 592 665 .

.

188, 419, 464, 514, 592,

833,8.34,835,846,1132,1151

424 530 449 456 531 543 546 596 607 623 664

972

..

.

190, 963, 1147, 1181

406 746 993 475 1009 361,907,1129 730, 972 671 631 1068

665 Vol.

522 691 470 611, 1000

318, 410, 1010

..

,

Vol.

728 1120

728 1010 318, 737 959 745 745 1122 869 979,1074 907

233 239 331 333 336 356 417 854 1178

,,

928

<

326 341 350

'529

84

No. 190

..

303 939, 994

.

NEW TESTAMENT

iii.

Nos. 697-1012 (1903)

No. 775 790 814 816 822 824 830 843 846 874 903 925 948 956 970 998 1002

806 516 874 1210 737, 989 933 1068, 1082 461

414 990 522 513 734, 737 1188 513, 589, 1132 614 414 178,

Vol. iv.

Nos. 1013

ff.

No. 1015

901

1031

997, 1061

1040 1079.

1132

.287,488,577,582,615, 692, 933

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Hb. P. (P. ITib. and Ilib. P.) Hibeh Papyri (all iii/s.c.)

Ch. P.

Greek Papyri from the Cairo Museum, ed. E. J. Goodspeed (Chicago, 1902) No. 3 4

1353

(1906)

817 692

No. 42 44

56

589 406 974 986 851

78

1010

44, 45 45, 60, 168

C. P. R. and P. E. R.

Cori)us

papjTorum Wessely

C.

ed.

Raineri,

(Vienna,

1895)

No. 11

690 654 962 892, 978 1002, 10G8 959

12

19

24 156 237

K. P. Papyri from Karanis, ed. E. J. Goodspeed (Chicago, 1900)

No. 46

458, 481, 595

L. P.

Papyri Graeci quarii

Deissmann Ostracon, Thebes, 32-3 a.d.

Batavi,

Musei antiLugduniC. Liemans

publici ed.

828 (1843)

a35f

Eudoxus Papyrus of the Astronomer Eudoxus, ed. Blass .

.

.

692

518

Papyri (1900) No. 110

119, 276

121

124 136 137

G.

An

Alexandrian Erotic Fragment, and other Greek Papyri,

chiefly

Ptolemaic

(1896)

No. 35

945

G. H.

Greek Papyri, No. 15 23" 36 38

939, 1062

274, 516, 983

P.

PapjTi from Magdola, in B 1902 ff., cd. Lefebore No. 16 and 20

817 933, 994 622, 987 595 861 495 959 1176

112 118

bis,

w M.

and P. Fay.) Towns and their

F. P. (Fay. P.

FajKim

665

b

CH 584

N. P.

Geneva Papyri,

ed. J. Nicole,

2 vols. (1896, 1900)

No. 7

993

16

1061

17

995 844 692 464 535 1108 527 728 2.-)2, 745 252, 745

19

25 38 47 49 50 56 67 69 O. P. (P. Oxy. and Oxy. P.)

series II (1897)

Oxyrhynchus Papyri

786 745, 746 82,

:

.

614, S0()

976

Vol.

No. 34 36

i.

Nos. 1-207 (1898)

977 10()9

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1354 37 38

.

.

195, 577, 632, 867, 1040

.

No. 654

635 990 484 1068 656 1010 533 888 723

715

989 70, 572, 1174 414

745

686

886 905

60S, 673

48,49,722 52 79 86

99 105 112 115 117 118 119 120 121 128 Vol.

No. 237

..

1021

931

1107

975 877

1118 1120

bis

939 1150 745

1133 1150 1157

690 666

1158 1159

513, 537, 631, 846, 963,

1162 H^-l

'.'.'.'.'.. '.

\

.

.

1002, 1129, 1131, 1132, 11,39

292 294 „„,

745

hqg

1122 1125

'.'.

71, 220, 509, 53.5,

851^ 993

518, 983, 991, 1048,

.

240 255 256 274 275

....

744

284, 993

1069

2m

834 939 668 559 877 522, 1016 522 999_ io24

716 724 727 729 742 743

Nos. 208-400 (1899)

ii.

Nos. 654-839 (1904)

Vol. iv.

578, 963

1091

1073 949, 967, 1085, 1154

.

.

.

577 933,1009 869 869 1066 550 1145

341

...

.

600, 686, 909, 1081

007

682

299

^: ^^- ^^^y Pans Papyri,

^^^

^^ in Notices et .

.

Extraits, xviii, part

No. 5 Vol.

iii.

Nos. 401-653 (1903)

No. 413 471 477 478 482 484 486 491

492 494 496 523 526 528 530 531

2,

ed.

Brunet de Presle (1865)

..

.

..

.

932 1137 470, 471 900 844, 900 474 548 1137 469 749 1018 502, 575, 767 .922,939,1002,1014 139, 900 863, 922, 1014, 1113 1210

1108 576, 585

10 15

410

18

1009, 1180

22 26

590 .

.

532, 574, 939, 972, 1031,

1043, 1141

590 517 614 36 645 37 615 47 49 ... 995, 989, 1087, 1169 51 414, 508, 536, 682, 867 774 60 62 1009 63 ....... 587, 590, 938 727 574

28

35, 37

.

.

.

.

.

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS R. L.

p. Eleph.

No.

1355

190,

1

G40

Revenue Laws

of

Ptolemy

Philadelphia (Oxford, 1896)

382

Florence Papyri, ed. Vitelli

Academy:

(Lincei

Rhein. Mas.

fasc. 1.,

Milan, 1905)

Rheinisches

No. 2

991, 1071

5

624

Goodspeed

P.

726 586

Col. 29

P. Fi.

No. 4

.

.

(P.

Goodsp.)

632, 877, 1022, 1119, 1129

632 484, 687 1080

73

77

1182

752, 983

1

165

66

689, 976

6 8 14

633 1134 590, 594 148 279, 669 406 1010 877, 1119 808, 811

16 P. Held.

19i2f

Papyri (mainly ed. G. A. Deiss-

Heidelberg

LXX), mann (1905)

406

No. 6 Pap. L. Dieterich, Abraxas, 195, 9

.

789

Phi-

Tb. P. (P. Tb., Tebt. P. and Tb.) Tebtunis Papyri (I'niversity of California PubUcations)

1,

No. 67

fiir

1912

Ixvii, 4,

No. P. Grenf.

Museum

lologie

24 26 28 33 35 36 40

588 1134

41 P.

Lend Kenyon, Greek P.

42 43 47 50 58 59 72 104

in British

Museum

274 837

xlii

P.P. Flinders Petrie Papyri,

ed.

Mahaffy (in Proc. Royal Irish Academy, Cunningham Memoirs, viii, P.

J.

i,

690 287 944 595 672 72G 414

15, 15

xi

XXV 28 37 42

91,

...

682,748,762,1126

T. P.

Turin Papyri,

ed.

Peyron

(1826)

No.

491

1

148

7

Wess.

Rein. P. Pajjyris Th.

Reinach

(Paris,

1905)

7

(ii/B.c.)

922, 1014

595

689 861 406, 1009 945 669 1187 516, 669, 752 517 1010 834, 932, 986

105

230 333 414 421

1891)

No. 8

613 654

162, 168,

P.

Pai)yr()rum s(Tii)(ur:io cue ^Specimen

xxvi

Cnn^ 1012, 1175

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1356 Wilcken

Griechische Ostraka

Archiv

fiir

Pap3TUsforschung

4

262 i, 587 iii, 289 iv, 410 i,

iv,

501 127

700 301 xviii, 134 XX, 139 xiii,

xvi,

XX, 335 xxii,

349

xxiv, 38

Odyssey

iv,

XX,

GREEK LITERATURE

684 52

Euripides (v/b.c.) Alcestis 386

(? x/viii b.c.)

137

X,

253 1027

ii,

CLASSICAL

i.

Homer i,

266 152 631

i

152

(e)

Iliad

NEW TESTAMENT

.

.

.

.

958 1160 590 1016 1170 755 981 610 1170 1170 1016 972 674 590 1136,1172 1053

Iphig. in Taur. 962

Fragment

981

^schylus Prom. Vinct. 268 358

f

Medea 627 822 Aristophanes (v/b.c.)

Aves 1237

722

1292

674, 744

1300 Ran. 721 Vesp. 213

712 375 733

Herodotus

(v/b.c.)

210, 2

1069

27 iv, 44 V, 108 iii,

(? viii/B.c.)

(v/b.c.)

1038 538 673

f

Persae 981

660 563 1161 746 392 629 875

1359

i,

Hesiod

837, 846

471 Bacchides 1065 Hecuba 401

vi, 67,

10

vi, 68,

5

170 1214

vii,

860 722 783 1110 1110 644

837

Thucydides (v/b.c.) i,

21

i,

52, 2

Sophocles (v/b.c.)

Oedipus Coloneus 155 ... 317 ... 816 ... Oedipus Tyrannus 1141 ...

.

.

.

1146 Philoctetes 100

300

Electra817 1078

Ajax 1180

...

994 738 878 737 878 1069 932

iv, 54,

1161

iv,

1094 856

V, 50, 3

i,

122

i,

137, 4

i,

141

ii,

45, 1

ii,

52, 1

iii,

vii,

36, 2

3

93 26, 9

899 706 1188 1163 631 1172 783 435 860 645 1163 991

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Isocrates (Iv/b.c.) iv,

44

Anabasis

9

vii, 4, vii, 4,

Cyrus

185 790 955 588 631 620 1070 1048 472 1102 747 517 1033 458

i,

4,

3

i,

6,

18

9 16

xu, 3, 9

Mem.

39 4, 25

6,

ii,

iv,

Hellen.

1,

i,

Oec.

vi,

2

2,

iii,

14

14

1001

X,

14

1001

7,

34

Aristeas

E 21 A 21 C 36 B

Apologia, 20

Demetrius

Do

eloc. 21, 11

iv,

61

Crito44A Theat. 155 C Protag. 309 C

857

'665

312 A 326 D Repub. 337 B 433 Crat. 399 A-B 405 D Soph. 254 A

1174 478

933 1060 228 766 779

289C)

Polit. (p.

149 1165

D 89 D

Phaedr. 78

Gorg. 453 459 515

275 438 1172 630

B B C

iii,

19, 7

Eum. 737

(iii/B.c.)

(iii/B.c.)

660 Polybius

iv, 32,

(ii/a.c.)

607 973 298 577 527

5

10 2

xxxii, 12

Diodorus i,

75, 5

i,

77, 3

(i/B.c.)

1031

1007 961

xi, 21,

3

xi, 37,

3

1007

xiv, 8, 3

961, 989

986 295 278

xiv, 80, 8 xvi, 74, 6

xvi,

85 Strabo

i,

1,

(i/B.c.)

973

7

5,

Philo (i/A.D.)

ii,

974 973

166, 20 112, 23

1069 Flavius Josephus Aristotle (iv/B.c.)

Rhet.

iii,

Antiq.

432

9

V,

JEneas

H

(Iv/b.c.)

vii, 9,

267

2

2

xii; 2,

595

(i/.\.D.)

1172

82

X, 4,

114, 5

bis

580 194 837

22 xiv, 41 c, 828 ii,

i,

.ZEschines (iv/B.c.)

b.c.)

1017

Herondas

xvii, 11,

851 851 1132 1038 897

(iii/ii

974

vi, 5,

Plato (iv/B.c.)

(iii/u.c.)

25

IX,

6 i, 3, 14 ii, 4, 20 V,

Theocritus

(Iv/b.c.)

2,

i,

KOIXH

ii.

9G1

Xenophon

1357

.

973

3

xvii, 5,

llJt

2

152

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

1358 Bell,

253 28 253 28 900 255

2

16,

ii,

V, 6, 3

2

V, 12,

vi, 2, 1

Apion

21

iv,

Vit. 17

Dionysius Thrax

(i/A.D.)

34, 372, 492, 1101, 1146 bis, 1188

ii,

18, 11

ii,

22,

ii,

23, 1

24

iv, 1,

41

iv, 1,

50

iv, 3,

9

iv, 4,

11

iv, 5,

8-9

iv, 10,

18

iv, 10,

27 34 35

iv, 10, iv, 10,

Plutarch (i/A.D.)

D

i,

256 592 B

i,

C

p.

694

Quest. Conviv.

i,

Cons, ad Uxor.

1

6, 1

....

1069 64 64 697 752

.

.

.

(ii/A.D.)

254

12

Clement

[Barnabas] (i/a.d.)

1124 773 1141

.

Ascensio Isaiae ii,

Pardagogus

2:28 4:9 6:11

.

1017 933 937 933 1091 999 963 963 1092, 1095 837 963, 1169 1169

of Alexandria (U/a.d.)

989

1

iii,

Hermas Vis.

i,

1,

8

i,

3,

2

(ii/A.D)

iv, 1, 1

5

viii, 3,

Clement

Rome

of

219 723 1102 972 946

5:7 i, 21:9 ii, 8:2 ii, 12:1 Clem. 45:1

1 Cor.

1

Sim. V,

(i/A.D.)

1, 1

4

^viii, 1,

viii, 5, 1

ix, 9, 1

4

ix, 12,

Mand.

iv, 1,

V, 1,

5 2

viii, 9,

Dio Chrysostom

(I/a.d.)

Epistle to Diognetus (ii/A.D.)

995

xxxiv, 44

p.

Marcus Aurelius vi,

......

11

631

84

533

p. 7

(ii/A.o.)

595

42

Irenaeus

60 584

Justin Martyr (ii/A.D.)

Apol.

1148 1010 612 348 611 739 424 880 1022 308 1010 278

i,

6

16,

Cohort. 5

(p.

253 A)

(ii/A.o.)

198 984

A

839 725

[Clement]

Homilies

i,

(iii/A.o.)

739 737

6

33 iii, 69 ix, 4 ii,

Arrian Epictetus

(ii/A.o.)

15

i,

9,

i,

11,

32 16

ii,

2,

ii,

17,

14

931 585 999 736

xi,

3

xvi,

20

xix, 12

.

.

.

875,942,1157 298 929 298 750

INDEX OF QUOTATIONS Pausanias

Gregory

(ii/A.o.)

"'^^'^*

^^^'^

Origen

(ii/A.D.)

vii,

59

(iv/A.D.)

137

prokius (^/^u.)

.........

Cor. 5:7 Contra Celsus

Nyssa

of

557B

iii,

1

1359

219 85

f

Iq rem publ.

ii,

225, 22

John Philoponus

.

.

1036

.

(v/a.d.)

Ignatius (ii/A.D.)

Ep. to Romans 8:3 Ep. toEphesians 10:2 Ep. toPolycarp 5:2

De

....

1007 ^^^^

aetern. 430, 28

1020 946 1020

gc

-^g

Achilles Tatius (v/a.d.) -

,..,

.

ii,

,

974

Alexander 22

Theophllns

Ad Autolycum I,

iv, 16,

961

13

CaUinicus (v/a.d.)

(ii/A.D.)

994

34

2,

923

24, 3

Vita Hypatii 57, 12, 113, 11

.

1040

1022

6

Priscian (v/a.d.)

HeUodorus .^thiop.

vi,

Lib. V. de

(iii/A.D.)

Casu

492

595

14

Apophthegmata Patnun Acta Christophori

105

(iii/A.D. ?)

.

^

Acta

„ Bamabae

,...

,

^""^

Eusebius

N. T. Gk., p. 128) Acta Paul^ et Theclae

....

88

Quaest. Barthol., pp. 24. 30

725 672

16:9

Gregory of Nazianzen ii,

13

A

622

Diogenes 10G9

(iv/A.D.)

137

Theogn.

S.

jo2

Theodoret (iv/A.D.) 851

.

412

Acta

673

932 993 594 1189

29,

.

13

(iv/A.D.) Epiphanius ^^

»V'

673

Apocalypsis Anastasiae 6,

Matthew 13:30

...

Martjo-ium Pauli

(iv/A.D.)

Eccl.Hist.vi,xxv,ll P. E. vi, 7, 257d

A u N. a> T. Apocrypha

T^

Gospel of Pet. 35 * ^ mu j u Thomae /r> (Radermacner, Acta

„.

,

(iii/a.d. ?)

^"

Mark

725

1001

68, 18

(vi/A.D.)

C

p^.^g,j^

j^

J

of

Oinoanda 1169

9

Theo ProKvnin. 128, 12

.

.

.

109:>, 10-)7

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK

1360

NEW TESTAMENT

Usener Legende der

hi.

Hippiatrici

L J!!'

Pelagia

18

.

.

860, 888

1009

1001

20

.^ . ^ ^ Xenophon of Epnesus

iii-

989 1102

393, 28

388,31

,

1017

(/)

6.

5

Cato Maj.

23, 3

^^^^

„

, , , John 1:6-8

138

(cf.p. 481) are

not referred to authors.

LATIN Pliny (i/a.d.)

Cicero (i/B.c.)

Pro Archia 10

MODERN

The very numerous illustrations of the vernacular modern Greek idiom

Vettius

274,11

Att.

^^^'^

244, 30

108 933, 994 108

Nat. Hist,

v, 15, 71

214

PA ^^^

R6 1914-

Robertson, Arcixibald Thorn; A grammar of the Greek Testament in the li^ht of torical research

PLEASE

CARDS OR

DO NOT REMOVE

SLIPS

UNIVERSITY

FROM

THIS

OF TORONTO

POCKET

LIBRARY